Dr. Peterson's FAIR Conference Talk

[Guest]

...the best way to stop nuisance emails is to simply ignore and delete them. With no reaction or response from you the sender should soon realise that their messages are either not getting through or not having the desired effect and eventually they should stop.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ ... mails.html

Peterson is reacting in the exact opposite way to which is advised for someone wanting the abusive e mails to stop.

[_Philo Sofee]

He can't actually show the evidence, it would destroy our faith in them. To actually see is a far lesser spiritual achievement than to be faithful in belief that they exist. Asking for the evidence is to brand one a skeptic. This just does not build one's spirituality... tis better to believe. The mantle is far, far greater than the intellect.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I'd still like to know if people have considered the notion that perhaps Peterson is sending himself these e mails.

Well, considering how poorly constructed they are I would guess they're fake. It's not uncommon for martyrs to need persecution and when none exists they just manufacture it in order to push their narrative.

One thing Mr. Peterson can't do, ever, under any circumstances, is to provide evidence for his many assertions. He just makes an assertion and let's it fly. He has enough followers who'll run with it, so there's no need for him to be genuine.

- Doc

[_Jersey Girl]

Thematically paralleled, my ass.

The one and only thematic parallel is that each email message and posts by Everybody Wang Chung on this board, are critical of DCP. As are most posts on this particular board, critical of DCP.

As an onlooker who has no actual horse in this race, I think I have the ability to look at this with a certain amount of perspective without getting lost in the tribal details.

That said, when I see DCP make such assertions or allegations regarding these email messages and this board (Everybody Wang Chung or whomever), I see a man striving to maintain his own relevance.

How? By reinforcing the construct that says, at least in part:

DCP is a target.
DCP is important.
DCP'S purpose is righteous.

That's why the anti's attack him, because--

Anti's are in sinful rebellion against the church because (and this is key)

The church is true.

You're welcome.
;-)

[_Jersey Girl]

Woops, I should have included in my above that while DCP strives to maintain his relevance, and to a larger extent, the relevance of the church itself, this board aids him in doing so.

If I were a stranger to this board looking in for the first time and noticing the number of DCP related threads down the front page alone, I would be under the immediate impression that this guy must be important.

In the grand scheme, and in an attempt to add a bit of perspective, the man is only relevant in a teeny tiny portion of space in this world. If DCP and mopologists, and this very board were a state measured by area alone, they'd be Rhode Island.

So the overall relevance isn't that great to begin with.

:-)

[_Philo Sofee]

Thematically paralleled, my ass.

The one and only thematic parallel is that each email message and posts by Everybody Wang Chung on this board, are critical of DCP. As are most posts on this particular board, critical of DCP.

As an onlooker who has no actual horse in this race, I think I have the ability to look at this with a certain amount of perspective without getting lost in the tribal details.

That said, when I see DCP make such assertions or allegations regarding these email messages and this board (Everybody Wang Chung or whomever), I see a man striving to maintain his own relevance.

How? By reinforcing the construct that says, at least in part:

DCP is a target.
DCP is important.
DCP'S purpose is righteous.

That's why the anti's attack him, because--

Anti's are in sinful rebellion against the church because (and this is key)

The church is true.

You're welcome.
;-)

You be one savvy woman, woman. Also because his celestial glory will be oh so much greater since he stood up to those nasty, mean evolutionists with aplomb. I mean, no personal reward? Fuhhhgiddd about it! I want something out of this! It is the deeply internal hope of apologists. I defended you and your church Lord, what are ya gonna give me for the work? They never seem to realize or think it would be so much more effective if the Lord considered it at all important to simply do it himself and have it done right and get on with it all. But, well, I digress.

[_Gadianton]

Nevo, if the email contents posted in this thread by Lemmie and Tom share the same voice, then the apologists have no grounds for believing the voices of Nephi and other Book of Mormon prophets are remarkably different.

[_Lemmie]

...That said, when I see DCP make such assertions or allegations regarding these email messages and this board (Everybody Wang Chung or whomever), I see a man striving to maintain his own relevance.

It seems as though Midgley agrees with you about needing attacks from the evil other in order to prove relevance. Here he is trying to help out:

Where is gemli? What professor Peterson has written above should provide an opportunity to belch out some of his atheist religious ideology, should it not?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterso ... 4150260512

[_Philo Sofee]

Midgley acts like he is still butt hurt that the Tanners were allowed to be alive in Salt Lake City and publish the historic truth while his church snowballed and black balled anyone who who taught that truth in lieu of the church's lies about their own history. What a clown he is. There is no Christ like love in that human/chimp. He so turns me totally off, I ought to focus on him rather than his cohort Dr. Peterson. He needs to be taken down a few notches. His arrogance is a stench upon the land. Too bad he doesn't blog.

[_Symmachus]

Remember when he was actually bragging about being in Nibley's Egyptian class, and they flew, literally FLEW through Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar, twice in one semster?! From Peterson's view point, this is just totally over the top impressive. From my take, I would have felt ripped off. Why not take a slow TWO years, and really learn the stuff in order to remember it and use it accurately? I mean, after all, how often has Peterson actually used Gardiner in anything he has written?

That's not really something to brag about. I mean, if at first you don't succeed, by all means try again, but don't tell everyone you didn't get any of it the first time and had to start over in the middle of the semester.

In January of 2018, Peterson again said he 'recognized' his anonymous emailer's characteristic style:
...
The problem is, I don't see anything similar between the style of the email above and the two I quoted in my previous post.

Are you sure there isn't any archaic syntax you missed?