Meet the Mopologists

[_Dr. Shades]

It only fits into place if it's accurate.

Which, according to you, it is.

I think I'll just frame this one.

As well you should.

[_Jersey Girl]

It only fits into place if it's accurate.

Which, according to you, it is.

I think I'll just frame this one.

As well you should.

According to me, your statements are false, inaccurate and unsupported by proof or evidence.

And as for this:

Just wondering, but wouldn't you have saved a lot of time by just saying, "Hey Shades, it was the Z Trolls, not Mr. Itchy." ?

As a matter of fact, what would have saved a huge amount of time on my part correcting errors privately and publicly, being pumped for information in the chat room by Scratch and spending even this small amount of time tonight correcting/challenging you here would have been for you not to circulate information shared with you privately and so "one or more posters" could run it up a public flagpole.

That's what would have saved time, Shades.

I've publicly admitted error multiple times on this board regarding those incidents, I posted a public apology to Kerry Shirts and here you are still carelessly throwing it around and attempting to defend it, as if it were all proven fact.

If you have proof, then post it.

Again, the only truth is that a joke was played on a small group of posters by an unidentified person or person(s) and the one difference between you and I, is that I have the confidence to admit it instead of regurgitating rumor for which there is no solid proof.

Kerry Shirts is a decent human being and there is no solid proof linking Juliann to the Ztrolls or the Itchy Blog. What you have is a perpetual pissing contest in which (on this thread) you attempt to resurrect something that was shaky to begin with and in your mind (I suppose) apparently using it to implicate Juliann and mock Kerry.

[_Daniel Peterson]

1:18, or thereabouts, editor Shirts makes an abrupt jump-cut, and we find DCP in mid-anecdote. In the story, DCP says that he accidentally let slip (by way of re-assurance), "That's why they pay me the big bucks." The other guy apparently said, "Really? How much do they pay you?" DCP goes on to say that it was necessary to "nip that [i.e., the notion that he receives remuneration for apologetics] in the bud real quick." Then he holds up his thumb and finger in a little "zero" sing. Apparently, he forgot about the 20 G's, and the various monies he's gotten for his editorial jobs and whatnot.

Lemme tell you: When Ibn Sina's Physics of the Shifa’ comes from the press, that's going to be a truly watershed moment in the history of Mopologetics. (Probably even more watershedly than our previous publication of Averroës' Middle Commentary on Aristotle's De Anima, if that can be imagined!) Aristotelian theories of motion are the coming rage; I expect the Church will be incorporating them into its public service announcements in literally no time.

Incidentally, unless I'm mistaken the anecdote I was telling regarded an experience that I had as a bishop. When a member of my ward called me very late at night (or, more accurately, early in the morning) about a difficulty, and we had to meet, he apologized to me about disturbing my night. I responded, "No problem. That's why they pay me the big bucks." To my considerable surprise, he took it seriously and asked how much "they" pay me. I felt that that little misconception needed to be put to rest at once.

DCP stands behind him, grinning the entire time.

I don't do scowls. So sorry.

"3 million," is DCP's very proud reply.

"Proud"? Well, if you say so.

the inadvertent admission as to how important MormonDiscussions.com has become in the world of Mopologetics.

Dream on.

I don't think that there's a single soul in the leadership of the Maxwell Institute, for example, besides me, who even knows that this place exists.

It seems that many of the FAIR crowd monitor this board through gritted teeth, laughing nervously about the criticism they find here.

Of the "FAIR crowd," I'm guessing that perhaps half a dozen pay even intermittent attention to this board. If there are more, I would be surprised.

Further, I was highly intrigued by the need among DCP, Shirts, and "Scotty Dog" Gordon to laugh off the notion that Mopologists receive payment (hint: they do).

Fifty to a hundred bucks annually, in a really good year, for a few "Mopologists." Nothing at all, ever, for most.

They really, really, really seem to desperately need to diffuse such a proposition.

There's no "desperation." That's purely, as such things typically are, a figment of your overactive and relentlessly hostile imagination. But there is an obligation to contradict public falsehoods.

[_moksha]

Tertiary highlight: Juliann does not have horns. I'd like to have dinner in her general proximity.

cks

I thought Jan was cute.

Does "Rommelator" (more German-Mormon connectedness?) post on the MAD board?

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Anyway, back to the video. For my money, the absolute BEST part of the video was at 9:09 when Kerry yanked some poor elderly man out of his shoes, practically throttled him, then demanded that he "say 'hi' to Bill Hamblin." When the startled man complied, Kerry almost literally tossed him aside, discarding him like yesterday's leftovers.

That was hilarious. The old man looked like he had just been mugged.

[_Mister Scratch]

1:18, or thereabouts, editor Shirts makes an abrupt jump-cut, and we find DCP in mid-anecdote. In the story, DCP says that he accidentally let slip (by way of re-assurance), "That's why they pay me the big bucks." The other guy apparently said, "Really? How much do they pay you?" DCP goes on to say that it was necessary to "nip that [i.e., the notion that he receives remuneration for apologetics] in the bud real quick." Then he holds up his thumb and finger in a little "zero" sing. Apparently, he forgot about the 20 G's, and the various monies he's gotten for his editorial jobs and whatnot.

Incidentally, unless I'm mistaken the anecdote I was telling regarded an experience that I had as a bishop. When a member of my ward called me very late at night (or, more accurately, early in the morning) about a difficulty, and we had to meet, he apologized to me about disturbing my night. I responded, "No problem. That's why they pay me the big bucks." To my considerable surprise, he took it seriously and asked how much "they" pay me. I felt that that little misconception needed to be put to rest at once.

Well, then, you can thank K. Shirts's editing for creating the (false) impression that you were referring to Mopologetic payment.

the inadvertent admission as to how important MormonDiscussions.com has become in the world of Mopologetics.

Dream on.

I don't think that there's a single soul in the leadership of the Maxwell Institute, for example, besides me, who even knows that this place exists.

LOL. Well, it has merited at least a couple of articles in the FARMS Review---Lou Midgley's response to Dr. Shades's "Intenet/Chapel Mormon" theory, and your own "Witchcraft Paradigm" which improperly cited quotes from myself, Kevin Graham, and, I believe, Rollo Tomasi. It used to be that RfM was the touchstone for online LDS criticism. Well, it seems that the center of gravity has shifted.

It seems that many of the FAIR crowd monitor this board through gritted teeth, laughing nervously about the criticism they find here.

Of the "FAIR crowd," I'm guessing that perhaps half a dozen pay even intermittent attention to this board. If there are more, I would be surprised.

Correction: if there are more, you will commence crapping yourself.

Further, I was highly intrigued by the need among DCP, Shirts, and "Scotty Dog" Gordon to laugh off the notion that Mopologists receive payment (hint: they do).

Fifty to a hundred bucks annually, in a really good year, for a few "Mopologists." Nothing at all, ever, for most.

So you've ended the $1,000+ "research stipends"?

They really, really, really seem to desperately need to diffuse such a proposition.

There's no "desperation." That's purely, as such things typically are, a figment of your overactive and relentlessly hostile imagination. But there is an obligation to contradict public falsehoods.

Boy, you got that right! I'm sure that many people watching the video would be left with the impression that Mopologists *never* receive *any* money at all. I mean, that was the impression that critics such as myself and Dr. Shades had carried for a long time. Hence why I characterized your "admissions" as a "watershed moment."

Anyways, I think you are misunderstanding me. That is because I employ a great deal of irony in my posts. You see, Prof. P., I prefer the rapier to the sledgehammer when making my points.

LOL....

[_Daniel Peterson]

I don't think that there's a single soul in the leadership of the Maxwell Institute, for example, besides me, who even knows that this place exists.

LOL. Well, it has merited at least a couple of articles in the FARMS Review---Lou Midgley's response to Dr. Shades's "Intenet/Chapel Mormon" theory, and your own "Witchcraft Paradigm"

LOL. I wrote the "Witchcraft Paradigm." That merely proves that I'm aware of this place. Which has never been in dispute.

Could you supply the reference for Professor Midgley's response to Shades's unfortunate dichotomy?

Incidentally, Shades has laid his ill-advised notion out on at least one other message board, and at a Sunstone symposium.

which improperly cited quotes from myself, Kevin Graham, and, I believe, Rollo Tomasi.

Still smarting over the fact that your pseudonym didn't get the public notice you crave?

It used to be that RfM was the touchstone for online LDS criticism. Well, it seems that the center of gravity has shifted.

Delusions of grandeur.

So you've ended the $1,000+ "research stipends"?

No. But research stipends cover research costs -- e.g., the hiring of research assistants, travel to library collections. They aren't salary or simple pocketable income. And they rarely have had to do with apologetic matters, in any case.

You really do need to stop revealing your ignorance. It's been redundant for quite a long time now.

[_Dwight Frye]

Does "Rommelator" (more German-Mormon connectedness?) post on the MAD board?

He does indeed.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

I would like to thank Mr. Scratch personally for the painstaking detective work that he put into finding these youtube videos and thank his anonymous informant. Good thing this informant chooses to remain anonymous. I would hate to see the blowback if his or her identity were revealed to Kerry Shirts. He would undoubtedly be enraged to the point of going Danite on this person's ass for revealing these candid videos.

The reviews brought back the good old days of Siskel and Ebert for me. How I miss them. Wise choice to go with stars instead of thumbs though. I would hate to see Scratch wind up in court over the use of thumbs in his reviews. So much talent would go to waste in a moment's indiscretion. I completely agree that Shirts' attempt at a "Blair Witch" feel, while appropriate in its creepiness, somehow failed to live up to its promise this time. Note to Kerry: it's all about the lighting, guy.

Then again, Shirts may have been merely alluding to the Blair Witch Project, while trying to snow us with the seeming, utter banality of the conference. I mean, don't you think he is simply taunting the critics of Mormonism, not just in his usual frenetic, yet milquetoast, avuncular fashion, which is explicit, but in trying to pass all of this off as normal? Sure, he would like to make us think that this is simply a collection of geeks with honorable intentions and a slight superhero complex, but I think we need to look deeper... past this vanilla facade to the profoundly disturbing, smooth-tasting, yet sinister nougat center.

So, my recommendation to Scratch: please re-watch (repeatedly) the entire Shirts video one frame at a time--this time looking closely at the hand motions of the people, the order in which words appear on book covers (any nasty acrostics?), the oddly-placed, suspicious pixels, and please listen to that soundtrack backwards many, many times. Only by doing this will you get to the bottom of what surely must have been the single most diabolical meeting of the year. Bohemian Grove? The Trilateral Commission? The Illuminati? Amateurs next to this konklave of kaos and pure evil. And if you should fail to find anything damning? You're not looking hard enough.

Start yet again by watching The Ninth Gate and The Da Vinci Code to get some pointers. Oh, and maybe you should read a few LaRouche pamphlets to boot.

Brilliant!

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Anyway, back to the video. For my money, the absolute BEST part of the video was at 9:09 when Kerry yanked some poor elderly man out of his shoes, practically throttled him, then demanded that he "say 'hi' to Bill Hamblin." When the startled man complied, Kerry almost literally tossed him aside, discarding him like yesterday's leftovers.

That was hilarious. The old man looked like he had just been mugged.

It's even more funny, in my opinion, if you know them both. Good men, the both, and healthy senses of humor.

Of the "FAIR crowd," I'm guessing that perhaps half a dozen pay even intermittent attention to this board. If there are more, I would be surprised.

Likewise.