Question About Rod Meldrum Theories

[Calm]

Bruce Porter had been working for LDS travel when they decided that they wanted Wayne May and I to join them so that we could all be working together. We came to some initial agreement and began working together........

Good to hear both sides. Never considered it a sinister plot. I just assumed that what Bruce Porter had said on the issue was likely accurate, though was reserving judgment until I saw something from your end of the experience. And glad to hear that any differences with those you worked with before have been resolved. It is not particularly very nice to have contention going on and I believe the best approach is to try and resolve differences as quickly as possible. Thank you. Edited September 12, 2012 by calmoriah

[Anijen]

This shoe fits your model as well as it does mine.

So in other words your defense is; because there has been fakes found in Mesoamerica I can not argue it being fake? Remember I was only talking about the Bat Creek Stone you are the one constantly bringing up Mesoamerica. I do not see my Mesoamerican friends use the heartland model as a defense for there theories.

There are competent scholars who disagree with each other over these stones.

I agree but you use these scholars who disagree with you as if they agree with you. That is deceiving.

The verdict is still out

Yes, that it is a fake.

and you are fighting against the ONLY scientifically verified stone anywhere in the America's with ancient Hebrew on it that has been dated into Book of Mormon time frames not only by carbon dating

You again are manipulating the science to meet your claims. The stone itself could not be carbon dated. For carbon dating to occur it (the living subject) must breath in carbon and when it dies then the carbon it has accumulated starts to decay. I have never know a stone to ever breath.

Show me anything with this level of evidence for ancient Hebrew writing in Mesoamerica!

I have never claimed to do so. You still fail to realize that making a connection to the Old World was a huge thing in the18th and 19th century. The Hebrew writings found in North America are just that a fraudulent attempt to prove such a connection (it was not just a LDS idea). The Bat Creek Stone is one.

Everyone reading this can clearly see that you are, again, missing the elephant in the room.

I will let them judge that and not you. Edited September 12, 2012 by Anijen

[Calm]

And... the "straw man" card is played once again...

You don't have your facts straight.

I have known those involved for some time now and have watched them interact with others, including antimormons. I am familiar with how they respond to people. I accept their outline of events where I do not personally know what was going on as more or less accurate (I don't assume infallibility for anyone but God). Not much else I can say about that...

FAIR has board members who don't accept the Mesoamerican models?

I was talking about FAIR, not just the FAIR board. And yes, while in the significant majority there is a minority that don't including some fervent supporters of other theories in the past that led to some interesting discussion, very informative for us onlookers (FAIR members do come and go, it is not always the same people)...at least so the numbers appear to me as not all have spoken up when such topics are discussed and I haven't taken a poll so I might be wrong and it might be higher numbers.

As to our neutrality....since most members do lean toward Mesoamerica and some are fervent supporters of the theory, of course more material will be on the site in regards to that theory so I would agree we are definitely not balanced in the way we present the theories. If someone is interested in putting up quality research focused on other theories, I wholeheartedly suggest submitting their work to FAIR. I am not the one who makes the decision on what goes up, not having expertise in that area, but I do know that the more verbal mesoamericanists are not opposed to being seriously challenged as they feel it gives them a chance to improve on their efforts.

[DNA truthseeker]

This is blatantly false. There aren't near that many board members and no such call with the FAIR Board ever occurred. i know that because I am a Board member.

You had better check your sources, they seem to have misguided you again. I can tell you the day and the time and where I was (at my uncle's home in California who was formerly in the Sacramento temple presidency). I don't know if all the FAIR people were board members, we weren't formally introduced. There wasn't time. They started in on me like a pack of dogs on a three legged cat! But there were no less than 5-6 different voices on the call. Talk to Scott Gordon or Robert White or John Lynch and ask them who else, exactly, was on that conference call at 7:00 am on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 888-**** security number 693-****. Don't tell me it didn't happen. Ask them. They were all there along with others. I have my records in my planner written in ink. You don't appear to have a grasp of the truth. Are all fellow FAIR board members obsessed with sharing their opinions served up with a complete lack of any facts? I should certainly hope not. You hold yourselves out as the final word in all gospel related truth and members of the Church are counting on you not to mislead them...like you just did. What happens when you are caught again and again spreading baseless falsehoods? Are you going to be reprimanded or rewarded by FAIR for these attacks?

Edited September 12, 2012 by DNA truthseeker

[ERayR]

You had better check your sources, they seem to have misguided you again. I can tell you the day and the time and where I was (at my uncle's home in California who was formerly in the Sacramento temple presidency). I don't know if all the FAIR people were board members, we weren't formally introduced. There wasn't time. They started in on me like a pack of dogs on a three legged cat! But there were no less than 5-6 different voices on the call. Talk to Scott Gordon or Robert White or John Lynch and ask them who else, exactly, was on that conference call at 7:00 am on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 888-**** security number 693-****. Don't tell me it didn't happen. Ask them. They were all there plus, others. I have my records in my planner written in ink. You don't appear to have a grasp of the truth. Are all fellow FAIR board members obsessed with sharing their opinions served up with a complete lack of any facts? I should certainly hope not. You hold yourselves out as the final word in all gospel related truth and members of the Church are counting on you not to mislead them...like you just did. What happens when you are caught again and again spreading baseless falsehoods? Are reprimanded or rewarded by FAIR for these attacks?

Does anyone but me see the irony of this statement? (Bolded Portion)

[Calm]

It is truly rich with irony that you now accuse me of attacking on this thread. There were some 100+ posts, mostly by your Mesoamerican friends attacking me before I ever got involved.

In a previous post, I stated that harsh things had been stated about you and your work. I have not ever said you were the only one attacking on this thread.

The testimonials on my site is what others have chosen to write. I did not write them nor did I edit them except for length or irrelevant material. That others have had such experiences I cannot control.

But you are the one choosing to put them up. There are no negative comments so it would seem you are not putting up all the comments sent to you.

The main reason that FAIR responded to me in this way is because the Heartland Model theory is the only alternative model that had become a serious threat to their theories. That was true then and it has become more true today.

Knowing the discussions that went on in deciding whether to take this step with you, I know that this is not true.

They have the voice of the Mormon media, years of promotion, advertising, funding and more

And the Maxwell Institute was funded in part by the Church. Are you saying that the Church was wrong in their decision to do so, that they were involved in something inappropriate? Are you saying that the references to FAIR in the Church News and other church publications are inappropriate?

FAIR, FARMS and BMAF's methodology may have cost a few die-hard Mesoamericanists their jobs at FARMS Review.

Only in the sense that the current director has decided to exclude pretty much all apologetics from the Maxwell Institute. Your work would be no more welcomed there by him than theirs. If you doubt me, why not submit it to see?

Whose methods are suspect, those who continue to attack fellow brothers of the Church

And how are you not attacking fellow brothers of the Church when you condemn FAIR and FARMS members, LDS scholars and even apparently Church leadership because of their support for FARMS?

those who simply are showing the evidences and the research they have found they feel supports the Book of Mormon better than the Mesoamerican theories?

If this was all you were doing, you would never heard from FAIR...at least not in the way that happened just as others who promote their theories haven't been addressed in the same way. Your experience is unique. I will leave it to observers to decide why that might be. Edited September 12, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

perhaps you did it in the parking lot of the church after the fireside.

Another possibility would be collecting of names of those interested to send information to later...depending on how this was done this could be seen as selling products, but also there are ways that it would not be. Perhaps Brother Meldrum could provide details on how he did sell his work during the time he was holding firesides, if strictly through online means for example, if he is still concerned about this claim.

[DNA truthseeker]

So in other words your defense is; because there has been fakes found in Mesoamerica I can not argue it being fake? Remember I was only talking about the Bat Creek Stone you are the one constantly bringing up Mesoamerica. I do not see my Mesoamerican friends use the heartland model as a defense for there theories.

I agree but you use these scholars who disagree with you as if they agree with you. That is deceiving.

Yes, that it is a fake.

You again are manipulating the science to meet your claims. The stone itself could not be carbon dated. For carbon dating to occur it (the living subject) must breath in carbon and when it dies then the carbon it has accumulated starts to decay. I have never know a stone to ever breath.

I have never claimed to do so. You still fail to realize that making a connection to the Old World was a huge thing in the18th and 19th century. The Hebrew writings found in North America are just that a fraudulent attempt to prove such a connection (it was not just a LDS idea). The Bat Creek Stone is one.

I will let them judge that and not you.

Sheesh...do I have to explain everything?

No, let me explain this slowly to you... there have been stones declared as fakes in Mesoamerica that LDS scholars have argued for their validity. This is the same with these stones, except that those doing the arguing for the stones are not LDS. That's a big difference.

The scholars in the film said what they said, then didn't like that what they said supports the Book of Mormon. Like you, they can't argue about what they said, so they resort to making claims about being taken "out of context" or some other subjective complaint.

There is no absolute evidence of its being a fake and competent researchers, and now fully accredited scientific analysis corporations, claim it is not, so who are you going to chose to believe? Those who cry that the Native Americans were nothing more than a bunch of ignorant savages, therefore they could not have had a written language which becomes their "proof," or the ones who have conducted scientific research on the actual stones?

The carbon dating associated with the stone was on the carbon material in the mound the stone was discovered inside of. Come now, do you really think I'm that naive as to think that a stone can be carbon dated? To date the stone itself would require radiometric dating, not carbon dating. No, I don't believe stones have breath, but I do believe they are made of intelligences based on scripture, but that's another subject for another time. Thanks for clarifying that for everyone.

I don't "fail to realize" anything of the sort, I question whether the people back in the 18th or 19th centuries were better equipped or less equipped to come to such judgements without the scientific rigor we have today. My vote is that they were less able, so that could logically lead to a re-assessment of their assumptions and conclusions, right? The farmers back then were finding all sorts of stones with ancient writing on them. The Smithsonian was busily declaring them all fakes because of manifest destiny and evolutionary bias, proclaiming the Native American had always been nothing more than ignorant savages. They were wrong. More modern methods are proving it out before our eyes. They were as advanced as any other culture in the world according to Dr. Bradley Leper and many other anthropologists and archaeologists. Their earthworks challenge the imagination. Their overall work has now been compared with that of the Great Pyramids of Egypt or the Great Wall of China. They knew high mathematics and completed projects that astound archaeoastronimers today. They blanket the inner continent of North America with their massive earthworks and their artifacts. Had any other region of the world been found to have such an array of materials, their greatness would be unquestioned. Unfortunately because of precisely the reasons brought up in the Lost Civilizations of North America film, their greatness has been ignored, destroyed and plowed under to the greatest extent. Yet still they persist, like a stubborn reminder of the truth about their history.

You are clinging to the old, uninformed methods rather than embracing the new findings from the technologically advanced science of today. New scattering electron microscopy analysis has declared the stone and its inscription ancient and Hebrew scholars declared it authentic. 18th & 19th century Smithsonian appointee's declared them fakes out of hand. You go with who you feel has the highest probability of finding the truth. I'll go with the newest findings myself. Either way you are in no position to be declaring the stone a fake when you have not conducted any such analysis. If I were you in this case, I'd leave it to the non-Mormon experts at American Petrographic Services. You can consult the deceased who declared it a fake. Maybe they will help to bail you out of the predicament you've gotten yourself into.

Edited September 13, 2012 by DNA truthseeker

[DNA truthseeker]

In a previous post, I stated that harsh things had been stated about you and your work. I have not ever said you were the only one attacking on this thread.

But you are the one choosing to put them up. There are no negative comments so it would seem you are not putting up all the comments sent to you.

Knowing the discussions that went on in deciding whether to take this step with you, I know that this is not true.

And the Maxwell Institute was funded in part by the Church. Are you saying that the Church was wrong in their decision to do so, that they were involved in something inappropriate? Are you saying that the references to FAIR in the Church News and other church publications are inappropriate?

Only in the sense that the current director has decided to exclude pretty much all apologetics from the Maxwell Institute. Your work would be no more welcomed there by him than theirs. If you doubt me, why not submit it to see?

And how are you not attacking fellow brothers of the Church when you condemn FAIR and FARMS members, LDS scholars and even apparently Church leadership because of their support for FARMS?

If this was all you were doing, you would never heard from FAIR...at least not in the way that happened just as others who promote their theories haven't been addressed in the same way. Your experience is unique. I will leave it to observers to decide why that might be.

Do you really expect me (or anyone) to put up negative posts about their research? Really? Do normally rational people do that? Why would anyone intentionally do that? Where are all the articles posted online about all the anti-Mormon and archaeological claims against the Mesoamerican theories? Come on...you are really stretching now. I mean, all that would accomplish, as I see it, would be to encourage you and all your buddies to write up more bogus claims and expect me to post it up online. You are right, I have not put up likely 90% of all the positive comment I've received. I could put up all negative comments to my research in about 2-3 dozen posts over 4 years in comparison with tens of thousands of positive ones. You should be thrilled I haven't posted up all the positive comments...you'd be reading them for days in order to formulate your attacks. Then you wouldn't have time for other important things...

When was the last time anything from FAIR was published on the Church's website...three years ago? Are you still clinging to those old articles as well? Have you wondered why the Church is no longer publishing your articles on their website? I don't ever second guess the Church leadership, which is why I back them 100% in their decision to fire the FARMS Review editors. Good on them! I know you want to have it only one way, saying that an attack on FARMS is an attack on the brethren, but sorry, you can't...it now goes both ways.

Good idea... why don't you allow members of the Church to determine for themselves which theory they feel is stronger or better? Why all the animosity from the Mesoamerican camp? Why all the attack articles on all of their websites and Church News and Mormon Times and Meridian Magazine and LDS Living? Why? Because the Heartland model is dismantling these crumbling Mesoamerican theories that try to lead people to believe that Guatemala is somehow that mighty Gentile nation above all other nations, that Guatemala is the oft referred to "land of liberty" rather than the USA, and that the New Jerusalem, prophesied to be build on the same lands as the Book of Mormon, is - notwithstanding its being thousands of miles to the south of the revealed location - somehow, in some magical way, still those lands. I couldn't agree more. Lets leave it to the members and take down all the attack articles published on FAIR, FARMS Review and BMAF and simply present our cases to the Church membership. I am all in favor of that! The only articles again the Mesoamerican theories I have on our website are in defense of attacks from these three organizations. We could do a lot more defending and just may do so in the future depending on their disposition.

Happy blogging. I'm checking out. It's been real, and it's been fun, but it hasn't been real fun. I'll now let the buzzards pick the carcass of this thread clean.

Edited September 12, 2012 by DNA truthseeker

[Brant Gardner]

there have been stones declared as fakes in Mesoamerica that LDS scholars have argued for their validity.

I am not question this, as there are certainly a lot of fakes everywhere (and some very old). However, I don't know which ones you are referencing. I would really appreciate the information. Would you supply the particulars on who is arguing for the authenticity of a fake from Mesoamerica?

[Calm]

Talk to Scott Gordon or Robert White or John Lynch and ask them who else, exactly, was on that conference call at 7:00 am on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 888-**** security number 693-****. Don't tell me it didn't happen. Ask them.

Did, there were four, only one additional person who was there, if I understood them correctly, as a resource not to participate directly in the conversation with you...which is likely why you don't have his name listed.

They took notes too so it is not just going off of memory. I also have records of what was reported at the time (I never delete an email from FAIR, too great of a research resource....) that confirms they haven't changed any details in their description including the timeline.

You hold yourselves out as the final word in all gospel related truth

Major exaggeration here. We accept accurate corrections from anyone for one thing, even antimormons. Edited September 12, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Do you really expect me (or anyone) to put up negative posts about their research? Really?

Since I never suggested this, I don't know why you are claiming that I expected it of you. What I was claiming was that you had control over what went up on your website, which you have confirmed. Readers can judge whether or not your choices were appropriate for themselves. My personal opinion is putting up posts that criticize seminary teachers and turn your presentations into spiritual experiences comparable to testimony meetings (in my opinion) among other things are problematic.

Where are all the articles posted online about all the anti-Mormon and archaeological claims against the Mesoamerican theories?

Just as an FYI for anyone interested, we do list the sources when we respond to the criticisms so anyone can see for themselves if they want to what the critics are saying. If we've missed it somewhere, we would be happy for someone to point out our lapse. See for example a wikipage chosen at random: http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Repudiated_concepts/Blood_atonement and its accompanying link of critical citations: http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Repudiated_concepts/Blood_atonement/CriticalSources

When was the last time anything from FAIR was published on the Church's website...three years ago?

Off the top of my head, the Mormon Channel has Brother Otterson recommending people use FAIR to aid them in answering charges. Haven't checked for any links lately, but I am pretty sure there is at least one active link up still being published. Just to be clear, I am not claiming any official endorsement. The Church has only put up the information like they have done other activities of value that other members have engaged in, like humanitarian or educational projects. Also FAIR would probably step back from anything or everything if someone asked, but to my knowledge this has never happened.

I don't ever second guess the Church leadership, which is why I am so happy about their decision to fire the FARMS Review editors.

Brother Bradford was not operating in a church leadership capacity when he fired Dan and the others. Why are you making this claim?

Why all the attack articles on....Church News?

The Church News is put out by the Church. Why do you think the Church is allowing what you describe as "attack articles" on it?

these crumbling Mesoamerican theories that try to lead people to believe that Guatemala is somehow that mighty Gentile nation above all other nations, that Guatemala is the oft referred to "land of liberty" rather than the USA, and that the New Jerusalem, prophesied to be build on the same lands as the Book of Mormon, is - notwithstanding its being thousands of miles to the south of the revealed location - somehow, in some magical way, are still those lands.

Haven't seen any Mesoamericanist make the claim that the prophecies are limited to Guatemala. Feel free to supply documentation for your claim.

edited for accuracy

Edited September 12, 2012 by calmoriah

[Scott Lloyd]

Why all the animosity from the Mesoamerican camp? Why all the attack articles on all of their websites and Church News and Mormon Times and Meridian Magazine and LDS Living?

I'm not thoroughly acquainted with either Meridian Magazine or LDS Living, but I'm confident Mr. Meldrum would be hard-pressed to find a piece on this topic in either the Church News or Mormon Times that is fairly characterized as an "attack article."

[juliann]

You had better check your sources, they seem to have misguided you again. I can tell you the day and the time and where I was (at my uncle's home in California who was formerly in the Sacramento temple presidency). I don't know if all the FAIR people were board members, we weren't formally introduced. There wasn't time. They started in on me like a pack of dogs on a three legged cat! But there were no less than 5-6 different voices on the call. Talk to Scott Gordon or Robert White or John Lynch and ask them who else, exactly, was on that conference call at 7:00 am on Tuesday, July 1st, 2008 at 888-**** security number 693-****. Don't tell me it didn't happen. Ask them. They were all there along with others. I have my records in my planner written in ink. You don't appear to have a grasp of the truth. Are all fellow FAIR board members obsessed with sharing their opinions served up with a complete lack of any facts? I should certainly hope not. You hold yourselves out as the final word in all gospel related truth and members of the Church are counting on you not to mislead them...like you just did. What happens when you are caught again and again spreading baseless falsehoods? Are you going to be reprimanded or rewarded by FAIR for these attacks?

I am sorry you are so angry but what you said was indeed false. As seen above, you did not receive a conference call from the FAIR Board. Thank you for correcting some of the misinformation.

[Calm]

I'm not thoroughly acquainted with either Meridian Magazine or LDS Living, but I'm confident Mr. Meldrum would be hard-pressed to find a piece on this topic in either the Church News or Mormon Times that is fairly characterized as an "attack article."

I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for dropping in.

Also perhaps you could also explain why the shift out of the Church News on your yearly report on the FAIR conference? I am assuming it is because it is a more appropriate fit with the Mormon Times section and when that came into being, you shifted to being published there (I don't read Church News myself so don't know when the last FAIR conference report was published there).

[Greg Smith]

I am sorry you are so angry but what you said was indeed false. As seen above, you did not receive a conference call from the FAIR Board. Thank you for correcting some of the misinformation.

Just for the record, there were 4 members of FAIR in the call on July 1, 2008.

* John Lynch

* Scott Lloyd

* Bob White

* Greg Smith (me)

Rod did not complain about our participation at the time. (I had read everything he had produced, so I knew more about his material than anyone--that's why I was there. I'd pulled the originals of material he had cited in the DVD.)

He refused to see that he was quoting Pres Hinckley out of context. I read him the statement of Pres Hinckley completely, and he said that he couldn't be expected to quote the whole thing. He refused to change it, or admit that it was misleading.

After FAIR published, he then changed it, and put a disclaimer sticker on the DVDs he was selling. So, publishing did _some_ good at least. :-)

[DNA truthseeker]

Another possibility would be collecting of names of those interested to send information to later...depending on how this was done this could be seen as selling products, but also there are ways that it would not be. Perhaps Brother Meldrum could provide details on how he did sell his work during the time he was holding firesides, if strictly through online means for example, if he is still concerned about this claim.

When I did firesides in Church buildings and tabernacles I came and presented the information and provided as much as I could possibly squeeze into the time allotment. At the end I always put my website up for those who would like to explore the research further. Remember, that for more than a year I was doing firesides and presentations all over the Wasatch front and I didn't even have any DVD's! I simply wanted to give members a fighting chance against the onslaught of the anti-Mormon DVD titled DNA vs. The Book of Mormon by the Christian Research Ministry in Brigham City (which I find most ironic that only a block or so down the street from them now stands the majestic Brigham City Temple! Gorgeous! Put right in their front yard, so to speak. That was my motivation. Some, including in this very thread, have accused me of priestcraft for selling educational materials that help members answer tough questions, but I never hear them talk about the full 4 years of intensive research I did before doing any presentations, nor the full year of presentations I did all around Utah for nothing more than the joy of offering realistic answers to a plaguing question that was driving people from the truths of the gospel. I only made the first DVD after being begged time and again to record it so folks could watch on their own time schedules. It has grown so huge now that I cannot keep up to its demands even working 14-16 hours a day (or even 36 hours straight without any sleep as I've just done posting all night to this thread). I do it because I love the Lord and I want to help people and I feel this research has better answers than Mesoamerican theories. I believe it can and does and will continue to provide stronger support for the Book of Mormon and I don't know of any other way to get this somewhat complex information out to the members of the Church without creating educational materials and letting people know about them. No one is forcing or coercing folks to purchase the materials and indeed many members could care less about Book of Mormon geography in general. If offering alternative theories that challenge other theories is wrong, even when those theories have become highly entrenched, and even though the Church is officially neutral, then I will have to be the one who faces my Lord one day and explain it. It is not now, nor ever has been the responsibility of any private organization such as FAIR, BMAF, or FARMS to correct members of the Church and attack them mercilessly as has been done in my case. I hope that this thread hasn't 'stirred the hornets nest' to extensively, but it is wearisome to have my tithing money being used to attack me. One Louis Midgley (of FARMS Review and FAIR fame) left a final message on a "courtesy" email he sent me wherein he nearly gleefully announced that at long last the attack issue against me was about to come forth, inviting me to lunch to help him revel in the moment. At the bottom of his email he quipped "Your tithing money at work." That should help to tell the story of the demise of FARMS Review and their attitude toward me and the Heartland model geography.

[Scott Lloyd]

I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for dropping in.

Also perhaps you could also explain why the shift out of the Church News on your yearly report on the FAIR conference? I am assuming it is because it is a more appropriate fit with the Mormon Times section and when that came into being, you shifted to being published there (I don't read Church News myself so don't know when the last FAIR conference report was published there).

Each year, I ask Correlation to go over the conference topics in advance. This year, it was their opinion that the topics were either too sensitive or too peripheral for Church News content.

However, I did assist Joe Walker with his coverage of the conference this year in the Deseret News, and I did report on one of the presentations (John Sorenson on "Mormon's Codex") for Mormon Times.

I'm in hopes that next year we can get back to reporting some of the conference proceedings in Church News, but I never take it for granted I will be permitted to do so.

[Nemesis]

Over-ruled. I think some important things are coming out of this thread especially seeing there are some serious accusations put out towards farms.

Nemesis

[Calm]

Thank you, Nemesis. I was very concerned that one thing Brother Meldrum stated might cause some confusion.

FAIR does not receive any financial help from the Church, never has (and never will in my opinion) and definitely not any tithing dollars.

I do not know what Brother Midgley was referring to or even if he was serious.

[Calm]

Each year, I ask Correlation to go over the conference topics in advance. This year, it was their opinion that the topics were either too sensitive or too peripheral for Church News content.

However, I did assist Joe Walker with his coverage of the conference this year in the Deseret News, and I did report on one of the presentations (John Sorenson on "Mormon's Codex") for Mormon Times.

I'm in hopes that next year we can get back to reporting some of the conference proceedings in Church News, but I never take it for granted I will be permitted to do so.

Yeah, it was a dynamic year. Very understandable that call. I read the reports...of course...and enjoyed them.

[Nemesis]

Thank you, Nemesis. I was very concerned that one thing Brother Meldrum stated might cause some confusion.

FAIR does not receive any financial help from the Church, never has (and never will in my opinion) and definitely not any tithing dollars.

I do not know what Brother Midgley was referring to or even if he was serious.

I agree its a serious charge made by Meldrum especially since when I read it I read it as sarcasm. Perhaps someone will address it.

Nemesis

[USU78]

Happy blogging. I'm checking out. It's been real, and it's been fun, but it hasn't been real fun. I'll now let the buzzards pick the carcass of this thread clean.

GENERAL: Away, away!

POLICE: (without moving) Yes, yes, we go.

GENERAL: These pirates slay.

POLICE: Tarantara!

GENERAL: Then do not stay.

POLICE: Tarantara!

GENERAL: Then why this delay?

POLICE: All right, we go.

ALL: Yes, forward on the foe!

Yes, forward on the foe!

GENERAL: Yes, but you don't go!

POLICE: We go, we go

ALL: Yes, forward on the foe!

Yes, forward on the foe!

GENERAL: Yes, but you don't go!

POLICE: We go, we go

ALL: At last they go!

At last they really go!

[Greg Smith]

Thank you, Nemesis. I was very concerned that one thing Brother Meldrum stated might cause some confusion.

FAIR does not receive any financial help from the Church, never has (and never will in my opinion) and definitely not any tithing dollars.

I do not know what Brother Midgley was referring to or even if he was serious.

He was referring to the publication of the FARMS Review.

GLS

[Scott Lloyd]

Just for the record, there were 4 members of FAIR in the call on July 1, 2008.

* John Lynch

* Scott Lloyd

* Bob White

* Greg Smith (me)

Oops. I think you meant to say Scott Gordon.

This happens fairly often, people getting our names confused. But I've never been a member of the FAIR, though I am an avid follower of its work.