Peterson at it again, blasting away in the comments

[_Some Schmo]

Tell me, Simon... do you like Scratch and Infymus? Or is there a better word that could be used to describe your feeling toward them?

I've never met either one.

So not meeting them is relevant to how you feel about them?

If so, why do you assume hate if the people involved have never met each other?

Surely you see where I'm going with this. Once again, you've set yourself apart with a double standard.

[_Simon Belmont]

Slander - a malicious, false and defamatory statement.

Simon CFR on anything posted in this thread about DCP that is - malicious + false + defamatory.

Remember - it has to be malicious AND false AND defamatory.

Read the OP. I am not going to hold your hand and show you every little thing. If you know nothing about what is going on in this thread, I expect you to bow out.

So not meeting them is relevant to how you feel about them?

If so, why do you assume hate if the people involved have never met each other?

I really wish you'd discuss the issues instead of making this thread about me.

Yes, I don't judge whether I like someone or not unless I've actually met them. That isn't true for others, but it is true for me. I assume Infymus, Scratch, and other DCP slanderers/stalkers hate him because they've implied as much. It's really quite simple.

But I am not here to attack back, I would just like some answers.

[_Doctor Scratch]

If DCP is genuinely interested in making amends, and in letting bygones be bygones, well, then: hey, I'm all for it. I've extended the olive branch to him in the past, and he's always brushed it aside. You see: I don't think that our criticism actually bothers him; I think he views all of it as part of an ongoing game. That's why he told Dan Wotherspoon on "Mormon Stories" that he's "having fun" on the boards. When you finally pin him down, the impression he gives is that he never gets upset. If DCP were genuinely upset and bothered by any of this criticism, then sure: I would feel bad and apologize to him. But I don't think it does bother him. I think he enjoys being able to milk the situation and to manipulate people's sympathy.

[_thews]

I don't hate critics.

I would just like to have some simple answers -- the kind you'd give to a 4 year old child.

You continue to ask questions under the assumption you answer them... you don't. You tuck tail and flee, only to pipe up later that your ignorance of the questions asked of you weren't ignored. Do you deserve an answer to anything Simon?

It has. Lots of times.
What you mean is, it hasn't been proven false to YOU.

Show me where? If it's been "lots of times" surely you will have no problem pointing me to something that definitively demonstrates the church is false.

What I asked you previously based on your claim that there is evidence to prove the historicity in Mormonism is true.

The many threads you've left when you were cornered should prove it to you. You have the same schtick the other apologists have, and that's to just leave a thread once you have no other outs. Let me prove it to you... you claimed there was evidence to prove the historicity in Mormonism, but only offered links to tangled web sites as your evidence. What exactly are you claiming is tangible evidence (please be specific) that proves the church is true? You can either back up what you said, acknowledge there isn't any evidence you claimed exists, ask me a question in response, or tuck tail again.

Your words Simon:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=15366&hilit=+historicity&start=0

You see, it is statements like these which confirm my already made judgement that you are nothing more than a bigot, attacking that which he does not understand in the slightest. You know absolutely nothing if you think there is no evidence to support Mormonism.

So Simon, please explain what tangible evidence "supports" Mormonism (be specific) as you stated? Here are your options:

A) Tuck tail (again, which is what I expect).
B) Answer the question.
C) Continue to ask questions, basking in ignorance of the questions you can't answer.

[_Yahoo Bot]

So Simon, please explain what tangible evidence "supports" Mormonism (be specific) as you stated?

Eyewitnesses, many of them, to the gold plates. One of the Whitmers recanted his testimony when he declared that he was unable to read the characters on the plates.

Eyewitnesses to angels.

That's evidence -- at least the best kind a court of law would find acceptable.

[_Simon Belmont]

If DCP is genuinely interested in making amends, and in letting bygones be bygones, well, then: hey, I'm all for it. I've extended the olive branch to him in the past, and he's always brushed it aside. You see: I don't think that our criticism actually bothers him; I think he views all of it as part of an ongoing game. That's why he told Dan Wotherspoon on "Mormon Stories" that he's "having fun" on the boards. When you finally pin him down, the impression he gives is that he never gets upset. If DCP were genuinely upset and bothered by any of this criticism, then sure: I would feel bad and apologize to him. But I don't think it does bother him. I think he enjoys being able to milk the situation and to manipulate people's sympathy.

You may not think the criticism bothers DCP (and I am no expert on the matter), but you have to ask: would it bother you after 5+ years? I mean, we're all human, we all feel the same basic emotions. I think it's possible to empathize. I just don't see the need, or the utility to continually attempt to malign someone's reputation online. Enough is enough, isn't it?

[_thews]

So Simon, please explain what tangible evidence "supports" Mormonism (be specific) as you stated?

Eyewitnesses, many of them, to the gold plates. One of the Whitmers recanted his testimony when he declared that he was unable to read the characters on the plates.

Eyewitnesses to angels.

That's evidence -- at least the best kind a court of law would find acceptable.

I'll start a new thread Simon. At least you finally answered what "evidence" you claim exists.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Like I said, Simon: if he's interested in reconciliation, he knows where to find me.

[_Joey]

Not trying to dismiss any apologies owed, testosterone to be adjudicated, or length to be measured here ---- but.....

Shouldn't we at least ask Provo to acknowledge that all the "heel clicking" generated by the MI and FARMS has still not generated an ounce of interest from the real world of academics when it comes historians and archaeologist to the claims of the Mormon Church's declaration of this supposed history in the Book of Mormon!

Who the hell has all this supposed scholarship, being pumped out of Provo on a daily basis, actually generated any secular academic interest from?????

There is a reason Provo left this board for the "Cafeteria" - he loves to fill himself in isolation!! B

[Guest]

You may not think the criticism bothers DCP (and I am no expert on the matter), but you have to ask: would it bother you after 5+ years? I mean, we're all human, we all feel the same basic emotions. I think it's possible to empathize. I just don't see the need, or the utility to continually attempt to malign someone's reputation online. Enough is enough, isn't it?

Simon,

If Daniel Peterson continues to behave in a way that illicits criticism, why would you think it unfair or unreasonable that he continue to be criticized for such behavior?

It is not as if he made a mistake five years ago and the critics won't let him forget it. Dr. Peterson continues to offend, in public, on a near daily basis.

If you were to continue to park in handicapped parking spaces without displaying a handicapped parking permit on your vehicle, do you believe that after five years of doing so you should no longer be cited for it?

Just the opposite would happen would it not? The penalties for continued offense should, and probably would, become more severe. After five years of such offenses you would be likely to have your driver's license suspended and would probably face additional heavy fines.

I would be happy to list for you some of Dr. Peterson's ongoing offenses. His behavior immediately prior leaving this board is but one example.

However, my intent here is not to criticize the good Dr., only to help you understand why he continues to draw fire, and why such fire is justified.