Don Bradley And The Kinderhook Plates

[Loran Blood]

At least one that I know of. Are you sure you really want to continue to exhibit your lack of familiarity with your apologists? Schryver argued that they were trying to encipher information, and that explains the mess that constitutes the GAEL. None of them really believed they were actually translating Egyptian, because none of the symbols were Egyptian.

Don't worry Mola. On virtually every subject, on any issue, and on any point, Kevin is almost always in well over his head, and that's the primary reason he constantly feels the overwhelming need to denigrate the intellect and education of others.

Those who know the least always shout the loudest, prance the highest, and demean others in an attempt to compensate for what they know very well they lack in critical substance.

Kevin attempts to turn every single debate or discussion he's in into a personal free-for-all. It doesn't matter the subject or the rules of the game for the discussion. Its really become very, very, very wearisome indeed.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Loran Blood

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Its really become very, very, very wearisome indeed.

I don't ignore people but I am about 1 second from doing so. Any way

Back on topic, does any one have any additional info about this topic. It really sounds fascinating.

[Loran Blood]

I know.

Deleted, not because it wasn't well deserved, but because its just not appropriate.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Loran Blood

[Xander]

You never connected the dots. I know mind reading is big among you and your kind but it is not something that most people I know do.

For me to say quite simply, "I know" is I guess, "rude." But telling me I've never connected the dots, while at the same time admitting you're not that familiar with the subject, is not in any way rude.

No. Not at all.

You're not in any position to tell me what dots I have or have not connected. You insinuated I was making stuff up with my comment about Schryver's FAIR presentation. I refuted that, and now you're upset about it.

My advice is don't come at me the way you have and then have the audacity to complain about rudeness.

[WalkerW]

His hair alone has experienced more than any lesser man's body.

His words carry weight that would break a less interesting man's jaw.

He is the life of parties he has never attended.

Sharks have a week dedicated to him.

If he were to punch you in the face, you'd have to fight the urge to thank him.

When in Rome, they do as he does.

He was once bitten by a rattle snake. And after two weeks of agonizing pain, the snake died.

He is quite simply, the most interesting man in the world.

Stay thirsty, my friends.

[Xander]

Well, like they always say, you can take the man out of the Trailerpark, but you can't take the Trailerpark out of the man.

The irony in this comment is quite hilarious coming from someone who would really know the intricate details of a trailer park.

I love how you guys get away with some of the most outrageous slurs, and then turn around and act indignant to rather innocuous phrases like "I know."

It makes for weird entertainment.

[LeSellers]

This, BTW, is a very old joke. A similar one is even found in the Talmud.

I believe Kevin was quoting an advertisement for Dos Equis ("Two X') beer here in USmerica.

Lehi

[Senator]

Kevin attempts to turn every single debate or discussion he's in into a personal free-for-all. It doesn't matter the subject or the rules of the game for the discussion. Its really become very, very, very wearisome indeed.

Other than flagrantly engaging in the same begavior you have just accused xander with; do you have anything of substance to add to the subject of the OP?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

No, it isn't a far cry from it, and yes you must have misunderstood what I said if you think it is.

Ugh. I admitted I misunderstood.

Irrelevant to the fact that his cipher theory is most likely undermined by Bradley's presentation.

No argument from me.

His primary thesis is even weaker than his cipher theory, but as far as "secondary" theories go, this one really took up most of his time and represented the finale of his presentation. You seem to interpret "secondary" to mean not really important if it turns out to be wrong. I don't know why you guys keep pounding this home as if it makes any difference to anything I've said. Who cares which theory was professed to be primary or secondary? They're both horrible arguments that do not stand the test of scrutiny.

Lol. YOu seem to think that more time equals more important. Please share with us the weakness of Will's primary thesis.

Oh really? And what were you coming across as when you insinuated that I misrepresented Will's argument, just before you said you may have misunderstood me?

You did misrepresent Will's thesis when you claimed the cipher as his primary argument. That is a fact and you were shown to be completely wrong in the other thread about this. I could go on in A Kevin style rant about how uninformed you sound when talking about Will's argument. AKA "Are you sure you really want to continue to exhibit your lack of familiarity" with Will's argument.

I did no such thing. I simply pointed out that you really don't want to continue with this insinuatio that I was misrepresenting Will's argument.

Hardly, it is well document how you talked down to me. And you did indeed misrepresent Will's argument.

I'm not asking for the time. In fact, I don't recall asking anything from you. If you don't like me, then don't come at me the way you have. Do this, and we'll get along just fine.

You missed the point here. Time for another Kevin down talking? It is called a metaphor. Are you really going to continue here showing us how uneducated you are on what a metaphor is?

Note this is a parody of how Kevin responds to people on this board.

You're repeating Pahoran's red herring. Why?

Red herring? Um dude this is a yellow tail. Will's cipher theory is 2ndary per William. I think I will take his word over yours. The question I have for you, is why do you not believe Will? And the idea that he spent more time on the cipher theory is completely irrelevant in claiming that it really means that it is the primary theory.

[volgadon]

I believe Kevin was quoting an advertisement for Dos Equis ("Two X') beer here in USmerica.

Lehi

Yes, I was just pointing out some trivia.

[Loran Blood]

Kevin, why do you talk down to me? You come across as a real a$. I confessed to not being real familiar with some of this stuff and you treat me like a complete fool. Even though you might have a valid point, some were, I would not give you the time of day because you are so rude.

Well, although I deleted my own comment, you pretty well stated it in your own words here.

Can you cut the crap out of your posts? In case you are wondering I have put it in bold for you.

No, he cannot. My view and sense of Mr. Graham has always been that he is not an "intellectual," and never has been, in the sense of a serious thinker. That he is competent in the manipulation of words, and well versed in their use as verbal weapons, I would never argue. What I have always argued is that he is not now, and will never be a serious thinker unless and until he undergoes a substantial change in temperament and alters his primary motive from provocation and aggression to a civil, intellectually substantive desire to explore differing viewpoints in a civil, rational manner. As you probably well know, Mola, in virtually every thread in which Xander has participated over some years, whether his opponents were me, Will, Wade, or any one else of longstanding presence here in "Internet" Mormonism, much of the thread inevitably deteriorates into a personal ad hominem war over who is more intelligent, educated, and "smarter" than thou. Kevin is always the who, and anyone who disagrees with him is always the thou. This has been the traditional pattern.

Until then, the "crap" is going to fly anywhere Kevin shows up.

His presence anywhere is sure to create anger, hostility, intellectual confusion, and provoke the breakdown of civil communication.

I am well aware of what Will argued. If anything it is you that seem to forget his primary reason and his primary argument. The cipher has and always will be 2ndary.

You might be tempted to say this over and over and over again until Kevin "gets it," but resist the urge, because its already been done, and Kevin still doesn't appear to comprehend. At least, he pretends not to.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Loran Blood

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You're not in any position to tell me what dots I have or have not connected. You insinuated I was making stuff up with my comment about Schryver's FAIR presentation. I refuted that, and now you're upset about it.

My advice is don't come at me the way you have and then have the audacity to complain about rudeness.

I never was trying to tell you that you personally have not connected the dots. What my comment was about is connecting the dots on this board.

I have seen absolutely no refutation of Will's arguments. And I refuse to go over to the other board. So you might was well bring your arguments here.

My audacity? Seriously? Ironic?

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Other than flagrantly engaging in the same begavior you have just accused xander with; do you have anything of substance to add to the subject of the OP?

Hardly the same behavior. Do you have anything of substance Senator?

[Loran Blood]

Other than flagrantly engaging in the same begavior you have just accused xander with; do you have anything of substance to add to the subject of the OP?

Trying to fan the flames?

I know that trick well.

Try another.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

To avoid the clutter I will not be posting in this thread after this.

[George Miller]

I wish to congratulate Don on his sleuthing skills and for puzzling out Joseph Smith's modus operandi in translating a small portion of the Kinderhook Plates. I had the chance of previewing the presentation at the MHA, and my only regret is that I couldn't be at the conference to see the gears turn in everyones heads as Don laid out the facts. As the saying goes Don, "your a gentleman and a scholar and a good judge of horses." Kudos to you, and it sounds like the audience had an enjoyable time listening to you presentation. A Mormon mystery is solved, and no matter how one interprets the ramifications, the intellectual world should be happy when such questions are answered.

Edited August 5, 2011 by George Miller

[Senator]

Hardly the same behavior. Do you have anything of substance Senator?

It's exactly the same.

And no, I don't have anything of substance to add pertaining to this particular subject. I've never claimed too.

But I do have interest in it, and it would be nice to read the substance without having to sift through all the crap!

[Loran Blood]

The irony in this comment is quite hilarious coming from someone who would really know the intricate details of a trailer park.

Sorry that I don't see the irony here. A number of people here know the "intricate details of the Trailerpark" and can hardly be thought of as trafficking in irony when pointing out the mannerisms and affect of one of its city fathers.

I love how you guys get away with some of the most outrageous slurs, and then turn around and act indignant to rather innocuous phrases like "I know."

It makes for weird entertainment.

Go back and look at the portions of your ad hominem rant I bolded. Then think back over the last four or five years to virtually every post you've ever made, and then come back here and do a matinee of your now well polished martyr act.

Edited August 5, 2011 by Loran Blood

[Loran Blood]

It's exactly the same.

And no, I don't have anything of substance to add pertaining to this particular subject. I've never claimed too.

But I do have interest in it, and it would be nice to read the substance without having to sift through all the crap!

Then talk to Mr. Xander, and not to the people he's flinging his own childish, patronizing mud at.

[Xander]

Lol. YOu seem to think that more time equals more important. Please share with us the weakness of Will's primary thesis.

Sure, I always dedicate 70% of my time speaking on insignificant or "lesser" theories while covering the "primary" argument in less than a quarter of my time. Makes sense to me!

"More important" was never the issue. That was a red herring created by his defenders who wanted to pretend this in some way changed the fact that Will was backing off his cipher theory. But in what sense was this "more important" when the cipher explains the "meaning and purpose" of the KEP? It doesn't even make sense to say this. The "meaning and purpose" of anything should be considered more important than some trivial apologetic argument about what came first.

You did misrepresent Will's thesis when you claimed the cipher as his primary argument.

Which is an opinion based on evidence. The evidence is found everywhere, from the name of the presentation, to the hoopla surrounding it. William's presentation was incoherent and he contradicts himself, claiming the "primary key" to understanding the meaning was found in the Egyptian Counting documents, which were tied in to his cipher argument. It isn't my fauly William cannot remain consistent.

That is a fact and you were shown to be completely wrong in the other thread about this.

Will's presentation is incoherent and contradicting. It is like me presenting on the meaning of the Rosetta Stone by spending 45 minutes explaining how it was used for translation, and then at the end tell my audience that the "most important" thing to remember is that the writing came before the stone! No, that doesn't tell us the "meaning and purpose" of anything. But it is funny how you have to drag stuff from a closed thread just to show I was wrong about something. LOL!I will admit that Will does say his primary argument is about chronology, but I will also say that the "meaning and purpose" of the KEP, according to his presentation, makes it clear that it was about creating a cipher. The what came first nonsense is just something he threw in there without a shred of evidence. You don't get to make ludicrous claims and then tell the critics "prove him wrong." No, you have to establish your point with evidence aside from some self-serving methodology created from whole cloth.

I could go on

I don't think you could, or else you wouldn't be reduced to simply repackaging Pahoran's pathetic attack against me.

Why are you derailing this thread anyway?

Edited August 5, 2011 by Xander

[Loran Blood]

Well, I'm going to bow out of this thread, as it speeds, brakeless on WD-40 saturated tracks, toward the sign that says "Bridge out."

I'll see how it develops from a distance, but I want to try, at least, to allow the board rules here a chance to work.

See you all in another thread.

[Xander]

I wish to congratulate Don on his sleuthing skills and for puzzling out Joseph Smith's modus operandi in translating a small portion of the Kinderhook Plates. I had the chance of previewing the presentation at the MHA, and my only regret is that I couldn't be at the conference to see the gears turn in everyones heads as Don laid out the facts. As the saying goes Don, "your a gentleman and a scholar and a good judge of horses." Kudos to you, and it sounds like the audience had an enjoyable time listening to you presentation. A Mormon mystery is solved, and no matter how one interprets the ramifications, the intellectual world should be happy when such questions are answered.

Well put.

[Mortal Man]

Bradley's presentation just ended at FAIR.

He just showed how Joseph matched a prominent symbol from the forged Kinderhook plates to a very similar symbol in the GAEL, which happens to list the exact explanation Joseph is related as presenting for the source of the plates. Joseph suggested he was going to attempt to work out a translation using the rest of the GAEL. It wasn't professed or claimed as an attempt at a revealed translation, it was trying to work it out from the previously created grammar document.

Case closed.

Fascinating! Kudos Don for your stunning discovery! I wish I could have been there to see it live. I would very much like to see your presentation and paper when they become available.

[Skylla]

This thread isn't about Kevin Graham. Get back to the topic.

Skylla

[scooby]

Stay thirsty, my friends.

You're going to like the way you look, I guarantee it.

---

BTW, thanks to the OP for the report on Don's lecture. I can't wait to learn more.