The Baloney Detection Kit

[_The Dude]

http://www.freedomfest.com/

From the link

Hear a Rabbi, a Christian, a Muslim, a Sikh and a Mormon defend their sacred scriptures, and debate the role of religion in a no-holds-bar roundtable with Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine and Scientific American.

It's a shame there won't be a Scientologist trying to defend Dianetics so that Dr. Peterson doesn't stand out as the biggest fool on the panel, trying to defend angels and gold plates. I feel really bad for him.

[_beastie]

I don't believe in magical rocks, either. I don't believe in Jaredite submarines, and I don't believe that a rock has the ability to read a language and provide a translation to the operator of that rock. I don't believe that any Latter-day Saint has any reason, scriptural or historical or otherwise, to believe such things.

You must believe that, at least once in history, God used a rock as a tool through which Joseph Smith was able to either see hidden treasures, and then later to translate the Book of Mormon.

Unless you believe the Book of Ether is a myth embedded in the Book of Mormon, then you do believe that Jaredites constructed some sea vessel that was able to travel underwater.

I think most people who believe in “magical” things don’t really think that the magic is inherent in that thing itself. They usually believe some sort of higher power – a God or perhaps an alien – bestowed some sort of power upon that thing, or uses it as a medium. So if you’re parsing on that point, it seems a bit of a semantic dodge.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Oh puleease! For sheer variety's sake, might I suggest that you try a different tack than suggesting that those who disagree with you necessarily fail to understand you or lack reasoning skills?

I'm bowing out of a discussion that strikes me as not very important, not very amusing, and, on the whole, a waste of my time.

Get mad if you like. Your choice.

It's a shame there won't be a Scientologist trying to defend Dianetics so that Dr. Peterson doesn't stand out as the biggest fool on the panel, trying to defend angels and gold plates. I feel really bad for him.

Sometimes you're not such a smugly condescending jackass.

You must believe that, at least once in history, God used a rock as a tool through which Joseph Smith was able to either see hidden treasures, and then later to translate the Book of Mormon.

Unless you believe the Book of Ether is a myth embedded in the Book of Mormon, then you do believe that Jaredites constructed some sea vessel that was able to travel underwater.

I think most people who believe in “magical” things don’t really think that the magic is inherent in that thing itself. They usually believe some sort of higher power – a God or perhaps an alien – bestowed some sort of power upon that thing, or uses it as a medium. So if you’re parsing on that point, it seems a bit of a semantic dodge.

See my response to Morrissey, above.

[_beastie]

You're nothing if not predictable.

[_Daniel Peterson]

LOL. And you're not?

I'm consistent. And I'm my own boss here. I don't feel the need to talk about everything you want to talk about when you want to talk about it just because you want to talk about it. So sorry.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Someone needs to email Shermer a link to DCP's postings on SHIELDS, so that Shermer will know what he's in for. I'm sure that Shermer would also be interested to know that The Good Professor has embarked on a project meant to prove the Resurrection.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Someone needs to email Shermer a link to DCP's postings on SHIELDS, so that Shermer will know what he's in for.

LOL. Malignant, as always, eh Scratchy? Gossip, spin, and character assassination. It never changes.

I'm sure that Shermer would also be interested to know that The Good Professor has embarked on a project meant to prove the Resurrection.

No I haven't. Remember, Scratchy, substance is not your strong point. You don't get things right. You're not good at this.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Someone needs to email Shermer a link to DCP's postings on SHIELDS, so that Shermer will know what he's in for.

LOL. Malignant, as always, eh Scratchy? Gossip, spin, and character assassination. It never changes.

What? It would just be a link, to an old friend. How is that "gossip, spin, and character assassination"? Surely you of all people can appreciate the harmlessness in just sending a link. In fact: I urge you to do so yourself. Think of it as a kind of "psyching out" of your opponent. You can show him how tough you'll be in the upcoming debate, thus giving yourself the upper hand.

[_Morrissey]

Oh puleease! For sheer variety's sake, might I suggest that you try a different tack than suggesting that those who disagree with you necessarily fail to understand you or lack reasoning skills?

I'm bowing out of a discussion that strikes me as not very important, not very amusing, and, on the whole, a waste of my time.

Get mad if you like. Your choice.

Mad???? Who is mad? Certainly not me. Why would I be mad? You are the one stalking off in a petulant huff, not me.

Perhaps it is not me who needs to work on his comprehension abilities.

It's a shame there won't be a Scientologist trying to defend Dianetics so that Dr. Peterson doesn't stand out as the biggest fool on the panel, trying to defend angels and gold plates. I feel really bad for him.

Sometimes you're not such a smugly condescending jackass.

Um, that was The Dude and not me. Am I still a smugly condescending jackass?

Does it occur to you that that's precisely how many people perceive you? Do you have any comprehension why? Does it matter to you? It seems to be a serious enough offense to you, as you use it to insult others, that one would think that you'd be concerned (and perhaps a bit mortified) to realize that this is precisely what others think of you.

[_beastie]

I'm consistent. And I'm my own boss here. I don't feel the need to talk about everything you want to talk about when you want to talk about it just because you want to talk about it. So sorry.

You are consistent in that the times when you actually deal with the topic being discussed, you refuse to clarify your comments when they appear at odds with LDS beliefs. We're left wondering if you were playing some sort of semantic game. You claim that the problem always lies with the reader in question - we simply are not capable of comprehending your points.

Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon through a peepstone. According to reports, words would appear on the stone. I think it's fair to refer to that as a magic stone.