Footnote integrity and the LDS Apologist

[_sock puppet]

It has been noted and shown several times about how loose Nibley and Sorenson have been with their footnotes.

Many readers won't bother to look up a footnote to check and see for themselves if the citation is correct for the proposition or not. They just assume that is, take the proposition as validated elsewhere, and keep reading on.

Seems that Nibley and Sorenson benefited from such reader habits, and could thus get away with a fair amount of spinning, using the footnote form as a way to give gravitas to statements Nibley and Sorenson wanted to be true.

I'm wondering what other noted LDS apologists are honesty and integrity challenged when it comes to their footnotes.

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Speaking of footnotes and integrity, who can forget Scott Gordon and his very public deceitfulness. With his presentation, Scott Gordon single handedly set Mormon Apologetics back about 20 years:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EReUoXIesMI

[_SteelHead]

The abuse of footnotes or misapplication of articles is not limited to Gordon Scott. Note how amateur apologist Jeff Lindsay uses a recent national geographic article on his DNA page
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/DNA.shtml

2013 News: Native American DNA Linked to the Middle East?
Breaking News, Nov. 2013:
Look at this lead paragraph from news at NationalGeographic.com:

Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian people linked to the Middle East and Europe, rather than entirely from East Asians as previously thought, according to a newly sequenced genome.
The source is the story, "'Great Surprise'—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins" from National Geographic's Daily News, Nov. 20, 2013, which discusses research in the journal Nature. In related posts at Mormanity and The Nauvoo Times, I explain why Mormons should not get overly excited about this tentative report. However, it does represent an important surprise that weakens some of the attacks made against the Book of Mormon. There is simply no basis to claim that there is no genetic evidence linking Native Americans and the Middle East.

Notice any failure to note that the DNA source is from Siberia and is dated 24000 years old. The article goes on to show the progression of this DNA from Siberia across the Beringia land bridge and into the Americas. Instead it is used to show "look middle eastern DNA in the Americas".

Why is this problematic? Mormon doctrine precludes the existence of DNA from 24000 years ago. This is before the fall of Adam, a time when there was no death. This is before the global flood (which is the official doctrine as per the recent article), so tracing DNA in the Americas back to Siberia should be an impossibility.

This is intellectual dishonesty. Scientific quote mining of the worst kind. Contrary to Lindsay's assertion that this weakens the scientific view of the problems the Book of Mormon has with DNA, this article reinforces the discrepancy between real science and mythology, in no way helping the Mormon apologist case, but rather serving to show the ridiculousness of the mopologist stance.

[_Bazooka]

The abuse of footnotes or misapplication of articles is not limited to Gordon Scott. Note how amateur apologist Jeff Lindsay uses a recent national geographic article on his DNA page
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/DNA.shtml

2013 News: Native American DNA Linked to the Middle East?
Breaking News, Nov. 2013:
Look at this lead paragraph from news at NationalGeographic.com:

Nearly one-third of Native American genes come from west Eurasian people linked to the Middle East and Europe, rather than entirely from East Asians as previously thought, according to a newly sequenced genome.
The source is the story, "'Great Surprise'—Native Americans Have West Eurasian Origins" from National Geographic's Daily News, Nov. 20, 2013, which discusses research in the journal Nature. In related posts at Mormanity and The Nauvoo Times, I explain why Mormons should not get overly excited about this tentative report. However, it does represent an important surprise that weakens some of the attacks made against the Book of Mormon. There is simply no basis to claim that there is no genetic evidence linking Native Americans and the Middle East.

Notice any failure to note that the DNA source is from Siberia and is dated 24000 years old. The article goes on to show the progression of this DNA from Siberia across the Beringia land bridge and into the Americas. Instead it is used to show "look middle eastern DNA in the Americas".

Why is this problematic? Mormon doctrine precludes the existence of DNA from 24000 years ago. This is before the fall of Adam, a time when there was no death. This is before the global flood (which is the official doctrine as per the recent article), so tracing DNA in the Americas back to Siberia should be an impossibility.

This is intellectual dishonesty. Scientific quote mining of the worst kind. Contrary to Lindsay's assertion that this weakens the scientific view of the problems the Book of Mormon has with DNA, this article reinforces the discrepancy between real science and mythology, in no way helping the Mormon apologist case, but rather serving to show the ridiculousness of the mopologist stance.

To be fair, for Jeff Lindsey to be intellectually dishonest wouldn't he have to be intellectual in the first place?

[_bcspace]

It has been noted and shown several times about how loose Nibley and Sorenson have been with their footnotes.

Beam In Eye.

[_Maksutov]

Speaking of footnotes and integrity, who can forget Scott Gordon and his very public deceitfulness. With his presentation, Scott Gordon single handedly set Mormon Apologetics back about 20 years:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EReUoXIesMI

That really is funny.