Well, that was interesting. I was contacted by someone named Hillary from the BBC's Content and Brand Protection Team. We chatted a bit, and I suggested to her that the BBC run a crawl script through on his blog to tack down a hard number of times he's plagiarized their material. She thanked me and mentioned they'll most like reach out to Patheos to file a cease and desist. lol
Dorkenpork.
- Doc
Good job, Doctor CamNC4Me. I wish we all would have been reporting Dorkenpork's plagiarisms many years ago. Dorkenpork has plagiarized so many (hundreds if not thousands) sources, authors and various publications. It's time to start reporting his unethical behavior.
Thanks, and great job bringing up the Book of Abraham angle. You know. If these fools actually believed their nonsense they'd include it without even thinking about it. It'd be as natural as the day is long.
Good job, Doctor CamNC4Me. I wish we all would have been reporting Dorkenpork's plagiarisms many years ago. Dorkenpork has plagiarized so many (hundreds if not thousands) sources, authors and various publications. It's time to start reporting his unethical behavior.
Thanks, and great job bringing up the Book of Abraham angle. You know. If these fools actually believed their nonsense they'd include it without even thinking about it. It'd be as natural as the day is long.
But they don't. Because they don't.
And also, on a very minor note, they don't because the people DCP plagiarizes don't include fiction in their timelines. Just one of those weird dumb things*.
*(Plagiarizing accurate historical accounts is bad, plagiarizing inaccurate fictionalized historical accounts is.... less bad? More bad?? Less good? More good???? )
Thanks, and great job bringing up the Book of Abraham angle. You know. If these fools actually believed their nonsense they'd include it without even thinking about it. It'd be as natural as the day is long.
But they don't. Because they don't.
And also, on a very minor note, they don't because the people DCP plagiarizes don't include fiction in their timelines. Just one of those weird dumb things*.
*(Plagiarizing accurate historical accounts is bad, plagiarizing inaccurate fictionalized historical accounts is.... less bad? More bad?? Less good? More good???? )
Well played, Prof Marcus.
There's definitely some Foundation for the last one - with a website, even.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details. Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Well, that was interesting. I was contacted by someone named Hillary from the BBC's Content and Brand Protection Team. We chatted a bit, and I suggested to her that the BBC run a crawl script through on his blog to tack down a hard number of times he's plagiarized their material. She thanked me and mentioned they'll most like reach out to Patheos to file a cease and desist. lol
Dorkenpork.
- Doc
I'm guessing none of this gets mentioned on Sic et Non...
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
Why is Dr. Dan Dorkenpork not using the Book of Abraham timeline? Why not discuss the teachings of the Book of Abraham and Egyptus who discovers Egypt? Or Egyptus placing her eldest son on the throne as Pharaoh, the first king of Egypt (1:25)? Or why not discuss that Pharaoh was a descendant of the Canaanites (1:22), a race of people who had a black skin come upon them as a curse (Moses 7:8)?
Does Dr. Dan Dorkenpork not have confidence in the explicit teachings of the Book of Abraham? Why disregard the Book of Abraham in favor of cutting and pasting a Wikipedia timeline?
Thanks, and great job bringing up the Book of Abraham angle. You know. If these fools actually believed their nonsense they'd include it without even thinking about it. It'd be as natural as the day is long.
But they don't. Because they don't.
And also, on a very minor note, they don't because the people DCP plagiarizes don't include fiction in their timelines. Just one of those weird dumb things*.
*(Plagiarizing accurate historical accounts is bad, plagiarizing inaccurate fictionalized historical accounts is.... less bad? More bad?? Less good? More good???? )
That's funny; I too have been convinced for quite some time now that DCP's serial email harasser is Lou Midgley.
“DCP” wrote: As some of you are aware, one of the many privileges that I enjoy in my high-paying work as an apologist, is the receipt of anonymous notes from one particular person who appears to be deranged. I very rarely read his notes any more — they go immediately into a file labeled “Anonymous Hate Mail” — but I was curious just now to see how, or whether, he had reacted to my comment above. And I found that, indeed, he had. Commencing within minutes of my posting the above, his messages #2394, #2395, #2497, #2498, and #2400 made fun of what I had written about the terrible injury — very nearly a fatal tragedy — that occurred in my family slightly more than a week ago.
On the very remote chance that it’s not and it is a member of this board:
)
