Jump to content

Rajah Manchou

Members
  • Posts

    1,909
  • Joined

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

5,325 profile views

Rajah Manchou's Achievements

Veteran

Veteran (13/14)

  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • Conversation Starter
  • Week One Done

Recent Badges

1.5k

Reputation

  1. You're known to have a deep affinity to biased news sources. you are susceptible to their excesses
  2. I've been in and out of Burma the past few decades, working with groups on the border. Many of them are also in hiding some have been thrown in prison. Although I agree with you that Oaks' talk will be comfort to the members of the Church in Myanmar, what is really critical at this point is that leaders in Congress condemn the military for not respecting the results of the election. Inexplicably 14 members of the House voted against such measures. Presumably to make some political point about election fraud, thinking a vote to condemn the Myanmar military might somehow invalidate their claims of election fraud in the US. 14 House Republicans vote against a measure condemning military coup in Myanmar I don't think those 14 give a rip about the Constitution.
  3. Since we are forever doomed to eternal whataboutism, might as well remind that the CHAZ was not the first occupied zone in the Pacific Northwest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Malheur_National_Wildlife_Refuge Our church and faith is all over the wikipedia article on that one. If I recall correctly, there was even an armed Captain Moroni defending it.
  4. Dunno. Anyway, when I got to the end of Oakes’ talk I wondered if I could bring myself to vote across party lines if there was a more urgent and immediate requirement that took priority over my personal political views. I’m kinda embarrassed to admit that it’d be hard to do, and that’s a problem I should figure out.
  5. If someone I voted for had said the same thing, I probably wouldn’t know better. Party lines can be blinding. I am hopeful President Oakes’ comments on not being afraid to jump parties when it’s needed will help us all cut through that.
  6. Nah, I listened to the recording. I just wanna find 11780 votes is exactly word-for-word quote, but I’ll drop it because when we discuss these things about America the thread gets closed. I’ll stick to talking about nameless countries.
  7. Not at all hanging by a thread. I mean he only wanted to find 11,780 votes. That’s not too much to ask. Come on fellas, gimme a break.
  8. My point being it happens often, even to the most exceptional nations, even as many are in denial that it nearly happened, to us. Have to give credit to our Constitution, it hung by a thread, and got us through.
  9. Constitutions are great and all, but they only work if everyone agrees to the terms and conditions. I live abroad. We've gone through six different constitutions (all of them based on the US constitution) since I arrived because politicians always seem to find a way to tip the balances in their favor. The country next door to me has a constitution too, also based on the US Constitution, but people are now being shot dead in the streets because one party got this brilliant idea from somewhere (I dare not say where) that they could simply dispute the elections if they didn't like the results. Constitutions might be divinely inspired, but President Oakes seems to be warning us that we shouldn't lean too heavily on a document that doesn't live and adapt right along side of us.
  10. Polynesians were experts, but like you say, they learned it from their ancestors. Their ancestors were the Kumr, the same people who settled (and named) Comoro Island and a likely candidate for the source of the Australasian genetic signal in the Americas. What if we're looking at everything backwards? The Book of Mormon setting is an island in the sea named Cumorah and Hagoth's ships sailed to South America in the 1st century BC. The Book of Mormon is an account of the former inhabitants of the American Continent and the islands from whence they came.
  11. The evidence for migrations across the Pacific during the Book of Mormon time period continues to grow: "Paleo-Asian" Ancestry In The Amazon Is Widespread In South America And Looks Comparatively Recent "The wide variability and wide geographic range points to a source of this genetic component in much more recent mariners, certainly no older than the arrival of the Paleo-Eskimo ancestors of the Na-Dene in Alaska (ca. 4500 years ago), but more likely (since this ancestry is not seen anywhere outside South America) via Polynesian mariners in the last 1500 years or less (about 30 generations or less), where solid evidence already shows sign of some slight recent admixture of South Americans into Polynesian gene pools nearest to South America, and where evidence from remains of flora and fauna native to the Americas in Polynesia and native to Polynesia on the Pacific Coast has established that some limited pre-Columbian maritime trade via the Pacific Ocean had to have taken place in about that time frame. The likely epicenter from which the admixture radiates also coincides with one of the most likely loci of South American source admixture into Polynesians ca. 1200 CE." This comment is also noteworthy: "It isn't obvious why this signal isn't more obviously Polynesian. And this lack of clear Polynesian genetic affinity could point to some other explanation that is still in a time frame much more recent than the Founding era of the Americas. But whatever the explanation is, it just can't have a 14,000 years old source."
  12. No need for that. It is why I find the History of the Rechabites to be such an interesting text. It's pretty much what the Book of Mormon claims to be. But there's no confusion about its origins and no burden of geography. No anachronisms or supernatural origins. It's just simply Another Testament of Jesus Christ, and it doesn't matter if its history or fiction. It does what its meant to do either way.
  13. I have no problem with you not dialoguing with me. But this is the second time you've accused me of lying, to get me banned, and then run away without an apology when its revealed you were wrong to accuse me. If you don't want to discuss with me, then simply don't discuss with me. No need to stir drama up and call in the mods. Overreaction.
  14. If I am JarMan then those pages and pages of me arguing with myself about whether or not Eric Garner was killed by a chokehold was an epic display of schizophrenia. 😁
×
×
  • Create New...