Letter to the American Association of University Professors

To the AAUP:

Subject: Request for help at Gordon College, Wenham, MA

The American Journal of Physics published an article (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 78, No.11, Nov. 2008) that incorrectly applies an equation in physics and has no scientific value.  I have been advised that Congressman Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th District) is investigating my allegations against the AJP because it undermines the integrity of science (http://www.newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation). An article has since been published that refutes the AJP article (Sewell G. (2013) Entropy and evolution, BIO-Complexity 2013(2):1-5).

The AJP article was written and published in a zealous desire to ridicule creationism. The refusal of the AJP to correct its mistake means the AJP is perpetrating a fraud upon the public in order to promote atheism. A number of Catholic colleges are refusing my request to confront the AJP with its misconduct. On September 9, 2013, I met with Fr. Brian Mulcahy (212-xxx-xxxx), President of the Providence College Corporation, and explained that a biology professor and physics professor at Providence College were being dishonest in their communications with me about the AJP article. Fr. Mulcahy promised to ask about my accusations.

The “1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure” refers to the “common good” and the “advancement of truth.” What occurred at Gordon College is directly connected to academic freedom. On Nov.1, 2013, I sent emails to Janel Curry (provost), David Lee (physics professor), and Karl Giberson (gibersok@gmail.com) saying they had a Christian duty to resign from the American Scientific Affiliation because this organization supports the AJP’s refusal to retract the article. I got an email response from M Ryan Groff, who is an adjunct professor at Gordon College, expressing an interest in investigating my allegation of pseudoscience. Suddenly, Dr. Groff refused to respond to my emails and return my telephone calls. My suspicion is that Curry, Lee, and Giberson threatened Dr. Groff with professional retaliation if Dr. Groff followed through with his initial interest.  On Nov. 9, I sent an email to Dan Tymann, Executive Vice President and Chief of Staff of Gordon College, telling of my plans to ask the AAUP to investigate.

The following is a list of people I mailed letters to with a certificate of mailing explaining why the AJP article should be retracted or why one or more of their subordinates has poor character:

Marietta DeChristina, Scientific American
Leon Wieseltier, New Republic
Neil DeGrasse Tyson, American Museum of Natural History
Cora Marrett, National Science Foundation
Joan Haynes, American Institute of Physics Publishing
David Ciancimino, New York Province of the Society of Jesus
Thomas Smolich, Jesuit Conference
Michael Sheeran, Association of Jesuit Universities
Lee Bollinger, Columbia University
Lisa Coico, City College of New York
William Durden, Dickinson College
John D. Gioia, Georgetown University
Donald Harrington, St. John’s University
Richard M. Joel, Yeshiva University
Joseph McShane, Fordham University
James Muyskens, Queen’s College
David Burcham, Loyola Marymount U.
John Sexton, New York University
Thomas Curran, Rockhurst University
Samuel Stanley, Stony Brook University
Harvey Stenger, Binghamton University
P. K. Norton, University of North Colorado

I’ll be very glad to travel to Washington DC to explain why your organization has a responsibility to investigate this matter.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Mailed with a certificate of mailing on 11/13/13 and faxed to (202) 737-5526


Letter to Leon Wieseltier

To Leon Wieseltier:

I thought you might be interested in my campaign to get the American Journal of Physics to retract the attached article about evolution. It is a matter of national concern because it undermines the integrity of science. My congressman, Yvette Clarke (D-NY District 9), said the matter is being investigated. My correspondence with her staff is at:

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/

In a nutshell, creationists have the incorrect but intelligible idea that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, according to which a cube of sugar will dissolve in a cup of coffee but will not un-dissolve. For the same reason, a gas will fill up the entire container it is in. This law does not apply to the evolution of stars or biological evolution because thermodynamics is the study of liquids, solids, and gases.

Nevertheless, a number of peer-reviewed and scholarly works in physics say that evolution does not violate the second law because of the sun. This is literally unintelligible, like thinking the planet Earth is a tetrahedron. The idea that Earth is flat is an intelligible error.

The attached article goes so far as to perform a fake calculation proving that the sun caused evolution. The article disgraces every physicist in the United States.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Mailed on October 3, 2013 with certificates of mailing to The New Republic, 60 Madison Ave., NY, NY 10010 and to Marietta DeChristina, Scientific American, 75 Varick St., NY, NY 10013

email to Marietta DeChristina sent on October 8, 2013

I have sent a number of emails to Scientific America at editors@sciam.com about the absurd article published by the American Journal of Physics (attached). I live in New York City, and want to meet with you to explain how much harm the AJP is doing by not retracting the article. I will be making a similar request to Leon Wieseltier because of his interest in the fallacy called scientism. The Scientific American is guilty of practicing scientism because its editors have ignored my emails.


Letter to Neil DeGrasse Tyson

Hayden Planetarium & Department of Astrophysics
American Museum of Natural History
Central Park West at 79th Street
New York, New York 10024

Dear Dr. Tyson,

The article I’v enclosed (“Entropy and evolution”, Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) is so absurd that it disgraces all physicists in the United States. I am writing to request an interview so I can explain why the article should be retracted.

This is a matter of national concern because it undermines the integrity of science. I’v brought the matter to the attention of the staff of Yvette Clarke (NY-D, 9th district), and was told the matter is being investigated. My correspondence with Clarke is at

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/.

I’v made a similar request to Leon Wieseltier of the New Republic magazine because he has written against scientism, and Marietta DeChristina because she is the editor of Scientific American and a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Mailed with a certificate of mailing and faxed to (212) 769-5007


Correspondence with Lutherans

Email sent to Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science on April 29, 2013: 

I’m trying to get the American Journal of Physics to retract the attached article because it propagates misinformation about evolution and thermodynamics. My correspondence with the AJP and other physics organizations in on my blog at http://www.newevangelist.me. I recently submitted a 10-page document with 9 exhibits to my congressman explaining why the fraudulent nature of the article and its maliciousness is a matter of national concern. The absurdity of the AJP article is explained at http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics.

If the article is not retracted, I’d like to submit a manuscript explaining this affair. What follows is a redaction of what I gave Congresswomen Yvette Clarke of New York. None of this material is copyrighted. Feel free to do with it whatever you want.

The theory of evolution is that microscopic organisms evolved into whales and elephants in about a billion years. This gives rise to the question of what caused this to happen. The only theory supported by the evidence is natural selection acting upon innovations. Not enough is known about the innovations to understand this increase in the complexity of life. In other words, natural selection doesn’t explain common descent. Evolutionary biologists always speak of “adaptive evolution.”

The only theory that even attempts to explain the complexity of life and common descent is the theory of intelligent design (ID). The trouble with this theory is that there is no evidence for it. To make their theory look better, ID advocates compare ID with natural selection. Many people go along with this scam because they don’t want to admit ID is a better theory than natural selection in some sense. They are more interested in arguing against God’s existence than in evolutionary biology.

As a result of this conflict about ID, many non-biologist think natural selection does explain the complexity of life and common descent. I call this ignorance and irrationality level 1 of the fraud being perpetrated upon the citizens of the United States by an article published in the American Journal of Physics (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). Level 2 of the fraud is that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. Level 3 of the fraud is the idea that evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics because evolution did not occur in a closed system.
Level 4 of the fraud is the absurd calculation in “Entropy and evolution.” The author estimates the probability of an organism A evolving into organism B in 100 years as being 1/1000. He then plugs this number into the Boltzmann equation for entropy to calculate the change in entropy of the biosphere.

Email from editor on May 14, 2013

Dear Mr. Roemer:

Thank you for sending Zygon your manuscript entitled “Exploring the Conflict Between Science and Religion” (ID: ZYGON-A-2013-05-0043).

We receive many proposals that, for one reason or another, we must decline to pursue. Yours falls in this category given our current volume of papers. I don’t think that it is of sufficient interest for the readers of Zygon to become involved in a dispute regarding another journal. Furthermore, a central element in the argument seems to be that the conflict between ID and Darwinists is due to different views of the cosmological argument, which seems historically and philosophically inaccurate.

Please accept my best wishes for your future work.

Sincerely,

Willem B. Drees
Editor, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science
w.b.drees@hum.leidenuniv.nl
http://www.zygonjournal.org/

Faxed letter to Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science dated May 14, 2013
Re: ZYGON-A-2013-05-0043

To: Debra H. Van Der Molen, Willem B. Drees, and Karl E. Peters:
I think my submitted manuscript proved that the AJP article (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) is a hoax analogous to the infamous Piltdown Man. I made it very clear in my submission and in my email to Karl Peters dated April 29 that I am not interested in publishing another article exposing this scam. My goal is to get the AJP to retract this article. I consider Willem B. Drees’s email to me dishonest. Just like the AJP, Zygon is trying to create a fraudulent paper trail that will make it look like Zygon carried out its professional and moral responsibilities.

What Zygon should do re-write the article in a way that your readers will be interested in. If you don’t do this, you will be helping the AJP perpetrate a fraud. All of the supporters of Zygon will become collaborators. I will make sure that their guilt will be documented by sending faxes, emails, and certified letters.

This scandal sheds light on the murders committed by the Nazis during WWII. No one was ever forced to kill anyone. However, there were severe penalties for telling about the murders. Collaboration took the form of being silent.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Faxed to 773 256 0782, emailed to w.b.drees@hum.leidenuniv.nl and zygon@lstc.edu

Email to presiding bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America sent on May 22, 2013

Dear Right Reverend Mark Hanson,

The American Journal of Physics published an article with a fake calculation showing that biological evolution did not violate the laws of physics (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). I have a Ph.D. in physics, and I cannot understand how such an article could be written and published. In its correspondence with me, the editor of the AJP engaged in trickery to avoid having to retract the article. That the science establishment is allowing the AJP to continue to spread misinformation about physics and evolution is even more unfathomable. The closest I can come to a real-life analogy is the murder of civilians by the German government during World War II. No one was ever forced to kill anyone. But, there were severe penalties for telling about the murders.

The AJP article is a piece of anti-religious propaganda. Creationists are explicitly mentioned and slandered with the accusation that they think evolution violates the laws of physics. Creationists know no more about physics than Lutherans, Muslims, and any other religious group. The science of the Big Bang, the origin of life, evolution, and fine-tuning of physical constants are nevertheless part of our salvation history because the Bible says God created the universe from nothing. The inability of science to explain these phenomena is a reason to believe in the Bible. Lying about science, or covering up a lie, is equivalent to lying about our salvation history.

One of the persons I’v accused of wrongdoing is Willem Drees, the editor of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science, which the Evangelical Lutheran Church in American has a close association with through the Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago and its Zygon Center for Religion and Science. Dr. Drees rejected the attached article in a disingenuous manner. I’v asked James Nieman to mediate this dispute with Willem Drees and gave him the attached letter and manuscript. I have also contacted through email, faxes, and telephone calls the 46 editors Zygon lists on its website. Only Frans de Waal, an anthropologist at Emory University, has shown an interest.
Very truly yours, David Roemer

Open letter sent to advisors of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science on March 11, 2014

To Francisco J. Ayala, Zainal Abidin Bagir, Anindita N. Balslev, Joseph Bulbulia, Ronald Cole-Turner, Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi, Terrence Deacon, Celia Deane-Drummond, Willem B. Drees, George Ellis, Dirk Evers, Owen J. Flanagan, Mohammed Ghaly, Ursula Goodenough, Niels Henrik Gregersen, Nidhal Guessoum, Peter Harrison, Philip Hefner, Michael S. Hogue, Antje Jackelén, Melvin J. Konner, Seung Chul Kim, Li Jianhui, Liu Xiaoting, Lu Feng, Ann Milliken Pederson, Gregory Peterson, James F. Moore, Andrew B Newberg, Karl E. Peters, Varadaraja V. Raman, Holmes Rolston III, Robert J. Russell, Robert A. Segal, Christopher Southgate, Ann Taves, Hava Tirosh-Samuelson, Mary Evelyn Tucker, Claudia Vanney, Frans de Waal, Wesley J. Wildman, Amos Yong, Solomon H. Katz, Edwin C. Laurenson, Michael Ruse, John A. Teske, and Gayle E. Woloschak

I am accusing the editor of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science (Willem Drees) of rejecting two manuscripts I submitted (ZYGON-A-2014-03-0019 and ZYGON-A-2013-05-0043) in a dishonest manner with the goal of helping of the American Journal of Physics cover up the mistake it made in publishing an article about evolution and the second law of thermodynamics (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008).

The AJP article mistakenly applies the Boltzmann equation for entropy to a living organism in order to squelch creationists for saying that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. Thermodynamics has nothing to do with the evolution of stars or biological evolution. I told my congressman (Yvette Clarke, D-NY, 9th district) that the AJP is perpetrating a hoax with the goal of promoting atheism. My correspondence with the U.S. House of Representatives is here:

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/

Instead of forwarding my correction of the article to the author, the AJP suggested that I submit my own article. I did so (manuscript ID No. 25055), and an anonymous reviewer said that I was wrong. In this way, the AJP and Zygon are undermining the integrity of science in the United States.

This hoax is related to the conflict over the theory of intelligent design. The following 3-minute podcasts gives my explanation for this conflict:

http://www.buzzsprout.com/16337/143091-the-intelligent-design-scam

Very truly yours, David Roemer


Correspondence with Catholic Priests

Email to the president of Providence College on December 11, 2012
Dear Fr. Shanley,
I’v asked Nicano Austiraco, Gary Culpepper, Paul Gondreau, James Keating, Sandra Keating, and Tomas Petri to resign from the Academy of Catholic Theology to protest the actions of fellow members Stephen Barr, who writes about evolutionary biology on the pages of First Things, and Russell Reno, who is the editor.

Russell and Barr are helping the American Journal of Physics and the American Association of Physics Teachers cover up the mistake of publishing an absurd article (Daniel F. Styer,  “Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). I explain why the article should be retracted in an essay published by the newsletter of the Catholic Truth of Scotland (http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf).

In an email to me, Stephen Barr said the AJP article was okay and that I was harming the Catholic Church. This is like mathematicians arguing about whether 2 +2 = 4 because the AJP article is based on an erroneous equation in physics and we both have PhDs in physics. Also, you don’t need to be a physicist to see why the article is anti-creationist propaganda with no scientific value. This is why I expect the above faculty members of Providence College to respond to my request in a more reasonable way than they have.

I asked Russell Reno for a personal interview so that I could explain why Barr and the editor and publisher of the American Journal of Physics are violating accepted procedures for peer-reviewed journals. Reno’s negative response to my request for an interview is similar to the response of many members of the Academy of Catholic Theology.

The behavior of mobs is part of the history of the 19th and 20th centuries.  The Academy of Catholic Theology has become a mob that lies about science, not the kind that breaks glass windows.

The following are links to my conversations with physicists about the AJP article. (see below)

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Letter sent to Fr. Joseph Daoust of “Domus Interprovinciales Romanae”on January 17, 2013
Dear Fr. Daoust,
I am writing to complain about the 10 Jesuits who are members of the Academy of Catholic Theology (http://www.academyofcatholictheology.org/) and four Provincials. One such Provincial is Father Provincial David S. Ciancimino of New York who refused my request for a personal interview. I’v asked the 10 Jesuits to resign from the Academy of Catholic Theology to protest the conduct of three other members: Stephen M. Barr, R. R. Reno, and Robert Louis Wilken who are affiliated with the journal First Things. My complaint against First Things is that it is refusing to republish my letter in the Catholic Truth of Scotland (http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf).

The Catholic Truth of Scotland explains why an article titled, “Entropy and evolution,” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008, https://docs.google.com/open?id=0Bw0xQqr5YbtJQ09ybDR0ejd2TTA), should be retracted. My reasons for recommending such a drastic remedy are here:

http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics

Dr. Barr, who received the Benemerenti medal from Pope Benedict, said I was mistaken about evolution and was harming the Catholic Church. First Things is helping the American Journal of Physics and its publishers (American Association of Physics Teachers and the American Institute of Physics) cover up its mistake. The phenomena of the Big Bang, the origin of life, and evolution are reasons to believe in the Bible because the Bible says God created the universe from nothing for the sake of mankind. For a peer-reviewed journal to disseminate misinformation about evolution is outrageous.

My correspondence with physicists about this issue is here:

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/02/american-journal-of-physics/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/23/american-association-of-physics-teachers/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/05/06/american-institute-of-physics/

http://newevangelist.me/2011/12/07/american-scientific-affiliation/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/02/first-things/

My YouTube video titled “The Truth About Evolution and Religion” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaF8vX6HXQ) also sheds light on this issue.This is a link to my submission to First Things: http://newevangelist.me/evolution-and-the-culture-war/.

I’m willing to drop my complaint against Fr. Ciancimino if he sends someone to attend a lecture I am giving in New York City on March 15, 2013. There is no cost for the lecture and no ticket, but to obtain a reservation and the exact location and time click on the following link:

<A HREF=”http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/316545″>Reservation for “Pseudoscience in the American Journal of Physics”</A>

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Letters sent on June 4, 2013
Dear Fr. Ciancimino and Fr. Smolich,
I am writing to ask you to reconsider your decision not to meet with me so that I can explain why “Entropy and evolution,” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, Nov. 2008) should be retracted and why your behaviors are damaging the reputations of Catholic priests.

The newsletter of the Catholic Truth of Scotland published my explanation of why the article is absurd to rebut atheistic propaganda. Stephen Barr, a member of the Academy of Catholic Theology and a Benemerenti Medal winner, said I was mistaken and that I was “harming the Catholic Church.” I accused him of not reading my analysis and demanded an apology. He ignored my emails and faxes. Nor did he advise the Catholic Truth of Scotland that I was mistaken. I might add that no one has answered the analysis at http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics. I am accusing Dr. Barr of lying about our salvation history.

The AJP article also undermines the integrity of science and is a matter of national concern.  I am communicating with Congressman Yvette Clarke’s office. A member of her staff named Scott initially told me that he could not be my advocate based on the information I initially gave him. I then gave him a 10-page document with 9 exhibits, and he told me the matter was being considered. Fr. Smolich’s remark that Scott was giving me a runaround is without basis, so far as I know.

If my accusation against Dr. Barr and his Jesuit enablers is not resolved, I will file a complaint with Cardinal Dolan against Fr. Joseph Koterski and Fr. Joseph Lienhart because of their connection with Barr through the Academy of Catholic Theology, and Fr. Ciancimino and Fr. Joseph McShane.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Faxed to 212-794-1036 and 202-328-9212
Mailed with certificate of mailing

Letter sent on June 6, 2013 to Timothy Cardinal Dolan
Your Eminence,
I am filing a complaint against Fr. Thomas Smolich, President of the Jesuits Conference in the United States, for refusing to meet with me to discuss what I hope will be a sign that God has communicated Himself to mankind: The American Journal of Physics retracts an article about biological evolution published in 2008.

In my opinion, creationists and advocates of the theory of intelligent design are not good witnesses to faith in God because they promote scientific theories not supported by evidence. They make humanists and atheists look like paragons of reason. This peer-reviewed AJP article does the exact opposite. It makes creationists look like paragons of reason, and mainstream scientists look like lunatics. It proves there is something rotten in the scientific culture of the United States.

Richard Dawkins repeated the atheistic propaganda in this article, and the Catholic Truth of Scotland published my rebuttal in May 2012. First Things, America Magazine, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, and Zygon: the Journal of Religion and Science are refusing to expose this scandal. I blame a prominent Catholic physicist, Dr. Stephen Barr, for this because he has explicitly stated that I am wrong and am “harming the Catholic Church.” Because so many Jesuits are affiliated with Dr. Barr though their membership in the Academy of Catholic Theology, I think Fr. Smolich has a duty to determine which of us is harming the Catholic Church. I describe Dr. Barr’s conduct in a letter to the President of New York University.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Enclosures
1) Letter to Fr. Smolich and Fr. Ciacimino, dated June 4, 2013
2) “Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008
3) Letter to Congressman Yvette Clarke, undated to Scott
4) Addendum to above letter titled “Thirteen Quotes About Evolution”
5) Manuscript submitted to Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science
6) Manuscript submitted to First Things and Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
7) Letter to President of New York University, dated February 24, 2013

Letter from Timothy Cardinal Dolan dated June 7, 2013
Dear Dr. Roemer,
Thank you most sincerely for your letter of June 6, 2013, together with your enclosures. Your thoughtfulness is deeply appreciated.

While I am grateful for your kindness in writing, neither as Archbishop of New York nor as president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops do I have canonical (Church law) jurisdiction over Father Thomas Smolich, S. J. I trust that you will understand.

With prayerful best wishes, I am, Faithfully in Christ,
Timothy Michael Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York

Letter sent to webmaster  of  http://www.sjweb.info on June 19, 2013 by David Roemer
Acting upon the advise of my pastor, I recently filed a complaint against the President of the Jesuit Conference of the United States (Thomas Smolich) with Cardinal Timothy Dolan for refusing to see me about a matter that compromises the integrity of Catholic priests who are part of the scientific culture of the United States because of their roll as teachers and editors. These priests are showing more devotion and loyalty to this atheistic culture than to the Catholic Church. Cardinal Dolan advised me in a letter that he has no jurisdiction over Fr. Smolich even though he is president of the United States Association of Catholic Bishops.

Fr. Smolich and other Jesuits are putting me in the position of calling Catholic priests liars and moral cowards over an absurd article published by the American Journal of Physics about evolution and thermodynamics.  This link (http://newevangelist.me/zygon/) is to an article I wrote about this shocking scandal.

I told Fr. Smolich’s assistant about Cardinal Dolan’s refusal to get involved today. Hopefully, Fr. Smolich will screw up his courage and deal with this situation in a responsible manner. If not, I would like to send the Superior General the same information I gave Cardinal Dolan.

Open Letter to Jesuits
I am complaining about a number of Jesuits to the Superior General and Timothy Cardinal Dolan for taking the side of atheists in the culture war about evolutionary biology. Cardinal Dolan’s response to my letter is at http://newevangelist.me/2013/06/21/priests/.

This scandal began when I started criticizing Richard Dawkins for some drivel he wrote about evolution and a branch of physics called thermodynamics. One of the reasons to believe in God is that those who don’t usually give bad reasons for not believing. Showing that a famous atheist doesn’t understand thermodynamics is a good way to preach the gospel. To understand this disagreement about evolution you need to know the four laws of thermodynamics:

  • Temperatures are measured with a thermometer (zeroth).
  • Energy is conserved (first).
  • Heat flows from hot to cold (second).
  • Minus 270 degrees on the Celsius scale is as cold as it gets (third).

Glenn Branch of the National Center for Science Education squelched me by citing an article (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) disseminating the same mistaken ideas as Dawkins backed up with an erroneous calculation and the authority of a peer-reviewed science journal.
I was amazed at the stupidity of the article and emailed a protest to the editor. Instead of forwarding my criticism to the author, the editor suggested I submit an article of rebuttal.

I graduated from New York University in 1971 with a Ph.D. in physics, and contacted a professor at NYU with expertise in thermodynamics. He confirmed that the calculation in the American Journal of Physics article was wrong, but declined to help me when he realized that I was trying to get the article retracted. His last email to me was hostile and insulting.

I submitted an article of rebuttal, and an anonymous reviewer rejected it. I told the American Association of Physics Teachers, the American Institute of Physics, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the National Science Foundation about this pseudoscience to no avail. In April 2013, I began communicating with a member of the staff of my congressman, Yvette Clarke. I submitted a 10-page document arguing that the AJP was perpetrating a fraud upon the citizens of the United States by not retracting “Entropy and evolution.” I was assured me that my allegation is being investigated. The documents I submitted to Congressman Clarke are at

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/ http://newevangelist.me/evolution-quotes/.

In the meantime, the newsletter of the Catholic Truth of Scotland published my refutation of the AJP article. In the hope of getting support, I contacted Stephen M. Barr, who writes about science and religion for First Things. Dr. Barr is a member of the Catholic Academy of Theology, a fellow of the American Physical Society, and a recipient of the Benemerenti Medal by Pope Benedict XVI in 2007. Dr. Barr told me that I was wrong and was “harming the Catholic Church.” Nothing in his email attempted to defend or explicate the absurd calculation.

I contacted the 10 Jesuits who are members of the Academy of Catholic Theology, and asked them to expel Dr. Barr for helping the AJP to cover up its mistake. They all are ignoring my entreaties even though I complained to their Provincials (James Shae, David Ciancimino, J. Daniel Daley, Timothy Kesicki) and the president of the Jesuit Conference in the United States (Thomas Smolich).

In addition to the references I gave Congressman Clarke, a new article was just published that explains why the AJP article is so wrong. [Sewell G (2013) Entropy and evolution. BIO-Complexity 2013 (2): 1-5. doi:10.5048/BIO-C.2013.2]. I’d like to supplement Sewell’s analysis with an explication of a statement made by a biologist about the imagined connection between evolution and thermodynamics:

Considered thermodynamically, the problem of neo-Darwinism is the production of order by random events. (Ludwig von Bertalanffy, “Chance or Law,” in Beyond Reductionism: New Perspectives in the Life Sciences, The Macmillan Company, 1969, page 76)

The unnecessary adverbial phrase “Considered thermodynamically” encapsulates the error of creationists and advocates of intelligent design who think evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics and anti-religion advocates who think evolution does not.

Bertalanffy doesn’t understand there are different meanings of the word order and the phrase random events. A gas consists of many molecules, and a protein is composed of hundreds of amino acids bonded together. This famous biologist thinks there is something to be learned by comparing a gas and a protein.

Each amino acid has to be in exactly the right place for a protein to work in a living organism. Bertalanffy presumably thinks we know the location of amino acids in a protein, but we don’t know the location of molecules in a gas. The exact opposite is true. All we know about the location of amino acids is which amino acid is next to which. We don’t know the location of the amino acids in x, y, and z coordinates. On the other hand, we know the x, y, and z coordinates of all of the molecules in the gas because we know where the container that holds the gas is located. Because of this confusion, Bertalanffy thinks a protein has more “order” than a gas.

Concerning “random events,” Bertalanffy can’t distinguish between improbable events and probability calculations. Biologists calculate the probability of getting the primary structure of a protein by the random selection of amino acids. Physicists can calculate the probability that oxygen molecules in a room will randomly drift out the windows and doors leaving the room short of oxygen. An oxygen-deprived room is an improbable event. The calculation by biologists is just a probability calculation.
Very truly yours,
David Roemer

http://www.newevangelization.info

Letter sent to Very Rev. Adolfo Nicolás Pachón on July 15, 2013, by registered mail (RE862697742US) to Borgo Santo Spirito 4, 00193 Roma, Italy
Dear Father General,
A number of Jesuits in the United States are helping the American Journal of Physics cover up its mistake in publishing an article about evolution and creationism in 2008.

I currently reside in the parish of the Church of Notre Dame in Manhattan. I discussed the matter with my pastor before filing the enclosed complaint against Fr. Smolich with Cardinal Dolan. Cardinal Dolan said that he does not have jurisdiction, so I am telling you about my low opinion of the character of many Jesuits. A version of my article published by the newsletter of the Catholic Truth of Scotland (“Evolution and the Culture War”) and a manuscript (“Exploring the Conflict Between Science and Religion”) are also enclosed. I am broadcasting the enclosed “Open Letter to Jesuits,” and sent it to all of the Jesuits I have previously contacted.

Since the integrity of science is a matter of national concern, I filed a complaint with my congressman, Yvette Clarke. A member of her staff (Scott) assured me that my accusation of pseudoscience is being investigated after receiving the enclosed letter and Thirteen Quotes About Evolution.
Concerning my enclosed letter to Fr. McShane, Fr. Koterski told me over the phone that it would be inappropriate for him to question Dr. Barr about his knowledge of physics. Fr. McShane ignored my written and oral request for an appointment.

Concerning my enclosed letter to Fr. Daoust, I am accusing Fr. Ciancimino of not accepting my invitation to the lecture because he would be obliged to tell Fr. Koterski and Fr. Lienhard that he was taking seriously my accusation against them and Dr. Barr. I try to explain in my enclosed letter to Fr. Sheeran the reason nobody wants to hear what I have to say in person.
Very truly yours, David Roemer
Enclosures:
Letter to Cardinal Dolan dated June 6, 2013
Evolution and the Culture War
Exploring the Conflict Between Science and Religion
Open Letter to Jesuits
Letter to Scott
Thirteen Quotes About Evolution
Letter to Fr. Joseph McShane dated February 21, 2013
Letter to Fr. Joseph Daoust dated January 17, 2013
Letter to Fr. Sheeran dated July 2, 20

Letter sent to Timothy Cardinal Dolan on August 7, 2013
Your Eminence,
I have not yet gotten a response to the registered letter (RE862697742US) dated July 16, 2013, I sent Fr. Adolfo Nicolás Pachón after you said you had no jurisdiction over the Jesuits I am criticizing for helping the American Journal of Physics cover up the mistake of publishing article about evolution that promotes atheism. I’v enclosed the USPS confirmation that his office got it on July 25, 2013. If I don’t get a response from Fr. Pachón in a few weeks, I will bring the matter to the attention of Archbishop Salvatore Fisichella of the Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelization.

I sent a registered letter to Archbishop Fisichella on November 19, 2012, about the Shroud of Turin and your criticism that my slideshow/lecture “debunked” the Holy Shroud (http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/). I have not even gotten an acknowledgment that this letter was received. I will ask the Pontifical Council to consider both matters.
Very truly yours, David Roemer=

http://www.newevangelization.info

Enclosure
Faxed to Frs. Ciancimino, Smolich, and Sheeran

Letter sent to João Bráz de Aviz, Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Apostolic Life, Palazzo della Congregazioni, Piazza Pio XII, 3, 00193 Rome, Italy by registered mail (RE862673644US) on September 26, 2013, and faxed to 39.06.69884526.

Your Eminence,
I’m complaining about the character of a number of Jesuits and Dominicans teaching in the United States for helping the American Journal of Physics cover up its mistake in publishing the enclosed article (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, Nov. 2008). The article promotes atheism because it misrepresents evolutionary biology. The inability of science to explain the origin of the universe, the origin of life, the evolution of whales from single-celled organisms in a hundred million decades, and the “fine-tuning” of physical constants is a sign that the Bible was divinely inspired because the Bible says God created the universe from nothing and cares about our welfare.

The article undermines the integrity of science and is a matter of national concern. I have filed a complaint against the AJP with my representative in the United States House of Representatives. If the AJP retracts the article, it will show how irrational atheists can be about biological evolution and religion.

Jesuits and Dominicans are involved through their connection with Stephen Barr, Ph.D., who is a prominent physicist and a member of the Academy of Catholic Theology. Dr. Barr told me that I am mistaken about the AJP article and am “harming the Catholic Church.” I asked the Jesuit and Dominican members of the Academy of Catholic Theology to expel Dr. Barr or resign from this organization. One Jesuit, a theologian, told me that it would be “inappropriate” for him to question Barr about his knowledge of physics. My allegation against that particular Jesuit is that he is a coward.

I had no success in getting the Jesuit provincials to meet with me. I filed a complaint with the Father General, and my registered letter was received on July 27, 2013. On August 25, 2013, I got an email from webmaster@sjcuria.org saying some office would contact me. No Jesuit did, but on September 9, 2013, I met with Rev. Brian Mulcahy, O. P., who is the chairman of the Providence College Corporation. A physics teacher and a biology teacher at Providence College have been giving me a runaround about the article. Fr. Mulcahy promised to confront these two teachers with my allegations. The biology teacher is a Dominican, and Fr. Mulcahy knows him personally. On September 13, 2013, I told the Jesuit webmaster about this meeting in an email.

My correspondence with Catholics is at http://newevangelist.me/2013/06/21/priests/. My correspondence with the U. S. House of Representatives is at http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/. I was interviewed on a radio show about this matter. A podcast of this interview is called “Evolution Hoax” and it is at http://www.buzzsprout.com/16337.

Asking the blessing of Your Eminence, I am,
Yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Email sent to Nicano Pier Giorgio Austiraco and Robert La Montagne on December 23, 2013
Dear Fr. Austriaco and Dr. La Montagne,
I met with Fr. Mulcahy on September  9 and explained to him why the AJP article was absurd, and why you two are being dishonest. He told me he would confront Fr. Austriaco with my criticisms.

In the meantime, I got an email from Daniel Styer, the author of the absurd article. I called him at home, and we discussed the matter for sometime. He seemed to be stressed out by what I am doing and saying. His suffering, and all the other suffering I have caused, is not on my conscience. I am following my conscience.

What you can do is contact your congressman and ask about the status of the investigation being conducted by Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district) according to Scott, her director of communications. If there has been no investigation, I will file an ethics complaint against Congressman Clarke. Maybe I can get Scott fired, just like, I hope, I got David Grier fired.

My offer to go to Providence and tell you two off to your faces is still open.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Email from Robert La Montagne on December 23, 2013

David,
You are becoming scary. Please do not come to my campus. I keep a 32 revolver in my desk to protect me from people like you. Please have no doubts about me using it on you.

Please take me off your mailing list and never contact me again.

I hope you have a happy Christmas –

Sincerely, Bob

Email sent to Robert La Montagne on December 25, 2013

Subject: Criminal Charges
Dear Bob,
Please call me about this matter ASAP. Basically, I threatened to come up to Providence College from New York City and confront you and Fr. Austriaco with my accusations of dishonesty. I am a gentleman, and the worst that could have happened is a fair fist fight. I cannot ignore your threat to shoot me dead with the revolver in your desk draw because it hows how irrational you and others are behaving about the American Journal of Physics article titled, “Entropy and evolution” (November, 2008) by Daniel Styer of Oberlin College. Consider this timeline:

1) On Feb. 1, 2012, I told the AJP about the error in the article.
2) On June 28, 2013, I told Dr. Styer about the error.
3) On Sept. 9, 2013, I told Fr. Mulcahy about the error and said that you and Fr. Austriaco were helping the AJP cover up its mistake by lying to me. Fr. Mulcahy promised to confront Fr. Austriaco with my accusations in an email to Fr. Austriaco, who was abroad at that time.
4) On Dec. 20, 2013, a creationist emailed Dr. Styer about my efforts to get the AJP to retract the article..
5) On Dec. 21, 2013, Dr. Styer emailed me “CreationWikiReply.pdf.” In a long and emotional telephone conversation he said my article in Creationwiki.org titled “Pseudoscience in the American Journal of Physics” was wrong. Styer’s document and his statements on the telephone were irrational and incoherent.

This raises the question of what transpired between Fr. Mulcahy, Fr. Austriaco, and you. Why do I get threatened with death after telling Fr. Mulcahy that you and Fr. Austriaco are Satan’s rag babies.
Very truly yours, David Roemer


Massachusetts Institute of Technolgy

I sent the following email  to Philip Sharp on January 18, 2013
Dear Dr. Sharp,
As a director of the AAAS you should be committed to its second mission (“Promote and defend the integrity of science and its use”), and should want the American Journal of Physics (AJP) to retract an absurd article titled, “Entropy and evolution” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). The article repeats the creationist error that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, and the even more nonsensical idea that evolution does not because of the sun. Unfortunately, the article goes so far as to write down an incorrect equation in thermodynamics to prove this quantitatively in units of entropy.

The AJP, the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT), and the American Institute of Physics (AIP) are resorting to trickery to avoid publishing a retraction. The following article explains why the AJP article is absurd: http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics.

There is a considerable amount of correspondence between me and the AJP/AAPT about this matter. I have given this information to Science, by email (science_editors@aaas.org) and fax (202-289-7562).

Very truly yours, David Roemer

I submitted the following on April 16, 2013,  to the MIT Technology Review at

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/513781/moores-law-and-the-origin-of-life/#comments

The second law of thermodynamics does not apply to biological evolution and the evolution of stars. I explain this here:

http://www.creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience-in-the-American-Journal-of-Physics

It also does not apply to the origin of life, as I explain in my comments about Walter Bradley’s essay in Debating Design, edited by William Dembski and Michael Ruse. My review of this book is on Amazon.com with the title, “20 Essays and 20 Blindspots.” See: http://newevangelist.me/2013/03/25/debating-design/

The following is a quote from Bradley’s essay followed by my refutation:

The total entropy change that takes place in an open system such as a living cell must be consistent with the Second Law of Thermodynamics and can be described as follows: ∆S(cell) + ∆S(surrounding) > 0.[7904]

This is like saying ∆S(airplane in flight) + ∆S(surrounding) > 0. An airplane can be broken up into a number of thermodynamic systems, e.g., the engine, pilot’s cabin, metal wing, etc. Each thermodynamic system will have its surroundings and this law will apply. But to suggest that there is such a thing as the entropy of an airplane in flight is nonsense. A living cell has much more machinery in it than an airplane. It is like an airplane that can replace or repair a broken wing.

I explained all this to Edmund Bertschinger and Max Tegmark so they would cancel their subscriptions to the American Journal of Physics to protest the fraudulent article titled “Entropy and evolution.” They ignored my emails and faxes. More importantly, they did not refute the Creationwiki.org article. I am not a creationist, so I can’t edit the article. I’m sure the creationists in charge will correct any mistakes. In any case, I will answer any comments you have about the AJP article and my Creationwiki article.

Message sent to staff of MIT Technology Review on April 17, 2013:
I suggest that you either post my reply to Prof. Gladyshev’s comment or invite me to the the lecture of thermodynamics that I offered to give the chair of your physics department. You should also know that I have taken this matter up with the NSF and my congressman in the 9th District of Brooklyn:

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/.

The head of the NSF should hate fraudulent research, as should you all.

Email message from Jason Pontin on April 27, 2013
David,
The AJP publication is *nothing* to do with MIT Technology Review, its editor David Rotman, or me. Even if I agreed that the article is fraudulent (which I do not: it sounds as if you have a difference of opinion, based on your religious views), it’s not my role to denounce every single fraudulent publication.

I don’t see how any of this has anything to do with Second World War.

If you manage to get through to my secretary you can tell her what you want. If you can find someone to listen, you can denounce us as somehow complicit in this matter. That’s free speech. But I have no interest in meeting with you. This is not my business.

Jason

Email message to Jason Pontin on April 27, 2013
Dear Jason,
Edmund Bertschinger, Max Tegmark, and David Rotman know or should know that the AJP article is based on an incorrect application of the Boltzmann equation in order to refute the religiously motivated fallacy that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. To this list of MIT sleaze I’m adding the biologist Philip A. Sharp, who also ignored my faxes and emails. Sharp is the president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and pays lip service to “Promote and defend the integrity of science and its use.”

What you should do is schedule an appointment to see me and invite David Rotman. At that time, I’ll explain the connection between genocide and pseudoscience and explain why Rotman should not be the editor of MIT Technology Review. This certainly is your business. The question is whether or not you have the character to carry out your responsibilities.
Very truly yours, David Roemer

Open Letter to Board of Directors of MIT Technology Review (Reid Ashe, Judith Cole, Jerome Friedman, Israel Ruiz, Megan Smith, Sheila Widnall, Ann Wolpert)

The Editor in Chief and Publisher, Jason Pontin, has not responded yet to the following message that is a response to his email refusing to meet with me:

(See above email dated April 27, 2103)

The AJP article is “Entropy and evolution” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). MIT Technology Review is involved because it published Georgi Gladyshev’s online comments about evolution and thermodynamics, but did not publish my reply referring to  http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics.

By deleting my reply and not deleting Gladyshev’s comment, MIT Technology Review is helping the AJP spread anti-religious propaganda. I explained the maliciousness of “Entropy and evolution” to Congressman Yvette Clarke in a 10-page indictment with 9 exhibits. I’d like to come to MIT to explain to Pontin, Rotman, Bertschinger, Gladyshev, Tegmark, and Sharp the harm that the AJP article is doing.
Very truly yours, David Roemer


Committee on Publication Ethics

Posted on LinkedIn COPE group:

I’m trying to get the American Journal of Physics to retract an absurd article titled, “Entropy and evolution.” The article uses a fake equation to prove that evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. The truth is that the second law does not apply to the evolution of stars or biological evolution. I pointed out the error to the editor. Instead of giving my comments to the author, who a conscience and a reputation to protect, the editor suggested that I submit my own article. I did so, and an anonymous reviewer said I was wrong. In this way, the AJP is avoiding responsibility. I explain why the equation is wrong at

http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics

My correspondence with physicists about this issue is at

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/

 http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/02/american-journal-of-physics/

 http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/23/american-association-of-physics-teachers/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/05/06/american-institute-of-physics/

 http://newevangelist.me/2011/12/07/american-scientific-affiliation/

 http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/02/first-things/

 Correspondence with Natalie Ridgeway starting March 28, 2013

Dear Natalie,
I submitted a post exposing unethical conduct by the editors and publishers of the American Journal of Physics (Code 1.8) in failing to correct an error in a peer-reviewed article. Why hasn’t it been posted? I could not find the FAQ you referred to. Am I following the wrong procedure? Are you deliberately helping the AJP to cover up its mistake in publishing the article? Are you assuming a peer-reviewed physics article can’t be absurd? I told the editor of the AJP (David Jackson) about the error. Instead of referring the matter to the author (Daniel Styer), he suggested I submit my own article. I did so, and an anonymous reviewer said I was wrong. In this way, the AJP is avoiding taking responsibility for the article. I also complained to the publishers of the AJP. Give me a call at 347-417-4703, if that is the easiest way for you to respond.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Dear David,
Thank you for your email via our LinkedIn account. Having checked our membership I am afraid that the American Journal of Physics is not a member of COPE. Therefore we are unable to consider a complaint against them (see the terms & conditions for complaints on our website here: http://publicationethics.org/contact-us ).

I am sorry that we cannot be of any assistance.

Kind regards, Natalie 

Dear Natalie,
Why don’t you publish my submitted post on your LinkedIn site? Lisa McLaughlin, Marc Cassar, John H., and Daniel K. are members of the American Institute of Physics and the American Physical Society, which are affiliated with the publishers of the American Journal of Physics, the American Association of Physics Teachers. They are all members of your LinkedIn group. They should know about this matter.

By not publishing my post, you are helping the American Journal of Physics perpetrate a hoax about biological evolution and religion that victimizes many people. The absurdity of the AJP article is the culmination of four pseudoscientific ideas about evolution:

  1. Natural selection acting upon innovations explains common descent. This is untrue. It only explains adaptation. Evolutionary biologists always speak of “adaptive evolution.” Atheists, creationists, and advocates of intelligent design are responsible for disseminating this misinformation.
  2. Evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. This is an error because the second law does not apply to the evolution of stars or biological evolution.
  3. Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics because of the sun. This idea is unintelligible.
  4. You can perform a thermodynamic calculation to prove # 3. This is what Eq. 4b in the AJP article does. The equation is incorrect for reasons explained in a number of publications.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Dear David,
The COPE LinkedIn site is for members who are interested in publication ethics in scholarly journals to disseminate information and discuss items of interest, it is not intended to be used as a medium to discuss specific cases. COPE does have a formal procedure for reviewing complaints against member journals if they have not abided by COPE’s Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (all journals agree to abide by this when they join COPE, see: http://publicationethics.org/resources/code-conduct ). However, as the American Journal of Physics is not a member of COPE we are not able to follow this procedure. Even if the AJP was a member we would not use LinkedIn to discuss the case but would look at it formally via our complaints procedure.

I am sorry that we cannot be of any further assistance.

Yours sincerely
Natalie Ridgeway
Operations Manager

Dear Natalie,
What you could do is expel Lisa McLaughlin from your LinkedIn group because she is possibly following unethical orders from her bosses. The email I sent is the discussion you are refusing to post. This is the letter I wrote to her boss with a certificate of mailing:

Mr. John Haynes
AIP Publishing
Suite 1NO1
2 Huntington Quadrangle
Melville, NY 11747

Dear Mr. Haynes,

I am writing to ask for an appointment to discuss a conversation I had yesterday over the telephone with Lisa McLaughlin. I called to see if Ms. McLaughlin got the email I sent her arguing that the article “Entropy and evolution” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) is a hoax analogous to the infamous Piltdown Man hoax. Ms. McLaughlin admitted getting the email, but said, “I cannot comment about this matter. Thank you.” I did not get the opportunity to ask why the AIP’s Director of Publication Operations and a member of the Committee of Publication Ethics LinkedIn group can’t comment on an accusation of fraud against a member organization.

At our meeting I’ll attempt to explain to you why the AJP article should be retracted. I made a similar request to Beth Cunningham of the American Association of Physics Teachers, but it was ignored.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Dear David

I have removed your recent post from the COPE Facebook site as, as I have explained before, The AJP is not a member of COPE and this is the not the correct forum for allegations such as this. It is not appropriate for our site to be used in this way.

Kind regards
Natalie

Dear Natalie,
There is no question that the article “Entropy and evolution” is fraudulent. It is like the Piltdown Man hoax because it promotes the atheistic error that human beings evolved from apes, not just their bodies. In the case of the Piltdown man, an amateur paleontologist used human and ape bones. In the case of the two AJP articles, the authors used the Boltzmann/Plank physics equation to prove evolution does not violate the laws of physics.

You are behaving just as badly as the editors and publishers of the AJP and causing just as much harm. That the articles are not retracted sheds light on how the Nazis could kill so many civilians during WWII. No one was ever forced to kill anyone. However, there were severe penalties for telling about the murders. Collaboration took the form of censorship and keeping quiet.

Very truly yours,
David Roemer


National Science Foundation

Letter sent to director  on April 6, 2013
Dear Dr. Cora B.  Marrett,
I am writing to request a personal appointment with you to discuss the importance of getting the American Journal of Physics to retract an article about biological evolution and thermodynamics (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). I’v send hundreds of faxes, emails, and letters to individuals and organizations who should be against pro-religion and anti-religion pseudoscience. I’v included a letter to the director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and an open letter to Howard Wactlar. I contacted Mr. Wactlar because one of his consultants is a member of the AAAS. I’v also enclosed the letter to the CEO of AIP Publications, LLC.

I asked 9 presidents of universities for appointments to explain why the chairs of their physics departments either don’t understand thermodynamics or have poor character. I’v enclosed the letter to the president of New York University because that is where I got a Ph.D. in physics. The only response was from the president of City College of New York, who was under the impression that I am advocating creationism. No physicist has rebutted the article in Creationwiki.org explaining the correct connection between evolution and thermodynamics.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Faxed to 703-292-9732
Mailed with a certificate of mailing

NSF

Fax sent to Congressman Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th District) on April 2013

Dear Scott,
Thank you for considering my allegation of fraud against David Jackson, editor of the American Journal of Physics (AJP), Beth Cunningham, Executive Officer of the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT), and John Haynes, Chief Executive Officer of the AIP Publishing LLC for failing to retract “Entropy and evolution” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) and for failing to follow generally accepted procedures for peer-reviewed science journals. My allegation is that the article disseminates misinformation about evolutionary biology with the goal of promoting atheism and discrediting religious faith. Dr. Cora B. Marrett, director of the National Science Foundation, is complicit in this misconduct because she ignored my request for an interview to explain to her why the article should be retracted. I acknowledge your criticism that the information I recently sent does not explain why you should be my advocate in this allegation. The following will explain the matter step by step and list the exhibits proving malicious intent.

Step 1

The theory of evolution is that single-celled organisms evolved into mammals in about a billion years or so. Calling this a fact is insulting to creationists who believe, as I do, that the Bible is the word of God and therefore communicates only truth. People who call evolution a fact tend to think it is a fact that free will is an illusion.  The human mind creates both theories to answer questions. In the case of evolution, the question is where do fossils come from? In the case of free will, the question is what is the relationship between myself and my body?

Step 2

Free will and evolution are connected to religion, and religion causes conflict between people. Conflict causes anxiety, and inhibition is a defense mechanism against anxiety.  As a result, people are inhibited from thinking intelligently and rationally and behaving honestly about evolution. Usually, intelligence is a measure of how much time it takes a person needs to grasp a theory or insight. But with topics touching upon religion, people are so inhibited they can’t even grasp certain insights and theories. Atheists generally don’t understand the mind-body problem, and can’t grasp the theory that humans are embodied spirits. The only theories of the mind they understand are dualism and materialism. Advocates of the theory of intelligent design think the Big Bang, the origin of life, evolution, and the fine-tuning of physical constants constitute evidence that God exists. In my opinion, these phenomena constitute evidence that the universe in not intelligible, which is evidence that God does not exist. However, the Big Bang, etc. is evidence that God is the primary author of the Bible because the Bible says God created the universe from nothing.

Step 3

Fact or theory, evolution gives rise to the question of what caused it. The only theory supported by the evidence is natural selection acting upon innovations. The old paradigm for innovations was random mutations, but the new paradigm is “natural genetic engineering,” according to James Shapiro of the University of Chicago. In any case, natural selection only explains the adaptation of species to the environment. Not enough is known about the innovations natural selection acts upon to understand the increase in the complexity of life in only a billion years. In other words, natural selection doesn’t explain common descent. Evolutionary biologists always speak of “adaptive evolution.” This is my interpretation of quotes #1, #2, #3, and #7 on the sheet titled “Thirteen Quotes About Evolution.”

Step 4

The only theory that even attempts to explain the complexity of life and common descent is the theory of intelligent design (ID). The trouble with this theory is that there is no evidence for it. It is an example of how anxiety about religion can inhibit people from thinking rationally. There is of course evidence that an immutable and infinite being, called God in Western religions, does exist.

Step 5

Quote # 4 is from an evolutionary biologist who advocates ID (Michael Behe), and quote #5 is from a mainstream biologist (Kenneth Miller). Miller in quote #5 is refuting quote #4. Notice that Miller does not deny or disagree with quote #4.  From what I have read, there is no disagreement between Behe and Miller about the limited explanatory power of natural selection. There is only a conflict about intelligent design. I call it a conflict, not a disagreement, because both of them, I am sure, cannot define the word intelligence. They are both fighting about something they don’t understand. We can comprehend the word intelligence because we can make ourselves the subject of our own knowledge. But the operations of the human mind can’t be explicated or defined.

Step 6

As a result of this conflict about ID and the misinformation propagated by both sides, many people think natural selection does explain the complexity of life and common descent. Quote # 6 is from a science writer with a Ph.D. in linguistics. Christine Kenneally thinks a billion years is plenty of time for a bacterium to evolve into a mammal even though it takes 20 years for a fertilized human egg to produce all of the cells in a human body. I call this ignorance and irrationality level 1 of the fraud being perpetrated upon the citizens of the United States by the AJP article.

Step 7

The second law of thermodynamics is that a gas will fill up the entire container it is in. The second law does not apply to gases in outer space. In outer space, the gravitational attraction between hydrogen atoms is what causes stars to form. The second law also also does not apply to a living organism because a living organism is not a thermodynamic system. A living organism is like a Boeing 747 in flight with the added ability of being able to repair a broken propeller. Nevertheless, a number of pro-religion advocates say mistakenly that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics. Quote #11 alludes to the connection between evolution and thermodynamics, but does not make this statement. This is level 2 of the fraud.

Step 8

Level 3 of the fraud is the idea that evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics, as opposed to the truth. The truth is that a living organism is not a thermodynamic system. Many people who should know the difference between a machine and a thermodynamic system are victims of the level 3 fraud. I suggest that the motive for this nonsense is that saying a living organism is not a thermodynamic system is very close to saying we don’t understand how mammals evolved from bacteria. Admitting this truth helps promote the theory of intelligent design and creationism. Many people are more interested in opposing ID and creationism than in promoting scientific knowledge.

Step 9

Level 4 of the fraud is the one that I am saying you should be an advocate against. It emerges from level 3. If evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics, it should be possible to perform a calculation to prove this. The fact that such a calculation is impossible is consistent with the fact that the second law does not apply to evolution. Daniel Styer, the author of “Entropy and evolution,” performs such a calculation by misusing the Boltzmann equation in for entropy (Eq. 4b). It was undoubtedly an honest mistake, considering how widespread is the error that evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics.

Exhibit No. 1

An explanation of why “Entropy and evolution” is absurd was published on October 31, 2011. See: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/10/more_philosophical_than_scient052441.html

Exhibit No. 2

On February 1, 2012, I told David Jackson, the editor of the AJP, about the error in the article. His response was to tell me to submit my own article “stating my case.” This was an incorrect procedure for a peer-reviewed science journal. I did not express a different point of view. I said the calculation was erroneous. Jackson should have referred my comments to the author for comment. Daniel Styer has a conscience to follow and a reputation to protect. It was up to Styer to decide whether my criticism was valid.
See: http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/02/american-journal-of-physics/

Exhibit No. 3

On February 15, 2012, I sent an email to Robert Richardson, a professor of physics at New York University, where I got a Ph.D. in physics in 1971, telling him the American Journal of Physics invited me to write a paper. I told him about the erroneous equation, and asked if I was right. I interpreted his response to mean that I was right, and I sent him all of my information about the article. When he realized that I was trying to get the American Journal of Physics to retract an article, he became hostile and refused to consider the matter. He did not make any attempt to explain to me why I was wrong.
See: http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/

Exhibit No.4

On February 24, 2012, I submitted a document to the AJP explaining why the article was absurd. The document included links to other articles and to my YouTube video titled “The Truth About Evolution and Religion.”
See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaF8vX6HXQ

It was given to an anonymous reviewer who said that I was wrong, but did not address my arguments. If the anonymous reviewer was honest, they would have told the editor to give the document to the author.
See:http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/23/american-association-of-physics-teachers/

Exhibit No. 5

On March 7, 2012, I got an email letter from Istvan Kolossvary, a member of the American Scientific Affiliation and a Research Scientist at D. E. Shaw Research, LLC, New York, NY. Referring to my criticism of the AJP article, Dr. Kolossvary says:

You are absolutely right, using the particular numerical value of k_B in Eq. 3 and 4 is ludicrous.  More than ludicrous, it is dangerous and damaging to students who are subjected to learning physics from teachers who try using numerology in defense of an agenda.  This particular value of k_B is for ideal gas in SI units. It is so elemental, I am embarrassed to point it out.  Even the name says it, this particular k_B value multiplied by Avogadro’s number is the ubiquitous gas constant ‘R’ that appears in every single page of every single introductory text to thermodynamics. The author of this paper, therefore, implicitly proclaims that evolution can be quantified/modeled as ideal gas.  Now, show me another journal in the scientific world that would allow a paper to be published on modeling evolution as ideal gas. Even if one could make an intelligible statement about evolution in the ideal gas context, WHERE IS THE ARGUMENT? In this paper, the author does not bother giving any argument, but willingly or unwillingly feeds numerology to science students.  This is clearly wrong.

Exhibit No. 6

In May 2012, the newsletter of the Catholic Truth of Scotland published my explanation of why “Entropy and evolution” was absurd. I have gotten no communication from this organization saying that my analysis was criticized by anyone.
See: http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf.

Exhibit No. 7

In January, 2013, Creationwiki.org published my explanation of why “Entropy and evolution” was absurd. There have been over 1000 hits, but to my knowledge no one has logged onto the site and suggested a correction.
See: http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics

Exhibit No. 8

From February 21, 2013, to February 27, 2013, I sent letters to the presidents of Columbia University, City College of New York, Fordham University, Georgetown University, Queen’s College, New York University, St. John’s University, Stony Brook University, Yeshiva University, University of Delaware, Binghamton University, Dickenson College, Loyola Marymount College, and Creighton University saying that their chairs of physics were “moral cowards” for not supporting my efforts to get the AJP to retract the article. All but one was sent with a certificate of mailing, and all in the New York area included a request for a personal interview. I got no responses from the chairs of physics to this criticism of their character, and only one response from one of the presidents. No attorney contacted me with an accusation of slander or malicious interference. All of my letters included a link to the Creationwiki.org article.

See: http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/

Exhibit No. 9

The following are links to my conversations with other individuals about this matter:

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/18/mit/

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/15/cope/

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/american-association-for-the-advancement-of-science/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/28/messiah-college/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/02/first-things/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/05/06/american-institute-of-physics/

http://newevangelist.me/2011/12/07/american-scientific-affiliation/

Very truly yours,
David Roemer

Letter sent to Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district) on January 5, 2014
Dear Ms. Clarke,
In a telephone conversation in April 2013, your communications director (Scott) indicated he would be my advocate in getting the American Journal of Physics to retract a malicious article (“Entropy and evolution”) that promotes atheism. It was written by Daniel F. Styer, a physicist at Oberlin College, and was peer-reviewed.  Scott initially refused my request, but had a change of mind when he saw the document with exhibits I sent him. My correspondence with your office is at

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/

A version of the article by Granville Sewell in Exhibit No. 1 was published last year in a peer-reviewed journal. It has the same title as the Styer article and is at

http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2013.2.

Also, I discussed the article with Professor Styer and exchanged emails with him on December 23, 2013. Apparently, Professor Styer did not know about my correspondence with the American Journal of Physics, which started in February 1, 2012, until he got my email dated June 28, 2013.

Dr. Styer did not admit that he misused the Boltzmann equation for entropy. However, he was unable to discuss the article in a rational manner. When I asked Dr. Styer what the entropy of a pendulum was, he replicated the absurdity of the article itself by saying, “Zero.” The AJP article disgraces every physicist in the United States, and shows how irrational people can be about anything connected to belief in God.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Mailed with a certificate of mailing, faxed, and emailed.
Faxed to Beth Cunningham, American Association of Physics Teachers, and Julie Schmidt, American Association of University Professors

Clarke

Letter sent to Charles E. Schumer (Senator, New York) on March 20, 2014
Dear Senator Schumer,
With an email dated March 14, 2014, and numerous emails and telephone calls to her staff, I made a request to see the Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security (Rose Gottemoeller) on March 14, 2014, about a matter that concerns national security. What happened is that I told Al Jazeera that Congresswoman Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district) was investigating of an article about biological evolution published by the American Journal of Physics. The article undermines the integrity of science and promotes atheism. It is evidence indeed that the United States is the “Great Satan.”  I am afraid Yvette Clarke’s staff and Rose Gottemoeller’s staff are giving me a runaround because they are unable to wrap their heads around the idea that a peer-reviewed physics article is absurd.  My correspondence with Congresswoman Clarke is here:

http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/

My last letter (1/05/14) to Congressman Clarke is being faxed along with this letter. There has been no response to this letter. I’ll be more than happy to travel to Washington DC to explain why the American Journal of Physics should retract the article, and why it is your responsibility to make the AJP aware of its obligations.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Letter sent to Kirsten Gillibrand (Senator, New York) on April 7, 2014
Dear Senator Gillibrand,I spoke to Senator Schumer’s NYC office this afternoon to inquire about my correspondence with his office. I am under the impression that Senator Schumer has an ethical duty to assign a caseworker to my complaint against the State Department in connection with my request for a personal interview with Rose Gottemoeller.

I want to explain to the caseworker why an article (“Entropy and evolution”) published in the American Journal of Physics is fraudulent and should be retracted and why the article endangers the United States. I had such a meeting with the President of the Providence College Corporation (Fr. Brian Mulcahy, O.P.) on September 9, 2013. I accused the physics and biology departments of Providence College of helping the American Journal of Physics cover up the mistake it made in publishing the article. Fr. Mulcahy indicated that he would investigate my allegations, however, he has not told me what the results of his investigation were. Fr. Mulcahy is located in New York City (212-737-5757).

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Faxed to 866-824-6340
Attachments: Letters dated March 20, March 27, April 3; email dated April 1; two certificates of mailing.

Letter sent to Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security, on April 21, 2014
Dear Mr. Secretary,
On 4/18/2014, I filed a complaint on the Homeland Security Investigations Tip Line against Rose Gottemoeller, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, and her science advisor Ronald Nelson for their reaction to the information I gave them concerning America’s security and foreign relations.
I want to meet with a member of your team in person to explain what I am concerned about.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
mailed with a certificate of mailing

Johnson

 

Letter sent to Rush Holt (D-NJ, 12th district) on April 25, 2014
50 Washington Rd
West Windsor, NJ 08550
Dear Congressman Holt,
I hope you accept the challenge I explained to you at yesterday’s reception of getting the American Journal of Physics to retract the divisive article about evolution and thermodynamics. As you well know, thermodynamics is the study of solids, liquids, and gases, and has nothing to do with the evolution of stars or living organisms.

The culture war about evolution is currently raising its ugly head at Ball State University where a professor of science is advocating the theory of intelligent design. A previous occurrence was reported in a 29-page congressional document titled, “Intolerance and the Politicization of Science at the Smithsonian: Smithsonian’s Top Officials Permit the Demotion and Harassment of Scientist Skeptical of Darwinian Evolution” (December 2006).

A retraction will constitute an admission that the scientific establishment in the United States is capable of being irrational about evolution. This might inspire advocates of intelligent design to stop promoting their irrational ideas about evolution.

We know that God exists because we are embodied spirits and because we are hoping or assuming the universe is intelligible. In my opinion, evolution is evidence that God does not exist because it is evidence that the universe is not intelligible. Evolution is, however, a reason to believe in the Bible because the Bible says God created the universe from nothing.

I recently sent Senator Kirsten Gillibrand a privacy release form in the expectation she will assign a caseworker for this scandal that involves the National Science Foundation, Department of Homeland Security, and the Department of State.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Faxed to 609-750-0618 and  866-824-6340 (Sen. Gillibrand)

Letter sent to Senator Gillibrand on May 16, 2014
Dear Trisha and Jake,
One of your colleagues yesterday indicated that he did not know how to proceed with the National Science Foundation, the Department of Homeland Security, and the State Department concerning the absurd article about evolution published by the American Journal of Physics. I’d like to meet with you to explain why I think you have a duty to take the following steps:

Step 1: Contact Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district) and inquire about the status of the congressional investigation of the AJP article. My correspondence with the NSF, Congressman Clarke, and Rush Holt (D-NJ, 12th district) is at http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/.
Congressman Holt has a Ph.D. in physics from New York University, which is where I got my Ph.D. in physics.
Step 2: Contact Jeh Johnson and Rose Gottemoeller about my request for an appointment. The AJP and its publishers are reluctant to retract the article because of the culture war in the United States about the teaching of evolution. One can describe this ongoing conflict as atheists vs God-fearers. This article makes the atheists look bad, in addition to disgracing every physicist in the United States. The article impacts negatively on our national security and international relations with Muslims. My correspondence about this is here:

http://newevangelist.me/2014/05/01/letter-to-secretary-of-homeland-security/

My discussions with the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security have been with Matthew Hoppler, who works in her office.
If I don’t hear from you in a week, I’ll file a complaint against Senator Gillibrand with the U. S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics.
Very truly yours, David Roemer

faxed to 866-824-6340 and mailed with a certificate of mailing

Letter received from Senator Gillibrand on June 2, 2014

Dear Mr. Roemer,
Senator Gillibrand has received your request for assistance regarding your concerns with the American Journal of Physics.

The Senator appreciates the trust and confidence that your request represents; however, we are unable to influence the publication, amendment, or redaction of articles appearing in peer reviewed scientific journals. Insofar as the staff of Rep. Yvette Clarke’s office has expressed a willingness to assist you, please contact them directly.

Please be assured that your request has received a through review, and it is our hope that your matter can be resolved to your satisfaction as soon as possible.

Sincerely yours, Kirstin Gillibrand

Letter faxed to U. S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics on June 8, 2014
John Sassaman, Chief Counsel
Re: Ethics Complaint Against Sen. Gillibrand faxed to your office on April 7 and May 16, 19, and 21.
Dear Mr. Sassaman,
In the accompanying fax, Sen. Gillibrand states she reviewed the material I submitted about “Entropy and evolution,” (American Journal of Physics, November 2008). In fact, her staff refused my request to explain the matter to them in person. In a nutshell, I am accusing the American scientific establishment of engaging in pseudoscience to promote atheism. The article undermines the integrity of science, exacerbates the controversy about the teaching of evolution, and interferes with our relationships with other nations. There is no way her staff could have investigated such an allegation without interviewing me.

Sen. Gillibrand also suggests that I contact Congressman Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district). Congressman Clarke has already agreed to investigate my complaint against the American Journal of Physics and the National Science Foundation. My correspondence with Congressman Clarke and Congressman Rush Holt (D- NJ, 12th district) is on my blog (http://newevangelist.me/2013/04/12/national-science-foundation/). Congressman Holt has a Ph.D. in physics from New York University.

I asked Sen. Gillibrand for help in my request to see Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security (Rose Gottemoeller) and the Secretary of Homeland Security (Jeh Johnson) about the negative impact the absurd article might have on American security and foreign relations. I was told that the Under Secretary was considering my request for an appointment.  I have not gotten any response from Mr. Johnson.

I suggest reading Evolution Revolution: Evolution is True. Darwin is Wrong. This Changes Everything by Alan BennettThis book exposes the anti-religion cult of Darwinism that many mainstream evolutionary biologists either follow or are browbeaten into following.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Faxed to Phillip Sharp (American Association for the Advancement of Science), Beth Cunningham (American Association of Physics Teachers), John Haynes (American Institute of Physics), France Cordova (National Science Foundation), Yvette Clarke (D-NY, 9th district), Rush Holt (D-NJ, 12th district), Mariette DiChristina (Scientific American), Neil DeGrasse Tyson (Hayden Planetarium), David Ciancimino (New York Province of the Society of Jesus), John Sexton (New York University), Julie Schmid (American Association University Professors), and Willem Drees (Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science).

Letter sent to John Sassaman, Chief Counsel of U. S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics on June 23, 2014
Dear Mr. Sassaman,
On June 18, 2014, I faxed a letter to your office requesting an appointment and saying I would file a complaint against you with the D.C. Bar for unethical conduct for dismissing my complaint against Sen. Gillibrand.

Some time ago, I filed a lawsuit that was dismissed because there was no cause of action. This decision was just if the writing and reading skills of all involved were sufficient. However, I appealed and explained the case to a judge in person. This is the basis of my belief that due process of law requires face-to-face meetings. The decision against me was just because the judge took full responsibility for dismissing my case.

I feel that if you do not accept my request for a personal meeting with you, you will be behaving unethically.  It is as if the judge in my case turned off his hearing aid when I was talking. My accusation is that you are replicating the unethical behavior of Sen. Gillibrand.

Sen. Gillibrand’s dereliction of duty is her unwillingness to investigate the behavior of Rose Gottermoeller (Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security) and her science advisor, Robert Nelson.  On March 11, 2014, I sent a LinkedIn message to Dr. Nelson telling about Rep. Yvette Clark’s investigation of “Entropy and evolution,” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). The article is atheistic pseudoscience, and can have a negative effect on our foreign relations and security.

Nelson and Gottermoeller are no doubt mindful of the culture war in the United States about evolution. Scientists at the Smithsonian Institute behaved like a Nazi mob towards one of their colleagues for publishing a review article (“The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories”) because the author (Richard Sternberg) plugged the theory of intelligent design (ID). The peer-reviewers considered the reference to ID a harmless philosophical addendum that did not detract from the scientific value of the paper.  (See the 29-page congressional document titled, “Intolerance and the Politicization of Science at the Smithsonian: Smithsonian’s Top Officials Permit the Demotion and Harassment of Scientist Skeptical of Darwinian Evolution,” December 2006).

If the American Journal of Physics retracts the absurd article, it will be a victory for people that are “Skeptical of Darwinian Evolution” and a loss for atheists. This is why Dr. Nelson ignored my LinkedIn message. He could not defend the article, but he dared not agree that the article should be retracted. The Committee on Ethics, Rose Gottemoeller, and Kirstin Gillibrand are simply following Dr. Nelson’s dishonorable lead with the same cowardly motives.

The DC Bar complaint form asks “Have you filed a complaint about this matter elsewhere?” The answer is that I filed the complaint with Rep. Yvette Clarke and that the matter is under investigation.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
Enclosures:
Certificate of Mailing to Yvette Clarke (1/6/14)
Screen Shot of LinkedIn message to Robert Nelson
Faxed to 202-638-0862 (Office of Bar Counsel)
mailed with a certificate of mailing

Sassaman


American Association for the Advancement of Science

Email from Science Magazine on May 23, 2012

Thank you for your note. As you might imagine, we do not get involved in these kinds of activities of other publishers.
Alan Leshner
CEO, AAAS
Executive Publisher, Science

Letter faxed to director of the AAAS on January 18, 2013

Dr. William H. Press
University of Texas at Austin
Department of Computer Science

Dear Dr. Press,
As a director of the AAAS you should be committed to its second mission (“Promote and defend the integrity of science and its use”), and should want the American Journal of Physics (AJP) to retract an absurd article titled, “Entropy and evolution” (Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008). The article repeats the creationist error that evolution violates the second law of thermodynamics, and the even more nonsensical idea that evolution does not because of the sun. Unfortunately, the article goes so far as to write down an incorrect equation in thermodynamics to prove this quantitatively in units of entropy.

The AJP, the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT), and the American Institute of Physics (AIP) are resorting to trickery to avoid publishing a retraction. The following article explains why the AJP article is absurd: http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics.

Because of her leadership position in the AAPT, Jill Marshall (marshall@mail.utexas.edu) is supporting the AJP’s refusal to stop spreading misinformation about evolution. There is a considerable amount of correspondence between me and the AJP/AAPT about this matter. I have given this information to Science, by email (science_editors@aaas.org) and fax (202-289-7562).

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Open letter to Allen Goldman (American Association for the Advancement of Science, Physics Section) and Howard Wactlar (National Science Foundation, Division of Information and Intelligent Systems):

The American Journal of Physics published an article (“Entropy and evolution,” Am. J. Phys., Vol. 76, No. 11, November 2008) that begins with the statement: “The creationist argument is that advanced organisms are more orderly than primitive organisms, and hence as evolution proceeds living things become more ordered, that is less disordered, that is less entropic. Because the second law of thermodynamics prohibits a decrease in entropy, it therefore prohibits biological evolution.”

The author says, “Two anonymous referees made valuable suggestions that improved this article significantly.” This raises the possibility that the peer-reviewers were more interested in anti-creationist propaganda than in making sure the article is a contribution to scientific knowledge.

The article says evolution decreased the entropy of the biosphere and estimates the decrease in joule/degrees. The article’s statements about evolution and entropy are unintelligible.

I pointed out the errors and misinformation in the article to American Journal of Physics, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the American Institute of Physics in a number of communications. The AJP, the AAPT, and the AIP are refusing to retract the article, which I think is the only remedy for its nonsense. I refer you to the following sources of information about evolution and thermodynamics:

  1. McIntosh, A.C., “Information and entropy – top -down or bottom-up development in living systems?”, Int. J. of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics. Vol. 4, No. 4 (2009), pp. 351 to 385.
  2. Fourth paragraph of Ilya Prigogine, Gregoire Nicolis, and Agnes Babloyantz, “Thermodynamics of evolution”, Physics Today 25(11) (1972), pp. 23 to 28. View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3071090.
  3. http://creationwiki.org/Pseudoscience_in_the_American_Journal_of_Physics
  4. My article in http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf
  5. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/10/more_philosophical_than_scient052441.html

Very truly yours, David Roemer


The Truth About the Shroud of Turin

Letter to the Vicar General of the Archdiocese of New York dated April 12, 2012
Dear Bishop Sullivan:
The following is a letter of complaint against the pastor of the Church of St Paul at East 117th Street in New York, Msgr. Greg Mustaciuolo, Sr. Joan Curtin, and Sr. Pauline Chirchirillo.

Sr. Maria Madre de la Sabiduria, SSVM, invited me to give a slideshow/lecture (http://www.holyshroud.info) about the Shroud of Turin on March 30, 2011, at the Church of St. Paul. On March 27 in a telephone conversation, Sr. Maria expressed some concern over the fact that I was not promoting the theory that the Shroud was authentic. I suggested that nobody in the audience would notice that nuance. We agreed that Sr.Maria would address the audience after my talk about the Shroud. The next day, Sr. Maria left a message on my answering machine cancelling the slideshow.

I didn’t check my messages and arrived at the church with my projector and slides. It was the pastor’s decision, not Sr. Maria’s, to cancel my talk. The pastor said he thought I believed the Shroud was authentic because I am on the Shroud Speakers Directory at The Shroud of Turin Website (http://www.shroud.com). He seemed to think the Catholic Church taught that the Holy Shroud was authentic. He certainly believed the image was created with a burst of radiation when Jesus rose from the dead. He mentioned how moved he was to see the Shroud up close up in Italy, but he deprived the group that night of the same experience.

The Catholic Church grants indulgences to people who pray before the Shroud itself or an image of the Shroud. I feel my slides of the Holy Shroud are just as deserving of veneration as the cloth itself. I feel that the pastor desecrated the Holy Shroud by depriving his parishioners of the experience of seeing a miraculous artifact.

I contacted the other individuals by email and telephone to tell them about my slideshow/lecture in 2011. No one gave me any help or encouragement. I was pretty much given a runaround. I feel they desecrated the Holy Shroud just as much as the pastor of The Church of St. Paul.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Letter from Archbishop Sullivan dated May 10, 2012
Dear Mr. Roemer,

Your April 12th email to my office concerning Father Claudio Stewart outlines your complaint about him and Sister Maria Madre de la Sabiduria. I suggest that you should resolve the issue as it is personal between you and them. It is not a matter that requires my involvement on behalf of the archdiocese of New York as it is personal. I have shared your letter with Father Stewart and asked him to speak with Sister.

Sincerely yours, Bishop Dennis J. Sullivan, Vicar General

Letter to the Vicar General dated May 22, 2012
Dear Bishop Sullivan,

I got your letter of May 10, 2012, and had a lengthy conversation with Sister Maria Madre de la Sabiduria on May 17, 2012. There is no way I can resolve the issue with Fr. Stewart and Sister without the help of a third party.

What I suggest is that I give my slideshow/lecture about the history and science of the Holy Shroud to Sister and Fr. Stewart with other people in the audience, preferably Catholics knowledgeable about fundamental theology.

Religion produces conflict, conflict produces anxiety, and inhibition is a defense mechanism for anxiety. When it comes to the Holy Shroud, many people are inhibited from thinking intelligently. They have thoughts that give them some kind of personal satisfaction, but their thoughts cut them off from other people.

Fr. Stewart, for example, is personally devoted to the Holy Shroud. But he deprived his parishioners from learning about a relic about which over 1,000 books have been published.

I am a member of the Princeton Club at 15 West 43rd St., and can get a meeting room in the morning with breakfast cheap. Without breakfast it is more expensive.

Very truly yours, David Roemer

Email sent to Cardinal George on July 10, 2012, and letter to Cardinal Wuerl on July 31, 2012
Your Eminence,

I’v developed a slideshow/lecture about the Shroud of Turin that you can see at http://www.holyshroud.info. I told a number of officials in the Archdiocese of New York about my talk in 2011 with the expectation of getting support and direction. Instead, I was given a runaround.

Acting on the advice of Fr. Daniel Gatti, Alumni Chaplain of Fordham, I contacted churches directly. I was invited to give a talk at a church in Harlem on March 30. When I arrived with my projector, the pastor told me he cancelled the talk. His reason was that I was not promoting the theory that the Holy Shroud is the actual burial cloth referred to in the Gospels. I’v attached the flyer for the event.

The pastor deprived his parishioners of the experience of seeing the Holy Shroud and learning of its history and the science of the image. My presentation includes the prayer supposed to be said when looking at an image of the Holy Shroud. I feel the pastor desecrated the Holy Shroud. In my opinion, he is also deceiving himself about the history the Holy Shroud, which is part of our salvation history.

I filed a complaint against this pastor and the officials with Bishop Dennis Sullivan, the Vicar General. Bishop Sullivan’s response to my complaint and my subsequent correspondence is blameworthy in a number of different ways, so it seems to me. He is in effect supporting the actions of the pastor.

I’v already contacted Bishop David Ricken and Bishop Gregory Mansour of the Evangelization and Catechesis office of the USCCB in the hope that they would help me resolve my complaint against the pastor which has now escalated into a complaint against the Vicar General. They have not been helpful. Bishop Mansour told me in an email that he “believed in the Shroud.”

I’ll be grateful for any help or guidance you can give me.

If there is anything I can do to be of service to you or the Archdiocese of New York, please let me know.

Yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Email from Catholic Answers (http://www.catholic.com) dated August 16, 2012
Dear David,

Thanks again for your inquiry. I forwarded your suggestion to the production team but they are not interested in another Shroud of Turin show at this time.

We discussed the Shroud of Turin with Dr. Niels Svensson just last year– If you are interested you can listen to the archived show by following this link: http://www.catholic.com/radio/shows/how-did-jesus-die-pre-recorded-5000 and selecting “Listen” or “Download” in the upper right corner of the page.

Thank you and God bless, the Radio Department

Email to Catholic Answers  on August 18, 2012

What concerns me is that your production team believes the Holy Shroud is authentic, and doesn’t want me to explain the true history and science of the relic. The Patrick Coffin podcast discussed the Holy Shroud in a way that might cause Catholics, in this age of atheism, to lose their faith. The theory that the Shroud is authentic is farfetched.

The Holy Shroud is a sign that Jesus is alive in a new life with God, and the history and science of the relic should be publicized in an honest and rational manner. The pastor in New York City, who cancelled my slideshow/lecture, deprived his parishioners of the experience of seeing the Holy Shroud. The pastor was also unwilling to discuss the history and science of the Holy Shroud with me. I suspect that he was inhibited from such a discussion because of anxiety. Christians should not be anxious about their faith, but should give their reasons for believing and should summon everyone to believe in Jesus.

It is not just that one pastor whose behavior was fearful. All the cardinals, bishops, and monsignors that I have contacted about my slideshow/lecture have reacted in a way that shows the Holy Shroud causes them anxiety.

The disingenuousness of your response is another instance of fearful behavior. Catholic Answers never acknowledged receipt of my correspondence with the Archdiocese of New York about the Holy Shroud. The proposed radio show is not just about the Holy Shroud, it is about the existing conflict I am having with the Archdiocese of New York. Did you really expect me to believe you were not interested because you just did a show on the Holy Shroud last year?

Email from Jeff Mirus of Trinity Communications dated August 24, 2012
David–

The shroud is not an important point of salvation history, and the Church has never pronounced on its authenticity, leaving that entirely to the scientific community.

However, I can understand why a pastor would not want to sponsor a program debunking the shroud, as he probably believes (as I do) that the evidence is far stronger pro than con– and–more important– he is aware as a pastor how easily people can be upset in their faith on an issue which should not affect their faith at all.

Jeff Mirus, Trinity Communications

Letter to Cardinal Dolan dated August 28, 2012
Your Eminence:
I developed a slideshow/lecture about the Shroud of Turin (http://www.holyshroud.info, attached transcript) and think you should know about the negative reaction of Catholics to my analysis of the science, history, and theology of the Holy Shroud. After sending emails to Newman clubs, Catholic colleges, and Catholic churches in Brooklyn and Manhattan, I got only one invitation to speak. To my chagrin, the pastor cancelled the talk at the last minute on the grounds that I was not promoting the authenticity of the relic. I am the only one on the Shroud Speakers Directory of The Shroud of Turin Website (www.shroud.com) who does not think the Holy Shroud is authentic.

My impression is that the question of the authenticity of this precious relic causes anxiety. Inhibition is a defense mechanism for anxiety, and everyone I have contacted seems to be afraid of even discussing the matter. Bishop Dennis Sullivan, for example, did not respond to my invitation of May 22, 2012 to attend a proposed lecture at the Princeton Club. My invitation was a response to his letter to me dated May 10, 2012 in answer to my letter of complaint against certain clerics in the Archdiocese of New York of April 12, 2012.

I’v included my email correspondence with Catholic Answers (http://www.catholic.com). There has been no response from Catholic Answers to my criticism of a radio show they produced about the Holy Shroud last year.

I also sent an email to Cardinal George that was not acknowledged. Cardinal Wuerl responded with the enclosed letter. I have also contacted Bishop David Ricken and Bishop Gregory Mansour. All are members of the Office of Evangelization and Catechesis of the USCCB.

The science and history of the Holy Shroud is part of our salvation history. The Catholic Church in America should broadcast our salvation history to everyone. No part of our salvation history should be obscured and covered up with half-truths and misrepresentations.

Yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Enclosures:
Announcement
Transcript
Letters dated April 12, May 10, May 22
Email to Cardinal George dated July 10
Emails to and from Catholic Answers dated August 16 and August 18.
Letter from Cardinal Wuerl
Emails to and from Catholic Culture

Letter from Cardinal Dolan dated September 5, 2012
Dear Dr. Roemer

Thank you most sincerely for your letter of August 28, 2012, together with the enclosures. Your thoughtfulness is deeply appreciated.

To begin, Dr. Roemer, I don’t think that you should equate a lack of interest in your slideshow/lecture, with the Church’s unwillingness to determine the authenticity of the Shroud. Through the centuries, the Holy See has permitted the shroud to be scientifically tested, and there have been countless articles, books, and documentaries in this regard.

While I do no know Mr. Jeff Mirus, of Trinity Communications, I think the reasons he gives for the decision of the Harlem pastors to cancel your slideshow/lecture make perfect sense. Until the Church has made a final pronouncement on the authenticity of the shroud, with more pros than cons at this time, why would a pastor want to sponsor an event that debunks the shroud.

With prayerful best wishes for a blessed fall, I am

Faithfully in Christ, Timothy Michael Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York

Letter to Cardinal Dolan dated September 17, 2012
Your Eminence:

Thank you for your letter concerning the cancellation of my advertised (“Conference About the Shroud of Turin”) slideshow/lecture five minutes before I was to begin. The pastor in charge thought my slideshow was “debunking” the Holy Shroud because it gives an unbiased account of the history and science of this important relic.

The human mind is structured like the scientific method. The lowest level is observation, which requires paying attention. At the level of inquiry, humans ask questions about what they observe. This requires intelligence, and extremely intelligent humans invent theories or hypotheses to answer the questions. At the level of reflective judgment, humans marshal the evidence and decide whether a theory is true or just probable. This level requires being rational. The next level is deciding what to do with our bodies, which requires being responsible.

Intelligence is usually a measure of how fast or how slow it takes someone to grasp a theory or insight. In the case of religion, there is so much conflict and anxiety that people are inhibited from thinking intelligently and rationally. Humans have blind spots and are biased.

According to John Paul II (Slide #6), the Holy Shroud is a sign or a reason to believe in revelation because “no one at present can explain” the image. A related sign is the Resurrection of Jesus, which is an historical event that can’t be explained in terms of any other historical event. Whereas the Shroud is a miraculous artifact that everyone can see, the Resurrection is a miraculous event that cannot be seen. The Holy Shroud is part of the historical Jesus, and I consider its mysteriousness just as persuasive a reason to believe in Jesus as the Resurrection.

According to Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan (The First Christmas: What the Gospels Really Teach About Jesus’ Birth), the Resurrection can be traced to within a few years of Jesus’ death. Since Borg and Crossan do not have the gift of faith, this admission, and others like it by nonbelievers, proves Jesus appeared to his followers after he died. Crossan and Borg deny, however, that Jesus was buried in a tomb. On this matter, I side with Raymond Brown who said Jesus’ burial in a tomb is historically certain (The Death of the Messiah: From Gethsemane to the Grave: Commentary on the Passion Narrative in the Four Gospels).

The Holy Shroud is a reason to believe Jesus is alive in a new life with God not just because the image is inexplicable (Slides #7, #11 to #23, and #30). It is a sign because the Catholic Church believes in Jesus and the Catholic Church teaches that the Holy Shroud and images of the Holy Shroud should be venerated (Slides #6, #8, and #10). As with all relics, it is not the physical object that deserves to be honored, but the person the relic represents.

A similar sign, as I explain in Slide #6, is the discovery in the 1960s that the universe began to exist 13.7 billion years ago. The Big Bang, as this phenomena is called, is a reason to believe God inspired the human authors of the Bible because John says that God created the universe from nothing (“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God …”).

I don’t consider the Big Bang evidence of God’s existence. The evidence of God’s existence is the spirituality of the human soul and the intelligibility of the universe. The lack of any theory of the Big Bang is evidence the universe is not intelligible, so I consider the Big Bang evidence that God does not exist.

The question of what caused the Big Bang brings up the much-discussed conflict between science and religion. One supposed instance of this conflict was the disagreement between the Catholic Church and Galileo over the Copernican system. I think the Church exercised better judgment than Galileo because the stars were fixed in space. The shift in the position of stars during Earth’s rotation around the Sun was not observed until a century later with the improvement of telescopes. This was not a conflict, but a disagreement between rational and intelligent people about evidence.

In my opinion, the controversy over whether the Holy Shroud is the actual linen cloth referred to in the Gospels is indeed a conflict—not a disagreement about evidence. The question of the Holy Shroud’s authenticity is related to the question of what caused the Big Bang because of the scientific question of what caused the bloody image of a crucified man. Fr. Manuel Carriera, a physicist and member of the Vatican Astronomical Observatory, thinks that the Holy Shroud is authentic and the image is an epiphenomenon of the Resurrection. He also thinks God caused the Big Bang.

Thinking God caused the Big Bang is just speculating about the content of revelation. Likewise, there is very little evidence supporting the authenticity of the Holy Shroud. These two theories are anti-evangelical because we live in an age where there are many people who think believing in God is irrational. Preaching the gospel means preaching to nonbelievers and preventing believers from becoming nonbelievers. This requires understanding nonbelievers and following Matthew’s advice to present Christian doctrine judiciously (“…neither cast ye your pearls before swine…”)

Many nonbelievers have a blind spot about the mind-body problem. They grasp only two solutions to the question of what the relationship is between ourselves and our bodies: dualism and materialism. They don’t understand the insight that the human mind is a mystery and humans are embodied spirits. It is a failure at the level of inquiry, not a failure at the level reflective judgment.

However, these same nonbelievers are intelligent and rational about the cause of the Big Bang. They realize there is no evidence that God or an angel caused the Big Bang. They reject the idea that the universe is unintelligible, and hope that science will someday understand the cause of the Big Bang.

Many nonbelievers will admit that the human mind is a mystery, but they consider the Big Bang a mystery too. This means they don’t know what a mystery is. They don’t grasp the difference between these two questions: 1) Why is the sky blue? 2) What is knowing the sky is blue? Christians have a duty to explain the difference between these two questions so that nonbelievers can understand why humans are embodied spirits and why God exists. We should build upon what people already know and understand. Telling stories about the laws of physics being violated only confirms the assumption that believing in God is irrational.

On March 30, 2012, the pastor’s congregation was five minutes away from seeing the Holy Shroud and being moved by the image. How would the parishioners have reacted to the theory (Slide #30) that the blood stains and body image on the 14-foot by 3-foot piece of linen were somehow created by heretics in the 1st or 2nd century after torturing and crucifying a volunteer or victim?

There is a 2002 movie titled Signs about a married Catholic priest (Mel Gibson) who lost his faith because his wife died in a freak accident. The priest regained his faith when his son survived an attack by an alien from another planet. The weapon the alien used was a dose of poison gas injected into the child’s nostrils. By coincidence, the child had an asthma attack and was unable to breath in the poison. The Mel Gibson character interpreted the coincidence to be a sign from God and regained his faith. My hope is that the parishioners would have thought it is quite a coincidence that there exists a two-thousand-year-old image—not a painting or a photograph—of the man who is believed to have saved mankind two thousand years ago.

My metaphysics teacher in college was Fr. Norris Clark who told us that finding oneself in error is wonderful experience because it helps us understand how other people can be in error. I’m praying the pastor sees that he made a mistake.
Yours respectfully in Christ,

David Roemer

Enclosures
Script of slide show
DVD of Signs

Email to Cardinal Gomez of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles dated 10/1/2012
Your Excellency,
I have a slideshow/lecture about the Shroud of Turin (http://www.holyshroud.info), and have gotten into a conflict with Cardinal Timothy Dolan about it. The attached letter to His Eminence tells the story. The letter does not say so, but Cardinal Dolan indicated that he thought I was “debunking” the Holy Shroud. I’m hoping you will bring the matter up with the synode on the New Evangelization. My letter to the Archbishop and a transcript of the lecture is attached.

Sr. Paula Jean Miller, Sr. Sara Butler, and Fr. Ralph Martin have gotten this email, but they don’t seem interested in the subject of the Holy Shroud.

Asking Your Excellency’s blessing, I am, yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Email to Sister Mary Lou Wirtz dated 10/4/12. Subject: Re:Re Letter
Dear Sister,
I hope you agree that Cardinal Dolan and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which I have also contacted, is harming the new evangelization by suppressing my lecture/slideshow (http://www.holyshroud.info). All of my correspondence is at http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/. A related controversy is over the theory of intelligent design (ID).

I don’t have any ideas about how these two topics (Holy Shroud and ID) can be brought up at the Synod. But I can tell you about the conflict I am having with the Academy of Catholic Theology and First Things about evolution.

Evolution is the theory that life evolved from bacteria to mammals in a period of 3.5 billion years. There is a lot of evidence for it, and scientists judge the theory to be true. Creationists are including evidence from the Bible, which makes their point of view a matter of faith.

The only theory that even attempts to explain evolution is the theory of intelligent design, but there is no evidence for this bright idea. The theory of natural selection only explains the adaptation of species to the environment. Natural selection explains why giraffes have long necks, but now how giraffes evolved from bacteria in only 3.5 billion years. Biologists always speak of “adaptive evolution.” The old model for evolution was a tornado hitting a junkyard and producing a Boeing 747 in flight. The new model is a computer generating an English sonnet by the random selection of letters. The advantage of the new model is that you can calculate how long it will take a computer to do such a thing.

Advocates of ID compare ID with natural selection to make ID look better. Atheists go along with the scam because they don’t want to admit that ID is a better theory than natural selection, in some sense.

The second law of thermodynamics is that nature tends towards a state of disorder. This is why a gas will fill up the entire container it is in. The second law does not apply to biological evolution or the evolution of stars. Nevertheless, the American Journal of Physics published an article with an absurd equation proving that evolution did not violate the second law. The Catholic Truth of Scotland newsletter published my explanation of why the AJP should retract the article.

Stephen Barr is a prominent physicist who writes about evolution on the pages of First Things. He is also a member of the Academy of Catholic Theology. He told me in an email that I was wrong and the AJP article was right, and that I was harming the Catholic Church. In my opinion, Barr is harming the Catholic Church. Barr does not go so far as to advocate ID, but he doesn’t say there is no evidence for ID. His argument is that ID is not science. In my opinion, Barr is helping atheists propagate misinformation about evolutionary biology. Barr should be expelled from the Academy of Catholic Theology because he is lying about science (http://newevangelist.me/2012/08/02/first-things/).

I’v attached the AJP article and a version of the article published in the Catholic Truth of Scotland. These are some links to more information about my conflict with the AJP, First Things, and the Academy of Catholic Theology:

http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/MAYnewsletter12.pdf

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/22/physics-department-of-new-york-university/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/02/american-journal-of-physics/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/02/23/american-association-of-physics-teachers/

http://newevangelist.me/2012/05/06/american-institute-of-physics/

http://newevangelist.me/2011/12/07/american-scientific-affiliation-2/

My YouTube video titled “The Truth About Evolution and Religion” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKaF8vX6HXQ) also sheds light on this issue.

Email sent to Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano, Apostolic Nuncio to the United States, on November 13, 2012
Your Excellency,
Cardinal Dolan is suppressing my slideshow/lecture on the history, theology, and science of the Shroud of Turin (www.holyshroud.info), and I am hoping you can help us resolve this conflict. My correspondence with the Archdiocese of New York is on my blog at

http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/

Cardinal Dolan did not answer my rebuttal to his letter of September 5, 2012.

I’v attached a transcript of the slideshow.

Yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Letter sent to Vatican on 11/19/12Archbishop Salvatore Fisichella,Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelization, on November 19, 2012
Your Excellency,

I sent the following message on the contact page of http://www.annusfidei.va on November 18, 2012:

On March 30, 2012, I arrived at a church in New York City to give a slideshow/lecture (“The Truth About the Shroud of Turin”; http://www.holyshroud.info). To my dismay and chagrin, the pastor cancelled my presentation because it does not promote the authenticity of this important relic. After explaining the science, history, and theology of the Holy Shroud, the slideshow gives evidence that Gnostics created the artifact in the 1st or 2nd century with methods that have been lost to history.

I complained to Bishop Denis Sullivan, Vicar General, to no avail. My invitation to attend a proposed my slideshow/lecture was ignored. Timothy Cardinal Dolan, the Archbishop of New York, sent me a letter saying I was “debunking” the Holy Shroud. He did not respond to my answer of this criticism, which is at http://newevangelist.me/shroud-of-turin/.

The Cardinal Archbishops of Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C. all ignored my requests for support, as did Bishops David Ricken and Gregory Mansour of the Office of Evangelization and Catechesis of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and Archbishop Vignanò, papal nuncio to the United States. Most of my correspondence is at http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/.

The science and history of the Holy Shroud is part of our salvation history. The Catholic Church in America should broadcast our salvation history to everyone. No part of our salvation history should be obscured and covered up with half-truths and misrepresentations.

Respectfully yours in Christ, David Roemer

Email from Under-Secretary for the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of the New Evangelization on October 3, 2013

Dear Mr. Roemer,
We are in receipt of your recent fax, dated October 2, 2013, in which you inquire if Archbishop Rino Fisichella, President of the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization, is in receipt of your letter of November 19, 2012. I can inform you that Archbishop Fisichella did indeed receive the letter in question. We have not replied to your letter thus far owing to the considerable volume of work in our Dicastery engendered by the onset of the Year of Faith, of which we hold the organizing secretariat, and to the subsequent attribution to us of the competency over Catechesis hitherto exercised by the Congregation for Clergy.

Given the subject matter of your letter, I would suggest that you write to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Concerning your request as to whether Cardinal Schönborn has received your letter of August 15, 2013, we would have no way of knowing this and I can only suggest that you make inquiries of the Cardinal’s secretariat in Vienna.

With every good wish, Msgr. Graham Bell

Letter sent to Archbishop Stefan Soroka of the Ukrainian Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia on November 27, 2013
Your Excellency:

This is a follow-up of the conversations I had with your secretary and the emails I sent about the Shroud of Turin. I’m in a conflict with Timothy Cardinal Dolan about the authenticity of the Holy Shroud and an article published by the American Journal of Physics about evolutionary biology. I am writing to ask to see you in person about these matters.

The reasons for believing in Jesus can be grouped under these facts:

  1. Jesus was a Jewish prophet.
  2. The Resurrection of Jesus is an historical event.
  3. According to Robert Drews (In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on Its History and Origins), the Shroud of Turin was created by Gnostics in the 1st or 2nd century with methods that have been lost to history, except that the body of a crucified victim or volunteer must have been used.

I consider the cosmological proof of God’s existence to be part of #1. People who feel strongly the Holy Shroud is authentic don’t fully understand the proof and why there are so many atheists and agnostics. You can’t effectively preach the gospel in this day and age without understanding the blind spots of non-believers.

Cardinal Dolan, with the support of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, is suppressing my slideshow/lecture (http://www.holyshroud.info) because I don’t promote the authenticity of the Holy Shroud. This replicates a common mistake made by historians and Christian apologists. They ask and attempt to answer these questions: What caused the Resurrection? Did Jesus really cure a lame person? I don’t consider these to be reasonable historical questions because there are no theories with any evidence to support them. Rational people ask whether Jesus is alive in a new life with God and consider out entire salvation history.

Concerning the AJP, Cardinal Dolan told me he did not have jurisdiction over the Jesuits whose integrity I was questioning. I’v brought the matter to the attention of the American Association of University Professors and was told that the Executive Director (Julie Schmidt) is investigating my allegations.

Very truly yours, David Roemer
faxed and mailed with a certificate of mailing
letter to AAUP enclosed

Letter sent to Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church on February 15, 2014
Your Beatitude,
I have the grounds and authorization to file a complaint against Timothy Cardinal Dolan of the Archdiocese of New York and Archbishop Stefan Soroka of the Metropolitan Archeparchy of Philadelphia with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith for discouraging the veneration of the Shroud of Turin and inhibiting evangelization. My correspondence about this matter is at:

http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/

Archbishop Soroka is relying on Russ Breault (http://shroudencounter.com/) for his information about the Holy Shroud. In his lectures about the Holy Shroud, Mr. Breault fails to mention the theory that Gnostics created the Holy Shroud in the 1st or 2nd century using a crucified victim and methods that have been lost to history. In my opinion, Mr. Breault is misrepresenting our salvation history.

I have asked the Office of Evangelization and Catechesis of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for help in resolving this conflict to no avail. I am hoping you will use your influence to resolve this matter on American soil.

Asking Your Beatitude’s blessing, I am, yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

registered letter, return receipt requested
Cc: Bishop David L. Ricken, Diocese of Green Bay, PO Box 23825, Green Bay, WI 54305, mailed with certificate of mailing

Letter sent to Gerhard Cardinal Müller of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on February 21, 2014
Your Eminence,
I was invited to present my slideshow/lecture (http://www.holyshroud.info) about Shroud of Turin at a Catholic church in New York, N.Y., on March 30, 2012. At the last minute, the pastor cancelled my presentation. He objected to my defense of the theory that Gnostics created the Holy Shroud in the 1st or 2nd century using a crucified victim and methods that have been lost to history (Robert Drews, In Search of the Shroud of Turin: New Light on its History and Origins). Cardinal Dolan supported the pastor’s decision and stated that I was “debunking” this important relic in a letter dated September 5, 2012. I filed a complaint with the Pontifical Council for the New Evangelization and was advised to bring the matter to your attention. I sent an email to cdf@cfaith.va on October 3, 2013. My correspondence about this matter and my attempt to explain to Cardinal Dolan why his conduct is harmful is at

http://www.newevangelization.info/shroud.html

http://www. newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/

In the meantime, I found out about books published in 2006 and 2012 that use the assumption of the Shroud’s authenticity to give an atheistic explanation of the Resurrection of Jesus. It gave me greater reasons to think Cardinal Dolan does not understand our salvation history and is weak in fundamental theology. I reviewed these books at

http://www.newevangelization.info/loken.html

http://www.newevangelization.info/wesselow.html

I’v had telephone conversations with the new Vicar General of the New York Archdiocese (Bishop Gerald Walsh) and his chief of staff. They are aware of my intention to ask you to correct Cardinal Dolan.

Asking the blessing of Your Eminence, I am, Yours respectfully in Christ, David Roemer

Sent by registered letter, return receipt requested
faxed to 3906698834809 and emailed

Email sent to Bruno Barberis (museo@sindone.org) on May 7, 2014

Dear Prof. Barberis,
I submitted an abstract promoting the theory that Gnostics created the Holy Shroud (http://www.holyshroud.info)
in the 1st or 2nd century using a crucified victim and methods that have been lost to history. The administrators
have rejected my offer without giving any explanation.

I asked another speaker, Bishop Michael Sheridan of the Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs, to boycott the conference. I think you have a moral duty to do the same because the Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith is considering my request that they correct Cardinal Dolan of New York for suppressing my slideshow/lecture about this sacred artifact. My correspondence with the Pontifical Council on the New Evangelization and the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith is at

http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the­truth-about­the­shroud­of­turin/

In my letter to Cardinal Mueller, I referred to two books written by atheists that assumed the Holy Shroud was authentic in order to give an historical explanation for the Resurrection. You should not preach the gospel by misrepresenting our salvation history.
Very truly your, David Roemer

Letter faxed to Very Rev. Michael Sheridan, Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs and Archbishop Cesare Nosiglia, Archdiocese of Turin, on May 8, 2014

Dear Bishop Sheridan,
I just spoke to Mark Antonacci (636-938-3708), who is on the committee of the St. Louis Shroud Conference (Oct. 9 to Oct. 12, 2014) that rejected my request to be a presenter. He very clearly stated that there is more evidence the Holy Shroud is authentic than the theory presented in my slideshow/lecture (http://www.holyshroud.info), which is that Gnostics created this official relic using methods that have been lost to history. He thought there was so little evidence Gnostics were involved that it did not deserve to be presented at the conference. This means the presenters at the conference will be misrepresenting our salvation history.

I have asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith to correct Cardinal Timothy Dolan for his handling of an incident that occurred on March 30, 2012, at a parish in Manhattan. See: http://newevangelist.me/2012/10/02/the-truth-about-the-shroud-of-turin/.
I arrived to present my slideshow, and the pastor cancelled it. When I complained to Bishop Walsh, the Vicar General, he said the matter did not concern him. Cardinal Dolan sent me a letter saying I was “debunking” the Holy Shroud.

I want to meet with the referees of the conference and explain to them why people who think the Holy Shroud is authentic should keep it to themselves. I am mailing this with a certificate of mailing in the event I decide that the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith is not doing its duty. If this happens, I will file a complaint with the Holy Father against Cardinal Müeller. I am sending this to the Custodian of the Shroud because his advisor is a scheduled presenter.
Very truly yours, David Roemer

Letter faxed and emailed to Gerhard Cardinal Müller, mailed to Timothy Cardinal Dolan, emailed to Dr. Ermano Cardelli, and faxed to Bishop Michael Sheridan and Archbishop Cesare Nosiglia on July 7, 2014.

Your Eminence,
There are some new developments concerning my complaint against Cardinal Dolan of New York (mailed and faxed on February 21, 2014 and emailed on October 3, 2013) and Bishop Michael Sheridan of the Diocese of Colorado Springs (emailed and faxed on May 7, 2014) for suppressing my slideshow/lecture (http://www.holyshroud.info) about the Holy Shroud because it discusses the history and science of this important relic honestly. In the 20th century, pro-religion apologists argued that the Holy Shroud was authentic, but now atheists use the authenticity of the Holy Shroud to explain away the Resurrection of Jesus.

I have submitted the attached paper to the Italy section of the International Electronic and Electrical Engineers for a conference titled “2014 IEEE Workshop on Advances in the Shroud of Turin Investigations.” It supports and helps clarify my slideshow/lecture. If it is accepted, I will go to Bari, Italy, on September 4, 2014, and present the paper. This means my paper will be published in the IEEE Xplore Digital Library.

Unfortunately, Dr. Bruno Barberis, who is the scientific consultant to the Papal Custodian of the Shroud (Archbishop Cesare Nosiglia), rejected my submission. Fortunately, Dr. Ermanno Cardelli of the University of Perugia has agreed to ask the committee to reconsider its hasty decision.
Asking the blessing of Your Eminence, I am, Yours respectfully in Christ,  David Roemer

 

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.