DiscussMormonism.com

Dr. Scratch noted:
Hey, Drumdude: did you notice that Dr. Peterson has been insulting you?
An online non-fan of mine who goes by the name of Dumb-Dud, or something like that, seems to be trying to outbid my Malevolent Stalker on the matter of how angered I am by the FX/Hulu miniseries Under the Banner of Heaven. They’re both convinced — or, anyway, they’re both pretending to be convinced — that I’m absolutely incandescent with rage at the enormous success of this Lafferty Brothers production that stars Andrew Garfield. The spoofs of Under the Banner of Heaven that I’ve written under my pen name Jim Bennett apparently count as evidence of my jealousy and indignation.

The pattern I have noticed in Peterson is he will respond this way when he has been caught/and/or actually refuted so solidly he cannot respond accurately or defend against what refuted him. He always reads anger into something that trounces his illogic or silliness of theological persuading or on some philosophical point, but most especially on theological points in the unique Mormon scriptures with a particular interpretation he thinks is correct. He always projects anger onto those who soundly destroy his argument, i.e. he projects his deeper most inner self because he knows he is discovered and beaten in whatever point he is trying to make. And oh how he loves to exaggerate it all!

Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑

Fri May 27, 2022 9:47 pm

Did anyone else catch the most recent episode? There was a classic moment at the end, where Allen Lafferty explains to Pyre that his faith was unraveled thanks to a "big, red book," that he'd kept hidden away. Pyre digs it out of the evidence files, and it turns out to be the Tanners' classic, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? LOL! Tears stream down Pyre's face as he reads, and his testimony unravels before our eyes. I imagine that the Mopologists are enraged over this. Will they do their usual schlocky summary of the episode, or will they skip it out of fear that mentioning the book might lead to more Chapel Mormons having an experience similar to Pyre's?

That scene cut so close the bone that I wished I could visit my 19 year old self just to let him know he was going to be okay.

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 01, 2022 1:37 am

Dr. Scratch noted:
Hey, Drumdude: did you notice that Dr. Peterson has been insulting you?
An online non-fan of mine who goes by the name of Dumb-Dud, or something like that, seems to be trying to outbid my Malevolent Stalker on the matter of how angered I am by the FX/Hulu miniseries Under the Banner of Heaven. They’re both convinced — or, anyway, they’re both pretending to be convinced — that I’m absolutely incandescent with rage at the enormous success of this Lafferty Brothers production that stars Andrew Garfield. The spoofs of Under the Banner of Heaven that I’ve written under my pen name Jim Bennett apparently count as evidence of my jealousy and indignation.

The pattern I have noticed in Peterson is he will respond this way when he has been caught/and/or actually refuted so solidly he cannot respond accurately or defend against what refuted him. He always reads anger into something that trounces his illogic or silliness of theological persuading or on some philosophical point, but most especially on theological points in the unique Mormon scriptures with a particular interpretation he thinks is correct. He always projects anger onto those who soundly destroy his argument, i.e. he projects his deeper most inner self because he knows he is discovered and beaten in whatever point he is trying to make. And oh how he loves to exaggerate it all!

Spot on, brother! I read some of his stuff a while back, prior to when I started posting. These posts were on MD&D and were from the mid-2000's. DCP was playing victim there as well, because someone called him on his nonsense. He was claiming then that some unknown enemies were accusing him of being angry. I think his avatar was some sinister character, probably to spice up the victimhood? I guess a tried and true victim weapon needs to be used, over and over again? The problem is that we can see and review what he has posted over the years and some of us here have a long history with senor victima.

Philo Sofee wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 01, 2022 1:37 am

Dr. Scratch noted:
Hey, Drumdude: did you notice that Dr. Peterson has been insulting you?
An online non-fan of mine who goes by the name of Dumb-Dud, or something like that, seems to be trying to outbid my Malevolent Stalker on the matter of how angered I am by the FX/Hulu miniseries Under the Banner of Heaven. They’re both convinced — or, anyway, they’re both pretending to be convinced — that I’m absolutely incandescent with rage at the enormous success of this Lafferty Brothers production that stars Andrew Garfield. The spoofs of Under the Banner of Heaven that I’ve written under my pen name Jim Bennett apparently count as evidence of my jealousy and indignation.

The pattern I have noticed in Peterson is he will respond this way when he has been caught/and/or actually refuted so solidly he cannot respond accurately or defend against what refuted him. He always reads anger into something that trounces his illogic or silliness of theological persuading or on some philosophical point, but most especially on theological points in the unique Mormon scriptures with a particular interpretation he thinks is correct. He always projects anger onto those who soundly destroy his argument, i.e. he projects his deeper most inner self because he knows he is discovered and beaten in whatever point he is trying to make. And oh how he loves to exaggerate it all!

Spot on.

Res Ipsa wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 01, 2022 2:05 am

Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑

Fri May 27, 2022 9:47 pm

Did anyone else catch the most recent episode? There was a classic moment at the end, where Allen Lafferty explains to Pyre that his faith was unraveled thanks to a "big, red book," that he'd kept hidden away. Pyre digs it out of the evidence files, and it turns out to be the Tanners' classic, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? LOL! Tears stream down Pyre's face as he reads, and his testimony unravels before our eyes. I imagine that the Mopologists are enraged over this. Will they do their usual schlocky summary of the episode, or will they skip it out of fear that mentioning the book might lead to more Chapel Mormons having an experience similar to Pyre's?

That scene cut so close the bone that I wished I could visit my 19 year old self just to let him know he was going to be okay.

It really was devastating, wasn't it? Now imagine that, in addition to getting crushed like that, Elder Pyre also had to contend with a bunch of hooligan professors from BYU making fun of him and mocking him for being "stupid" and not knowing about this "alternative history." That, in a nutshell, is why I've always had a problem with the Mopologists--that's fundamentally what they were doing during the late 1990s and early-to-late 2000s. I think things have shifted somewhat in the past decade or so (partly due to their ejection from the Maxwell Institute--and the 10th anniversary of that is quickly approaching!), but it really is pretty difficult to look past a lot of their cruel behavior.

Ha ha--funny:

Daniel Peterson wrote:I, alas, haven’t watched it. Not necessarily out of principle — though that would be a good and sufficient reason by itself — nor even (altogether) out of a lack of interest, but because I haven’t been in North America much lately and haven’t had much time when I have been. Also (and rather curiously, given my alleged obsession with the miniseries), I haven’t actually posted any of my own thoughts about it. I suffer from a weird reluctance to comment on things about which I have no actual knowledge.

Doctor Scratch wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 03, 2022 9:32 pm

Ha ha--funny:

Daniel Peterson wrote:I, alas, haven’t watched it. Not necessarily out of principle — though that would be a good and sufficient reason by itself — nor even (altogether) out of a lack of interest, but because I haven’t been in North America much lately and haven’t had much time when I have been. Also (and rather curiously, given my alleged obsession with the miniseries), I haven’t actually posted any of my own thoughts about it. I suffer from a weird reluctance to comment on things about which I have no actual knowledge.

That last sentence is probably the most cogent explanation he has ever given for why he plagiarizes.

Keep posting DCP. Sometimes you express yourself accurately without the pretense that usually infects your posts.

DCP today wrote:I haven’t actually posted any of my own thoughts about it. I suffer from a weird reluctance to comment on things about which I have no actual knowledge.

DCP yesterday wrote:The series is regrettable

By my count, Dan has posted about this show at least a dozen times now.

The series IS regrettable for someone who imagines they have a Holy Ghost based testimony of Mormonism. Of that, I truly have not a smidgin of doubt.