Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
-
- Posts: 18922
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
-
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
- Contact:
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
I stand corrected, with thanks. The post has been edited to correspond with public reporting and other easily located records. What I identify as erroneous material has been struck trough, but not otherwise altered.andrewcriddle wrote: ↑Thu Jul 09, 2020 10:20 am Could you give a source for this please ?
I don't think it is an accurate summary of the committee's findings.
Andrew Criddle
If there is any remaining issue, then I am confident we can work that out.
-
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
Because apparently people keep having to address me even when I've attempted to leave the conversation:
When plagiarism is as morally degenerative and dangerous to society as sexual harassment, rape, child porn, and other horrendous deeds, let me know. Until then, I do not care about your false equivalency of MLK Jr. to others.
That being said, I don't use MLK's work except under specific circumstances, and I always note (when I do) its dubious background.
And I don't think anyone should be exempt from their terrible deeds nor should their "great" ones be unencumbered. I could list endless monsters throughout history whose work has been absolutely instrumental for the progress of science and the human race (worth noting how much influence Mengele's research had on genetics, for instance, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3350031?se ... b_contents). Should we just ignore their crimes?
Stop protecting the legacies of horrible people. They don't deserve to be acknowledged for their great deeds. MLK having affairs and plagiarizing isn't even remotely comparable to non-consensual rape, child porn, and harassment. MLK's dissertation has been held accountable and permanently labeled for its plagiarism. If that happens to him, it should happen to those who have done far worse.
Don't attempt to drag me in this again. I'm done. If you find this "Orwellian" then that is your personal problem, not mine. I at least have a moral compass to my citation and academic practice.
When plagiarism is as morally degenerative and dangerous to society as sexual harassment, rape, child porn, and other horrendous deeds, let me know. Until then, I do not care about your false equivalency of MLK Jr. to others.
That being said, I don't use MLK's work except under specific circumstances, and I always note (when I do) its dubious background.
And I don't think anyone should be exempt from their terrible deeds nor should their "great" ones be unencumbered. I could list endless monsters throughout history whose work has been absolutely instrumental for the progress of science and the human race (worth noting how much influence Mengele's research had on genetics, for instance, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3350031?se ... b_contents). Should we just ignore their crimes?
Stop protecting the legacies of horrible people. They don't deserve to be acknowledged for their great deeds. MLK having affairs and plagiarizing isn't even remotely comparable to non-consensual rape, child porn, and harassment. MLK's dissertation has been held accountable and permanently labeled for its plagiarism. If that happens to him, it should happen to those who have done far worse.
Don't attempt to drag me in this again. I'm done. If you find this "Orwellian" then that is your personal problem, not mine. I at least have a moral compass to my citation and academic practice.
- Joseph D. L.
- Posts: 1422
- Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
No one is stopping you from leaving. You just have too much of an ego not to walk away.Chris Hansen wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 2:02 pm Because apparently people keep having to address me even when I've attempted to leave the conversation
I honestly do not fucking care.When plagiarism is as morally degenerative and dangerous to society as sexual harassment, rape, child porn, and other horrendous deeds, let me know. Until then, I do not care about your false equivalency of MLK Jr. to others.
That being said, I don't use MLK's work except under specific circumstances, and I always note (when I do) its dubious background.
And I don't think anyone should be exempt from their terrible deeds nor should their "great" ones be unencumbered. I could list endless monsters throughout history whose work has been absolutely instrumental for the progress of science and the human race (worth noting how much influence Mengele's research had on genetics, for instance, https://www.jstor.org/stable/3350031?se ... b_contents). Should we just ignore their crimes?
Let me make this as crystal clear as I can. I do not give a good God damn about some moral transgression. What I care about is the information they bring. If Pervo was a child killing psychopath, would matter zero to me if his insights on Acts of the Apostles was worth taking up.Stop protecting the legacies of horrible people. They don't deserve to be acknowledged for their great deeds. MLK having affairs and plagiarizing isn't even remotely comparable to non-consensual rape, child porn, and harassment. MLK's dissertation has been held accountable and permanently labeled for its plagiarism. If that happens to him, it should happen to those who have done far worse.
And harassment is such a tenuous and vague indictment. Are you seriously conflating it with rape and pedophilia? Remember coffeegate? Just asking someone out is tantamount to harassment these days, and you people want to play white knight moral crusaders storming the castle of the injustice of an ugly guy asking out a thot.
And how is anyone protecting the legacy of Pervo by using his research? Please enlighten me, oh great possessor of the one and only moral compass.
You're a psychopath on par with Giuseppe.
Or fucking what guy? What are you going to do? If you don't want to respond then that is your own problem and responsibility. I can--baring Peter Kirby's approval--respond and reply to anyone and in anyway that meets the standards of the community guidelines.Don't attempt to drag me in this again.
And I have a moral compass too, and I don't take the effort of letting petty moral transgressions take up space rent free in my mind.I'm done. If you find this "Orwellian" then that is your personal problem, not mine. I at least have a moral compass to my citation and academic practice.
Get the self righteous stick out of your ass my dude.
- Joseph D. L.
- Posts: 1422
- Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2017 2:10 am
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
You never did apologize to me for your libelous accusations of plagiarism either, and I am owed one. If I felt so inclined I could have legal action taken against you as these accusation could be damaging to my reputation if/when my book comes out. But if you apologize now I'll consider it forgiven and forgotten.
-
- Posts: 994
- Joined: Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:25 am
- Contact:
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
And that's why you came back? To tell us all that you don't care?Until then, I do not care about your false equivalency of MLK Jr. to others.
You weren't dragged into anything in the first place. A public conversation which you started continued after you decided not to participate further.Don't attempt to drag me in this again.
Get over yourself.
-
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
I did not accuse you of plagiarism. I accused you of just copying your "research" from Boswell and not properly citing where all your sources came from. In scholarly writing and standards, we always denote where our citations come from, even citations of citations. Yes even when you are quoting something quoted in another work, you cite where the quote came from. This is standard practice.Joseph D. L. wrote: ↑Sun Jul 12, 2020 3:55 pm You never did apologize to me for your libelous accusations of plagiarism either, and I am owed one. If I felt so inclined I could have legal action taken against you as these accusation could be damaging to my reputation if/when my book comes out. But if you apologize now I'll consider it forgiven and forgotten.
However, I apologize that I wasn't clear enough on that. I am not accusing you of plagiarism, and if you would like I will edit the previous comment. The only time I've even talked plagiarism is when it came to MLK Jr. I was not trying to say you were a plagiarist.
I'm only here because you spammed my interview and made these false claims again.
I said and I quote:
"Every single one of Joseph's references were being pulled straight out of Boswell's work [...] Couldn't be bothered to do your own bloody research. That is just astounding. What absolute laziness. You are just a parrot for Boswell."
I never said you plagiarized him and I'm not now.
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
Well, reading Hansen's screed was very revealing, it explained a lot of things about her/his mind set and end game.
I think I just might have discovered a new species of mythicist here.
Although it has all the markings of your typical mythicist, that is; anti-Christian, anti-history, hypocrisy, etc, it has broad bans of hate and projection not seen before. e.g. Hansen implied I was a holocaust denier and that it actually was the Christians not the Nazi's who murdered the most Jews in WWII.
As you probably know, I have a ongoing page on the different types of mythicists.
So, what would be the proper classification? "Woke mythicst"? "Usurper mythicist", "Neo-mythcist"?
By the way, can anyone explain why Hansen's personal links on this thread show error (404)? Is that due to defamation suits?
I think I just might have discovered a new species of mythicist here.
Although it has all the markings of your typical mythicist, that is; anti-Christian, anti-history, hypocrisy, etc, it has broad bans of hate and projection not seen before. e.g. Hansen implied I was a holocaust denier and that it actually was the Christians not the Nazi's who murdered the most Jews in WWII.
As you probably know, I have a ongoing page on the different types of mythicists.
So, what would be the proper classification? "Woke mythicst"? "Usurper mythicist", "Neo-mythcist"?
By the way, can anyone explain why Hansen's personal links on this thread show error (404)? Is that due to defamation suits?
-
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2020 2:46 pm
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
Just to make it clear, I sincerely do apologize to Joseph D. L., to Neil Godfrey, to Ken Olson, Secret Alias, and to everyone else in here whom I treated like absolute crap, bullied, and worse. I was in the wrong, I was acting horribly, taking my anger at other things in my life out on all of you, and you deserved better. And I hope you can all forgive me. I have apologized before, and I will again.
To address the rest of this:
Most Nazis were Christians... I never said that Nazis did not perpetrate the Holocaust. I said that Christians were responsible for it. And I'm not wrong. The vast majority of Nazis were Christians. But congrats on... being incompetent at reading. I also never implied you were a Holocaust Denier. You really are bad at reading. I said you were appropriating Jewish suffering and applying it to Christians... who were the victimizers in this atrocity. The vast majority of Nazis... were devout Lutherans and Catholics. You just clearly didn't bother engaging with what I was actually saying and are now just dishonestly misconstruing me.
I do endorse ethical citation methods to this day, so I guess I'm "woke". Mine as well say I'm woke too because I'm pro-Feminism, pro-Queer Theory, and think Critical Race Theory is awesome. Oh, and Marxism is cool as a method of analysis too. And I'm a socialist! I'm just the wokest. Really hitting me where I live John.
I fail to see how I'm a mythicist... given most of this screeding is me railing on mythicists like an a-hole in this page.
The links don't work because I deleted those accounts a while ago. If you want the more updated info, I think I gave the most current bibliographic list to Giuseppe (if not, G hit me up and I will).
To address the rest of this:
Most Nazis were Christians... I never said that Nazis did not perpetrate the Holocaust. I said that Christians were responsible for it. And I'm not wrong. The vast majority of Nazis were Christians. But congrats on... being incompetent at reading. I also never implied you were a Holocaust Denier. You really are bad at reading. I said you were appropriating Jewish suffering and applying it to Christians... who were the victimizers in this atrocity. The vast majority of Nazis... were devout Lutherans and Catholics. You just clearly didn't bother engaging with what I was actually saying and are now just dishonestly misconstruing me.
I do endorse ethical citation methods to this day, so I guess I'm "woke". Mine as well say I'm woke too because I'm pro-Feminism, pro-Queer Theory, and think Critical Race Theory is awesome. Oh, and Marxism is cool as a method of analysis too. And I'm a socialist! I'm just the wokest. Really hitting me where I live John.
I fail to see how I'm a mythicist... given most of this screeding is me railing on mythicists like an a-hole in this page.
The links don't work because I deleted those accounts a while ago. If you want the more updated info, I think I gave the most current bibliographic list to Giuseppe (if not, G hit me up and I will).
Re: Resource for Mythicist and Response Documentation
Sure, if that is the excuse you want to make for your recent ugly behavior and ad honimem attacks against Ehrman and me. It comes with the territory. Doesn't make it right but we expect it from both sides. However, unlike Ehrman, I don't mind giving a tit for tat. So, try to keep that in mind, I'm not your punching bag and do not try to project your unresolved anger onto me.
Now then, you claim to be an expert on the history of mythicism and writing a book on it. You claim to be smarter than Carrier and Ehrman on the subject. So, in the future when you call me out for ignorance on the subject you need to provide your strongest argument on the specific dispute with sources. Please do not launch into another triad of how stupid I am compared to you.
Try to look at it this way, you play the role of the doctor and I the patient. If you don't know, say you don't know, but don't berate the patient for asking the question.
Fair enough?
Now then, you claim to be an expert on the history of mythicism and writing a book on it. You claim to be smarter than Carrier and Ehrman on the subject. So, in the future when you call me out for ignorance on the subject you need to provide your strongest argument on the specific dispute with sources. Please do not launch into another triad of how stupid I am compared to you.
Try to look at it this way, you play the role of the doctor and I the patient. If you don't know, say you don't know, but don't berate the patient for asking the question.
Fair enough?