From ''Glass & Steel in the Book of Mormon, why a problem?''

[_Tobin]

No one is saying it was easy. WE are not also talking about solid iron except maybe with Meteoric iron.

That IS what we are talking about. Please try to keep up.

This must be your new thing to whine about.

LOL that's the best you can come up with. I notice you haven't disagreed with it. :)

Ok, let me clarify, you WHINE a lot. Better?

Ah, I see you finally agree they did have high heat and you have moved on to missing bellows now. Congratulations. At least that is progress, even though you disppointingly end up whining in the end.

So now you are going to openly lie. Nice going. I guess when you haven't got a good argument, one has to lie and make insults like whining.

And yet you don't dispute they did have high heat available. Your position is now, no bellows. All whining aside.

It's your theory that the text states there was an iron age. You seem to missing some parts there buddy.

The only thing missing is iron smelting in Meso-America. As to the iron age, you would have to give us your definition of it. I only showed the text brings up iron use numerous times. This is the point of the thread, that the text is anachronistic. You still seem to miss that.

And as I have explained ad nauseum, these were specialized uses, so there was no iron age.

Which is a straw-man. I showed they would need this knowledge with the text. You were the one who now suggested the primarily religious text should be giving details of how they got the iron ore. LOL

You claim the text describes and iron age. Where's your evidence in the text of extensive mining?

[_Themis]

Ok, let me clarify, you WHINE a lot. Better?

You've lost when you have to resort to insults.

Ah, I see you finally agree they did have high heat and you have moved on to missing bellows now. Congratulations. At least that is progress, even though you disppointingly end up whining in the end.

Lying and insults now. I never said they had high heat technology. We have show you they clearly did not. Have you no idea what high heat we are talking about.

And as I have explained ad nauseum, these were specialized uses, so there was no iron age.

Yet you don't back it up with evidence, just simple assertion. I understand why. Assumption A.

You claim the text describes and iron age. Where's your evidence in the text of extensive mining?

You can state iron age all you want. Not going to respond to your BS. I have shown the text says they did use iron, and the words that go with it are more in line with being common then rare.

[_Tobin]

You've lost when you have to resort to insults.

It's not an insult, just an observation. Think of it as sock puppets.

Lying and insults now. I never said they had high heat technology. We have show you they clearly did not. Have you no idea what high heat we are talking about.

Denial inspite of having been provided proof of ceramics created in 1000BC using high heat kilns at 900C. Now who is lying?

Yet you don't back it up with evidence, just simple assertion. I understand why. Assumption A.

That is why I say you are whining. Your position that the text describes an iron age despite the lack of any archeological evidence is disingenuous at best. It simply can't be taken seriously.

[_Runtu]

Interesting that we bring up high heat technology. It's hard to believe you did not understand that this meant temperatures hot enough to melt iron. You bring up the Olmec and ceramics, and what temperatures they used to produce them, which is about 600 degrees less then what is needed for iron, and then say we are lying. LOL

And that's in degrees Centigrade, or almost 1100 degrees Fahrenheit short of the temperature needed to melt iron.

Not at all. My position is the text describes iron use, and uses words to indicate more then a rarity that you want to believe. This makes the text anachronistic no matter how you slice it, since no iron or high heat technology to melt iron has ever been found. This is the point of the thread you still seem to miss.

The Book of Mormon describes the use of iron and steel for weapons and tools and explains the method used (smelting). There's no evidence for any of that, which is, of course, the point.

[_Tobin]

I am unaware...

Enough said. Trotting out the same old tired and broken arguments and reasoning does not impress me at all. Just like your statement that kilns are the same as open fire pits. You lack any sort of scruples what-so-ever. You are intellectually dishonest. You lack any level reflection nor do have any regard for the facts, historical or otherwise. You distort commonly understood concepts and terms. You insist that your interpretation of religious texts is the only correct one; and the sheer height of your arrogance is truly spectacular to behold. Themis, I might enjoy discussing things with you if you said anything that was compelling, honest, or thoughtful in any way. This is not the case.

[_Themis]

I am unaware...

Enough said. Trotting out the same old tired and broken arguments and reasoning does not impress me at all. Just like your statement that kilns are the same as open fire pits. You lack any sort of scruples what-so-ever. You are intellectually dishonest. You lack any level reflection nor do have any regard for the facts, historical or otherwise. You distort commonly understood concepts and terms. You insist that your interpretation of religious texts is the only correct one; and the sheer height of your arrogance is truly spectacular to behold. Themis, I might enjoy discussing things with you if you said anything that was compelling, honest, or thoughtful in any way. This is not the case.

Still can't address the evidence. I understand your dishonesty is driven by assumption A. Let me ask this question. Did you understand when Runtu and others brought up high heat technology in a thread discussing iron smelting, that it meant temperatures high enough to smelt iron. If yes, do you agree that the Olmec did not obtain high enough temperatures to smelt Iron. You accuse us of lying, yet it seems to me you are the one being dishonest.

[_Runtu]

Still can't address the evidence. I understand your dishonesty is driven by assumption A. Let me ask this question. Did you understand when Runtu and others brought up high heat technology in a thread discussing iron smelting, that it meant temperatures high enough to smelt iron. If yes, do you agree that the Olmec did not obtain high enough temperatures to smelt Iron. You accuse us of lying, yet it seems to me you are the one being dishonest.

I don't understand why he's so unwilling to engage the evidence. You and I have laid out our argument rather clearly, and what he responds with has nothing to do with it. I think this may be an exercise in futility.

[_ludwigm]

I don't understand why he's so unwilling to engage the evidence.

Tobin has his fifteen old, respectable men. He believes them.
And You are the donkey...

I think this may be an exercise in futility.

Abandon all hope, who enter here.

[_bcspace]

Nevermind.

[_Shulem]

Tobin,

I think you're kind of acting like a baby. Not trying to insult you but you should just address the issue and make your points without all the snide remarks. Save those remarks for the end after you've presented your case and have fully responded to the questions put to you.

Thanks,

Paul O

PS. What is the king's name written in the writing of Facsimile No. 3? Is there really a king's name like Joe Smith said? I can't read it. Could Joe really read Egyptian? What's up with that?