BAD SCHOLARSHIP, WEIRD BELIEFS AND STRANGELY UNEXPLORED AREAS OF RESEARCH
Identifying strangely neglected areas of research, understanding why orthodox research scholarship and 'knowledge' becomes lopsided, revealing and understanding the reasons for the creation, dissemination and widespread belief in academic and policy oriented research frauds, lies, deceptions, hoaxes, fallacies, myths, braced myths, errors and irrational policymaking.
Monday, 27 July 2015
The New Crisis in Darwinism
Progress in search engine technology facilitated original research in Google's Library Project of over 30 million searchable books and other publications.That research led to game changing discoveries, which have transformed the unique anomaly of Darwin's and Wallace's claimed dual independent discoveries of Matthew's prior-published original ideas. That old anomaly was changed by the New Data in 2014 from a vexation into a crisis of credulous deifying Darwinist belief in the double occurrence of paradoxical immaculate conceptions by Darwin and Wallace, miraculously occurring as each logically must, whilst they were surrounded by naturalists who they knew, who influenced them, and whose minds were fertile with Matthew's ideas, having read and then cited the book decades before Wallace (1855) Darwin and Wallace (1858) and Darwin (1842, 1844 and 1859) replicated the work within it, and decades before Darwin fallaciously claimed no naturalist had read it before 1860.
Consequently, the issue of Patrick Mathew's priority over Darwin and Wallace for his own prior-published and cited discovery is not something that the history of scientific discovery can ethically or sensibly continue to choose to ignore if it is to be of any use in helping us to understand how the discovery of natural selection occurred. Such knowledge is important, because it is fundamental in developing ways to increase the chances of making other great discoveries in the future.
Read more on the Patrick Matthew Website Here