Will Schryver's Benefactor

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply

Who is Schryver's Likely Benefactor?

 
Total votes: 0

_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Kishkumen »

stemelbow wrote:Considering the extreme dislike for anything FAIR common among these posters, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors boasting about this. Its weird to me that so much from FAIR is discounted by posters here before even considering what is said. I think your boast, if true, is impressive, though. So you're safe with me.


Speaking for myself, I have no particular beef with FAIR. Some good people work with them. Here I am thinking of David Keller, Wiki Wonka, and Kevin Barney most particularly.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Will Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:12 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Will Schryver »

Kishkumen wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:No, it's simply because I have pity on any disabled person who brings a knife to a gunfight:


And here I thought I was being treated to a photographic example of the Schryver gene pool.

I wasn't born "away down south in Dixie."
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Kishkumen »

Will Schryver wrote:In fact, if one were to go to the trouble of carefully parsing one of Cracker Graham's mind-numbingly endless rants ... er, posts, it could be demonstrated that somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of the material is patently untrue, 7% is an exaggeration or misrepresentation of something with a basis in truth, and the remainder is a mixture of twisted grammar, misspellings, and incoherence that defies comprehension.

Other than that, he's one of the most proper researchers in the GSTP.


For a second I thought this was Schryver's scholarly autobiography, until I reached the part about twisted grammar and so forth. Heaven knows Will is fastidious in his posting. If he put as much effort into his scholarship as he does crafting posts, his book would be out already, ripe for the slamming!
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Will Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:12 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Will Schryver »

Kishkumen wrote:
stemelbow wrote:Considering the extreme dislike for anything FAIR common among these posters, I don't think you're doing yourself any favors boasting about this. Its weird to me that so much from FAIR is discounted by posters here before even considering what is said. I think your boast, if true, is impressive, though. So you're safe with me.


Speaking for myself, I have no particular beef with FAIR. Some good people work with them. Here I am thinking of David Keller, Wiki Wonka, and Kevin Barney most particularly.

"Good people" meaning, in Kishkumen's book, those who he believes speak well of him.

LOL!
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Kishkumen »

Will Schryver wrote:I wasn't born "away down south in Dixie."


There are genetic puddles all over the place, as I am sure you know from personal experience.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _wenglund »

Kevin Graham wrote:Funny to whom wade? Your own scholars have contacted me out of the blue to help them research for their publications. I've done more research for FAIR than you two numb nuts put together.

So to say I know how to do proper research is "funny" to whom? To you? If so, then I'll take that as a compliment any day of the week.

Your problem with me has always been the fact that I actually do know how to research a subject and make compelling arguments. How many times do I have to show that Will misuses his sources before you actually get it? There is a reason why Will refuses to debate me. It is because he can't.


You are, without a doubt, the scholar's scholar, the expert's expert, the go-to-guy for all things LDS. Unquestionably, your renown research on Mormonism is cited in more footnotes and bibliographies than any human alive--apologists and critics alike. Your opinions are so well respected and credibilized as to be widely considered as fact. And, don't you ever let anyone tell you otherwise. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Will Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:12 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Will Schryver »

Kishkumen wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:In fact, if one were to go to the trouble of carefully parsing one of Cracker Graham's mind-numbingly endless rants ... er, posts, it could be demonstrated that somewhere in the neighborhood of 90% of the material is patently untrue, 7% is an exaggeration or misrepresentation of something with a basis in truth, and the remainder is a mixture of twisted grammar, misspellings, and incoherence that defies comprehension.

Other than that, he's one of the most proper researchers in the GSTP.


For a second I thought this was Schryver's scholarly autobiography, until I reached the part about twisted grammar and so forth. Heaven knows Will is fastidious in his posting. If he put as much effort into his scholarship as he does crafting posts, his book would be out already, ripe for the slamming!

Ah, don't be sore about my "troubles at home" quip. I said I was sorry ...
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
_Kishkumen
_Emeritus
Posts: 21373
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Kishkumen »

Will Schryver wrote:"Good people" meaning, in Kishkumen's book, those who he believes speak well of him.

LOL!


LOL! I have no idea, nor do I care, what these good men speak concerning me. Your standards for what constitutes a good person are not mine. But thanks for making a comment that is very revealing of your character and values.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Buffalo »

Will Schryver wrote:"Good people" meaning, in Kishkumen's book, those who he believes speak well of him.

LOL!


Most unintentionally revealing comment of the day. Nice projection, Bill.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_Will Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 438
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:12 pm

Re: Will Schryver's Benefactor

Post by _Will Schryver »

wenglund wrote:
Kevin Graham wrote:Funny to whom wade? Your own scholars have contacted me out of the blue to help them research for their publications. I've done more research for FAIR than you two numb nuts put together.

So to say I know how to do proper research is "funny" to whom? To you? If so, then I'll take that as a compliment any day of the week.

Your problem with me has always been the fact that I actually do know how to research a subject and make compelling arguments. How many times do I have to show that Will misuses his sources before you actually get it? There is a reason why Will refuses to debate me. It is because he can't.


You are, without a doubt, the scholar's scholar, the expert's expert, the go-to-guy for all things LDS. Unquestionably, your renown research on Mormonism is cited in more footnotes and bibliographies than any human alive--apologists and critics alike. Your opinions are so well respected and credibilized as to be widely considered as fact. And, don't you ever let anyone tell you otherwise. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It's like I said, when it comes to out-of-control self-delusion, the Cracker man's the world champ, hands down. He's obviously got some very serious, albeit carefully concealed, issues in his life. Hard to say what they might be. If I had beastlie's consummate diagnostician skills, I'd probably conjecture that the Cracker man has some deeply rooted insecurities, coupled with a heaping tablespoon of old-fashioned unfulfilled narcissistic desires for grandeur.

Other than that, though, ya gotta admit he wields a mean meat cleaver.
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.
Post Reply