Sustainable Violins
The Secret Violin Shop Nottingham
Dr Mike Sutton
To Enquire About The Secret Violin Shop violins: Contact drmikesutton@hotmail.com
To Buy Direct Contact me: Dr Mike Sutton of The Secret Violin Shop, Nottingham by email: drmikesutton@hotmail.com
Alternatively, I always have many violins for sale, including those shown on this website, through eBay HERE. Deliveries throughout the UK or, by appointment only, collect from The Secret Violin Shop Workshop in Nottingham
The Secret Violin Shop's "Violins With Stories" collection is a collection of violins that are played at various performance events, some of which have personal stories that bust commonly believed entrenched myths about history, science and violins. The Patrick Matthew Violin is currently, at least arguably, the star of the collection. More about the collection can be found here. There is also a dedicated Facebook group with details of past and forthcoming events HERE
THE PATRICK MATTHEW VIOLIN
At the intersection of art, culture, music and science The Patrick Matthew violin was made to help inform society of the Darwin Supermyth bust. You can see press association images of the violin and videos of the violin being played at PatrickMatthew.com
Richard Smith Plays Flowers of Edinburgh on The Patrick Matthew
Richard Smith Plays Hoedown on The Patrick Matthew
Mike Sutton holds The Patrick Matthew violin
The Story Behind The Patick Matthew Violin
The Patrick Matthew Violin was made and is being played to inform science and history that it is exquisitely ironic that in the so called post-truth age of lies, fake news and other deception that it must fall to art to inform science and history that those disciplines should be less artistic and more scientific. Our history of science should be based on verifiable empirical data - not beloved myths that are bust by such data. You can find out more and see more videos of the violin at the relevant PatrickMatthew.com page.
The academic use of hi-tech empirical data detecting disruptive technologies to unearth and then help reduce the orthodox acceptance and dissemination of mere fake facts.
What is a Supermyth?
Read my "Dysology" article "On Supermyths" to find out more. HERE
The phenomenon of the Supermyth was first published on Best Thinking to bust the myth about a decimal point error in the iron content of spinach leading to it it being the secret of Popeye’s superpowers and generations of children being forced to eat the slimy muck.
The story has now jumped from the internet to the pages of a book published by the Penguin Group.
Sam Arbesman’s 'The Half Life of Facts: Why Everything we Know Has and Expiration Date' was updated between the hard back and the paper version in order to take account of my article: 'The The Spinach, Popeye, Iron, Decimal Error Myth is Finally Busted'.
Supermyths, of which braced myths are a sub-type, are ironic, unintended, or else deliberate and disingenuous, consequences of fallacy dissemination.
Supermyths have very specific components:
1. The creation of a fallacy, myth or error by an orthodox expert.
2. Being used by another expert who in turn promotes it as being ‘true, and whilst still thinking that it is true either promotes it as a good example of the need to be healthily skeptical of bad scholarship, or else:
3. compounds the myth by using it as a premise upon which to build one or more supporting myths.
Braced myths are supermyths that have been pointedly deployed by orthodox scholars in order to bust another specific myth or fallacy. The braced myth hypothesis is that using one myth as a specific mythbusting device in this way braces the supermyth to make it further entrenched and therefore more difficult to prevent it being credulously disseminated as though it is veracious knowledge.
My latest research onto this phenomenon, with the aid of hi-tech research techniques, has enabled me to discover and prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace plagiarised the entire concept of natural selection from the botanist Patrick
Other academic articles covering the concept of supermyths
Retrospective Technological Mythmaking: Media Discourses of Furby and Artificial Intelligence, by D.Travers Scott (2024) Journal for Media History
NEWS ON THE NEW DATA DISCOVERED IN THE HISTORY OF DISCOVERY OF NATURAL SELECTION AND OTHER MYTHS BUSTED
1. The Daily Telegraph [Archived]
2. Scottish Daily Mail [Archived]
3. The Sunday Times Magazine [Archived]
3.The Scottish Courier [Archived]
4. The Scotsman [Archived]
6, Five Thirty Eight [Archived]
7. Sputnik (France) [Archived]
8. Sputnik (Germany) [Archived]
9. New Scientist [Archived]
SCIENCE FRAUD, THE BOOK
How do we solve the science problem of the supposed later dual independent conceptions of a prior published theory?
How did Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace in 1858/59 supposedly independently and miraculously replicate what Darwin, Wallace, de Beer, Mayer, Dawkins and many other top biologists said was essentially the exact same full theory of evolution by natural selection and the very same four essential words to name it (natural process of selectionthat BigData analysis shows Patrick Matthew originated and had published in 1831? And why, in light of the new data that busts Darwin and Wallace's excuse that Matthew's theory was unread before 1860, are the Darwin dependent Linnean Society and the Royal Society now shamefully publishing desperately silly papers by cyberstalking obscene criminals, workplace harassment criminals and repeat research plagiarists that claim Matthew's theory is now suddenly and yet ever so conveniently to be argued to be significantly different to that published by Darwin and Wallace?
Readers of this website can buy a copy of Science Fraud at a 40% discount off the current retail price. The book provides all the independently verifiable data, supported by academic references to sources, that proves both Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace plagiarised the theory of evolution by natural selection.
Visit the publisher's website Curtis Press and use the code suttonsites24 to get this deal at checkout before paying.
Myths and Erroneous Thinking in the Violin Industry
In The Secret Violin Shop's workshop, one thing I have learned is that violin soundposts that look for all the world to be perfectly vertical through the treble side F-hole are in fact real badly slanting.
The thing is, luthiers who use the traditional stabby tool to stab a new (or just as likely re-stabbing an old multiply stabbed full of holes) soundpost to simply fit it through the f-hole have no way of knowing if it is perfectly vertical or not, or if it is making proper full contact with the top plate. That is, not unless they take the tailpiece off and view it through the end pin hole, which most don't..
I personally use a new type of tool that does not involve stabbing a nasty hole of any kind into the soundpost. Moreover, I always view the soundpost installing process through the end pin hole to ensure the post is perfectly vertical and of even greater importance that it fits properly flush to both the top plate and bottom plate.
The images below show the original soundpost as installed in the violin I am restoring, which looked perfectly straight through the f-hole, but was badly slanting, which stops it vibrating correctly. The second image shows the newly fitted perfectly straight soundpost. Both images taken through the end pin hole.
Traditionally and badly installed soundpost
Properly installed with innovative methods soundpost
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.
The unethical Darwin Supermyth is bust in the 2023 Springer book Academic Integrity in the Social Sciences in a chapter entitled The Patrick Matthew Effect in Science.
My detailed blog post on this supermyth can be read {here}.
Contrary to the myth that Matthew's ideas were merely briefly stated in the appendix 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.
You may have heard of "The Matthew Effect in Science" and so the "Patrick Matthew Effect" is incredibly important and ironic for those who have written about the Matthew Effect but are uninterested in Patrick Matthew precisely because of The Matthew Effect.
The Darwin and Hoooker Invented Terraforming Supermyth but is 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
Nullius in Verba Charles Darwin:
Click here to read my peer reviewed science paper on Darwin's and Wallace's plagiarism of Matthew's prior published theory of natural selection
Using hi-tech 'big data' research methods I found the hidden books in the library that prove beyond all reasonable doubt that both Darwin and Wallace committed the greatest known science fraud in history by plagiarising the entire hypotheses of natural selection from Matthew.
Find out how hi-tech, big data, research methods changed everything we thought we knew about the discovery of the theory of natural selection. Cilck here to discover more.
Explanations by Analogy have the Power to Change the World.
Read Mike Sutton's 2015 position paper on why the New Data means Darwinist beliefs in their namesake's and Wallace's so called "independent discoveries" of Matthew's prior published theory - whilst surrounded by friends and associates who read it - is as improbable as The Virgin Mary supernaturally conceiving a child whilst surrounded by fertile men. Here
Click here to read my published paper on Darwin's plagiarism - presented in 2014 as the last historic Sunday Lecture at Conway Hall [Archived here]
Click here to read my peer reviwed criminology paper on why Matthew has full priority over Darwin and Wallace for the theory they replicated 27 years after it was first published.
Click here to read the irrational Darwinist Trinity of Faith Defence
In my Sunday lecture at the historic Conway Hall in London, I presented the newly discovered evidence that proves that, pre-1858, Patrick Matthew’s (1831) book - outlinng the full theory of natural selection - was read by at least seven naturalists. Most tellingly, three of the seven were at the epicentre of influence on Darwin’s and Wallace’s researches and two of those three were personal associates and correspondents of Darwin and Wallace. I showed that Matthew, not Darwin, should be celebrated as solver of the problem of species. Read the paper here.
Visitit Patrickmatthew.com for more details about the true biological father of the discovery of natural selection {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 academic use of hi-tech empirical data detecting disruptive technologies to unearth and then help reduce the orthodox acceptance and dissemination of mere fake facts.
What is a Supermyth?
Read my "Dysology" article "On Supermyths" to find out more. HERE
The phenomenon of the Supermyth was first published on Best Thinking to bust the myth about a decimal point error in the iron content of spinach leading to it it being the secret of Popeye’s superpowers and generations of children being forced to eat the slimy muck.
The story has now jumped from the internet to the pages of a book published by the Penguin Group.
Sam Arbesman’s 'The Half Life of Facts: Why Everything we Know Has and Expiration Date' was updated between the hard back and the paper version in order to take account of my article: 'The The Spinach, Popeye, Iron, Decimal Error Myth is Finally Busted'.
Supermyths, of which braced myths are a sub-type, are ironic, unintended, or else deliberate and disingenuous, consequences of fallacy dissemination.
Supermyths have very specific components:
1. The creation of a fallacy, myth or error by an orthodox expert.
2. Being used by another expert who in turn promotes it as being ‘true, and whilst still thinking that it is true either promotes it as a good example of the need to be healthily skeptical of bad scholarship, or else:
3. compounds the myth by using it as a premise upon which to build one or more supporting myths.
Braced myths are supermyths that have been pointedly deployed by orthodox scholars in order to bust another specific myth or fallacy. The braced myth hypothesis is that using one myth as a specific mythbusting device in this way braces the supermyth to make it further entrenched and therefore more difficult to prevent it being credulously disseminated as though it is veracious knowledge.
My latest research onto this phenomenon, with the aid of hi-tech research techniques, has enabled me to discover and prove beyond any reasonable doubt that Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace plagiarised the entire concept of natural selection from the botanist Patrick
The Darwin Supermyth is bust
It is a proven fallacy that Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace (1858/59) were each first to independently conceive the full theory of evolution by natural selection. This is because top Darwin experts such as Richard Dawkins and Darwin medal winners Sir Gavin de Beer and Ernst Mayr (to name just a few) write that Patrick Matthew (1831) was in fact first into print with the entire theory. The myth that Darwin should have priority for Matthew's prior published theory is based on the falsehood knowingly spread by Darwin that no single person read Matthew's theory. In fact Darwin's and Wallace influencers and their influencers, among others also newly discovered, had read and cited Matthew's book. For these facts and many more in this story read the book Science Fraud.
More than one artificial intelligence system finds Charles Darwin guilty of knowingly lying about Matthew's (1831) prior readership. Hence the Supermyth of Darwin being an honest originator of the thery of evolution by natural selection is busted by the empirical data and logical reasoning based on it.
See the empirical data on this topic Here
The Spinach 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
.
Mythbusting Articles on Spinach
Spinach, Iron and Popeye: Ironic lessons from biochemistry and history on the importance of healthy eating, healthy scepticism and adequate citation (Sutton 2010) (here and here and also here)
The Spinach, Popeye, Iron, Decimal Error Myth is Finally Busted (Sutton, M. 2010) (here)
Did Popeye Really Increase Spinach Consumption and Production by 33 percent in 1936? (here)(Original Best Thinking blog post archived in full here)
SPIN@GE USA Beware of the Bull: The United States Department of Agriculture is Spreading Bull about Spinach, Iron and Vitamin C (Sutton 2011) (Here)
Spin@ge II: Does the United States Department of Agriculture’s Publication of Spuriofacts Have its Origins in a Perverse Scientific Paper Written in 1937? (Sutton, M. June 2012) (here and archived here)
How the spinach, Popeye and iron decimal point error myth was finally bust (Sutton 2010) (Here and also here)
Read the mythbust in HealthWatch edition 101. Click
the popout button on the image above to read the article
A Selection of Popular Science and other Books Citing Mike Sutton's Spinach, Popeye and Iron Decimal Point Error Supermythbust. Read the story: Here
THE PATRICK MATTHEW SUPERMYTH
THE MOST SENSATIONAL DISCOVERY OF INDEPENDENTLY VERIFIABLE PROOF OF HISTORIC SCIENCE FRAUD SINCE PILTDOWN MAN. Read the Supermythbust HERE
The Darwin Supermyth is bust
It is a proven fallacy that Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace (1858/59) were each first to independently conceive the full theory of evolution by natural selection. This is because top Darwin experts such as Richard Dawkins and Darwin medal winners Sir Gavin de Beer and Ernst Mayr (to name just a few) write that Patrick Matthew (1831) was in fact first into print with the entire theory. The myth that Darwin should have priority for Matthew's prior published theory is based on the falsehood knowingly spread by Darwin that no single person read Matthew's theory. In fact Darwin's and Wallace influencers and their influencers, among others also newly discovered, had read and cited Matthew's book. For these facts and many more in this story read the book Science Fraud.
More than one artificial intelligence system finds Charles Darwin guilty of knowingly lying about Matthew's (1831) prior readership. Hence the Supermyth of Darwin being an honest originator of the thery of evolution by natural selection is busted by the empirical data and logical reasoning based on it.
See the empirical data on this topic Here
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 lack of beat policing, 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.
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.
The unethical Darwin Supermyth is bust in the 2023 Springer book Academic Integrity in the Social Sciences in a chapter entitled The Patrick Matthew Effect in Science.
My detailed blog post on this supermyth can be read {here}.
Contrary to the myth that Matthew's ideas were merely briefly stated in the appendix 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.
You may have heard of "The Matthew Effect in Science" and so the "Patrick Matthew Effect" is incredibly important and ironic for those who have written about the Matthew Effect but are uninterested in Patrick Matthew precisely because of The Matthew Effect.
The Darwin and Hoooker Invented Terraforming Supermyth but is 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
The Face Masks Supermyth (AKA #MasksSupermyth)
During the 2020 Covid19 pandemic, scientific advisers of the UK government created an unevidenced story that the UK public do/would behave like idots when wearing protective masks in public places.to try to limit the spread of the virus. They refused to admit they were just making things up, refused to admit they were wrong in light of scientific advice from other countries, other science and logic (e.g. this paper by Prof Greenhalgh in the BMJ).
Only after 8 weeks of lockdown - during which time the UK government (except Scotland) stubbonly stuck to their fabricated story telling rather than admit they were wrong from the start - did Prime Minister Boris Johnson recommend masks be used by the public inside shops etc. But even then he refused to make them compulsory!
How many thousands of lives have been lost by this lethal dysology?
See the video timeline of the Masks Supermyth mythbust HERE
The face of Covid-19
Zombie Cop 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.
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.
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.
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
