DCP - your June 4 Mormon Times article on John Whitmer

[_Dan Vogel]

Dan P.,

And you know what I think of your defense. I was just checking to see if your reasons have gotten better.

[_Buffalo]

LOL. You know what I think of your theory.

Best,

-DCP

Who can argue with this logic?

[_madeleine]

Maybe "golden plates" is metaphorical.

[_Daniel Peterson]

It’s not ad hoc because the theory is entailed in the evidence we already have.

As you know, I couldn't possibly disagree more strongly.

I didn’t make it up to escape counter evidence.

I think that's precisely what you did.

You have to neutralize the testimonies of the witnesses.

It’s based on the statement of John Whitmer in 1839 and Martin Harris’s in 1838 about the Eight Witnesses. Dispute my use of these sources all you want,

As you know, I reject utterly your use of those sources. I regard it as an abuse or misuse of them.

but it’s not an ad hoc theory.

Again, I disagree.

The weight according to witnesses was between 40 and 60 pounds, which is consistent with tin but not gold.

It is also consistent with a gold alloy that would, unlike tin, have the appearance of gold that was reported by the witnesses.

http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu/publica ... m=1&id=393

Tumbaga is an ad hoc theory to account for the lighter weight of the plates.

And yet, somehow, your "tin" is not?

It’s better than the gold plates theory in scope and explanatory power.

I note, with interest, the Kuhnian language. But I disagree completely.

[Guest]

Dan & Daniel,

In terms of the witnesses to the Gold Plates, is there a document(s) with their signature on affirming the statement?

[_LDS truthseeker]

Based on the conversations here between the two Dans; the plates were either real, ancient plates made of gold & other lighter metals or if they existed at all, they were made of some cheap metal like tin painted gold.

So in essence DCP's Mormon Times article should be changed from:

"Moreover where did Joseph Smith and his supposed co-conspirators get all that gold?"

to

"Moreover where did Joseph Smith and his supposed co-conspirators get all that tin and gold paint?"

[_Daniel Peterson]

If you have access to some sort of gold-colored paint that, applied to tin plates, would convince somebody holding them and closely inspecting them that they were really made of gold, I suggest that you create such an artifact and let us see it.

And it would be even better if you were to use an early-nineteenth-century paint for the project.

[_LDS truthseeker]

If you have access to some sort of gold-colored paint that, applied to tin plates, would convince somebody holding them and closely inspecting them that they were really made of gold, I suggest that you create such an artifact and let us see it.

And it would be even better if you were to use an early-nineteenth-century paint for the project.

Who knows under what circumstances the witnesses saw the plates. There wasn't electric lights back then so they may have seen them in a dimly lit room and maybe only got a glimpse of them. The witnesses did not write their own statements (which would have been far more convincing) and instead merely signed a prepared statement which may or may not 100% reflected their experience.

And since 2/3 of the plates were sealed, which seems very convenient, if it was a fraud, then only a handful of plates would have had to be fabricated and attached to a block of metal which would give it some weight. I mean why would 2/3 of the plates be sealed as they would never be translated?

I don't think it would be all that hard to manufacture a set of plates and paint them gold. They had gold paint back then. It could have even been polished copper that had the 'appearance of gold'.

Someone made the Kinderhook Plates and they passed a detailed inspection and were even placed in a museum. So I have little doubt that someone couldn't make a mock set of plates (mostly sealed) and convince some 19th century people that believed in things like 'second site'.

Your challenge DCP is different because you would already know what I was making would be a fraud. But the witnesses wanted to believe in the plates. They wanted them to be true and they probably thought they were real already so they just needed a little more prompting to seal what they already knew. So they would be far easier to convince, especially 180 years ago then you would be now.

Someone made such a set of plates and gave them to the Tanners to display in their store. They weren't painted but are made of lead and weigh some 200 pounds. I know as I have hefted them myself and know of their surety. So surely it could be done - even 180 years ago by others.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Who knows under what circumstances the witnesses saw the plates.

Anybody who has read their numerous accounts will have a pretty good idea.

There wasn't electric lights back then so they may have seen them in a dimly lit room and maybe only got a glimpse of them.

Except that they saw them outside, and, at least in the case of the Eight Witnesses, held them and leafed through them -- in the afternoon.

The witnesses did not write their own statements (which would have been far more convincing) and instead merely signed a prepared statement which may or may not 100% reflected their experience.

That is, with all due respect, a red herring.

Their testimonies were published with the Book of Mormon from the beginning. Hundreds if not thousands of people spoke with them -- believers, unbelievers, hostile journalists, etc. -- and they had plenty of opportunity to say "Hey! Wait a minute! That's not what happened!" But there is no evidence that any of them ever did.

I don't think it would be all that hard to manufacture a set of plates and paint them gold.

As I've said, feel free to do it.

Remember that real gold coins were in circulation back then. People knew very well what real gold looked like.

They had gold paint back then.

So do we. And even today's gold paint wouldn't convince me for a nanosecond.

It could have even been polished copper that had the 'appearance of gold'.

Except that polished copper . . . doesn't look like gold.

Someone made the Kinderhook Plates and they passed a detailed inspection

Which concluded that they were gold?

So they would be far easier to convince, especially 180 years ago then you would be now.

As someone who has spent most of his life studying people from the past, I'm always bemused by the assumption that we're somehow more in touch with ordinary work-a-day reality than our ancestors were.

Someone made such a set of plates and gave them to the Tanners to display in their store. They weren't painted but are made of lead and weigh some 200 pounds. I know as I have hefted them myself and know of their surety. So surely it could be done - even 180 years ago by others.

And these lead plates looked like gold?

[_Buffalo]

The Testimony of Eight Witnesses

Be it known unto all nations, kindreds, tongues, and people, unto whom this work shall come: That Joseph Smith, Jun., the translator of this work, has shown unto us the plates of which hath been spoken, which have the appearance of gold; and as many of the leaves as the said Smith has translated we did handle with our hands; and we also saw the engravings thereon, all of which has the appearance of ancient work, and of curious workmanship. And this we bear record with words of soberness, that the said Smith has shown unto us, for we have seen and hefted, and know of a surety that the said Smith has got the plates of which we have spoken. And we give our names unto the world, to witness unto the world that which we have seen. And we lie not, God bearing witness of it.

Christian Whitmer
Jacob Whitmer
Peter Whitmer, Jun.
John Whitmer
Hiram Page
Joseph Smith, Sen.
Hyrum Smith
Samuel H. Smith

They didn't say they were really gold.