DCP Targets Paul Osborne in a Smear Campaign

[_Ray A]

For those new to the board, or unfamiliar with Dialogue, here's how "the machine" works:

"The LDS intellectual community and church leadership: A contemporary chronology.

The clash between ecclesiastical authority and individual conscience.

For her efforts she was excommunicated, and to this day has been barred from being rebaptised. "Bridge-builders" can forget it.

[_zzyzx]

Why would Peter-Man obsess over a nut with a masterbation fixation?

Maybe Osborne really has a fixation on the former Head Master of BYU... Master Bateman?

Could it be this public fixation by the little 'O' intrudes on Peter-Mans man-crush on Master Bateman?

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Hello Everyone,

Oh my. I am at a loss for words. I am terribly saddened by the behavior by one of my fellow academics. My heart is heavy this day. Professor Peterson should follow the example of the Savior and His servants in the Restored Church of Christ, and make peace with those who give offense. What a bizarre display of hubris by someone who shoulders the burden of leading by example. Again, I am saddened.

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_Pokatator]

Several other posters here have now met DCP, including yourself, Sethbag and Chris. Chris has made some very similar observations to mine. In the flesh DCP is apparently a nice person, but when he goes to his keyboard he can drip with sarcasm and mockery in the name of "humour", and that is what he did to you in the Peterson Denounces Love! thread.

I actually wish I was on that list because maybe if I met him, I could go away with the thought that the man is a nice man in person. then I would then have at least one good thought about him.

Paul is a much more kind and forgiving man than I am, I respect him for that.

[_harmony]

Maybe he's just trying to make sure he's never called as a GA.

[_TAK]

Maybe he's just trying to make sure he's never called as a GA.

Or maybe he is just doing his job as a Mopologist.. Trashing critics is rule one..
Being a jolly fellow in person just another side to him.

[_harmony]

Maybe he's just trying to make sure he's never called as a GA.

Or maybe he is just doing his job as a Mopologist.. Trashing critics is rule one..
Being a jolly fellow in person just another side to him.

One would hope that the brilliance of the apologetics would speak for themselves, and no personal attacks on critics would be necessary. One would hope.

[_TAK]

One would hope that the brilliance of the apologetics would speak for themselves, and no personal attacks on critics would be necessary. One would hope.

They don’t have to be brilliant .. They just need to be right.. Unfortunately for them they are neither ..

[_Some Schmo]

One would hope that the brilliance of the apologetics would speak for themselves, and no personal attacks on critics would be necessary. One would hope.

They don’t have to be brilliant .. They just need to be right.. Unfortunately for them they are neither ..

Arguing with a mopologist is like arguing with a willful toddler. Their arguments are immature, based on limited knowledge, and comply with only the most fundamental, non-nuanced and magical world view.

So unless you try to argue on their grounds, you aren’t going to get anywhere. If you try to reason with them, you’re most likely liable to upset them to the point where they’ll throw a temper tantrum. Happens all the time.

[_Yoda]

Personally, I think it's obvious DCP has gone after Paul because he dissed Nibley. Yes, that is reason enough.

I agree.

I think that Paul's attack on Nibley was more of a personal affront to Dan because he and Nibley were friends. Also, Nibley has passed away.

If someone spoke ill of a friend of mine who passed away, I would be upset, and want to defend their name. I honestly think that is how DCP's "campaign" against Paul started.

I do find the multiple threads and references a little bizarre, though, to be honest.

I've only ever attacked Nibley because of his apologetics.

Yes, but your recent comments about Nibley were personal. If you had simply attacked his work, I don't think that Dan would have taken issue with it.

Years ago I posted several threads in the FAIR Book of Abraham section entitled: Nibley Strikes Again I, II, II and spelled out my reason how his argument stunk. I received very little opposition from those posts.

Again, in those posts you were attacking Nibley's work, not Nibley personally.

I spoke to my apostate mother yesterday. She actually remembers Nibley teaching when she attended BYU back in the 50's. My mother told me she thinks he probably raped his daughter. My mother thinks Nibley is worse than a skunk! Could it be that the GA's have been fooled all along by a rapist in their own midst!

Since Nibley is deceased, and was never formally accused of this, I think it's unfair of you to refer to him as a rapist. There is a lot of speculation about the accuracy of the book his daughter wrote concerning that issue.

Maybe he was guilty...maybe he wasn't. But in this country, we are innocent until proven guilty.