Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:50, 3 April 2006

Just so folks understand

Jason Gastrich is POV pushing (again) in this article, which was a simple few sentences of "hero worship" from the born-again perspective until I found it and improved it.

I'm going to go ahead and figure that it's going to become yet another conflict involving Gastrich because he cannot approach any of these subjects without POV pushing. He's here, after all, to make Misplaced Pages more Christian (at least, from his point of view) and insure that "Christians have a voice" at Misplaced Pages. The consequence of that is that Gastrich is unable to separate that from his "contributions" whenever the subject even peripherally involves things he considers "Christian." Gastrich is also using Misplaced Pages to promote his Christian heroes; and being somewhat developmentally disabled on an emotional level, he acts very much like a spoiled child whenever something is written that he presumes is bad. We keep seeing it in the article about Bob Cornuke.

Bob Cornuke, in the reference cited in the article, claims to have found the anchors of the vessel that Paul was sailing when it was involved in the shipwreck described by the account in Scripture.

Now, I approach this claim scientifically, as a trained and skilled investigator, and I accept that it's a claim that has been made. I don't assume that the items are the anchors of Paul's ship just because he says they are. That's not how it works. No one really knows what it is that Cornuke claims to have found--even he doesn't know. He makes the assumption, based on his perspective, that he's found the anchors. No one else knows that, and there's no independent, qualified verification by the archaeological community.

Because Cornuke has made the claim, and because Cornuke is one of Gastrich's personal heroes--and because this is something that Gastrich wants to believe (being a Biblical literist an inerrantist), he (or his AOL sock) keeps changing my "claims to have found" section of that sentence to "has found." Then he accuses me of "POV pushing."

I just report the facts, i.e., Cornuke claims to have found the anchors from the ship that Paul was sailing when it sank, as described in Acts 27. I have yet to find any independent, verifiable, peer-reviewed article from any archaeological reference that these items are the anchors of Paul. In other words, no one else seems to want to make that assertion. Shucks, the reference that is associated with that part of the article was found and inserted by me. It's a link to an article written by Cornuke.

Gastrich, the born-again Christian (sort of), whom originally wrote the stub article on Cornuke, and whom argues hither and yon at Misplaced Pages and engages in tantrum throwing when he doesn't get his way, changes it to "has found," claiming that the other version is "POV pushing."

Have a nice day. - WarriorScribe 17:44, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm an inerrantist and I think that's a stupid claim to make. What, did Paul scratch his initials on the anchors of every ship he was on? A.J.A. 01:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

For whatever it's worth, I don't have a problem with Cornuke claiming that's what he's found, as long as an encyclopedia article is clear that it's just a claim. I understand and agree with your comment. I simply think that it's less POV if we make it clear, especially given the lack of supporting evidence, that it's a claim, and nothing more. To argue or insist otherwise is POV-pushing...and, in the case of some, wishful thinking. - WarriorScribe 04:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I guess you'll have to see the video, read the book, and hear him speak. I've done 2 of 3 and I'm impressed. And by the way, I didn't read any of the personal attacks above. All I have to do is see WarriorScribe's name and I know it's not worth reading. --Jason Gastrich 02:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

You're also impressed by Hovinds science credentials (AiG are not impressed by him). By Misslers apologetics. David D. (Talk) 03:02, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Quite correct...it's easy to impress Gastrich...as long as you're telling him what he wants to believe, already believes, or doesn't have to think about much. - WarriorScribe 03:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

By the way, notice a couple of things. First, Gastrich boasts of seeing a video and reading the book (as I have also done). He makes no attempt to explain to us exactly what compelling evidence exists, especially independently verified, that provides any real support for the claim that the anchors are those of Paul's vessel. Second, this time, he did not change the article to read as he would prefer it to read, which suggests that he did read my commentary, as written above, knows he won't get away with another POV edit, and tried tossing a pathetic insult as he retreated. - WarriorScribe 03:51, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

UPDATE (Content removal)

This page has under gone major construction to eliminate the slanderous and libelous material and references and present a less biased, but accurate view of who he is. All serious edits and updates are welcome, but character attacks or other negative comments, even hidden in non-direct language, will continue to be removed. The intent of the post is not to push a POV, but a provide a more judicious and balanced description of Robert Cornuke as is the intent of Misplaced Pages.org. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SYITS (talk • contribs)

You removed facts about LBU lacking school accreditation. You removed cited articles calling him a "fraud" and "con artist." You inserted uncited material about Wyatt. You inserted uncited claims in his video. Please become familiar with wikipedia policies before you edit further. Arbusto 22:18, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, what do you know? Another Gastrich sock, along with the normal Gastrich whitewash and the pretense that the whitewash is nPOV... - WarriorScribe 15:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Not every whitwasher is Gastrich. JoshuaZ 15:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

True, but what are the odds that it just happens to be someone else, offended at the publication of the sordid details of one of Gastrich's personal heroes...? ;) It could be someone else, but the verbiage, presumption to lecture, and socks talking to one-another (i.e., "John Doe") tactic is vintage Gastrich. - WarriorScribe 15:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Possibly, but I think in general you guys are too quick to condemn such socks as Jason. Given his personality, if it is him, it wiil become much more blatant very soon. JoshuaZ 16:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I understand. You could, quite possibly, be right. Odds are pretty good that it's Gastrich, particularly given his record, but I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time!  ;) - WarriorScribe 16:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Problem with Current Article

First of all, I would like to apologize for my entrance onto Misplaced Pages and my initial attempts at editing this post. I am brand new to this forum and this kind of concept and I have been, since the first “debacle”, familiarizing myself with the rules and regulations of this site to ensure compliance with the guidelines and cordiality with all the editors.

Instead of just editing the live post, as I did previously, I am offering various refutations and reasons that the current post is incorrect and biased and provide explanation why it should be rewritten. Additionally, I will detail how and why it violates the published rules, goals and guidelines of Misplaced Pages .

I have also offered a rewritten version of the article that strives to reflect an NPOV and that more accurately presents Bob Cornuke and that upholds the 5 pillars of Misplaced Pages .

Firstly, below are 8 major problems with the current article:

1. The post, in general, describes Bob as a "con artist" and a "fraud", with most of these accusations referenced from The New Zealand Cult List , which is offered as a valid source for these terms. This website provides no sources or citations from these accusations and cannot itself be considered a source) . These words clearly cast Bob in a negative light, even though they are hidden in “neutral” language. Plus, they mostly originate from the contentions of a "competitor" (Roy Wyatt, ), who has himself been subject to these same kinds of claims, even though they are not prominently discussed on Wyatt’s Misplaced Pages article.

These are spurious accusations in nature (refer to discussion below on Mt. Sinai discovery) that come from a rival archeologist and should have no place on Misplaced Pages, as this violates the top 2 of the 5 pillars . There are plenty of other forums where accusations can be aired, regardless of merit, but it is a stated goal of wikipedia.org not to be one of these forums.

Additionally, neither Cornuke nor Williams have ever been found guilty of any form or fraud or other malfeasance by any court of law! So, it is inappropriate and unjust for these accusations to be presented here, and even given prominence since they are included in the opening paragraph of the post.

2. Additional evidence that this is a biased post against Bob Cornuke comes from an outside source, Google. Regardless of the editors’ efforts to disguise the accusations with "neutral" language, it is plainly a biased POV and can be seen when a Google search is done on the term "Bob Cornuke" . The Misplaced Pages article is the 6th result, and notice the description, under the title, that’s presented:

"Ten Reasons to be wary of Bob Cornuke · Dictionary of Cults & Religious Groups List: C See: Bob Cornuke; A Critique of Bob Cornuke with a timeline Following ..."

This immediately gives the impression that Bob Cornuke is part of a cult and that everyone should be wary of him (there is no basis or reference for the accusation that he is in a cult and it is solely the opinion of a dissenter and should be immediately dismissed . The accusation is contained on the New Zealand Cults List and is not cited or referenced by any valid outside source). This description on Google clearly presents a biased picture of Bob Cornuke BEFORE the user ever has a chance to see the actual article! Add to that Misplaced Pages’s reputation of being known as an online "encyclopedia", and it raises these baseless accusations from the level of banter between rivals and critics to established truth.

3. The opening paragraph of Controversy and Criticism is misleading. While Wyatt was the first to name Jabal Al-Lawz as the place of Mt. Sinai, Cornuke and Williams were the first to bring photographic and video evidence from the site, and subsequently add merit to Wyatt's claims. Wyatt is also credited in Bob and Larry’s book The Mountain of Moses. . A rephrasing of this material, at the least, is warranted (reference the modified article below) and more appropriately, this reference should be removed (See Self-published Sources ) as it fails to uphold the Misplaced Pages standards for a valid reference..

4. The inclusion of the lawsuit from Kathryn Proffit is also frivolous and only seeks to tarnish Bob Cornuke and give merit to the "fraud" and "con-artist" accusations. Anyone who was been around the world of business or ministry, especially over the last 10-15 years, has probably been sued or knows someone who has. Anyone can accuse anyone of anything and file a lawsuit, if they have the money and audacity to pursue the case, regardless of the merit of the claim. Let me repeat that, regardless of the merit of the claim.

This lawsuit has still not come before a judge for settlement and her initial request for injunction was denied, casting some doubt on the merit of that claim, especially since it's based on an un-witnessed, oral agreement . If, and only if, Bob is found to be guilty or negligent in this matter, should this material become part of this article.

Additionally, the website referenced “The New Zealand Cult List” for the “fraud” and “con-artist” accusations is not a valid reference. They don't cite any evidence or sources for their claims, except the Christianity Today article (which does not discuss his interest in money nor does it make any mention of Cornuke being “fraud” or a “con-artist” ), so these accusations can only be viewed as the opinion of an invalid source and not an objective or unbiased source of FACTS (which are required for encyclopedias AND this website). The sole purpose of this New Zealand Cults website seems to be to accuse others of malfeasance, so they are biased by their very nature and can’t be used here. Any and all references to this website should be removed and any content based on its material rephrased or removed to comply with the rules and regulations of this website.

5. If there are valid critical sources of Bob Cornuke, a 2nd category should be added called 'Skeptical Sites', instead of listing them all under ‘External Links’. This is used in Ron Wyatt's post and is a much more neutral presentation of dissenting material, as long as it holds up to the criteria established by Misplaced Pages .

6. The Link "Top 10 Reasons to be wary of Bob Cornuke" is full of problems, both in the assertions it contains and the material used as references. This is clearly an opinion piece and a direct attack on Bob’s character. The materials that are cited are full of holes, and they certainly do not meet the criteria established by Misplaced Pages for valid references . Bob Cornuke's even being attacked for not having a good website, as if it somehow not having a good website actually holds any bearing on the merit of someone’s research or the quality of their character.

BASE institute is a very small, I mean, VERY small organization, with no permanent staff. BASE has no budget for a blockbuster website, and they rely on volunteers to assist with it. It's obvious Mr. Mander is digging for anything to smear Cornuke, even though Bob's only goal is to share his discoveries, and the discoveries of other adventurers , with people all around the world through his testimony.

Bob does not spend his time attacking other ministries or individuals and as official policy, does not give merit or dignity to spurious accusations by responding to them. Additionally, this document fails to uphold the described standards for a valid reference as established by Misplaced Pages (See Self-published sources ).

7. The post on pinkoski.com is also rather problematic; Pinkoski goes on and on about how Bob and Larry never mention Wyatt, yet gives the references where Ron Wyatt is mentioned in Bob and Larry's book! Cornuke and Williams are out to promote the work THEY did and the things THEY found, not what Wyatt discovered or found. Also, Pinkoski makes reference to accusations that Larry Williams supposedly reported that Wyatt never actually found Jabal Al-Lawz, but the article cites no source or reference for this accusation. Pinkoski was also a curator of one of Wyatt's museums, so he's obviously a biased source against Cornuke and Williams and again should not be counted as a valid critic or reference (See Self-published sources ).

It’s also interesting to note that Cornuke and Williams prominently feature Jim and Penny Caldwell on their video, Mountain of Fire – The Search for the True Mount Sinai (Dean River Productions, Copyright FHC LLC. © 2002 – ). So it doesn’t seem that they are in the habit of taking all the glory or not giving credit where credit is due.

8. Assigning Bob Cornuke to the categories of "Fraudsters" and “Religious Scandals” is also spurious and without merit. These categorizations should be removed immediately. From the commentary above, these accusations have clearly been identified as without verifiable proof or merit and they fail to uphold the standards established by Misplaced Pages for valid references.

As an additional note, I notice that Ron Wyatt’s post is much more benign and neutral in nature than Bob Cornuke’s, even though Wyatt has been the subject of the same kinds of criticism, if not more so, for his discoveries and research . Even given this, Wyatt is NOT categorized similarly, under “Fraudsters” or “Religious Scandals” like Cornuke, even though Wyatt’s mentioned on the same New Zealand Cult List website ! Clearly, this categorization of Bob as a fraud is not from an NPOV and should be removed immediately as it has no valid reference or basis in fact. Otherwise, this link should be added to Ron Wyatt’s article.

It seems clear that a Pro-Wyatt, Anti-Cornuke coalition has wrestled control of this post and it is time this article is brought back into reality and rewritten with verifiable facts and a neutral presentation that follows the rules and regulations of Misplaced Pages.

Below is a revised post for review. Any comments and edits are more than welcome, but they must meet the rules and guidelines established by Misplaced Pages to be accepted. Thankfully, Misplaced Pages has established an arbitration committee if editors continue to taint the article or include invalid sources as references. --SYITS 14:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

__________________________________________________________________

Robert Cornuke is the president of the Bible Archeology Search and Exploration Institute ] in Colorado Springs, Colorado. Bob was a policeman for eleven years and, as a member of the famed Costa Mesa SWAT team and a crime scene investigator, he learned the techniques of investigation and scientific research, which he uses today. Bob uses the Bible as a literal guide to find the Biblical locations, which he has explored and who "consciously models himself on 'Indiana Jones.'"

Bob's first explorations were in eastern Turkey searching for Mt. Ararat with the late Apollo astronaut Jim Irwin. Later investigations led to Israel and the Ethiopia’n highlands hunting for the Ark of the Covenant and to Malta in search of Apostle Paul's shipwreck. Bob states, "I am an investigator who uses the Bible as a literal guide, a compass if you will, to try to find lost Biblical locations and artifacts." .

Bob Cornuke has completed field studies and research on the following topics:

Noah’s Ark

The Ark of the Covenant

Mt Sinai

Paul’s Shipwreck

In addition to his BASE activities, Bob is also an adjunct speaker to Louisiana Baptist University , an unaccredited university, from which he received a PhD. in 2005. He has written several books including The Lost Shipwreck of Paul and In Search of the Ark of the Covenant, Relic Quest and more. He has appeared on CBS, NBC, MSNBC, The 700 Club and television's Ripley's Believe It or Not.

Controversy and criticism

Bob Cornuke's work has been the subject of various criticisms, mostly surrounding his work on the Apostle Paul's Shipwreck and the exploration of Jabal Al-Lawz as Mt. Sinai in Saudi Arabia instead of the traditional Sinai Peninsula location in Egypt.

Bob Cornuke, and Larry Williams, traveled to Jabal Al-Lawz in 1988, and were the first to return from the mountain with photographic and video evidence of the find. Ron Wyatt was the first to identify Jabal Al-Lawz as the Mt. Sinai of the Bible, after he traveled to the area in 1984. Additional explorers, including Jim and Penny Caldwell , have traveled to the site and produced additional material to support the claim that Mt. Sinai is Jabal Al-Lawz. The Caldwell’s were prominently featured in Cornuke and William’s 2002 Video, ‘’Mountain of Fire – The Search for the True Mount Sinai’’ .

Due to Bob Cornuke’s research on the Apostle Paul’s Shipwreck in Malta, a lawsuit was filed against him by a former US ambassador to Malta, Kathryn Proffitt. Proffitt alleged Cornuke violated an oral agreement concerning his book on this shipwreck and requested an injunction. A Federal Judge, who noted “that the book is already on shelves and that her agreement with Cornuke was only an oral contract”, denied this request .

Books

• Ark Fever:Legend Chaser, Tyndale House Publishers, 2005. ISBN 1414302967
• In Search of the Mountain of God: The Discovery of the Real Mt. Sinai, Part 1, Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000. ISBN 0805420525 (Co-written with David Halbrook)
• In Search of the Lost Ark of the Covenant, Part 3, Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2002. ISBN 0805420533 (Co-written with David Halbrook)
• In Search of the Lost Mountains of Noah: The Discovery of the Real Mt. Ararat, Part 2, Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001. ISBN 0805420541 (Co-written with David Halbrook)
• Relic Quest: Legend Chaser, Tyndale House Publishers, 2005. ISBN 1414302975
• The Lost Shipwreck of St. Paul, Global Publishing Services, 2005. ISBN 0971410038

Videos

• “Mountain of Fire – The Search for the True Mount Sinai”, 2002, BaseInstitute.com

• “Mystery of the Ark of the Covenant”, BaseInstitute.com

External links

• BASE Institute
• Koinonia House many references on much of Bob Cornuke’s research – search “Cornuke”
• Christianity Today article on the controversies surrounding the alleged discovery of Paul's anchors.

__________________________________________________________________

This appears to be a brewing issue between one of Gastrich's heroes ("SYITS" is, almost certainly, a Gastrich sock, representing a "pro-Cornuke" perspective), arguing some sort of conspiratorial nonsense about some nebulous "anti-Cornuke" or "pro-Wyatt" group. Characteristically, Gastri...uh, SYITS, wants to lecture about the rules of Misplaced Pages, while white-washing, marginalizing, minimizing, and perhaps eliminating statements that are either controversial or those which he views as unflattering or controversial.

This is an encyclopedia. It's purpose is not to provide an unfettered platform for hero-worship. That means that articles about certain personalities and institutions are not always going to be flattering, and they are not intended to cast the person or institution in a flattering light, subject to approval and the subjective application of shifting standards by hero-worshippers. If there is controversy about an individual or institution, it gets reported, regardless of the resolution to the controversy, if, indeed, a resolution has been reached. It doesn't get whitewashed or minimized simply because someone doesn't happen to like it.

Compare the (admittedly flawed) article, as it stands, with the "proposed version," as it appears above. Notice some of the sly and not-so-sly POV pushing occurs. For example, the current article explains that the claims of Cornuke with respect to the "discovery" of "the anchors of Paul" is just that, i.e., a claim--nothing more. Gastrich, during his attempts to whitewash that fact, would remove it, and claim that he did so to maintain a more neutral POV. When I explained, above, why he was wrong, we heard no more about it, which is not unusual. Instead, we have another tried-and-true tactic. We have the creation of sock puppets, and new attempts, later on, to remove that simple little fact. Notice that there is no mention of that, at all, in the "revision" that is proposed above. Notice, also, that while some of the controversy is retained with respect to the conflict between Ron Wyatt and Cornuke, within their little "walled garden," it is minimized by the verbiage of the edited version above (along with the veiled threat of a call for arbitration, something Gastrich knows about all too well, having been banned for a year by a recent ArbCom decision).

The comment about Cornuke modelling himself as a modern-day "Indiana Jones" isn't mentioned, at all, in the proposed article, though it was is referenced in the current article.

The talk of the "famed" Costa Mesa SWAT team has been restored in the new article by "SYITS." Well, I was a cop for 11 years, also. I wasn't aware of any specific "fame" for the CMPD SWAT team any more than that of the LAPD SWAT team, the Denver SWAT team, or any other SWAT team.

Cornuke's experience as a crime scene investigator, such as it might be (and it is without confirmation by any independent source) does not really qualify him as any kind of scientific expert in the fields of archaeology or ancient history. It would appear that the citation of this "fact" takes advantage of the normal misunderstanding that most of us might have with respect to what CSI agents tend to do in the course of their duties. CSI agents for most departments (including Costa Mesa PD, if I recall correctly), are civilians , they are neither police officers nor specifically trained in the interpretation of evidence. They "process" crime scenes, gather evidence, run various laboratory tests, and only occasionally present conclusions. They apply scientific prinicples, but they do not "do science."

Cornuke's use of the Bible as a guide, as claimed, doesn't do anything for his investigative credibility.

And notice the more familiar references to "Bob" instead of "Cornuke" or "Dr Cornuke" in the article.

These points, and a few others, point to a writer whom has a stake in the article as he has presented it. I believe that the author is a Gastrich sock, given away by the edits, the style of writing, the veiled threats found in today's commentary as well as the first commentary on this page, and the concentration on a single, Gastrich-created and supported article in Misplaced Pages. If that is the case, it is interesting that, just a few weeks ago, Gastrich was telling us that he wouldn't participate in Wiki, any more, due to the alleged "unequal yoking" that occurs when one "cooperates" with "unbelievers."

I will certainly agree that the article needs a bit more work, as do most (maybe all) articles at Misplaced Pages, composed and edited, as they are, by non-professionals. But I don't think that whitewashing and marginalizing legitimate controversies is an improvement. I guess we'll see, particularly if much discussion of this article ensues. If I need to, I can go point-by-point through the comments of "SYITS," above, and show why most of them are groundless, baseless, rely in a biased reading of the article, or engage in attempts at whitewash. - WarriorScribe 16:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

SYITS IS NOT A GASTRICH PUPPET

For the record, I SYITS am not in any associated with this Gastrich individual and am not a "sock puppet" of any form. I am a real person who happened to find problems with the Bob Cornuke's article and I want to offer an appropriate rebuttal.

--SYITS 00:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

• Christian leaders
• Christian ministers
• Christian people
• Christian writers