2thinkForums
Honest Intellectual Inquiry: Science, Religion, Philosophy, Ethics, Politics, and Literature
Discussion Forum for 2think.org and lds-mormon.com
Home | Contact admin | View Archives from Old Forum
 New Topic  |  Go to Top  |  Go to Topic  |  Search  |  Log In   Previous Message  |  Next Message 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice
Author: Uncle Dale 
Date:   02-03-10 22:00

Jockers only included Spalding's wordprint, because there was prior
evidence that Spalding had written prose resembling parts of the Book
of Mormon.

Thus, the claim that Spalding had written something similar to the BoM
was the major reason he was included in the Jockers study.

So, the old "anecdotal" claims were important just at the very beginning,
in determining whether or not to include Spalding in the study.

They also considered including Ethan Smith. There is one anecdotal claim
from the 1880s, linking Ethan Smith to the BoM text. But the evidence
was insufficient in the case of Ethan Smith -- so he was not included.

Once the authorship candidates had been selected for testing, THEN
the anecdotal evidence faded into insignificance. It only resurfaces in
the light of possible interpretation of the computer analysis data.

It is rather like our saying we want to know who your purported
grandmother was, when we do DNA testing on you. Once that testing
is under way (and completed) we are far, far less interested in info
on your grandmother (whether true or false) than we are in test results.

Make any sense?

UD
 Reply To This Message  |  Flat View   Newer Topic  |  Older Topic 

 Topics Author  Date
 BoM Authorship S/R Theory without Manuscript Found  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:22 
 What we lose  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:29 
 Is what we lose expendable?  new
Jersey Girl 01-31-10 16:37 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
marg 01-31-10 22:22 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 14:07 
 Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Martin 02-02-10 07:12 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:38 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:39 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 04:35 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
marg 02-03-10 04:39 
 Nice job being Dale's, er, "tool", marg!  new
Martin 02-03-10 08:34 
 I agree with you Martin  new
marg 02-03-10 16:08 
 Re: I agree with you Martin  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 19:35 
 Dale yet again(!) DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  new
Martin 02-03-10 04:43 
 Re: Dale yet again(!) DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 05:21 
 I do NOT grant you persmission to repost my words anywhere.  
Martin 02-03-10 08:43 
 Re: Dale & marg DEMAND I reverse the Burden of Proof!  new
hoplite 02-03-10 04:09 
 Thanks, hoplite  new
Martin 02-03-10 05:00 
 Re: Thanks, hoplite  new
marg 02-03-10 05:26 
 Putting this in amber, too  new
Martin 02-03-10 08:10 
 Is history scientific?  new
Martin 02-03-10 10:26 
 Re: Is history scientific?  new
marg 02-03-10 16:26 
 Why can't Marg read?  new
Martin 02-04-10 01:57 
 Re: Is history scientific?  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 21:06 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:16 
 Vicki you can't think worth shit and you never could  new
marg 02-03-10 04:23 
 marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  
Martin 02-03-10 05:23 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
marg 02-03-10 05:42 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
Martin 02-03-10 08:59 
 Martin why should I have animosity for you?  
marg 02-03-10 16:40 
 Re: Martin why should I have animosity for you?  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 18:00 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
aussieguy55 02-03-10 19:56 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 20:11 
 Celebrate the real victory! Do not mourn the loss of harmful anecdotes!  new
Martin 02-04-10 01:13 
 The richness of metacognition  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 23:08 
 Re: marg keeps putting the "sub" into "sub-moron"!  
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:39 
 vicki write on topic for a change instead of trying to create drama  new
marg 02-05-10 20:03 
 marg, *read* the thread instead of creating chaos  new
Jersey Girl 02-06-10 01:32 
 Martin has added nothing new that wasn't already appreciated.  new
marg 02-06-10 03:07 
 FYI lady  new
Jersey Girl 02-06-10 03:35 
 Re: FYI lady  new
marg 02-06-10 04:31 
 Marg, you couldn't argue yourself out of a mime's air box!  new
Martin 02-09-10 07:10 
 Re: Marg, you couldn't argue yourself out of a mime's air box!  new
marg 02-09-10 15:49 
 Re: marg, *read* the thread instead of creating chaos  new
marg 02-06-10 18:59 
 Still waging war, are ya?  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 00:10 
 THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Martin 02-01-10 02:15 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
marg 02-01-10 02:35 
 Go ahead and pull up your chairs!  new
Martin 02-01-10 04:41 
 Re: Go ahead and pull up your chairs!  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:30 
 Dale asks "What evidence"?  new
Martin 02-02-10 07:33 
 Re: Dale asks "What evidence"?  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:41 
 Dale again DEMANDS me to provide an alternative!  
Martin 02-03-10 04:31 
 Wait just a New York minute  new
Jersey Girl 02-02-10 21:20 
 Re: Wait just a New York minute  new
Martin 02-03-10 01:35 
 No, don't  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:42 
 Re: No, don't  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:43 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:28 
 Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Martin 02-02-10 09:25 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Uncle Dale 02-02-10 11:45 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Martin 02-03-10 09:42 
 Re: Dale tries valiantly to save his life's work by reframing the debate  new
Jersey Girl 02-02-10 23:21 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
Jersey Girl 02-01-10 19:13 
 [lost response!]  new
Martin 02-02-10 11:10 
 Re: THIS IS THE KEY: The main flaw in marg's and Broadhurst's "thinking"!  new
marg 02-03-10 05:16 
 Re: Is what we lose expendable?  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 14:41 
 Re: BoM Authorship S/R Theory without Manuscript Found  new
marg 01-31-10 19:26 
 Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Martin 02-01-10 04:40 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-01-10 10:36 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 00:35 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 00:49 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 01:02 
 Re: Repeating what I wrote elsewhere  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 02:05 
 This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 19:51 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 21:34 
 I'm going to answer you twice  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:46 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:00 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 22:06 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:40 
 JG asks a very insightful question  new
Martin 02-04-10 03:15 
 Re: JG asks a very insightful question  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:52 
 Re: I'm going to answer you twice  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 04:07 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 21:57 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-03-10 22:26 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 22:29 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 10:25 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:24 
 Re: This post is ready for you, Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-06-10 00:20 
 You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
marg 02-06-10 01:49 
 Re: You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
Uncle Dale 02-06-10 02:35 
 Re: You are such a gentleman Dale.  new
marg 02-06-10 04:08 
 *SPECIFIC QUESTION ANSWERED SPECIFICALLY!*  new
Martin 02-04-10 02:41 
 Re: *SPECIFIC QUESTION ANSWERED SPECIFICALLY!*  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 13:10 
 Constraints  new
Martin 02-05-10 03:18 
 Re: Constraints  new
Uncle Dale 02-05-10 11:09 
 Bravo! Bravo! A wise man indeed!  new
Martin 02-09-10 05:26 
 Re: Bravo! Bravo! A wise man indeed!  new
marg 02-09-10 15:10 
 my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 15:52 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 16:17 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 17:31 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
Uncle Dale 02-04-10 18:37 
 Re: my respect and admiration goes to Dale  new
marg 02-04-10 19:41 
 *Look, functioning intellects, at Marg's words and despair*  new
Martin 02-05-10 08:36 
 Broadhurst's deeply offensive allegation that I called for "SUPPRESSION"!  new
Martin 02-05-10 09:25 
 Re: Broadhurst's deeply offensive allegation that I called for "SUPPRESSION"!  new
marg 02-05-10 14:24 
 MARG DOTH BUT REPEAT THE OFFENSE!  new
Martin 02-09-10 07:19 
 I'm *sorry* that I hadn't read this earlier, Martin  new
Jersey Girl 02-03-10 00:31 
 Excellent! Spot on!  new
Martin 02-03-10 03:22 
 Stepping in again, Martin, please read this  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 20:08 
 Vision  new
Martin 02-05-10 05:50 
 Re: Vision and seeing the light  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 22:40 
 LOUD I am!  new
Martin 02-09-10 05:48 
 *** IN LITTLE WORDS, or at least in LITTLE SENTENCES *** PLEASE READ!  new
Martin 02-04-10 04:03 
 This was your best  new
Jersey Girl 02-05-10 23:37 
 mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion  new
marg 02-04-10 21:41 
 If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 21:57 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
marg 02-04-10 22:01 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
Jersey Girl 02-04-10 22:05 
 Re: If mikwut has nothing to do with this discussion, then  new
marg 02-05-10 13:02 
 Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
Martin 02-05-10 09:40 
 Re: Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
Uncle Dale 02-05-10 11:33 
 Re: Broadhurst, I ask that you not re-phrase or re-characterize my words  new
marg 02-05-10 14:49 


 Need a Login? Register Here 
 User Login
 User Name:
 Password:
 Remember my login:
   
 Forgot Your Password?
Enter your email address or user name below and a new password will be sent to the email address associated with your profile.

phorum.org
Copyright 2thinkforums.org 2007 All Rights Reserved

The content of all posts is the reponsibility of the author.
2thinkforums, its hosters, and administrators take no responsibility for any of the content posted by 2thinkforums posters