BYU's John Clark -- Five year anniversary of being "ignored"

[_Runtu]

I am an apologist and I believe that the Book of Mormon has to be historical or it is false.

Uh-oh. You know what that means, don't you? You're one of those fundamentalist, black-and-white thinkers who is on the road to apostasy.

You'd better repent and become a postmodernist before it's too late.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Yes. I'm sure we all carefully noted how many ellipses you needed to use.

The original sentence is easily available for inspection, on this very thread. If I've fundamentally distorted what the original sentence said, my knavery will be readily exposed.

No. Your "knavery" is exposed in your endlessly futile attempts to try and save face by dodging very simple, direct questions.

by the way: Tell Bill Hamblin that I don't appreciate him telling lies about me on the MADboard.

[_silentkid]

If . . . you feel that I misrepresented you . . . I apologize.

I tried one of those apologies out at MAD once and Pahoran let me know how insincere it was.

First of all, I don't "dislike" FARMS all that much. Mostly, I just dislike the part of it that involves the kind of Mopologetics that you, Hamblin, Midgley & et al. engage in. But, you already knew that.

Great point, Scratch! I'd guess that most of the FARMS reviews/articles written by those 200 to 300 BYU professors are pretty innocuous. When I read through the latest editions of the FARMS review, there are only one or two articles that even interest me. I imagine that the professors I worked with felt the same way (they are biologists and aren't very interested in linguistic arguments and NHM and such). After all, apologetic attempts to defend magical thinking aren't going to persuade many scientists, even LDS scientists. They pointed out that they didn't appreciate the tone of certain writers. They didn't like the attack pieces. I first heard of the Metcalf is Butthead incident from a BYU professor, not an online message board.

[_Pokatator]

Dr. Dan owes Runtu an apology.

But hey, Newbies, you will never, ever, ever see that happen.

Newbies, watch and learn:

At 1:40 this afternoon, in this very thread, more than four and a half hours before Pokatator posted the comment cited above, I addressed the following to Runtu:

If . . . you feel that I misrepresented you . . . I apologize.

Dr. Dan I definitely apologize to you, I mistyped. I am definitely saving this exchange for future reference so I don't make this mistake again. I just have never seen you do this before.

This is a red letter day in Mormon apologetics.

[_Doctor Scratch]

I imagine that the professors I worked with felt the same way (they are biologists and aren't very interested in linguistic arguments and NHM and such). After all, apologetic attempts to defend magical thinking aren't going to persuade many scientists, even LDS scientists. They pointed out that they didn't appreciate the tone of certain writers. They didn't like the attack pieces. I first heard of the Metcalf is Butthead incident from a BYU professor, not an online message board.

Gee, how would they know about any of this? According to DCP, the BYU profs who dislike FARMS haven't even read a single page of FARMS material!

[_TAK]

Incidentally, there's also a terminological problem with what you seem to be trying to say: FARMS is a department of the Maxwell Institute. My project, the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative (or METI), is another department of the Maxwell Institute, separate from FARMS. Chipmunks and whales are both mammals, but it doesn't follow from that fact that chipmunks are whales..

And yet you are on the Executive Council that over sees both the chipmunks and the whales.. incredible !




~/)~~

[_Joey]

Well today is the official anniversary for Clark's infamous claim that was totally ignored off BYU campus.

Here it is again:

http://newnewsnet.BYU.edu/story.cfm/50535

I was told it really cost him amongst his professional peers!!!! So much so none have uttered a word about his claim and supporting works!!

[_Daniel Peterson]

Ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum ta dum.