Supermyths Discovered
Dr Mike Sutton (criminologist)

SUPERMYTHS: Mike Sutton's Website

Hopefully followed by optimistic skeptics in search of veracity

© Dr Mike Sutton 2010 - 2015 All Rights Reserved

Read the original 600 page e-book new discovery that Darwin's friends and influencers read and cited Patrick Matthew's prior-published hypothesis decades before Darwin published the Origin of Species {Here}.

Counterfeit Discoverer

A Selection of Busted Supermyths

The 'Charles Darwin and Patrick Matthew Supermyth'

 

In 1859 Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species referring to natural selection as “my theory”. In 1860, orchard owner Patrick Matthew laid claim in the press to having originated the same theory 28 years earlier in his 1831 book 'On Navel Timber and Arboriculture'. Darwin apologized, acknowledging that Matthew had published the entire concept. Alfred Wallace, another who at the same time claimed to have independently discovered natural selection, agreed. However, Darwin and Wallace claimed no prior knowledge of Matthew’s ideas, excusing themselves by further claiming that no one had read them. Ignoring the principle of nullius in verba, scientists have always taken Darwin and Wallace at their word. Hi-tech methods uniquely reveal that pre-1859 Matthew’s book was cited by seven naturalists, three in Darwin’s inner circle and one who published Wallace’s first paper on evolution. Many more cited Matthew's book. The same method discovered six lies Darwin told to obtain primacy over Matthew. Moreover, Darwin’s notebooks reveal that apple trees were the first thing he wrote about on evolution and that he owned at least five publications that cited Matthew’s book. An electronic plagiarism check, which compared Darwin's and Wallace's unpublished and published work with Matthew's book proves beyond all reasonable doubt that they plagiarised his unique phrases, terms, his hypothesis and many uniquely creative examples of how natural selection works in nature. Darwin and Wallace were facilitated in their science fraud by the organizational conventions of the Royal Society and the British Association for the advancement of science.

 

Prior to my discovery of the new facts about who cited Matthew's 1831 book, and commented on his original ideas, many scientists, including the Darwinist head of the Skepticks Society Michael Shermer, and Darwinist celebrity scientist Richard Dawkins biased-stacked myth upon myth in order to bury the threat of Matthew in oblivion.

 

My detailed blog post on this supermyth can be read {here}.

 

The full story is now published in "Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret."

 

Contrary to the myth that Matthew's ideas were merely briefly stated in th eappendix to his book and busting the supermyth that Matthew's 1831 book, revealing and detailing his unique and full discovery of natural selection, went unread by any naturalists known to Darwin and Wallace, it was cited in the literature before 1858 by three naturalists who played key pre-1858 roles in facilitating and influencing Darwin’s and Wallace’s published ideas on natural selection.

 

Read some details of the Patrick Matthew Supermythbust here

The Darwin Finches Myth

The long-busted, yet pervasive, myth that Charles Darwin's Eureka! Moment realisation of the ability of natural selection to explain the problem of species, came by way of his observation of variation in the beaks of Galapagos Islands finches is a supermyth. Darwin did no such thing. He failed to understand the significance of the variation in those finch beaks, he never collected the finches, he misclassified 7 of the 13 finches that were collected by a crew member of The HMS Beagle.. Darwin mentioned finches once only in The Orign of Species, in which he wrote nothing on the evolution of finch beaks. The significance of adaptation of Galapagos Islands finches was a late 20th century discovery.

 

The Darwin Finches Myth is a supermyth because it is deployed to this day by Darwinists arguing against the myth of divine creation of new species. It is used by the uninformed, including some Darwinists, in an attempt to disprove the overwhelming evidence that Darwin’s real Eureka! Moment came after 1837 and was found within the pages of Patrick Matthew’s (1831) full and prominently published and reviewed articulation of the theory of the ‘natural process of selection.’ Darwin claimed never to have read the book despite the newly discovered fact that other famous naturalists read and cited it - including three of Darwin's scientific associates.

 

Read the mythbust here

Expert Skeptics Suckered Again: Incredibly, the Famous Semmelweis Story is another Supermyth

The Semmelweis reflex or “Semmelweis effect”, which is a metaphor for the reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs or paradigms, is another exquisitely ironic supermyth.

 

The Spinach Supermyth

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The influential policing policy research finding that “…a patrolling policeman in London could expect to pass within 100 yards of a burglary in progress, roughly once every eight years but not necessarily catch the burglar or even realise that the crime was taking place” is a braced super myth that was invented and then deployed to bust the myth that beat foot-patrol policing is the best answer to crime.

 

Read the mythbust here

Zombie Cop Supermyth

A story started thirty years ago by nutritionist Professor Arnold Bender, and famously supported by the immunohaematologist Professor Terence Hamblin, that a decimal point error made in 19th Century research of the iron content of spinach led to its erroneous promotion, is completely untrue.

 

 

Read the mythbust here

Read the mythbust in HealthWatch edition 101. Click

the popout button on the image above to read the article

The Crime Opportunity Supermyth

 

Based as it is on a simple truism and five fallacies: equivocation; ambiguity; precognition; post hoc ergo propter hoc; and the ‘social absolute’ the notion of 'opportunity' , which is central to so called ‘Crime as Opportunity Theory’, cannot logically be a cause of crime. Administrative criminologists, desperate to bust the myth that crime and criminality is caused by distal social factors such as poverty, parenting and sub-culture have created the myth that every crime is the cause of itself. The myth stems from the fact that leading criminologists made the mistake of confusing mere truisms with scientific notions of causality.

 

 

Read the mythbust here

 

The Humpty Dumpty Supermyth

 

The origin of the nursery rhyme character Humpty Dumpty has been

something of an etymological search for the Holy Grail for well over 100 years. Myths about the influence being the shape of eggs and a name given to a Royalist forces cannon in the English Civil War abound. Hi-tech research methods reveal that in fact Punchanello (AKA Punchinello) is the influential cultural influence for Humpty Dumpty, by way of a 1701 poem. And there really was a Parliamentary forces cannon named Punchinello. Humpty dumpty originally had nought to do with eggs. Later an egg-character was used to simply represent a humpy dumpy Punchinello-physical-type.

 

Read the mythbust here

 

 

 

The Moral Panic Supermyth

 

Moral Panic is a sociological term embodied with inherent meaning. Despite 45 years of myth and counter-myth that - in turn - Stan Cohen, Jock Young and Marshall McLuhan coined and invented the term and the concept of Moral Panic, the truth is that both term and exact deviancy and media escalation concept have been in use throughout the last 183 years in the USA and throughout Europe.

 

Read the mythbust here

 

 

The Asteroid Supermyth

 

It is a myth that William Herschel coined he term 'asteroid' for space rocks. Because expert archive research proves that the son of Charles Burney suggested it in 1801 and that this suggestion was conveyed to William Herschel. As Cunningham (2013) uniquely informs us: "Asteroid was Herschel's choice, but it was not his creation."

 

However, in busting the myth that William Herschel coined the astronomicall term 'asteroid', Cunningham has inadverantly created a supermyth in claiming that Burney Jr coined it, because the term asteroid was used by Girolamo Brisiano in a 1588 publication, where the words 'aster' and asteroides' were deployed in the context of stars, fully 213 years before Charles Burney Jr's father, Dr Charles Burney senior, offered 'his' son's supposedly newly coined astronomy word 'asteroid' up to Herschel to name space rocks!

 

In short, it is a supermyth that Burney Jr coined the astronomy term asteroid.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Moreover, the term asteroid had been used to name a star like flower in over 100 publications before 1801.

 

See the mythbust here

The Original Honest Darwin Supermyth

 

I am currenlty looking into who it was who first published their credulous beleif in Charles Darwin's mythical originality and honesty. But the myth has been compunded since by a multitude of books that claim Darwin uniquely coined the term 'natural selection' and uniquely discovered the concept. Because those in the know - e.g. Darwin, Wallace, Hamilton and Dawkins - had/have no doubt that Patrick Matthew prior-published the full hypothesis in 1831 - 27 years before Darwin's and Wallace's papers were read before the linnean society in 1858 and six years before Darwin first put pen to private paper on the topic.

 

Famoulsy, his biographer Ronald W Clark wrote in 1984 that the only reason he beleived Darwin had not plagiarised Matthew's prior published hypothesis is because Darwin was so honest. In reality, Darwin told at least six lies to obtain priority over Matthew for Mattthew's complete prior-published hypothesis of natural selection. By way of just one example, he brazenly lied about the prior readership of Matthew's orignal ideas at a time when he had been told already that the opposite was true (Sutton 2016). In an effort to hide the truth, Darwin scholars are misleading the public by denying this 100 per cent proven fact exists.(see the disgraceful proof here). There is no room for reasonable doubt that it is irational to give a serial liar the benefit of the doubt regarding his claims to have independently discovered what Matthew uniquely discovered before him, which Matthew uniquely coined the natural process of selection when the New Data that I uniquely discovered proves that Darwin knew four naturalists who cited Matthew's book - containing the hypothesis he replicated and renamed by uniquely four word shuffling Matthew's name for it into 'the process of natural selection', naming the book that replicated it after the term Matthew's 1832 reviewer Loudon (1832) used to describe Matthew's unique discovery 'Origin of Species' and opening that book with the unique Artificial versus Natural Selection Analogy of Differences that Matthew used to explain it.then replicating many of Matthew's examples of its operation in nature to explain it in his private essays in the 1840's and in The Origin (1859).. Darwin knew and was greatly influenced by Blyth. Loudon edited two of Blyth's highly influential papers on organic adaptation by evolution. Darwin knew and was influenced by Chambers - who also cited Matthew's book in 1832. Darwin also knew Selby who cited Matthew's book in 1842 and then went on to edit Wallace's Sarawak paper - which Darwin also read pre-1858 (see Sutton 2015 and Sutton 2016 or the full references to these independently verifiable new facts in peer reviewed academic journals).

 

You can see one of Darwin's major lies exposed for the first time on my Blog post "Immaculate Deception". A further five of Darwin's major self-serving lies, and much greater detail about those Darwin and Wallace knew who read Matthew's book before Darwin and Wallace replicated the discoveries within it - yet each climing not to have known about it - can be found in my book Nullius in Verba: Darwin's greatest secret.

Forthcoming soon: The Original Honest Wallace Supermyth