Robert Ritner's Decimation of Mormon Egyptology

[_Bob Loblaw]

Are you really claiming this is a demonstration of plagiarism by Rhodes? It seems more likely this is what I was talking about and bit of tit-for-tat. However, let's assume Ritner is claiming plariarism here. Where is the evidence? What exactly was plagiarized? It seems like a rather deceitful way of making the charge without correcting or demonstrating the charge is true or valid in the least?

No, it's not. The demonstration is in the text I posted above. Rhodes was supposed to be doing a new translation/transliteration, and there is strong evidence that he took much of it from Ritner without attribution. The examples given are, as Ritner says, "obvious smoking guns." You honestly can't see it?

Wow.

[_Tobin]

Are you really claiming this is a demonstration of plagiarism by Rhodes? It seems more likely this is what I was talking about and bit of tit-for-tat. However, let's assume Ritner is claiming plariarism here. Where is the evidence? What exactly was plagiarized? It seems like a rather deceitful way of making the charge without correcting or demonstrating the charge is true or valid in the least?

No, it's not. The demonstration is in the text I posted above. Rhodes was supposed to be doing a new translation/transliteration, and there is strong evidence that he took much of it from Ritner without attribution. The examples given are, as Ritner says, "obvious smoking guns." You honestly can't see it?

Wow.

Fascinating. Yet he completely fails to state his evidence. In fact, he fails utterly to even to state it was plagiarism. All we have from you is some "strong evidence" that he took much of his work from Ritner. Who determined it was strong evidence? Clearly Ritner thinks so little of his strong evidence that he has not pursued the matter past a small citation in his book.

[Guest]

ETA: I was apparently writing this response (in between applying coats of paint) while Sethbag (who wrote a much better response than this) was writing his upthread. Sorry for the duplication, but I will leave this one up anyway.
_______________________________________________

Mormon teachings diverge from reality in ways that are already apparent to children in junior high and high school.

In fact, if they actually believe what they preach, many (of not all) Mormon GAs would score very poorly on tests in many areas of a good high school's science curriculum. In a Knowledge Bowl setting, they would have their lunch eaten by the every student in the room.

Just when I think you can't say anything more absurd, you always surprise me with gems like this.

Does your arrogance know no bounds?

Whose arrogance could use some bounds here? I would claim that it is the one who simply decides to ignore or disavow all of the demonstrably false and silly beliefs professed by grown men who are the leaders of the LDS Church, as opposed to the one who points them out.

For example, which of the following answers do you think would get be scored as correct on high school science test?

- The first humans on the Earth were Adam and Eve and they were to be found, less than 10,000 years ago, in the Garden of Eden, which was actually in Daveiss County, Missouri .

- The Atlantic basin was formed in a cataclysmic event less than 10,000 years ago as the waters from a global flood were receding (so that there would be a uninhabited continent for the Jaredites and the Nephites to eventually possess).

- Small bands of bronze age humans from the Middle East crossed the ocean by boat between 2500 BC and 600 BC to eventually grow into populations numbering in the millions and then disappear without a trace (except for the fact that they were are the progenitors of the Amerindians).

- The sun gets its light from Kolob.

I could go on and on. Just because you don't want to acknowledge this demonstrably false whacko stuff does not mean that it is not in Mormon scripture, which Mormon GAs are required to hold up as the absolute truth.

And the more that the general population finds out about what LDS leaders, faithful members, and the apologists believe, the less willing they are to listen to the "Mormon message". This is the main reason that LDS Church growth rate in the US has now dropped to that of the general population.

[_Themis]

I wish the experts in other fields (linguistics, population genetics, ancient american archaeology, etc.) would write books where they systematically call out the BS that spews from Mormon apologists. It isn't very often that someone who is a leader in an academic field takes Mormon apologists to the wood shed. This is one of those rare times and it is very satisfying to watch.

Interesting sentiment and I certainly agree. Sad truth is, however, that it seldom requires an expert to demonstrate the ways in which Mormon apologists and believing Mormons, in general, are required to twist, warp, parse and misrepresent scientific fact and common knowledge in their quest to maintain unfounded beliefs and reduce cognitive dissonance.

Ritner certainly is doing the church a service in the long run. Others would be nice, but they are either not aware or not interested enough to get involved. Especially in light of the politics and personal attacks that would follow. Fortunately many former believers that are very well educated bring up current research that has bearing on LDS issues. One recent example is Simon Southerton. He brought up current research that is putting to rest any realistic idea that a small group of people from the middle east arrived in the Americas around 600 BC.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Says Mr. Thews, who completely ignoring reality, believes in a zombie who died for his sins.

But, he embraces Science when it suits him.

- Doc

[_Bob Loblaw]

Fascinating. Yet he completely fails to state his evidence.

You clearly didn't read what I posted. He gives several examples of unattributed "borrowing" by Rhodes.

In fact, he fails utterly to even to state it was plagiarism.

Uh, unattributed borrowing is plagiarism.

All we have from you is some "strong evidence" that he took much of his work from Ritner. Who determined it was strong evidence?

He provided the evidence, and it is strong. He shows specifically where Rhodes lifted stuff from Ritner. I know, you're probably just trolling, but I can't believe you could be this obtuse.

Clearly Ritner thinks so little of his strong evidence that he has not pursued the matter past a small citation in his book.

Ritner gives 9 clear examples. I can only conclude that you have reading comprehension problems, or you're a troll who doesn't give a crap. I'm guessing the latter.

[_Equality]

but I can't believe you could be this obtuse.

Hey, no need to stretch the truth just to make a point. Lol.

[_Bob Loblaw]

Hey, no need to stretch the truth just to make a point. Lol.

I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but this is silly.

[_Themis]

Says Mr. Thews

Where? I don't see him.

Perhaps you are again mistaking me for him. :)

[_Bob Loblaw]

Where? I don't see him.

Perhaps you are again mistaking me for him. :)

:highfive: