If one were to post fake apologetics to "the other boar

[_Rollo Tomasi]

She must follow it extremely closely. It couldn't have been minutes between The Dude's post here, and then Juliann's dig over at MAD.

I think she misses the old days of FAIR, before they starting banning those who disagreed with her/them. I can't read FAIR anymore (or MAD or whatever it's called now), but I bet the quality has sunk since so many were silenced. It's going the way of ZLMB, I imagine. Too bad -- it used to be a pretty fun place.

[_asbestosman]

Duder - did you see Juliann's comment?

Good grief...they are beyond obsessed about our board over there!
....

And The Dude is over there claiming victory on the Pundit thread he abandoned. That makes it official.

I had no idea that Juliann, et al. monitor this bb so closely and frequently. I'm starting to think they actually miss us. ;)

Maybe I'm a spy. Would you ban me if I were? ;)

[_asbestosman]

As entertaining as it must sound to ridicule others for their faith, most seasoned LDS scholars take their careers a little more seriously than that. You'll find almost as much criticism of each other's arguments within LDS scholarly circles as criticisms of outsiders.

Oh really? Have you seen any LDS apologists criticize David Stewart's pseudoscientific defense of conventional Hemispheric Geography? If you have I would love to see it. It's a perfect test for your assertion, since his article is so misleading on scientific matters, while beautifully faith promoting on the surface.

If you find something related to this, please send me a PM on the MA&D board since I may not see your response on this thread if it takes you more than a day or two to find it. Thanks.

I agreed with some of Tarski's criticizm of Dr. Stewart's "non-linear" equations (although I didn't prove there were no non-linear relationships). Does that count for anything?

[_Who Knows]

For Rollo, and others who can't read the MAD board, here's some more dialogue between Juliann and The Dude:

You just had to throw in a dig at me.

I note that the FAIR version of David Stewart's article was significantly altered following our debate. Quotes and citations that I vigorously challenged have been deleted. Does that say anything?

Hmm....digs here from me are awful digs there from you are fine. Got it.

Haven't read it the paper, wouldn't know. We have all been told that we aren't allowed to change anything. Ever. That is bad. Inerrancy reigns.

But more to the point...you fled the thread...does that say anything?

1. Where did I throw a dig at you? I didn't,

2. Where did I claim victory? I didn't.

3. You say I fled the thread. Have it your way, Juliann. I ran, ran away because I could see I was loosing. Yes indeed, DNA evidence nicely harmonizes with traditional LDS beliefs about the principal genetic ancestry of the Native Americans. LOL! Have it your way. Long live Hemispheric Geography.

It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the time commitment; with the futility of getting a concession out of Stewart; with the fact that nobody (critic or apologist) really understood what we were talking about anyway, and were instead focusing on elements of debating style (like who can keep posting for the longest period of time). Give me a break, woman. I don't want, or need, another fight with you.

Oh, here I go running away again....

Fun stuff...

[_The Dude]

If you find something related to this, please send me a PM on the MA&D board since I may not see your response on this thread if it takes you more than a day or two to find it. Thanks.

I agreed with some of Tarski's criticizm of Dr. Stewart's "non-linear" equations (although I didn't prove there were no non-linear relationships). Does that count for anything?

Yes, I remember that you and Tarski agreed about that. You guys zeroed in on the math stuff. Couple of nerds, you are. :)

I'm more interested in criticism of Stewart's publication, either the edited one on the FAIR site (which is still linked to the LDS.org newsroom), or the nearly original one published in the FARMS review.

Of course a critic like myself is going to challenge Stewart's erroneous DNA claims, but will apologists challenge their own? Are there sufficient intellectual checks within the apologetics community? (FYI, I believe there are checks, but the system is flawed by a "circle the wagons" mentality, as evidenced by this case.)

[Guest]

Hello the Dude,

You are aware, I presume, that David Stewart MD claims that a close examination "demonstrates that modern DNA evidence in no way disproves the traditional LDS belief that Book of Mormon peoples represent the principal ancestors of the American Indians."

I assumed that Dr. Stewart suggested something along those lines. Unlike you, however, I’m not qualified to offer any sort of critique—I had a hard time just putting up with my Brother-in-Law over the holidays who is pursuing a PhD at Oxford in Stem Cell Research—actually, come to think of it, that may have been a bit more interesting.

For years, I’ve believed that the Book of Mormon story involved a very small family group that interacted with a much more dominate early American culture, so I have no vestment either way in the DNA issue.

Given my respect for your knowledge, I’ll simply take your word on it that DNA analysis stomps out any chance for the Hemispheric model.

Truth be told, I would just as soon that it did.

[_maklelan]

Oh really? Have you seen any LDS apologists criticize David Stewart's pseudoscientific defense of conventional Hemispheric Geography? If you have I would love to see it. It's a perfect test for your assertion, since his article is so misleading on scientific matters, while beautifully faith promoting on the surface.

If you find something related to this, please send me a PM on the MA&D board since I may not see your response on this thread if it takes you more than a day or two to find it. Thanks.

I'm not aware of any that are well enough trained to review it in depth yet, and it is a brand new article. It takes time for reviews and criticisms to come out. Give it time.

[_harmony]

Duder - did you see Juliann's comment?

Good grief...they are beyond obsessed about our board over there!
....

And The Dude is over there claiming victory on the Pundit thread he abandoned. That makes it official.

I had no idea that Juliann, et al. monitor this bb so closely and frequently. I'm starting to think they actually miss us. ;)

Maybe I'm a spy. Would you ban me if I were? ;)

No, we'd give you a head's up, so we could watch you twist and distort it over on MAD. We like spies here.

[_maklelan]

But if I remember correctly, Maklelan was initially very impressed by Stewart's article and started a thread about it on the FAIR board.

I enjoyed it when I read it because I was relatively unfamiliar with the information. I am in no position to judge the accuracy of these arguments, but I've dug into what I can and have seen where things conflict. If you'll notice, my post made it clear that I wasn't at all convinced by the Hemispheric model, but I thought it was interesting that someone was bringing up points to defend it.

[_harmony]

Oh really? Have you seen any LDS apologists criticize David Stewart's pseudoscientific defense of conventional Hemispheric Geography? If you have I would love to see it. It's a perfect test for your assertion, since his article is so misleading on scientific matters, while beautifully faith promoting on the surface.

If you find something related to this, please send me a PM on the MA&D board since I may not see your response on this thread if it takes you more than a day or two to find it. Thanks.

I'm not aware of any that are well enough trained to review it in depth yet, and it is a brand new article. It takes time for reviews and criticisms to come out. Give it time.

Hey, mak! If you want to see someone in a huff, check out Juliann. Watch out for the ruffled feathers though.