Rosanne Barr was a Mormon... Sometimes.

[JAHS]

Roseanne Barr talks about ‘Mormons’ and the ‘mysteries of history’ with Tucker Carlson

"Barr grew up in Salt Lake City, Utah, in a Jewish family. She once explained her childhood faith by saying, “Friday, Saturday, and Sunday morning I was a Jew; Sunday afternoon, Tuesday afternoon, and Wednesday afternoon we were Mormons,”

I wonder how common something like this is in Utah in families of different faiths.

They also talked about mounds in North American and how it relates to the Book of Mormon:

"On a recent Roseanne Barr podcast, Tucker Carlson and Roseanne Barr discussed ancient “mounds” in Missouri, and Carlson referred to Latter-day Saint beliefs about ancient America, saying, “I’ve certainly spent a lot of my life making fun of that, but I’m gonna stop.”

The two began discussing subjects in history that still mystify some scholars. Carlson continued, “Here in North America, there are certain archeological ruins, say in the state of Missouri, that were not built by the descendants of the current Native American Indians, we know that. They are a mile long. A mile long. In Missouri now.”

He continued: “Like I’ve never heard any of this in schools, it’s all totally real. It’s on Wikipedia.”

Barr asked, “What does it look like?” 

“It’s a mound,” Carlson explained. “You know, 50 feet high or something — I’m guessing on that. So there is an overwhelming, well there’s proof, that there were massive population centers in North America long before 1492. "

[pogi]

19 hours ago, JAHS said:

 “Here in North America, there are certain archeological ruins, say in the state of Missouri, that were not built by the descendants of the current Native American Indians, we know that. They are a mile long. A mile long. In Missouri now.”

“Descendants”? No.  Ancestors? Yes.

[The Nehor]

23 hours ago, JAHS said:

He continued: “Like I’ve never heard any of this in schools, it’s all totally real. It’s on Wikipedia.”

Wait, what?

23 hours ago, JAHS said:

“It’s a mound,” Carlson explained. “You know, 50 feet high or something — I’m guessing on that. So there is an overwhelming, well there’s proof, that there were massive population centers in North America long before 1492. "

Yeah, and Tucker had a guess on his show early this year claiming they were created by another group that ‘bear no resemblance to the Native Americans’ which is another of Tucker’s great contributions to baseless pseudohistory.

[Stargazer]

4 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Wait, what?

Yeah, and Tucker had a guess on his show early this year claiming they were created by another group that ‘bear no resemblance to the Native Americans’ which is another of Tucker’s great contributions to baseless pseudohistory.

I'm pretty sure he's referring to the Cahokia Mounds, which is an enormous complex of mounds and a huge city that apparently abandoned by around 1350. Its population at its peak isn't really known, but some estimates range as high as 40,000. 

As for Tucker's claim that it bears no resemblance to any known Native American group, he's not necessarily wrong. Who built it, lived and worked in it? From what I've read nobody knows much about them. It appears from some research that Cahokia was a bit of a melting pot in its later stages. Meaning that there may have been elements of many other cultures in the mix. Whoever they were, in some periods they appear to have practiced human sacrifice. And were perhaps instrumental in developing and/or promulgating the famous vegetable trio of corn, beans, and squash.

[Stargazer]

On 12/24/2023 at 8:01 PM, The Nehor said:

Yeah, and Tucker had a guess on his show early this year claiming they were created by another group that ‘bear no resemblance to the Native Americans’ which is another of Tucker’s great contributions to baseless pseudohistory.

And I think you're allowing your political proclivities to govern how you receive information. One shouldn't poison the well before one drinks out of it. Sometimes, even people one disagrees with politically say things that are true. I have to watch that one myself. Keeping an open mind can be a full-time job, but it has its rewards.

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, Stargazer said:

And I think you're allowing your political proclivities to govern how you receive information. One shouldn't poison the well before one drinks out of it. Sometimes, even people one disagrees with politically say things that are true. I have to watch that one myself. Keeping an open mind can be a full-time job, but it has its rewards.

Yeah, but once I find that someone’s statements have no real correlation with reality it is better to just go to another source rather than wasting time trying to figure out if some part of what they said is actually factual. This seems to me like listening carefully to Satan just in case he accidentally drops something helpful.

[Calm]

2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, but once I find that someone’s statements have no real correlation with reality it is better to just go to another source rather than wasting time trying to figure out if some part of what they said is actually factual. This seems to me like listening carefully to Satan just in case he accidentally drops something helpful.

If it’s original thought or analysis, then it might be worthwhile to examine someone’s work even if their percentage of accuracy, etc was low, but if it just discussing the work of others, doesn’t contain anything new, then why not go to the actual researchers to get their material?