DiscussMormonism.com

I'm losing track of the discussions currently spread out over several threads, but I have seen it asked multiple times by multiple posters: What was the evidence that led Pahoran, et al. to conclude that Scratch and Chino Blanco might be one and the same?

If this has been answered somewhere, I'd appreciate a friendly point in the right direction. If it hasn't, then consider this another request for the evidence.

TrashcanMan79 wrote:I'm losing track of the discussions currently spread out over several threads, but I have seen it asked multiple times by multiple posters: What was the evidence that led Pahoran, et al. to conclude that Scratch and Chino Blanco might be one and the same?

If this has been answered somewhere, I'd appreciate a friendly point in the right direction. If it hasn't, then consider this another request for the evidence.

The best we have is that 'someone told him'. Personally, I think Pahoran did a Facebook search and linked Chino to a few people that Pahoran knows in real life.

H.

As best I can tell, Pahoran has a secret informant that Liz knows and believes that said CB was Scratch. Then Pahoran and Liz dropped heavy hints on this board ("Chinese white guys" and "Democrats Abroad in Taiwan") and, according to them at least, Scratch acted in a manner that demonstrated that these hints were hitting too close to home.

I have to say it all reminds me of this (starting at 3:45 and NSFW):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krb2OdQksMc

The only evidence is someone's horrible intuition. I understand why Pahoran was convinced, he is just a dullard, but I'm tickled pink that DCP fell for it with all his pretense of being a scholar. Of all the tools that are supposed to made available to him, this convinced him? lol.

MrStakhanovite wrote:The only evidence is someone's horrible intuition. I understand why Pahoran was convinced, he is just a dullard, but I'm tickled pink that DCP fell for it with all his pretense of being a scholar. Of all the tools that are supposed to made available to him, this convinced him? lol.

Subtle, MrStak, subtle. But I do like your calling Pahoran a tool.

Heavy hints? Before being redacted, Pahoran came right out in a couple of posts and named names.

LDSToronto wrote:The best we have is that 'someone told him'. Personally, I think Pahoran did a Facebook search and linked Chino to a few people that Pahoran knows in real life.

My money says Simon Belmont was the anonymous source.

WRONG THREAD

MsJack wrote:

LDSToronto wrote:The best we have is that 'someone told him'. Personally, I think Pahoran did a Facebook search and linked Chino to a few people that Pahoran knows in real life.

My money says Simon Belmont was the anonymous source.

I think this is a real possibility.

1) We know that Belmont has a grudge against Scratch the size of a whale turd.

2) We know that Belmont engages in electronic spying and uses Facebook for that purpose.

3) We know that Belmont has worked for LDS Church security.

4) We know that Belmont, whatever his techno expertise, is as dumb as a post.

5) Who more likely than Belmont to have cooked up this completely stupid theory?

6) Oh, and, Dr. Peterson has a soft spot for Belmont. So does Liz.

I'm liking this theory.

ETA: We also know that Liz engaged in a classic Belmontian maneuver in the way she intimated knowledge of the Chino-Scratch connection.

Belmont is probably also the one digging up information which has been recently deployed here against others.

Kishkumen wrote:6) Oh, and, Dr. Peterson has a soft spot for Belmont. So does Liz.

Hush now! Belmont is he that shall not be named! We've spent months cleaning up all the Horcruxes!