The Misuse of Non Sequiturs

My current research on the Standard Social Science Model (SSSM) has revealed the origin of the logically opposed concepts, ‘sequitur’ and ‘non sequitur.’ Prior to this social science research, I wasn’t sure of the origin of these two concepts because I never even heard of them before US logicians were challenging my scientific proof of God. In my hard science career, I used either/or logic, for instance, to sample many instruments on rockets and spacecrafts. In my soft science career on the US crime problem, I used both/and logic. When opposed social concepts coexist, the both/and logic applies. Examples of coexisting opposites are as follows: permanence/change, one/many. absolute/relative, identical/difference, and finite/infinite.

In my discussions with US logicians, they seemed to be unfamiliar with both/and logic and were interested mostly in the identification of non sequiturs, especially in my blogs that distinguish talk languages and scientific languages. Logicians do not seem to recognize the reason why I distinguish talk and scientific languages. After I completed my research on the SSSM, I concluded that logicians assume that Nature creates talk languages and the scientific languages. The truth is that humans create both languages. To me, US logicians reject human creativity and God because they view the universe as a mechanism.

Clearly, five atheists offered book reviews on my book at Amazon.com only to promote atheism and the use of non sequiturs. They did not even read my book. This kind of book review activity is dishonest. More importantly, this kind activity is against the US founding documents, which say that the USA is a nation under God. How can the US government authorize and fund scientific projects that reject God?