Tag Archives: uniformitarianism

Radiometric Dating Doesn’t Mean “Dating” — Michael J. Findley

File:Thorium decay chain from lead-212 to lead-208.svg
If someone collects a sample, brings it to a laboratory for radiometric testing and gets scientific results, the answer is a ratio of parent isotope to daughter isotope. That is it, plain and simple.
My apologies to those who follow our blog regularly, but this is a somewhat of a repeat. I believe that one of my errors is attempting to cover too much territory in one blog, so this is just one point.
We are assuming that the samples were collected properly, handled properly and tested properly. There was no falsification of the data, either intentionally or accidentally. If pieces of the same samples where taken to another reputable laboratory, we would get the same results.
The results would be the ratio of parent isotope to daughter isotope. It might be simplified 25:75 meaning twenty-five percent of the sample was the parent isotope and the remaining seventy-five percent of the sample was the daughter isotope.
With better equipment, the result might be more precise, such as 24.543:75.457. Whatever the precision of the test equipment, the final result is still a ratio. What do those ratios mean?
A simple Google search of geology.com reveals the following quote. “Certainly we all know that there were different conditions in the Precambrian, which makes up 88% of all geologic time. We know that the interior of the early Earth was much hotter than that of today, for a number of reasons. For example, heat production due to radioactive decay at 4 Ga was ~3x that of today. Other causes of early heating include heat of accretion, the Sun’s T-tauri event (beginning of H fusion), core differentiation, and the Mars-size impact events. How much hotter was the early Earth? We don’t know but we do know that there are vanishingly few rocks from the first 800 Ma of Earth’s history, as expected for a hot early Earth.”
When did Plate Tectonics begin on Earth, and what came before?
Posted by geosociety under Structural Geology and Tectonics
http://geosociety.wordpress.com/2013/04/28/when-did-plate-tectonics-begin-on-earth-and-what-came-before/
This quote is used because of the first four words “Certainly we know…” How is it possible to know about the Precambrian period? The other important point is that this is not an isolated comment. While I found this in geology.com., similar certainty about dating samples that are pronounced to be millions of years old can be found in genetics.com, nationalgeographics.com, nature.com, scientificamerican.com and any other mainstream science journal.
When asked, “How did you arrive at these dates?” the answer is usually, “radiometric dating”. Since, as this article started out, properly conducted radiometric tests return ratios, not dates, how do these ratios turn into dates? In other words, we are back to the question, what do these ratios mean?
All radiometric dating methods depend on radioactive decay taking place at a known, constant rate. For example, the known constant of Uranium235 to Lead is a half-life of 703.8 million years. That means, if the original sample of Uranium235 was one hundred percent, and the sample at the time of testing was 50%, then the sample would be 703.8 million years old. It would take another 703.8 million years to convert half of the remaining Uranium235 to lead. So a sample that had 25% Uranium235 and 75% lead would have gone through two half lives and would be 1407.6 million years old. It is a simple progression and easily charted. Half of the remaining 25% of the Uranium235 would be converted to lead in another 703.8 million years. So the ratio can tell you how far down the chart your sample is.
And that look-up point on the chart is the date published in the science journals. According to “Science” today, that is the end of the story. But this article is what Paul Harvey used to call “the rest of the story.”
For our example sample to actually be 1407.6 million years old, two assumptions must be true. First, the sample began as 100% Uranium235 1407.6 million years ago, without any lead. Second, nothing happened to change the rate of decay during that 1407.6 million year time period.
In answer to the uniformitarian complaint that nothing can interfere with the rate of decay, measure the radiation levels around the Bikini atolls, Nagasaki, Hiroshima, or any other high radiation site. Laboratories all over the world refine radioactive isotopes. Laboratories can also covert one material to another, such as converting uranium to plutonium.
The uniformitarian response is that such an alteration in nuclear decay rates would cause mass extinction. (Such as the flood?) Even uniformitarians admit to several mass extinctions, such as the end of the Devonian period. Mass extinctions happened and almost certainly altered global decay rates.
But the important problem to the uniformitarian is the preschool question, “Were you there?” We have no information about, nor is it possible to get, any information about the original condition of the sample.
In the beginning God created. This is the real answer. It neither requires vast amounts of time nor knowing every possible change in every possible sample. This simple answer confounds those who want the world to be millions of years old because they do not want to be responsible to a holy God.

Illustration source: Wikimedia Commons Diagram of the thorium decay chain from lead-212 to lead-208. Each parent nuclide spontaneously decays into a daughter nuclide (the decay product) via an α decay or a β− decay. Note that bismuth-212 can either decay into polonium-212 or thallium-208. The final decay product, lead-208, is stable and can no longer undergo spontaneous radioactive decay. This image was created as part of the Philip Greenspun illustration project. Date 25 August 2008
Source: Own work Author Eugene Alvin Villar (seav)

Leave a comment

Filed under Current Issues, Politics, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, Scientific

There Should Be A List — Post by Michael J. Findley

8-03-5
AiG (Answers in Genesis) has a webpage listing arguments Christians should not use because they are already disproved, weak, or there is not enough evidence.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/topic/arguments-we-dont-use
Secular Humanists should make a similar list of arguments (reasoned positions, not heated debates) used against creationism which are already disproved, weak or lack evidence. The AiG list contains 29 separate arguments. If a Secularist would make a similar kind of list for fellow Secularists, it would be a much larger list.
Secularists routinely call me ignorant, uneducated (I have an earned M.A.), opposed to science, and many other things I will not repeat. While these statements are libel, I could honestly and legitimately make some of those charges about some of them. Instead, I will simply use the word silly. It is silly to repeat a thoroughly refuted argument. It is silly to be so uninformed that you do not understand the beliefs of someone you are attacking.

Since these people will likely just ignore any list I make of their own silliness, I will make a very brief list of what we believe. First, when we examine evidence, we understand that physical evidence requires several assumptions. First, that the physical “laws”, as science has chosen to call them, are constant. Just one example; a thermometer will always register the same temperature, assuming that the conditions are the same. Second, we understand that our knowledge is limited. No one has ever taken a core sample of the planet Jupiter. Nor is there a firm scientific definition of the word “breed” in animal husbandry. Third, it is not scientifically possible to dismiss the supernatural as not existing, since the supernatural cannot be measured with scientific instruments. A humorous examination of these problems is found in the illustrated book Motel of the Mysteries by David Macaulay.

These are some of the reasons why courts use witness testimony as the most reliable testimony. That does not mean that witness testimony should be accepted without question. Motives must be examined. The history of the witness (character) must be examined. The circumstances must be examined and witnesses compared. Also, physical (circumstantial) evidence, if it is strong enough, can overrule witness testimony.

We have examined the evidence and concluded that the Bible is the Word of God. (The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.) Ancient written testimony on origins outside of the Word of God needs to be examined carefully, but is the next most reliable source of information. Even preschoolers know enough to ask “Were you there?” Physical evidence is open to interpretation and though it can be helpful, it is less reliable than written records outside of the Word of God.
“And God said to the angel of the presence: “Write for Moses from the beginning of creation till My sanctuary has been built among them for all eternity.” Book of Jubilees I:27
“And the angel of the presence spake to Moses according to the word of the Lord, saying: Write the complete history of the creation, how in six days the Lord God finished all His works and all that He created.” II:1

The Book of Jubilees has twenty-one copies among the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some Christians, such as the Coptic Church, believe that the Book of Jubilees is part of the Word of God. The first six days of creation, God was working, that is, inputting energy and matter. The laws of physics as we know them were not in place yet.
The original creation was the space/time continuum, as general relativity puts it, and matter. The original matter was all water. The earth was created out of water and by water. (2 Peter 3:5) or, as Genesis 1:1 puts it, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. The Mayan book Written Leaves or the Popol Vuh says of the original creation “in the day and year of the clouds.” Berossus said about the original creation, “For the whole universe consisting of moisture…” A Polynesian creation myth says “In Whai-tua two existences without shape were formed: Maku (moisture), a male, and Mahora-nui-a-rangi (Great Expanse of Heaven), a female…”

Light was created on the first day, so there was no problem with plants. While plants need light, they are not required to have sunlight. Even without that light, plants were created on Day Three and the sun on Day Four. Less than twenty-four hours without sunlight is not a problem. People who claim that there is some problem are displaying their ignorance.

When the land was created, it was created out of water. This original creation of land had no life forms. Today we see the original creation of land as the lowest layers of sediment without fossils.

The entire universe, including sun, moon, planets, stars and all other celestial objects, were put in place on the fourth day. The photons of light allowing us to see them were put in place at the same time, allowing them to be visible the creatures on earth to see them.

All organisms were created by the end of the sixth day. The information about Adam and Eve in Chapter Two of Genesis provides additional complementary information, similar to several reporters writing accurately about the same story. Adam’s body was formed out of existing material directly by God. Adam was then was given life by God. Like Adam, Eve’s body was formed out of existing material. Even today, rib tissue can regenerate. The discussion between the serpent and Eve was neither an allegory nor a fairy tale, but a historical record. To reject the historical record of the Fall means there is no need for an atonement for sin. There is no need for a virgin-born sinless atoning sacrifice.

Adam, all creatures, plants, and the universe were created fully-formed and, by the end of Day Six, fully functional. We do not know if these trees had rings. Nor do we know if any of them survived the flood.

Water came up from the earth, watered the garden (park) of Eden, then split into four parts to water the earth. Geysers and hot springs are found all over the world. Perhaps the Garden of Eden was similar to Yellowstone Park today, with Yellowstone Lake and Yellowstone River.

For 1656 years the climate was, by our standards, mild and constant. This is what uniformitarians see in the fossil record and call the Devonian Period. There is much disagreement about the exact differences during the Antediluvian period compared to today, but we know that the huge creatures of this period, dragonflies with 52″ wingspans. and flying creatures with 45′ wingspans, could not fly today. The largest creatures of this period probably could not even walk today. It was a time of lush vegetation.

There is disagreement about a catastrophe with many changes sometime in the middle of the Antediluvian period. Numerous written documents claim that there was, but Bible does not say anything about such a catastrophe.

The four rivers coming out of Eden watered the earth. That made Eden the highest or at least one of the highest points on the single continent of the Antediluvian world. It also means that because the environment of Eden was comfortable for nudity, there were no high mountains like we have today. In the year 1656 AM, God sent a catastrophic flood which destroyed all land life on earth.

According to every document which records the flood, including the Bible, it was a series of different events. The original creation laid down solid material. This was followed by 1656 years of gentle deposits. The first weeks of the flood included violent volcanic activity, putting massive amounts of volcanic material into the oceans. This created many different layers of sediment on top of the original creation layers and the Antediluvian layers. Tectonic plate movements caused uplifts, bending and twisting the layers that followed these. This caused more volcanic activity, creating more layers of sediment.

This catastrophe also invalidates all dating methods, because all known dating methods rely on uniformitarian assumptions. The actual conditions during the flood are unknown. The original created conditions are unknown.

Noah did not open the doors to the ark and release the animals until the vegetation returned. Up to this point God had not given men permission to eat animals, so this return of vegetation was the food supply. Lifespans were shorter, which is another indication of changes.

The Ice Age began because of  oceans warmed by volcanic activity and volcanic dust blocking the sun and cooling the atmosphere. Because of the water trapped in the ice, lower ocean levels allowed to men and animals to walk over the most of the earth. The experience of the ark also gave men shipbuilding skills.

At some point, hundreds of years later, the Ice Age ended and the earth stabilized. It is so sad that men today believe that by looking at the earth and the existing conditions on earth that they can understand the past. They ignore both the written records of the past and material evidence which contradicts what they choose to believe.

Leave a comment

Filed under Bible Teaching, Current Issues, Politics, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific, Writing, Reviewing, Publishing, and about Blogging

Circular Reasoning

blog post bristlecone and ice ageAssuming something to be true then using that assumption as a “proof” is the essence of circular reasoning. The issue is not the nature of the evidence, but the honesty of the observer. For example all dating systems assume deep time to be true. One very clear example is dendrochronology or tree ring dating. Bristlecone Pines (BCP) have been cataloged with almost 9,000 continuous rings, adding older dead trees to the rings of living trees. That is presented as “proof” of 9,000 continuous years. Without questioning the almost 9,000 continuous rings, this is assuming one ring=one year. For the past hundred years one ring has equaled one year. Using written human history, we can reasonable assume one ring=one year for over 3,000 years. But a tree ring is a growth/dormant cycle, not a year. In rain forests even today, there can be as many as 6 cycles per year, producing 6 rings per year. Even uniformitarians must admit that the Ice Age had a different climate and dendrochronology would not be valid during the Ice Age. That is circular reasoning. Assume that the Ice Age was at least 10,000 years ago, then assume that dendrochronology is valid for 10,000 years. The Bible records a worldwide flood about 2300-2400 BC. The Ice Age would follow that and last at least 500, perhaps 700 years. During that time period there would be many more growth/dormant cycles per year than the one per year we are observing now.

Every other type of dating of deep time uses the same assumptions. First assume deep time, and then claim that the evidence proves the assumption. What was the original condition of a radiometric sample? There were no observers. You assume the sample to be millions of years old and then use the sample to prove that it is millions of years old.

The point is, everything around us is evidence of a young earth if you are willing to examine the evidence honestly instead of attempting to use the evidence to prove pre-existing assumptions.

7 Comments

Filed under Bible Teaching, Current Issues, Politics, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific, Writing, Reviewing, Publishing, and about Blogging

February Book Releases: The Conflict of the Ages, Part One, Carrie’s Hired Hand and Diary of a Christian Dog

The Conflict of the Ages Part One: The Scientific History of Origins 

The Conflict of the Ages is a Multi-Part exploration of History, Science and Ancient Literature. This first installment covers the concepts of God, time, Creation, physics, cosmology, ans specifics about each day of Creation. We make comparisons with ancient sources to see where they agree with the Scriptural account. We reference classic and modern scientific views, exposing errors, preconceptions, presuppositions and falsehoods taught as fact by the mainstream scientific community. God is the first witness and the Bible the first eyewitness account of beginnings and origins. Other ancient documents contain at least some truths and parallel accounts.

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/137138

http://www.amazon.com/Conflict-Ages-Part-One-ebook/dp/B007ETAAV4/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1330455372&sr=1-1

http://www.scribd.com/doc/83069908/New-COA1-With-Ref-Scribd

Youtube video Trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFGwV6eDvQE

A Northerner married to a Southerner gets enough stares and scorn. Carrie doesn’t need more from Robert Salliger, handsome friend of her dying husband. He says Ben’s death is his fault. He swears to take care of Carrie and the children. But she goes home alone, and can’t read the letters that come. When a deaf and dumb boy arrives she is glad for the help but has no idea how much help he will be.

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/133779

http://www.amazon.com/Carries-Hired-Hand-ebook/dp/B007AGDA6I

http://www.scribd.com/doc/81996812/Carries-Hired-Hand-Scribd (free here)

YouTube Trailer link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSwrLggGTik

An English Knight begins a diary of his “adventure” joining Louis IX’s First Crusade. The armada to Alexandria encounters a violent storm and the knight and his companions shipwreck. He must make an impossible choice: Cut himself off from his people or face execution. His life of turmoil and terror leads him to peace, but slavery and torture block his quest to find his friend and get home to his father.

http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/128706

http://www.amazon.com/Diary-Christian-Dog-ebook/dp/B0074D5D26

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80188123/Diary-Scribd (free here)

You Tube Trailer Link

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsBveZ56eAU

1 Comment

Filed under Excerpts from our Fiction Books, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, Writing, Reviewing, Publishing, and about Blogging

The Religion of Physics III: Hawking Rewrites History

There are two ways to rewrite history. The common lie is ineffective. The amazingly effective method is far more difficult. Simply eliminate any information which contradicts what you are attempting to promote. Never tell any outright lie, simply be very selective in what you allow your audience to hear.

Secular Humanists always start from the simple and “progress” to the complex. Cave paintings are presented as the simplest, therefore earliest, of man’s art expressions. Then man’s art “evolved” to flat painting, to one-dimensional perspective, to two-dimensional perspective, and finally to realistic painting. This is a means of expressing man’s supposed “evolution” in culture and of course took thousands of years. The Parthenon, the Acropolis, Luxor, Angor Wat, the Great Wall of China and thousands of other ancient works of art, created during the same time periods as cave paintings and flat paintings are either ignored or added at the end as an appendix. In music the same “evolution” is foundational. Simple percussion, simple harps, animal horns, these ancient instruments develop over millennia. The complex orchestras of Babylon, ancient India and China are once again either ignored or added as an appendix.

“Our present ideas about the motion of bodies date back to Galileo and Newton. Before them people believed Aristotle, who said that the natural state of a body was to be at rest and that it moved only if driven by a force or impulse.” These are the opening words of Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time, Chapter 2, Space and Time. The writings of Galileo and Newton, their ideas of gravity, inertia and motion laid the foundation for modern Physics. It is not true that nobody before them “bothered to see” if Aristotle was correct by experiment. Herodotus opens his Histories with “Those of the Persians who have knowledge of history declare…” He views the Persians as more knowledgeable than the Greeks but less knowledgeable than the Babylonians or the Egyptians.1 Francis Bacon declared in 1620 that “printing, gunpowder and the compass” were the greatest inventions of all time. Each of these inventions go back to the early Chinese.2

Printing, cannons, navigation, massive stone structures, 2,000-year-old roads and bridges which are still in use all require advanced use of physics. Where are their records? Alexander the Great burned the massive Persian archives. Julius Caesar, later Eusebius and later still Islamic Arabs burned the majority of the library of Alexandria. Throughout history wars have destroyed much of the information of earlier cultures.

In A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking uses the same tactics: destroy or ignore all facts of history which disagree with uniformitarianism/evolution. Even Albert Einstein’s much smaller work, The Evolution of Physics goes back to the mathematics of the Greeks. Many Greeks contributed to the system of geometry known today as Euclidian or two-dimensional geometry, which includes trigonometry. It is foundational to both Newton and Galileo. It is also contrary to Aristotle and Stephen Hawking’s ideas, therefore ignored.

After the book’s conclusion, Stephen Hawking takes the three men he credits with the founding of modern physics, Albert Einstein, Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton, and devotes 2 pages to each one. Perhaps these pages were intended to be tributes. The fact that each of these men believed that the universe was designed and created with a moral purpose is ignored. When it is mentioned, it is ridiculed.

Albert Einstein said hundreds, perhaps thousands of times, “God does not play dice with the Universe.” Stephen Hawking said, “All the evidence show that God was actually quite a gambler, and the universe is a great casino, where dice are thrown, and roulette wheels spin on every occasion.” He also said, “Not only does God play dice, but … he sometimes throws them where they cannot be seen.”

Steven Hawking points out that Albert Einstein publicly protested against Germany’s involvement in WWI, became a pacifist, supported Zionism, was offered the Presidency of Israel, which he declined, supported the US in WWII helping to build the first atomic bomb.

“Galileo, perhaps more than any other single person, was responsible for the birth of modern science. His renowned conflict with the Catholic Church was central to his philosophy…” Stephen Hawking’s high praise shows the crux, the lynchpin of modern science: principled resistance of the established religion when it stands for error and unwavering devotion to truth. Stephen Hawking then twists this praise to advance his own religion at Galileo’s expense. He falsely claims that “Galileo was one of the first to argue that man could hope to understand how the world works, and moreover, that we could do this by observing the real world.” What about Job? What about the 10,000 Arabic documents on astronomy, their widespread use of the Greek astrolabes? Scholarly Arabs rejected the Ptolemaic system in 1070 AD. What about the Mayans, Egyptians, Babylonians, the Indus Valley, the Chinese, the Japanese, the Incas??

Galileo took the same position as John Calvin, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, the Anabaptists, Augustine of Hippo and all other Reformers. The Holy Spirit guides the conscience of the individual believer to correctly understand both special revelation (the Bible) and general revelation (the material world). “It seems to me that it was well said by Madama Serenissima and insisted on by your reverence, that the Holy Scripture cannot err, and that the decrees therein contained are absolutely true and inviolable. But I should have in your place added that, though Scripture cannot err, its expounders and interpreters are liable to err in many ways, and one error in particular would be most grave and most frequent, if we always stopped short at the literal signification of the words.”3

Galileo did not believe, as Stephen Hawking so boldly lies, “that the Bible was not intended to tell us anything about scientific theories, and that it was usual to assume that, where the Bible conflicted with common sense, it was being allegorical.” Instead, Galileo, like Martin Luther, took the position of Augustine; “I have insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.”4

Galileo believed that the Established Religion of the day, the Roman Catholic Church was suppressing the truth of the Bible. Savanarola was burned at the stake in 1498 AD for the very same belief. Galileo explained this in detail in his 1610 publication Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo. Stephen Hawking even admits this. Galileo “wrote about Copernicus’s theory in Italian (not the usual academic Latin) and soon his views became widely supported outside the universities.” At that time, the universities represented the thinking of Aristotle. Stephen Hawking fails to understand that the modern University system took the place of the Roman Catholic Church in suppressing scientific truth.

Stephen Hawking is retired from the position Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge University, a position once held by Sir Isaac Newton. Yet Stephen Hawking opens his comments on Isaac Newton with: “Isaac Newton was not a pleasant man. His relations with other academics were notorious, with most of his later life spent embroiled in heated disputes.” Another view might say that Sir Isaac Newton was a very principled man who spent the later part of his life defending himself against baseless personal attacks. Neither statement is entirely true, but when Hawking spends less than two pages on Newton, such a charge is entirely unwarranted. Rather he should have expanded on Sir Isaac Newton’s considerable contributions to physics, such as his works in the field of optics, the prism and the invention of the reflecting telescope, none of which are mentioned with more than an offhand comment in A Brief History of Time. Instead of attacking Isaac Newton’s character, Stephen Hawking should either be complimentary or stick to Newton’s scientific accomplishments. This comes across as an attack because Newton was a Christian who based his science on the Bible.

Except for the personal attacks on Einstein, Galileo and Newton, A Brief History of Time is an extremely seductive and interesting collection of important facts. It is completely religious, carefully selecting the facts which support Stephen Hawking’s conclusions.

“We find ourselves in a bewildering world.” This is the simple position of those who believe in the “new” or “progressive” physics, represented by Stephen Hawking. Though this thinking is now so dominant they simply refer to their beliefs as physics, this is the opposite of classical or traditional physics represented by Albert Einstein. Einstein believed “One may say the eternal mystery of the world is its comprehensibility.”6

Stephen Hawking uses the label scientific determinist for his belief in this “bewildering world.” “The usual approach of science of constructing a mathematical model cannot answer the question of why there should be a universe for the model to describe. Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?” “…Why is it that we and the universe exist? If we find the answer to that, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason-for then we would know the mind of God.”

Compare this with the attitude of Galileo. “Some years ago, as Your Serene Highness well knows, I discovered in the heavens many things that had not been seen before our own age. The novelty of these things, as well as some consequences which followed from them in contradiction to the physical notions commonly held among academic philosophers, stirred up against me no small number of professors-as if I had placed these things in the sky with my own hands in order to upset nature and overturn the sciences. They seemed to forget that the increase of unknown truths stimulates the investigation, establishment, and growth of the arts, not their diminution or destruction.”5

All quotes of Stephen Hawking are from the book A Brief History of Time.

1 The History of Herodotus by Herodotus of Halicarnassus, 440 BC, Translated by George Rawlinson 1858 AD.
2 Novum Organum, Liber I, CXXIX 1863 translation
3 Letter to Benedetto Castelli (1613) fro Galileo
4 Augustine of Hippo The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 408 AD.
5 Essay published in 1615, in response to enquireies of Christina of Tuscany, as quoted in Aspects of Western Civilization: Problems an dSources in History (1988) by Perry McAdow Rogers, p. 53.
6 Albert Einstein, article “Physics and Reality” in Journal of the Franklin Institute (March 1936).

3 Comments

Filed under Current Issues, Politics, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific