Will Schryver's Book of Abraham talk

[SlackTime]

I'm not offended, just looking at it from a distance. I agree that "data are data" but I disagree that "talented dilettantes frequently discover" stuff. It may have happenednbut "frequently"? I doubt it, especially in a specialist field like Egyptology. But then again, it would appear from DCP's post that the discovery has nothing to do with Egyptology at all.

I'm not sure where the insult lies, but in areas that I don't know much about, I tend to lend more credence to established authorities than outsiders with spectacular claims. But as I said: let's wait another week and see what the hype is all about. Will it be truly spectacular and groundbreaking, or merely more "he said she said apologetics"?

Maybe it is your assumption that the KEP and/or the Book of Abraham have anything to do with Egyptology that you need to revisit. Joseph Smith couldn't translate Egyptian, and the assumption that the KEP have anything to do with Egyptian hieroglyphics... well, maybe you should wait for the FAIR conference.

- SlackTime

[USU78]

I'm not offended, just looking at it from a distance. I agree that "data are data" but I disagree that "talented dilettantes frequently discover" stuff. It may have happenednbut "frequently"? I doubt it, especially in a specialist field like Egyptology. But then again, it would appear from DCP's post that the discovery has nothing to do with Egyptology at all.

I'm not sure where the insult lies, but in areas that I don't know much about, I tend to lend more credence to established authorities than outsiders with spectacular claims. But as I said: let's wait another week and see what the hype is all about. Will it be truly spectacular and groundbreaking, or merely more "he said she said apologetics"?

If you're talking about the last few decades, then I would tend to agree that talented dilettantes in the sciences are few and far between. If you are going to include history, however, then everybody was pretty much a dilettante. Ben Franklin? Goethe? Tom Jefferson? Dilettantes all.

As to your gratuitous slam on those engaged in the serious study of the BoA and the KEP, as I stated, it's such a young area of inquiry that you can count the serious students on two hands and maybe one foot. Nearly all are dilettantes. Only a dilettante would have much interest. Everybody but maybe one person on the "anti" side is a dilettante. Most on the "pro" side are dilettantes.

So why not Will?

If the Tanners are/were "expert" in things Mormon, surely Will can qualify. It's not like it's a high or even intermediate hurdle to clear.

[Ariarates]

Maybe it is your assumption that the KEP and/or the Book of Abraham have anything to do with Egyptology that you need to revisit. Joseph Smith couldn't translate Egyptian, and the assumption that the KEP have anything to do with Egyptian hieroglyphics... well, maybe you should wait for the FAIR conference.

Well, you got me there. Up till now, I was indeed under the impression that the BoA was translated from Egyptian. It says so in my copy of the PoGP: "Translated from the papyrus by Joseph Smith". I take this from the latest translation of the scriptures into my language (2004). I just checked the online English version, which also has this description. What did I miss?

[SlackTime]

Well, you got me there. Up till now, I was indeed under the impression that the BoA was translated from Egyptian. It says so in my copy of the PoGP: "Translated from the papyrus by Joseph Smith". I take this from the latest translation of the scriptures into my language (2004). I just checked the online English version, which also has this description. What did I miss?

The language of the scrolls make no difference since Joseph couldn't translate except by the Gift and Power of God. But this presentation is about the KEP, not the translation of the Book of Abraham, a totally different subject.

- SlackTime

[LifeOnaPlate]

A little question about this one: did Mr. Metcalfe obtain said photos in a completely ethical and above-board manner, and does he have a legal claim of ownership thereof?

Regards,

Pahoran

From what I understood, he obtained the images during the Salamander affair. He was a research assistant for Steve Christensen at the time and I believe was allowed to photograph them.

[USU78]

From what I understood, he obtained the images during the Salamander affair. He was a research assistant for Steve Christensen at the time and I believe was allowed to photograph them.

Then those photos would belong to Steve's estate, n'est-ce pas? Mac was the personal representative for Steve [don't ask -- I just happen to know personally]. Did Mac authorize their retention and use by said Church critic? How about Steve's widow? Did she?

[LifeOnaPlate]

What scholarship are we talking about exactly? Doesn't such a groundbreaking discovery merit a more eminent platform such as a world-reknowned Egyptological society or journal?

A friend once told me that a good argument was a good argument, whether it was published in the most prestigious journal or written on a watermelon.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Then those photos would belong to Steve's estate, n'est-ce pas? Mac was the personal representative for Steve [don't ask -- I just happen to know personally]. Did Mac authorize their retention and use by said Church critic? How about Steve's widow? Did she?

I don't know how it all boils down, we'd have to look at the Salamander books, Victims and Sillitoe's book, to see what they say. Then Brent of course could give some insight. I don't remember thinking it was shady how he acquired them, but it's been over a year since I was reading that stuff.

[LifeOnaPlate]

If the Tanners are/were "expert" in things Mormon, surely Will can qualify. It's not like it's a high or even intermediate hurdle to clear.

The Tanner's are even quoted in the prestigious wikipedia.

[Daniel Peterson]

A friend once told me that a good argument was a good argument, whether it was published in the most prestigious journal or written on a watermelon.

Ooooh!

Sound's like something I would say.

Did I say it? I hope so.

[USU78]

The Tanner's are even quoted in the prestigious wikipedia.

Ist das nicht ein Dilettante?

Ja, das ist ein Dilettante!

Oh, du schoener!

Oh, du schoener!

Oh, du schoener Dilettante!

[wenglund]

Is it scholarly to jump to conclusions about Will's qualifications and whether his findings ought to have been peer-reviewed and published in scholarly journals, prior to even learning what he has to say?

Aren't those who seem most animated about the supposed lack of peer-reviews and expertice in this case, themselves anything more than amateurs on the matter, who have yet to have their positions regarding the KEP peer-reviewed and published in scholarly journals?

I ask because the irony seems lost on some people. Clearly, projection doesn't just happen at the movies.

If it is of any consolation, one does not need to be a scholar or and expert to grasp what Will has to say. They simply need a modicum of common sense--which may rule out some of the critics in question. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[USU78]

I don't know how it all boils down, we'd have to look at the Salamander books, Victims and Sillitoe's book, to see what they say. Then Brent of course could give some insight. I don't remember thinking it was shady how he acquired them, but it's been over a year since I was reading that stuff.

Metcalfe and Toscano both worked at CFS', Gary Sheets' real estate investment/management company's, offices. I used to visit the offices on business for my employer and would chat with Toscano, whom I knew [and know] as a colleague. Steve worked for CFS as a bigwig. Metcalfe either worked for Steve personally or for CFS. The sources aren't clear and I don't know if anybody remembers after this long. What is clear is that neither Sillitoe or any of the other folks who wrote on Hoffman would have cared about so trivial a piece of personal property [at the time] as the photos taken by Metcalfe on Steve's [or CFS'] behalf.

But the research assistant doesn't acquire any title to the stuff he gathers on behalf of his principal. He is an agent that does nothing on his own behalf. He acquires no title to the stuff he generates.

Thus, either CFS' estate [in which case tracking down an actual owner would be tuff] or Steve's estate [in which case we know precisely who owns the photos] owns the product of Metcalfe's research, including the photos.

It's not exactly complicated, unless, of course, Brent can throw further light on the subject of whose the photos are.

[USU78]

Is it scholarly to jump to conclusions about Will's qualifications and whether his findings ought to have been peer-reviewed and published in scholarly journals, prior to even learning what he has to say?

Aren't those who seem most animated about the supposed lack of peer-reviews and expertice in this case, themselves anything more than amateurs on the matter, who have yet to have their positions regarding the KEP peer-reviewed and published in scholarly journals?

I ask because the irony seems lost on some people. Clearly, projection doesn't just happen at the movies.

If it is of any consolation, one does not need to be a scholar or and expert to grasp what Will has to say. They simply need a modicum of common sense--which may rule out some of the critics in question. LOL

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Precisement!

[LifeOnaPlate]

Ooooh!

Sound's like something I would say.

Did I say it? I hope so.

It was you, DCP.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Metcalfe and Toscano both worked at CFS', Gary Sheets' real estate investment/management company's, offices. I used to visit the offices on business for my employer and would chat with Toscano, whom I knew [and know] as a colleague. Steve worked for CFS as a bigwig. Metcalfe either worked for Steve personally or for CFS. The sources aren't clear and I don't know if anybody remembers after this long. What is clear is that neither Sillitoe or any of the other folks who wrote on Hoffman would have cared about so trivial a piece of personal property [at the time] as the photos taken by Metcalfe on Steve's [or CFS'] behalf.

But the research assistant doesn't acquire any title to the stuff he gathers on behalf of his principal. He is an agent that does nothing on his own behalf. He acquires no title to the stuff he generates.

Thus, either CFS' estate [in which case tracking down an actual owner would be tuff] or Steve's estate [in which case we know precisely who owns the photos] owns the product of Metcalfe's research, including the photos.

It's not exactly complicated, unless, of course, Brent can throw further light on the subject of whose the photos are.

Interesting stuff. I recall reading about the photographs in one of those books, or it might have been on the Shades board. Anyone have Metcalfe's email?

[Ariarates]

The language of the scrolls make no difference since Joseph couldn't translate except by the Gift and Power of God. But this presentation is about the KEP, not the translation of the Book of Abraham, a totally different subject.

Are you changing the subject on me? Here's what you first said to me:

Maybe it is your assumption that the KEP and/or the Book of Abraham have anything to do with Egyptology that you need to revisit.

I know nothing about "the KEP" except that I found out today what the acronym means and I vaguely remember from reading in my father's copy of Nibley's book on the papyri (that oversized volume, can't remember the exact title) that there were some Egyptian papyri on display in Kirtland; the book was a bit obtuse for me not being an Egyptologist and all, but the introductory narrative was very Indiana Jonesy (at least that's how I remember it). Anyways, I'll wait for Will's presentation to learn more about that.

However, I am indeed labouring under the assumption that the BoA has something to do with Egyptology. This is what the 2004 edition of my scriptures tell me and that's what I see when I look at the facsimiles in the BoA. You suggested I need to revisit this assumption, so my question to you was: what did I miss?

In other words: what changed between 2004, when the church updated the scriptures in my language and now, the moment you are telling me the BoA has nothing to do with Egyptology. Why is the language of the scrolls given in the scriptures but do you consider it irrelevant? I don't get it.

[Chris Smith]

Here is Brent's account of how he came by the photographs.

[USU78]

Here is Brent's account of how he came by the photographs.

Never knew about the additional prints. Interesting . . . and thanks for running that down.

[Mortal Man]

A friend once told me that a good argument was a good argument, whether it was published in the most prestigious journal or written on a watermelon.

Ooooh!

Sound's like something I would say.

Did I say it? I hope so.

No Dan, you said, "An argument is a good argument if it plunges from my prestigious ivory tower and crushes the peasants like watermelons."

[Daniel Peterson]

No Dan, you said, "An argument is a good argument if it plunges from my most prestigious ivory tower and crushes the people like watermelons."

Nope. That sounds like something somebody like you would say that I would say, not like something I would actually say.

Wanna compare blue collar bona fides?

[Mortal Man]

Wanna compare blue collar bona fides?

I had a paper route for 5 years, starting when I was 9 years old. I folded them with numb hands in icy blizzards and fought my way up punishing hills through blinding snow to deliver them on time.

When I was 14, besides earning my Eagle, I dug dirt and planted trees at a nursery in Centerville under a behemoth barking taskmaster.

At 15, I hustled patrons at Lagoon to spend a few bucks on my rigged (not by me) games.

At 16-17, I flipped burgers at McDonalds.

At 18, I taught kids how to swim and encouraged them not to run on the deck.

At 19-20, I hiked all over the streets of Melbourne Australia selling religion.

At 21, I sold toys to people who could afford them.

At 22, I tested laundry detergent.

At 23, I tutored high school kids and advertised student loans.

It only gets worse from there.

What did you do, besides take your tea and crumpets in the library?

[Daniel Peterson]

I had a paper route for 5 years, starting when I was 9 years old. I folded them with numb hands in icy blizzards and fought my way up punishing hills through blinding snow to deliver them on time.

When I was 14, besides earning my Eagle, I dug dirt and planted trees at a nursery in Centerville under a behemoth barking taskmaster.

At 15, I hustled patrons at Lagoon to spend a few bucks on my rigged (not by me) games.

At 16-17, I flipped burgers at McDonalds.

At 18, I taught kids how to swim and encouraged them not to run on the deck.

At 19-20, I hiked all over the streets of Melbourne Australia selling religion.

At 21, I sold toys to people who could afford them.

At 22, I tested laundry detergent.

At 23, I tutored high school kids and advertised student loans.

It only gets worse from there.

What did you do, besides take your tea and crumpets in the library?

I assume that you're not serious.

If you are, let me know, and I'll respond with my own list.

[Mortal Man]

I assume that you're not serious.

If you are, let me know, and I'll respond with my own list.

I am serious (except for the last line). Those were my jobs growing up.

[Chris Smith]

Andrew, my little brother was standing behind me as I read your list, and remarked, "That makes me want to revise my resume."