It is currently Thu Jul 31, 2014 10:45 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 335 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 16  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:52 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 7137
Location: On the imaginary axis
Will Schryver wrote:

Chap wrote:
I take it you don't dispute that the surviving papyrus is a normal Egyptian funerary text?


In the first place, since they all differ to some degree one from another, I don't know that there is really anything that qualifies as "a normal Egyptian funerary text," least of all the extant fragments of the Joseph Smith papyri, which are rather exceptional when compared to the larger body of extant Egyptian Book of the Dead literature (the human figure holding a knife above the living person on the lion couch being only one among several exceptional aspects).


Gosh.

Texts of a given genre vary from one to another.

Some may even have unique features not possessed by all other exemplars of the genre.

Therefore this papyrus is not a 'normal' Egyptian funerary text. Therefore it is not a Egyptian funerary text at all, but a highly mysterious document, demanding an astonishing explanation.

That explanation can only be that it is the writings of Abraham, who is thus not a semi-mythical figure from the self-imaginings of one of the many Semitic groups of the ancient Near East, but in fact a published author, whose work has reached us because a scribe working in the funeral industry in Ptolemaic Egypt happened to copy it out many centuries after Abraham had written it, and sold it to some grieving relatives who buried it with the mummy of their nearest and dearest, who was later dug up, and then by a strange chain of circumstances it arrived in the hands of the Prophet Joseph Smith via a traveling showman. You see, God works in really mysterious ways.

Wait a bit, though: the actual bit with Abraham's text on it is missing nowadays, so we can't show it to you ... no sir, don't walk away, I haven't finished ...

_________________
Christopher Ralph: The discovery that the creators of South Park place a higher value on historical authenticity than do the Brethren creates spiritual shock-waves from which some members never recover.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:54 pm 
2nd Counselor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:12 am
Posts: 438
Kishkumen wrote:
Darth J wrote:
I think he means one that does not involve the patriarch of the Semitic people teaching Mormon theology and 19th-century astronomy to a king who was called Pharaoh quite some time before the fact.


Yeah, one would think that was obvious.

Oh, look! The pompon bearer has arrived!

That's definitely my cue to leave.



ETA: Ooops! John caught my one of my rather infrequent spelling gaffes. [Shuffles away in embarrassment ...]

_________________
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.


Last edited by Will Schryver on Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:56 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:06 pm
Posts: 15049
Location: Sterling, Virginia
Will Schryver wrote:
Oh, look! The pompon bearer has arrived!

That's definitely my queue to leave.


Do you mean "cue" or are you lining up for something?

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:18 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 7137
Location: On the imaginary axis
Will Schryver wrote:
However, there is only one instance, of which I am aware, of an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on the couch. Therefore I wouldn't be too hasty to dismiss the Joseph Smith papyri as nothing more than "common Egyptian funerary texts." They are anything but "common," as has been repeatedly noted in books you've apparently never read.


Let's see. This is the relevant bit of the papyrus:

Image

Is there a human head on the papyrus, as opposed to on Smith's 'facsimile' of it?

Image

Let's see, which way shall we call it? Let's assume that it is true that "there is only one instance, of ... of an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on the couch", this one (on the facsimile, that is)

So either

(a) That makes it likely that the presence of a human head on the Smith 'facsimile' is the result of Smith mistakenly 'restoring' it because he did not know what Anubis looked like.

or

(b) That makes it likely that the presence of a human head on the Smith 'facsimile' is because there really was one on the papyrus when Smith saw it.

Hard one, eh?

_________________
Christopher Ralph: The discovery that the creators of South Park place a higher value on historical authenticity than do the Brethren creates spiritual shock-waves from which some members never recover.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:31 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 3:33 pm
Posts: 12064
Location: Kli-flos-is-es
Chap wrote:
Gosh.

Texts of a given genre vary from one to another.

Some may even have unique features not possessed by all other exemplars of the genre.

Therefore this papyrus is not a 'normal' Egyptian funerary text. Therefore it is not a Egyptian funerary text at all, but a highly mysterious document, demanding an astonishing explanation.

That explanation can only be that it is the writings of Abraham, who is thus not a semi-mythical figure from the self-imaginings of one of the many Semitic groups of the ancient Near East, but in fact a published author, whose work has reached us because a scribe working in the funeral industry in Ptolemaic Egypt happened to copy it out many centuries after Abraham had written it, and sold it to some grieving relatives who buried it with the mummy of their nearest and dearest, who was later dug up, and then by a strange chain of circumstances it arrived in the hands of the Prophet Joseph Smith via a traveling showman. You see, God works in really mysterious ways.

Wait a bit, though: the actual bit with Abraham's text on it is missing nowadays, so we can't show it to you ... no sir, don't walk away, I haven't finished ...


There's no way ANYONE could accept the Book of Abraham without an a priori belief in the thing, that's for sure.

_________________
Parley P. Pratt wrote:
We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:
There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:37 pm 
2nd Counselor
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 11:12 am
Posts: 438
Chap wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:
However, there is only one instance, of which I am aware, of an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on the couch. Therefore I wouldn't be too hasty to dismiss the Joseph Smith papyri as nothing more than "common Egyptian funerary texts." They are anything but "common," as has been repeatedly noted in books you've apparently never read.


Let's see. This is the relevant bit of the papyrus:

Image

Is there a human head on the papyrus, as opposed to on Smith's 'facsimile' of it?

Image

Let's see, which way shall we call it? Let's assume that it is true that "there is only one instance, of ... of an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on the couch", this one (on the facsimile, that is)

So either

(a) That makes it likely that the presence of a human head on the Smith 'facsimile' is the result of Smith mistakenly 'restoring' it because he did not know what Anubis looked like.

or

(b) That makes it likely that the presence of a human head on the Smith 'facsimile' is because there really was one on the papyrus when Smith saw it.

Hard one, eh?

You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.

_________________
I thought myself the wiser to have viewed the evidence left of such a great demise. I followed every step. But the only thing I ever learned before the journey's end was there was nothing there to learn, only something to forget.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:40 pm 
God

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:40 pm
Posts: 5872
Buffalo wrote:
There's no way ANYONE could accept the Book of Abraham without an a priori belief in the thing, that's for sure.


What does that mean? Prior to what? Are you saying no "converts" every believe the thing?

_________________
Love ya tons,
Stem


I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:48 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 10:06 pm
Posts: 15049
Location: Sterling, Virginia
Will Schryver wrote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.


Could you provide a reference for those of us who might like to explore these questions with some rigor?

_________________
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:50 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 6064
stemelbow wrote:
Buffalo wrote:
There's no way ANYONE could accept the Book of Abraham without an a priori belief in the thing, that's for sure.


What does that mean? Prior to what? Are you saying no "converts" every believe the thing?


I think I'll let Will Schryver explain what he meant:

"If I were an outsider looking in at all of this, I find it difficult to believe that I could be persuaded that the production of the Book of Abraham was anything other than a clumsy imposture perpetrated by Joseph Smith upon his followers. But, of course, I’m not. I came into the discussion already possessing a conviction that the Book of Abraham was divinely-inspired scripture" -- Schryver to Graham, email.

_________________
"Faggotry of all sorts isn't going to change LDS doctrine" - bcspace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:53 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 7137
Location: On the imaginary axis
Runtu wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.


Could you provide a reference for those of us who might like to explore these questions with some rigor?


Seconded.

(How does Schryver know I am an apostate member of the CoJCoLDS?)

_________________
Christopher Ralph: The discovery that the creators of South Park place a higher value on historical authenticity than do the Brethren creates spiritual shock-waves from which some members never recover.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:55 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13719
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
Will Schryver wrote:
Oh, look! The pompon bearer has arrived!

That's definitely my cue to leave.



ETA: Ooops! John caught my one of my rather infrequent spelling gaffes. [Shuffles away in embarrassment ...]


Don't leave now, Will! We just love your pedantic explanations of things that are fairly obvious. It adds so much.

_________________
The Electronic Journal of Jaredite Studies
The Definitive Electronic Jaredite Bibliography

"I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser." ~Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:02 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 1:47 am
Posts: 3998
Location: The Ivory Tower
Will Schryver wrote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.

Interesting. So some 19th century eyewitness specified that there was a human head? That would be strange, to say the least.

Also, which recent non-Mormon Egyptological treatment of the Joseph Smith Papyri are you referring to? Certainly not Lanny Bell's 2008 publication, which reconstructed the vignette as follows:

Image

_________________
Worlds Without End
Mild-Mannered Musings
Smidgens on Religion


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:05 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 6064
Quote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

That's a laugh. Your prized scholar is a proven moron whom you yourself disagreed with after giving his presentation this past August. He is the "scholar" who said Joseph Smith's translations pretty much dovetail with modern Egyptological understandings. Talk about idiotic and deceptive. While you're here, why not deal with the numerous refutations I have provided for you? Why are you straining at gnats about the irrelevant length of the scroll?
Quote:
In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.

Of course they were "human figures." But to say this constitutes a unique vignette simply because Joseph Smith was too ignorant to know the priests typically wore Anubis headgear, is pretty idiotic and begs the question. Did the payrus originally have a human head instead of one shaped like Anubis?

The best in Egyptological scholarship disagrees with you and Gee. The entire depts at Brown and U of Chicago universities, included. The more you press this the more foolish you look, but for you to pretend you're on the edge of modern scholarship is just laughable.

God I hope you publish something soon.

_________________
"Faggotry of all sorts isn't going to change LDS doctrine" - bcspace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:11 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13719
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
Kevin Graham wrote:
God I hope you publish something soon.


Amen.

_________________
The Electronic Journal of Jaredite Studies
The Definitive Electronic Jaredite Bibliography

"I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser." ~Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:14 pm 
Dark Lord of the Sith
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 5:16 pm
Posts: 12563
Location: A castellated abbey
Will Schryver wrote:
Darth J wrote:
I don't know that there is really anything that qualifies as "a normal Egyptian funerary text,"


I think he means one that does not involve the patriarch of the Semitic people teaching Mormon theology and 19th-century astronomy to a king who was called Pharaoh quite some time before the fact.


Will Schryver wrote:
I figured he wasn't referring to the unique nature of a vignette that shows an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on a lion couch.

That said, there are unique aspects to pretty much every lion couch scene found on extant Egyptian papyri. However, there is only one instance, of which I am aware, of an Anubis figure with a human head wielding a knife over a living person on the couch. Therefore I wouldn't be too hasty to dismiss the Joseph Smith papyri as nothing more than "common Egyptian funerary texts." They are anything but "common," as has been repeatedly noted in books you've apparently never read.


I know that you have no interest whatsoever in this obscure, irrelevant corner of cyberspace, but are you so uninterested that you can't keep track of whom you're addressing?

I was talking about the substance of the Book of Abraham, not the funerary scenes that Joseph Smith said were Abraham illustrating his adventures. I did not dismiss anything as "common;" that would be Chap who talked about "common" texts that are entirely irrelevant to the meaning that Joseph Smith imposed upon them.

_________________
And the life of the ebony clock went out with that of the last of the gay. And the flames of the tripods expired. And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:16 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 11:44 am
Posts: 6064
CaliforniaKid wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.

Interesting. So some 19th century eyewitness specified that there was a human head? That would be strange, to say the least.

Also, which recent non-Mormon Egyptological treatment of the Joseph Smith Papyri are you referring to? Certainly not Lanny Bell's 2008 publication, which reconstructed the vignette as follows:

Image


Keep in mind Chris, that Will is the same moron who created a pundits thread dedicated to the so-called 19th century eye witnesses, and he totally fabricated sources from whole cloth and tried to multiply sources by taking two references that referred to the same singular testimony. When I called him out on it, he fled the scene like the coward he is. His case rests on the fact that some woman said the roll was "long" and then declares "we now know the length of the scroll!" What an idiot. It took you and I roughly ten minutes of research to refute his misuse of the source, and all he could do was accuse me of relying on Metcalfe to find the document he used - which was false.

Schryver has a history of deception especially when it comes to his use of primary sources. Why this moron thinks anyone on THIS forum would ever feel the need to trust him or give him the benefit of the doubt again, is a marvel in and of itself.

_________________
"Faggotry of all sorts isn't going to change LDS doctrine" - bcspace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:18 pm 
Dark Lord of the Sith
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 5:16 pm
Posts: 12563
Location: A castellated abbey
Kishkumen wrote:
Darth J wrote:
I think he means one that does not involve the patriarch of the Semitic people teaching Mormon theology and 19th-century astronomy to a king who was called Pharaoh quite some time before the fact.


Yeah, one would think that was obvious.


Will Schryver wrote:
Oh, look! The pompon bearer has arrived!

That's definitely my cue to leave.


Who? Me, or Kishkumen?

If I am a pom-pom bearer for anyone, it is you. How many times am I on record as saying that my sincere prayer is for you to become the public face of Mormon apologetics, and that I will not be satisfied until your theories are printed in the Ensign?

_________________
And the life of the ebony clock went out with that of the last of the gay. And the flames of the tripods expired. And Darkness and Decay and the Red Death held illimitable dominion over all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:32 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 3:23 am
Posts: 7137
Location: On the imaginary axis
CaliforniaKid wrote:
Will Schryver wrote:
You're obviously not aware of the most recent scholarship as pertains to this issue. I'm not surprised. Very few apostate Mormons have taken the time to explore these questions with any rigor.

In any event, that there was a human figure with a knife standing over the image of live person on the couch is confirmed by both contemporary eyewitness testimony and supported by modern non-Mormon Egyptological scholarship. That is why this constitutes such a unique lion couch vignette in comparison to other known instances.

Interesting. So some 19th century eyewitness specified that there was a human head? That would be strange, to say the least.

Also, which recent non-Mormon Egyptological treatment of the Joseph Smith Papyri are you referring to? Certainly not Lanny Bell's 2008 publication, which reconstructed the vignette as follows:

Image


Bump ...

_________________
Christopher Ralph: The discovery that the creators of South Park place a higher value on historical authenticity than do the Brethren creates spiritual shock-waves from which some members never recover.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 6:38 pm 
Seedy Academician
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:00 pm
Posts: 13719
Location: The Brutus Memorial Rectory at Cassius University
Kevin Graham wrote:
Keep in mind Chris, that Will is the same moron who created a pundits thread dedicated to the so-called 19th century eye witnesses, and he totally fabricated sources from whole cloth and tried to multiply sources by taking two references that referred to the same singular testimony. When I called him out on it, he fled the scene like the coward he is. His case rests on the fact that some woman said the roll was "long" and then declares "we now know the length of the scroll!" What an idiot. It took you and I roughly ten minutes of research to refute his misuse of the source, and all he could do was accuse me of relying on Metcalfe to find the document he used - which was false.

Schryver has a history of deception especially when it comes to his use of primary sources. Why this moron thinks anyone on THIS forum would ever feel the need to trust him or give him the benefit of the doubt again, is a marvel in and of itself.


I recall that. To this day it amazes me. Whenever the subject of the length of the scroll comes up, and an apologist refers to the eyewitness testimony, the memory pops right up. "Long." No subjectivity there! Nosirreee.

_________________
The Electronic Journal of Jaredite Studies
The Definitive Electronic Jaredite Bibliography

"I don't profess to be such a Prophet as were Joseph Smith and Daniel; but I am a Yankee guesser." ~Brigham Young


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:51 pm 
Elder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 340
Location: Jah-oh-eh
Will Schryver wrote:
This means, of course, that there was very little space between each successive layer of papyrus in the rolled up scroll, much as in the image of the scroll (BM EA10748) I posted earlier:

Image

I see some pretty large gaps between layers; especially center left.

Quote:
Mortal Man would have you all believe that his 700 micron value is merely an “upper bound” for the thickness of each layer. But that is a deception on his part, and he knows it. In order for his admission of the tightness of the scroll winding to be reconciled with the predicted thickness of each winding layer, the papyrus itself must be very near 700 microns in thickness.

I see, since you keep going around in circles, that this is all you've got. I encourage you to hold onto it until your paper is published.

Quote:
This is why he wrote earlier in this thread:

Quote:
… your measurements appear to be off by 300-500 microns.

And:
Quote:
… I believe that the average physical thickness is not much less than 700 microns.

I applaud your skill in deleting the "Nevertheless," and recontextualizing my comments. To reiterate, the issue of physical thickness is a sideshow. It's mildly interesting in its own right, hence my previous comments, but has no bearing on our results.

To your credit, I should mention that your thickness measurements do have bearing on John Gee's results They demonstrate that his effective thickness of 53 microns cannot be correct (which, again to your credit, you have already acknowledged).

Quote:
He understands very well that the output of his calculations dictates a physical thickness of the papyrus in the neighborhood of 700 microns. His talk of this value merely representing an “upper bound” for the thickness is an obfuscatory tactic born of his fear that the scroll of Hor, in reality, is nowhere near 700 microns in thickness.

Contrary to your assertions, I think that most people, if they pause and think about it for a few moments, can see what I'm talking about.

Quote:
… a Ptolemaic-era scroll containing a portion of the Egyptian Book of the Dead was recently unrolled and its various physical dimensions were recorded. It was a little over 3 cm (~1.2 inches) in diameter before it was opened, and its length, once unrolled, was about 7 meters (~23 feet). I’ll let Chap do the math in order to determine the effective thickness of each layer.

If its "various physical dimensions were recorded" then how thick is it?

Quote:
I call those bold words for a disbeliever so intimidated by Mormonism that he refuses to confront it openly, but instead cowers hypocritically in the shadows of his secret apostasy.

I say, "Bring 'em on." Like Han Solo, I prefer a straight fight to all this sneaking around.

Quote:
What all of these ambitious debunkers of Mormonism have never realized is that the Book of Abraham is not inside the coffin. The coffin is merely a metaphor for their faith.

That's beautiful Will, you truly have a gift.

I hope that once we've passed through this veil of tears, you'll come visit me in Hell so we can reminisce about all the good times we've shared.

_________________
What they don't teach in Sunday school


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Has John Gee Pulled Another Fast One?
PostPosted: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:02 pm 
Elder
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:44 pm
Posts: 340
Location: Jah-oh-eh
wenglund wrote:
Your clarifying response and printable graphics are much appreciated, and I am pleased to learn that someone else has been thinking along the same lines as me. I would be interested in reading Vance's argument. Could you provide a link?

See here

Quote:
However, if one then reasonably assumes that the peaks in your autocorrelation analysis represent the distance between half-windings rather than full windings, what effect does that have on the calculated dimensions of the Hor papyri--particularly the length?

It would double the length.

_________________
What they don't teach in Sunday school


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 335 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ... 16  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], canpakes, Google [Bot], huckelberry, Michael and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group