Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _Themis »

The Nehor wrote:
Yes, and we train our missionaries in logic, load them up with proofs showing our evidence, and then convince others through intense argument with vast amounts of supporting proofs that we're right. Uhhhh...no.

What we do is teach the basics and get them to have an experience with God which they can't prove to anyone but works for them because they experienced it.


It's unfortunate that we don't train them in logic, but that would hurt the church's intentions. What the church does is try and get members to produce a positive experience and then tell them this is from God and what we say is the truth. Unfortunately when it come to what works, Their are people who become terrorists who think in similar fashion.
42
_Simon Belmont

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _Simon Belmont »

AtticusFinch wrote:Because I am not your babysitter. Can't you read?


Can you back up any of your claims or not?
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _AtticusFinch »

Simon Belmont wrote:
AtticusFinch wrote:Because I am not your babysitter. Can't you read?


Can you back up any of your claims or not?



Yes, I will back one of them up right now...

you can't read. Your posts on this thread are my proof.

And I will back up another. You have an IQ less than 4. Your posts on this board are my proof.

You are dismissed.
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
_Simon Belmont

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _Simon Belmont »

AtticusFinch wrote:Yes, I will back one of them up right now...

you can't read. Your posts on this thread are my proof.

And I will back up another. You have an IQ less than 4. Your posts on this board are my proof.

You are dismissed.


So the answer is "no" -- got it.
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _MCB »

And I will back up another. You have an IQ less than 4. Your posts on this board are my proof.
Dr. Finch, you are trespassing into another academic realm. To derive an IQ equivalent for an extremely low functioning person, adaptive behavior interviews are needed. Communication skills, such as the ability to indicate by pointing to pictures whether one wants a hamburger meal or a fried chicken meal, need to be assessed. That kind of data would certainly help us understand what kind of educational interventions Simon needs in order to eventually live a life independent of the 24-7 supervision of the LDS organization.

As for an IQ of four, that is statistically highly improbable, since such a person would almost have to be on life support.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _AtticusFinch »

MCB wrote:As for an IQ of four, that is statistically highly improbable, since such a person would almost have to be on life support.


Have you not read his posts?
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _AtticusFinch »

Simon Belmont wrote:
AtticusFinch wrote:Yes, I will back one of them up right now...

you can't read. Your posts on this thread are my proof.

And I will back up another. You have an IQ less than 4. Your posts on this board are my proof.

You are dismissed.


So the answer is "no" -- got it.


yes, the answer is no...I am not your babysitter
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _MCB »

AtticusFinch wrote:
MCB wrote:As for an IQ of four, that is statistically highly improbable, since such a person would almost have to be on life support.


Have you not read his posts?
A ratio IQ would be about 30. That would give him a mental age of four. Or at least, an emotional age of four. <grins> with moderation. Your behavior is somewhat childish at times, too.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _AtticusFinch »

MCB wrote: [ A ratio IQ would be about 20. That would give him a mental age of four. Or at least, an emotional age of four. <grins> with moderation. Your behavior is somewhat childish at times, too.



NO IT"S NOT!!!!!!! (stomping my feet and holding my breath)
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Slam Dunk For Mormons: The Debate Is Over.

Post by _MCB »

A cup of cold water on the head is good for that problem.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
Post Reply