The problem with Limited Geography,

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I have professional expertise in what is and is not evidence, and you are wrong. There is a lot of evidence against the Book of Mormon including some to which you allude and baldly dismiss as not constituting evidence. Some we haven't even mentioned here such as JS's proven history for claiming he translated historical documents and coming up with something not remotely accurate in place, time or content to what we know the document says with the aid of the Rosetta Stone (I'm suspending my rule of not debating such things to show how a case might be made against the Book of Mormon in court, since we're talking bout what is and is not evidenc).

Even a post-modernist view, and I appreciate very much sophisticated post-modernism such as Cormac McCarthy's, does not do violence to the evidence. It's about recognizing the continuing vitality of mystery. Not denying reality.

Correction, I am right and you are wrong ... You have professional expertise in what 'may' be considered evidence. And simply because it 'may' be considered evidence does not mean it is such.

Surely you can see the error in your reasoning

[Sleeping in EQ]

Tooblue, you can be an interesting guy, but every time you start talking about how complex you are, I know the thread is at the bottom and twitching.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

In the first place, I don't think it's far fetched that ancient Americans and ancient Egyptians independently came up with pyramids. If you have evidence of Old World peoples migrating to the Americas in 600 B.C. out with it! Cough it up.

What wonderful coincidences

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by tooblue

What wonderful coincidences

Compare reed boat construction between the Nile and Lake Titicaca.

What about Olmec heads with distinctly African facial traits?

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

Tooblue, you can be an interesting guy, but every time you start talking about how complex you are, I know the thread is at the bottom and twitching.

I only talk about it to point out that every participant here is equally complex if not moreso In fact isn't that the most compelling aspect of these threads –that participants start and participate in them in an effort to divulge their complexity?

Losing sight of individual posters complexity is a root cause of thread deterioration.

[All-American]

So I saw this thread, and noticed that it had gone from six or so posts to fifty posts, and even before I opened the thread, thought, "SU must have started another pissing match."

Folks, why do you bother arguing with him? Here is a guy who asks for answers in the same breath in which he says he won't bother with anybody who claims to have answers. He beats the same drum ad nauseum, as though THIS time, somebody might listen. And yet we fire back, as though THIS time, he might change.

We are as much to blame for his obtrusiveness as he is, so long as we keep responding to this drivel. Please just ignore him.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by All-American

So I saw this thread, and noticed that it had gone from six or so posts to fifty posts, and even before I opened the thread, thought, "SU must have started another pissing match."

Folks, why do you bother arguing with him? Here is a guy who asks for answers in the same breath in which he says he won't bother with anybody who claims to have answers. He beats the same drum ad nauseum, as though THIS time, somebody might listen. And yet we fire back, as though THIS time, he might change.

We are as much to blame for his obtrusiveness as he is, so long as we keep responding to this drivel. Please just ignore him.

I want to have an intellectual discussion about the Book of Mormon. It looks to me like it's about like trying to have ain intellectual discussion about a baseball card. Help me out. Prove me wrong.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by All-American

So I saw this thread, and noticed that it had gone from six or so posts to fifty posts, and even before I opened the thread, thought, "SU must have started another pissing match."

Folks, why do you bother arguing with him? Here is a guy who asks for answers in the same breath in which he says he won't bother with anybody who claims to have answers. He beats the same drum ad nauseum, as though THIS time, somebody might listen. And yet we fire back, as though THIS time, he might change.

We are as much to blame for his obtrusiveness as he is, so long as we keep responding to this drivel. Please just ignore him.

Archaea and some of the others here derive masochistic pleasure out of licking his testicle sweat.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I want to have an intellectual discussion about the Book of Mormon. It looks to me like it's about like trying to have ain intellectual discussion about a baseball card. Help me out. Prove me wrong.

All you've done is prove what All-American said is true. You ask for mustard seeds, but then you ignore them once you've been given some.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I want to have an intellectual discussion about the Book of Mormon. It looks to me like it's about like trying to have ain intellectual discussion about a baseball card. Help me out. Prove me wrong.

That's a crock. You are as close minded if not more so than any apologist. Look at your posts in this thread. You are not interested in considering infromaiton, as you have reached your conclusions and force feed everything into them, whether they fit easily or not.