Has Science Proven the Existence of God?

[Daniel Peterson]

Daniel, that is what I surmised you were referring to..addressed this in my previous reply.

Where, precisely? Did you acknowledge the double falsehood of your claim?

You are still attempting to shift the focus onto me rather than the issues.

Pointing out that your statement was false on two counts is not a personal attack. This defense doesn't work, "religiously free." Your false claims are not exempt from refutation simply because you're you.

I'm curious to know whether you are capable of acknowledging that you were wrong, and that you didn't know what you were talking about. This is a really clear, even black-and-white case, so it seems a perfect diagnostic test.

[religiously free]

Me;

You are still attempting to shift the focus onto me rather than the issues.

D.P: Pointing out that your statement was false on two counts is not a personal attack.

No but it is an ad hominem..as the focus of the discussion is authenticity of BOM not me. RE: Farms...besides salary there are other criteria affecting personal bias, and regarding expertise their evidence must be open to critical evaluation by independent objective experts...in order to support or refute the evidence and conclusion.. That is if any experts are interested in taking the ludicrous claims of the church seriously, which few people outside of mormonsm do take seriously. This church takes advantage of people's trusting nature. It is not the only church to do so.

[Zeta-Flux]

rf,

First, "ad hominem" means personal attack. You just admitted that Daniel is not personally attacking you, so stop calling his argument "ad hominem."

Second, you are the one who brought up the arguments against FARMS. Daniel was just responding to your arguments and giving validity to those who write about the DNA issue. A simple, "I was wrong" would suffice. Then you can bring up other arguments.

Third, you are the one actually giving the "ad hominem" attacks. Just in that last post you accused "this church" of "taking advantage of people's trusting nature." You gave no evidence of your claim. If anyone is making the ludicrous claims, it doesn't seem to be the Mormons.

Personal bias?

Expertise?

Critical evaluation?

These don't seem to be lacking on our side. Care to tell us why you qualify for these things?

[alienward]

Religion is an OLDER thought process than science. I know of no believers in God who trace their belief to the fact that SETI is looking for extraterrestrial intelligences, and therefore there must be something out there. Instead they turn to the prophets of old (and if they are LDS, the prophets today) to witness that God exists, because they have seen him.

And if they

[religiously free]

Z.F: First, "ad hominem" means personal attack. You just admitted that Daniel is not personally attacking you, so stop calling his argument "ad hominem."

It means 'against the person' and it is when the argument is diverted from the argument to the person making the argument.

[Daniel Peterson]

Z.F:

[alienward]

You're wrong, "religiously free."  You made a statement that included two claims of purported fact:  (1) that the FARMS DNA writers have no expertise in genetics and (2) that the FARMS DNA writers are paid to defend the Church.  Both claims are false.

From BYU:

One of the nation's largest private universities, BYU is owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. A significant portion of the cost of operating the university is paid from the tithes of the Church members.

From FARMS:

Over the years, first FARMS, and now the Institute, has established a close relationship with dozens of BYU faculty members, many of whom serve on the Institute board and participate in FARMS-related research and publication efforts. Now even more BYU faculty and staff, from a wider range of disciplines, are able to participate in FARMS-related research efforts and publications.  These scholars benefit from increased support for their own study projects, more opportunities for peer review of their work, and increased opportunities for scholarly publication.

Ok, so none of this increased support is financial

[Daniel Peterson]

Ok, so none of this increased support is financial

[Dunamis]

Discussions that invade the privacy of any poster are not allowed. You are getting dangerously close, Alienward. Move on now.

[Ray Agostini]

Alienward wrote:

Yes, when you acknowledge the KJV plagiarism in the BoM.

Informed scholars don't view it as plagiatism. They say it's too sophisticated for that. That's why even Professor David Wright says the BoM is "inspired". But those who do not have an understanding of the sophisticated nature of the content of the BoM might ignorantly call it "plagiarism". Plagiarism is not always easy to detect. If Joseph Smith was doing this surreptitiously he did a lousy job.

Although it

[alienward]

Discussions that invade the privacy of any poster are not allowed. You are getting dangerously close, Alienward. Move on now.

Thanks for the head's up.

[alienward]

Perhaps alienward didn't notice that three of the five FARMS DNA authors that I mentioned (sixty percent of them) don't even work for BYU.  I'm reasonably confident that neither Idaho State University nor the National Institute of Standards and Technology is tithing-supported, and that neither devotes much of its budget to the defense of Mormonism.

Yes, I

[Dunamis]

You don't appear to be listening, Alienward. The job description of any of our posters is none of your business. Using "BYU" instead of a screenname is not going to get you anywhere. Understand? You can take the explanation already given or express your disbelief as you already have. If you pursue it beyond that we will consider it personal and harrassment.

[alienward]

You don't appear to be listening, Alienward.  The job description of any of our posters is none of your business.  Using "BYU" instead of a screenname is not going to get you anywhere.  Understand?  You can take the explanation already given or express your disbelief as you already have.  If you pursue it beyond that we will consider it personal and harrassment.

I am not using BYU instead of a screen name. I am talking about the organization called BYU. And, since FARMS was acquired by BYU and fully integrated into BYU, it

[Daniel Peterson]

BYU employees who write apologetics for FARMS are in fact writing those apologetics for BYU as paid employees of BYU.

In precisely the same sense that BYU employees who coach their daughters' soccer teams or assist with their son's Boy Scout troops or mow their aged neighbors' lawns are coaching, scouting, and mowing as paid employees of BYU. In precisely the same sense that alienward is posting on this board as a paid representative of whatever firm or institution he belongs to.

I've made this point as clearly as I know how. I've said what I wanted to say. If alienward wishes to persist in his hostile delusions, there's nothing I can do for him. And the sheer unspeakable pleasure of his company simply isn't enough to keep me engaged with him.

[Calm]

Then by that logic everything they do is as a paid employee of BYU, including the laundry at their home and taking the kids to school and even sleeping at night.

[John Russell]

Since when is personal bias an issue? Does anyone out there know an unbiased scientist? Scientists are among the most biased people, clinging tenaciously to pet theories and ideas, and often working very hard to tear down competing ideas. Anyone familiar with the history of science, or who works in the sciences (I do) is aware that scientific "objectivity" is largely romantic tripe.

There are qualified scientists on both sides of the BOM genetics debate. Mike Whiting (of the apparently questionable BYU) is a first-rate evolutionary biologist/systematist who has set arthropod phylogenetics on its ear with his research. Mike has pointed out a number of valid limitations pertaining to the use of mitochondrial DNA in understanding relationships. It is not the end-all technique, and there is still much to be learned about relationships among and within biological taxa using other methods. More techniques are in the offing. But each of these is merely a technique, and each has limitations. These methods can prove relationships when positive, but are not definitive for disproving them when negative.

[alienward]

In precisely the same sense that BYU employees who coach their daughters' soccer teams or assist with their son's Boy Scout troops or mow their aged neighbors' lawns are coaching, scouting, and mowing as paid employees of BYU.

[Daniel Peterson]

Moderators, this discussion actually had some potential at one point. I don't know whether it still does -- it's been on life-support for a few days -- but please don't let alienward kill yet another thread.

(My thanks to John Russell for his valiant attempt to restore substance to the thread, on the basis of actual knowledge of science.)

[John Russell]

Alienward, when academic institutions establish or acquire centers, such as FARMS, they obtain centers or foundations that consist of individuals who make contributions largely on their own time. I am associated with several research "centers" to which I make various contributions as time permits. I am occasionally requested to contribute time or written materials, but I do so with no additional remuneration beyond my personal interest in the projects. Your persistent slamming of FARMS for bias or wasting of time would equally apply to all of the federally-funded Centers for Excellence, much of what happens with NIH and CDC, and innumerable other organizations like FARMS that operate under a particular umbrella and staffed by voluntary participants who make time as necessary to do the work. I don't see your point. Should we toss every biased researcher out of Centers of Excellence who contribute to the Centers during some of their paid time, or even their off hours?

[alienward]

Moderators, this discussion actually had some potential at one point.  I don't know whether it still does -- it's been on life-support for a few days -- but please don't let alienward kill yet another thread.

More from About FARMS:

In extending the invitation to become part of BYU, Gordon B. Hinckley, LDS Church president and chairman of the BYU Board of Trustees, observed that, "FARMS represents the efforts of sincere and dedicated scholars. It has grown to provide strong support and defense of the Church on a professional basis. I wish to express my strong congratulations and appreciation for those who started this effort and who have shepherded it to this point." He concluded by noting that he sees, "a bright future for this effort now through the university."

From FARMS, Board and Staff, Research, John A. Tvedtnes, Senior Resident Scholar:

Within the Institute, Tvedtnes is an associate editor of the Ancient Texts and Mormon Studies series and is a researcher on several projects, including Studies in the Book of Abraham.

Is Tvedtnes not a paid apologist in precisely the same sense that Hinckley is not a paid clergy?

[John Russell]

Alienward said:

Is Tvedtnes not a paid apologist in precisely the same sense that Hinckley is not a paid clergy?

How dare he be paid to serve as an editor! After all, this requires no time at all......

I still don't see what this line of arguing has to do with ANYTHING. Do you reject the use of drugs that were not developed and tested independent of a pharmaceutical company? Do you actively research the sources of funding from Dr. Southerton and other critics, and discard their results if those sources are biased? What exactly is your concern?

[Calm]

Within the Institute, Tvedtnes is an associate editor of the Ancient Texts and Mormon Studies series and is a researcher on several projects, including Studies in the Book of Abraham.

Does any of this fall within the apologetic work that FARMS does?

[alienward]

How dare he be paid to serve as an editor!  After all, this requires no time at all......

Why no comment on the BoA research duties he also has?

I still don't see what this line of arguing has to do with ANYTHING. Do you reject the use of drugs that were not developed and tested independent of a pharmaceutical company? Do you actively research the sources of funding from Dr. Southerton and other critics, and discard their results if those sources are biased? What exactly is your concern?

I

[John Russell]

Why no comment on the BoA research duties he also has?

Because I don't know the source or application of his research funds, but I do know that editorial duties take considerable time and effort. I am paid by my home institution, but much of my research is conducted using external funds (none of which end up in my paycheck). Do you know where he gets his money and how it is used? Further, the quote you provide fails to illuminate in even the smallest degree the extent to which Tvedtnes is paid for his apologetic work.

I don