by the way, if I am so intellectually dishonest, etc., etc., then why is that my findings vis-a-vis the KEP keep getting confirmed by the experts? Are they all intellectually dishonest, too?
Probably. You are relying strictly on a handful of Mormons, right? And we are supposed to be impressed that they have favored the most apologetically appealing conclusion that some idiot came up with? This proves how bankrupt their position really is if your pet dittograph argument is all they have to fall back on. They are those who are perfectly aware of the ramifications for the Church as well as their own faith, if the evidence proves Joseph Smith could not translate ancient documents. Which brings me to another point. We already know Joseph Smith could not translate Egyptian symbols. This is an established fact that you will never be able to change.
What about the forensics lab? Are you going to call their results intellectually dishonest?
Oh you mean Hauglid finally decided to take my advice and get forensics involved? Don't tell me, Skousen and a few others with bullet-proof testimonies, those are the "experts" who have been chosen to "verify" your findings?
Or are you just going to continue your three-year-long slide into utter irrelevance when it comes to the Book of Abraham controversy?
Little has changed since I was banned from MAD a few years ago. Virtually nothing has been published on the papyri issue. But I did spend quite a bit of time dissecting and decimating your idiotic arguments left and right, which you never had the balls to come forth and defend, probably because they appeared on forums that didn't give you lecturing authority as a "pundit."
Kevin, you have fallen so far behind in the discussion that it's sad...Yes, my observations concerning the interlinear insertion at Abr. 1:12 and the dittograph on page 4 of the same document have been confirmed by multiple "experts" in textual criticism and forensic document analysis. Skousen is the only I will name at present, but all will be named.
Again you prove how much of an arrogant idiot you really are if you think any field of expertise can "verify" your claim that an entire page was "dittographed" by accident. Nothing short of a time machine, by which someone can travel back and watch what the scribe was doing, can "verify" any of this. Abraham 1:12? You're still babbling about that and you think you have advanced the discussion? What "discussion"? I've read your sporadic posts over the past couple of years at MAD, but my favorite parts were when you managed to lure Brent into the thread and he'd then illustrate just how much of a moron you really are. Will, you are the best thing that has happened to critics of the Book of Abraham.
I decided to wait until someone publishes something on the matter before getting back into it, and all this time you have been begging for undeserved attention on the forums, demanding that we recognize your "relevance" by reminding us constantly that there are "experts" working hard to verify something that
you came up with. This is all ab out Will trying to stroke his ego. But no amount of ego stroking with change the fact that yo have been proved to be both dishonest and idiotic. If you really wanted to help bring credibility back to Book of Abraham apologetics, you'd bow out immediately.
And on at least these two significant points (which I have been arguing for almost three years now) my conclusions are going to be vindicated and the critics' arguments to the contrary will be proven false. And the bigger picture: the theory of KEPA #2 and #3 being simultaneous transcripts of an oral dictation will be shown to be entirely untenable.
Anyone dumb enough to believe this needs serious therapy. On several occasions I illustrated at least a half dozen compelling pieces of evidence supporting the simultaneous dictation scenario, and you have never dealt with any of them. Ever. But hey, you're "relevant," eh?
You tried to pump everyone up about Hauglid's FAIR presentation but he never dealt with them either. Instead, he flat out lied to his audience by pretending he had never heard of any evidences in favor of it. This is how you guys operate. This is how you keep fence straddlers on the fence. By pretending to be oblivious to any real evidence that contradicts your apologetic theories. You set out to make a mountain out of a piece of flimsy evidence and then pretend that if you get a handful of Mormon "experts" to rally to your side, then that means you've somehow addressed the mountain of evidence that contradicts your theory. From your bogus time line of the translation to the names of the people involved, you've made virtually every possible claim and error there is to make on the subject. I've got every post you've ever made on the subject saved in a file that I peruse whenever I feel the need to laugh.
