Jump to content

cinepro

Contributor
  • Content Count

    10,502
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by cinepro

  1. On 10/4/2020 at 5:36 AM, gav said:

    Based on the tone of the first two sessions of conference I don't see November's election and the events that follow being very smooth in the USA.

    I don't live there so "I don't have dog in this fight" but we have had a talk in both sessions so far on temporal and spiritual preparedness. Others on unity, leaving behind competitive cultural aspects and some very strong words around getting out and staying out of the current political instabilities and turmoil. Others on adversity and testing. I don't remember the twelve getting too involved in the political vagaries of the day in the past, so this focus on current affairs by many of the twelve seems portentous.

    These seem to be more direct focus than usual on these types of themes or perhaps my confirmation bias is just a little hyper sensitive in these areas lately

    If you don't have a dog in the fight, then it probably isn't Confirmation Bias.

    It would more likely be an Availability Bias, where things that are more recently emphasized and discussed come to mind more quickly, so when you hear a statement in General Conference you link it to things that have prominently been in the news (like the upcoming US election.)

     

    Availability Bias

    • Upvote 1
  2. When it comes to the Second Coming, I think this is one of the best talks I've heard:

     

    Quote

    My generation was not immune either from the effects of what I call Second-Coming fever. As young missionaries, some of us serving in the Italy Milan Mission speculated that 1974 would be a critical year—and possibly the very year of the Second Coming. We were highly imaginative as we wove together a tapestry of various bits of data, including the facts that the April annual general conference that year was to be the 144th annual conference of the Church and President Spencer W. Kimball, the twelfth president of the Church, would be sustained as prophet, seer, and revelator in a special solemn assembly to be held on April 6. What better day than this, a day filled with historical tradition and scripturally significant numbers such as 12 and 144, for the Lord to return to earth to begin His millennial reign? You may laugh, but we took our wild speculation very seriously. Of course that historic and spiritually uplifting conference has come and gone, and we are still here. (See CR, April 1974, or Ensign, May 1974.)

    Even today I encounter scores of people who believe they will witness the Second Coming in their lifetime. For my part, I am now somewhat reserved and wiser. I teach my students these guiding principles: prepare a will, buy life insurance, put funds away in a retirement program, and, if they really want to be nice to their family, purchase a pre-need funeral program that includes a cemetery plot! For many of my students, this last bit of advice is a little morbid, but it makes my point. Live today as if you will meet Jesus this evening, but plan your life as though you will live to be 100 years old.

    https://speeches.byu.edu/talks/richard-neitzel-holzapfel/glass-half-full-second-coming-lord-jesus-christ/

     

    • Upvote 1
  3. Not sure if this ever got discussed here, but since it was such a big discussion back in 2018, I wanted to make sure everyone saw how this turned out.

     

    Quote

    The plaintiffs dropped the suit, their attorney Craig Vernon told the station, after a recent Utah Supreme Court ruling “eviscerated” their case. That decision deemed that a new state law removing the statute of limitations in civil suits alleging sexual abuse could not be applied retroactively.

     

    • Like 4
  4. 2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

    There is currently a rumor of a scholarly work being undertaken that will soon be published that exposes the influence of Adam Clarke’s Bible Commentary in the Book of Mormon. Specifically the Book of Mormon Isaiah chapters. 

    Assuming that this supposed scholarly paper is successful in finding such influence, how exactly does one successfully navigate its influence in a record that claims ancient origins?  

    Wouldnt its inclusion be further evidence that the Book of Mormon is a 19th century work and not based on an actual history?

    Where did you hear this rumor?

    • Like 2
  5. 40 minutes ago, JarMan said:

    The text could have been reworked to some degree: perhaps while it was being copied. A small amount of “later” stuff doesn’t shift the date of the bulk of the work. 

    The true value of a theory (and some might say the only value of a theory) is the effect it can have on someone that doesn't already believe it.

    So tell me: what is the value of your new "reworked EmodE" theory to someone that isn't already committed to the idea that the Book of Mormon is true? You might be thinking that the more complex this theory gets, the more convincing it is because that makes it less likely for 19th century authors to have created it. But I'm not sure it works that way for someone who doesn't already believe in the supernatural nature of the creation of the book.

    • Like 1
  6. 5 hours ago, darkrats said:

    The Ensign magazine died a long time ago anyway. I remember when I started reading it back in the 1970s. It's content then was mainly doctinal and historical, with some articles many pages long. Every page was utilized, with tightly spaced wording and photos or artwork that really supported the articles. And then it changed. At first I couldn't put my finger on it, until I realized the words were now spaced almost double, allowing shorter articles to replace longer ones, without making it look like the magazine was now smaller. Then, over the years, self-help articles began to appear, replacing the historical ones and opinion pieces replaced doctrinal ones. Then came articles directed to younger members and children, even though they had their own magazines. Photos were replaced by cartoon graphics and so on. Take a look at the latest Liahona and you can see what we will be left with; pages with games and pages to color, and of course these days the obligatory two or three articles dealing with sexual matters. I used to read the Ensign magazine a lot, even subscribing long before I became a member. Now I find myself not even taking the time to download a PDF or to read it online. I know there are a lot of new generation LDS who will applaud all the changes and the ending of the Ensign. I would mourn the passing of such a great magazine as the Ensign, but as I said, it really died a long time ago.

    I agree. Reading old Ensigns (1970s - 1980s) is definitely more towards the "BYU Studies" end of the spectrum. Articles where you can actually learn stuff. Now it's almost full-Watchtower.

  7. 1 hour ago, gav said:

    Lovely, whose sock puppet are you? coming out swinging on your first post.

    I might be missing something, but it seems extremely odd for someone who has been on this forum for two weeks to accuse someone else of being a sock puppet.

     I mean, even if JasonMonroe were a sock puppet, if it were someone whose time on this forum predated August 3, how would you even know who it was?

    • Like 1
  8. 3 hours ago, Duncan said:

    One thing I found odd was at the angel Moroni raising was people weren't wearing masks but most of them won't attend church due to it being not safe enough🤔

    Assuming the "angel Moroni raising" you refer to was outdoors, outdoors is much safer than indoors. Especially if you're singing and spending a lot of time near people indoors.

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.04.20053058v1

    • Like 2
  9. 11 hours ago, OGHoosier said:

    B) I dispute "moving further away all the time". Some developments are negative, some supportive. But it's not a unified progression in one direction. 

    It might be more correct to say that apologetics is dancing with science, and science is leading.

    • Like 4
  10. 18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

    No explicit references at the ready. Just a pervasive and ambient understanding from having been reared in the Church and having served a mission myself. I’m just stating my understanding, not necessarily trying to prove anything. Must every conversation here be a debate? 
     

    What do you think has been the reason for the missionary standards of appearance up to now?

    It's something I've never heard, and it always seemed pretty obvious to me that the rules might be different for missionaries and GA's, so your question seemed extremely odd. I mean, when was the last time you even saw a GA in public wearing a short-sleeved shirt with a tie?

    • Like 1
  11. 51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

    I thought part of the thinking traditionally was that missionaries, as full time representatives of the Church, were to convey the same image in their dress and grooming as the leaders of the Church. Will the General Authorities and general officers (Relief Society, Primary, Sunday School, Young Women and Young Men) now become more casual in appearance?

    You would first need to establish that your assumption was correct. Do you have any references for that ever being given as the reason in any published statements by the Church?

    • Like 1
  12. On 4/9/2020 at 11:19 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

    What you say certainly makes sense with regard to pre-recording the audio for the remote performances and then having the singers lip-synch the performances in the outdoor settings. But they would still need a way to match their lip syncing with the pre-recorded audio. How was this accomplished? In watching the segments again, were you able to discern any loudspeakers on the premises that would have enabled them to hear the pre-recorded audio to do the lip syncing?

    Also, pre-recording the audio indoors for later lip syncing outside does not all by itself solve the problem of how to seamlessly integrate the remote performances with the main one in Salt Lake City. How did they hear the backing track to sing along to? Loudspeakers? Wouldn’t the sound from the loudspeakers have been picked up by the microphones used to record the voices? 
     

    Perhaps they had a set of headphones for each singer to hear the backing track. But that would have been cumbersome, it seems to me. 
     

    Edited to add: 

    I just re-watched the video myself. The music from the organ with backing vocals from the choir in the Salt Lake Tabernacle was integrated seamlessly underneath each of the remote choir performances. Tempo and pitch were perfectly matched throughout. In at least one instance there is a perfect audio dissolve from one remote choir to another. 
     

    The whole thing was superbly smooth. You don’t get a product that smooth without a lot of thought, preparation and attention to detail. It’s a technological marvel in addition to being aesthetically and spiritually pleasing. 

    The outside shots never show what is in front of the choirs, so they could have had big speakers playing back the pre-recorded singing, or they could have played it off an iPod.  It wouldn't matter at that point.  And since the editor could change the shots as needed, they didn't even have to do a really good job lip syncing.

    Once the recording is being done in a studio or controlled space, there are a lot more options.  Since the space is acoustically treated, they can playback the pre-recorded organ and it won't be audible when they mix the sound with the real organ recording.  Or they can give everyone headphones, but once you get beyond a certain number of people, that gets unwieldy. 

  13. I just watched it again, and it should be pointed out that the choirs aren't actually being recorded in their outdoor "performances" (there are no microphones in the long-shots, and they're on a beach in New Zealand!) 

    They obviously pre-recorded it (probably in a studio or other acoustically prepared space) and then lip-synced it in a more scenic local setting.  I'm guessing they had a backing track (organ or something simpler) for the recording.  In a studio environment, there are a lot more options.

    • Like 1
  14. 1 hour ago, Judd said:

    Why would it interfere with the recording? It’s like listening to just a drum track to a song. Yeah, you can faintly hear everything else in the background, but it gets lost in the mix.

    If it's loud enough for the singers to hear, it's loud enough for the microphone to pick up.  Although if they were all outside, there wouldn't be any reverberation so you might be able to play the original track over it and have it not be too noticeable.

    • Like 1
  15. 1 hour ago, amo said:

    Can you imagine the enormous health risk that all this entails?

     

    You are correct.  If you see "enormous health risks", they are probably imagined.

     

    In order to measure the risk, you would need to know these factors:

    What are the odds that an individual speaker has been infected with Covid-19?

    Since no speaker appears to be symptomatic, what are the odds of a speaker being infected but non-symptomatic and producing "viral droplets" to such a degree that they create a viral residue on the pulpit?

    Assuming that such a risk of contagion has been created on the pulpit or microphone, what's the risk of the virus surviving to the degree that a subsequent speaker could come in contact with the surface and transfer that contagion to their hands?

    Assuming that a speaker transferred the contagious viral droplets to their hands, what are the odds that they touch their eyes, nose or mouth in such a way that the contagion can be given host in their body before washing their hands? (Having each speaker wipe their hands with a disinfectant wipe following their talk would mitigate this risk.)

    And even accounting for their advanced ages, assuming they do transfer the contagion and get infected, what are the odds they get a major infection compared to a mild one?

    Do the math on this and let us know what the actual risk is and how "enormous" it is.

    • Like 4
  16. On 3/28/2020 at 11:52 AM, Navidad said:

    Quick question. I have been to a number of baptisms of eight year olds. It seems there is a big emphasis on getting them baptized as soon to their eighth birthday as possible, regardless of individual maturity. Are baptisms ever postponed until later if youngsters just aren't "ready?" I can't help but observe, thinking, would I have baptized that child at his or her level of maturity? Of course it doesn't matter at all what I would have done. I know that. There is a wide range of maturity at that age. 

    There was a child in a ward on my mission (in the Eastern US in the early 1990s) who waited until they were 9 because they thought they weren't ready.  Of course, the fact that they were mature enough to think that makes me think they were more ready than most 8-year-olds, but they didn't ask me.

    • Like 1
  17. On the subject of missionaries coming home, the Church appears to have solved the problem with crowds at the airport.  We had one missionary from our stake coming home from South America and his family just got a call from him when he was already at the airport ready to be picked up.  Another family in our stake has a missionary in the same country and hasn't heard when they'll be home, so they're expecting to get a phone call out of the blue any day now!

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...