Signs of Decline in LSMs Recovery - Tomes

[Cassidy]

Freedom> I don't think that Nigel or anyone else assume that they can conclusively interpret Google Trends results,

I find little disagreement with the logic of your argument with the notable exception of the above statement. In fact, Dr. Tomes' whole presentation pivots on the results of Google Trends.... and there are so many ridiculous fallacies in his presentation and conclusions that I do not know where to start other than where I did.... that is, if one wishes to use Google Trends as the barometer of interest or disinterest then its strongest proponent --- Dr. Tomes --- , in spite of dozens of articles, is way underwater.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Freedom> I don't think that Nigel or anyone else assume that they can conclusively interpret Google Trends results,

I find little disagreement with the logic of your argument with the exception of the above. In fact, Dr. Tomes' whole presentation pivots on the results of Google Trends.... and there are so many ridiculous fallacies in his presentation and conclusions that I do not know where to start other than where I did.

I think he's just trying to present meaningful statistics in the context of the LC. Given that the data is out there, it is bound that someone will come along sooner or later and try to interpret it.

I think everyone would basically agree that the same data could not be used to prove a increase in popularity in WN or WL. So if Nigel's interpretation is wrong, then that points towards the data being inconclusive. Now that I have seen the data that Nigel presented, I am not content with just dismissing it as being inconclusive. Nigel is not the only one out there trying to make use of this kind of data. I am willing to accept Nigel's interpretation until someone comes along with a better one.

[Cassidy]

Freedom>I am willing to accept Nigel's interpretation until someone comes along with a better one.

And you are entitled to that.

However, that benefit of the doubt is part of the fallacy that shores up the problem with Dr. Tomes' presentation. Here is what I mean;

Tomes is a Phd and no doubt he worked hard for it and earned it by the sweat of his brow... and the discipline required to complete one's dissertation is extensive and comes under critical review. Nothing is taken for granted, no benefit of the doubt is given, and a compelling presentation must cover all the bases and assumptions. Unfortunately, Dr Tomes' does not apply the same rigor in his attack writings on Witness Lee as one would expect from a man of his training.

For instance, Dr. Tomes assumes that there are no variables to the Google search engine trends that could be factors against his argument. Over the last decade Google search engine growth rate has declined, there have been new entrants to the search engine market, and geopolitical factors have blocked Google in huge growth markets such as China. He offers no explanation for these variables and their potential impact to the Google Trend he relied on.

Again, he asks the reader to join him in a leap of faith that the Google search engine is the mechanism whereby existing and new members will seek links to relevant LSM content. Apparently, Tomes misses the fact that links to the online web sites that have the writings of Witness Lee and Watchman Nee are already provided to members verbally or in print so that members, existing or new, do not need Google or any other search engine to find the material.

Furthermore, one could make a strong case that since most of the new members will bypass the search engines because they have direct links, then the ones left who are searching for information are, for the most part, not members of the local church and if that assumption is taken into account then the decline trend Tomes references is not disinterest from existing members or new members but disinterest from non-members who wanted to find out something about Lee & Nee..... people who might be trying to find a site like this one for instance. That would suggest the trend decline is an indicator of something quite different from what Tomes states.

But then Freedom, would you give that last scenario the benefit of the doubt? I think not because it is human to relegate to the less credible position the argument and the evidence that does not align with preconceived ideas and beliefs. Even though Tomes has presented but one dubious piece of evidence and does not address the numerous others variables he will, nonetheless, get a free pass with most in his preferred audience. With those who regard him he is considered as one of the initiated so what he says must be given the benefit of the doubt even if his argument lacks tangible facts to back it up. He provides a ton of reference and it gives the impression that his opinion is more than that. I think that is problem.. a very big and dangerous one actually.

I'll close with this: Google trends show a similar decline for the last decade for the Baptist denomination and also for Protestantism. Perhaps there is a bigger decline of interest in fundamental churches... or perhaps Google Trends does not provide enough information to infer anything at all. I think that is the case... it is just data and without a lot of other correlating data it remains just that. I hope so because the Google Trends also show rising interest for Zombies and the Underground Alien Base at Dulce!

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Cassidy

Furthermore, one could make a strong case that since most of the new members will bypass the search engines because they have direct links, then the ones left who are searching for information are, for the most part, not members of the local church and if that assumption is taken into account then the decline trend Tomes references is not disinterest from existing members or new members but disinterest from non-members who wanted to find out something about Lee & Nee..... people who might be trying to find a site like this one for instance. That would suggest the trend decline is an indicator of something quite different from what Tomes states.

But then Freedom, would you give that last scenario the benefit of the doubt? I think not because it is human to relegate to the less credible position the argument and the evidence that does not align with preconceived ideas and beliefs. Even though Tomes has presented but one dubious piece of evidence and does not address the numerous others variables he will, nonetheless, get a free pass with most in his preferred audience. With those who regard him he is considered as one of the initiated so what he says must be given the benefit of the doubt even if his argument lacks tangible facts to back it up. He provides a ton of reference and it gives the impression that his opinion is more than that. I think that is problem.. a very big and dangerous one actually.

The idea that people are more frequently using direct links is worth considering and I haven't discarded that possibility. I don't think it's really possible to get that kind of information. Only LSM knows how many people visit their sites overall. Something to consider though is that a site can either be visited by entering a URL directly (amazon.com), or using a search engine to find a URL. If I misspell the URL and enter "amzon.com", on my computer, that automatically performs a google search for "amzon.com", which would bring up the real link. Even if people are being provided LSM URLs, there is a good chance that they can still be searching for the URL, say if they forget the exact URL. On Facebook, I see lots of people posting LSM URLs, so that is definitely one way people will end up using just links. If an link is announced in a meeting (such as equip.org for the CRI), how many people are going to write down the URL and enter it directly? I bet you plenty will forget the URL and just google "CRI".

To address the second part of what you said, I don't think that anyone here (including myself) agrees with everything Nigel writes. His writings have value because he is one of the only ones consistently attempting to critique LSM at a scholarly level. This is something that needs to be done. Outsiders can do the same thing, however, they don't understand the inner workings of the LC. So maybe Nigel gets more of a "free pass" than he should. I don't think that's such a big deal, however, because can come here and critique what he has written. Don't worry, I'm sure DCP reads everything he writes, whether or not they have a response.

One thing that's important to realize is that in relation to the LC, there is no such thing as getting "all the facts". Do you think if I were to write an email to LSM asking for statistics of visits to their websites that I would get any kind of response? I'm sure Nigel would love to have access to such numbers. Since that kind of information isn't available, conclusions have to be drawn from the information at hand. People such as myself who are on the fridges are happy to know something rather than nothing.

Originally Posted by Cassidy

I think that is problem.. a very big and dangerous one actually.

This coming from someone who believes that brother Lee is the only person who has been speaking as God's oracle since 1945. Nothing very dangerous about that! Let's give Nigel Tomes some room, after all he was under this kind of myth for many years and he is just trying to work his way through all the Local Church myths. Give him a break, he's the only regional leader/elder who has had the intestinal fortitude to come on the internet and post what God has been revealing to him since leaving "the recovery". Don't worry, eventually he'll get there. In the meantime he is probably busting a cut watching people like this guy come out and try to defend the defenseless.

[rayliotta]

Originally Posted by Cliffhanger

This coming from someone who believes that brother Lee is the only person who has been speaking as God's oracle since 1945. Nothing very dangerous about that! Let's give Nigel Tomes some room, after all he was under this kind of myth for many years and he is just trying to work his way through all the Local Church myths. Give him a break, he's the only regional leader/elder who has had the intestinal fortitude to come on the internet and post what God has been revealing to him since leaving "the recovery". Don't worry, eventually he'll get there. In the meantime he is probably busting a cut watching people like this guy come out and try to defend the defenseless.

Fortunately Tomes is not the only one. There's also John Myer. According to his website, there is a "Southern California Care Group [that] has been established for the encouragement and support of departing Local Church Members in that area."