Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

264 Excellent

1 Follower

About cacheman

  • Rank
    Just some guy who wonders about stuff

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

1,396 profile views
  1. Hi Tacenda, I think you misunderstood me. I don't think you're 'darkened and ignorant'. I'm not the best writer, and I apologize if my writing was unclear. I was simply trying to demonstrate that LDS leaders have described exmembers (like myself) in much the same way as some exmormons describe church members. I think both sides need to be careful in how they characterize others. I appreciate the fact that you clarified what you meant by your earlier post. I would have liked that post if there was a 'like' button on your posts. I'm sorry you've experienced harsh judgement from others. I enjoy reading your posts, even if i might disagree with something now and then. I feel that you are very open and transparent about yourself on this board. I respect that.
  2. I agree with you here. I've also heard similar things from other former Mormons. It reminds me of how LDS leaders talk about former members....ie. their minds become darkened and confused...they no longer have the superior intelligence bestowed to those who obey the gospel...they become as much darkened as they were previously enlightened...they experience darkness, ignorance..., etc. Statements (from whichever side) like this are arrogant and have a belittling effect on the 'others' which only serves to further the divide whether intended or not.
  3. Good catch! I will. Actually, I can't now. Maybe I missed the time-frame for editing.
  4. The problem is that I am not qualified to judge the breadth of his work. The one thing I've seen that he's written in my area of expertise caught my eye because the claim was contrary to what others have written. That piqued my interest enough to look into it, and I found his methodology lacking in that particular situation. I'm not dismissing the rest of the work. But, based on my first impressions, I'm not likely to read more of his writings. How would I evaluate the soundness of the information he presents when I am unfamiliar with the standard methodology in those disciplines. Your last two sentences are ridiculous. If Dan Vogel thought and wrote in such black and white terms, then of course I wouldn't put much stock into what he says. But, as far as I know, he doesn't..... and I believe you know that. If you have a reference where he says something like 'it's patently impossible that Joseph Smith wasn't aware of the Comanches riding horses', then please share it. I would agree with you that the statement would be at best, irresponsible.
  5. I did the search back when the link was first posted. I just looked again and found some... https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Topographical_Description_of_the_State/fXlNAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_journal_of_the_voyages_and_travels_of/-GJZAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1 https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Prairie_Scout_Or_Agatone_the_Renegad/_gwTAAAAYAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Winning_of_the_West_Louisiana_and_th/QHcOAAAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=comanche
  6. What Bob says about Dr. Sorenson's work rings true with the little bit of his work that I've looked into. It can be tricky to evaluate information that falls outside of your own area of experience or expertise. But, I did come across one piece of writing from his Mormon's Codex book that was discussing something within my area of knowledge and interest. When I looked into the particular claim that he was making, I found that he was at best making an egregious error. I've posted about it elsewhere on this forum. Likewise, when I opened up the link for his response to Coe, I came across this (Bolded portion is Coe; Sorenson's response is below it): When a scholar uses language such as 'patently impossible' to discuss what someone may have known historically..... that makes me wonder if their confidence level is calibrated correctly. So, I did a quick 5 minute google books search and found 3 books published in the US prior to 1820 that discussed the use of horses by the Comanche and Sioux. I'm no historian, but that quick little bit of research that I did makes me think that Joseph 'may' have heard or read something about Native American horsemanship prior to the BoM. Based on the two examples that I've looked into, I'm not sure why I should place trust in the things he says which are outside my area such as archaeology, anthropology, etc. cacheman
  7. I have no idea about their private conversations. But years back, someone posted, what they claimed was Dr. Ritner's response to repeated statements by Dr. Gee and Dr. Peterson that Gee had Dr. Ritner removed from his committee, he mentioned that he was concerned about his name being associated with Gee's apologetic output. He also called their repeated posts regarding the change of chairs as false allegations. I'm not aware of Dr. Gee or Dr. Peterson publicly making those allegations in the years since that response.
  8. That's understandable, and just to be clear, my post was not meant to single you out. It just happened to be the last one I read before I responded. There were others in this thread who reacted more harshly. Whatever the case (whether she bears some guilt or is an innocent victim herself), it must be a frightening and vulnerable time for her and her kids.
  9. Maybe I've missed something in the articles..... but I'm inclined to give his wife the benefit of the doubt. It's not clear to me that she knew all of what was going on. I would imagine that this was a frightening, chaotic, and confusing few moments of panic following the allegations in the store. Her husband might have been trying to convince her that the accuser was wrong or misinterpreting his actions. If she didn't see the photos before he deleted them, then she might be inclined to believe her husband over his victim. I try imagine how I would respond if I was in a store with my wife, and then from the other side of the store I hear someone accusing her of some horrible thing. My likely first inclination would be to protect my wife, and then try to talk things out with the accuser and gather more information (especially, if I thought it was out of character for her). Without convincing information, I would do what I could to protect her, because in my mind, it would be very unlikely that she would do the horrible thing she was accused of. I'm uncomfortable with some of the speculation and accusations I'm seeing towards his wife. It's hard to know how anyone will respond in a traumatic incident. If she attempted to cover up, or aid and abet a crime, then it's the responsibility of the authorities to look in to that. I don't think that we have enough information.... at least I don't.
  10. Ok. So, this was also just an assumption or perhaps a vague memory that may or not be correct? Are you comfortable making statements about people that you don't know to be true? If not, perhaps you should edit it.
  11. I'm not that familiar with this story, and I can't find any source where he claimed to be the first openly gay member of a bishopric. Can you please provide a source for that?
  12. Maybe I'm misinterpreting what you're saying..... But, are you implying that God used the 9/11 terrorists to afflict his people in an attempt to bring then back in the fold?
  13. Hi Smac, While the Harvard FAQ is correct on some points, I believe that the FAQ needs updating. The 2018 Farm Bill legalized regulated hemp production and hemp product sales across the country. The bill removed any Cannabis with lower than 0.3% THC from the controlled substance act. Therefore, any hemp derived products (including CBD products) are currently legal in all 50 states, assuming that the hemp was produced by a licensed grower following the federal and state guidelines. The federal government does not consider CBD itself (or any other non-THC cannabinoid) in the same class as marijuana if derived from legally grown hemp. The DEA has been slow to update their definition of 'marihuana', and still includes all Cannabis in their definition. But, they no longer have the authority to regulate interstate movement of Cannabis seed or plant material if it falls below the 0.3% THC threshold. That authority is now under the USDA. -cacheman
  14. Bergin stated; "I referred to a study just published which indicated that 50% of white male homosexuals surveyed in San Francisco had had at least 500 sexual partners, 28% had 1000 partners, and 25% of them had had relationships with boys under the age of sixteen" He didn't extrapolate.... he just didn't speak to the survey methodology or mention the authors comments about the study not being representative. You did the same as him, but further extrapolated by stating that; "fully 25% of the adult homosexual males of San Francisco had actually had sex with minors under the age of sixteen". This was among the 'facts' you presented to counter Calm's statement that "Same sex pedophilia is not the same thing as homosexuality. It is best to be careful to use clear terminology to avoid confusing them." Even if the statistics you presented were factual, I fail to see how they counter her statement.
  • Create New...