More on the Financing of Mopologetics

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Did the moon landing take place on a Houston sound stage?

Absent absolutely definitive evidence to demonstrate them true, NASA's claims can always be doubted.

True enough, but at least we have photos, video, moon dust and rocks in support. With Watson's 2nd letter, we have nothing. Ergo, the problem.

[_Daniel Peterson]

at least we have photos, video,

Easily forged.

moon dust and rocks in support

Have you personally verified the lunar origin of the dust and rocks? Are you competent to do so?

Scientists can be bought, pal. How do you know they're not lying, like Evil Bill and me?

With Watson's 2nd letter, we have nothing.

You have the text, and you have the testimony of people who claim to have held and read the letter. That's not nothing.

In fact, it's rather like those alleged moon rocks. You have the testimony of people who claim to have held and tested the rocks.

But can you trust them?

Perhaps you'll respond that you've actually seen the moon rocks. (I have.) But you don't know that they're really moon rocks.

Aieeeeeee!

Ergo, the problem.

Your problem. And poor antishock8's. And perhaps Scratch's, if he really believes any of the stuff he says.

Who else has this problem? Nobody, really.

[_beastie]

So, DCP, do you actually believe that the majority of posters here think you're making tons of money in your apologetics?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

at least we have photos, video,

Easily forged.

Perhaps, but we couldn't even begin to determine whether the Watson 2nd letter is forgery because neither the original nor a copy exists.

moon dust and rocks in support

Have you personally verified the lunar origin of the dust and rocks? Are you competent to do so?

Competency is irrelevant to the veracity of the Watson 2nd letter because it doesn't exist in order to be examined.

Scientists can be bought, pal. How do you know they're not lying, like Evil Bill and me?

Finally, a real admission.

With Watson's 2nd letter, we have nothing.

You have the text, and you have the testimony of people who claim to have held and read the letter. That's not nothing.

The "text" means nothing without the actual letter -- again, this is the very reason Watson put the blessed "text" in writing, with his signature, and on Office of FP letterhead. And since the mysterious "text" directly contradicts the text in his prior letter (of which a copy DOES exist), then you damn well ought to prove it up, my dear scholar.

Ergo, the problem.

Your problem. And poor antishock8's. And perhaps Scratch's, if he really believes any of the stuff he says.

Who else has this problem? Nobody, really.

Actually, it's the problem of the supposed scholar who cites a non-extant letter to establish that Watson (and the Brethren) have changed the position on the issue. Perhaps you're willing to overlook shoddy scholarship, but that doesn't mean the rest of us are.

[_Daniel Peterson]

So, DCP, do you actually believe that the majority of posters here think you're making tons of money in your apologetics?

No. I suspect that even Scratch himself has quietly abandoned his suggestion that I receive something in the mid-six-figures from the Church. (Who knows what poor antishock8 thinks?)

But that has long not been the issue.

[_beastie]

No. I suspect that even Scratch himself has quietly abandoned his suggestion that I receive something in the mid-six-figures from the Church. (Who knows what poor antishock8 thinks?)

But that has long not been the issue.

It appears to be a quite significant issue on MAD, given how many people are repeating the "wads of cash" phrase. Most of those people do not bother to read threads over here and just rely on the accounts of others. For some reason, the emphasis on what is the real issue has become distorted. Ironically, this has occurred along with crows about the lack of reading comprehension on the part of posters here.

[_Daniel Peterson]

It appears to be a quite significant issue on MAD, given how many people are repeating the "wads of cash" phrase.

That was Gadianton's phrase. He may not have received Scratch's memo about my supposed mid-six-figure annual Mopologetic salary.

[_Chap]

Did the moon landing take place on a Houston sound stage?

Absent absolutely definitive evidence to demonstrate them true, NASA's claims can always be doubted.

This one is actually looking a bit more like the gold plates business.

Perhaps an angel took the letter from Hamblin's office in order to test our faith in BYU academics. Such things have happened, we are assured.

Or perhaps he did it so the terminally bored can enjoy the continual delight of DCP's unique wit and repartee, and be given a whole new reason for living. DCP and Antishock make a great comedy duo, don't they? They were made for each other.

(Professor! Maimonides is calling you ... it's what they pay you to do, remember? Every moment another brain cell you will never get back is popping into oblivion)

[_cksalmon]

Did the moon landing take place on a Houston sound stage?

Absent absolutely definitive evidence to demonstrate them true, NASA's claims can always be doubted.

The sound stage was in Southern Nevada. Duh.

[_Daniel Peterson]

(Professor! Maimonides is calling you ... it's what they pay you to do, remember? Every moment another brain cell you will never get back is popping into oblivion)

Good point.

I can only let myself go with such reckless abandon today because I know that I'll be off the boards altogether for the next eight days, starting tomorrow morning. (Actually, because of bishop's interviews, effectively starting tonight.) And I'll have little else with me but a dual-language Arabic/English text (not Maimonides, but Qadi ‘Abd al-Jabbar's Critique of Christian Origins) to edit and a few books to read.