Plagiarising Science Fraud

Plagiarising Science Fraud
Newly Discovered Facts, Published in Peer Reviewed Science Journals, Mean Charles Darwin is a 100 Per Cent Proven Lying, Plagiarising Science Fraudster by Glory Theft of Patrick Matthew's Prior-Published Conception of the Hypothesis of Macro Evolution by Natural Selection

Saturday, 4 November 2017

Why the topic of Darwin's and Wallace's Plagiarism is now "owned" by the social sciences

There is an 1831 citation of one item of Matthew’s (1831) published work in a German book. Click here 

The cited work is on the topic of Matthew's lightning rods experiment, and it attributes the Matthew experiment to von Matthew Esquire, author of the treatise On Naval Timber. The fact Matthew's experiment is translated into German for a German readership, and appeared first in Robert Jameson's Philosophical journal is important. It is important because Jameson, who was Regius Professor of Biology, taught Charles Darwin at Edinburgh University in 1827.

 Jameson's nephew William Jameson – a correspondent of William Hooker the father of Darwin’s best friend Joseph Hooker - later cited Matthew's (1831) ideas on natural selection pre-1858. William Jameson did so in 1853 (see Nullius 2017). 

The 1831 German translation of Matthew's correspondence to Robert Jameson's journal and the fact Matthew's earlier and rather cranky experiment, which found no evidence to support earlier observations of others that lightning conductors improved the growth of trees or other plants in their immediate vicinity, is in Jameson's Edinburgh New Philosophical journal, which is just one more item amongst many of Matthew's prominently published work that proves Matthew was far from an obscure Scottish writer on forest trees. Matthew, reasoned in his observations that the reason for more luxuriant plant growth near lightning conductors might be because the soil had been particularly well turned near where they were sited. Professor William Jameson's journal reproduced a lengthy communication by Matthew on this rather weird and wonderful lightning rod experiment and then noted his 1831 authorship of On Naval Timber and Arboriculture. As early as 1831, Matthew had, therefore, on the basis of this one independently verifiable fact alone, an international reputation as an experimental gentleman agricultural naturalist science author, in an esteemed journal, edited by a most esteemed biologist. 

Moreover, it is Robert Jameson who is widely believed to be the anonymous author who was first to use the word "evolved" in 1826 in a biological evolutionary sense (see Dempster 1996.p. 143) for an analysis of competing ideas about who was the author).  As I explain my 600 page Kindle e-book (first edition) of Nullius in Verba:Darwin's greatest secret, the undergraduate Darwin offended Robert Jameson by capering off and presenting his own evidences in Jameson's field of interest ater Jameson introduced him and tutored him in his unpublished pioneering work on sea sponges. 

The german translation effectively cites The Edinburgh New Philosophical journal v.11 (1831). Matthew's experiment can be found on pages 386 to 388. And in this article in the journal edited by Robert Jameson we see the journal records that Matthew is the author of NTA. 




This adds one more citation to the list of 24 pre-1858 citations of Matthew's book that is contained in Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret. Read the abridged paperback (vol 1) Nullius in Verba for more of the newly discovered facts. 

Another citation - bringing List 1 to 26, is added by The Quarterly Review citation of it in 1833 on pages 125 and 126. The author of the piece referred to Matthew's 'Critical Notes' in NTA as pert nonsense Click Here.

As further evidence he was not an obscure Scottish writer on Forest Trees, as Darwin (1861) sought to portray him in order to downplay Matthew's right to both first and foremost priority for the theory Darwin replicated and referred to fallaciously thereafter as "my theory", Matthew's (1831) NTA was listed among the few new scientific books published in 1831 (here).

The list of those discovered to have cited Matthew's (1831) book pre 1858 is growing. The Quarterly Review cited it in 1833 on pages 125 and 126. The author of the piece referred to Matthew's 'Critical Notes' in NTA as pert nonsense Click Here
+
+

No comments:

Post a Comment

Spam will be immediately deleted. Other comments warmly welcome.

On this blogsite you are free to write what you think in any way you wish to write it. However, please bear in mind it is a published public environment. Those who seek to hide behind pseudonyms may be exposed for who they actually are.

Anyone publishing threats, obscene comments or anything falling within the UK Anti-Harassment and the Obscene Communications Acts (which carry a maximum sentence of significant periods of imprisonment) should realise Google blogs capture the IP addresses of those who post comments. From there, it is a simple matter to know who you are, where you are commenting from, reveal your identity and inform the appropriate police services.