Confirmation of Developments?

[_RockSlider]

--@Beastie, I hope so, too, though as others have pointed out, this "informant" was quite anxious to see that the information be made public, and I think that measures have been taken to keep everything in the clear. Dan sent the message to close to 20 people, knowing full well that the MI "leaks like a sieve."
...
--The bit about him being out of the country is interesting. Does it mean that, had he been in Provo, he would have been able to offer up more opposition, or tap into his connections more efficiently?

If all of this is true, the leak must have been intended. In any real business, matters of this kind would have never been addressed outside of a private face to face meeting.

As Liz pointed out, it appears that Bradford's initial letter was addressed only to Dan and may have been based on Dan's skipping out on just such a private meeting.

[_Doctor Scratch]

--@Beastie, I hope so, too, though as others have pointed out, this "informant" was quite anxious to see that the information be made public, and I think that measures have been taken to keep everything in the clear. Dan sent the message to close to 20 people, knowing full well that the MI "leaks like a sieve."
...
--The bit about him being out of the country is interesting. Does it mean that, had he been in Provo, he would have been able to offer up more opposition, or tap into his connections more efficiently?

If all of this is true, the leak must have been intended. In any real business, matters of this kind would have never been addressed outside of a private face to face meeting.

As Liz pointed out, it appears that Bradford's initial letter was addressed only to Dan and may have been based on Dan's skipping out on just such a private meeting.

It sounded like Bradford had tried to resolve the issues surrounding the Review, but that DCP just ignored him and took off on this trip.

[_DrW]

I agree that locking the blog thread without denial or comment is a clear confirmation.

Wow.

I hope Scratch's informant isn't at risk in some way.

Besides locking two threads on the subject, they have also deleted at least one comment in another thread asking about it.

Kind of reminds me of the days when those behind the Iron Curtain would read Pravda because they were expected to do so, and listen to VOA (when it was not being jammed) to get the real story.

Now it's the Zion Curtain, the MADBoard (or Deseret News), and MDB.

[_Jason Bourne]

I agree that locking the blog thread without denial or comment is a clear confirmation.

Wow.

I hope Scratch's informant isn't at risk in some way.

It is starting to look that way. However, I disagree. if the informant leaked this I hope there are repurcussions to them. What they have done has been and is unethical. If they worked for me I would fire their ass in two seconds.

[_Kevin Graham]

I agree that locking the blog thread without denial or comment is a clear confirmation.

Wow.

I hope Scratch's informant isn't at risk in some way.

It is starting to look that way. However, I disagree. if the informant leaked this I hope there are repurcussions to them. What they have done has been and is unethical. If they worked for me I would fire their ass in two seconds.

Not necessarily (Moderator Note)in real life information removed. If the informant was on Dan's email list, then he is free to share anything Dan sends him. There is nothing unethical about it since Dan was clearly hoping to get as much attention from this as he could, because he obviously thinks he is on the right, fighting the good fight, and he wants to recruit supporters. I mean why send it out to 18 people, as if it were any of their business? In so doing, he made it their business.

[_Kevin Graham]

Dan says his wife predicted something like this would happen, but how far back did they see this coming? This might explain Dan's sojourn into the blogosphere, where he continues to lampoon critics while denying commentary from his readers.

It seems Dan can leave us, but he can't leave us alone.

[_LDSToronto]

I agree that locking the blog thread without denial or comment is a clear confirmation.

Wow.

I hope Scratch's informant isn't at risk in some way.

It is starting to look that way. However, I disagree. if the informant leaked this I hope there are repurcussions to them. What they have done has been and is unethical. If they worked for me I would fire their ass in two seconds.

The informant isn't necessarily an employee of the Maxwell Institute or BYU. To me, this is no different than when the media quotes an anonymous source.

H.

[Guest]

Kind of reminds me of the days when those behind the Iron Curtain would read Pravda because they were expected to do so, and listen to VOA (when it was not being jammed) to get the real story.

Now it's the Zion Curtain, the MADBoard (or Deseret News), and MDB.

Sometimes I've compared Mormonism and the early socialist world of the 50's.

It was booed by TBMs and neglected by others. I experienced both system, have the basis to evaluate their attributes.

OK, the ideologies are at the opposite ends of the scale. The actuators are the same and identical.
They are gazing different direction...



by the way We had not only the VOA. We had a station called Free Europe.

In the military college, on the radios the button of short wave was weeded out.
As prospective radar technicians, we had screwdrivers...

[_Tobin]

Kind of reminds me of the days when those behind the Iron Curtain would read Pravda because they were expected to do so, and listen to VOA (when it was not being jammed) to get the real story.

Now it's the Zion Curtain, the MADBoard (or Deseret News), and MDB.

Sometimes I've compared Mormonism and the early socialist world of the 50's.

It was booed by TBMs and neglected by others. I experienced both, have the basis to evaluate the attributes.

OK, the ideologies are at the opposite ends of the scale. The actuators are the same and identical.
They are gazing the opposite direction...



by the way We had not only the VOA. We had a station called Free Europe.

In the military college, on the radios the button of short wave was weeded out.
As prospective radar technicians, we had screwdrivers...

I think you'd find that early Mormonism was very socialist actually. It kept the politburo (the brethren), but gave up on the socialism.

[_degaston]

Look, Dr. Peterson is a wonderful guy. I don't always agree with what he writes or edits but there's a lot I don't agree with amongst good men who choose to be lightning rods.

This place has been terrible to him, and the assault is usually carried on by cowardly anonymous posters. People who should know better. Lawyers and academics and more.

I hope you're happy, Kish, sitting there in the safety of your ivory tower of Classicism and doing the anonymous thing that most of your treasured ancients would find despicable. I will wager that you were in Hypatia's mob.

Dr. Peterson can only blame himself on the criticisms he's gotten and the troubles coming his way. Playing the blame game will do him no good and will only make him, the church, and his apologists look bad. As an Apologist he and his cohorts have done plenty to destroy the church's ability to attract and retain converts. If only they had boldly defended the church's historical teachings and point out how the so-called scientists are "getting it wrong" then he'd have fared better. Instead he took the approach that led me and others to conclude that these apologists think that the historical GAs were misguided and that the so-called scientists might actually have some credibility/knowledge in their theories that undermine the teachings of Joseph Smith, other early Mormon leaders, and their sources (such as the Angel Moroni). And where he and any future apologists will really fail is if they don't do a good job on pointing out how the current church leaders (i.e. the men sustained as prophets, seers, revelators) are transparently and honestly addressing the real issues of the critics that cause many people to leave the church. The biggest selling point of the church is how its led by living prophets who get current revelation on today's biggest issues. And is there anyone who can doubt that the biggest issue facing the church's growth are whatever issues are bothering the people who leave and the people who seriously investigate but then stop investigating? I hope we can all get past the lies told in the past that the real reasons almost all people leave (or don't join) are because they are either lazy, sinners, or offended. Anyone in the apologetics leadership who doesn't start off with that foundation is doomed to failure and loss of respect from everyone.

For example, I consider a personal email I got from a recent past president of the BYU Alumni Association while he was serving as the association's president but he wrote this as a Bishop to me as a member who was on his Ward roster: 'You [Degaston] obviously have strong feelings about "evidences" of the truthfulness of the church. The issue of DNA is a particularly interesting one. My discussions with world experts only strengthens by belief in the history of the Book of Mormon. I'd love to visit with you about that, but leave it up to you.' I found it quite shallow of him to say "my discussions with world experts only strengthens my belief in the history of the Book of Mormon" as he was quite generic and I had made it pretty clear to him that I had studied this matter quite extensively. Who are these "world experts" and what specifically have they written? That's the problem with ambiguities and how it just destroys the church's reputation. They need to be specific and then they might get respect. In the meantime they deserve all the scrutiny they're getting and they have nobody to blame but themselves for all this.