David Holmes' Compter Analysis - Comments?

[Bibletruth]

I found this article on the Religious Tolerance site:

"Subsequent British analysis for the Association for History and Computing

A similar multivariate analysis technique conducted by a British non-Mormon, David I. Holmes. 3 He concluded that the author of Doctrine and Covenants and of The Book of Mormon was the same person, Joseph Smith.

He analyzed:

14 large blocks of text from the Book of Mormon, totaling 120,000 words.

Documents written or dictated by Joseph Smith between 1828 and 1833.

Three blocks of about 10,000 words from the early revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants,

Text from the book of Isaiah and

Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham.

Holmes concluded:

"... the aim of my research is to complement historical and scientific studies into the authenticity of the Book of Mormon by subjecting it and related Mormon scripture to stylometric analysis. In this paper it is understood that a particularly effective measure for purposes of discrimination between writers is the vocabulary richness of a text....

"We may summarize by noting that the analyses have shown that the Joseph Smith and Isaiah samples form distinct and separate clusters, whereas all other samples tend to cluster together...."

"The formation of the clustering observed here, provides evidence of the utility of the multivariate technique advocated by this study. ..."

"An important discovery is the fact that the samples of writings from the various prophets who purportedly wrote the Book of Mormon do not form prophet-by-prophet clusters. The dendrogram in Figure 2 shows that only the two samples from Alma display internal homogeneity... There appears to be no real difference between Alma's vocabulary richness and Mormon's vocabulary richness within the Book of Alma, a conclusion in direct contradiction to the findings of Larsen and the Brigham Young University team. This study has not found, therefore, any evidence of multiple authorship within the Book of Mormon itself. Variation within samples from the same prophet is generally as great as any variation between the prophets themselves.

"Two of the three 'revelations' samples are also indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets. ... The dendrograms and principal components plots place the Book of Abraham text (AB) firmly in the main 'prophet' cluster, its nearest neighbor being sample R1 from Moroni. In terms of vocabulary richness, clearly the Book of Abraham is indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets and from samples D2 and D3 of Joseph Smith's revelations....

"It is my conclusion, from the results of this research and the supporting historical evidence, that the Book of Mormon sprang from the 'prophetic voice' of Joseph Smith himself, as did his revelations and the text of the Book of Abraham. We have seen that the style of his 'prophetic voice' as evidenced by the main cluster of the textual samples studied, differs from the style of his personal writings or dictations of a personal nature."

Interestingly, this study's results contradcted those foud earlier by a BYU computer analysis. Wonder why?

Here's a link to the whole article: http://www.religioustolerance.org/ldsbom1.htm

[Doctor Steuss]

[...]

Interestingly, this study's results contradcted those foud earlier by a BYU computer analysis. Wonder why?

Obviously, the Mormons either lied or are intellectually inept.

[Avatar4321]

Who the heck is David Holmes and why should I care?

[slim]

Was this the same computer that was smart enough to make Tyson Gay the olympian Tyson Homosexual? Computers are only as good as the programs they are running (which are written by men)

Computers are always right? Good grief Charlie Brown.

[Mars]

I would definitely like to see the signal processing algorithms.

[Doctor Steuss]

Obviously, the Mormons either lied or are intellectually inept.

I disagree.

I disagree.

Of course you do, you silly little man.

Of course you do, you silly little man.

I may be silly, and little, but you sir have done a great disservice by calling me a man.

I may be silly, and little, but you sir have done a great disservice by calling me a man.

My apologies. Now, back to your claim regarding the intellectual capacity of the Mormons, and their penchant for dishonesty. Perhaps the reason for the difference is because David Holmes used a method that was based mainly on the vocabulary, whereas those kooky Mormons used methods that involved the rates noncontextual words were used and also word-pattern ratios.

[Zakuska]

By Joe I've think you've got it Watson!

Joseph Smith really did "translate" the book of Mormon.

[Bibletruth]

Who the heck is David Holmes and why should I care?

David I. Holmes, a Senior Lecturer in Statistics at Bristol Polytechnic

[Obiwan]

1. I can read for myself and see that there ARE different "voices" in the books.

2. I can read for myself and see that in relation to the Book of Mormon there is an over-riding voice also.

3. I can read for myself and see that there is a voice that is Josephs in all the materials.

4. I can read for myself and see that there is "another" voice which is the KJV English Voice.

5. I can read for myself and see that there is "another" voice even which is God's SPIRITUAL voice in the texts.

Further, you seemed to ignore the last part of your quoted study in which the person states that there IS a "difference" between Joseph's OWN voice, and his "prophetic" voice. Thus ignoring all that might imply.

In conclusion, I find the study to be very limited in it's scope and complexity, only noticing what IT wanted to notice, rather than taking into account all levels of "voice" variations in the materials in question.

[Mars]

http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=jbms&id=136

Been there and done that, evidently.

[Tarski]

I found this article on the Religious Tolerance site:

"Subsequent British analysis for the Association for History and Computing

A similar multivariate analysis technique conducted by a British non-Mormon, David I. Holmes. 3 He concluded that the author of Doctrine and Covenants and of The Book of Mormon was the same person, Joseph Smith.

He analyzed:

14 large blocks of text from the Book of Mormon, totaling 120,000 words.

Documents written or dictated by Joseph Smith between 1828 and 1833.

Three blocks of about 10,000 words from the early revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants,

Text from the book of Isaiah and

Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham.

Holmes concluded:

"... the aim of my research is to complement historical and scientific studies into the authenticity of the Book of Mormon by subjecting it and related Mormon scripture to stylometric analysis. In this paper it is understood that a particularly effective measure for purposes of discrimination between writers is the vocabulary richness of a text....

"We may summarize by noting that the analyses have shown that the Joseph Smith and Isaiah samples form distinct and separate clusters, whereas all other samples tend to cluster together...."

"The formation of the clustering observed here, provides evidence of the utility of the multivariate technique advocated by this study. ..."

"An important discovery is the fact that the samples of writings from the various prophets who purportedly wrote the Book of Mormon do not form prophet-by-prophet clusters. The dendrogram in Figure 2 shows that only the two samples from Alma display internal homogeneity... There appears to be no real difference between Alma's vocabulary richness and Mormon's vocabulary richness within the Book of Alma, a conclusion in direct contradiction to the findings of Larsen and the Brigham Young University team. This study has not found, therefore, any evidence of multiple authorship within the Book of Mormon itself. Variation within samples from the same prophet is generally as great as any variation between the prophets themselves.

"Two of the three 'revelations' samples are also indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets. ... The dendrograms and principal components plots place the Book of Abraham text (AB) firmly in the main 'prophet' cluster, its nearest neighbor being sample R1 from Moroni. In terms of vocabulary richness, clearly the Book of Abraham is indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets and from samples D2 and D3 of Joseph Smith's revelations....

"It is my conclusion, from the results of this research and the supporting historical evidence, that the Book of Mormon sprang from the 'prophetic voice' of Joseph Smith himself, as did his revelations and the text of the Book of Abraham. We have seen that the style of his 'prophetic voice' as evidenced by the main cluster of the textual samples studied, differs from the style of his personal writings or dictations of a personal nature."

Interestingly, this study's results contradcted those foud earlier by a BYU computer analysis. Wonder why?

Here's a link to the whole article: http://www.religioustolerance.org/ldsbom1.htm

This isn't evidence of anything. But, NHM is! /end sarcasm

[Doctor Steuss]

[deleted...]

[Glenn101]

I found this article on the Religious Tolerance site:

"Subsequent British analysis for the Association for History and Computing

A similar multivariate analysis technique conducted by a British non-Mormon, David I. Holmes. 3 He concluded that the author of Doctrine and Covenants and of The Book of Mormon was the same person, Joseph Smith.

He analyzed:

14 large blocks of text from the Book of Mormon, totaling 120,000 words.

Documents written or dictated by Joseph Smith between 1828 and 1833.

Three blocks of about 10,000 words from the early revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants,

Text from the book of Isaiah and

Joseph Smith's Book of Abraham.

Holmes concluded:

"... the aim of my research is to complement historical and scientific studies into the authenticity of the Book of Mormon by subjecting it and related Mormon scripture to stylometric analysis. In this paper it is understood that a particularly effective measure for purposes of discrimination between writers is the vocabulary richness of a text....

"We may summarize by noting that the analyses have shown that the Joseph Smith and Isaiah samples form distinct and separate clusters, whereas all other samples tend to cluster together...."

"The formation of the clustering observed here, provides evidence of the utility of the multivariate technique advocated by this study. ..."

"An important discovery is the fact that the samples of writings from the various prophets who purportedly wrote the Book of Mormon do not form prophet-by-prophet clusters. The dendrogram in Figure 2 shows that only the two samples from Alma display internal homogeneity... There appears to be no real difference between Alma's vocabulary richness and Mormon's vocabulary richness within the Book of Alma, a conclusion in direct contradiction to the findings of Larsen and the Brigham Young University team. This study has not found, therefore, any evidence of multiple authorship within the Book of Mormon itself. Variation within samples from the same prophet is generally as great as any variation between the prophets themselves.

"Two of the three 'revelations' samples are also indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets. ... The dendrograms and principal components plots place the Book of Abraham text (AB) firmly in the main 'prophet' cluster, its nearest neighbor being sample R1 from Moroni. In terms of vocabulary richness, clearly the Book of Abraham is indistinguishable from the Book of Mormon prophets and from samples D2 and D3 of Joseph Smith's revelations....

"It is my conclusion, from the results of this research and the supporting historical evidence, that the Book of Mormon sprang from the 'prophetic voice' of Joseph Smith himself, as did his revelations and the text of the Book of Abraham. We have seen that the style of his 'prophetic voice' as evidenced by the main cluster of the textual samples studied, differs from the style of his personal writings or dictations of a personal nature."

Interestingly, this study's results contradcted those foud earlier by a BYU computer analysis. Wonder why?

Here's a link to the whole article: http://www.religioustolerance.org/ldsbom1.htm

That information is a bit dated. It was before the Berkley Group study. Also the vocabulary richness test was applied to the federalist papers and came out second to the word print algorithms used by the Berkley Group. I am at work and do not have time to provide the link. Just Google for Davis I. Holomes, word print, and Federalist papers.

Glenn

Edited to add this link.

[SolarPowered]

To make any valid comments on this, one would have to have access to Mr. Holmes data and his analysis, and would also have to have sufficient expertise in the field to understand what he did and how it might be right or wrong.

Since no one here has access to Mr. Holmes data and analysis, there's really nothing to be said at this time.

Edit: I was under the impression that Bibletruth was posting something new, not warmed-over hash. It appears that Mr. Holmes was debunked long, long ago, as Glenn has pointed out.

[Bibletruth]

To make any valid comments on this, one would have to have access to Mr. Holmes data and his analysis, and would also have to have sufficient expertise in the field to understand what he did and how it might be right or wrong.

Since no one here has access to Mr. Holmes data and analysis, there's really nothing to be said at this time.

Edit: I was under the impression that Bibletruth was posting something new, not warmed-over hash. It appears that Mr. Holmes was debunked long, long ago, as Glenn has pointed out.

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

[Avatar4321]

David I. Holmes, a Senior Lecturer in Statistics at Bristol Polytechnic

Again... why should I care?

[Zakuska]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

Who is truly Neutral?

[Avatar4321]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

Good thing it's on a computer screen then.

[Lachoneus]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

CFR that Holmes is neutral.

[Nemesis]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

So basically you are saying that LDS are not allowed to defend themselves? Good grief we don't have to outsource. So tell us whats the point of you being here since we are not allowed to discuss and defend the religion we are part of since we are not neutral.

Nemesis.

[jwhitlock]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

So you consider your link to the article at religioustolerance.org to be totally neutral, but not the Maxwell Institute rebuttal?

Get real. Your "article" also references the "expert" analysis of the Tanners on the subject - which you also seem to be willing to accept as "unbiased" for some unfathomable reason. Your airy dismissals don't lend you much credibility.

Why don't you try responding to the points made in the rebuttal? Or is that not where you wanted to go?

[MormonMason]

Obviously, the Mormons either lied or are intellectually inept.

Nope. That was not it at all. Holmes simply used a different methodology than the Mormon group did.

The reality of the wordprinting situation is that one can modify the protocols to show a single translator/source or separate authors. Holmes' approach was geared to produce the results it did.

Holmes used vocabulary as part of the protocol and the Mormon study group used dozens of non-contextual words, excluding vocabulary analysis.

[Bibletruth]

Nope. That was not it at all. Holmes simply used a different methodology than the Mormon group did.

The reality of the wordprinting situation is that one can modify the protocols to show a single translator/source or separate authors. Holmes' approach was geared to produce the results it did.

Holmes used vocabulary as part of the protocol and the Mormon study group used dozens of non-contextual words, excluding vocabulary analysis.

I'm not a Mormon. As I read through the BoM, D&C, Moses, Abraham, etc., it just seems to me that one can see a common thread throughout - some of the phrases are the same, and the manner in which the books are written (an attempted duplication of King James English) just seems so contrived.

[MormonMason]

Sorry, but I don't consider "debunking" from a non-neutral source to be worth the paper it's written on.

And Holmes is a neutral source?

[phaedrus ut]

To make any valid comments on this, one would have to have access to Mr. Holmes data and his analysis, and would also have to have sufficient expertise in the field to understand what he did and how it might be right or wrong.

Since no one here has access to Mr. Holmes data and analysis, there's really nothing to be said at this time.

Edit: I was under the impression that Bibletruth was posting something new, not warmed-over hash. It appears that Mr. Holmes was debunked long, long ago, as Glenn has pointed out.

He's been "debunked"? I'm curious as to that claim, care to post a example?

I'm familiar with A Multivariate Technique for Authorship Attribution and its Application to the Analysis of Mormon Scripture and Related Texts by David Holmes published in Literary and Linguistic Computing by Oxford University Press. Also A Stylometric Analysis of Mormon Scripture and Related Texts Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Vol. 155, No. 1 (1992).

For those also curious there was a bit of back and forth between BYU statistican G. Bruce Schaalje and Holmes you can read -here.

Phaedrus