Scientific Evidence for Smith's Blarney

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Scientific Evidence for Smith's Blarney

Post by _Kishkumen »

I wouldn't know about Ugo's integrity. That's very personal. If he truly believes and is at peace with himself, I doubt one should conclude that he is lacking integrity. We might wonder how a scientist could buy into the existence of Book of Mormon peoples, but then all of us are full of inconsistencies and contradictions. What seems inconsistent to you or me may be just fine from his perspective.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_sock puppet
_Emeritus
Posts: 17063
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 2:52 pm

Re: Scientific Evidence for Smith's Blarney

Post by _sock puppet »

Kishkumen wrote:I wouldn't know about Ugo's integrity. That's very personal. If he truly believes and is at peace with himself, I doubt one should conclude that he is lacking integrity. We might wonder how a scientist could buy into the existence of Book of Mormon peoples, but then all of us are full of inconsistencies and contradictions. What seems inconsistent to you or me may be just fine from his perspective.

At first, a person might seem full of inconsistencies and contradictions. When I initially view someone through my paradigm, my view of how the world all fits together and makes sense, someone else can appear fractured and not congruent. But in my experience the more that person explains himself or herself, the more internally consistent my 'picture' of that person becomes. Someone whose ideas are expounded upon in lectures and written and published, the more cohesive the picture of him or her should become. If like DCP the enigma persists, indeed in some instances grows, then I'm left wondering what the closely guarded and unrevealed agenda is that if we knew would then make all the scrambled jigsaw pieces come together. The normal psyche tries to harmonize and make order out of all the information available. It is one who is schizophrenic or has split personality or some other severe psychological disorder that can shelve troubling items indefinitely.

Perego has not to my knowledge explained his conclusions more broadly in a 'big picture' way that makes them congruent with the science to which he appeals. This suggests to me that he his jealously guarding an agenda that he does not want others to know, an agenda that might justify the apparent disconnect. If he does not have one of those severe psychological disorders and is hiding his real agenda, therein lies the lack of integrity as a scientist.
_Gadianton
_Emeritus
Posts: 9947
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 5:12 am

Re: Scientific Evidence for Smith's Blarney

Post by _Gadianton »

Thanks reverend, probably the most serious research of this kind to date.
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Scientific Evidence for Smith's Blarney

Post by _Kishkumen »

Gadianton wrote:Thanks reverend, probably the most serious research of this kind to date.


Always happy to oblige, Dean Robbers.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
Post Reply