[gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapters + + The War against GPS: Global Peace Science + + + Hamlet's question of peacemaking

  • From: Leo Semashko <leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: María Cristina Azcona <mcrisazcona@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2014 11:37:05 +0400

Dear Maria Cristina,

Many thanks you for your conciliatory letter. 

Indeed, we must be peacemakers, not troublemakers or quarrel-markers. I always 
insisted to replace bickering and wrangling with constructive work, but it was 

I again invite our great peacemakers: Ada Aharoni, Ernesto Kahan, Glenn Martin, 
Charles Mercieca, Maria Azcona, Bishnu Pathak, John Galtung, Frank Dorrell and 
everyone who want to write an article in the encyclopedic/dictionary style 
under the title "Scientific Peacemaking Achievements and Contributions to 
Global Peace for 100 (or 50) years: Theories and Facts" in 5-11 pages within 
one month. 

I wrote an article for two weeks "Degeneration of Peacemaking" in 11 pages for 
GPS, and you, please, write a counter-article with a list of scientific 
achievements and positive contributions of peacemaking in global peace. People, 
including I, see only the hundreds of wars, but do not see the peace 
achievements for 100 years among the hundreds of thousands of peacemakers army. 
Please, show these achievements if you see and know them! (I and people do not 
know and do not see them!) This will be you constructive alternative to 

Everything is relative and known in the comparison. People can compare your 
article about the achievements of peacemaking and my article about its 
degradation and to understand who is who and who is right, and what is 
contribution of Tetrasociology to global peace in comparison with other 
theories: Weber, Habermas, Wallerstein, Luhmann, Chomsky, etc. It will be 
interesting and useful to all. 

I suggested this for a long time but so far none of the peacekeepers did write 
such an article. Now I again invite you to write such an article - I'll be 
happy to publish it in the GPS book. You can write this article jointly or 
individually, separately, as you want.

Dear Maria, pleas, could you connect together these peacemakers for such an 
article? This will be the best fulfillment of your mediatory mission in this 
case for creating GPS. Thank you. 

If all these peacemakers are not able to write such an article, at least, 
please, indicate even though something like that. If you and indicate cannot 
anything of this sort, it will be yet another eloquent fact of degeneration of 

What do you want? Do you want to confirm or deny this historical fact? 
To be or not to be peacemaking and peace? 

With love, best harmony wishes,


Dr Leo Semashko:
Founding President, Global Harmony Association (GHA) since 2005;
Director, GHA Website "Peace from Harmony": www.peacefromharmony.org

----- Original Message -----
  From: María Cristina Azcona, mcrisazcona@xxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 10 июня 2014 г., 21:05:47
  Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global Peace 

Dear Leo and Glen

I think there is not controversy upon leo and Glen opinions

let me be intermediat ein this conflict, I love to do this

I see clearly what Glen is saying and is nothing different from your opinion leo

This is a "language" problem because Glen is native speakers and we are not, Leo

the management of language is very diferent  among all of us because of our 

Let us be patient with one another and first give it a second thought, perhaps 
Glen is not "attacking" the book at all, he simply expressed his opinion as you 

You cannot respond in this way on the first bad critic you receive because you 
requested for it!

he is free to say whatever he wants and you promised to publish all reviews, so 
please publish his opinion too.
I dont want all revisions to be love givings  I am happy that a true peacemaker 
like Glen has taken his time top read our book and give opinions on it and even 
participate in it

I understand that you are thinking he is destroying your baby but he isnt.
he isnt at all. He uis saying that GPS ought to take a chapter on peace 
movements all over the world in the past and the nowadays, far from our efforts 
but truly interesting and comment on them in favour or in reverse but 
commenting their existence
Not to name them is to deny the existence of such a lot of NGos that try to do 
things well

I)t is great to read his opinion and I find it really useful but please LEO 
dont react so fast 
and let us reread his emails and simply think a little on the good partsd of 
his message
Exactly what is the part you dont like and dont publish that part let only the 
good parts of the comment and negotiate it with Glen, dont react, dont react, 
we need to be united, we need to be patient, we are PEACEMAKERS not QUARREL 
with love and TRUE admiration toward both LEO AND GLEN 

María Cristina Azcona

María Cristina Azcona

2014-06-10 4:41 GMT-03:00 Leo Semashko <leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx>:
Dear Glen,

Once again, for the fifth time, I repeat: GHA creates a unique, first in the 
world history, the scientific paradigm of global peace from harmony during 10 
years. We have created seven books and 50 projects under this paradigm, which 
you in the ABC of Harmony (2012) rightly praised and appreciated as "our new 
planetary paradigm, the fundamental revolution in science and paradigm shift in 
human consciousness emerging … with great insight by Leo Semashko …" [ABC, 

Now we create the eighth book: "Global Peace Science (GPS), Scientific 
Revolution of Peace Thinking and etc. ...", the title of which was approved a 
year ago by the GHA in a whole, including you. No one in 10 years, including 
you, and all the GHA other great peacemakers, not named every a SINGLE 
scientist and ANY THEORY / CONCEPT / SCIENCE, able to compete with GPS. 

GPS from harmony is the GHA mission. Let GHA fulfill its mission as it wants. 
Do not suppress the freedom of our scientific thinking. Your aggressive attack 
on GPS was evaluated as an ideological war against GPS (and against GHA) and 
you have no one to support it. Anyone can participate in GPS within its 
paradigm and everyone is free to come out of it. You come out of it and 
rejected our five conditions of constructive cooperation. We respect your 

Please, respect our choice, respect our freedom of scientific work, respect our 
mission GHA, not suppress them, and do not attack us! We do not do that in 
relation to your Constitution, do not attack it aggressively as you GPS, not 
suppress your organization's mission, etc. You came out of GPS, so please 
release us from your aggression and suppression of our freedom, let us work the 
way we want to work and work for 10 years. Not prevent us from working! Not 

Your contribution to GPS (“in the light of all the work that has been done 
worldwide”, which we recognize in GPS) is only your aggressive attack against 
it, which has received a scientific analysis and evaluation in the relevant 
paragraph of 11 pages, which was discussed in the GHA and received support: we 
found no a objection to it. 

This is my last response to you. I will not repeat myself for the sixth time, 
sorry. I will not be like your squirrel in a wheel. Our pointless discussion 
with you, you have made an aggressive attack against GPS, is closed, excuse. 

Best harmony wishes,


----- Original Message -----
  From: Martin, Glen T, gmartin@xxxxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 9 июня 2014 г., 22:50:32
  Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global Peace 

Dear Leo,
There has been no change in my views or my intended contribution to the GPS 
book.  I have simple spelled out different aspects of my belief that all 
participants in GHA are contributors to a global peace science.  I do not 
believe they should be considered secondary to the “real” GPS that apparently 
will be promoted in the book you are working on.   Your contribution is 
important, but so is that of everyone else.  My comments on the first two 
chapters (that you requested) were intended to show the limitations of those 
chapters in the light of all the work that has been done worldwide in the area 
of global peace science.  I think the book should recognize this worldwide 
work.   That is all I have been saying.  I am hoping that this inclusive point 
of view can be recognized as my contribution to GPS.
Yours in peace and harmony,
Dr. Glen T. Martin
President, World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. 
President, Institute on World Problems (www.earth-constitution.org)
Professor of Philosophy and Chair, Peace Studies, Radford University 
Laureate, GUSI Peace Prize International
From: Leo Semashko [mailto:leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 1:48 AM
To: Martin, Glen T
Cc: peace-from-harmony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global 
Peace Science
Dear Glen,

In each letter you change your position as in a kaleidoscope. Each new one 
rejects previous. We do not understand the Brownian motion of your thoughts. 
Your letters does not give any constructive contribution to GPS. Therefore, the 
discussion with you makes no sense and good for GPS and we close it. We must 
get back to work with GPS and not spin like a squirrel in a wheel pointless. 

But we respect your choice and wish you to find the right direction and stay on 

I sincerely thank all participants in this debate and we are going back to work 
with GPS further. 

Best harmony wishes,


----- Original Message -----
  From: Martin, Glen T, gmartin@xxxxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 8 июня 2014 г., 15:10:54
  Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global Peace 

Dear Leo,
From the beginning I have never made a very strong separation between the 
Global Harmony Association and Global Peace Science.  I believe that “harmony” 
is not merely subjective and personal, that harmony can be studied and promoted 
among caring and thoughtful people, and that the Global Harmony Association is 
full of caring and thoughtful people.  Even love, as philosopher Errol E. 
Harris points out, that is, non-attached universal love (agapē), is rational 
and can be part of global peace science.   
When I think of GPS and this book, I think of all the wonderful contributions 
of its authors, contributing to our understanding and insights into peace and 
harmony. To me it is all global peace science and this includes the specific 
version of GPS that you have developed.   But your version of GPS, as important 
and brilliant as it may be, does not supersede or displace the contributions of 
all the other peace thinkers in GHA.   All of them together are giving us 
global peace science.
I support the book, but I do not wish to see the contributions of everyone else 
in GHA minimized or marginalized.  There are many dimensions of peace research 
going on in the world today, done by brilliant, caring, and reflective people.  
I do not wish to either implicitly or explicitly exclude the wonderful work 
being done worldwide today and pretend that there is a narrow version of GPS 
that displaces the important work they are doing.  That is neither scientific 
nor the way to world peace.
With best harmony wishes,
Dr. Glen T. Martin
President, World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. 
President, Institute on World Problems (www.earth-constitution.org)
Professor of Philosophy and Chair, Peace Studies, Radford University 
Laureate, GUSI Peace Prize International
From: Leo Semashko [mailto:leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2014 7:08 AM
To: Martin, Glen T
Cc: peace-from-harmony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global 
Peace Science
Dear Glen,

GHA and I cannot understand, what do you want in the end and ultimately? You 
have two alternatives.

The first alternative. If you do not want to cooperate with the GHA in creating 
GPS, please, write to us: "I do not want to participate in GPS and refuse to 
discuss and publish anything in its book on the motives that shown in my letter 
of May 28." It's your email, which is fully, on 100% negative, aggressive, 
hostile and destructive to GPS. It gives you a complete reasoned basis for such 
refusal. This frees both you and us from wasting time. Please, read carefully 
my answer on it in 11 pages..

The second alternative. If you want to cooperate with the GHA in creating GPS, 
we expect from you the following five practical things:

2.1. The confirmation of your positive judgments and estimates of 
Tetrasociology and ABC of Harmony as "our new planetary paradigm, the 
fundamental revolution in science and paradigm shift in human consciousness" 
[ABC, 298], as well as from your article here [ABC, 108-109] and other your 
positive comments about the importance of GPS, etc. We can cooperate with you 
only if you see any positive value of GPS. This does not exclude your 
constructive criticism, which is possible only in this case. If your valuation 
of GPS is on 100% negative, as in your letter of May 28, we cannot cooperate 
with you, as you are with us.

2.2. You send me your promised donation of one thousand dollars for global 
peace in the GPS book, like all of its co-authors on their possibility,  for 
its translation into two languages ​​(Russian and English, one page worth $ 30 
- total $12 000), to edit it (one page worth $ 20 - total $8000), for 
statistical studies of India and the U.S. ($4000) for its publication in two 
languages ​​(at least $6000 dollars) and so on.

2.3. You write your article in 2-3 pages with your constructive criticism of 
GPS as your rebuttal and clarification/correction of your letter of May 28.

2.4. You correct in this spirit your article about the Earth Constitution for 
GPS (see its constructive criticism in my answer to 11 pages).

2.5. You correct in this spirit your prospect of the Conference 2015: "The 
Building New World and Global Peace: Paradigms of Evolution of Consciousness 
and Social Harmony" (you could edit it) and put on the discussion in it the two 
alternative approaches as two alternative structures: 11 sectors of Barbara 
Hubbard (Evolution of Consciousness) and SOCIONOME (social genome of global 
harmony and peace) and SPHERONS of GPS. This will greatly enhance the 
scientific interest and meaning of your conference, strongly fresh its 
scientific contents and importance. I could send you my version of its 
prospect, if you want.(See in more details in my answer to 11 pages).

These five positive steps provide you and us with constructive cooperation, 
instead of endless bickering that you started in February of this year. I can 
engage in constructive cooperation, but I refuse to bicker. I will not respond 
to your emails of this nature - it is a waste of time. Do you agree with these 
five positive steps of our constructive cooperation?

So, you have two alternatives. Please let us know your choice, which we will 
respect. Thanks for the response. 

With love, best harmony wishes,


----- Original Message -----
  From: Martin, Glen T, gmartin@xxxxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 6 июня 2014 г., 18:52:23
  Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global Peace 

Dear Leo,
I do not think that hostility is in order.  You did ask for remarks about the 
first two chapters of the book, and my remarks were sincere, honest, and 
supportive, wishing the book the best of success.  Why do you consider these 
simple thoughts a “war against GPS”?   People in the world of peace studies and 
academia write thoughtful criticisms of one another’s work all the time.  This 
is the only way that human understanding and the pursuit of truth can move 
Jürgen Habermas calls this way of discussion a “dialogue directed toward mutual 
understanding.”   I think that is what our discourse on GHA and other public 
media should be.  We should be trying to mutually understand one another with 
the goal of harmony, peace, and global justice.   Please let us look at our 
dialogue this way, not as “war.”   I do not understand why you would think that.
You may publish my letter and your rebuttal as you like, but I think it would 
not promote either harmony or GPS to do so.  I was simply trying to request 
that you explain to everyone how GPS serves a “a new paradigm for global 
peace”.   If I have failed to understand how it does this, it is also likely 
that others have not understood how it does this either, even if they are 
hesitant to speak up.  
Instead of attacking my observations about what appears to be missing from GPS, 
please just explain to me and everyone, in comprehensible terms, what this new 
paradigm is.   If it is so esoteric that no one but you or a few people can 
understand it, how is it going to serve as a paradigm for global peace?
That is all I was asking.  Please let us engage in harmonious dialogue directed 
toward mutual understanding, not in acrimony, hostile remarks, and accusations 
of “war on GPS.”   If peace leaders cannot work in harmony and mutual 
understanding, how can we expect the rest of the world to do so?
Yours in peace,
Glen Martin
Dr. Glen T. Martin
President, World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. 
President, Institute on World Problems (www.earth-constitution.org)
Professor of Philosophy and Chair, Peace Studies, Radford University 
Laureate, GUSI Peace Prize International
From: Leo Semashko [mailto:leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 6:47 AM
To: Martin, Glen T
Cc: peace-from-harmony@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter + + The War against GPS: Global 
Peace Science
Dear members of the GHA, dear Glen,

I am happy to send you in attachment for your discussion within three days, 
until June 9, inclusively, a new paragraph of GPS (11 pages), devoted to the 
answer on Glen’s destructive criticism (see below). I consider it as the war 
against GPS. 

Before publishing our polemic, we will discuss it. Everything is said in this 
paragraph. I just want to emphasize one idea that can be a constructive way to 
restore the working relationship. It is as follows: We will publish your (Glen) 
letter and our response to it in the book and on the website. Are you able to 
publish these texts at least on your website for your students and your 
conference participants, to revive and to inspire them through scientific 
revolution of GPS at least in its criticism? 

Could you destroy our deep doubts on this score? Thank you,

With love, best harmony wishes,


Dr Leo Semashko:
State  Councillor  of  St.  Petersburg,
Philosopher, Sociologist and Peacemaker from Harmony;
Director:  Tetrasociology Public Institute, Russia;
Founding President, Global Harmony Association (GHA) since 2005;
Director, GHA Website "Peace from Harmony": www.peacefromharmony.org
Global Peace Science from Harmony: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=585 
In Russian: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=606;
World Interfaith Harmony Project on the ABC of Harmony Base:
GHA Program Book, The ABC of Harmony for World Peace:
GHA Peace Video: http://youtu.be/hbxY5lREOeA;
My Web page: www.peacefromharmony.org/?cat=en_c&key=253;
Address: 7/4-42 Ho-Shi-Min Street, St. Petersburg 194356, Russia
Phone: 7 (812) 597-65-71; Skype: leo.semahko
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/leo.semashko?ref=tn_tnmn

----- Original Message -----
  From: Martin, Glen T, gmartin@xxxxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 27 мая 2014 г., 23:23:08
  Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter

Dear Leo,
I wish you the best of luck with this book and promoting global peace science.  
But as someone who has been Chairperson for many years of a program in peace 
studies at this university, I have to say that GPS is not a panacea for world 
peace and it is very unlikely that the placing it at the beginning of this book 
is going to somehow make thoughtful and informed people subscribe to it.
As I wrote to you earlier (which resulted you’re your removing me as co-editor 
of the book),  none of the major themes that characterize the worldwide 
movement in peace studies appears in GPS.  There is no consideration of the 
vast contributions to understanding the violent dynamics of our world made by 
Max Weber, Immanuel Wallerstein, Jürgen Habermas, and others.  There is no 
consideration of the global ethics movement and the great amount of work done 
on defining global ethics on behalf of peace.   There is nothing about the 
theory and practice of nonviolence and the vast amount of work coming from the 
inspirations of Gandhi, King, Tolstoy, etc.  
Nor is there anything about the worldwide movement for the study and practice 
of nonviolent communication led my Marshall Rosenberg and others.   There is 
nothing substantive about the role of capitalism in the promotion of war, a 
literature spearheaded by Marx and continued by many others.  There is no 
analysis of totalitarianism, its forms and roles in war and violence, and the 
literature on that subject, led, for example, by Hannah Arendt.   There is 
nothing about the vast literature on human rights and human dignity and its 
contributions to creating peace and harmony.   Nor is there anything about the 
ethics of care and compassion and the literature around that theme.  What are 
all these scholars, working in all these fields, going to think about GPS?   I 
doubt very much if they are going to drop their own substantial work and flock 
to GPS.
Regarding GPS itself, it is not clear to me how the four societal spheres can 
be effectively and properly differentiated or what value it would be to 
approach society this way.   Each set of social information ?C humanitarian, 
instrumental (informational), organizational, and technical would seem to apply 
to all the spheres.  I can see gathering specific information for selective 
purposes defined by certain spheres, but how this contributes to peace is not 
apparent to me.
One can appreciate that these four functions are essential to society 
(humanitarian, informational, organizational, and technical), but recognizing 
this appears to me to be merely a descriptive feature of the interrelation of 
these.  However, I do not see these as classes of people but as functions that 
are often the domain of any one person: for example, I personally have 
humanitarian functions, informational functions, organizational functions and 
technical functions ?C as do many other people.  This categorization appears 
somewhat arbitrary and limited in its usefulness.
Nor do I see how study of these functions is going to lead to harmony or peace. 
 Historically society both nationally and internationally has been involved 
with much conflict, war, and violence.  I do not see any prescription here for 
changing things in ways that would promote peace.  Like the famous case of 
Adolph Eichmann, I may appear to have benign technical, organizational, etc., 
functions, but I am still part of a social machine dedicated to war, violence, 
and genocide.   
I can perhaps see how the sociology with multivariable and dimensions would be 
a good place for dialogue among social scientists and other thinkers.   But how 
is this going to get the world to peace?  What if my technical job is building 
nuclear weapons?    Am I in “disharmony” with something?   I do not see how the 
words “disbalance” or “disproportion” (that appear many times) are illuminating 
as to how we can achieve peace.   According to the definitions in the chapter, 
I could apparently be building weapons while in a state of social harmony.  
Neither do I find analysis of the institutions and motivations usually 
associated with war and violence:  I do not find any mention of multinational 
corporations, systems of exploitation, industrial-military complexes, 
militarized sovereign national security states, terror and counter-terror, 
undemocratic structures of governing, motives for imperialism, patterns of 
hate, fear, and ignorance, etc. ?C things that are most often taken as causes 
of war and impediments to be overcome through a process of both dialogue as 
well as structural changes.   What am I missing here?
     And as I said above, neither do I see mention of the positive things that 
are usually associated with the establishing of peace: conflict resolution, 
authentic democratic modes of governing, economic conversion to peaceful goods 
and services, dialogue directed toward mutual understanding, nonviolence in 
theory and practice, nonviolent forms of communication, economic and social 
justice, truth and reconciliation processes, respect for human rights and human 
dignity, etc.
In the literature of peace studies, analyses are often divided into structural 
dimensions (economic, social, and political systems that may support either war 
or peace) and psycho-social dimensions (people’s fears, emotions, moral 
convictions, attitudes, etc.).   How does Tetrasociology address transformation 
in each of these areas?  Just collecting data is not going to create peace.   
What are the ethical, structural, social, and psychological characteristics of 
a world peace system (as opposed to the present war-system)?   In these 
chapters, I see the word “harmony” appear over and over again, but its useage 
appears so vague and general that I do not see how it seriously addresses any 
of the above issues.
As I said above, I wish you the best of luck with this, but I do not think that 
GPS supplies any hitherto undiscovered secret about how to create peace in a 
complex world.  I am willing to bet that many people contributing papers to 
this volume have much to say that is ignored by GPS.  And I do not think it 
will not help the cause of peace if we fool ourselves into thinking we have a 
magic bullet.
My best harmony wishes to you and all the authors of this book.  We all 
sincerely want peace, but in the quest for peace and harmony we also must also 
remain faithful to truth, intellectual integrity, and the tradition of quality 
scholarship upon whose shoulders all peace researchers build.
Dr. Glen T. Martin
President, World Constitution and Parliament Assoc. 
President, Institute on World Problems (www.earth-constitution.org)
Professor of Philosophy, Radford University (www.radford.edu/gmartin)
Laureate, GUSI Peace Prize International
From: gha-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gha-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Leo Semashko
Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 7:59 AM
To: Prof. Dr. Timi Ecimovic
Cc: mulej@xxxxxxxxx; gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [gha] Re: 1st and 2nd Chapter
Dear Timi,

Thank you very much for your support of the GPS first chapters, their 
appreciation, congratulations and your corrections! But I read it the first 

As for your suggestions and corrections - they are acceptable in principle but 
we will look at the discussion in GHA and other suggestions. 

In this regard, I ask everyone, please, send your responses to ALL MEMBERS of 
GHA to the GHA address: gha@xxxxxxxxxxxxx. 

Is it possible for you? It would be more efficient. Thank you. 

With love, best harmony wishes,


----- Original Message -----
  From: Prof. Dr. Timi Ecimovic, timi.ecimovic@xxxxxxxxxxxx
  To: leo.semashko@xxxxxxxxx
  Sent: 26 мая 2014 г., 18:55:28
  Subject: 1st and 2nd Chapter

Dear Leo!
It is second time I am working on same issue. 
1.       General view ?C great work, nice presentation and profound innovation 
within the social sciences ?C please accept my congratulations.
2.       Let me comment on CREATION. Creation has got many meanings but most 
significant meaning is “God Creation” of everything including mankind. I am 
suggesting first sentence God created human…… to be: The Nature of the planet 
Earth allowed Homo sapiens to live within the Biosphere of the planet Earth. My 
sentence is not obligatory but possible solution.
3.       Global Peace Sciences is created by God’s will  - is creationism 
statement. I am suggesting following: Global Peace Science is summary of work 
of people of good will. The sentence is not obligatory but possible solution. 
4.       Preface: (Possible solution) Need, intent and conditions of the GPS 
Please it is not easy work to read 1st and second chapter, but my suggestion is 
to replace use of creation and like words with understandable simple words - 
work, evolution, reach, achievement etc.
My contribution is not obligatory and you dear Leo are free to do whatsoever 
you think is better for GHA.
Have a nice day!

*Prof Dr Dr h. c. Timi Ecimovic,
Korte 124
SI - 6310 Izola - Isola
Phone: ++ 386 5 64 21 360
E - mail: timi.ecimovic@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Home page: www.institut-climatechange.si 

Other related posts: