Another blow to John Gee

[Hagoth]

This guy is really having a bad month.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/09 ... to%20see.

[Linked]

These are small but telling examples, revealing the way Gee takes research out of context to suit his own narrative, all the while claiming that it’s other people who are pushing a narrative.

Apologetics in a nut shell.

[jfro18]

These are small but telling examples, revealing the way Gee takes research out of context to suit his own narrative, all the while claiming that it’s other people who are pushing a narrative.

Apologetics in a nut shell.

What a great line... and this couldn't happen to a more deserving person.

[2bizE]

I’ve read the article and agree with it. John Gee is nut bag.
What criteria does Deseret Book use for removing books from its shelves? If truth was a criteria, then its shelves would be fairly empty.

[Mormorrisey]

I've been browsing and occasionally commenting on some faithful reddit boards, and it astounds me how much they defend John Gee and his work, and claim that Jana is "out to get him" and had a nefarious hand in getting his book pulled from Deseret Book and the BYU religious centre. Lest we forget, John started this whole shebang with his hit piece on Jana in the Interpreter:

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... -evidence/

And then followed up that mess of a review with another drive by assault in his FairMormon podcast "By the Numbers." Which I won't post, because it's just awful. But I don't understand how John Gee can claim persecution by the academy, when he's the instigator of all his own problems. What's that old phrase, "hoisted by his own petard?" That's John Gee in a nutshell.

[Yobispo]

I've been browsing and occasionally commenting on some faithful reddit boards, and it astounds me how much they defend John Gee and his work, and claim that Jana is "out to get him" and had a nefarious hand in getting his book pulled from Deseret Book and the BYU religious centre. Lest we forget, John started this whole shebang with his hit piece on Jana in the Interpreter:

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.o ... -evidence/

And then followed up that mess of a review with another drive by assault in his FairMormon podcast "By the Numbers." Which I won't post, because it's just awful. But I don't understand how John Gee can claim persecution by the academy, when he's the instigator of all his own problems. What's that old phrase, "hoisted by his own petard?" That's John Gee in a nutshell.

All I had to read was the Abstract:
Abstract: Riess’s book surveying the beliefs and behaviors of younger members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was supposed to compare the attitudes of younger generations with those of older generations. Unfortunately, flaws in the design, execution, and analysis of the survey prevent it from being what it was supposed to be. Instead the book is Riess’s musings on how she would like the Church to change, supported by cherry-picked interviews and an occasional result from the survey. The book demonstrates confusion about basic sampling methods, a failure to understand the relevant literature pertaining to the sociology of religion, and potential breaches of professional ethics. Neither the survey results nor the interpretations can be used uncritically.

My bold added to highlight irony.

[Mormorrisey]

Man, Dan Peterson has now entered the fray to support his buddy John Gee and his battle with secular heathens:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ained.html

Reading the comments, it's just hilarious - there's a troll that keeps asking Dan if he is "going to follow the Brethren" since Desert Book and BYU Religious Center have banned Gee's book and have FAIR stop selling it. Priceless.

But the comment of the day, week, month, who knows, belongs to Dan's favourite contributor, Lou Midgely, who has these words of warning for Jana Riess and her ilk, who he blames indirectly for having the book banned, and some shadowy secular deep Mormon state, rather than Gee's own shoddy research:

"I think I know more than I can say. Jana Riess is one rather obvious person. I will not speculate over others who may or may not have been involved in this very strange event. I don't think the event is over yet. If I am guessing correctly, if Saving Faith is eventually released even in a second edition, it will come as a crushing blow to those who sought to make it go away."

Are these guys for real? Do they not understand that most MEMBERS could care less about what John Gee, or even Jana Riess for that matter, have to say about any of these issues? That the scope of their audience runs into the tens? It's just nuts, the influence apologists think they have.

[A New Name]

But the comment of the day, week, month, who knows, belongs to Dan's favorite contributor, Lou Midgely, who has these words of warning for Jana Riess and her ilk, who he blames indirectly for having the book banned, and some shadowy secular deep Mormon state, rather than Gee's own shoddy research:

"I think I know more than I can say. Jana Riess is one rather obvious person. I will not speculate over others who may or may not have been involved in this very strange event. I don't think the event is over yet. If I am guessing correctly, if Saving Faith is eventually released even in a second edition, it will come as a crushing blow to those who sought to make it go away."

Lou Midgely has been a jerk since the early 1990's, when he got one of the very first LDS message boards, called Mormon-L (a LISTSERV for you nerds), thrown off of the BYU servers because he kept loosing arguments.

[Linked]

...Lou Midgely...:

"I think I know more than I can say. Jana Riess is one rather obvious person. I will not speculate over others who may or may not have been involved in this very strange event. I don't think the event is over yet. If I am guessing correctly, if Saving Faith is eventually released even in a second edition, it will come as a crushing blow to those who sought to make it go away."

This is beautiful.

Hint at insider info that you can't share, check. Attack the heathen enemy, check. Claim you aren't speaking for others as you speak for them, check. Hint at larger machinations in the works, check. Act like something inconsequential is actually really important, check.

I think it broke my BS meter.

[Exiled]

Man, Dan Peterson has now entered the fray to support his buddy John Gee and his battle with secular heathens:

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/danpeters ... ained.html

Reading the comments, it's just hilarious - there's a troll that keeps asking Dan if he is "going to follow the Brethren" since Desert Book and BYU Religious Center have banned Gee's book and have FAIR stop selling it. Priceless.

But the comment of the day, week, month, who knows, belongs to Dan's favourite contributor, Lou Midgely, who has these words of warning for Jana Riess and her ilk, who he blames indirectly for having the book banned, and some shadowy secular deep Mormon state, rather than Gee's own shoddy research:

"I think I know more than I can say. Jana Riess is one rather obvious person. I will not speculate over others who may or may not have been involved in this very strange event. I don't think the event is over yet. If I am guessing correctly, if Saving Faith is eventually released even in a second edition, it will come as a crushing blow to those who sought to make it go away."

Are these guys for real? Do they not understand that most MEMBERS could care less about what John Gee, or even Jana Riess for that matter, have to say about any of these issues? That the scope of their audience runs into the tens? It's just nuts, the influence apologists think they have.

Reading what apologists like Midgely have written is what drove me out. He is completely clueless ... and a narcissist ... and very tone deaf ... and perhaps an unrepentant stalker for mormon jesus ...

[moksha]

If Dr. Gee had not treated the social sciences like the Book of Abraham, where he can cherry-pick information to reach unwarranted conclusions, perhaps his book would still be on the Deseret Books shelves. You can't bring Mopologetics to the mainstream and expect people to not call BS on it.

[moksha]

Here is a very informative article. Even the comments are helpful in understanding this issue.

https://faithpromotingrumor.com/2020/09 ... se-at-BYU/

[Hagoth]

Here is a very informative article. Even the comments are helpful in understanding this issue.

https://faithpromotingrumor.com/2020/09 ... se-at-BYU/

This pretty much sums it up:

The existence of the Religious Studies Center itself is both the result and the engine of a series of perverse incentives within a system that needs the status and prestige (and salaries) of a university, but that has for decades now mostly avoided rigorous engagement with the academy. But because the majority of these faculty have little-to-no incentive to participate in conversations outside the academy (also because they possess little training that would allow them to do so), they are a pond that, without an influx of freshwater, festers and sickens those who drink from it.

It's hard to imagine how BYU could possibly bridge the chasm between this state of affairs and Holland's fantasy of the "Harvard of the West." Perhaps he should set his sights a little lower and try giving Ringling Bros. Clown College a run for its money.

[moksha]

It's hard to imagine how BYU could possibly bridge the chasm between this state of affairs and Holland's fantasy of the "Harvard of the West." Perhaps he should set his sights a little lower and try giving Ringling Bros. Clown College a run for its money.

That was great!!!

[A New Name]

It's hard to imagine how BYU could possibly bridge the chasm between this state of affairs and Holland's fantasy of the "Harvard of the West." Perhaps he should set his sights a little lower and try giving Ringling Bros. Clown College a run for its money.

That was great!!!

BYU is at best the "Liberty University" of the West!