My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Shulem »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:21 am
Shulem
Professor Gee will have to come to terms and figure out what to do with his dying faith in the Book of Abraham translation. Isn't that right, Gee? Perhaps you can write a book on how to save faith. That should sustain you for a while at least.
Writing a book with actual and verifiable facts would be vastly superior........ :biggrin: Gee tried to write about how faith verified a longer roll using mathematics and Chris Smith and his co-author destroyed him with accurate mathematics, not faith mathematical facts. Mathematical facts that Gee's faith cannot refute.
You make a good point. Faith in itself is not a bad thing but is an important part of our existence and our life's experience. But faith directed in things that are proven MATHEMATICALLY incorrect is misdirected faith and should therefore be adjusted and realigned to agree with the known facts. Something like that.

Faith is based on imagination and creative thought. Parallelomania is used by apologists in an attempt to legitimize the Book of Abraham. A parallel here and a parallel there. See here and see there. But never mind the MATH! For apologists, faith in parallels and creative thinking trumps the math.

The Book of Abraham is proven false or untrue by the NUMBERS. You can't defy the math. Not even faith can make bad math true.

User avatar
Gadianton
Hermit
Posts: 9926
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Gadianton »

Shulem wrote:Yes, there is the case of the missing hieroglyphs on Abraham's Facsimile No. 2. Smith filled in the gaps (lacuna) -- BUT did he do that with characters from John Gee's imaginary missing roll? Heavens no! He took them from the very papyrus roll in which John Gee knows are funerary spells or literature of the Book of the Dead.
That's fascinating, Shulem. Are you aware of any legitimate Egyptian symbols used by Joseph Smith in any context that don't have an obvious source?

Also, one of the tenets of every Chapel Mormon's faith is that Egyptian is so compact, that one glyph can generate pages of English text, which the Joseph Smith-Egyptian papers confirm, but which in the world we know as "reality" simply is not true.

It's interesting that the proposed scroll length is 41 feet. There wasn't a subconscious target length was there? How much Egyptian scroll does it take to produce the amount of text in the Book of Abraham?
Lou Midgley 08/20/2020: "...meat wad," and "cockroach" are pithy descriptions of human beings used by gemli? They were not fashioned by Professor Peterson.

LM 11/23/2018: one can explain away the soul of human beings...as...a Meat Unit, to use Professor Peterson's clever derogatory description of gemli's ideology.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Shulem »

Gadianton wrote:That's fascinating, Shulem. Are you aware of any legitimate Egyptian symbols used by Joseph Smith in any context that don't have an obvious source?
Nope. As far as I know, Smith transferred characters from funerary material in his possession and incorporated them into the Facsimile lacuna. Everything Smith borrowed was originally meant to attribute glory to Egyptian religion. The Hypocephalus is a tribute to the Egyptian gods. Jehovah be damned! He, was no friend of Egypt! It's utterly ironic that the Mormons publish these spells in their book of canon.
Gadianton wrote:Also, one of the tenets of every Chapel Mormon's faith is that Egyptian is so compact, that one glyph can generate pages of English text, which the Joseph Smith-Egyptian papers confirm, but which in the world we know as "reality" simply is not true.
Actually, that is an old apologetic consideration that begun with Nibley but didn't persist. Chapel Mormons today that believe such nonsense are not intelligent or informed.
Gadianton wrote:It's interesting that the proposed scroll length is 41 feet. There wasn't a subconscious target length was there? How much Egyptian scroll does it take to produce the amount of text in the Book of Abraham?
That's a question best put to professor Gee. He knows the answer to your question and has probably already written out the entire text in Egyptian form to match papyrus specifications from the documents Smith had.

Now this is IMPORTANT and I want you to listen closely to what I'm saying, so lean forward and catch my drift:

IF Joseph Smith had a copy of John Gee's transcription of the Book of Abraham in hieroglyphic form -- Smith would translate it to be anything OTHER than the Book of Abraham.

Isn't that right, John? You know it, and I know it.

:wink:

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:08 pm
Actually, that is an old apologetic consideration that begun with Nibley but didn't persist.
So you are saying that Abraham did not infuse that writing with algorithms that could be fully expanded upon with an upgraded seer stone placed in a hat? Do you have any geology citations which could back up that contention?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Shulem »

moksha wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 6:18 pm
So you are saying that Abraham did not infuse that writing with algorithms that could be fully expanded upon with an upgraded seer stone placed in a hat? Do you have any geology citations which could back up that contention?
Yeah, I guess that's what I'm saying, moksha. I don't know of any geology citations which would disprove that contention.

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 6:52 pm
I don't know of any geology citations which would disprove that contention.
Well, that's gneiss (actually, it was something like banded iron jasperite/hematite with some special property that could only be gained from a newly dug wishing well).
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Simon Southerton
Area Authority
Posts: 619
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:09 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Simon Southerton »

moksha wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:21 pm
At Sic et Non Dr. Hauglid has been labeled as a non-believer. I am thinking that this is grossly unfair to Dr. Hauglid. Seems to me that Dr. Hauglid said he didn't believe the Egyptian origin story of the Book of Abraham, not that he disavowed anything else. This apologetic step to cast him as a non-believer seems unfair, both to Dr. Hauglid and to anyone else at BYU who wishes to come clean in terms of intellectual honesty.
Towards the end of the interview Brian admits to believing both the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon were creations of the 19th century.

I'm surprised Peterson hasn't used the anti-Mormon label yet, or maybe he has. He knows his audience. Its very important to attach that label so he can shut down their critical thinking skills as soon as possible.
LDS apologetics --> "It's not the crime, it's the cover-up, which creates the scandal."
"Bigfoot is a crucial part of the ecosystem, if he exists. So let's all help keep Bigfoot possibly alive for future generations to enjoy, unless he doesn't exist." - Futurama

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by moksha »

Simon Southerton wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:34 pm
moksha wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 8:21 pm
At Sic et Non Dr. Hauglid has been labeled as a non-believer. I am thinking that this is grossly unfair to Dr. Hauglid. Seems to me that Dr. Hauglid said he didn't believe the Egyptian origin story of the Book of Abraham, not that he disavowed anything else. This apologetic step to cast him as a non-believer seems unfair, both to Dr. Hauglid and to anyone else at BYU who wishes to come clean in terms of intellectual honesty.
Towards the end of the interview Brian admits to believing both the Book of Abraham and Book of Mormon were creations of the 19th century.

I'm surprised Peterson hasn't used the anti-Mormon label yet, or maybe he has. He knows his audience. Its very important to attach that label so he can shut down their critical thinking skills as soon as possible.
Seems to me that he can still be a non-orthodox Mormon (faith is a voluntary endeavor) until Dr. Hauglid declares himself non-affiliated. D. Michael Quinn has held onto his belief years after his ex-communication. This ex-communication business is a messy affair since the important relationship is between the believer and God. Thank goodness it cannot be performed on the Sic et Non blog.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Shulem »

Peterson knows that the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham are 19th century works. He knows it.

He knows!

Peterson is navigating his way through Mormon apologetics -- protecting his job and securing his pension.

Hi, Dan!

It's Shulem.

Satan tells me secrets. All I need to know. I learned that from my mother who is also an apostate and who attended BYU long ago.

:twisted:

User avatar
Hagoth
Valiant B
Posts: 190
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 9:16 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Hagoth »

Gadianton wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 10:36 pm
John Gee says the other scroll is 41 feet long??
And yet was rolled up small enough to be gripped in a mummy's hand.
"Be excellent to each other." - Bill and Ted
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” - Mark Twain

User avatar
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 6586
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Philo Sofee »

Hagoth wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:14 am
Gadianton wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 10:36 pm
John Gee says the other scroll is 41 feet long??
And yet was rolled up small enough to be gripped in a mummy's hand.
Perhaps Gee needs to get Chris Smith's help in measuring the size of the ancient Egyptian hands (use their skeletons) so we can verify that indeed, there is evidence for a longer scroll! See? There is yet hope for the Book of Abraham... :rolleyes:
Dr CamNC4Me
"Dr. Peterson and his Callithumpian cabal of BYU idiots have been marginalized by their own inevitable irrelevancy defending a fraud."

User avatar
consiglieri
God
Posts: 6185
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:47 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by consiglieri »

There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)

User avatar
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 3568
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Dr Exiled »

consiglieri wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:34 pm
There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
Excellent idea!
"Religion is about providing human community in the guise of solving problems that don’t exist or failing to solve problems that do and seeking to reconcile these contradictions and conceal the failures in bogus explanations otherwise known as theology." - Kishkumen 

User avatar
Dr Moore
Endowed Chair of Historical Innovation
Posts: 836
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 11:19 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Dr Moore »

consiglieri wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:34 pm
There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
+1

User avatar
Fence Sitter
God
Posts: 8852
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Fence Sitter »

Hagoth wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 7:14 am
Gadianton wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 10:36 pm
John Gee says the other scroll is 41 feet long??
And yet was rolled up small enough to be gripped in a mummy's hand.

The Egyptians were very good at making papyri rolls. A 40' long roll is not unheard of and it would have fit underneath the crossed hands of a mummy. But there is only one problem. Such a roll would have been a tightly wound blank roll from which the sections of papyri used to make the Hor scroll would have been cut. The roll Gee used to make his arguments about the long roll was called the Toronto roll and in no way resembled the Hor scroll. Gee, once again, cherry picked his scroll facts to make his argument without telling his audience how he was waving his magic apologetic wand.
"Any over-ritualized religion since the dawn of time can make its priests say yes, we know, it is rotten, and hard luck, but just do as we say, keep at the ritual, stick it out, give us your money and you'll end up with the angels in heaven for evermore."

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by moksha »

Fence Sitter wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 1:36 pm
The roll Gee used to make his arguments about the long roll was called the Toronto roll and in no way resembled the Hor scroll.
As long as sides of wasabi, soy, and pickled ginger were included in the sarcophagus a Toronto roll could work.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Doctor Scratch
B.H. Roberts Chair of Mopologetic Studies
Posts: 8006
Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 10:44 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Doctor Scratch »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:38 pm
consiglieri wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:34 pm
There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
Excellent idea!
Absolutely. I'd definitely be interested in listening to that.
"[I]f, while hoping that everybody else will be honest and so forth, I can personally prosper through unethical and immoral acts without being detected and without risk, why should I not?." --Daniel Peterson, 6/4/14

User avatar
moksha
God
Posts: 22391
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by moksha »

consiglieri wrote:
Tue Jul 14, 2020 12:34 pm
There is a sudden groundswell of support for an interview of Kerry Shirts on Radio Free Mormon. What do you say Kerry?
I'm feeling it now. Seems to be at least a 6.7 on the RFM scale. Kerry would be tremendous. I am also sensing an after swell for a few direct from Scratch questions for Kerry.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace

User avatar
Chap
God
Posts: 14164
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 4:23 am

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Chap »

Philo Sofee wrote:
Sun Jul 12, 2020 9:21 am
Shulem
Professor Gee will have to come to terms and figure out what to do with his dying faith in the Book of Abraham translation. Isn't that right, Gee? Perhaps you can write a book on how to save faith. That should sustain you for a while at least.
Writing a book with actual and verifiable facts would be vastly superior........ :biggrin: Gee tried to write about how faith verified a longer roll using mathematics and Chris Smith and his co-author destroyed him with accurate mathematics, not faith mathematical facts. Mathematical facts that Gee's faith cannot refute.
I followed that discussion closely. It ran over several months. The mathematics involved was relatively simple, and it soon became clear that Gee simply did not understand the way the calculations worked: he had made elementary mistakes in his reasoning. By the time Chris Smith and Mortal Man had written up their work in full, there was no room for doubt that Gee's 'long scroll' theory was a mathematical and physical impossibility.

No rocket science was involved. It is not difficult to work out the maximum possible total length of a spirally wound roll, given that the spacing of the recurrent lines of damage caused by folding when the scroll was squashed makes it easy to calculated the diameters of the relevant layers of the roll That leads on to a calculation of the maximum total possible length in the roll. Gee got that wrong.

See the account given in:

Smith, Christopher C. “‘That Which Is Lost’: Assessing the State of Preservation of the Joseph Smith Papyri.” The John Whitmer Historical Association Journal, vol. 31, no. 1, 2011, pp. 69–83. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43200509. Accessed 15 July 2020. From this I quote:
Another important line of evidence regarding the original length of the Hor
scroll is the evidence of the existing fragments themselves. The fragments are
from the outer end of the scroll, which means they were wrapped around the
inner portion whose length we would like to know. Only a finite amount of
papyrus could have fit within these bounds. If we can determine the lengths of
severed successive wrappings from the outer portion, simple spiral geometry
can be used to determine the probable length of the lost interior portion.
The difficulty in applying this method lies in accurately determining
the original wrap lengths. Repeating patterns of damage to the upper and
lower edges of the papyrus are the key. These repeating patterns result from
damage incurred by the scroll prior to being unrolled. The distance between
two successive, matching damage patterns is the length of one winding.
Unfortunately, the act of manually finding matching reference points for
measurement is a subjective and difficult task. In 2008, John Gee visually
examined the papyrus and proposed 9.7 and 9.5 cm (about 3.8 and 3.7 inches)
as the lengths of the first and seventh windings. Based on these figures, Gee
concluded that 1250.5 cm (about 41 feet) of papyrus could be missing from the
interior end of the scroll of Hor.46 When I checked Gee's measurements against
some photographs of the papyri, however, I achieved quite different results.
This led Andrew Cook and me to devise a less subjective method of measuring
the distance between successive lacunae.
In order to obtain more reliable measurements, we first traced the upper
and lower edges of the original papyrus from the church archives and digitized
these tracings. We then used a computerized method called "autocorrelation"
to determine the horizontal distance that each damaged section must be shifted
in order to optimally match the successive damaged section. The lower edge of
the papyrus was used as a check against the findings from the upper edge
order to ensure accuracy. Our method returned 56 cm (about 22 inches) as the
probable length of the missing portion, which agrees well with Klaus Baer's
estimate of 59 cm (about 23 inches) of papyrus missing from the Document of
Breathing. Given this finding, it does not seem physically possible that another
text followed the Document of Breathing on the Hor scroll.
You can download a pdf of an earlier article with full details of the figures and calculations here:

Andrew W. Cook and Christopher C. Smith, "The Original Length of the Scroll of Hör," Dialogue : A Journal of Mormon Thought 43, no. 4 (Winter 2010): 1-42

But did Gee retract? Guess.
Zadok:
I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis.
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.

User avatar
Shulem
Son of Perdition
Posts: 11922
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by Shulem »

Water Dog wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 7:43 pm
Shulem wrote:
Mon Jul 06, 2020 8:13 pm
William Schryver, where are you?
sup?
Will,

I think it would be marvelous if you were to appear (in voice) on Radio Free Mormon. Don't you think that would be fun? I think it works for everyone, especially you, whereby you can express yourself to an audience that really wants to hear you speak from the heart.

How about that, consiglieri? don't you think hosting William Schryver on your show would be a smash hit? I'm pretty sure you'd pick up a lot of new listeners and then everybody can know more about the real William Schryver whom I suspect is a good person who has been through a lot.

We want want William!
We want want William!
We want want William!

User avatar
consiglieri
God
Posts: 6185
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 4:47 pm

Re: My Interview with Brian Hauglid is Up!

Post by consiglieri »

All are welcome! All welcome!

This house has many hearts!

But first I want Kerry!
You prove yourself of the devil and anti-mormon every word you utter, because only the devil perverts facts to make their case.--ldsfaqs (6-24-13)

Post Reply