BOOK AND ARTICLE REVIEWS;

Below are short summaries of the author's main point of the author . Almost all of the books are recommended. (Many are written by Noted Scientists) Please not that the summaries are worth reading even if you are not considering buying the books. 

Click here for science article reviews.

Click here for longer, abstract like reviews/comments on Key books.

40 Classic Books and Monographs on the Creation/Evolution Controversy.

Books on Problems of Fundamental Physics

In the reviews that follow, we have endeavored to summarize the author's key points, especially as they relate to the key positions of this site and the need for society's understanding and oversight of science activities.  All these authors together support the fact that more than a few noted scientists realize the limits of science and the probable reality of the existence of  level of reality which is beyond science but which underpins science.  

"The Foundations of Scientific Inference" by W. Salmon (Past president of the Philosophy of Science Association.)  On page 6, Mr. Salmon says: "The fact that people do or do not use a certain type of inference is irrelevant to its justifiability.  Whether  people have confidence in the correctness of a certain type of inference has nothing to do with whether such confidence is justified."  That includes all scientists, including, of course, the authors of this site.   Something is not true just because someone (even a scientists) believes it to be true. "Understanding the Present" by B. Appleyard.  This book is about understanding science of the present time and its limits, failings, and dangers.  On page 62, the author talks about what science should be, which unfortunately is not what it is in this day of profit motives and other personal agendas.  The author says; "---science was the separation of knowledge from value.  Indeed, this seems to be what ensures its success.  -----  It requires always the possibility of experimental refutation and a permanent process of skepticism about its own findings."  Certainly, Darwinian dogma is rarely if ever examined with skepticism by those who get a value (career, wages, travel, etc.) from the Darwinian community and this writer knows of no experiment that has been run trying to disprove Darwinian macro evolution.

"Facing the Limits of Knowledge in the Twilight of the Scientific Age, The End of Science", by John Horgan.  In this book Mr. Horgan interviews quite a number of noted scientists in a number of scientific disciplines.  While we believe that the term "End of Science" is overstated, what the author really means is the end of reductionist science and the end of science as something which is believable in terms of providing the ultimate answers to the universe and life's mysteries.   Anyone who believes that science has all the answers will be surprised by what the experts scientist think.  (Note the interview with R. Dawkins the atheist/reductionists who is the epitome of the arrogant scientist who believes he/she has all the answers.)   Mr. Horgan quotes evolutionists S.J. Gould on page 124 which shows that an equally notable scientist does not believe that evolution has all the answers as does Mr. Dawkins.)  

"Science, Money, and Political Triumph, and Ethical Erosion", by D. Greenberg.  Even in the Scientific American magazine which is, of course, very pro science and publishes many articles with atheistic bias, the title of their review of the book was Bloated, Whiny, and Self-Important, Is the scientific bureaucracy the quintessential special-interest group?  We believe the answer is an even more profound yes than the review implies and that science is already controlled by atheistic and monetary special interests.

"The Trouble With Physics" by world class physicist L. Smolin.  If you have any knowledge or interest in basic physics and the limits of the science models of reality, you should read this book.  Speaking on page 197 of the possible range (landscape) of string theories (at this time the most basic of all science theories (though loaded with probable flaws) he says quoting a leading physicist: "Susskind claims that the stakes are to accept the landscape and the dilution in the scientific method it implies or give up science altogether and accept intelligent design (ID) as the explanation for the choices of parameters of the standard model."  (Referring to the fundamental basic explanatory model of physics.)  It should be noted that Susskind is no believer in ID but rather in a landscape of actual infinite universes with no physical evidence to support such a belief.

"What Is Life?" by E. Schrodinger (Nobel Laureate Scientist); says on page 4 of his book; "--enough is know about the actual material structure of organisms and about their functioning to state that, and to tell precisely why, present-day physics and chemistry could not possibly account for what happens in space and time within a living organism."  He backs this up on page 30 with some calculations of statistical physics.  Also reference pages; 32, 47, 52, 82, 85, 95, 102, 104, and 109.

"The End of Certainty" by I. Prigogine (Nobel Laureate scientist).  On page he says; "Persistent interactions means that we cannot take apart a system and consider it in isolation."  In laymen's terms, this means that the reductionistic approach to science cannot provide the complete story of the complex systems in living entities.

"Pi In The Sky; Counting, Thinking, and Being" by J. Barrow.  On page 19, referring to a mathematical proof by K. Godel, Mr. Barrow says; "---there must always be gaps in our knowledge of the physical world.  In the vein it has been suggested that if we were to define a religion to be a system of thought which contains unprovable statements, so it contains an element of faith, then Godel has taught us that not only is mathematics a religion but it is the only religion able to prove itself to be one."  We would add that if mathematics is a religion, then science which relies on mathematics must also be one. 

On page 297, Mr. Barrow says; "Many see the mathematics and the scientific edifice that is built upon it as the antithesis of traditional immaterial conceptions of reality.  Yet at root they are strikingly similar in the tantalizing nature of their incompleteness." 

Also reference pages 16, 124-125, 135, 140-143, 146, 153, 172,184, 186-187, 205, 210, 214, 238, 241, 247-248, 284-285, 297.

"Beyond Science, The Wider Human Context" by Physicist and Minister J. Polkinghorne.  Starting on page 5 speaking of science he says: "the story of clear theoretical prediction receiving unchallengeable experimental confirmation and so leading to certain truth is altogether too simplistic a tale."

"Does God Play Dice" by I. Stewart" (Professor of Mathematics).  This is a must read (at a somewhat higher level) to understand the underlying unity of the design of reality.  pp xii, 27, 35, 43, 45, 47 ,54, 72, 73, 74, 84, 93-95, 98, 102, 105, 130-134, 143, 153-154, 165, 182, 185-186, 188, 190, 193-198, 205-208, 214, 227, 247, 250, 253-254, 257, 266  On page 73 the author says; "Today's science shows that nature is relentlessly nonlinear."  This means that reductionism (the whole is simply the sum of the parts) is not valid in nature in general.

"Foresight and Understanding, An Inquiry into the Aims of Science." by S. Toulmin, Professor of Philosophy.  On page 101 the professor says; "There is only one way of seeing one's own spectacles clearly: that is to take them off.  It is impossible to focus both on them and through them at the same time.  A similar difficulty attaches to the fundamental concepts of science."  (Our fonts.)  In other words, scientists are not necessarily in a position to give an unbiased evaluation of the findings and direction of science.

"The Truth of Science" by R.G. Newton.  Note pages 51, 69, 93, and 218.  (Refer to Book review on line.)

"Paradigms Regained, A Further Exploration of the Mysteries of Modern Science by J. Casti, Ph. D. in mathematics.  On page 30, speaking of the DNA code; "The code that nature has evolved to use is very far to the left of the main cluster of randomly generated codes.  It is very unlikely that such an efficient code arose by chance.  That is about as close to invoking design/a Creator as scientist, who needs funding for his work and depends on pier review of his work from the atheistic science community leadership, can come.  We would add that for the code to have meaning, there must be some way  to decode DNA also, and ask how that arose if not from design.

"What is this thing called Science" by A. Chalmers. Msc. Physics and Ph. D. Philosophy of Science.  On page 24 he says about science; "candidate observation statements should be such that their validity can be tested in ways that involve routine, objective procedures that do not necessitate fine, subjective judgments on the part of the observer."  Sadly, the life sciences have gone far beyond this defensible and true science position and have become dominated by subjective speculations passed of as science.

"The Faith of a Physicists" by J. Polkinghorne, Physicists and Minister.  On page 28 he says; "Those of a reductionists frame of mind (they believe everything can be understood from simply taking it apart and examining its mechanisms) regard the "higher" sciences as no more than physics.  Among contemporary scientists, the biologists, flushed with the undoubted success of molecular biology, are most prone to make such assertions."  "Physicists did the same in the eighteenth century, but they have accumulated more experience since then (for physics is an easier subject than biology) and its practitioners, in consequence, tend to be much more wary about making claims that all is within their narrow grasp."  We believe that biologists are just beginning to realize how little they know and how complex their science is and that in its entirety, it will probably always be beyond the narrow grasp of the human mind.

"Show me God" by F. Heeren.   This is a book which looks at some of the truths of science from the viewpoint of a believer in God but is reasonably honest in looking at both the limits of evidence for God and chance (the atheist position is essentially that all the order in the universe including the laws of physics has occurred merely by chance.)  This books contains excerpts from interviews with a number of noted scientists.  Mr. Heeren says on page 202 speaking of the laws of physics being so precisely balanced to allow life and an ordered universe; "But even if the chance position can't prove that these laws exist by chance, the design position hasn't yet proved they were designed by God."  (We agree with him only to a limited extent, the calculations of mere chance versus design strongly favor design unless one postulates an actual infinity of other undetectable universes!)  Starting then on page 204 Mr. Heeren lists seven areas where hard science has found evidence of what one would have to admit at least look like design rather than chance. 

Additional pages and comments; the following pages are not a comprehensive list since I have not fully read the book but have jumped thru sections.  Ref. pp 27, 29, 57, 70, 75 (Actually starting on page 74, the author lists summary statements of the chapter (and does so for other chapters) which are essentially lay summaries of science findings or science situations which support the arguments for the existence of God.), 93, 116 (On page 116 he says; "Modern science has no laws or observations to show how something could have come from nothing, it doesn't even have a theory to propose such an event.  ----as physicists Milton Rothman points out, "there is no way of obtaining evidence concerning a prior existence" (i.e., before the big bang)."  We would add that the laws of quantum mechanics also do not qualify, since quantum mechanics deals with energy transformations at the subatomic level but does not speak at all on the issue of where the energy comes from in the first place.) pp 118-119 (On page 119: "We have equations that describe the transformations of one thing into another, but we have no equations whatever for creating space and time. And the concept doesn't even make any sense in English.") pp 1212, 174, 189-193249, 259,290.

"The Science of God. The convergence of Scientific and Biblical Wisdom" by MIT Ph.D. Physicist G. Schroeder.  Dr. Schroeder makes the case that "Religious belief is enhanced by an open-eyed investigation of the world and honest science demands humility when faced with the astonishing richness of life's creation."

"Beyond the Cosmos" by H. Ross, Ph. D Physics.  Another book by this scientists who provides Biblical references as well as scientific viewpoints.  On page 52 he begins talking about how to deal with apparent contradictions in certain biblical doctrines.  Unlike Dr. Ross, atheistic scientists like to point out apparent contradictions and use their inherently limited and imperfect understanding of God (to put it mildly) and their interpretations of the Bible to try to support the atheist position.  

Starting on page 81, there is an extended discussion of the "higher dimensionality of God"  and how the Trinity could be understood as a higher order of existence of God.  This book is a good reference written by a man with a doctor's degree in physics to show how other viewpoint are reasonable by other scientists.

"Complexity, Life at the Edge of Chaos" by R. Lewin.  On page 26, Mr. Lewin quotes a scientist as saying about evolution; "all but impossible for natural selection to orchestrate the activity of the one hundred thousand genes in the human genome."  A major theme of the book is that Darwinian evolution is to simplistic to explain the evolution of life.  On page 222, he also sees the need to control science and says; "Things such as rapid population growth, and environmental destruction, wrong headed political decisions are based on short-term gains.  If  we continue to fail in this respect, the future will be bleak."   This is true of most impacts of science on society.  The greater the complexity, the greater the need to understand science.

"Emergence, From Chaos to Order" by J. Holland, Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.  Note pages 42, 121, 122, and 204.  Mr. Holland says: "The behavior of the overall system cannot be obtained by summing the behaviors of its constituent parts."  The idea of emergence (the whole being more than the sum of its parts) and the idea that the whole can be coherent (in tune or functioning harmoniously) are very important in understanding the limits of science.  The concepts of coherence and emergence are not given enough importance in science, and one reason for this is that they are to a large degree beyond the simplified situation experiments and linear mathematics of reductionistic hard sciences.  Even farther beyond reductionistic science, nature is filled with situations which involve the concept of feedback (correction process) and such situations in nature are nonlinear (not straight line relationships) and chaotic (determined very sensitively by initial conditions) but deterministic in seeking attractors (specific outcomes which are not predictable but which are precisely determined by the governing laws plus the initial conditions.) 

Simply put, reality is full of emergence and not just governed or limited by the generally simplistic reductionistic "laws" of science. (Emergence means that properties come into being which are not predictable from the properties of constituent elements.)  Linear reductionistic science is inherently very limited in describing reality.  According to professor Holland; "We can no more truly understand strategies in a board game by compiling statistics of the movements of its pieces than we can understand the behavior of an ant colony in terms of averages."  "The behavior of an ant colony is not the simple sum of the behaviors of a group of average ants.  The coupled interactions of the ants provide a coherence to the nest that far exceeds anything predictable in terms of simple summations." (Our emphasis.)  Science can't even fully explain the behavior of ants!  Science cannot explain in hard factual terms how the coherence came into being.

"The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" by Thomas S. Kuhn.  Note the first paragraph of page 46, first paragraph page 52, and page 110.

A Case Against Accident and Self-Organization  (A must read book!!!!!)

"Natures Destiny, HOW the LAWS of BIOLOGY reveal PURPOSE in the UNIVERSE" by M. Denton, Ph. D. Developmental Biology.   On the inside of the loose cover the he says; "Is mankind a central product of the universe?  Or merely an accident fit to survive?  The exploding discoveries of biology in the past half century could radically change the scientific answer to this debate."  On page 139 the author says; "the laws of nature are fit for only one specific type of life--that which exists on earth."  On page 148 he says: The contrast between the apparent ease which life forms assemble and replicate themselves and the absolute failure to simulate (our words; truly understand to even a first approximation) this effortless activity in any sort of nonliving artificial system is very striking." On page 216 referring to the cell membrane, he says; "No other material is known which could substitute for this particular structure."  Note pages; 35-36, 76, 90-91, 139, 153-155, 163, 184-185 and 212.

"Rare Earth" by P.Ward and D. Brownlee, Geology and Astronomy Professors.  If you realize that life is improbable, you will find it interesting the studies of these professors have led them to conclude that even a suitable planet for life is very improbable.  That improbability must be multiplied times the extreme improbability of evolution itself leading to complex life or any life at all.  Note pages 150-155.

"Man and His Cosmos, God's Laughter" by G. Staguhn who is not a scientist but whose book is full of quotes by noted scientists.  "A Jewish proverb has it that when man thinks, God laughs."  On page 7 he quotes the great physicists E. Schrödinger who says; "on the one hand all the elements of our world picture are creations of the conscious mind, including science itself, but that conscious mind or "personality" is not contained in the same world picture.  He is pointing out the irony of arrogant science which has absolutely no explanation for the consciousness which has generated all the models of reality used in science.  Note also pages 39, 41, 86 (last paragraph), 87, 93, 130, 151, 162, 177, 204, 222, 225, 242, and 250.

"Soul; God, Self and the New Cosmology"; by A. Tilbey.  Interviews with Scientists and Theologians as seen on the learning channel and the BBC series "Soul."  This is a book for the more philosophical reader and not for other than the most critical students, but is a great thought stimulator.

"The End of Time" by J. Barbour.   Those who have not dug fairly deeply into physics will be surprised by the theme of this books which is that even our conceptions of time are questionable.  We all do "know" that we can only go forward in time, however, but most of the laws of physics are independent of the direction of time.  The "arrow" of time as discussed on page 25 of this book can only be explained two ways: "either the universe was created in a highly unlikely special state, and it initial order has been degrading ever since, or it has existed for ever, and  at some time in the recent past it entered by chance an exceedingly improbable state of very low entropy, from which it is now emerging."  (Entropy is a measure of disorder and low entropy mean high order.)  So one way or another, the arrow of time depends on the universe being in the past in a very ordered and improbable state.  This is a very deep book which goes into quantum mechanics and relativity and requires a fairly sophisticated science reader.

pp 25, 31, 130, 137, 143, 157, 160, 177-180, 189, 205, 252-253, 255, 273, 277, 280

"Zero, the Biography of a Dangerous Idea" by C. Seife.  This book is best read by someone with at least a background in calculus.  The book points out the relationship between zero and infinity and shows how our reasoning fails us even when we look at the simple mathematical principles which under gird science.

"Mystery of the Aleph" by A. Aczel.  This is a book about the concepts of infinity.  The book is nonmathematical for the most part and easy to read.  It contains some very deep thoughts about the paradox's which arise when we even break a line up into points.  We believe such paradox's are inherent in all reasoning which attempts to break things up in to pieces as with trying to break a line up into points.  We believe that simple mathematical reasoning about the nature of lines and points, illustrates a probable truth that everything is in fact continuous at some deep level and interrelated and that reductionism is very limited in what it can tell us about reality.

"The Pattern of Evolution" by N. Eldredge, Curator in the Department of Invertebrate Paleontology at the American Museum of Natural History.  On page 5 Mr. Eldredge says "Dawkins's "selfish genes" are as incapable of triggering ecological succession as they are of directly causing evolutionary history."  Note also pages 7, 8, 10, 21, 41, 63-66, 81, and 141-144.

"Life is a Miracle" by W. Berry.  This book is not written by a scientist, but is a good dissertation on the dangers of science.  Mr. Berry says on page 12; "If we lack the cultural means to keep incomplete knowledge from becoming the basis of arrogant and dangerous behavior then the intellectual disciplines themselves become dangerous."

"The Cooperative Gene" by M. Ridley.  on page viii, the author says; "The evolution of complex life was impossible until these selfish genes had been tamed."  In other words, even if one believes in Darwinian macro evolution (that selection from random variations can generate true novelty), life is not about "selfish genes" but on the contrary, life is essentially about cooperation.  On page ix, the author reproduces a quote, "Mendelian inheritance, it turns out, is designed to prevent selfish genes from acts of subversion."  pp 8-10, 11-12, 14-18, 26-27, 30, 36-37, 45, 54, 62-63, 69, 77, 83, 90-93, 96, 103, 105, 109, 114-120, 126-129, 138-141, 144, 149, 156-160, 162, 169, 173, 176, 181-182, 186-188, 210, 214, 217. 219, 221, 223, 226, 232, 234

"Intelligent Design" by W. Dembski Ph.D. in mathematics.  Page 113, "Macroevolution--the unlimited plasticity of organisms to diversify across all boundaries--even if true, cannot legitimately be attributed to the mutation-selection mechanism."

On page 165 he says; "what laws cannot do is produce contingency; and without contingency the cannot generate information, to say nothing of specified complex information."  What Dr. Dembski has done is mathematically looked at the information involved in life and the nature of that information and concluded on the basis of probability calculations, that it is extremely improbable that Darwinian evolution can be the full answer to all of life.

Looking at the improbability that Darwinists shrug off, Dr. Dembski notes that if the degree of improbability is in fact effective in producing an end result, then if the same thing applied to a betting situation, everyone (yes everyone who goes into every casino in the world) who took 5$ to a casino would win a million dollars.  What he is saying is that the Darwinists are, in essence, allowing the process of so many wildcard occurrences in evolution that they can then postulate (no proof) that anything is possible from evolution; when in fact, evolution had and has few if any wildcards to use.  

Evolution could not call an arm a wing and simply have it become a wing (as a card player can do with a wildcard), all the improbable occurrences (of functional and survival advantageous structures) in between, would actually have to had happened by chance (actually existed) for Darwinian evolution to produce novel structures.  That would have had an incredibly low probability.  Intelligent Design is far more probable as an explanation.   This book is recommended for general readers.

"The Cartoon Guide to Genetics"  by Gonick & Wheelis is an excellent book for students or anyone who wants to discover that science can be very interesting and the truth of science sometimes quite surprising.   Even in its cartoon form, this book has a lot of information and is recommended for all readers.

"What's Darwin Got to Do with it?" by Newman & Wiester is an excellent book for younger readers.  This book is written like a cartoon and the discussion shows how what sounds like good reasoning, on the surface, can in fact be very misleading.  This book recommended for all readers.

"Toward a New Philosophy of Biology" by E. Mayr.  This major proponent of Darwinian evolution as the whole explanation for life makes some very interesting statements as on page 98; "mutations, in a given species, are highly "constrained," which means that only a very restricted range of mutations is possible."  We certainly agree with him on that as one of the reasons to reject Darwinian evolution as explaining more than a very small part of life.  Note pages 402, 404-405, and 535.  pp 400-472 on macroevolution.  pp 407-409

"This is Biology" by E. Mayr.  More interesting admissions from this leader of Darwinian evolution theory.  Mayr says on page 33; "feature of science that distinguishes it from religion is its openness."   It is hard to imagine any less open community than the evolution sciences. 

On page 43 Mayr says; "all scientists at all times commit errors; they seem to be unavoidable.  One should search for errors, analyze them when found, and learn from them; it is in unforgivable sin to conceal errors".  One wonders if his pronouncements are supposed to apply to Darwinian macro evolution theory or just to those who want to examine its flaws.

Mayr said not to long ago in the Scientific American magazine February 2002 issue on page 97 says of evolution "is a fact so overwhelmingly established that it has become irrational to call it a theory."  One again wonders if in this statement (his statements are just one paragraph) if he is referring only to microevolution or just the fact of change at some low level (bird beak size, etc.) occurring in life forms.  If not, he seems to be contradicting what he says in his book about "openness"?????? (as well as many statements as he makes in the book referenced above.)   Note also pages 49, 56, 73,77, 81,105.

"Time's Arrow and Evolution" by Prof. H. Blum.  On page 164, Prof. Blum says (speaking about the assumption that life originated by accident); "How, when no life existed, did substances come into being which today are absolutely essential in living systems yet which can only be formed by those systems?  It seems begging the question to suggest that the first protein molecules were formed by some more primitive "non protein living system", for it still remains to define and account for the origin of that system." (Our fonts.)

"Darwin on Trial" by P. Johnson.  Note the Dawkins quote (one example of the many holes in Dawkins (the high priest of reductionist scientism) science supposedly knows or can know it all position) on page 35 and the Burgess shale discussion starting on page 55.  (Also note that you can find supposed rebuttals on the internet of the questions books like this raise.  When reading such rebuttals to those questioning Darwinism, be on the lookout for complex arguments to explain away variances from the Darwin dogma and the leaps of logic and assumptions used to try to rebut simple facts.)  

"Evolution; A Theory in Crisis" by M. Denton.  Especially note pages 225, 268, 289, and 314.  Also pp 90-91, 103, 105, 109, 113, 139, 145, 147, 149, 151, 154, 163, 165, 176, 182, 186-187, 189, 191, 193, 206, 210, 211, 217, 219, 223, 225, 227, 250, 263, 266269, 277 code analysis, 288, 289, 302, 304, 314-315, 323, 330, 332, 348,358.  This is an example of the type of book that should be taught, side by side with evolution theory to students, to make them aware of all the inconsistencies in the Darwinian macro evolution theory and to make sure they know that it is may be and probably is, no more than a theory when extrapolated into the macro evolution arena.  This can be done while teaching microevolution (changes in size of bird beaks and external colors) as fact.

"Darwins Black Box" The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution by M. Behe, associate professor of biochemistry.  This book has been heavily attacked by evolutionists but their arguments against it just make for more problems for the theory of macroevolution since the idea of multifunctional evolution of the piece parts of some irreducibly complex structure just require even more steps and more improbability for macroevolution.  We think that the basic point, even if it is not yet proven, represents a serious challenge to macroevolution.  One of the many problems with macroevolution is that it must explain everything about life to be what its proponents claim it to be.  Mr. Behe also makes some interesting comments starting on page 188 on the subject of design.

"Randomness" by D. Bennett.  For the more philosophical reader only.  Note pages 158-162 and 169-170.  Science cannot even define the exact relationship of the circumference of a circle to the diameter of a circle without reference to infinity.  The same is true for the natural logarithm "e" (used extensively in science) to at least 1500 decimal places.

"Signs of Life" by Sole and Goodwin.  A book for the technical reader.  On pages 38-42 points out how information in complex systems is not local but is in some unknown way propagated throughout systems which is not at all considered in the present theories of evolution.   This "nonlocal" behavior argues strongly against the simplistic Darwinian macroevolution reductionist (genes supposedly hold the full explanation) theory as being valid.

"Icons of Evolution, Science or Myth?" by A. J. Wells.  This book does what we will do a lot in this site, that is, quote the very scientists who are proponents of evolution where their statements show that evolution is no more than a theory with some evidence but with many more questions than answers.  Note pages 3 (last paragraph) and the subject of molecular phylogeny starting on page 49.

"The Collapse of Evolution" by S. Huse.   This book is written by a Christian scientist (which should not discount the fact based questions he raises any more than the fact that many scientists are atheists means inherently that the facts of their positions should be discounted.)   Note pages 19, 86, 94, and 119.

"Biology as Ideology" by R. Lewontin whom S.J. Gould refers to as "the most brilliant scientist I know".  Note pages 48, 67,and 100.  (We would like to not that we do not agree with all his philosophy, we especially do not agree with his apparent materialism, but still recommend his books for the more serious readers.)

"The Fingerprint of God" by H. Ross, Ph. D Physics.  A book with recent scientific findings together with Bible chapter and verse references for those who want to see how well the two fit together.

"To Infinity and Beyond" by E. Maor, Ph. D. Mathematics.   This book starts off with the startling revelation that at least potential infinity and possibly actual infinity, is implied even in basic counting and the concept of a straight line.  On page ix, Mr. Maor says; "it is hard to see how mathematics could exist without the notion of infinity, for the very first thing a child learns about mathematics--how to count--is based on the tacit assumption that every integer has a successor.  The notion of a straight line, so fundamental in geometry, is based on a similar assumption--that we can, at least in principle, extend a line indefinitely in both directions.  Science is dependent on mathematics and mathematics is based on assumptions (axioms) which are inherently not provable.   Science is not a pure source of truth.  Science also requires faith.

"Nature Loves to Hide" by S. Malin.  Note pages 39, 66, 133, and 143.

Books Recommended but with minimal review comments at this time, partial list of key pages:

Stories of the Invisible, A guided tour of molecules by P. Ball; pp 15-16, 44-45, 47, 50-51, 53, 57, 59, 65, (73 material engineering) 91, 100, 103, 118, 121, 124, 140, 145, 149, 166

Fire in the Mind, Science; Faith and the Search for Order by G. Johnson; On page 22; "Some of Kauffman's colleagues like Brian Goodwin, --, go so far as to deny that natural selection is responsible for biological structure. they insist that the patterns in the living world are not imposed from the outside by Darwinian processes but are generated from within , as the organism obeys internal laws of its own.  On page 129 Mr. Johnson says; "Chaitin showed that it is impossible to prove whether or not a particular number is random------it is always possible that there is more order to be squeezed out."   This has profound implications as to the limits of science in understanding the information involved in evolution and almost certainly means that it can never be proven that evolution is based on random variations only, even if that were true which is open to serious question.  Ref. pages 22, 76, 99, 129, 153, 154, 174-177, 200, 267, 269-271, 273-277, 283, 286, 310, 325 

 Schrödinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality by J. Gribben; pp 135, 158, 184, 186

 Signs of Life by R. Pollack; pp 180

 Inventing Reality, Physics as Language by B. Gregory; pp 181

 The Touchstone of Life, Molecular Information, Cell Communication and the   Foundations of life by W. R. Loewenstein; pp 42, 123, 138, 159, 285, 326    This book shows the incredible complexity of the cell far far beyond the explanatory power of any simple reductionism even thou the author obviously believes in evolution to some degree.  We believe that Darwinian evolution is a fine tuning mechanism but not the full answer to the full spectrum of  the evolution of life which has "design" written all over it as is clear even in the book if one is open minded.  On page 331 the author quotes a saying: "Don't let an ugly fact spoil a beautiful hypothesis."  He follows on that page with a section titled; "The limits of scientific knowledge."  On page 333 speaking of biology and physics at the lowest quantum level he says: "--but in the spirit of the age if we now try to press the analysis of life to the limit, the quantum realm.  It is here where some of the frontiers of contemporary biology may lie."  We believe the author is somewhat correct and to a degree seems to understand that the reality is that at the quantum level, all of reality is that of fields and not the mechanistic paradigm of DNA and Darwinism.

The Physics of Immortality by F.J. Tipler, world class physicist;  On page 29 Mr. Tipler quotes another world class physicist R. Penrose as saying; "To my way of thinking, there still is something mysterious about evolution with its apparent "groping" towards some future purpose."  Though Mr. Tipler propounds some theories we do not accept, we believe that overall he  points out that physics is not inconsistent with Christian beliefs.  pp 28, 29, 77, 101, 107, 156, 158, 183, 194, 203, 208, 211, 247, 250, 251, 262, etc.

The Red Queen by M. Ridley; 43, 46, 50, 56, 62, 64, 73-74, 80, 97, etc. (Note, I do not agree with the thesis of the book, but it contains a lot of facts which refute macroevolution.)

Quantum Questions, Mystical Writings of the World's Greatest Physicists by K Wilber; pp 6, 7, 11, 15, 48, 73, 83, 95, 161

Doubt and Certainty by T. Rothman and G. Sudarshan; pp x, xi, 13, 57, 63, 74, 76, 77, 82, 83, etc.

Life Evolving by C. de Duve (Nobel Prize Winner)  This book makes some interesting admissions which actually argue against the authors position that life can be explained naturally.  It also admits that some scientists are becoming skeptical of the explanatory powers of evolution.  The author additionally admits that life seems designed into the laws of physics.  The author also admits that many of the hypotheses of the evolution community are highly speculative and not supported by scientific fact.  On page 51 he makes some very interesting admissions about the biases of science.  See also page 149 and pp 173 last full paragraph.

Quantum Evolution by J. McFadden  pp 32-33, 75, 113, 149, 221, 224-225, 228, 231, 235, 237, 243.  The author has begun the process of bringing the fundamental realities of quantum mechanics to bear on the extreme improbabilities associated with the origin and evolution of life.  He does in some cases seem, however, to makes some questionable assumptions about the behavior at the subatomic and atomic levels.  The key point, in any case, is that the author is writing the book because of the extreme improbability that science can otherwise explain the origin of life.  The book is worth reading because it is a first step towards a view of evolution which recognizes that quantum mechanics underlies everything including life and does a good job of over viewing the strange world of the quantum which underlies all of reality.

The Non-Local Universe, The New Physics of Matters of the Mind by Nadeau and Kafatos.  pp 12, 21, 34, 39, 41, 50, 58, 61, 80-81, 96, 101, 103, 109, 111, 113, 116-117  The authors first discuss that new findings of physics which show that reductionism is a very limited way and often impotent way of looking at reality and then discuss how evolution is profoundly affected as it relates to the interactive and extremely complex reality of living organisms.

Information, Mechanism and Meaning, D.M. Mackay.  pp4-5, 11-13, 15-17, 19-20, 31, 33, 80, 108, 146 

Fly, The Unsung Hero of 20th-Century Science, by M. Brookes.  pp 19, 28, 30, 36, 37, 62, 65-72, 97, 103-107, 136-137, 149, 151, 152-155, 159, 170-171, 173-176, 179, 182

"Understanding the Present" by B. Appleyard.  This book is essentially about the same basic subjects as this web site.  It is a book about the actual truth and limitations of science and the misuses of science as they impact society.  We believe, however, that the conflict between science and religion is less basic than does Mr. Appleyard.  We believe that the conflict is essentially relates to the philosophy of some scientists and not at all to the reality of hard science fact.    pp XV, 85, 88, 94, 128-133, 145. 234

"Infinity and the Mind" by R. Rucker.   This is an excellent book on understanding the non-intuitive properties of infinity and possibly God.   Excellent on the one and the many apparent contradictions.  pp 6, 10, 46, 48, 51, 159, 200, 205, 229-230. 

The Emperor's New Mind by Roger Penrose;  19, 21-22, 27, 96, 97, 107,110,112, 178, 183, 220, 227, 250, 254, 270, 274,286, 292, 294-298, 307, 309, 315, 317, 319, 335, 337, 339-340, 344, 351-352, 354, 356, 360, 364, 371, 378, 385, 398, 402, 406, 410, 412-413, 416, 417, 426, 429, 429, 436, 442-443, 446, 447

"The Large, the Small and the Human Mind" by Roger Penrose (One of the top world physicists.) pp XVI-XVII, 16, 44, 48, 89, 112

"At Home in the Universe, The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization" by S. Kauffman Professor Emeritus of biochemistry. pp 42, 152, 161, 180, 183, 184-186, 188-189, 194,  200, 212, 220, 232, 234, 238, 252, 269

"Investigations" by S. Kauffman pp 6, 7, 8, 10, 17, 18-20, 23, 47, 48, 60, 74, 82-84, 95-96, 117, 122, 123, 125, 129, 136-139, 144

"Unraveling DNA, The Most Important Molecule of Life" by D. Frank-Kamenetskii Professor of Advanced Biotechnology, who says on page 66; "the same DNA region encoding a maximal message of three proteins, appear, therefore, to be quite clear."  He goes on to say; "Despite its discovery back in 1977, the gene-overlapping phenomenon has so far failed to provide any explanation as to how a thing like this can occur during the course of evolution."  The truth is that DNA does not fully explain life.  pp 19, 24, 42, 45, 51, 55, 66, 68-71, 74, 76, 80, 84, 86, 91-93, 117

"Nexus, Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Theory of Networks" by M. Buchanan; pp 37-38, 43, 49-50, 61, 63-65, 67, 70, 72,

Stephen Hawking, Quest for a Theory of Everything' PP 85;  "IT IS QUITE POSSIBLE THAT GOD ACTS IN WAYS THAT CANNOT BE DESCRIBED BY SCIENTIFIC LAWS."  PP 121; A GOD EXISTING OUTSIDE OUR UNIVERSE AND OUR TIME WOULD NEED A "BEGINNING" IN ORDER TO CREATE, BUT IT COULD STILL LOOK TO US , FROM OUR VANTAGE POINT IN "REAL" TIME, AS THOUGH THERE HAD BEEN A BEGINNING."

IT AIN'T NECESSARILY SO, THE DREAM OF THE HUMAN GENOME AND OTHER ILLUSIONS BY RICHARD LEWONTIN.  PP 27, 46, 57, 59, 62, 70-73, 93, 95-96, 99-100, 102, 104, 106-107, 113, 126-127, 141-142, 147, 191-192  (We would like to note that we do not agree with Mr. Lewontin in all aspects of this philosophy, but still recommend his books as showing how complex life is and how little it is understood in its complexities.)

Acquiring Genomes, A Theory of the Origin of Species by Margulis and Sagan.  The authors basically argue that symbiosis is the driving force behind evolution and not random variations in the genome.  We have only scanned the book to date but note that in Chapter 5 titled; Principles of Evolutionary Novelty, they completely ignore the problems associated with the morphological discontinuities associated with large scale or complex novelties which are found in all of life.  The authors, as with almost all macro evolutionists who reject "design" fall into the assumption that reductionism in reverse (simple additions of parts) works at all levels when in fact, it has been proven that such is not the case and that life involves all sorts of control and feedback elements which are not amenable to simple addition or subtraction.  The book is not recommended.

"The Fabric of the Cosmos" by B. Greene; pp 5, 13, 15, 23, 25-26, 30, 34, 47, 49, 58, 67. 76, 114, 119-122, 136, 139, 169, 176, 179, 188-189, 199, 283, 286, 291-292, 296, 302, 307, 310, 313, 319, 322, 330, 351, 353, 356, 361, 385-388, 417, 425, 427, 478-482, 487

"The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" by Barrow and Tipler (Professors of Astronomy and Physics respectively.)  "Another weakness of the Anthropic argument for the isotropy of the Universe is that it is based upon an unconfirmed theory for the origin of protogalaxies. ----- the outstanding problem in explaining the presence of galaxies from the action of gravitational instability on small fluctuations from homogeneity in any cosmological model is the size and nature of the initial fluctuations."  He is saying that even the existence of galaxies is not explained fully in any scientific model of the origin of the universe nor even by the assumptions of the Anthropic argument (this universe must be the way it is for humans to exist to observe it.)  He elaborates further on page 428 about the ad hoc nature of the assumptions in cosmological models which lead to galaxies in the model like those we actually observe.  The fine tuning of the supposed homogeneity of the origin of the universe is a major problem for those who reject design ignoring the many extreme improbabilities that leaves unexplained.

pp 29-32, 124, 126, 129-123, 137, 155-156, 178, 180-182, 191, 193-195, 198, 204,219, 222-223, 225, 243-245, 249, 257-258, 260-261, 264,317, 428, 470, 544-545, 561, 565

"Quantum Physics, Illusion or Reality?" by A. Rae.  On page 70 Mr. Rae (Dept. of Physics, University of Birmingham) says; "others have suggested that the world is observed, not only by ourselves, but by an eternal conscious being, whom we might as well call 'God'."   pp 13, 24, 27, 47, 51-53, 56-58, 59, 70, 71, 81, 88

"The Ghost in the Atom" by Davies and Brown (Davies is a noted Physicist); On page 54 the book quotes a comment by a noted  physicists; "Eugene Wigner has suggested that he can insert a very definite division between the observer and the observed, because he invokes the mind as a completely separate entity which is somehow coupled to the world, and he says that it's the entry into the mind of the observer that resolves the paradox's" (of quantum mechanics.)  This is a very profound suggestion since it says that it may be that by accepting that mind is independent of physical reality in some sense, that the most profound paradox's of the most basic law of physics may be resolved. 

On page 116, professor of Mathematics/Physics John Taylor says; "I am a hard nosed physicists.  Since one has no idea of what goes on in the other universes, they shouldn't be brought in."  He is referring to postulated other universes which cannot be know to exist and shouldn't be used to try to explain the paradox's of quantum mechanics or for that matter to explain how the laws of physics are so perfect for life in the universe.  pp11, 31, 34, 39, 47-50, 54, 59-64, 66-68, 74-76, 82, 91, 96, 103, 116, 119-120, 130, 134, 138-139, 141-144, 146-147

"The Bit and the Pendulum, from Quantum Computing to M Theory -- The New Physics of Information" by T. Siegfried.  On page 144 there is a discussion of "Computing with Chaos".  This has profound implications for theories of the evolution of life.  pp 2, 4, 17, 24, 55, 81, 138, 144-146, 150, 155, 167, 175, 214, 226  Ref. "A new breed of Thinking Computer".  Read section labeled "Harmony."   Computation in Nervous Systems.  On page 167, Mr. Siegfried discusses the distinction between the general term "information" and the content of the information.  This distinction is very important in understanding the information in living entities and the information generated by the laws of physics acting undirected.  This distinction when understood, shows that life is not explainable simply by the laws of nature acting alone.

The Splendid Feast of Reason by S. Singer says on page 67; "A new kind of energy field associated with the brain seems to be required to understand the generation and the physical nature of thought and consciousness."  The author makes some interesting speculations like that quoted, and there is nothing wrong with that, but he also makes some leaps of reasoning which make the book value questionable and the book is not recommended as giving a correct picture and it is not a feast of reason.  For example, on page 63 he says: "Life's designs spontaneously result from the actions of proteins encoded by hundreds of developmental genes that are successively turned on or off as explained on page 55."  On page 55, however, he talks about regulator proteins but does not say how natural forces (Darwinian evolution) could have produced such regulators (which came first that which needs to be regulated or the regulator which had nothing to regulate and what about Ashby's law which requires regulators to have as many possible states as that which they are to regulate (how did the regulator know how to evolve, how did it communicate with the cell structures to be regulated) which is a major problem for Darwinian evolution.)  He does not (nor can anyone else beyond the superficial) truly explain what controls the control genes and proteins.  He also goes beyond science and attacking religion in general.

"Lessons from the Living Cell: The Limits of Reductionism" written by S. Rothman who has a Ph.D. and has worked in experimental biology for 40 years.  In the book he says on page 1 speaking of a full understanding of even something as simple as a protazoa from its DNA, Dr. Rohm says; "it will never be possible and that such optimism is misplaced."  He adds on page 3 in regards to a comprehensive understanding of life; "Such an understanding was never realistically achievable this way."

On page 8, Dr. Rothman in regards to genes explaining all of evolution; "equating genes and evolution in this way is just a mental sleigh of hand.  Genes do not in and of themselves make and organism more or less able to adapt to the environmental exigencies it faces.  This ability is an exclusive property of the whole intact organism. ---- Most important, genes and proteins are not in and of themselves responsible for the multitudinous features of life that provide for our adaptive capabilities. ---- they are transcendent qualities of the organism, and it alone.  (We highly recommend the book.  It makes a very good case for the failings of reductionism and the limitations and failings of that science community.)

           Books recommended, in our reading/partially read pile:

The Universe Next Door by M. Chown.  We reference this book because of its very interesting discussion starting in Chapter 3 about the wave nature of matter.  It turns out that the universe is not filled with microscopic granules of matter but rather waves of matter and this has profound implications for all of science.  (Note, we believe that references to other universes are simply speculations based on mathematics and probably inherently beyond science. There is certainly no evidence of any other universe.)

Travels to the Nanoworld by M. Gross, chapters 2,3, and 4 look very interesting.  On page 50 the book talks about an antibody against cholesterol crystals.  This could be very profound.  Cholesterol despite its bad reputation when excessive in amount causes problems in some people, is vital to mammals.  The truth about cholesterol is in a way typical about the truth in the evolution debate.  Most of the time there is a chicken or egg first problem for Darwinists.  How did mammals exist before the could safely use Cholesterol with the antibody protecting against cholesterol crystals?  What did the antibody do to survive before it came to exist in the body of the mammal using but needing protection from Cholesterol crystals?  The often cited (in evolution debates) biology of sight is discussed starting on page 98.  On page 101 the book discusses the incredible precision and response of the vision system.  Clearly the higher level vision systems are probably not simply a simple photon detection system with add on features via Darwinian evolution.

The Philosopher's Stone; Chaos, Synchronicity and the Hidden Order of the World by F.D. Peat. On page 44, Mr. Peat says; "It is almost as if the entire universe were the tiniest addition to that ultimate law."  We would ask; if the universe is tiny addition to the law, what is the source of that law?  On page 62, speaking of the deepest law of physics (quantum mechanics), Mr. Peat raises another very deep point; "--interaction always involves at least one quantum of energy.  But the quantum is indivisible, and this means that the interaction itself, the very act of observation, cannot be in any way analyzed or divided."  We believe that such a statement has a core of truth in a limited way. Also refer to pp 48, 63, 66-67, 72-73, 76, 79, 85-86, 89, 95-98, 104, 108, 111, 114, 116, 120.

From Here to Infinity by I. Stewart

About Time by P. Davies

Seven Experiments That Could Change the World by R. Sheldrake.  We especially look forward to part Three about science "Illusions of Objectivity".

Strange Matters, Undiscovered Ideas at the Frontiers of Space and Time, by T. Siegfried

How Blind Is the Watchmaker? : Nature's Design & the Limits of Naturalistic Science by Neil Broom

Not By Chance - Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution by Dr. L.M. Spetner

        Books on our to purchase and read list;

The Scientific Companion : Exploring the Physical World with Facts, Figures, and Formulas

Information Theory and Evolution by J. Avery