Meldrum And May's New Real Estate Scheme

[Anijen]

The problem with the Sorenson crowd is that they redefine science and academics in a way that isn't science and isn't academics.  

 

I admit to approaching it from a legal perspective where I deal with junk science issues frequently.   A court won't permit testimony about a scientific principle unless it meets certain standards, such as peer acceptance or peer discussion, reproducible results, discussion in peer literature, statistical methods and similar tests (none of which is particularly exclusive).

 

When you read Sorenson's works as well as those of his followers, you will see that "science" and secular "plausibility" dominate his and their discussion.  On this board, many of his followers denounce my refusal to acknowledge "science" and secular discussion of the Book of Mormon.  

 

Yet, Dr. Sorenson has never found a single LDS anthropologist who will agree with him in a secular environment - a BYU university secular publication, a peer reviewed publication.  Dr. Sorenson is not a cartographer or geographer and does not follow secular means of those disciplines to tie an ancient text to real-world past or present geography.  Dr. Sorenson does not publish in peer-reviewed journals his Book of Mormon musings but does so for his diffusionist musings.

 

Dr. Ray Matheny of BYU has certainly gone on record to say that Dr. Sorenson's views are unsupportable.

 

Further, his followers have similar issues.  My pending paper demonstrates that Roper and Fields published a "wordprint" study to tie the 1 Oct 1842 Times and Seasons Zarahemla article to Joseph Smith's authorship, where they both claim to be linguists (they aren't) and use a non-statistical disapproved wordprint methodology wherein they use only one of the three tests for the disapproved methodology.   Even so, neither they nor Sorenson agree that Zarahemla is likely in the location identified by "Joseph Smith" in the 1 Oct 1842 article.

 

Kevin Christianson has taken me to task in his nice way for refusing to consider non-traditional considerations and discussions of the Book of Mormon's text, but I'm just not willing to start reading Erich Von Daniken, either.

 

I certainly have no problem reading and understanding Dr. Sorenson's conclusions in a religious context,  But once I'm condemned here for not recognizing the science behind his conclusions (as one might be condemned on this board for not realizing the evolution trumps religion), I feel compelled to point out that it isn't science.  And, the only science I really criticize is the cartographic stuff.   The linguistic comparison of Native American words to Hebrew and Egyptian is a different matter and has a more verifiable source.  

Edited February 27, 2015 by Anijen

[Bob Crockett]

I'm no driveler. I was Jack Welch's first research assistant, a Platinum level FARMS supporter, twice a FARMS author, and I hire archaeologists for Native American sites and edit their reports in my line of work. One of my digs documented a 5000-year-old Chumash grave area. And your qualifications, Mr. Anonymous?

How about a single LDS doctoral level archaeologist or anthropologist who has agreed with Dr. Sorenson in a professional setting? Or why don't you refer me to the most-qualified doctoral level archaeologist of any sort who has agreed with Dr. Sorenson's work in any setting, and I'll explain to you why he or she is likely just hedging.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Bob Crockett

[The Nehor]

I'm no driveler. I was Jack Welch's first research assistant, a Platinum level FARMS supporter, twice a FARMS author, and I hire archaeologists for Native American sites and edit their reports in my line of work. One of my digs documented a 5000-year-old Chumash grave area.

Be careful about beating your chest like that. You might bruise it.

[Ferdinand55]

Yet, Dr. Sorenson has never found a single LDS anthropologist who will agree with him in a secular environment - a BYU university secular publication, a peer reviewed publication.  Dr. Sorenson is not a cartographer or geographer and does not follow secular means of those disciplines to tie an ancient text to real-world past or present geography.  Dr. Sorenson does not publish in peer-reviewed journals his Book of Mormon musings but does so for his diffusionist musings.

Well, what did you expect? By commenting on or providing rebuttals to Sorenson's work, peer reviewers would be entering a religious war zone and would be blasted to pieces by both sides involved. Any statement that they make will be used by either the apologists or the critics. No one wants to get involved in this mess, so why would Sorenson even bother to get his theories approved by the academic community?

 

For a faithful Latter-day Saint, there are really only two options for Book of Mormon geography: Meldrum's and Sorenson's. Neither is peer reviewed, so we just have to asses both of them by the merits of their conclusions.

[Bob Crockett]

Well, what did you expect? By commenting on or providing rebuttals to Sorenson's work, peer reviewers would be entering a religious war zone and would be blasted to pieces by both sides involved. Any statement that they make will be used by either the apologists or the critics. No one wants to get involved in this mess, so why would Sorenson even bother to get his theories approved by the academic community?

 

For a faithful Latter-day Saint, there are really only two options for Book of Mormon geography: Meldrum's and Sorenson's. Neither is peer reviewed, so we just have to asses both of them by the merits of their conclusions.

Untrue. BYU library has dozens of books published over decades with different theories. Joseph Smith intended only a hemispheric model, at least according to Dr. Sorenson. I don't feel a need to follow any model.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Bob Crockett

[Bob Crockett]

Be careful about beating your chest like that. You might bruise it.

I'm so sorry. I was responding to a nice post now deleted.

[Anijen]

I'm so sorry. I was responding to a nice post now deleted.

Sometimes my reaction is a bit quicker than a best patient response. So I deleted it. I am not anonymous to you and many other people on this site. I have messaged you personally and gave you a small vitae with my real name etc. I have posted on this board with my real name claiming the "Anijen" avatar I went back to "Anijen" because, frankly, I like it, and second anonymous can be just as enlighting and knowledgable as say your run of the mill lawyer (oops that be you).

 

You play the anonymous card about as frequently as you play the anti-Sorenson card. Yawn.

 

Bottom line I think you are wrong on this topic, I disagree with most the stuff you write about when it concerns a great scholar

such as John Sorenson..

 

Cordially

Jeff Holt a.k.a. Anijen

Edited February 27, 2015 by Anijen

[mfbukowski]

Please list these Meso-american money making schemes.

Lotsa cruises

[ERayR]

Lotsa cruises

 

Are they Sorenson owned, run or associated?

[Bob Crockett]

I disagree with most the stuff you write about when it concerns a great scholar

such as John Sorenson..

Cordially

Jeff Holt a.k.a. Anijen

He is a great religious scholar. You'll have to point me to his academic treatises. (Actually, I am familiar with his best academic books. I'm certain that I may likely be one of 2 or 3 here who have them.)

I think that diffusionists are generally considered to be nuts by their anthropologist peers. I rather like diffusion theory but it is pretty close to believing in the Illuminati or aliens.

 

This is not a thread about Sorenson. Get back on topic.

[Sevenbak]

 

For a faithful Latter-day Saint, there are really only two options for Book of Mormon geography: Meldrum's and Sorenson's. 

      I needed that laugh tonight.  Thanks!

[Stargazer]

Lotsa cruises

 

I love cruises!