The constant name calling and insulting is a sure sign that you are extremely defensive. And for those who don't believe me on a previous post about the connection between anger and pride, it is so obvious here a high school student could see it. Your need to express your superiority keeps popping out in the way you try to demean others. A dead giveaway.
You might have an argument if it were not for that stubborn little fact that not everyone I disagree with is called an idiot. It takes a special form of stupidity to earn that designation. I don't apply it to bcspace. I don't apply it to Lifeonaplate. I don't apply it to Bokovoy, or Peterson, or any of the other numerous online opponents I frequently disagree with.
So how do you explain that I wonder.
That is why I won't tell you the name of the person I was referring to.
This is a cop out. You want to tell Runtu but what does Runtu really know. He probably found out from you that there is someone else out there that might fit the description, but since this person never posts on this forum, this means he doesn't fit the description.
Haven't you noticed the fairly thick paranoia around here?
You obviously don't understand what paranoia is. It isn't paranoiua to draw logical conclusions based on the evidence. Paranoia is the psychological disorder of thinking someone is always out to get you with no evidence. Your comments drew attention from other posters who knew you were referring to me, long before I ever saw them. Your description is admittedly a "rumor" and we already know Will Schryver and pacman had propagated an exact rumor about me. You were responding to harmony's claim that posters posting here had defected from FAIR. This suggests strongly that the person you had in mind actually posts here. After two weeks you finally managed to find someone else who could plusibily fit the description, but the fact he doesn't post here disqualifies him.
And your insistence that you can't tell us his name is just laughable.
Hey, yesterday I got a phone call from an apostle who said he knew the Book of Mormon was a fraud. Buit I can't tell you his name because I don't trust you. What a joke.
You care nothing about people online charity. What comes first is defending your faith at all costs. If feelings get hurt or reputations get destroyed, then all the better. Just look at the company you keep. Pacman's PM to you was a disgusting nugget of stupidity. And that was just a quick glimpse into the window of your behind the scenes chatter world. I was on your e-list for years and I know the kind of sludge you guys like to throw about. But in public you put on a smiley face and act like you are an innocent.
People at FAIR and MA&D don't think Kevin is that much of a blip on the radar as far as apologetics goes.
I suppose the only thing that gets under their skin is personal attacks against people like Dr. Gee, Will Schryver and Dr. Peterson.
This is the excuse they use as they conveniently delete all the evidence of these "personal attacks." You just buy into whatever they say without a care for truth and verification. I spent a good year constantly documenting the FAIR moderator claims about my "personal attacks" and allowed the audience on my forum judge for themselves who was doing the attacking.
A couple of yars ago Trevor wrote me an email explaining why FAIR has a hard time with me. They didn't know how to handle someone like me. They were not used to someone from within being self-critical. They thought all time and energy shoudl be spent criticizing teh opposition. It was better to throw out what you don't understand, was their philosophy. They needed me to be an anti-Mormon or an ex-Mormon badly, because I was winning minds at FAIR. Pointing this out (that someone is or might be ex-Mormon) serves as 50% of the Mormon argument. With me they couldn't discredit me because they still had my articles on their website and I was as active in the Church as one could expect me to be.
If anyone at FAIR is "follwoing" anyone in their Book of Abraham concerns, it is going to be Metcalfe, not Kevin.
I hope so. Metcalfe is on the cutting edge here. All I do is report on what he and others have proved. I offer my own insights as they happen, but on the whole I agree that I am nothing in this debate. But then, I never claimed I was. The debate is really over for me, and it was over before I ever started contributing. All I did really was bring the travesty of Book of Abraham apologetics to the attention of FAIR, and they spat in my face for it.
Metcalfe is the one with the standing, the scholarship and the "point man" position on the Book of Abraham.
Not according to Juliann, board owner at MAD. She constantly reminds him just how he is anything but a scholar. So does Pahoran. So stop pretending they respect any scholarship on the critical side. They don't.
Kevin isn't an Egyptiologist.
Irrelevant. If you think being an Egyptologist means anything with regards to the KEP and the significance of its evidence, then you really are an idiot. Hauglid isn't one either. Neither is Shirts.