george murphy wrote:
>
> Edward Hassertt wrote:
>
> > In response to my instance that George should explain his SPOG so this lowly
> > minister could understand it, I received the following message:
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "George Hammond" <ghammond@mediaone.net>
> >
> > >
> > > And another thing Ed, I don't talk to people privately
> > > unless they are Nobel Laureates or internationally recognized
> > > authorities. If you want to say anything to me you will
> > > have to say it publicly.
> > > This goes for anyone else who thinks they are going to
> > > harangue me behind closed doors.
> > >
> > > killfile: Edward Hassertt <hassertt@prodigy.net>
> >
> > I addressed him privately out of respect and an attempt to approach him
> > biblically (Matt 18). I am upset with his disdain for people who are
> > actually in the trenches serving God in the community, but its probably
> > because his theory is so far out of reality that he can't explain to me.
> > Why is this guy even on a list for Christians in science, let alone a list
> > for scientists? I have a Masters Degree in Theology and am finishing up my
> > second BA in philosophy, yet he can't explain his theory in a way I can
> > understand, yet claims his theory will change the world. How can it change
> > the world if no one but Nobel Laureates or internationally recognized
> > authorities can understand it? This guy is a joke.
>
> Dear Edward -
> You have discovered what some of the rest of us on the ASA list found
> some time ago - that it is not worth trying to communicate with this man. His
> knowledge of relativity is superficial and that of theology is non-existent.
> His favorite argument, addressed to anyone who disagrees with him, is "You're an
> idiot." His "Scientific Proof of God" is simply a series of nonsequiturs.
>
> The reason he is on this list is simply that it is open to all who wish
> to participate. Virtually everybody here wishes that he would go away. The
> best way for that to be accomplished will be for all the sensible people on the
> list to ignore him as strictly as possible. It will probably take awhile for
> him to leave because he seems to have nothing better to do with his time that
> try to announce his SPOG as an answer to everything, but he will eventually
> leave if he can't get a rise out of anybody.
>
> Shalom,
> George
>
> George L. Murphy
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> "The Science-Theology Interface"
[George Hammond]
Dear George Murphy and Edward Hassertt:
I find the present situation personally embarrassing and disastrous
to the point of mortification. Nevertheless, dire circumstances force me
to have to face up to it and undertake a constructive initiative. There
are several factual circumstances that bear on this.
In the first place it is obvious that the world social structure is
undergoing a rapid change. The good guys of yesterday may easily become
the villains of tomorrow, and vice versa, and many innocent people are
at risk. At the center of all this is a potential religious confrontation
between the Christian and Moslem worlds involving 40 Billion dollars worth
of potential military action. And central to this type of social situation
is certainly anything such as the proposal of a "scientific proof of God".
We have already seen growing levels of hate in the lower realms of our
society and the situation can get worse if educated people don't put their
heads together fast and start displaying a proper role model for behavior
in the coming few years apparently of religious, social and military crisis.
Therefore, I am going first.. I am officially "standing down" vis a vis
any further disputation and confrontation concerning the discovery of a
scientific proof of God. Out of pure concern of the consequences of further
disputation, I am initiating an effort of reapproachmont; first.
Edward Hassertt has complained bitterly that I have said that the SPOG
can only be understood by Nobel Laureates and International authorities.
The answer to that is yes and no. It can only be confirmed by authorities,
but it can be understood by anyone. The problem is that no authorities have
confirmed it, so therefore no one will bother to try and understand it
because they have no way of knowing if they're wasting their time on
something
that may not be true.
In order to solve this problem, I have recently sent the abstract for a
summary paper on the SPOG to Philip Hefner, editor of the peer reviewed
journal
ZYGON. Sir John Polkinghorne, an eminent Physicist and Theologian is a
frequent contributor to this journal, and I have asked Dr. Hefner if Zygon
would give me an assurance that they would ask John Polkinghorne to review
the paper. Polkinghorne was a student of Dirac's, was head of Particle
Physics research at Oxford, was President of Queen's College in London,
is a member of the Royal Society and a Knight of the Order of the British
Empire as well as being an Ordained Minister in the Anglican Church.
This is exactly the kind of expertise that is necessary to evaluate
something
like the scientific proof of God.
Now, I mention this at some risk to myself, since George Murphy is also a
contributor to Zygon, and Howard Van Till, also on this list, is a Book
Reviewer for Zygon. All I would need is for either one of them to pick up
the telephone or send an email to Philip Hefner telling him that they
thought
George Hammond was a crank, and that would be the end of any publication of
the SPOG in Zygon, or any chance of John Polkinghorne ever seeing it. Any
other angry person on this list could do the same thing.
However, as I said, the current social situation has now reached
disastrous
proportions involving something like a 40 Billion dollar budget for military
action, and there is no doubt that there is going to be shooting between
Moslems and Christians soon. Therefore, the matter of a "universal"
scientific
proof of God has become even more vital and at the same time more volatile.
Therefore, I am now officially "standing down" from my previous
adversarial
posture and now intend to pursue a course of peacemaking, reconciliation,
and
strictly sincere dialogue in all matters pertaining to Religion, starting
with
the matter of a scientific proof of God. I have great fear of the
situation.
As for the matter of "simple explanations" of the SPOG, sure, there are
many,
but again, none of them are sufficient to "prove" the theory... that can
only be
done at advanced levels, by talking it over with someone like John
Polkinghorne,
or perhaps Robert Elliot Pollack, director of the CSSR at Columbia. But the
only way that can be done is to get it published in the peer reviewed
literature.
I published the foundational paper in the peer reviewed literature (Hammond
1994),
and now intend to publish the final paper, the scientific proof of God
itself
in a peer reviewed journal. Then and only then will we be able to get the
opinion of people like Polkinghorne and Pollack and others, and find out if
the theory is true. After that, assuming it is true, then "simple"
explanations
will become effective because people will know that what they are trying
to understand has already been proven correct. In the meantime, arguing
with
lay people using heuristic models can never "prove" or "disprove" the
theory.
It seems to me that the most constructive avenue is to support the
publication
of this theory in the peer reviewed literature, so that we can get the
opinions
of the Nobel Laureates and international authorities. I would hope that
nobody
would maliciously go out of their way to prevent that.
In the meantime, I intend to stand firmly by my resolve to resist all
temptations
toward unruly behavior or carelessness. The current situation between two
of
the world's great religions is too serious, the danger of social violence
and
further damage is too immanent, and I am resolved to pursue a new
reapproachmont
along all religious fronts, including my own efforts.
If someone is sincere and cautious enough to want to pursue a discussion
of
this discovery, within the confines of this new social and political
reality,
which calls for only the most constructive and positive efforts... sure, I
will respond. But, nota bene, the days of ridicule, and superficialities
in serious religious matters such as this one, are gone with the wind.
-- Be sure to visit my website below ----------------------------------------------------------- George Hammond, M.S. Physics Email: ghammond@mediaone.net Website: http://people.ne.mediaone.net/ghammond/index.html -----------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 15 2001 - 21:37:20 EDT