Darwin's and Wallace's Dual Immaculate Deception in Oils

The picture was commissioned, in light of new data (Sutton 2014) that proves naturalists well known the Darwin and Wallace read and then cited Matthew's book before going on to play roles at the very epicenter of influence on the pre-1858 work of Darwin and Wallace on natural selection. The Blessed Virgin St Mary's conception of Jesus of Nazareth, is a miracle because she became pregnant with the child of "God" whilst surrounded by men who were fertile to some unknown degree. The analogy is perfect because so too were Darwin and Wallace surrounded by man whose brains were fertile - to some unknown degree - with Matthew's unique ideas. Therefore, in the final analysis, if Darwin and Wallace did not conceive Matthew's unique discovery, name for it, examples of it in nature, and his artificial versus natural slection analogy of differences to explain it, by some kind of 'knowledge contamination,' then they must surely have each been mysteriously endowed with a miraculous and divine cognitive contraceptive device (MAD CCD).

Seriously, I don't think belief in miracles has any rational place in helping us to tell the veracious history of the discovery of the theory of natural selection The probability that Darwin and Wallace lied when they each claimed to have independently discovered natural selection seems more likely than not. The New Data and a wealth of further evidence about their lies and deceit suggests Darwin and Wallace committed the world's greatest science fraud by deliberately plagiarizing Matthew's book.

Background to Gabriel Wood's painting "Their Immaculate Conception"

Contrary to the Patrick Matthew Supermyth started by Darwin in 1860 in his own defense, other naturalists in fact did read Matthew's (1831) prior published theory of natural selection.

At least 25 people cited the book before 1858 and seven of those were naturalists.

The Newly Discovered Citing Seven, in date order of their citing of Matthew's book, are:

Public Domain

Patrick Matthew: The biological father of the theory of natural selection

1. John Loudon (1832)   ,
2. Robert Chambers (1832),
3. Edmund Murphy (1834),
4. Cuthbert Johnson (1842),
5. Prideaux John Selby (1842),
6. John Norton (1851)
7. William Jameson (1853).

Three of these seven naturalists - Loudon, Selby and Chambers - played key roles at the epicenter of influence on both Darwin's and Wallace's pre-1858 work on the theory of natural selection.

Loudon - an associate of Darwin's friends William and Joseph Hooker - edited two of Edward Blyth's (1835, 1836) hugely influential papers on species. Blyth was Darwin's most useful and prolific informant.

Selby edited Wallace's (1855) famous Sarawak paper on natural selection.

Chambers (1844) wrote the best selling Vestiges of Creation - the book that most influenced Wallace, greatly influenced Darwin, and "put evolution in the air" in the first half of the 19th century.

Barring the occurrence of a dual supernatural miracle of immaculate conception by divine cognitive contraception, some kind of 'knowledge contamination' appears more likely than not.

More details available here on BestThinking

How to Make a Significant Contribution to Knowledge to Academic Knowledge

Are you fed up with hearing and reading claptrap? If so, my advice is that you don't waste your valuable time and energy berating the frozen donkeys who stubbornly believe in it. You need to tell them the facts and then share those facts with a wider and more receptive audience.

Your time and your brain are your most valuable assets. Don't take either for granted. If you are looking for ways to find previously undiscovered, argument winning, independently verifiable facts, you might care to think about buying my book 'Nullius in Verba' at the Thinker Books Store or on Amazon Books. In it you will find out how to uniquely discover your own brand new, hard, confirming or dis-confirming facts.

My simple to use new Big Data technology method will work in any area of your interest, allowing you to bust myths and fallacies, thereby providing you with a solid foundation upon which to make your own unique and significant contribution to veracious hard-evidence-based knowledge.

• They may tell you that it's not what you say but the way that you say it. However, in the real world, in the long-run, facts trump claptrap every time.

If you want to impress your friends, confuse your "enemies", and greatly enhance your cognitive armoury to deal with mere clever rhetoric and soft-beliefs masquerading as knowledge, then read Nullius in Verba today.

In this book, in plain English, I lead by example to show you exactly how easy it is to make simple and freely available new Big Data research technology and techniques work for you.

Matt Rudd of the Sunday Times on Spuriofacts about Spinach

In his popular column "The God of Small Things", Matt Rudd (Senior Writer for the Sunday Times) writes on page 5 of the Sunday Times Magazine of May 10th 2015):

'Child A announces he no longer has to eat spinach. His teacher told him a 19th-century scientist got the decimal point wrong when they recorded its iron content, inadvertently exaggerating it tenfold.

Popeye's superpowers were founded on a myth he claims.

The Sunday Times Magazine May 10th 2015Attribution

Article by Matt Rudd, Senior Writer for The Sunday Times.

Wait there while I check, I say. Four days later, I have an answer. It is possibly the most convoluted answer in the history of this column, but I'll give you the short version.

The decimal point error was first mentioned in an article by Professor Bender in 1971. it has since been used as an example of the importance of accuracy in science.Which is ironic, because there never was a decimal point error in the first place.

Dr Mike Sutton of Nottingham Trent University spent many, many weeks getting to the bottom of the myth. The confusion comes from the fact that dried spinach conatains a lot more iron (44.5 mg per 100g) than fresh spinach (2.7mg per 100g). It was this, rather than an errant decimal point, that caused the initial muddle. There was another muddle involving iron oxide.

And then Professor Bender came along with his decimal point story, and now we have a myth about a myth.

Or a SUPERMYTH, as Dr Sutton calls it.

Popeye, by the way, got his superpowers from the beta-carotene in his spinach. Iron had nothing to do with it. To confuse matters much further, spinach still has a relatively high iron content, even without moving any decimal points. But it's still no good. As Sutton points out: "Spinach contains oxalic acid and oxalic acid is an iron blocker."

So Child A's teacher was right for the wrong reason. And Child A is now trying to find a reason to avoid broccoli.