On the Internet, Are Authors Devalued by Oppositions When Their Oppositions Cannot Devalue the Theory of an Author?
After my book (The First Scientific Proof of God) was published in June 2006, I began
to present book reviews on related Amazon.com books. In time, I concluded that an unusual number of people were voting against my reviews of atheistic and theistic books. These votes devalue me rather than my theory of God. My newest book review on Hegel’s ‘Phenomenology of Spirit’ is also following this voting pattern by atheists. (click)
When Len Clements of Las Vagas mentioned the concept of the ‘last resort’ in a debate, I ask the question, "Since atheists are not trying to devalue my scientific proof of God, are they trying to devalue me and other authors as their last resort to save atheism?
I conclude that atheists are devaluing authors on Internet book stores as a ‘last resort’ of saving evolutionary theory and other support theories. However, I do not believe that ‘last resort’ is a common behavior of Americans. In the United States, where the development of a beautiful human mind is a possibility, ignorance should not lead to the ‘last resort’ behavior of devaluing hard-working authors.
The effort to devalue me is always the result of ignorance or the lack of knowledge. I express this belief because considerable knowledge is needed to value my modern theory of God. My theory of God developed with modern science and not ancient scriptures. Without knowledge of my God, a person will not know that philosophy has become a science, that the universe has no end, and that reincarnation has become a strong theory.
At this time, ignorance, rather than a conspiracy of atheists, is devaluing authors such as me. Unfortunately, devaluing authors are limiting the development of US morals and the daily use of the first two paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps, it is time to for the US Congress to eliminate the ‘last resort’ behavior on US Internet book stores.
Information to other authors: intelligent property is protected by law. And although freedom of speech seems to be unlimited, there are many limits, for instance, when yelling ‘fire’ in a theater when there is no fire or when book sales have been limited by ‘last resort’ efforts to devalue an author.
to present book reviews on related Amazon.com books. In time, I concluded that an unusual number of people were voting against my reviews of atheistic and theistic books. These votes devalue me rather than my theory of God. My newest book review on Hegel’s ‘Phenomenology of Spirit’ is also following this voting pattern by atheists. (click)When Len Clements of Las Vagas mentioned the concept of the ‘last resort’ in a debate, I ask the question, "Since atheists are not trying to devalue my scientific proof of God, are they trying to devalue me and other authors as their last resort to save atheism?
I conclude that atheists are devaluing authors on Internet book stores as a ‘last resort’ of saving evolutionary theory and other support theories. However, I do not believe that ‘last resort’ is a common behavior of Americans. In the United States, where the development of a beautiful human mind is a possibility, ignorance should not lead to the ‘last resort’ behavior of devaluing hard-working authors.
The effort to devalue me is always the result of ignorance or the lack of knowledge. I express this belief because considerable knowledge is needed to value my modern theory of God. My theory of God developed with modern science and not ancient scriptures. Without knowledge of my God, a person will not know that philosophy has become a science, that the universe has no end, and that reincarnation has become a strong theory.
At this time, ignorance, rather than a conspiracy of atheists, is devaluing authors such as me. Unfortunately, devaluing authors are limiting the development of US morals and the daily use of the first two paragraphs of the Declaration of Independence. Perhaps, it is time to for the US Congress to eliminate the ‘last resort’ behavior on US Internet book stores.
Information to other authors: intelligent property is protected by law. And although freedom of speech seems to be unlimited, there are many limits, for instance, when yelling ‘fire’ in a theater when there is no fire or when book sales have been limited by ‘last resort’ efforts to devalue an author.
posted by George Shollenberger @ 1:26 PM
8 Comments:
At 5:25 PM,
Anonymous said…
You wrote: "Unfortunately, devaluing authors are limiting the development of US morals"
Who exactly are these devaluing authors and why are they limiting the development of US morals?
At 10:21 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to ken gibson,
The devaluing authors are those who are presenting new and modern creation or intelligent design theories.
Since these new and modern theories can reveal deeper truths, a devalued author must seek these deeper truths using his own funds and time. Some of these deeper truths are new morals such as new human rights. Other deeper truths are new law of nature.
In our nation under God, an author cannot seek governmental funds for research effort. It is strange that atheistic projects can seek and receive governmental funds.
My scientific proof of God is raising many new questions about federal policies. I developed this proof without any help from the US government.
George
At 8:59 AM,
Anonymous said…
You seem to be contradicting yourself. First you wrote: "(...) devaluing authors are limiting the development of US morals", and a day later you wrote: "(...) devaluing authors are those who are presenting new and modern creation or intelligent design theories."
Your first statement is negative about this specific category of authors ("devaluing authors"), while your second statement is very positive about them.
Could you please shed some light on this apparent contradiction?
At 2:36 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to ken gibson,
There is no contradiction. Let me state my point again.
If a author is being devalued, the devalued author is limited in the development of US morals. Thus, if an author is not devalued, this author is not limited in the development of US morals.
George
At 2:48 PM,
Anonymous said…
What is wrong with you? Can't you read? For the third time, you wrote:
"(...) devaluing authors are limiting the development of US morals".
Now, calm down a bit and slowly read what you wrote. Do you see it now? You wrote that a certain kind of authors, including yourself, "are limiting the development of US morals". By your own words, you are limiting the development of US morals.
At 5:11 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
ken,
I am satisfied with what I have said. Yes I and other authors are limiting the development of US morals.
Perhaps you do not realize that any form of development is limited if author's books are not propagated.
George
At 10:20 AM,
Anonymous said…
"I and other authors are limiting the development of US morals."
Well, you said it yourself. But how can you be a good Christian and at the same time purposefully limit the development of US morals? Why do you limit the development of something that is so important to all of us? What we need instead is people who PROMOTE, not limit the development of morals in the USA.
At 12:17 PM,
George Shollenberger said…
response to william b. steinberg,
We are not limiting the development of morals purposively. If we limited our work on God purposively, why would we produce any books on God?
For example, when five atheists devalued me and my theory of God on Amazon.com, they impeded the propagation of my theory to other people. This impedence limited the expansion of the development of morals by other researchers. Eventually, these devaluations might be judged to be unAmerican and even illlegal. Freedom is not an absolute. Only God is absolute.
George
Post a Comment
<< Home