Not a Feather in the Cap of BYU Scholarship

[cinepro]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/season/18/boise-id/appraisals/modern-mexican-figurines--201304A28

Collector: I've had them inspected by several experts. Three of the staff at Brigham Young University looked at the objects approximately 20 years ago and authenticated them, giving me a date of a pre-classic period on the bulk of them, which is prior to 700 A.D. But some of the items predate Christ.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Collector: I trust the information that I got from the people... They were going to take them to BYU and donate them to the museum as they went back to Mexico because they knew they wouldn't be able to bring them back out of the country, and I had to haggle with them hard and heavy to get them to let me have them.

Host: Did you receive these as a gift, or did you actually buy them?

[mrmarklin]

The owner said they were looked at by BYU scholars, but had zero documentation.  Yeah, that's credible.

[juliann]

So a guy dressed up like Indiana Jones says some "scholars" took a look and said they were authentic without examination. I particularly liked how he gave no further information until the assessor said something more (before it went south) and he jumped in to confirm that was exactly what "the scholars" had said. I feel for the guy, probably the only correct part of his story was that his friends bilked him for $500.

Not sure what this has to do with any feathers for BYU, however.

Edited April 25, 2016 by juliann

[smac97]

On 4/25/2016 at 1:28 PM, cinepro said:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadshow/season/18/boise-id/appraisals/modern-mexican-figurines--201304A28

Quote

Collector: I've had them inspected by several experts. Three of the staff at Brigham Young University looked at the objects approximately 20 years ago and authenticated them, giving me a date of a pre-classic period on the bulk of them, which is prior to 700 A.D. But some of the items predate Christ.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Collector: I trust the information that I got from the people... They were going to take them to BYU and donate them to the museum as they went back to Mexico because they knew they wouldn't be able to bring them back out of the country, and I had to haggle with them hard and heavy to get them to let me have them.

Host: Did you receive these as a gift, or did you actually buy them?

 

 

A few excerpts from the owner of these apparently spurious artifacts:

Quote

"I acquired these items in 1977 from a family that was moving from Idaho back to Mexico.  I have 31 pieces, and they were all recovered from a prayer cave on the property."

A prayer cave in Idaho?  Found by a Mexican family?  Or was this prayer cave in Mexico?  How did this family know that?  Where did they obtain these figures?

Quote

"I've had them inspected by several experts.  Three of the staff at Brigham Young University looked at the objects approximately 20 years ago and authenticated {them}..."

"Staff?"  Who at BYU?  What were their credentials/training?  Did they look at all 31 objects?  Or just a sampling?  What does "look at" mean?  And later on he says that the BYU folks never gave him anything in writing, but here he says they "authenticated" them.  That sounds . . . odd.

Quote

"...{The BYU folks had} given me a date of pre-classic period on the bulk of them, which was prior to 700 A.D., but some of the items pre-date Christ..."

So three credentialed and qualified "staff" at BYU examined these 31 pieces and placed most of them them in the pre-classic period?  And are the two being shown in the vid among those?

Quote

"...Nothing written {was given to me by the BYU 'staff'}.  They just looked at them and instantly said that there's no question that they're original..."

So three credentialed and qualified "staff" at BYU examined these 31 pieces and "instantly" declared that there is "no question that they're original?"  That seems . . . odd given what is said next:

Quote

 

Appraiser: "...In the authentication process, what we do is we consider the collection history, any sort of research that you've done, and then the next phase is looking at them stylistically.  When you look at this stone piece, and you look at how the nose is treated, and the eyes, and the mouth.  Then over here on this object how this is treated.  And 'stylistically' means what to the eyes look like, what is the nose, how are the arms treated, what about this iconography.  This is very strange stylistically."

Guy: "That's what, that's what they told me."

Appraiser: "It's very, very atypical.  Very strange."

Guy: "Yes."

 

Um, what?  The BYU folks looked at these items, "instantly" declared to this fellow that there is "no question that they're original," yet they also told him that the form of the objects (iconography, etc.) was "very strange stylistically . . . very, very atypical . . . very strange" (or words to that effect)?  And they also did not give him anything in writing memorializing their findings?  All of this seems . . . odd.

Quote

Appraiser: "The second part of the authentication process is is looking at the surface.  Does the surface make sense.  And looking at the surface at both of these, and how each thing is carved, they're very particular pieces in the manner in which they're not only carved, but what they're carved from."

I wonder if the BYU folks took these things into account,  Perhaps not, since they supposedly were able to "instantly" declare that there was "no question" that these items are "original" (?), but also that their form and iconography are "very strange stylistically . . . very, very atypical . . . very strange".

Quote

 

Appraiser: "What is your feeling about the authenticity {of the items}?"

Guy: "I trust the information that I got from the people that I got . . . they were going to take them to BYU and donate them to the museum as they went back to Mexico because they knew they wouldn't be able to bring them back out of the country.  And I had to haggle with them hard and heavy to get them to let me have them."

 

Um, what?  I thought he was relying on supposed "staff" from BYU.  Now he's talking about "information that {he} got" from the most trustworthy of sources . . . the sellers of merchandise!  So did they guy have these items examined by "staff" at BYU, or was he relying on "information" from the sellers that they had had the items examined at BYU?  And then he admits that the "information" he received from the sellers came during "hard and heavy" negotiations.  It's almost as if the sellers were telling him things that would, in his mind, enhance the value of these items.  So that when they reluctantly sold these items, they would get the best price for them.

Yeah, no chance at all that this guy was swindled.  It's all on the up and up.  It has to be.  Because the point of this thread is to . . . try to make BYU - and, by extension, the LDS Church - look bad.

Quote

 

Appraiser: "So what do you think about the value on these pieces?"

Guy: "I have no idea.  None of the people would give me a value.  They said the collection is very unique.  And the clay figurines, they said they really honestly {had} never seen anything like them."

 

So the BYU folks had "never seen anything like" the figurines, but they were able to "instantly" declare that there was "no question" that these items are "original" (?), but also that their form and iconography are "very strange stylistically . . . very, very atypical . . . very strange".

And all of this is supposed to reflect badly on . . . BYU?

Quote

 

Appraiser: "Did you receive these as a gift or did you buy them?"

Guy: "I purchased them for $500 ... for the entire collection ... in 1977."j'

 

Adjusted for inflation, that puts the purchase price at about $1,964.79.  That's nearly two thousand reasons for the sellers to tell this guy a story.

But that doesn't matter, as long as Cinepro gets a chance to try to make BYU - and, by extension, the LDS Church - look bad.

Quote

Appraiser: "Unfortunately, with my experience of nearly four decades, both of these pieces are reproductions. ... These are sun-dried and sold to the tourist market.  I have no idea why the scholars said what they said to you, but I can tell you that both of these are contemporary pieces.  They're 20th century.  And the value on these each would be in the $10-$15 range.  

I feel badly for this guy, but his story has rather ... an odor to it.  The story about BYU "scholars" authenticating these figures just does not hold up well.

But the video clip clearly gave Cinepro a moment to publicly relish the prospect of BYU - and, by extension, the LDS Church - looking bad (with the LOL emoji and everything!).

In a way, I am kind of embarrassed that Cinepro uncritically seized on this video clip, given the various problems with it.  Critical thinking apparently goes out the window whenever there's a chance to rag on the Mormons.

Thanks,

Smac

 

Edited April 25, 2016 by smac97

[cdowis]

Sounds to me that over the years, the story has grown from the "scholars" saying "they are very unusual"  to "definitely authentic".  He may even believe his narrative of the encounter.  Sounds like from his story that the truth is that they said that the artifiacts could be authentic, but they wanted to take them to BYU to confirm.

I feel sorry for Indiana Jones.  I suspect that he got alot mileage from his story, and now he  has become  just an ordinary person.

And for the critics, just more proof that Mormon scholars are incompetent buffoons.  Thanks, cinepro, for your sharp eye.  You never miss an opportunity to stick it to LDS, Inc, even if it means trusting this individual's unsupported memory.

Edited April 26, 2016 by cdowis

[UtahTexan]

Oh goodie, Cinepro- are we gonna start a thing comparing BYU to Catholic Universities?  I simply cannot wait.....

[Robert F. Smith]

"Not a Feather in the Cap of BYU Scholarship"

  

Is there anything at all substantive here??