Rules of Patheos: Midgley appears to violate TOS 10x

[_Dr LOD]

a bunch of participants from "Dr. Shades's" hate site showed up in a concerted attack on Professor Louis Midgley

Examples?

I don't think a single one of the comment-section Doctors or associates have any history here at all. Perhaps they've lurked, but certainly, none of the long-time participants here have shown up over there. Dr. Shades is all. Dr. Cam mentioned he'd visited but I never saw those threads, and so I doubt he means that.

Am I missing somebody?

On Dan’s board I go by velhoburrinho. I found this board through his comments, just recently. To honor the good Dr. Midgley and out of amusement I’m calling myself Dr. LOD. And I am currently banned on Dan’s vanity blog.

I really am a MD for the past decade plus. At the start of my questioning truth claims of the church I quickly had access to people at the highest levels Q70 and other other high level NOM church apologists. I was first referred to the essays and FAIR, the levels of intellectual dishonesty, and gaslighting was stunning, especially from the Daniel Peterson camp.

I have discussed my current conversations on SEN with my contacts at Maxwell. They had a laugh about what they saw.

Oh and thanks Dr Moore for jumping in on The Midgley, and pinning him against a wall with his own words.

[_Jersey Girl]

Dan’s vanity blog.

Nailed it. And welcome!

[_Dr Moore]

Oh and thanks Dr Moore for jumping in on The Midgley, and pinning him against a wall with his own words.

Nice to meet you Dr. Vegan Burrito!

[_Gadianton]

Greetings Dr. LOD.

"I found this board through his comments, just recently."

Yeah, it's a pretty effective kind of advertising - "whatever you do, don't look over there!"

Out of curiosity, have you tried clearing your web cache, including cookies? Or did the Blog owner tell you that you were banned?

[_Philo Sofee]

Man.... we are gittin ALL the good guys! WOO HOO! This is great!
Welcome all you phony doctors, fake degree holding hoodlums and not so welcome over at the board that probably ought not to be named. From here we can still snipe Sic et Non without nary a complaint or threat of banning. Here we CAN disagree with each other, and sometimes rather vehemently, and STILL not get banned. Here we can actually say what we really feel and think, even about our moderator, and STILL not get banned. Here we have freedom of expression, freedom to analyze, read whatever you wish and comment on, refute each other, and actually LEARN new and interesting things on all topics, WITHOUT having to be pre-forced to any kind of special conclusion. In other words, this is actually Internet heaven, the best kept secret on the net! Welcome all of you

[_Doctor Scratch]

Peterson is frothing with rage:

It was just a vehicle for "Dr. Moore's" intention, explained elsewhere, of demonstrating our alleged hypocrisy.

Having accomplished his mission, at least to his own satisfaction and that of his completely objective friends at "Dr. Shade's" hate site, he's now done.
His very first substantial comment here falsely accused Professor Midgley of having "admitted" that the purpose of his essay on Grant Palmer's book was the "character assassination" of Mr. Palmer.

People here objected to that false accusation and, so, "Dr. Moore" is now taking bows at "Dr. Shades's" hate site for his exposure of our alleged incivility.

This stuff is so incredibly tiresome.

What set him off, I wonder? Was it the indignity of having all these Ph.D.-holding posters upvoting the few posts that actually seem as if they had been written by honest, scrupulous, and intelligent people? Whatever the case may be, it seems he has been going on a banning spree. I do agree that this:

My best guess is that Midgley went into such a fury over Shades and the others being there that he privately went to DCP and said it’s either him or me. He’s publicly requested banning Shades several times.

Is almost certainly correct. Whatever the case, a hearty welcome to Drs. Moore and LOD! "SeN"'s loss is clearly our gain.

As for Dr. Shades's banning: it appears that Peterson banned him, then Dr. Shades came here to report what happened, and so then DCP went and *un*-banned him in an effort to make it seem as if he (Shades) was lying? Is that the game they're playing? Pretty weak stuff. Let them come over here and attempt to defend Midgley's vicious, unprofessional, and unscrupulous Palmer article. Peterson writes:

I can confirm that, at the time that Professor Midgley was writing his essay, we knew -- or had excellent reasons to believe -- a number of eye-opening things about Mr. Palmer's duplicitious dealings that we did not include. Professor Midgley's essay could have been much more negative than it was.

Again I ask: would the Mopologists like to have the details of Hamblin's divorce posted? The dollar amount in his 401K? The dumb sorts of faux-macho artifacts he's collected? If the Mopologists want to make rancid insinuations--as they've been doing (and bear in mind that they were the ones who started it, and they've been doing it for decades), then it needs to be pointed out that it can be done to them in return. All DCP's comment proves in the end is just how vicious and malicious they were when they went after Palmer. Midgley's remark about Palmer "begging" and "crying" is remarkably cruel. Remember: Palmer passed away and cannot defend himself from these sorts of accusations.

[_Doctor Scratch]

It's still there, Dr. Shades. Boy, things are really nuts over there, right?

Dr. Moore is absolutely destroying the arguments of the apologists in this thread. And he's really getting noticed. One of his posts got 18 up-votes, and most of those voters themselves hold doctorate degrees. This must be absolutely embarrassing for the apologists.

All right: I have to apologize to Dr. Peterson for making fun of him for choking up over the award that his own organization gave to him. I mean, I'm at a loss for words myself at the moment:

https://disqus.com/by/doctorscratchownsyou/

For the record, that isn't me, though I'm very humbled by the tribute! Is it wrong to assume that this had something to do with the recent censorship and bannings?

[_moksha]

That's their idea of leveling the playing field. ;-)

I'm not certain. My guess is that Dr. Midgley knew that trying to dig up dirt on Grant Palmer by interviewing his students, colleagues, church leaders, friends, and neighbors was an act of personal dynamiting rather than the earnest efforts of reviewing a book. He wanted dirt and damage. On some level, he knew that conventional morality would find his actions and motives abhorrent. Had he worked somewhere besides BYU where standards of ethics applied, he would have been sanctioned by his peers and employers for such methods. Thus it made sense that he would be so strongly defensive when this matter was mentioned.

[_Dr Moore]

Peterson is frothing with rage:

The guilty take the truth to be hard.

I do agree. It is extremely bad form to double down on character assassination of someone who has passed away. Even if their facts are entirely correct, it displays a horrible lack of judgment and empathy to speak as they (Dr Peterson and Dr Midgley) have. I wonder if Jesus is proud of them.

It wasn’t my intention to ignite such a firestorm of rage. I merely found Dr Midgleys brave challenge to be a worthy point of entry for a lively discussion. Nay.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Just had lunch in Provo with two members of the Maxwell Institute.

They have both been getting a huge kick out of reading SeN and the many recent meltdowns Prie$tcraft and Woody are having. It's the gift that keeps on giving.

Oh, I have no doubt that the people at the Maxwell Institute are laughing uproariously at Midgley and Peterson.