TBMs: How do you Reconcile Facsimile No. 2?

[_bcspace]

When I asked my dear, kind, loving TBM-til-the-day-she-dies mother why Joseph Smith's translations didn't match those that multiple Egyptologists independently produced from the same source, she, in all sweet sincerety, explained to me that all of the Egyptologists simply must have gotten it wrong.

I love my mom. I think that she is a very representative sample of her Mormon generation.

Probably a Fielding-McConkite. My dear mother once, in an attempt to show she knew her rock 'n' roll, referred to Led Leppard and Def Zeppelin.

[_Morley]

Naw. Too much missing papyri. That the Egyptians changed or erased history to benefit the current ruling class is an established fact. So you're being intellectually dishonest by dismissing the possibility I raised. But you do seem to be prone to Fortigurn's Lazy Research as evidence by the fact that you did not read the CERN paper in the other thread even though you said you did.

Yes, I read the CERN Paper. I also read the interpretation on your news site. The interpretation had little to do with the original paper. A bit of a stretch, all covered by 'we were told not to draw conclusions' tripe.

I'm very familiar with Johnson's book but haven't read it. Have you? Do you really believe that the rich tradition of mythology in Greece sprang from Jewish creation myths? Why am I asking? Of course you do. You have to fit all the pieces together somehow.

You also have to shorten the history of Greece and Egypt to fit in with a literal Garden of Eden, don't you? Wow. You're more of a literalist than I imagined.

Good luck making it all work, my friend. I mean that. I never could.

[_bcspace]

Yes, I read the CERN Paper. I also read the interpretation on your news site. The interpretation had little to do with the original paper. A bit of a stretch, all covered by 'we were told not to draw conclusions' tripe.

Being unable to show how it's wrong, you are unable to support your claim. Methinks you only read just now if at all.

I'm very familiar with Johnson's book but haven't read it. Have you?

Yep. Both of them.

Do you really believe that the rich tradition of mythology in Greece sprang from Jewish creation myths? Why am I asking? Of course you do. You have to fit all the pieces together somehow.

Like I said, it's only a hypothesis that illustrates my Book of Abraham example.

You also have to shorten the history of Greece and Egypt to fit in with a literal Garden of Eden, don't you?

Why would I have to?

Good luck making it all work, my friend. I mean that. I never could.

Works great. Try to remove all intellectual dishonesty and you'll come nearer to the truth.

[_Morley]

Being unable to show how it's wrong, you are unable to support your claim. Methinks you only read just now if at all.

I made no claims. You did. You said the paper debunked global warming. It didn't. I went to the CERN paper. It didn't even try to debunk global warming. Please think whatever you wish.

[_bcspace]

You said the paper debunked global warming

I never said that. Try again.

[_Morley]

Do you really believe that the rich tradition of mythology in Greece sprang from Jewish creation myths? Why am I asking? Of course you do. You have to fit all the pieces together somehow.

Like I said, it's only a hypothesis that illustrates my Book of Abraham example.

That creation myths has genesis in the deeds of real people is not the same as saying (as Johnson does) that they all spring from the actual Garden of Eden tales.

You also have to shorten the history of Greece and Egypt to fit in with a literal Garden of Eden, don't you?

Why would I have to?

Maybe you don't. If you place the Flood at 3000 BCE, you certainly do.

Good luck making it all work, my friend. I mean that. I never could.

Works great. Try to remove all intellectual dishonesty and you'll come nearer to the truth.

Please do school me about what you see as my intellectual honesty.

[_Morley]

You said the paper debunked global warming

I never said that. Try again.

Sorry. I was using short cuts. You implied the paper debunked man-made global warming.

[_bcspace]

Sorry. I was using short cuts. You implied the paper debunked man-made global warming.

Yes. AGW is based on the notion that since CO2 is a greenhouse gas, GW must be caused by ever increasing amounts of it in the atmosphere. The CERN report debunked that and the other things I mentioned like the hockey stick data fiasco and the misreading of temperature sensors that when corrected showed that GW slowed significantly in the late 90's all point to that as well.

[_jon]

The Egyptians are notorious for burying or changing the past, especially when it's unpleasant to the current rulers

No...no, you didn't say this...were you smiling ironically whilst you typed?

[_Morley]

Sorry. I was using short cuts. You implied the paper debunked man-made global warming.

Yes. AGW is based on the notion that since CO2 is a greenhouse gas, GW must be caused by ever increasing amounts of it in the atmosphere. The CERN report debunked that and the other things I mentioned like the hockey stick data fiasco and the misreading of temperature sensors that when corrected showed that GW slowed significantly in the late 90's all point to that as well.

No. The CERN report did not debunk that. The CERN article presented data but drew no such conclusions. It was the article on your news site that attempted to debunk it.