Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

TAK wrote:I don't think Anderson's book and witnesses that saw with spiritual eyes is going to help with that case of logic...

Have you read it?
_Lamanite
_Emeritus
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Lamanite »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
Lamanite wrote:Can you tell me how I might obtain a copy of this study?

It's time for the infamous FARMSite mind trick:

Eeevil FARMS Review editor: This is not the kind of study you want to read.

Lamanite: "Never mind. This is not the kind of study I want to read."

Eeevil FARMS Review editor: You would rather watch Dan Peterson on BYU-TV while writing out a check to the Maxwell Institute and sending it in via the Institute's clandestine and secretive fundraiser, Ed Snow.

Lamanite: "I think I'll see if there's something with Dan Peterson on BYU-TV. And maybe I'll write out a check to the Maxwell Institute and send it in via the Institute's clandestine and secretive fundraiser, Ed Snow."

Eeevil FARMS Review editor: Heheheheh. Another mind neutralized! Another virtual lobotomy! Our fiendish plan of concealing our fundraising by publicizing it works just as well as our scheme to ensure that the Sheeple remain unaware of Brethren-unapproved books by reviewing those books! We need not fear the Scratch/Kishkumen/Gadianton Tri-Unity. It cannot stop us!



I really thought you were going to tell me where to find it. That was somewhat of a let down for me.

May I counter with a Tongan mind trick:

Lamanite: I will seriously beat you if you do not tell me where to find the study.

Brother Peterson: Let me put down the Krispy Kreme and I'll tell you White House....

Lamanite: Severe right hook to the eye socket before the donut hit the table.

Brother Peterson: *severeal birds appear to be circling over his head*

I still don't know where to find the study.

Big UP!

Lamanite to Peterson: You will hire me as you're first Tongan research assistant and you will provide me with a large portion of the FAIR war chest!!!
_Lamanite
_Emeritus
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Lamanite »

Daniel Peterson wrote:This is where you find it:

http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/papbyrecent.dtl



I should have put some smiley emoticons in there or something. :wink: Thanks.


Now about that research assistant position....you wouldn't let my inability to find the oxford study influence your decision on whether or not I can find other import junk would you?

Threat of violence retracted!

Big UP!

Lamanite
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Lamanite wrote:
Daniel Peterson wrote:This is where you find it:

http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/papbyrecent.dtl



I should have put some smiley emoticons in there or something. :wink: Thanks.


Now about that research assistant position....you wouldn't let my inability to find the oxford study influence your decision on whether or not I can find other import junk would you?

Threat of violence retracted!

Big UP!

Lamanite


Lamanite,

For the time being, you need to either subscribe to the journal or do a one-time pay per view deal that costs $28.00. I noticed on the pinned thread (in this forum) that Uncle Dale mentioned pirated copies online.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
TAK wrote:that's where FARMS scholarship belongs - Jr Sunday School..

Zing!

I am hurt. . . . I am sped.
Ay, ay, a scratch, a scratch; marry, 'tis enough.
No, 'tis not so deep as a well, nor so wide as a
church-door; but 'tis enough,'twill serve: ask for
me to-morrow, and you shall find me a grave man. I
am peppered, I warrant, for this world.
Help me into some house, Benvolio,
Or I shall faint. A plague o' both your houses!
They have made worms' meat of me: I have it,
And soundly too: your houses!


How DARE thee mangle Shakespeare where I can see it! Arrogant knave, stand down and get thy literate self on topic!

(You could have squeezed this into the topic somehow via the Shakespeare/KJV=LDS scripture route. Just a hint. ;-)
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Jersey Girl
_Emeritus
Posts: 34407
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 1:16 am

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Jersey Girl »

Daniel Peterson wrote:A solid historical case would be a good start.


From a historical perspective, what's missing?
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
_Lamanite
_Emeritus
Posts: 261
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2008 9:07 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Lamanite »

Jersey Girl wrote:


For the time being, you need to either subscribe to the journal or do a one-time pay per view deal that costs $28.00. I noticed on the pinned thread (in this forum) that Uncle Dale mentioned pirated copies online.


How the hell am I supposed to leave the Church if Oxford won't provide the smoking gun????

Like Oxford really needs my money.

Lamanite

bad form Oxford.
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

Jersey Girl wrote:From a historical perspective, what's missing?

Have you read Matt Roper's analysis of the question?

Or you might even consult Dan Vogel's demolition of the Spalding theory, here on this very board. (Yes, Virginia, there was once a substantive exchange on MDB.)
_cinepro
_Emeritus
Posts: 4502
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 10:15 pm

Re: Jockers et al. (2008) study. What more is needed? (S/R)

Post by _cinepro »

Daniel Peterson wrote:A solid historical case would be a good start.


If any theory about the Book of Mormon needs a "solid historical case" for a start, I have bad news for you Dr. Peterson.

I would suggest that the Spalding/Ridgon Theory doesn't need a "solid historical case" so much as it needs some really, really dedicated believers that can make a historical case for it, ignore evidence to the contrary, and find internal "evidences" in the text after poring over the Book for years.
Post Reply