Posted by:
tanngrisnir
(
)
Date: May 28, 2011 06:19AM
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe's_LawPoe's Law is an axiom suggesting that it's difficult to distinguish between parodies of religious fundamentalism and genuine proponents of religious fundamentalism, since they both seem equally insane.
Now that we've established that, here is my question: Is this article not a perfect example of Poe's Law?
http://www.cureloms.com/Cureloms.pdfI thought I'd just post this since I have seen few weirder Mormon things on the internet. This guy has typed unreadable nonsense for pages upon pages, all on the topic of Cureloms and Cumoms being Mastodons. He's absolutely crazy! The whole document is full of very excessive alliteration, and yet I think he wants to be taken seriously! Is this a joke? I honestly can't tell.
Some of my favorite excerpts:
"This treatise transforms this puzzling passage from problematic perplexity into one more tiny thread in the tremendous tapestry of telling testimony for the Lord's divine latter-day marvelous work and majestic wonder -- the profusely prophesied exuberantly ensigned reestablishment and restoration of the original and official creed and church of the Holy Messiah, our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ."
"There are plethoric and plentiful petroglyphs/pictographs/paintings/pictures/pieces/portrayals that have been presumed to be Proboscidea; they range frompotentially plausibly possibly Proboscidea to powerfully persuasively positively Proboscidea."
"A subsequent section will make a sweepingly comprehensive and strongly compelling solid case that the Proboscidea were clearly coexistent with the incredibly sophisticated and fairly recent civilizations of ancient America. If one accepts this advanced-civilization coexistence contention, then the dubious and dubitable premise would be in defending the notion that no one in these brilliant civilizations ever thought of domesticating Proboscidea."
"Yet a dizzyingly deep dive into detail yields two truly outstanding Proboscidean candidates, without any decent alternatives. Imposters do not tend to get supported on unusual prognostications. Another alleged absurdity again arguably adduced as an alluringly affirming attestation."
NUTS!!!