New Video Response to Recent Apologetics on Bk of Abraham

[drumdude]

I don't have any particular faith in The System. But I do know a number of physicians, pharmacists, pharmacologists, and the like, and I have no reason to see them as either conspiratorial or, as you seem to suggest, psychologically incapable of forming valid judgments. Moreover, I certainly do lack faith in my own medical, pharmacological, and immunological expertise.

So, as I do in many areas of my life, I tend to accept the consensus of experts. I admire your ability to forego such reliance and regret your expressed derision for my personal incapacity, but there you have it.

Says the man who employs LDS academics for the express purpose of going against the consensus of experts.

Folks you can’t make this stuff up!

[Everybody Wang Chung]

I don't have any particular faith in The System. But I do know a number of physicians, pharmacists, pharmacologists, and the like, and I have no reason to see them as either conspiratorial or, as you seem to suggest, psychologically incapable of forming valid judgments. Moreover, I certainly do lack faith in my own medical, pharmacological, and immunological expertise.

So, as I do in many areas of my life, I tend to accept the consensus of experts. I admire your ability to forego such reliance and regret your expressed derision for my personal incapacity, but there you have it.

Says the man who employs LDS academics for the express purpose of going against the consensus of experts.

Folks you can’t make this stuff up!

[Philo Sofee]

I enjoyed this Vogel video very much.

[drumdude]

[Skipping over some very verbose and completely irrelevant discussion that ignores the basic point]

Some consensus views of experts are worthy of trust and that Some consensus views of experts are not worthy of trust.

Thus, I can be inclined to accept consensus medical and pharmacological views while, at the same time — and with neither hypocrisy nor self-contradiction — I dissent from consensus views about some aspects of pre-Classical Mesoamerica and related matters.

Good Lord

The part that makes Dan a hypocrite is that he doesn’t have a good reason to dissent from the expert consensus. His reasons are even worse than those offered by the anti-vaccine crowd whom he mocks.

For example: I trust the experts on COVID vaccines. However- it is plausible that the COVID vaccines were rushed and might cause some harm. That’s not an inherently insane hypothesis.

It is much, much, much, MUCH less plausible that Hebrews sailed to the Americas in 600BC and set up a civilization lasting hundreds of years which disappeared without a trace. That is, for all intents and purposes, outside of Mormonism, an insane hypothesis. With zero evidence.

Good lord Dan, do better. At least admit that you go against the consensus based solely on faith and in spite of the weight of evidence. Just like the anti vaccine crowd.

And to bring this back to the book of Abraham, admit that the LDS Egyptologists are completely at odds with their non-LDS peers. Every. Single. One.

As I’ve said before, Dan dismisses all conspiracy theories except his own. Which is the definition of being intellectually dishonest.

You can’t make this stuff up.

[I Have Questions]

And to bring this back to the book of Abraham, admit that the LDS Egyptologists are completely at odds with their non-LDS peers. Every. Single. One.

As I’ve said before, Dan dismisses all conspiracy theories except his own. Which is the definition of being intellectually dishonest.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Peterson is deliberately misrepresenting what is being said.

Some consensus views of experts are worthy of trust and that Some consensus views of experts are not worthy of trust.

The point being made is the lack of rational coherence in Peterson’s decisions on which consensus views of experts he trusts, and which he doesn’t. The rational seems to be no deeper than “Because I wanna”.

His decision making logic is exactly the same as the anti-vaxxers that he scathes for their choice to not trust the expert consensus. And you are right to point out that his refusal to accept that is a demonstration of intellectual dishonesty.

[drumdude]

He calls me a “dogmatist” and a “fly.” Days after whinging about the tactic of dehumanizing your opponent.

It’s hard to imagine having someone like him as a college professor. Perhaps I was spoiled at my university to have been taught exclusively by men and women of strong moral character and integrity.

[Shulem]

It is much, much, much, MUCH less plausible that Hebrews sailed to the Americas in 600BC and set up a civilization lasting hundreds of years which disappeared without a trace. That is, for all intents and purposes, outside of Mormonism, an insane hypothesis. With zero evidence.

The scientific world lends little credence for Smith's claims of Book of Mormon historicity. It's really a nonstarter because there is no evidence and there are so many problems with the novel's content that it makes it hard for non-LDS scholars to give it any real consideration. The Book of Mormon is DOA and the Church as a whole can't even agree on where Lehi landed and where Zarahemla and Bountiful may have existed. It's all become like a Mormon fairytale in a church ever divided and unable to come to a collective agreement about where Christ appeared in ancient America. Some say, "Lo here!" or "Lo there!"

But where are the bloody temple stones and foundation of the mighty Bountiful temple? where are the bloody stones that housed the golden plates? There is nothing!

And to bring this back to the book of Abraham, admit that the LDS Egyptologists are completely at odds with their non-LDS peers. Every. Single. One.

Indeed, the Mormons have no right whatsoever in making claims that Egypt was discovered, founded, and setup by a woman in 2300 BC. This claim is an utter abomination to the world of Egyptology. The Mormons continue to hold to their false claims and their corrupt scholars lie to the members who are too stupid to face the truth. Look, the claims of Abraham chapter one are just as stupid as the ones in chapter three. It's all Joseph Smith's imagination as he collected ideas from other sources to aid him in crafting his fictional stories.

[drumdude]

The scientific world lends little credence for Smith's claims of Book of Mormon historicity. It's really a nonstarter because there is no evidence and there are so many problems with the novel's content that it makes it hard for non-LDS scholars to give it any real consideration. The Book of Mormon is DOA and the Church as a whole can't even agree on where Lehi landed and where Zarahemla and Bountiful may have existed. It's all become like a Mormon fairytale in a church ever divided and unable to come to a collective agreement about where Christ appeared in ancient America. Some say, "Lo here!" or "Lo there!"

But where are the bloody temple stones and foundation of the mighty Bountiful temple? where are the bloody stones that housed the golden plates? There is nothing!

Yep. And back to my original point, DCP created interpreter to be a Potemkin journal and spam low quality articles which are supposed to substitute as evidence.

You can buy a doctor to say the covid vaccines are dangerous. You can buy an Egyptologist to say the book of Abraham is ancient. But to anyone with a critical brain, that doesn’t make it true. If they had legitimately compelling arguments, they would become the consensus view. There is no COVID vaccine cabal, and there is no anti-Mormon science cabal.

There’s just a giant gaping black hole where the evidence for the Book of Mormon should be.

[Shulem]

You can buy an Egyptologist to say the book of Abraham is ancient. But to anyone with a critical brain, that doesn’t make it true.

Mormon-Egypt (Poopoo-peepee-land) BEGINS in the Book of Abraham at about 2300 BC in which it's said the first king therein was named Pharaoh, the son of Egyptus (Aegyptus), a woman bearing a Greek name. That is impossible. The Mormons have a problem for what to do about Smith's fake Egypt that predates the genuine Egypt we understand through legitimate Egyptology. Never mind the f-ing Facsimiles and the phony translation process! That's old news! The very text or storyline of the Book of Abraham is fatally flawed and I really would appreciate if critics (including Vogel) would take this measure up and shove it down the throats of Mormon scholars. We have them by the Goddamn balls and they know it.

IT IS THE SMOKING GUN!

[Shulem]

Look, I yelled for years and years about what's the king's name in Facsimile No. 3. The BYP finally came to the rescue. But he's been abducted by a UFO and has left the planet.

Now, I'm gong to yell for years and years about Egypt being founded in 2300 BC according to Smith's revelations. Would someone please lend me a hand? Vogel? Let's kick some apologetic ass and watch them squirm like the worms they are!

John Gee is like a little worm crawling about the dirt not knowing how to defend Smith's Egypt from that point of view. We have him boxed in right where we want him. Twist his arms and make him scream in pain! Hold him down and paddle his ass!