Randall D. Isaac
A Petition for your consideration
Thanks for this post. I heartily support anything that helps preserve fisheries.
Monday, July 16, 2012
Colorado/western US fires
One of the positives of the fire has been how it has brought the community together. Here is what my church is doing. This is just a small part of what others are doing. http://www.faithefc.org/High_Park_Fire.htm Here the largest church in Fort Collins expresses our corporate gratitude for the fire fighters and first responders. http://vimeo.com/44469222
Friday, June 29, 2012
Artifical Intelligents and Reductionism
Dear Billy:Check out the following article, which was published in our latest issue of God and Nature magazine. It's all about transhumanism and Christianity. http://godandnature.asa3.org/column-modern-frontiers-ancient-faith.htmlYou may want to read God and Nature in your spare time if you have questions like these; some of them may already be answered by our writers! Best,Emily
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
American Journal of Physics
I just posted my review of Biology’s First Law: The Tendency for Diversity and Complexity to Increase in Evolutionary Systems on Amazon.com by Daniel W. McShae and Robert N. Brandon. This is a link to ithttp://newevangelist.me/2012/06/25/1800/I’v already quoted from this book to support my campaign to get the AJP to retract its absurd article about entropy and evolution. This is another quote: Based on what we have said so far, some will be poised and ready to make a leap, from the notion of accumulation of accidents to the second law of thermodynamics…. We advise readers against this, for their own safety. We are concerned that on the other side of that leap there may be no firm footing. Indeed, there may be an abyss. First, we think the foundation of the ZFEL [zero-force evolutionary law] lies in probability theory, not in the second law or any other law of physics. And second, our notions of diversity and complexity differ fundamentally from entropy, in that entropy, unlike diversity and complexity is not a level-related concept. (location 220 on Kindle)
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
GOD BASED MAGNETISM
GOD BASED MAGNETISM where conventional science went wrong. The facts that were missed, overlooked, ignored, suppressed and denied in conventional science. What is conventional science afraid of, GOD?, the facts?, the truth? I say that magnets are individual. That is, an individual north pole magnet and an individual south pole magnet. If I am able to prove this self evident fact and as well as you could, then this fact proves that conventional science is incorrect in all disciplines’. Furthermore, Einstein and all the other great scientist before him are incorrect also. If you disagree with this, then you must be able to prove that north and south pole magnets are not individual magnets. What say you.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
Flashing the ISS
R. Isaac said:OUTSTANDING! That's a great accomplishment. Thanks for posting it. Thanks! The project was not an advancement for hard science, but such things can help to stir interest in science. Our local astronomy club has had, at times, over 1,000 people, mostly youngsters, at individual, pro-science events, and the recent "first" with our ISS contact will add spice to our presentations.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
frank j tipler
I can't find the link you mention in your post. Am I missing something? I would really like to find this review also!
Friday, February 24, 2012
Biomedical experiments, public safety, morality
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
A few days ago, Rory O'Connor was on the Greater Boston show on public television, being interviewed by Emily Rooney. Rory is one of three authors of the book NukeSpeak, a 30 year old book which has just been reissued in a 30th anniversary edition. The authors are strongly anti-nuclear power and devote the book to decrying the euphemistic language with which nuclear power was marketed to the public. I'm a cautious supporter of nuclear power. I think it can be deployed at reasonably safe and economical levels, but it must be done with great care. What struck me about this book is the use of language to convey scientific ideas and technological capabilities. The concept is not new to me. At IBM, we worked hard with our communications team to find the right words to convey the messages we wanted to get across. In the course of doing science, we habitually select language that may be technically accurate but slanted to portray the nuance we want to communicate. That's not wrong. But awareness of the language we use is critical. In the often rancorous debated on science and faith, much can be discerned from the adjectives chosen to describe key players and ideas. One of our goals, hard though it may be too achieve, must be to pay attention to seeking words that are fair and accurate not just in technical meaning but in the nuanced implications.
Tuesday, January 03, 2012