tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post5361060009189606517..comments2024-03-24T03:21:55.744-06:00Comments on Life On Gold Plates: A New Book of Mormon Wordprint AnalysisBHodgeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-90323299529054161542022-06-26T20:26:03.209-06:002022-06-26T20:26:03.209-06:00like this replica designer bags this content rep... like this <a href="https://www.dolabuy.co/wallets-c-157_158_201/louis-vuitton-replica-m80015-pocket-organizer-monogram-other-in-black-p-3048.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>replica designer bags</strong></a> this content <a href="https://www.dolabuy.co/triomphe-c-157_315_319/celine-replica-ava-hobo-bag-in-triomphe-canvas-p-2840.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>replica gucci bags</strong></a> see this site <a href="https://www.dolabuy.co/lockme-c-157_158_258/louis-vuitton-replicas-clutch-lockme-m56088-black-leather-p-2025.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>Hermes Dolabuy</strong></a>tepeethhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06026648372425877236noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-24295530875826663462022-06-11T19:11:11.845-06:002022-06-11T19:11:11.845-06:00see this here replica gucci bags special info yo... see this here <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/luggage-c-157_315_320/" rel="nofollow"><strong>replica gucci bags</strong></a> special info <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/ch%C4%81nei-c-209_211/uk-7-star-replica-shoes-sneakers-from-china-2022-p-4827.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>you can try these out</strong></a> click here for info <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/gg-marmont-c-157_168_169/gucci-high-quality-pearly-gg-marmont-flap-belt-476809-bag-matelasse-leather-p-1144.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>look these up</strong></a>slypheshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06132263259151130561noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-52493005953927972442022-05-14T02:28:11.270-06:002022-05-14T02:28:11.270-06:00here are the findings high quality designer replic... here are the findings <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/flap-c-157_190_277/designer-knockoff-as2696-flap-bag-aged-calfskin-goldtone-metal-p-4101.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>high quality designer replica</strong></a> company website <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/monogram-c-157_158_241/louis-vuitton-replicas-designer-monogram-tivoli-m40144m40143-handbag-p-4585.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>replica bags buy online</strong></a> visit the website <a href="https://www.dolabuy.ru/gg-marmont-c-157_168_169/high-quality-gucci-replica-498110-gg-marmont-crossbody-bag-p-1333.html" rel="nofollow"><strong>best replica designer</strong></a>smalihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12206836324653950905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-37814742410899392932016-05-19T19:39:46.907-06:002016-05-19T19:39:46.907-06:00Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for inspir...<br />Thank you for sharing your thoughts and for inspiring us. Keep it up and continue on what your doing. Visit my site too.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.triciajoy.com" rel="nofollow">triciajoy.com</a><br /><br />www.triciajoy.comandrea chiuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04035532519352427999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-86327072318002964452016-03-16T04:03:29.372-06:002016-03-16T04:03:29.372-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11809267923133028596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-14692433306889396492016-03-16T04:03:20.070-06:002016-03-16T04:03:20.070-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11809267923133028596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-2325379633122258862016-03-16T04:03:07.673-06:002016-03-16T04:03:07.673-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11809267923133028596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-59790637350240876742016-03-16T04:02:53.989-06:002016-03-16T04:02:53.989-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11809267923133028596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-79636642157056714792016-03-16T04:02:40.194-06:002016-03-16T04:02:40.194-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11809267923133028596noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-86854694504978340382015-08-05T04:47:25.149-06:002015-08-05T04:47:25.149-06:00Your blog is Amazing. Very nice thing you are prov...Your blog is Amazing. Very nice thing you are provide in your blog. It give me much help to my problem.<br />Visit :- <a href="http://bookofmormon-tickets.com/" rel="nofollow">Book of Mormon Tickets</a><br />andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14625287413297458232noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-13923825738305215482014-06-08T18:54:13.912-06:002014-06-08T18:54:13.912-06:00i like the way to structured your blog and the dis...i like the way to structured your blog and the discussion as well<br /><br />www.joeydavila.netforbidhttp://www.joeydavila.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-46932258141714956042013-07-17T20:32:20.258-06:002013-07-17T20:32:20.258-06:00Nice! Actually I'm glad this is an option that...Nice! Actually I'm glad this is an option that we can implement. I've always wanted to have my comments stand out from others. Allows us to be much more creative.<br /><br /><br />minuteinfonet <br />minuteinfonet.blogspot.comminuteinfonethttp://minuteinfonet.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-28925528808047770442011-01-22T12:42:03.372-07:002011-01-22T12:42:03.372-07:00Chris, thanks. I downloaded the paper last week bu...Chris, thanks. I downloaded the paper last week but wanted to read it before adding anything on it here. From a quick scan it seems to me the authors have not simply rebutted the Criddle paper, but have offered a more fruitful way to apply statistical models to the question to begin with. It may seem suspicious to you that people at BYU are the respondents, but this should be no more suspicious than Criddle himself being a vocal ex-Mormon. In this case they are each making a statistical argument which allows for a somewhat less biased way to evaluate respective positions. The second article so far seems much more willing to admit shortcomings which should help raise your confidence level a bit.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-70566357933061297852011-01-21T21:16:26.419-07:002011-01-21T21:16:26.419-07:00I know this thread has gone stale, but Schaalje an...I know this thread has gone stale, but Schaalje and friends from BYU have published a retort to Jockers et al. original study in the same journal. Their findings were basically opposite those of Jockers et al. The premise of the study is that Jockers et al used a closed NSC (nearest shrunken centroid) to address the authorship of the Book of Mormon whereas the BYU folks used an open NSC. The primary difference is that the closed NSC does not take into account that the author might not be any of the chosen test cases (someone other than Spaulding, Rigdon, Cowdrey, Smith, or Pratt) whereas the open NSC allows for a "latent" (or none of the above) author to account for the authorship. While the latter seems like a more reasonable approach to the question. It always seems suspicious that the BYU folks are the only ones who authored this paper. I see no reason why (if their study is valid) Schaajle et al. couldn't have found some non-Mormon colleagues to jump on board. Nevertheless and notwithstanding this is turning out to be an interesting dialogue.<br /><br />You can find the Schaajle et al. paper here:<br />http://llc.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2011/01/18/llc.fqq029.abstractAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13200219422689622607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-86790188696117960542010-11-03T10:25:52.811-06:002010-11-03T10:25:52.811-06:00Anon, I also think Rigdon's lack of comment on...Anon, I also think Rigdon's lack of comment on assisting with the BoM is nice circumstantial evidence against his assistance especially given his bid during the succession crisis to step forward as a "guardian" to the Church.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-84523785721705187572010-11-02T20:56:17.738-06:002010-11-02T20:56:17.738-06:00I am curious about what writings of potential auth...I am curious about what writings of potential authors were relied on in order to perform the study. I mean, couldn't it be the case that Rigdon's (and others') writings might begin to approximate the Book of Mormon because they had read it and been affected by its form? Also, the "Rigdon behind the BOM" theory doesn't seem to explain why Joseph would be given all the glory and honor. Why not two prophets, at least? Why would Rigdon settle for a distant second if he was the mastermind?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-25584880156682328392010-05-10T15:44:07.380-06:002010-05-10T15:44:07.380-06:00Thanks for the comment, ridgerunner. I'm still...Thanks for the comment, ridgerunner. I'm still not completely sold on Hebraisms generally as evidence. It remains to be seen how much Joseph Smith influenced the content of the translation, for example. Some Hebraisms may simply be similarities one could find in the KJV translation. I'm more interested in evidence such as chiasmus when it brings things out in the text I wouldn't have noticed without it. Fore instance, the chiasmus identified in some of Alma's stuff brings out themes we as readers should pay more attention to. FWIW.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-1270818314058948162010-05-09T19:23:16.220-06:002010-05-09T19:23:16.220-06:00I find the idea that Spaulding or Ridgon the autho...I find the idea that Spaulding or Ridgon the authors of the Book of Mormon unrealistic being that there are hebrewisms through out the text that would require, to my mind at least, a serious knowledge of hebrew. To my understanding, neither Spaulding nor Ridgon possessed that much knowledge of Hebrew sentence construction. Neither did Joseph Smith at the time. <br /><br />It seems that there are many that want to show that the Book of Mormon is just another 19th century publication but the original text shows that not to be the case.ridgerunnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11192012118736859570noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-26484511539166155672009-10-14T14:03:34.855-06:002009-10-14T14:03:34.855-06:00Ben McGuire provides the following update (rumor i...Ben McGuire provides the following update (rumor is a full response to the Criddle et. al. paper is forthcoming):<br /><br /><i>The Spalding word print simply isn't heavy in the Book of Mormon. There are a lot of reasons why I say this, but I don't really feel at liberty to discuss everything on a public forum until a formal response has been published. However, I will reiterate one specific concern which I made quite early on when the Criddle study first came out. The test authors which were used (Longfellow and Barlow) were quite similar to the Book of Mormon. However, they were similar in the same ways that the artificial author Isaiah/Malachi was similar to the Book of Mormon. When run through the ringer, only two (IIRC) chapters were associated to Barlow and Longfellow. But, about a third of the chapters of the Book of Mormon which were not already recognized as effectively quotes from Isaiah were also identified as Isaiah/Malachi. If we remove the artifical author (Isaiah/Malachi) from the equation, many (if not most) of these thirty chapters don't get assigned to Spalding, or Rigdon or the other authors, but to Longfellow and Barlow. And this means that in dismissing the misidentified chapters that were connected to Isaiah/Malachi as simply reflecting biblical language, the study effectively dismisses any effectiveness of its test cases with a magic wand.<br /><br />The study is only capable of telling us who is the most likely of the possible candidates. But it doesn't really tell us how likely any one of the candidates is on their own. (In fact, if we reduce the list of possible authors to only one, it will give us a 100 percent chance that this author is the author of the text in question - whether that candidate is Joseph Smith, Spalding, or Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev). The methodology used is problematic on its own, and the statistical model needs some kind of control built in to the mathematics (not into the rather subjective text and author selection) in order to be really usable.</i><br /><br />See more of the discussion here:<br /><br />http://www.mormonapologetics.org/topic/45781-book-of-commandments-word-print-study/BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-33965563944442620452009-01-28T14:17:00.000-07:002009-01-28T14:17:00.000-07:00Anonymous: This blog is a response to the wordprin...Anonymous: This blog is a response to the wordprint study. The authors of the study won't be able to see your comment as I doubt they check the comments here. <BR/><BR/>Take care.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-780671137358227832009-01-28T14:05:00.000-07:002009-01-28T14:05:00.000-07:00I find your report interesting; however it seems a...I find your report interesting; however it seems as if you're trying to grasp at theories to make an assumption of yours override the results of wordprint studies.<BR/><BR/>You theory in the end rests to a large degree on Spalding and Rigdon being authors of the book.<BR/><BR/>Rigdon however was converted by Parly Pratt, who was converted by being loaned a copy of the Book of Mormon. Therefore your postulation that Rigdon somehow managed to assist in writing the book seems weak as it's well documented that he had never met Joseph Smith until he had a desire to meet the translator of the Book of Mormon.<BR/><BR/>Indeed many theories about the origins of the plates include him as a likely author; but it's resting on a false assertion made nearly two centuries ago which was as ridiculous then as it is now.<BR/><BR/>I'm fine with people trying to prove their theories about the Book of Mormon but placing Spalding and Rigdon together as collaborators really killed your article for me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-45036886742289598562008-12-22T15:47:00.000-07:002008-12-22T15:47:00.000-07:00By the way, cinepro, I personally view the "starti...By the way, cinepro, I personally view the "starting point" of wordprint analyses of the Book of Mormon to be earlier than this recent attempt. As early as 1980, with Larsen, Rencher, and Layton's study, we have a starting point. Soon their take was evaluated in Sunstone by Croft. After that, Hilton and the so called Berkley group formulated a new study. Subsequent articles in the Journal of BoM Studies describe their findings. The new study is another in a line of several wordprint attempts. <BR/><BR/>As with the former attempts I am relatively unimpressed with the latest one, most especially with the historical aspects undergirding the theory. I am no statistician, but I am a student of history, and I am not impressed whatsoever with the arguments for a Spaulding/Rigdon/Smith/Pratt etc. conspiracy. I am preparing more blog posts on the topic but suffice ti to say for now, this wordprint study looks to be pretty shaky at least from the historical standpoint.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-73032663028884374472008-12-22T08:13:00.000-07:002008-12-22T08:13:00.000-07:00Craig Criddle has requested I post the following h...Craig Criddle has requested I post the following history of his project to the site. I have no problem doing so, but also note that it does not discuss any of the problematic aspects of the wordprint study, and it also makes me wonder how familiar with the history of this theory the other authors of the study are. Criddle downplays his involvement, but cannot be absolved from the very foundation of it, which is based on his own historical research into the Rigdon/Spaulding issue. Again it is noted that the wordprint study is relative, and that plugging in any number of authors could yield similar results, as the results are based on the authors included alone, not on general authorship. <BR/><BR/>Criddle: <BR/><BR/><I>History of the Stanford Book of Mormon authorship Study<BR/><BR/>In the Fall of 2005, I posted an essay “Sidney Rigdon: Creating the Book of Mormon” at two locations on the internet. In that essay, I explained my background and biases with respect to the Book of Mormon, and I explained how I came to the conclusion that Sidney Rigdon was its likely architect. I based my conclusion on the evidence summarized in that paper. Among other things I had noticed word usage patterns in the Book of Mormon that seemed to me to be consistent with Rigdon's style. <BR/><BR/>While I found some intriguing patterns, I did not have the expertise to carry out a more detailed text analysis. In particular, I was not knowledgeable in computerized text analysis. I was actually manually calculating word frequencies, using the word count feature of Microsoft Word, combined with Excel tables.<BR/><BR/>Frustrated by that process, I typed the key words “computer text analysis Stanford” into Google, to see whether a colleague at Stanford might have the necessary expertise. I received hits for Matthew Jockers in the English Department. So I emailed Matt. I told him that I had a hypothesis regarding the authorship of the Book of Mormon, and that I was looking for a collaborator with expertise in computer text analysis. He was interested. So we met, and I showed him what I had. Matt knew very little about Mormonism and nothing about the Mormon scriptures, but he was familiar with authorship attribution scholarship and intrigued by my hypothesis that one or more 19th century authors potentially authored the Book of Mormon. He was also very knowledgeable in text analysis and had the computer tools and know-how needed to understand the problem and extract the word frequency data from texts. After some discussion, he agreed to do the analysis for me; at that point we had not discussed co-authoring a paper. <BR/><BR/>With the help of friends, I was able to obtain most of the texts we needed for analysis, but I was not successful in obtaining reliable text for Joseph Smith (which we are still hoping to obtain). Matt took the texts I provided, segmented and encoded them into the xml that his tools require. He did the same with two control texts that he obtained.<BR/><BR/>Initially, Matt provided me some lists of frequently used words, bigrams, and phrases in the Book of Mormon and in the other texts. I ran some tests using my amateur methods, and Matt ran some tests of his own using his methods. We had some similar outcomes, with Rigdon appearing as a likely major contributor. This led Matt to believe that the theory was worth rigorous testing using more sophisticated methodologies. He decided to organize and lead a team effort with an eye toward publication of the research. We both understood the need for a bona fide statistician, and Matt recruited Daniela Witten, a doctoral student in Statistics with expertise in machine learning and classification. <BR/><BR/>Matt organized and directed regular meetings of the three of us in which we discussed how to proceed. Matt wanted to conduct tests using the Delta method, a method commonly used for authorship attribution. Daniela proposed additional testing using the method of Nearest Shrunken Centroids (NSC), a pattern classification technique developed at Stanford. <BR/><BR/>Matt and Daniela then did the analysis, applying both Delta and NSC. I was not involved in that part of the work. We all recognized that I had a bias issue, and we agreed that we would let the chips fall as they would: if the results came back negative for Spalding-Rigdon theory then that’s what we would report. But the results came back supportive of the Spalding-Rigdon Theory. <BR/><BR/>Matt then wrote the first draft of our manuscript and sent it to me and to Daniela for our additions. I added my expertise in Mormonism and the historical context. Daniela wrote the sections on statistics and NSC. The manuscript went through more than 20 revisions thereafter. We also solicited help from a small group of informal reviewers and incorporated their suggestions.<BR/><BR/>On April 5, 2008, Matt submitted the manuscript to the Journal of Literary and Linguistic Computing. The anonymous peer review process took six months. On October 7, 2008, we finally received notification that the paper was accepted pending an adequate response to the reviewer comments.<BR/>We completed our response to the reviewer comments and submitted the corrected manuscript on November 6. On November 24, we received word that the manuscript was accepted. At the same time we received page proofs. We corrected them and returned the article on November 27. It was published electronically on December 6.<BR/><BR/>I would like to make a couple of points.<BR/><BR/>First, this manuscript should be referred to as the "Jockers et al. (2008) study" or as the "Stanford authorship study," not as the “Criddle wordprint study”. Yes, I did contribute significantly, but Matt led and coordinated the team, and he is the corresponding author. That is as it should be. Without him, nothing would have resulted. Daniela’s expertise as a statistician and skills as a writer were critical to the paper, so her contribution should not be discounted either. This is important for all to understand. <BR/><BR/>One reason I am making these points is because, as many apologists have already (correctly) pointed out, I am the team member with bias. Matt and Daniela were unbiased, and had very little knowledge of Mormonism before they became involved with this project.<BR/><BR/>While I contributed expertise as a former Mormon, Matt and Daniela carried out the data analysis and the results are what they are, independent of my participation in the research. <BR/><BR/>I am hoping that by providing this background, it will become clear to all that this work should not be referred to as "the Criddle word print study”: it was a team effort led by Matthew Jockers. I was a member of that team, and, while my expertise was important, I did not carry out the analysis itself. <BR/><BR/>Craig Criddle</I>BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-7840489439171008002008-12-20T23:02:00.000-07:002008-12-20T23:02:00.000-07:00It sounds like many of us can agree that the study...It sounds like many of us can agree that the study has problems (most notably the omission of Joseph Smith as a possible author). I hope we can look at this study as a starting point in a dialog on the subject, where additional studies can be refined to shed more light on the question. I, for one, would like to see some suggestions from LDS statisticians not only on how they would structure future tests, but also what they would expect as a result from future tests that would validate or falsify their currently held theories.cineprohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14256320868634563295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32960447.post-87210290403302040032008-12-11T17:13:00.000-07:002008-12-11T17:13:00.000-07:00Yes, apparently Hilton says "Our group, later know...Yes, apparently Hilton says "Our group, later known as the Berkeley Group, included major contributors from different scientific disciplines and differing religious persuasions. All of us shared the scientific curiosity which led us to test the intriguing Larsen-Rencher-Layton claim." I don't know who was in the group but I imagine you could track Hilton down and ask. Either way, the Hilton study is pretty far from problem free, in my view.BHodgeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01751807169882645742noreply@blogger.com