Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

P. S. - Wasn't there a thread at MADB last year wherein Daniel C. Peterson used an anonymous source to ascribe some manner of wrongdoing or unprofessional conduct to Grant H. Palmer?


Let's not forget the whole Robert Ritner scandal either. For several years Dan propagated the myth that Ritner was reprimanded and thrown off John Gee's dissertation committee, because of anti-Mormon bias or what not. He never once provided a source, but only assured us all that he neck-deep in the ongoing exchanges at the time. Of course Ritner threatened to post the actual emails that would prove Dan was not telling the truth, and then suddenly Dan shut his trap and never spoke a word about the subject since!

And of course the Metcalfe myths that festered and mutated through the years on the LDS apologetic e-lists. Tvetdness, Midgley and others loved to share their stories based on hearsay, about how Metcalfe swindled a grieving widow into selling him the KEP photos, saying she never would have done so if she knew Metcalfe was a wolf in sheep's clothing, etc. All of this, of course, was pure bunk. Base manure fabricated from the LDS gossip mill.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _Buffalo »

Kevin Graham wrote:
A few minutes ago Pahoran started a thread speculating as to whether some poster on CARM is Kevin G.


LOL! Really?

I have not been to the CARM forum in at least ten years. I've had nothing to do with any of the Evangelical forums since the time when I was operating as an LDS apologist.

But I love how Pahoran takes advantage of the opportunity to slander folks on a forum where he knows they cannot defend themselves (notice he didn't raise the point over here, nor did he ask me about it), and then turns around and pitches a fit if anyone dares mention his real life identity. What a hypocrite.


Pahoran = coward

Sorry, Pahoran, you know it's true.
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.
_Pahoran
_Emeritus
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:20 am

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _Pahoran »

Buffalo wrote:
Kevin Graham wrote:LOL! Really?

I have not been to the CARM forum in at least ten years. I've had nothing to do with any of the Evangelical forums since the time when I was operating as an LDS apologist.

But I love how Pahoran takes advantage of the opportunity to slander folks on a forum where he knows they cannot defend themselves (notice he didn't raise the point over here, nor did he ask me about it), and then turns around and pitches a fit if anyone dares mention his real life identity. What a hypocrite.

Pahoran = coward

Sorry, Pahoran, you know it's true.

I have just seen this thread.

Buffalo = foot in mouth. See here.

Sorry Buffalo, but you're probably too thick to realise that it's true.

Regards,
Pahoran
_why me
_Emeritus
Posts: 9589
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 8:19 pm

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _why me »

Reading threads like this and others dealing with Will or Dan give me the impression of a dysfuntional family who have a love/hate relationship with each other. It is amazing to be reading this thread as a lurker. I would be reading a family's dirty luandry and love tiffs.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world.
Joseph Smith


We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…”
Joseph Smith
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _Buffalo »

Pahoran wrote:
Buffalo wrote:Pahoran = coward

Sorry, Pahoran, you know it's true.

I have just seen this thread.

Buffalo = foot in mouth. See here.

Sorry Buffalo, but you're probably too thick to realise that it's true.

Regards,
Pahoran


Finding some balls only after being called out for cowardice doesn't really count, you know.
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.
_Pahoran
_Emeritus
Posts: 1296
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 2:20 am

Re: Why *should* MAD permit discussion of the Schryver Scandal?

Post by _Pahoran »

Buffalo wrote:
Pahoran wrote:I have just seen this thread.

Buffalo = foot in mouth. See here.

Sorry Buffalo, but you're probably too thick to realise that it's true.

Regards,
Pahoran


Finding some balls only after being called out for cowardice doesn't really count, you know.

What part of "I have just seen this thread" don't you understand, Buffalo?

Regards,
Pahoran
Post Reply