Scientific Proof of God, A New and Modern Bible, and Coexisting Relations of God and the Universe

Monday, August 03, 2009

Remaking America by George Shollenberger, Idea 100 + XX (Intelligent Design, Xa)

In this blog, I discuss the contributions of Gottfried Leibniz (1646-1716) to man’s knowledge of God’s Intelligence Design. His major work challenges the universe developed by England’s Isaac Newton (1642-1727) and the physical atoms developed by England’s John Locke (1632-1704). I agree with Leibniz’s challenges because I disagree with Newton’s ‘billiard-ball’ universe and Locke’s physical atoms. Instead, I agree with Leibniz’s universe (or New System), his indivisible atoms, and his new meanings of space and time. Leibniz’s popular infinitesimal calculus originated during the development of his New System. My book on ‘The First Scientific Proof of God’ presents his New Syetem.

Leibniz sought a debate with Locke on atoms. But Locke died before it was started. His preparation for this debate is found in ‘New Essays on Human Understanding.’ It is translated by Peter Remnant & Jonathan Bennett in 1982. The New System, the indivisible atoms, the new meaning of space and time, and the debate with Samuel Clarke on Newton’s universe are found in the 1973 book on ‘The Philosophy of Leibniz’ by G. H. R. Parkinson.

The above work of Leibniz is connected to the indivisibles of Nicholas of Cusa and Galileo. Leibniz shows these connections on pages 120-121 of Parkinson’s book, There, Leibniz says, ‘The atoms of matter are contrary to reason, besides the fact that they also are composed of parts, ... It is only atoms of substance, that is to say unites which are real and absolutely with no parts, ... They might be called metaphysical points: ..." The atoms of substance are developed in his Monadology. To modernize them, in my book, I call them spiritual atoms. They are the souls of everything found in the universe. In humans, the soul is mind. All atoms of substance are immortal and cannot be destroyed by nature. Thus, human life is continuous and endless.

Since humans and lower animals are perceiving things and can sense things, the perception of God is absolute. Although humans cannot perceive God, human perceptions can conceive God with reason. Since God’s perception is absolute, God can perceive the behavior of every substantial atom. Thus, an important question is, ‘Is God active or passive with respect to these substantial atoms? In my book, I show that God and man can exchange information. I also show that God is connected to his creation. So I conclude that God is active.

The work of Leibniz and Parkinson’s 1973 book are needed by every nation. But Parkinson’s book came too late to install in the USA. Thus, it was too late to prevent the assassination of President Kennedy, prevent the development of a drug culture in the 1960s, stop the U.S. Supreme Court from removing school prayers in 1967, and stop U.S. colleges and universities from turning away from God. Without the Parkinson book, by 2009 the education of U.S. citizens lost its world leadership.

After the USA landed on the moon, almost forty years passed. During this period, science fell and technology began to rise. When will science return to its position of leading technology?

12 Comments:

  • At 3:15 PM, Anonymous Dylan said…

    1. Cranks overestimate their own knowledge and ability, and underestimate that of acknowledged experts. [Check]
    2. Cranks insist that their alleged discoveries are urgently important.[Check]
    3. Cranks rarely if ever acknowledge any error, no matter how trivial.[Check]
    4. Cranks love to talk about their own beliefs, often in inappropriate social situations, but they tend to be bad listeners, and often appear to be uninterested in anyone else's experience or opinions

     
  • At 6:17 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to Dylan,

    Are you a scientist?

    Your statements are giving meaning to a thing you call a'a crank.' Where are your proofs of your four statements?

    George

     
  • At 5:06 AM, Anonymous Dylan said…

    Don't you get it? You are the living proof! You (BA) overestimate your own knowledge and ability, and underestimate that of acknowledged experts (who hold BS and PhD degrees). You insist that your so-called proof is urgently important. You hardly ever ackowledge any error, although you make them by the dozens. And you tend to react badly to people exposing the numerous flaws of your 'proof'. That makes you a textbook crank.

    But there is more. You suffer from delusions of grandeur. Were you really a national leader in the field of radio telemetry, causing the US electronics industry to shift from analog into digital technologies? Did you really develop the bullet-proof vest for police? I don't think so! Your name is never mentioned in articles on these subjects.

     
  • At 8:14 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Dylan,

    You have been suckered into the dead field of psychology. Too bad that you must live daily with a bunch of psychologists who never know what to do next, must produce another book that says nothing, or serves a pill to yet another patient who is not sick.

    Sorry, but haven't given the proof I requsterd. This is the dead life of the atheistic psychologists.

     
  • At 9:47 AM, Anonymous Dylan said…

    About 'spiritual atoms' you write:

    "They are the souls of everything found in the universe. In humans, the soul is mind. All atoms of substance are immortal and cannot be destroyed by nature. Thus, human life is continuous and endless."

    Where is the proof? Real scientists laugh at these preposterious and wholly unsubstantiated claims. You are a joke.

     
  • At 1:47 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Dylan,

    You and your friends are not scientists because you are not using the scientific method of proof.

    When I say, 'They are souls of every thing found in the universe ..., I am presenting a theory, not a proof. With this theory, I am still seeking a proof. Often a theory will become widely accepted if it is found to be consistet with a related proven theory.

    When you say 'I am the living proof ... you are not using the scientific method because I am not a proof. I can only prove my existence. But, identifying my attributes will require the scientific method. You are making guesses about me, not scientific proofs.

    To my knowledgen no soft science has ever found a proof.

    So what are you offering when you use an undefined word, such as 'crank' and follow up with a words to define crank? Can you measure a person's crankness and prove that this person has cranks and crank differences.

    Before I retired, I worked on projects in which hard science phenomena had to be measured. We could measure all hard science phenomena. I also worked on the human problem of crime. The cause of crime was never found. Now, you are tryin to tell me that you know the cause of crankness.

    Psychologists, socialists, etc. are playing a game with humans and symbols just like a child plays a game with marbles. A symbol about a human must get its meaning with a scientific law. What is the law of crankness and how do you measure its differences????????

    Dylan, I suggest that you find a new and purposive job in this great nation before the soft sciences closes their shop doors where these soft scientists are 'playing with humans.'

    There are no scientific laws of human life.

    George

     
  • At 12:15 AM, Anonymous Adam said…

    "purposive"... ah, how I miss your elegant responses to others sometimes.

    Since you're so interested in proof, here you go. Apparently your real name is Casimir Zeglen, the closest American name I can find, and you first made the bullet proof vest in the 1800's. That's pretty impressive.

    Link:http://www.tech-faq.com/inventor-of-the-bullet-proof-vest.shtml

    The following link shows that body armor for Police was first used in 1931. According to you're bio you were about two years old. Again, your genius clearly knows no bounds. I can't believe you are not more well known for this feat.

    http://inventors.about.com/od/bstartinventions/a/Body_Armor.htm

    Here's the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_proof_vest#1950s.E2.80.931970s

    Or perhaps you're actually the Korean guy that worked on this? Curiously, I don't find your name anywhere associated with this invention. You seem reluctant to explain that though...

    Oh yeah, and to add: From dictionary.com...

    Crank (noun): 3)an unbalanced person who is overzealous in the advocacy of a private cause.

    Apparently you haven't had much success in refuting the existence of words either.

     
  • At 9:32 AM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to Adam,

    Who is Adam?

    I do not know who he is. But I do know that he is a very poor researcher and thus makes error after error in an attempt to assassinate my character, as other atheists tried. he does not even know the difference between soft body armor and other armors.

    The soft armor is light weight and did not appear until the 1970s after a new fiber was developed by DuPont, like goung beyond nylon. The name of new fiber was 'Kevlar.'

    As the project rmanager for 'developing' new technologies for police at the National Institute of Justicee, U.S. Departnent of justice, the Kevlar was brought to our attention. We developed it by testing it in a military labortary with medical doctors, and finally tested it on police. In this field test, on the night before Xmas, a Seattle cop was hit on the heart. This kind of hit was the most troublesom in our lab tests. But he survived and so have thousands of police ever since.

    Adam, you better straighten out your life and learn how to conduct real research. Your attempt to assassinate my character is a common behavior of atheists. I think is time for you to talk to a person who knows something about God.

    George

     
  • At 12:16 PM, Anonymous Benny Boy said…

    It was Lester Shubin who was project manager for the NIJ and who oversaw the development of Kevlar for police body armour (Ballistic vest-Wikipedia).

    Also, there is no proof of God.

     
  • At 12:33 PM, Anonymous Benny Boy said…

    Also, modern forensics began in the 1500s and community policing in the 1960s.

     
  • At 3:05 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Response to Benny Boy,

    The Ballastic vest Wikipedia has some problems.

    Les and I worked at the NIJ for about 25 years There, Les was a chemist and I was an engineer. Les and I always had different responsibilities on NIJ Projects such as the vest project. My responsibility was 'development and field test.' His responsibility was "NBS Standards.'

    The vest idea was discovered by a technology transfer agent from the Defense Department. I don't remember his name.

    Page 6 in my 2006 book on 'The First Scientific Proof of God,' poves that God exists.

    George

     
  • At 3:27 PM, Blogger George Shollenberger said…

    Reponse to Benney Boy,

    Forensic science did not start in the 1500s. Since forensic science is sill a physical science, forensic science could begin only after Galileo passed on in 1642.

    NIJ did not start community policing until the middle 1980s.

    Your reserch effort must be improved.

     

Post a Comment

<< Home