Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Themis »

Kevin Graham wrote:Oh this is a Mormon tradition that dates all the way back to the early days.

Smearing anyone who would dare speak the truth is just how they operate.


Right back to Joseph Smith and company. To be fair it is common for many groups to smear those who criticize or leave the fold.
42
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Themis »

Daniel Peterson wrote:It's true that I will not further comment publicly on the Ritner/Gee relationship at Yale. I was sued, several years ago, by an evangelical anti-Mormon. I learned from that experience that anyone can be sued by anybody for anything (or, for that matter, for nothing). And I learned by direct personal experience that the costs to the person sued, in time and energy and money, can be enormous -- even if that person is innocent, even if the complaint has no merit and no basis in fact, and even if the suit is eventually tossed out by the judge "with prejudice." That legal assault cost me a very great deal, extending over more than two years.

If I can avoid it, I will not give Professor Ritner (or Mr. Graham) anything with which to formulate a law suit against me. I didn't find the experience amusing then, and I don't think I would find it amusing now.


Sometimes we have to learn the hard way. I know it's easy to believe a friend and Colleague without trying to get the other side of the story which is always there. Truth is usually somewhere in between. Most people won't sue, but some will, and in Ritner's case it would be appropriate since he has a name that can be hurt by false accusations others may believe but have only Gee's words to go on. I realize the same applies to you, although that might be a full time job and not worth the cost and effort.

Hope you are enjoying Yellowstone.
42
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _harmony »

Kevin Graham wrote:The idea was to suggest that at Yale, Ritner's "anti-Mormonism" was so bad, that Yale threw Ritner off Gee's dissertation committee.


I find this idea ludicrous. Why would Yale care if Ritner was an anti-Mormon? Do the Yale powers that be even know what an anti-Mormon is or does?

Much more likely that one of the parties requested the change and Yale granted it.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:Moreover, while probably nobody here but myself is fully aware of Dr. Gee's extremely prolific record of publications and academic presentations, he seems to be doing rather well as an Egyptologist by any reasonable measure.


He's employed by BYU as an associate research professor. I'm not sure how far up the Egyptologist food chain that would make him, reasonable measure or not.

He's written:
6 papers, 4 of which were published by BYU or an affiliate.
38 articles, 26 of which were published by BYU or some other arm of the church
4 books, all of which were published by BYU/MI

all from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Gee

I'm not sure having the home team published the vast majority of your work is really helpful if one is trying to move up a non-home team food chain.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

Did you bump this because of the Juvenile Instructor thread?
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

I bumped it because I was asked by two other people to give them an explanation what it was all about. So I bumped it for them to read for themselves.
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Actually, I was merely trying to dampen an earlier anti-John-Gee feeding frenzy here by pointing out that there might be other factors involved, and that the members of the chorus of ridicule against Dr. Gee might not be in a position to comment intelligently on the Ritner/Gee matter.


Yes, it is called poisoning the well no matter how you try to spin it. Gee is accused of lying, which he most certainly has, and your only response is to inform your audience that Gee's professor was removed from his dissertation committee! You have no intellectual basis for defending Gee. All you have is ad hominem against anyone who dares point out the fact that John Gee is willing to lie for the Lord.

I don't believe that I have ever said -- certainly I have never believed -- that Robert Ritner is just an anti-Mormon whose responses to Gee should be rejected on that basis alone.


Now you are just insulting everyone's intelligence. Ritner is an anti-Mormon Evangelical didn't ya know? He participated in the Luke Wilson video, which is all Mormons need to know. But you're saying you didn't mean to imply his bias against Gee was based in his Mormonism! You want us to believe that your bringing up the so-called "removal" from the committee, wasn't intended in any way to bias your audience towards Ritner's arguments against Gee's claims?

Then what, pray tell, was your purpose for mentioning this in virtually every single time Ritner's arguments were raised on the forums, over the course of three years? There was no "anti-Gee frenzy" in every instance. And you were not subtley implying that there "might be other factors involved." You were banking on it, and you were counting on those factors involving an extreme prejudice against Gee. So much so that we could easily dismiss anything Ritner says out of hand! This was the whole point of you commenting on how rare an occasion it was for a Dept Chair to be thrown off a committee. It must have been someything extraordinarily bigoted on Ritner's part, right? But of course, you left all that to the imaginations of your naïve readers, especially those who are conditioned to think in these terms. LDS folks are always the victims of unwarranted persecution. Your little deceptive rant about Ritner's prejudice against the innocent Mormon graduate student, whose only apparent crime was to reveal that he was LDS, just completed the picture for them. In the words of your mentor, "you're a damned fool."
_Milesius
_Emeritus
Posts: 559
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 7:12 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Milesius »

Getting a degree in Egyptology to defend the "Book of Abraham" is like getting a degree in geology to defend Young Earth Creationism. Like Nibley, who probably influenced him, instead of accepting the obvious, i.e., the "Book of Abraham" is an impudent fraud and a farrago of nonsense, Gee has decided to divorce himself from reality and doubled down on crazy in order to defend it. What a waste.
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei
_Kevin Graham
_Emeritus
Posts: 13037
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _Kevin Graham »

Milesius wrote:Getting a degree in Egyptology to defend the "Book of Abraham" is like getting a degree in geology to defend Young Earth Creationism. Like Nibley, who probably influenced him, instead of accepting the obvious, i.e., the "Book of Abraham" is an impudent fraud and a farrago of nonsense, Gee has decided to divorce himself from reality and doubled down on crazy in order to defend it. What a waste.



But, but, but, but.. didn't ya know?

Gee shows up at academic conferences all the time! Dan knows all kinds of academics who think highly of Gee. He writes in all sorts of Egyptological Journals, and he makes sure all his "refutations" of Ritner are in hard to come by, obscure publications written in French. Man that guy is just too smart for all of us. Did I mention he shows up at all sorts of academic conferences?

Who cares if roughly 75% of his "scholarship" has been published by the Mormon Church. That doesn't mean he is an apologist first.
_jon
_Emeritus
Posts: 1464
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:15 am

Re: Peterson and Gee's libel against Ritner?

Post by _jon »

In all of Gee's Egyptology study did he ever come up with an explanation of why Joseph got the translation of the facsimiles flat wrong?
'Church pictures are not always accurate' (The Nehor May 4th 2011)

Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told, regardless of what is right.
Post Reply