The Nehor
-
Posts
32,408 -
Joined
Posts posted by The Nehor
-
-
10 minutes ago, teddyaware said:
How can you conduct yourself so frivolously on this board when there are so many healthy minor children who need to be mutilated?
Nice to see someone speaking out about circumcision and assigning gender to intersex infants when they definitely cannot consent.
2 -
3 hours ago, Zosimus said:
I'm no Modi fan, but Indian archeologists have been making these claims for decades
Yeah, but the prime minister is not usually going on pilgrimages to sites when overenthusiastic people declare they have found some fabled site.
Still better than a lot of what Modi is doing. Compared to massacring muslims, destroying mosques, and declaring yourself a priest and blessing a new temple built where the mosque once stood this is relatively harmless.
0 -
4 minutes ago, Doctor Steuss said:
One part that stood out to me immediately was this:
Because, quite frankly, we do have quite a few studies showing a majority of positive long-term outcomes of gender affirming care, from several different countries. IIRC, there was even a metanalysis done about 3 years ago on several of the long-term outcome studies. It seemed this statement could only come from someone who was ignorant, or dishonest. Turns out, it's neither. It's just transphobic media propaganda massaging the message. The actual statement which the "key finding" blurb is taken from and the media misrepresents by removing context is specifically limited to only people who have accessed GIDS (ref: page 33 of the Final Report).
This.
Itching ears and all that.
0 -
On 4/16/2024 at 4:58 PM, Stargazer said:
Up until 2 years ago I was our stake clerk. I made sure to watch the financials of every ward, especially their fast offerings. The rules say that there has to be a permission document from the stake president if a bishop or his family get FO support. In fact, we did have one bishop who regularly did get such. He had been in a good deal of financial stress for quite some time, and I made sure the stake president was monitoring this.
Yeah, this is true but if you are trying to game the system you don’t make the check out to the Bishop or one of his family. You use it to buy something from a business that the BIshop owns or has a stake in that most people don’t know about. Basically embezzlement and money laundering rolled into one.
0 -
3 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:
The Indian government sure would. I suspect they are lying. The Prime Minister is a Hindu Nationalist who is using the Hindu religion to stir up his people against Muslims and other religious minorities. He is a fascist. Reinforcing the idea of a glorious past is a key element of fascism. Nazi archaeologists made several “discoveries” about the glorious past history of the German people.
It is kind of strange that they pulled all the archaeologists studying the supposed site of Dwarka out and now none of them are talking about the site. Then the prime minister does a kind of pilgrimage to the supposed site.
A suspicious person might suspect that there is no evidence Dwarka is there at all and Modi is using this discovery as religious propaganda.
0 -
5 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:
All the scientist thought that ancient Dwarka was a myth... Until they found it.
Except they almost certainly didn’t.
0 -
15 hours ago, PacMan said:
When such mainstream scientific articles promulgate those very stories, absolutely.
That's called journalism.
Something your anti-conspiracy conspiracy website clearly knows nothing about.Journalism would also involve following up on those initial articles if there was anything to substantiate anything.
*crickets*
Yeah.
It is a fantasy. The experts all think it is a fantasy. The only people who believe it are those who want it to be Atlantis and you say they are being ridiculous which leaves just you who want it to be a lost Nephite city when it is too far down to be a Nephite city unless there was a rare tectonic sinking event. It would have to be 50,000 years old or more to have sunk by normal means and there is no known civilization that old that could build the buildings that are supposed to make up this “city”. If it was a sinking event that would almost certainly have knocked down any of the buildings.
And all this conjecture is based on some overhead sonar readings we don’t have and the one side sonar picture from a robotic submersible that I posted. That is it. That doesn’t show evidence of buildings. No one has taken pictures of this supposed city. No diver has seen it. No video has recorded it. Do you not realize how tenuous this whole thing is?
0 -
17 hours ago, Tacenda said:
I was about to mention that Nehor was there, he would know.
The investments that were kept in my name was simply being kept as a rainy day fund to maintain the ability to handle our church in a time of crisis. Rumors that Lamanite kings contributed to said fund are greatly exaggerated and they had no say in the day to day operations of my church.
1 -
1 hour ago, PacMan said:
A lot of unsubstantiated stuff in that article. Frankly, I'm more inclined to believe the various outlets, including the National Geographic, than a conspiracy anti-conspiracy website happy to dunk on a new Atlantis theory (which makes no sense). And while I don't know why NG didn't go through with the expedition (if it's true they actually planned one, which itself is unsubstantiated), it's pretty typical for journalistic organizations to offer corrections when corrections are needed. And thus far, I'm aware of none.
There wasn’t a correction because there was nothing wrong in the article. They quoted someone saying there was possibly a city there. If they had reported that there was a city there a correction might have been required.
I find it hilarious that you are complaining about the supposed shoddiness of my source after posting pictures that didn’t even come from the expedition. Now that something disagrees with your just as loony as Atlantis theory you suddenly get skeptical?
Do you expect mainstream scientific articles to spend time and money refuting stuff that only the alt-history folk believe in? Why did nothing happen with this if it was credible? Finding this would put the people exploring it on the academic map. They wouldn’t be fighting some mythical scientific thought police that spends time debunking cool things to avoid rocking the boat. If it were credible people would be champing at the bit to look into it. It isn’t so they aren’t.
0 -
I have heard that Salt Lake or some automated system in Salt Lake is notifying Stake Presidents if a Bishop is being kept in “too long”. Three years does seem a bit short but I think spreading the load in general is a good idea.
3 -
8 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:
They were reaffirming their commitment to the covenant made alive through the Atonement of Jesus:
1 And now I speak concerning baptism. Behold, elders, priests, and teachers were baptized; and they were not baptized save they brought forth fruit meet that they were worthy of it. (Moroni 6)
*There are also examples in Church history of "reformations" where the Saints rededicated themselves to the Covenant through rebaptism. I think it happened twice under Brigham.
It also wasn’t always a general thing. Sometimes people would be rebaptized before marriage or before other big life events or just as part of a personal rededication. Some restorationist offshoots still do rebaptisms.
2 -
On 4/15/2024 at 1:42 PM, pogi said:
The other 12% will be dead soon from "natural causes" after a short imprisonment...so they don't count.
Accidental self-defenestration is a chronic problem in Russia.
1 -
22 hours ago, manol said:
Ha! Imo that's a good name for it!
There are several names for it but most of them would be censored here and probably rightly so. I picked the palatable one.
1 -
15 hours ago, PacMan said:
Of course there is. Namely, that the scientist said they went back with sonar and did a second scan. Further, if this was all just made up, then the Washington Post and National Geographic (2002) have some real editorial problems. Because they also published stories about these findings.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/10/10/in-cuban-depths-atlantis-or-anomaly/96b5cd79-9eb8-4fc7-8f18-8a3b3e9b4037/
Your arguments to the contrary are completely unsupported.No, they had sonar the first time. They were looking for ship wrecks. What they did the second time was send down a device to do a side scan. That is the image I posted.
Then the discoverers raised money for a third expedition which failed because the submersible failed to be able to get pictures or collect data. Since that was the whole point of the expedition this is a pretty big failure. No backup system? No one fixed it? A suspicious person would wonder if the expedition even happened and maybe it was all a grift. They briefly tried to raise funds for a fourth expedition but this time no one was biting. I don’t blame them.
Some newspapers did pick up the story at first. Their report was accurate. They reported that the discoverers did make some rather strong claims but didn’t endorse them as correct.
Now the only people taking this seriously are the “Ancient Aliens” people and those who want to believe it is part of Atlantis.
Here is an old blog from 2012 discussing this that mostly debunks ‘woo woo’ bad archaeology: https://badarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/10/28/an-underwater-city-west-of-cuba/
1 -
2 hours ago, PacMan said:
Sorry, but I don't remotely understand your ipse dixit. The sonar was taken on a subsequent expedition after initial findings. But why that matters, you tell me.
https://www.news.co.cr/lost-city-found-beneath-cuban-waters/15221/
Said differently, I don't understand the purpose of your response.I am saying there probably is no underwater city.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_underwater_formation
Edit: This is the image from the original story.
There is no reason to believe that the later images promulgated are anything other than extrapolations from that. It is also possible that they are entirely made up.
1 -
3 minutes ago, ZealouslyStriving said:
We seem to have been kindly disposed towards Muslims from the beginning:
https://journalofdiscourses.com/3/7
This is mostly just anti-Catholicism where he props up Islam as the lesser of two evils. Also the idea that slaves to Islamic masters just had to convert and they would get full citizenship? Yeah……no. Sounds like he just read some basic stuff about Islam and assumed it was generally true somehow.
Also considering Islam as the lesser of two evils is not really being kindly disposed.
1 -
2 hours ago, PacMan said:
More interesting, is that back in the early 2000s, a group commissioned by the Cuban government was scanning for sunken ships when they came upon a rather interesting find.
https://www.tampabay.com/archive/2002/11/17/underwater-world-man-s-doing-or-nature-s/
This complex is located just off the Western coast of Cuba.
It is unlikely this city even exists.
Also those pictures of the underwater city are not from the original expedition. This tale has grown in the telling.
0 -
The narrow neck is too small to be the site of the Panama canal.
0 -
13 minutes ago, manol said:
This makes sense to me.
So... what happens when there is no such thing as time, such that time spent with one person does not take away from time that can be spent with another? My understanding (based on numerous near-death experience accounts) is that time as we know it here does not exist (at least not as a limitation) on the "other side".
I speculate that the polyamorous community is ahead of the rest of us in your openness to "love has no limits", and I hope and expect that limitations imposed by time and locality will some day no longer be in play.
That is a usual defense of plural marriage in the eternities. I have used it myself. When you can inherently know and feel the love of someone else jealousy probably isn't a huge issue. It is not a good defense of plural marriage in mortality.
If you tried to structure something similar to LDS plural marriage the polyamorous community would call it "harem building" and the idea that all these women should basically raise children with less help from the father would be seen as lunacy. In general people in polyamorous relationships only have children with one partner if they have children at all. Also it is pretty generally accepted that other than small amounts of time to maintain other preexisting relationships for the first few years of a child's life you shouldn't expect to have time to start new relationships and your other partners have to accept that you will have less time for them.
It is also worth noting that the polyamory they put on trashy shows is not the norm. Those are almost always triads and quads (or bigger) and are a very hard form of polyamory. These setups involve three or more people all simultaneously in a relationship with everyone else in the group. A triad is three dyad relationships plus the group relationship. The odds of one relationship thriving on its own are decent. When you need three relationships to go well for your relationship structure to work and you aren't even a part of one of those relationships the odds of success plummet. The usual way these form is due to a hetero couple adding a woman (or very rarely a man) with the intent for the couple to date the new (usually bisexual) woman (sometimes called a unicorn or a third though the latter is considered dehumanizing, sometimes called a dragon if it is a man). This works even less well than most triads for all sorts of reasons.
The problem with plural marriage is that it shares a lot in common with unicorn hunting. It is different in that the women don't usually share a sexual relationship but it is still a lot of relationships to manage and maintain. Plural marriage can sometimes mitigate this by having separate households but that means the man has to split his time. Now imagine that it is a man and his three wives all living together. Each person has three adult relationships to maintain, at least one of them probably sexual/romantic. There are six one on one relationships to maintain. If even one goes bad living in that house could become a complete hell. Note that this applies even if your three relationships are going relatively well.
That is also why people into polyamory generally tell you NOT to live with more than one partner unless the relationships are all in great shape and have lasted a long time (at least past the New Relationship Energy or honeymoon phase).
2 -
On 4/13/2024 at 9:39 AM, bluebell said:
How would dividing your time between two women give you more time with one?
Polyamory lesson #1: Love has no limits. Time to express that love is limited.
2 -
2 hours ago, Nofear said:
This is required training for bishoprics to regularly review. Financial dishonesty is actually a pretty quick way to have one's membership withdrawn. It probably still happens once in awhile but mechanisms are in place to identify and correct them.
I know, I’m a clerk. I get to do the audits.
There are cases of embezzlement and fraud but they are pretty rare. If you are smart about it you can sometimes get away with it.
The most common method is to siphon Fast Offering funds to entities that somehow benefit the Bishop or whomever or someone in their family. To pull off fraud you usually need both the Bishop and the clerk to be ‘in on it’.
1 -
3 hours ago, Calm said:
I never connected garments with that, not sure why you would think LDS would since we don’t really do original sin. Is there some version I have missed?
It was meant as a morbid joke.
0 -
I would trust them more if just once the Church financial report or audit announcers revealed corruption or embezzlement or something.
0 -
7 minutes ago, Rain said:
There has been a sister who spoke to the man in charge and his female assistant about many concerns. She spoke about it on the podcast of At Last She Said It episodes 138 and 139.
One of the things asked about was colored garments like military personel are able to have. He gave her a definite no on that. Bright color is one of the things that Days for Girls requires in the period packs volunteers make. Part of the reason they are dark is many of those girls need to wash by hand and don't have the cleaners that are available to many of us. So while periods affect women with white garments they affect women in third world countries even more. If there can be an exception for military I don't understand why there can't be for women on periods.
If you do that then how will women be constantly reminded of original sin….or something?
0
How the Book of Mormon Came to Pass
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by The Nehor
It is the idea that the writings of Athanasius Kircher, the 17th century Jesuit polymath scientist was a source for Spaulding and Rigdon and John Smith (Joseph Smith’s third cousin iirc) which led to the Book of Mormon. Supposedly this came via Dartmouth College. I have heard the theory that Joseph Smith was ‘secretly’ educated at Dartmouth too.
Kircher thought he was translating hieroglyphs back then. He was wrong. I think this is somehow tied to the Book of Abraham or something. I didn’t focus much on the details and only read summaries.
Edited to add: One of the bullseyes i have seen touted is that Ramah was a high place in something Kircher wrote or translated and that there is a hill called Ramah in the Book of Mormon. Of course there is also a city called Ramah in the Bible which seems a more likely source.