DiscussMormonism.com

Prof. P. has weighed in in a definitive way:

Daniel Peterson wrote:A blog post from my friend and colleague William Hamblin has just appeared, responding to a certain strain of criticism directed against our friend and colleague John Gee.

I might add here that, just as this strain of criticism against Dr. Gee is false, several criticisms leveled at my defense of Dr. Gee’s graduate work at Yale, though they appear to have taken on a life of their own in certain quarters, are substantially incorrect. My statements defending my former student and current colleague against unjust and factually untrue claims about his experience in graduate school have been irresponsibly ripped from their original context in order, through distortion, to blacken my character. Just for the record.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeterson/

DCP complains about what he sees are attempts to "blacken" his character unfairly. He rails against guilt by association.

Then he makes a point of telling his readers that he attends events like Les Misérables and a performance of Friedrich Schiller’s Mary Stuart with his good friends Will and Belinda Schryver.

After the conclusion of Les Misérables yesterday, we had dinner with our good friends Will and Belinda Schryver and then attended a performance of Friedrich Schiller’s Mary Stuart, which neither of us had ever seen or read before.

John Gee and Will Schryver - just the kind of "A" list folks any good apologist would want to make sure everyone knew they were close friends with.

Is it just me, or has DCP substantially lowered the bar when it comes to his incessant name dropping?

So, Daniel denies insinuating that Dr. Ritner acted inappropriately toward Gee?

What exactly are the false charges? And what kind of credibility does Peterson have regarding the Gee and Ritner situation that anyone should take his claims at face value?

It was my understanding that Dr. Peterson was warned by Ritner that he should stop lying about Ritner online, lest he find himself in court. Am I wrong about that?

This tag-team buffoonery by Hamblin and Peterson is lamentable. It's like sitting through Plan 9 from Outer Space. It totally blows, but darn it if you fight getting out of your seat, being unable to decide whether it is just too humiliating to imagine the filmmakers taking their work seriously, but also finding the catastrophe is just too compelling to ignore altogether.

It is almost beyond belief.

I can't speak for others, but I've never insinuated that Gee isn't a legitimate Egyptologist or that he lacks credibility in the field.

I have pointed out that Dan repeatedly attempted to smear Robert Ritner by alleging that Ritner had done something terrible to Gee whilst the latter was studying under the former, which (according to Peterson and Gee) led to Ritner having been forcibly removed from Gee's dissertation committee. And that's pretty easy to document:

"It would be the same John Gee who, having suffered much at the hands of Robert Ritner (in ways that no doctoral candidate should have to), successfully petitioned his department to have Ritner replaced as his doctoral advisor, and who then, under the direction of the eminent Yale Egyptologist William Kelly Simpson, proceeded to earn a Ph.D. Yes, it would be that one." - Daniel C. Peterson posting under his "Logic Chopper" alias, 11/20/2002

"Did you know that Dr. Ritner was Gee's dissertation chairman at Yale -- until, after a lengthy period of immense and growing dissatisfaction, Gee successfully petitioned Yale to have Dr. Ritner removed and another person substituted? Such things are not common at Yale." - Daniel C. Peterson posting under his "FreeThinker" alias, 10/31/2003

"RC, there is a 'chip' [on Ritner's shoulder]. There are personal issues, interpersonal issues, and a history here. It didn't begin with Professor Ritner's 'preliminary article online.'

I really don't want to get into this. (I don't know all of it myself, but I've been privy to some of it for quite a few years now, John Gee being a former student of mine with whom I kept in contact over the years before he returned from Berkeley and Yale to BYU, and I know rather more than I wish I did.) Perhaps it will all come out some day. Perhaps it won't. But don't presume that you know the whole story." - Daniel C. Peterson, 9/29/2004

"Professor Ritner was once Professor Gee's dissertation chairman at Yale University, until he was removed from that position and replaced by another professor. There is a personal history here (of which I was aware as it played out, since Professor Gee had been a student of mine before he went off to graduate school at Berkeley and then Yale." - Daniel C. Peterson posting at MADB, 3/22/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

"I also will not comment on his removal from my dissertation committee other than to note that it was the department's decision to do so. There is much more to the story than what Professor Ritner has chosen to tell." - John Gee (from an e-mail provided by Dan Peterson), 3/23/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

"Perhaps you're unaware that Professor Gee (successfully) petitioned his department at Yale to have Professor Ritner replaced as chairman of his doctoral committee. Such requests are not commonly made. And they are not commonly granted. Do you think they're best buddies?" - Daniel C. Peterson posting at MADB, 6/10/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

Full context is available for the first three examples where he did this, and it doesn't exonerate him. The only reason context isn't available for the last three examples is because the MADB/MDDB mods deleted the threads.

Upon being notified of the above statements, Ritner responded (June 2007):

"Dear Mr. Graham,

Thank you for the kind and informative note. My response to Gee's relevant academic output will be contained in the book edited by Brent. Gee has been increasingly visible, but not increasingly respected, at meetings. I do not know Mr. Peterson, nor how he would have any knowledge of my involvement with Gee's dissertation (except through misrepresentations by Gee himself), but I am the one who rejected further participation in Gee's work, and I signaled many errors in his work as a reason. If Mr. Peterson continues to make false allegations, I may have to consider a slander or libel lawsuit. In any case, whoever he is, he is neither competent nor legally authorized to discuss the private matter. I have retained my dated correspondence and may put it on-line if such misrepresentations continue.

Sincerely,
Robert Ritner"

Even if Ritner had really done what Peterson and Gee alleged of him, it would still be highly unprofessional to bring up the private proceedings of dissertation committees on Internet message boards. So I don't know which part of the above Dan finds to be "substantially incorrect."

MsJack wrote:Even if Ritner had really done what Peterson and Gee alleged of him, it would still be highly unprofessional to bring up the private proceedings of dissertation committees on Internet message boards. So I don't know which part of the above Dan finds to be "substantially incorrect."

That's because you're a "hack."

Thanks for providing the documentation of Dr. Peterson's unprofessional behavior toward Dr. Ritner in this matter, Jack.

It is unbelievable that he is the one who continues to allege that others have acted inappropriately in connection with this affair.

Kishkumen wrote:Thanks for providing the documentation of Dr. Peterson's unprofessional behavior toward Dr. Ritner in this matter, Jack.

I second the "thank you" for the documentation Jack, this is very important to the dialogue.

The whole Ritner affair always makes me chuckle. Who in their right mind would go on to a message board and post what Dan did about one of the bigger names in their own field? It is like they are intent on getting themselves marginalized even further.

MrStakhanovite wrote:The whole Ritner affair always makes me chuckle. Who in their right mind would go on to a message board and post what Dan did about one of the bigger names in their own field? It is like they are intent on getting themselves marginalized even further.

Ritner is not only a big name in Egyptology, but he is also a respected name in my field. I cite him in one of my articles, and undoubtedly will do so again in my second book (which I have already commenced work on). Indeed, he makes fairly regular appearances at our conferences.

MsJack wrote:I can't speak for others, but I've never insinuated that Gee isn't a legitimate Egyptologist or that he lacks credibility in the field.

I have pointed out that Dan repeatedly attempted to smear Robert Ritner by alleging that Ritner had done something terrible to Gee whilst the latter was studying under the former, which (according to Peterson and Gee) led to Ritner having been forcibly removed from Gee's dissertation committee. And that's pretty easy to document:

"It would be the same John Gee who, having suffered much at the hands of Robert Ritner (in ways that no doctoral candidate should have to), successfully petitioned his department to have Ritner replaced as his doctoral advisor, and who then, under the direction of the eminent Yale Egyptologist William Kelly Simpson, proceeded to earn a Ph.D. Yes, it would be that one." - Daniel C. Peterson posting under his "Logic Chopper" alias, 11/20/2002

"Did you know that Dr. Ritner was Gee's dissertation chairman at Yale -- until, after a lengthy period of immense and growing dissatisfaction, Gee successfully petitioned Yale to have Dr. Ritner removed and another person substituted? Such things are not common at Yale." - Daniel C. Peterson posting under his "FreeThinker" alias, 10/31/2003

"RC, there is a 'chip' [on Ritner's shoulder]. There are personal issues, interpersonal issues, and a history here. It didn't begin with Professor Ritner's 'preliminary article online.'

I really don't want to get into this. (I don't know all of it myself, but I've been privy to some of it for quite a few years now, John Gee being a former student of mine with whom I kept in contact over the years before he returned from Berkeley and Yale to BYU, and I know rather more than I wish I did.) Perhaps it will all come out some day. Perhaps it won't. But don't presume that you know the whole story." - Daniel C. Peterson, 9/29/2004

"Professor Ritner was once Professor Gee's dissertation chairman at Yale University, until he was removed from that position and replaced by another professor. There is a personal history here (of which I was aware as it played out, since Professor Gee had been a student of mine before he went off to graduate school at Berkeley and then Yale." - Daniel C. Peterson posting at MADB, 3/22/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

"I also will not comment on his removal from my dissertation committee other than to note that it was the department's decision to do so. There is much more to the story than what Professor Ritner has chosen to tell." - John Gee (from an e-mail provided by Dan Peterson), 3/23/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

"Perhaps you're unaware that Professor Gee (successfully) petitioned his department at Yale to have Professor Ritner replaced as chairman of his doctoral committee. Such requests are not commonly made. And they are not commonly granted. Do you think they're best buddies?" - Daniel C. Peterson posting at MADB, 6/10/2006; thread destroyed by MADB admin, quote preserved here.

Full context is available for the first three examples where he did this, and it doesn't exonerate him. The only reason context isn't available for the last three examples is because the MADB/MDDB mods deleted the threads.

Upon being notified of the above statements, Ritner responded (June 2007):

"Dear Mr. Graham,

Thank you for the kind and informative note. My response to Gee's relevant academic output will be contained in the book edited by Brent. Gee has been increasingly visible, but not increasingly respected, at meetings. I do not know Mr. Peterson, nor how he would have any knowledge of my involvement with Gee's dissertation (except through misrepresentations by Gee himself), but I am the one who rejected further participation in Gee's work, and I signaled many errors in his work as a reason. If Mr. Peterson continues to make false allegations, I may have to consider a slander or libel lawsuit. In any case, whoever he is, he is neither competent nor legally authorized to discuss the private matter. I have retained my dated correspondence and may put it on-line if such misrepresentations continue.

Sincerely,
Robert Ritner"

Even if Ritner had really done what Peterson and Gee alleged of him, it would still be highly unprofessional to bring up the private proceedings of dissertation committees on Internet message boards. So I don't know which part of the above Dan finds to be "substantially incorrect."

Does anyone know if Ritner has been replaced on any other grad student's dissertation committee than Gee's?

As such a removal is reportedly rare at Yale, I would think if Ritner has been removed in other situations, that fact might be a circumstance that supports Gee's claims. If Ritner has not, then that fact suggest that the problem was with Gee, not Ritner.