Let's be sensible. No journal editor is going to tolerate someone asking for
a particular reviewer and thus I expect Phil hefner will send Hammond's
paper straight back without even loooking at it. Peer review is anonymous
though at times you can guess who the reviewer is.
A few corrections on John Polkinhorne ( who would refuse to touch this in a
very polite way) . Polkinghorne was a student of Dirac's, was head of
Particle
> > Physics research at Oxford, (ACTUALLY CAMBRIDGE) was President of
Queen's College in London(CAMBRIDGE NOT LONDON)
> > is a memberFELLOW of the Royal Society and a Knight of the Order of the
British
> > Empire as well as being an Ordained MinisterPRIEST in the Anglican
Church.
Cant everyone ignore all this codswallop and let it be frozen out by
silence. Most asa stuff at present is simply deleted.
Michael Roberts
----- Original Message -----
From: "george murphy" <gmurphy@raex.com>
To: "George Hammond" <ghammond@mediaone.net>
Cc: <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: Gloree gloree halaluuulyaaa.... gloree gloreee halaluuulyaa
> George Hammond wrote:
> <snip>
>
> > 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.
> > <snip>
>
> I appreciate the attitude that Mr. Hammond has shown here. I will
not attempt
> to influence the decision about publication in Zygon one way or another,
and will
> consider a response to the article if and when it is published.
>
> Shalom,
>
> George
>
> George L. Murphy
> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
> "The Science-Theology Interface"
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 16 2001 - 18:13:45 EDT