Daniel C. Peterson: well-respected scholar? or not?

Post by **_Pahoran** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:15 am

Tal Bachman wrote:Hey Senor Scratch, thanks for the welcome. It's not that I'm interested in arguing - I get the impression ideologues are all-but-incorrigible even under the most favourable circumstances (like when their livelihoods don't depend on their continued adherence to the ideology)

That is certainly true, as your dedication to your own anti-Mormon ideology so clearly demonstrates.

so that arguing with them is rather like mud-wrestling with pigs - but I can't abide forums like FAIR. If the big brave church defenders over there had any guts, they'd tell their moderator to stop spiking all the stuff that most effectively calls them on their BS, and expose themselves to any and every question.

Just like if you had any guts, you'd stop beating your wife. Since what you describe doesn't actually happen on the FAIRBoards, there is nothing to tell anyone to stop.

Tal Bachman wrote:After all, it is Mormon apologists, just like apologists for any religion or ideology

Including anti-Mormonism, for which particularly vile hate ideology you have made yourself a high profile apologist,

Tal Bachman wrote:who bear the burden of proof in showing why theirs is really "the only one true way"...Perhaps it's me, but Mormon apologists seem to be doing as well in that task, as are Scientologist apologists, Moonie apologists, communist apologists, and eco-freak apologists in theirs (of course, within their own minds, they have "answered every charge!" and "resolved this issue long ago!" and they "have their opponents on the run!", etc...).

Ah. Damnation by association.

Thus proving that Canadian rock musicians can be demagogues too.

Tal Bachman wrote:RFM I cut a break for,

Of course you do. And I don't need to waste any time with your ridiculous excuses for privileging Scumbag Central.

Regards,
Pahoran

Post by **_Runtu** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 3:27 am

Is it just me, or is it ironic to be lectured about hate and damnation by association by someone who refers to RfM posters as scumbags who follow a vile hate ideology?

Post by **_Pahoran** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:58 pm

Runtu wrote:Is it just me, or is it ironic to be lectured about hate and damnation by association by someone who refers to RfM posters as scumbags who follow a vile hate ideology?

Yes, it is just you.

Anti-Mormonism is a vile hate ideology. I'm sorry if that jars your comfortable assumptions of superiority, but that's just the way it is.

Regards,
Pahoran

Post by **_Pahoran** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:09 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:Ouch. This assessment from Tal Bachman is quite brutal. Then again, Prof. P. has long been asking for it, as he has been pretty relentless in referring to Bachman as "Tal Tales". The most devastating bit is indeed the quote from Peterson's own alma mater, UCLA:

Tal Bachman wrote:And lastly, this, from the current head of the very graduate program from which the world famous Arabist got his Ph.D.:

UCLA Arab Studies Chair wrote:I'm not aware of any scholarly work of his in the fields of biblical studies or Semitic languages. I'll take your word for it that he graduated from UCLA at some point in the past...Mormons generally think their beliefs are credible. I'm not aware of non-Mormon scholars who find their beliefs credible, but that's hardly surprising".

I rather suspect that the quoted email is, if not an outright fabrication, then at least the result of some very heavy-handed editorial interference.

Dan Peterson came to New Zealand a couple of months ago. While here, he was invited to meet with a government minister who was worried about immigration issues and wanted Dan's insights into Muslim beliefs and culture. I find it rather incredible--as in, non-credible--that a government minister from half way around the world would have heard of Dan in the context of his academic field, while an academic working in that field and in his own country would not. Can you explain that to me?

I would be delighted to see a rebuttal from the Good Professor on this, but I won't hold my breath. What it ultimately demonstrates is that His Highness is a very small fry---no one knows who he is.

See above.

And though I'm not totally sure about this, I have a feeling that Arab Studies is a relatively small field, and so Peterson's lack of noteworthiness is even more dismaying. Very, very sad, in my opinion.

Sad? Bunk! You are chortling and rubbing your hands together with unholy glee.

What a pity it's misplaced.

Regards,
Pahoran

Post by **_Runtu** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:36 pm

What exactly about disagreeing with Mormonism constitutes a hateful ideology? Sure, some people really hate Mormonism, but not all of us. And why does my disagreeing with your characterization indicate my feelings of superiority?

I wonder what it is that drives you to paint with such a broad brush.

Post by **_Mister Scratch** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:43 pm

Runtu wrote:What exactly about disagreeing with Mormonism constitutes a hateful ideology? Sure, some people really hate Mormonism, but not all of us. And why does my disagreeing with your characterization indicate my feelings of superiority?

I wonder what it is that drives you to paint with such a broad brush.

He has to kiss the asses of the higher-ups on FAIR so that he doesn't get kicked off. He acts like a bigger jerk over there than practically anybody else, and for a TBM, he gets warned by the mods an awful lot, but he's allowed to stay because he is essentially a lapdog for DCP and Bill "Don't Call Me Jacob" Hamblin, along with the other members of the FAIR hierarchy. His brown-nosing earned him the label of "Gollum" from Brent Metcalfe (and can't you just picture Pahoran behaving that way? "Oh, yes! FAIR! MY Precious... MY PRECIOUS!!!" Drooling over it and panting beside the scholarship of the two professorial bigwigs?) In any case, his suckling at the teat of FAIR has earned him a spot on the so-called "NOC-List": meaning that he can basically act however he wants, and will never be banned.

Post by **_Runtu** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:45 pm

I don't know that it's ass-kissing, really, as his shtick hasn't changed in the last 10-12 years, as far as I can see. Even back then when I was a believing apologist, I was mortified by his behavior. I still haven't quite figured it out. I figure that I'm in good company if I'm now getting some of his bile thrown at me.

Post by **_Pahoran** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 7:58 pm

Mister Scratch wrote:
Runtu wrote:What exactly about disagreeing with Mormonism constitutes a hateful ideology? Sure, some people really hate Mormonism, but not all of us. And why does my disagreeing with your characterization indicate my feelings of superiority?

I wonder what it is that drives you to paint with such a broad brush.

He has to kiss the asses of the higher-ups on FAIR so that he doesn't get kicked off.

That's false, of course.

For the record, long before I started posting at FAIR, I had realised that anti-Mormonism is just another hate ideology. Its adherents/practitioners are all, without exception, utterly unscrupulous haters. You are a case in point.

He acts like a bigger jerk over there than practically anybody else, and for a TBM, he gets warned by the mods an awful lot, but he's allowed to stay because he is essentially a lapdog for DCP and Bill "Don't Call Me Jacob" Hamblin, along with the other members of the FAIR hierarchy.

"Lapdog?" *Chuckle*

Dan and Bill are my friends. I'd rather stick up for a friend and be called a "lapdog" than be a vicious cowardly cur like you.

His brown-nosing earned him the label of "Gollum" from Brent Metcalfe

That is another of your many lies.

Mister Metcalfe embarrassed himself with his "Gollum" joke--thus disqualifying himself forever from being able to complain about Hamblin's unpublished "Butthead" acrostic--in response to me describing certain parties as "a precious set of rascals."

(and can't you just picture Pahoran behaving that way? "Oh, yes! FAIR! MY Precious... MY PRECIOUS!!!" Drooling over it and panting beside the scholarship of the two professorial bigwigs?) In any case, his suckling at the teat of FAIR has earned him a spot on the so-called "NOC-List": meaning that he can basically act however he wants, and will never be banned.

I have no reason to believe that such a list exists. That you assert that it does gives me even less reason to believe that it exists.

Regards,
Pahoran

_rcrocket · Post by **_rcrocket** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:05 pm

Gee, its good to have you here Pah -- before you arrived in months past they sometimes accused me of being you.

But, there isn't a whole lot of substance on this board. Very unlike FAIR, I might add. The vicious anti-Mormons who haunt here are, with the exception of a few, aren't very well read and some are downright naïve.

P

Post by **_Runtu** » Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:09 pm

Plutarch wrote:Gee, its good to have you here Pah -- before you arrived in months past they sometimes accused me of being you.

But, there isn't a whole lot of substance on this board. Very unlike FAIR, I might add. The vicious anti-Mormons who haunt here are, with the exception of a few, aren't very well read and some are downright naïve.

P

Does this mean we have a tag team for insults? Cool.