MAIN CATEGORIES OF CONCERN
1. SUTTON’S RESEARCH IS POOR AND LAZY
On the face of it, the details of these topics, discussed across the hundreds of pages comprising this website, may seem trivial in their focus, academic in their triviality, and no more than one boffin taking swipes at another. After all, everyone knows that universities are jam packed with professional jealousy and ruthless ambition. Hopefully you’ll find that’s not the case as you work your way through this material, but you will need to objectively engage with the information for it to be made obvious. You will not require any qualifications to do so, other than basic literacy and some common sense, because what you will find here, will not be a complicated technical argument, but instead a clear exposure of the frankly huge number of mistakes made by Sutton whilst carrying out his research.
This is the type of research work that makes you cringe, not so much because of major failings and possible legal violation, such as fraudulent fabrication, although that does also feature, but more so from the profundity of “lazy and careless” mistakes that undermine almost every point made. This type of error is officially considered less of a misdemeanor, but is actually thought worse than fraud amongst professional academics, according to a recent survey (Bouter et al. 2016, ).
Sutton’s case is an intriguing example of extraordinarily poor standards, but typical nonetheless for an academic blinkered by ego and ambition: they are simply unable to see the problems with their work, evident to anybody else prepared to spend a little time and effort in taking a proper look.
2. SUTTON IS SPREADING MISINFORMATION
Bouter et al. (ibid.) considered the major contraventions of academic principles, Fabrication, Falsification, and Plagiarism (FFP), alongside less legislated examples which they collectively called, Questionable Research Practices (QRP).
Sutton’s case, presented here, has both, QRP in the main, but a sprinkling of FFP as well. Reasons for investigating the case are explained in the dossier forming the vast majority of this dedicated website. There’s so much of it simply because it catalogues Sutton’s very many silly mistakes (e.g., practical and lexical), major failings in scientific methodology (e.g., logic and procedure), and several instances of unprofessionalism (e.g., personation and fabrication).
This website forms an official invitation to the authorities concerned to familiarise themselves with the details of this case, and to please take action against the ongoing spread of misinformation. It is also an invitation for you to make an individual stand. What can you do? Publicise such cases: highlight them on social media, report them to local papers, exert pressure on those authorities to intervene and stop the rot. It is NOT an invitation to Sutton to respond here or anywhere else. He has had plenty of opportunity to discuss the scientific and historical details with qualified professionals, but resorted to insults instead.
3. HIS ASSOCIATES ARE ODDLY INCURIOUS
The parties most at risk as a consequence of Sutton’s activities continuing unchecked, are the reputations of his university, and the people who have endorsed his work. Despite my best efforts to bring these failings to their attention, it is evident that in a bizarre act of professional self-harm, and for whatever reasons, the following have yet to engage with the evidence presented them,
- Kathie Moore (Professor and Dean of the School of Social Sciences at NTU).
- Fiona Ross (Chair of The Carse of Gowrie Sustainability Group with whom Sutton has been collaborating on a heritage project).
- Mark Griffiths (Professor of Psychology at NTU, who has given his endorsement).
- Michael Alexander (journalist at the Dundee Courier who has published articles publicising the work).
- Bob Butler (founder and CEO of ThinkerMedia who published the 1st edition of Sutton’s work as an ebook.
- Andy Sutton (cover designer for Sutton’s self-published, 2nd edition of his book).
- Dariusz Sagan (an editor of Polish journal Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy, FAG, who published one of Sutton’s papers).