Backyard Science

[_Fortigurn]

No problems. Let us know how it goes.

[_cksalmon]

But that's what I did to start with. I clicked on the link and it started quickplayer. When it was finished, all it showed was garbled text in a center column down the middle of the screen.

Well apart from the garbled text, that's what is supposed to happen. It's supposed to open your browser's media player and play the file. If it didn't, then there's a problem with your browser's settings, or the media plugin, or your browser's installation.

You can 'right click' on a Mac by holding down the 'control' key and clicking (instructions here).

Thanks Fort. I really appreciate it. I'll give it a whirl. I pretty much want to kill myself when reading stuff like that so if anyone chooses to criticize these exchanges, you couldn't push me any further than I already am.

Hey JG--

To get right-click functionality with your Mac mouse, you can "CTRL+click." That bugged the crap out of me, too. I finally just got a PC mouse. They're truly plug-n-play with OS X. Now, you tell me how to reset my administrator password (which I've forgotten) so I can log on to my old, cherry-red G3.

Best.

CKS

PS. I see that Fort beat me to it. I'm still waiting for the admin reset instructions, though.

[_Jersey Girl]

Okay, it worked but it stopped at 23 minutes for some reason. Thanks.

[_Blixa]

Hmmm...WFMU's blog has been featuring the Christian propaganda film oeuvre of Baptist minister Estus Pirkle.

Today's selection, "The Believer's Heaven," reminded me of the Shirts podcast more than once. Its certainly got the same style of mendacious meanderings made out to be moral messages. Ditto the emphasis on the physical body: turns out heaven is one big glamour shot. Check out the time-lapse makeover that not only rids that poor woman of her wrinkles but also gives her an outstanding and towering coif!

Now if Shirts only had a singing midget (on wheels, no less) and the promise of eternal rent-controlled mansions!

http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/04/h ... _hell.html

[_cksalmon]

Hmmm...WFMU's blog has been featuring the Christian propaganda film oeuvre of Baptist minister Estus Pirkle.

Today's selection, "The Believer's Heaven," reminded me of the Shirts podcast more than once. Its certainly got the same style of mendacious meanderings made out to be moral messages. Ditto the emphasis on the physical body: turns out heaven is one big glamour shot. Check out the time-lapse makeover that not only rids that poor woman of her wrinkles but also gives her an outstanding and towering coif!

Now if Shirts only had a singing midget (on wheels, no less) and the promise of eternal rent-controlled mansions!

http://blog.wfmu.org/freeform/2007/04/h ... _hell.html

"Does this excite you?!?!"

Um...I'm scared. Is this the film of a mugshot being taken?

CK "The glorified body is the beehive-hair-do'ed body" Salmon

PS. Or are these the B-rolls of The Wizard of Oz, Evelyn?

[_Jersey Girl]

Alright, perhaps against my better judgement, I'm throwing in on this thread. A few things to get out of the way...

1. The alliteration: Kerry often engages in word play using alliteration. He has a love of language and words. That's all there is to it, folks, so shut up. Alliteration isn't the topic of the podcast. It is simply a device he's using to engage you.

2. Self satisfied chuckle (or whatever someone called it): I've heard Kerry's voice and there is nothing remotely "self satisfying" in his laugh. You are interpreting it the way you wish to. Again, shut up.

3. Roller Coaster voice quality: What you're hearing is his style of articulation. He has a smooth speaking voice and anyone who listened to more than the first 5 minutes of the podcast would hear it. Again, shut up.

No one on this thread has bothered to address the content of the podcast. That's going to change in short order and whether or not anyone chooses to pick up the ball is up to the players involved.

[_cksalmon]

Alright, perhaps against my better judgement, I'm throwing in on this thread. A few things to get out of the way...

1. The alliteration: Kerry often engages in word play using alliteration. He has a love of language and words. That's all there is to it, folks, so shut up. Alliteration isn't the topic of the podcast. It is simply a device he's using to engage you.

2. Self satisfied chuckle (or whatever someone called it): I've heard Kerry's voice and there is nothing remotely "self satisfying" in his laugh. You are interpreting it the way you wish to. Again, shut up.

3. Roller Coaster voice quality: What you're hearing is his style of articulation. He has a smooth speaking voice and anyone who listened to more than the first 5 minutes of the podcast would hear it. Again, shut up.

No one on this thread has bothered to address the content of the podcast. That's going to change in short order and whether or not anyone chooses to pick up the ball is up to the players involved.

My problem with Kerry's eclectic and idiosyncratic use of sources and methodology is that some caricatured TBM is going to listen and think, "Ah-hah! Yes, it all makes sense now."

I picture the reverse scenario involving the caricatured "anti-Mormon" reading Decker and Hunt's The Godmakers and thinking "Ah-hah! Yes, it all makes sense now."

Yes, they're caricatured. But they really do exist.

No one should encourage them.

CKS

[_Jersey Girl]

Once more, perhaps against my better judgement...we'll see...

Kerry,

I know that you're reading this thread. I happened to check in on MAD and saw your comments about this thread, the board and Kevin posting on your blog. I also read the exchanges between you and Kevin on your blog. I'm not willing to talk between boards or comment on your blog. Recently you made this comment on MAD:

That's the one. I have my very serious doubts there is any capability on that board of anyone dealing with the Biblical archaeological materials I used in the podcast. They are the finest biblical scholars in the world, so far as I am aware. And I certainly did not use the Graham methodology of reading a mere first few pages of each book and article either.

I listened to the first 23 minutes of your podcast. People can't deal with the material you presented if you avoid engaging them. You're registered on this board and why you're talking on MAD about this thread instead of participating in the thread itself, I have no clue. I am on this board and previously attempted to discuss at least some of the material in a thread on FAIR several months ago. When I began asking you questions, you refused to engage. Based on your above comments regarding the posters on this board...

now is your chance.

Again, I could only hear the first 23 minutes of your podcast so that's all I have to go on at the moment. Here are the areas I would choose to challenge you on:

1. Whatever archaeological evidence you can or have presented to support the idea of God having a body, doesn't prove that at all. What it does, Kerry, is prove that human beings thought that God had a body and wrote about that concept or made carvings or statues of God with a body in order to express it. They are no more accurate representations of God than the artists renderings of Christ. They are merely artistic interpretations.

2. The story of the Caananite God "El" stems directly from Baalism. Baalism is clearly condemned in the Bible. In order to support the theory of God having a body (unless you're discussing Jesus Christ) which would lead one to believe that you're attempting to make a connection between ancient Baalism and Mormonism, what you're doing is replacing Christian theological concepts with the concepts found in the fertilitity religion of Baal which is again, clearly condemned in the Bible.

3. It is my opinion, and only my opinion, that this is a dangerous and slippery slope for an LDS apologist to set out on. It seems to me that you are faced with a choice between supporting Christian concepts or Baalism. Should the choice be to support Baalism, are you willing to put your belief in Jesus Christ aside and accept fertility pantheons, temple sexual rituals (including homosexual acts) and infant sacrifice?

There is your serious reply. Ball is in your court.

Jersey Girl

[_cksalmon]

Once more, perhaps against my better judgement...we'll see...

Kerry,

I know that you're reading this thread. I happened to check in on MAD and saw your comments about this thread, the board and Kevin posting on your blog. I also read the exchanges between you and Kevin on your blog. I'm not willing to talk between boards or comment on your blog. Recently you made this comment on MAD:

That's the one. I have my very serious doubts there is any capability on that board of anyone dealing with the Biblical archaeological materials I used in the podcast. They are the finest biblical scholars in the world, so far as I am aware. And I certainly did not use the Graham methodology of reading a mere first few pages of each book and article either.

I listened to the first 23 minutes of your podcast. People can't deal with the material you presented if you avoid engaging them. You're registered on this board and why you're talking on MAD about this thread instead of participating in the thread itself, I have no clue. I am on this board and previously attempted to discuss at least some of the material in a thread on FAIR several months ago. When I began asking you questions, you refused to engage. Based on your above comments regarding the posters on this board...

now is your chance.

Again, I could only hear the first 23 minutes of your podcast so that's all I have to go on at the moment. Here are the areas I would choose to challenge you on:

1. Whatever archaeological evidence you can or have presented to support the idea of God having a body, doesn't prove that at all. What it does, Kerry, is prove that human beings thought that God had a body and wrote about that concept or made carvings or statues of God with a body in order to express it. They are no more accurate representations of God than the artists renderings of Christ. They are merely artistic interpretations.

2. The story of the Caananite God "El" stems directly from Baalism. Baalism is clearly condemned in the Bible. In order to support the theory of God having a body (unless you're discussing Jesus Christ) which would lead one to believe that you're attempting to make a connection between ancient Baalism and Mormonism, what you're doing is replacing Christian theological concepts with the concepts found in the fertilitity religion of Baal which is again, clearly condemned in the Bible.

3. It is my opinion, and only my opinion, that this is a dangerous and slippery slope for an LDS apologist to set out on. It seems to me that you are faced with a choice between supporting Christian concepts or Baalism. Should the choice be to support Baalism, are you willing to put your belief in Jesus Christ aside and accept fertility pantheons, temple sexual rituals (including homosexual acts) and infant sacrifice?

There is your serious reply. Ball is in your court.

Jersey Girl

I think you're asking some very good questions, Jersey Girl. But, Kerry has demonstrated, via his podcasts and notes, a willingness to deploy random and non-correlative sources and methodologies as they suit his purpose(s). He comes across as an affable fellow, despite the annoying alliteration, but I don't think you'll be able to find anyone who will back his fringe insights other than himself.

I can't help but think of http://www.greaterthings.com/ when I listen to him. (I should note that GreaterThings.com is one of the participants in the Mormon Only search engine.)

Best.

I hope he responds.

CKS

[_Runtu]

Alright, perhaps against my better judgement, I'm throwing in on this thread. A few things to get out of the way...

1. The alliteration: Kerry often engages in word play using alliteration. He has a love of language and words. That's all there is to it, folks, so shut up. Alliteration isn't the topic of the podcast. It is simply a device he's using to engage you.

2. Self satisfied chuckle (or whatever someone called it): I've heard Kerry's voice and there is nothing remotely "self satisfying" in his laugh. You are interpreting it the way you wish to. Again, shut up.

3. Roller Coaster voice quality: What you're hearing is his style of articulation. He has a smooth speaking voice and anyone who listened to more than the first 5 minutes of the podcast would hear it. Again, shut up.

No one on this thread has bothered to address the content of the podcast. That's going to change in short order and whether or not anyone chooses to pick up the ball is up to the players involved.

I didn't address the content because I am not familiar with the scholarship. I'll leave it to dart and others to respond. I just commented on how difficult it was to listen to, particularly because overuse of alliteration really grates on my nerves. Not a substantive criticism, obviously.