Jump to content

cinepro

Contributor
  • Posts

    10,564
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by cinepro

  1. To add some history, here's the section about the Provo Temple design approval from "David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism." Having addressed the mandate of functional temples, Fetzer made them economical by taking a minimalist approach on the exteriors. The result was not universally acclaimed, either in his initial presentation to the First Presidency or later:
  2. I agree the whole "being together forever" thing doesn't make sense the more you think about it. Suppose my wife and I end up in the Terrestrial Kingdom. If we both have memories of our Earth life and can find each other, then as far as I can tell, the only thing that would change is that we won't be able to have sex. We can still go on walks, watch old movies, go to museums of Earth history, and play pickleball. But no sex. But maybe it's set up so I won't be able to be with my wife. There will be special segregated areas where people can't reunite with loved ones from Earth in the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdom. So we remember what happened on Earth, but we're around different people. As eternal beings, wouldn't we just eventually...move on? I mean, I'd always remember what happened, but after a billion years, wouldn't I eventually make new friends? The doctrine of sealing and togetherness seems to imply that out of the billions of people who have lived, the one you find and choose to marry, and the few that you give birth to, are the only ones you can be happy with for the rest of eternity. It's a romantic idea, and I wouldn't show this to my wife, but I'm not sure it really makes sense. I mean, it's not even true for most people for the few decades we're on Earth (many kids and parents are more than happy to be apart, and spouses often find out within a few years or decades that they're happier not being together). So then we get to the other stuff, like eternal increase and getting our own planets. But from what I can tell, a lot of people aren't really interested in "increase" beyond two or three, and they're not interested in managing massive projects. They just want to watch TV and hang out on the internet. If we have the same personalities in the afterlife as we do here on Earth, I'm not seeing a planet of would-be managers of planets managing eternal increase.
  3. Thanks. I think you mean "2.34x", not "2.34%", but beyond that, I have a different question. What is the actual risk reduction being introduced by the vaccines to previously infected individuals? What is the baseline risk that the 2.34x is based on? The study took a pool of existing data and analyzed it to get that ratio. But it doesn't give us what, I suspect, is the more common question: What is the risk of reinfection (and hospitalization and death) to someone who has prior natural immunity compared to someone without prior natural infection, someone fully vaxxed without prior natural infection, and fully vaxxed with natural infection? Because the 2.34x number could be saying that, for example, out of 10,000 previously infected people, 2,000 will get reinfected with the vaccination and 4,680 (2.34x) will be reinfected without the vaccination (so 6,680/10,000 get reinfected). So a huge number (66.8%!) are getting reinfected, and the risk reduction from vaccination is huge. Or it could be saying that out of 10,000 previously infected people, 1 was vaxxed and reinfected compared to 3 who were unvaxxed and reinfected. So a tiny, tiny percentage were reinfected either way, and I suspect many people would argue that the benefit of vaccination is tiny.
  4. Do you have the source and raw numbers for the 2.5x figure?
  5. Probably going by cases, not deaths...
  6. Relevant article about the FDA.
  7. That's a good example of another thing that people assume is related to public health when it really isn't. There is no reason related to health that anyone needs to wear shoes or shirts in a business. Think about it for a second. Why would your feet need to be covered when all they touch is the floor, but your hands don't need to be covered when they touch...everything...?
  8. I spend so much time in LDS-centric forums that honestly I think a lot of it is the perspective of people living in Utah and other states that are perceived to have low-masking. They tell themselves that if only more people would have worn masks, things would have been okay. I'm in Los Angeles, so I have the opposite experience. Everywhere I went, everyone was wearing masks but our case numbers still went off the charts. Even right now, we've had a mask mandate for 3 weeks and our cases are rising as quickly as in other nearby non-mask counties. So I'm at the point where I believe masks could work, and I believe they should work, but in looking at the real-world data, I'm not convinced they do work. And the longer this goes on (and the more data that comes in), the more the pro-mask crowd sound like people that made up their minds in April of 2020 and are determined to maintain their belief in masks no matter what the data says. I understand the psychological forces at play, but it's odd that they still insist they're being scientific. And then there's the mystery raised by Bernard Gui. Even with high rates of masking, we saw massive winter spikes. Hawaii (with high masking) is seeing one right now. But now we're told there's a new more highly contagious variant and the way to stop or impede it is...to do the same thing that didn't stop the less contagious version? To Defeat Delta Variant, Experts Recommend Doing All The Things That Didn't Work The First Time
  9. That new variant was detected in Santa Clara (south of SF), and they have 85% of >12yo vaxxed with one dose, and 79.3% with two doses. Those are some of the highest numbers in the nation. https://covid19.sccgov.org/dashboard-vaccinations If we're saying we need communities to exceed those numbers in order to end this, then we need to figure out what plan B is because we're not getting past 80% fully vaxed in most counties any time soon. Vermont, the top state, only has 68% fully vaxxed. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html
  10. I'm pretty sure 99.999% of readers understand that to be the Tower of Babel. The only ones who don't understand it to be that are the ones that see that as creating huge timeline and geographic troubles for the BoM (usually in relation to the presence of people on the American continent long pre-dating the traditionally assumed date for the Tower of Babel). For example: LDS Seminary Manual
  11. To add on to my original comment about Nelson's memories (and Brian Williams'), I will note that it appears Paul H. Dunn's problems were a bit more than faulty memories. His memories were so far off of what he experienced, it would be bordering on delusional for him to have believed those stories really could have happened. I mean, how do you accidentally mis-remember playing pro baseball?
  12. As someone who understands (just a little) how memory works, I don't find these discoveries about the stories to be surprising or disturbing. I find them to be expected. In fact, I would be more surprised if objective investigation showed the memories to be absolutely accurate. That would be unexpected! You may find the discussion around the Brian Williams situation (the NBC news anchor who had his career destroyed over an inaccurate memory) to be relevant: Scientists explain how Brian Williams’ memory may have failed him The science behind Brian Williams’s mortifying memory flub
  13. Interesting. Did anyone catch that the article liberally quotes Cardon Ellis, the creator of the FAIR/"This is The Show" videos? But that's not the best quote...
  14. It looks like the doctor that signed her note is an Osteopath. That's a legit medical doctor, but "Osteopathy" has roots in pseudoscience similar to chiropractic and other "therapeutic touch" schools of thought. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9806345/Incoming-freshman-loses-scholarship-refusing-covid-vaccine-medical-conditions.html And the doctor did post a link to a pro-hydroxychloroquine medical news conference last July. He linked to this video and said "Very good info": https://www.bitchute.com/video/Brcm2OtyDVlO/ The group that sponsored the news conference is anti-vaxx: https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/
  15. I must be getting slow in my old age, but I read the article thinking about some close friends I have who admit they drink way too much soda and energy drinks, but fail every time they cut back. Mentally, I didn't even connect the article to the WoW and tea and coffee.
  16. Dang. If someone is more orthodox on something than Peterson, you know they're way out there.
  17. Okay, let's be honest. There is a CES manual called "Presidents of the Church." It has an English approval date of 2/12. So first I would ask who approved it, and what does that approval mean? In this manual, used by the Church Education System to teach college-level students about the Presidents of the Church and their teachings, there is a section on page 90 called "They Shall Organize Worlds and Rule Over Them." In this section, the following story is told: So if someone asked "Hey, do members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints think they'll get worlds over which they shall rule as gods?" I wouldn't feel honest telling them no. Would you?
  18. Of course, they could have just said "Yes." Since, as had been mentioned by so many LDS, it is something that "Latter-day Saints believe." And let's not forget that President Nelson has recently said this: We may quibble over the phrasing of "getting your own planet", but let's not pretend that the principle isn't part of LDS teachings.
  19. In your summary of the lyrics, you left out the most important (and explanatory) line: WE'LL CONVERT YOUR CHILDREN... WE'LL MAKE THEM TOLERANT AND FAIR. I don't see anything in the song beyond that. What are you seeing, or are you objecting to the "tolerant and fair" part?
  20. 1. Polygamy (women) 1. Book of Abraham (men) 2. Book of Mormon lack of evidence/ face-in-a-hat translation method (everyone)
  21. That's a fair point. Because if there's one thing exMos hate, it's ascribing characteristics to an entire group based on one person's experience.
  22. Well, this should be interesting... Saturday at 3:55. https://sunstonemagazine.com/2021symposium/ Probably incorporates ideas from this blog post: The Five Doctrines of ex-Mormonsim
  23. One interesting mention of Noah in the BoM comes from Jesus himself, in 3 Nephi 22: If the flood wasn't global, what, exactly, what Jesus promising would never happen again? There have been regional floods that killed people regularly for centuries. What's the actual covenant?
  24. That's a very odd parsing of the situation. So, if someone asked you whether the CoJCoLdS teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, or that sex before marriage is not okay, you would say "Churches don't teach, people do. So the 'Church' doesn't actually teach anything. All I can say is that many leaders in the LDS Church believe those things..."? And even if you believe that makes sense, I think most people would understand that if they go to a church or other group's official website and find something repeatedly and consistently taught throughout the site, it's fair to say that church or group "teaches" that. The only people who would disagree are probably the members of the group that really wish the group didn't actually teach that. But to the point at hand, I would simply point out that every single Church leader, scholar, or other person that has taught about Noah's flood in any Church-published talk, manual or other curriculum or forum has taught a global flood for Noah to the exclusion of a mythological or regional interpretation. If you can find a single exception, do share. So the "Church" might not teach it, but every time the Church publishes someone's teachings about the flood, that person does. Flood at Noah's Time LDS OT CES Manual LDS Seminary Manual
  25. Well, you run into a problem right there when you appeal to the nuances of Hebrew. The problem being this article by BYU Professor Donald Parry. Parry is relevant based on these qualifications: So what does the good professor have to say about the scope and reality of Noah's flood? Now, obviously Parry doesn't speak for every single individual in the Church. But when a Professor of Hebrew publishes that in the Ensign, it takes away a bit of the latitude for what can be said about what the Church teaches, and what a clear reading of Hebrew implies.
×
×
  • Create New...