Daniel C. Peterson: well-respected scholar? or not?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Rollo Tomasi
God
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:27 am

Post by Rollo Tomasi »

Plutarch wrote:[Juliann] appears to be from what I read on this board a major FAIR denizen of significant intelligence and little tolerance for several folks here.

The bolded words caused me to engage in loud laughter.

You are the archetypical fiend of hell ....

Who is fast becoming the Gilligan to your Skipper. Good to see you finally found a friend, Bob.

Never mind the fact that (at least since March) we are treated to discussions about masturbation ...

Ah, an SWK wannabe.

personal infidelity...

I haven't seen any of that.

hatred of their faithful spouses ...

It's almost always the other way around -- one of the sad by-products of the "families are forever" obsession.

hatred of their divorced spouses ...

Plenty of divorced TBM's have the same "hatred," which began when they were the aforementioned "faithful spouses."

pre-marital sex ...

Bob is breaking out the "Miracle of Forgiveness" again! I'm sure, like SWK and others of the Brethren, he would rather his children be dead and buried than alive and "stained" by sexuality.

homosexual bliss ...

Ah, can't forget to throw in the Morg-bred homophobia, eh, Bob?

I am told I have got to be one of the worst lawyers on the planet.

Your skills were not challenged, just your embellished resume.

My church position is mocked to the nth degree and my qualifications for it.

You contributed to that by using the moniker "Bishop Lee" and "Bishop." Let me guess -- you make your wife and children call you that home, right? Wouldn't be surprising, what with your "presiding" over the ward AND your family.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)

User avatar
Rollo Tomasi
God
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:27 am

Post by Rollo Tomasi »

Plutarch wrote:You are being unfair to deal this card.

Are you suggesting that Runtu is being any more unfair than Pah was to him? Pah often steps over the line with his vitriolic tirades -- he should learn a lesson from this.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

Plutarch wrote:Runtu:

Can you see where this is going? Your posts on this board are just going to make people who have some milk of human kindness in them totally unwilling to engage you, disagree with you, or criticize you for fear that in the future you will come back and make accusations of precipitating a suicide attempt. I know that if you came back down the line and said to me the things you are saying to another poster on this board, I couldn't sleep for days and would probably abandon board participation forever. You are being unfair to deal this card.

Get your personal life off the public boards. Get help from real people. God bless you and help you.


P


Seriously, did you read what I posted? The one time in my life when I posted about a serious personal crisis, most people responded with kindness and urged me to get help. One did not. I have not spoken with Pahoran since that day, so I don't consider it "playing a card" of any kind. That was a horrible time, and I'm glad it's passed. I just didn't expect to talk to the one person I really didn't want to ever come across again. I'm trying to learn to forgive.

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by Pahoran »

Mister Scratch wrote:
Plutarch wrote:Runtu:

Can you see where this is going? Your posts on this board are just going to make people who have some milk of human kindness in them totally unwilling to engage you, disagree with you, or criticize you for fear that in the future you will come back and make accusations of precipitating a suicide attempt. I know that if you came back down the line and said to me the things you are saying to another poster on this board, I couldn't sleep for days and would probably abandon board participation forever. You are being unfair to deal this card.
P

The hell he is. Find me one other person who thinks that Pahoran is anything other than a massive jerk and an arrogant trash talker.

Massive jerk and an arrogant trash talker I may well be, but you have certainly surpassed me in both of those areas.

That Pahoran might feel guilty is but in drop in the well of shame he ought to be feeling. He's sort of like the Church itself: unwilling to ever apologize, regardless of the offense.

And your superior example in that regard can be found--where, exactly?

Regards,
Pahoran

rcrocket

Post by rcrocket »

Rollo Tomasi wrote:
Plutarch wrote:You are being unfair to deal this card.

Are you suggesting that Runtu is being any more unfair than Pah was to him? Pah often steps over the line with his vitriolic tirades -- he should learn a lesson from this.


How sad and pathetic, that you justify Runtu's rantings with Pahoran's ravings. Carry on.

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

Plutarch wrote:
Rollo Tomasi wrote:
Plutarch wrote:You are being unfair to deal this card.

Are you suggesting that Runtu is being any more unfair than Pah was to him? Pah often steps over the line with his vitriolic tirades -- he should learn a lesson from this.


How sad and pathetic, that you justify Runtu's rantings with Pahoran's ravings. Carry on.


I'm sorry I brought it up. As I said, I never expected to talk to Pahoran again after that horrible time. But it's in the past, and it was between me and him. I'm sorry for bringing it here.

Mister Scratch
Master Mahan
Posts: 5604
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:13 pm

Post by Mister Scratch »

Pahoran wrote:Massive jerk and an arrogant trash talker I may well be


Glad you'll admit it. That's the first step towards true repentance.

That Pahoran might feel guilty is but in drop in the well of shame he ought to be feeling. He's sort of like the Church itself: unwilling to ever apologize, regardless of the offense.

And your superior example in that regard can be found--where, exactly?

[/quote]

Hey, bring it on, Pah! I'll happily retract and apologize profusely if you can produce one single instance of the institutional Church ever offering up a sincere apology. Good luck with that one. Maybe you can enlist your clone, Wade Englund, to help you.

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by Pahoran »

Fleabite,

I previously wrote:

Pahoran wrote:Massive jerk and an arrogant trash talker I may well be, but you have certainly surpassed me in both of those areas.

And you dishonestly edited my response thus:

Mister Scratch wrote:
Pahoran wrote:Massive jerk and an arrogant trash talker I may well be

Glad you'll admit it. That's the first step towards true repentance.

Don't you realise what a pointless exercise it is when the quote you are mangling can be seen on the very same page?

Mister Scratch wrote:
That Pahoran might feel guilty is but in drop in the well of shame he ought to be feeling. He's sort of like the Church itself: unwilling to ever apologize, regardless of the offense.

And your superior example in that regard can be found--where, exactly?

Hey, bring it on, Pah! I'll happily retract and apologize profusely if you can produce one single instance of the institutional Church ever offering up a sincere apology.

You could start by retracting and apologising for some of the lies you have told in this forum.

Good luck with that one. Maybe you can enlist your clone, Wade Englund, to help you.

Hey, why don't you come right out and lie that Wade is my sock-puppet, too? You know you want to.

Regards,
Pahoran

User avatar
Rollo Tomasi
God
Posts: 4085
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:27 am

Post by Rollo Tomasi »

Plutarch wrote:How sad and pathetic, that you justify Runtu's rantings with Pahoran's ravings.

You seemed to make the initial comparison -- I was simply pointing out your absurd statement.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."

-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)

User avatar
Pokatator
Famous Potato
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:38 am

Post by Pokatator »

Boy all we need now is PacMan and then we would have 3 Ps in a pod.

Pah I remember Runtu's post he is refering to, if you have a heart it's in some cold place like the Arctic.

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by Pahoran »

Pokatator wrote:Boy all we need now is PacMan and then we would have 3 Ps in a pod.

Pah I remember Runtu's post he is refering to, if you have a heart it's in some cold place like the Arctic.

Unlike Rollo, I see the level of substance in your posts is the same as it ever was.

ShadesBoard, the place for FAIR's castoffs.

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Yes, he's a well-respected scholar.

Post by Pahoran »

Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that the very last substantive post thereon was made by me, and nobody has even tried to respond to it. I wonder why?

A fringe clique of obsessive haters decides Dan is not a respected scholar. Meanwhile, a government minister half a world away is consulting him about his area of academic expertise.

Is this strange, or rather is it to be expected?

Regards,
Pahoran

harmony
God
Posts: 18195
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:35 pm

Re: Yes, he's a well-respected scholar.

Post by harmony »

Pahoran wrote:Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that the very last substantive post thereon was made by me, and nobody has even tried to respond to it. I wonder why?

A fringe clique of obsessive haters decides Dan is not a respected scholar. Meanwhile, a government minister half a world away is consulting him about his area of academic expertise.

Is this strange, or rather is it to be expected?

Regards,
Pahoran


Well, in the first place, we only have your word for it, that the gov't official requested a meeting. And in the second place, if Daniel was in NZ anyway, and if by some obscure yet heretofore unidentified means the gov't official had heard of him, then why wouldn't he consult him? I mean, for all we know, you told the gov't official that Daniel was a world-renowned scholar and an expert in Islam Studies.

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

OK, I'll bite, Pahoran. Who was the government official, and how was the invitation made? I just read a press release about Dr. Peterson's tour of New Zealand and Australia wherein his visit is described as follows:

Professor Daniel Peterson will explore the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, and
Islamic relationships with non­Muslim nations. His visit to Australia and New Zealand in
September is to enlighten opinion leaders from government, media, academic, business and
religious fields.


Given this stated goal, I'd be surprised if it weren't Peterson et al. who requested the enlightening meeting.

User avatar
Pokatator
Famous Potato
Posts: 1417
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:38 am

Post by Pokatator »

Pahoran wrote:
Pokatator wrote:Boy all we need now is PacMan and then we would have 3 Ps in a pod.

Pah I remember Runtu's post he is refering to, if you have a heart it's in some cold place like the Arctic.

Unlike Rollo, I see the level of substance in your posts is the same as it ever was.

ShadesBoard, the place for FAIR's castoffs.

Regards,
Pahoran


I must have had enough substance to be banned.

I know your motto, "You can't insult me, I'm too ignorant."

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Re: Yes, he's a well-respected scholar.

Post by Pahoran »

harmony wrote:
Pahoran wrote:Perhaps the most telling thing about this thread is that the very last substantive post thereon was made by me, and nobody has even tried to respond to it. I wonder why?

A fringe clique of obsessive haters decides Dan is not a respected scholar. Meanwhile, a government minister half a world away is consulting him about his area of academic expertise.

Is this strange, or rather is it to be expected?

Regards,
Pahoran


Well, in the first place, we only have your word for it, that the gov't official requested a meeting.

That's true.

But since no-one has yet managed to accuse me of inventing falsehoods out of whole cloth, I'm content to stand on that.

And in the second place, if Daniel was in NZ anyway, and if by some obscure yet heretofore unidentified means the gov't official had heard of him, then why wouldn't he consult him?

My point exactly. Why wouldn't he? After all, Dan is a respected scholar, the anti-Mormon lunatic fringe notwithstanding.

I mean, for all we know, you told the gov't official that Daniel was a world-renowned scholar and an expert in Islam Studies.

That's right. Dan is completely obscure and unknown, but cabinet ministers are listening to me.

ROTFLOL!!

Regards,
Pahoran

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by Pahoran »

Pokatator wrote:
Pahoran wrote:
Pokatator wrote:Boy all we need now is PacMan and then we would have 3 Ps in a pod.

Pah I remember Runtu's post he is refering to, if you have a heart it's in some cold place like the Arctic.

Unlike Rollo, I see the level of substance in your posts is the same as it ever was.

ShadesBoard, the place for FAIR's castoffs.

Regards,
Pahoran

I must have had enough substance to be banned.

Do any of you really believe that substance had anything to do with your banning?

Or rather, is that something you keep repeating to each other, in much the same way as convicts tell each other how innocent they all are?

Regards,
Pahoran

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22509
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Post by moksha »

Pahoran wrote:
Tal Bachman wrote:And lastly, this, from the current head of the very graduate program from which the world famous Arabist got his Ph.D.:

UCLA Arab Studies Chair wrote:I'm not aware of any scholarly work of his in the fields of biblical studies or Semitic languages. I'll take your word for it that he graduated from UCLA at some point in the past...Mormons generally think their beliefs are credible. I'm not aware of non-Mormon scholars who find their beliefs credible, but that's hardly surprising".

I rather suspect that the quoted email is, if not an outright fabrication, then at least the result of some very heavy-handed editorial interference.

Dan Peterson came to New Zealand a couple of months ago. While here, he was invited to meet with a government minister who was worried about immigration issues and wanted Dan's insights into Muslim beliefs and culture. I find it rather incredible--as in, non-credible--that a government minister from half way around the world would have heard of Dan in the context of his academic field, while an academic working in that field and in his own country would not. Can you explain that to me?
Regards,
Pahoran


This does seem most puzzling. Maybe its like Americans failing to see the genius of Jerry Lewis when the French can find him as appealing as their snails. Or maybe not. I like Dr. Daniel Peterson. If his international notoriety ellipses his domestic academic fame, then it must be a mystery. I wouldn't be surprised in he became a Presidential Adviser on the Middle East for Mitt Romney if elected.

Maybe you can enlist your clone, Wade Englund, to help you.

Look, this was a simply an experiment of Sorenson Genetic Research that went wrong. Instead of asking if it could be done, the better question would have been whether it should be done. Researchers found that in their desire to make more obedient members, they merely created more irascible ones. They labeled their experiment CASE CLOSED.

....
Last edited by moksha on Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Runtu
God
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sat Nov 04, 2006 11:06 pm

Post by Runtu »

Speaking of substance, Pahoran, I responded to your substantive post about Dr. Peterson's invitation to meet with a goverment minister. Apparently, you aren't willing to extend the same courtesy. Must be that disingenuous evil nature of yours. ;)

User avatar
Who Knows
God
Posts: 2455
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:09 pm

Post by Who Knows »

Pahoran wrote:Do any of you really believe that substance had anything to do with your banning?

Or rather, is that something you keep repeating to each other, in much the same way as convicts tell each other how innocent they all are?

Regards,
Pahoran


I'd say a combination of substance, persistence and a dash of unwarranted paranoia on the part of FAIR.

Pahoran
God
Posts: 1296
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:20 pm

Post by Pahoran »

Who Knows wrote:
Pahoran wrote:Do any of you really believe that substance had anything to do with your banning?

Or rather, is that something you keep repeating to each other, in much the same way as convicts tell each other how innocent they all are?

Regards,
Pahoran


I'd say a combination of substance, persistence and a dash of unwarranted paranoia on the part of FAIR.

In every single case that I actually know anything about, persistence--in flouting board rules and/or trying to do end-runs around moderator decisions, such as by creating sock-puppets to avoid queueing--was indeed a critical factor.

Regards,
Pahoran

Post Reply