Boy, was I wrong

[_wenglund]

So let me get this straight....

"To dream the impossible dream..." LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_beastie]

So let me get this straight....

"To dream the impossible dream..." LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

So which part of my summary was incorrect?

[_wenglund]

I do. New information that has come to me in the past few weeks has led me to conclude that my thread was far from the prime counteragent of William's publication aspirations. My post was simply a catalyst that led others to make their move on plans they'd been hovering over for some time.

Unfortunately, I don't have anything I could share in public to prove that, and anything I could say would be hearsay from anonymous sources. Since I am the only one that acted publicly, I have little doubt that the entirety of the credit or the blame (depending on your perspective) will continue to be heaped on me.

Fascinating.

I was waiting for you to be more specific as to which parties you believe issued threats before I was going to care. I noticed your "threats" claim pages ago, but I figured if I bothered to deny having any part in threats, you would simply do your little obscurantisme terroriste thing and claim that you never meant me in the first place and how silly of me to even think you could mean that, blah blah blah.

But, I did suspect you.

But since you're hinting that I'm involved somehow by dropping things like this:

Maybe he, or some else here, can talk MsJack, harmony, beastie, and Stak into going on record. We will see.

No, I have never been involved in any "threats" against the Neal A. Maxwell Institute for Religious Scholarship. Nor did I ever initiate contact with anyone at the MI to discuss anything remotely related to William Schryver. The only things I even said about the MI in my "Mormon Apologetics & Misogyny" original post was that William was claiming the MI had plans to publish his work and that I considered it to be a credible scholarly organization.

I appreciate you going on record. Was that so hard?

Satisfied?

Almost. Were you aware of any threats that may have factored into MI's decision to jettison Will's article?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_EAllusion]

Hey MsJack,

Not that this has to do with this thread, but you mentioned that you have a fair amount of MADB archived prior to the transition? Could you perchance find the thread in which Will Schryver argues natural selection is a tautology? I remember enough of the thread that I could give you some relevant search terms via PM if more is needed. I'd like to reread that for other reasons.

Edit: Found the link: http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... opic=15982

[_Doctor Scratch]

...some of us wondered aloud what might happen if the M.I. went through with publication, and if media caught wind of Will's antics, ala "Metcalfe is Butthead."

Could you please elaborate--i.e. tell us where this so-called "wondering" took place, and who exactly said what? And, whether this "wondering" was also brought to MI's attention? (Links would be nice if possible)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It's on the big, long 60+ page thread, Wade, and no: I'm not going to go digging through it for you. If you think there is a real "threat" there (and for the record, I don't recall any threats of any kind), you can go ahead and find it and at last have some half-measure of forcefulness behind your argument.

[_wenglund]

So which part of my summary was incorrect?

Which part? Now that's funny.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

Wade, I have it on good authority that everyone came out a winner in the latest Schryver melodrama. It's time to cheer up, stop worrying about recriminations, and get back to that kayak.

Some will invariably find the outcome of lynch mobs to be a win-win all around. I don't happen to be one of them. Perhaps I am unique that way--at least around here.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_MsJack]

But, I did suspect you.

Then you should have said so sooner. But if you suspected me of making threats to the MI, it sounds like Scratch has much better informants than you do. I'm just a World of Warcraft addict who would starve without a can opener. I couldn't threaten the Maxwell Institute if I wanted to.

I appreciate you going on record. Was that so hard?

Of course not. Discerning which of your vague claims you actually expect me to reply to has been the only "hard" part of this exchange.

Were you aware of any threats that may have factored into MI's decision to jettison Will's article?

I was not and am not. The only type of "threat" I could even imagine that could factor into a decision like that would be threats of disaffiliation and/or withdrawal of funds. But I have no knowledge of any persons who went so far as to do that.

(Also off-topic) EAllusion ~ I'll check with my friend. He didn't have the thread you and beastie were looking for the other day. Sorry about that. He doesn't have them all, but it's worth a shot.

[_EAllusion]

This is the thread where I found the link:

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... &start=105

For fans of Will schadenfreude, he embarrasses the heck out of himself there arguing something untenable.

He also makes this comment to Beastie:

You’re in completely over your head here, baby. You don’t have a freaking clue what is even going on. You’re just here for what you believe is a circle-jerk pile on, with me as the target.

But if you’d like to attempt to disprove my assessment, feel free to restate, or even directly quote, those instances where anyone has demonstrated that "natural selection" (absent the influence of external forces, such as described above) amounts to anything more than "those who reproduce best are selected." I’m quite confident you cannot do it. The best you can hope for is to play cheerleader for someone else who might try. So grab your pompoms, beastlie baby, and cheer on your boys. :lol:

That quite clearly was in line with his demeaning comments towards women. So add that to the list if you'd like.

[_wenglund]

It's on the big, long 60+ page thread, Wade, and no: I'm not going to go digging through it for you. If you think there is a real "threat" there (and for the record, I don't recall any threats of any kind), you can go ahead and find it and at last have some half-measure of forcefulness behind your argument.

By all means don't put yourself out. If your vast network of informants can't assist you with a link, I suppose I will just have to look through the thread myself.

Is that the only place you are aware of where there was talk of going to the papers and such if Will's article wasn't pulled?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-