DiscussMormonism.com

Can someone who witnessed Gee's presentation fill us in on the details?

Gee spent a portion of his presentation claiming that Andrew Cook and Chris Smith made a mistake in their calculations on the length of the papyri. When asked what that was in the Q&A, his response: Cook and Smith made the mistakes, they to find and correct the mistakes themselves.

Is there or will there be video of this somewhere?
Who was the brave soul who dared ask this question?

Suddenly it all comes to me - is John Gee Droopy?

I'd especially like to hear from anyone who was impressed by Gee's remarks and, like Bill Hamblin, has a "high degree of confidence" that Gee/Schryver are right and Cook/Smith are wrong concerning the missing papyrus. What specific insights did you gain from Gee's talk that enabled you to see Cook/Smith's "mistakes"?

Q&A for FAIR presenters are done by written questions handed in during the presentation.

I spent several minutes afterwards attempting to get an answer from Gee, who repeatedly refused. He finally (seeming to pull this from his rear) said it was a scalar issue and that Cook would know what he was referring to.

I just barely mentioned this to Cook a few minutes ago who confirmed that Gee was making it up, and that a scalar would have no bearing on anything.

Also, the next issue of Dialogue will have a response from Cook, who squashes Gee's rants.

The only specific information given by Gee about our alleged error was that "It's a scalar issue. But you won't know what that means."

CaliforniaKid wrote:The only specific information given by Gee about our alleged error was that "It's a scalar issue. But you won't know what that means."

You should count yourself lucky that your problem is not a vector issue. (Those are even less understandable and I hear they can be a real b!!ch.)

Hate to say it, but sounds as if John Gee may have been taking lessons in academic courtesy and protocol from Will Schryver.

___________________________

ETA: Serious question: have any Egyptian funerary papyri been found that are significantly larger (longer) that the extant Joseph Smith papyri? If not (and I think not but don't know for sure) how can Gee reasonably stand on the assumption that the original Joseph Smith papyri unrolled to room (rooms) length?

Gee to Cook/Smith: my presentation can beat up your presentation. Neener neener

Does this pass as Mormon scholarship?

the narrator wrote:Q&A for FAIR presenters are done by written questions handed in during the presentation.

Does the speaker have to respond to all of them or just the ones he chooses?

I spent several minutes afterwards attempting to get an answer from Gee, who repeatedly refused. He finally (seeming to pull this from his rear) said it was a scalar issue and that Cook would know what he was referring to.

I just searched for "scalar" in our paper but "the search item was not found". I know what a scalar is but I'm afraid I don't know what Gee is referring to. Could someone please ask him to clarify?

Guys, the thinking has been done, now get in line. If Gees says Cook/Smith made a mistake, then they made a mistake. Don't pester him with irrelevant questions about what exactly the mistake was!

You people have truly given your souls to the service of Satan.

I do not know of any conference or journal where this sort of paper would pass the cfp review rigor.