The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_Joey
_Emeritus
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:34 am

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Joey »

So once again, if the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation of an ancient record from an original source, and there is no special or needed expertise in reading the Book of Mormon, why is Michael Coe's conclusion with respect to a historical setting in mesoamerica lacking???

What would he be lacking if he read "zero" Mormon "scholarship" over the past 30 or 100 years??
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Dr. Shades »

wenglund wrote:Scholastically speaking, could this thread be the metaphoric equivolent of a couple of birthday candles judging stadium lights as not producing much light?

When the stadium lights are not turned on, doesn't a lit birthday candle produce more light?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_Joey
_Emeritus
Posts: 717
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 1:34 am

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Joey »

Joey wrote:So once again, if the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation of an ancient record from an original source, and there is no special or needed expertise in reading the Book of Mormon, why is Michael Coe's conclusion with respect to a historical setting in mesoamerica lacking???

What would he be lacking if he read "zero" Mormon "scholarship" over the past 30 or 100 years??


Seriously, setting aside stadium lights and b-day candles, can anyone who finds merit in the Peterson-Gardner excuse of unfamiliarity w LDS scholarship answer the above question posed or find fault in the logic? Anyone. Including Peterson, Gardner or Wade.
"It's not so much that FARMS scholarship in the area Book of Mormon historicity is "rejected' by the secular academic community as it is they are "ignored". [Daniel Peterson, May, 2004]
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _wenglund »

Dr. Shades wrote:When the stadium lights are not turned on, doesn't a lit birthday candle produce more light?


Yes.

And even when turned on, a lit birthday candle the size of texas will produce more light, particularly if the Mount Everest-sized wick is made of solid rocket propellant.

In other words, there are countless ways to alter the variable so as to mis the obvious point of my simle analogy.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _wenglund »

Joey wrote: Seriously, setting aside stadium lights and b-day candles, can anyone who finds merit in the Peterson-Gardner excuse of unfamiliarity w LDS scholarship answer the above question posed or find fault in the logic? Anyone. Including Peterson, Gardner or Wade.


I am not sure why I am included in this esteemed group. In terms of Meso-American studies, particularly in relation to the Book of Mormon, I can't muster the light of a birthday candle.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14117
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Dr. Shades »

wenglund wrote:In other words, there are countless ways to alter the variable so as to mis the obvious point of my simle analogy.

I wasn't trying to "alter the variable" just for the sake of doing so. The stadium light being off was an analogy in itself.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_wenglund
_Emeritus
Posts: 4947
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:25 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _wenglund »

Dr. Shades wrote:
wenglund wrote:In other words, there are countless ways to alter the variables so as to mis the obvious point of my simple analogy.


I wasn't trying to "alter the variable" just for the sake of doing so. The stadium light being off was an analogy in itself.


No one was suggesting that you did so just for the sake of doing so. And, of course when the variables of the analogy are changed, it becomes another analogy in itself. But, that is beside the point of both my original analogy and my Texas-sized birthday candle analogy.

No biggy, though. It was an insignificant point that merely served to artificially sustain the life of an ill-conscieved thread that had pretty much spent its hot air.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-
"Why should I care about being consistent?" --Mister Scratch (MD, '08)
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Themis »

wenglund wrote:
Dr. Shades wrote:When the stadium lights are not turned on, doesn't a lit birthday candle produce more light?


Yes.


Not that it is important but No, the candle does not produce more light, but is more noticeable in stadium with the lights off compared to the lights on. :)
42
_Inconceivable
_Emeritus
Posts: 3405
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:44 am

Re: The Peterson-Gardner Ruse

Post by _Inconceivable »

wenglund wrote:It was an insignificant point that merely served to artificially sustain the life of an ill-conscieved thread that had pretty much spent its hot air.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

'glund,

Hardly. You engaged in perpetuating the ruse as well. Your analogy was intended to draw attention away from the fact that Peterson and Gardner had nothing to bring to the table but far fetched conjecture.

Perhaps the best characterization of your annoying behavior is akin to weeping, wailing and nashing your teeth. It's still impolite and dishonest.

fail.

Honestly, if the Book of Mormon were proven to be an actual history, it wouldn't affect my emnity towards the religeon that claims it. They hardly resemble each other and you know it.
Post Reply