Leaderboard

Hi, Gecko, and welcome. I am not a hobbyist historian, so my knowledge of history is limited to an unimpressive general education and whatever I might Google up. But I'm happy to try to help. And welcome home from your mission! I hope it was an ennobling experience for you. Obviously, I can't speak for the Church, but I'll offer whatever insights I can. The first insight is this: Such questions should not ruin your life. As you taught on your mission, a testimony is a revelation from God to your spirit and your mind and/or heart. If your testimony is firm and is the foundation of your faith, you begin to become unshakeable. Such questions might be a curiosity to you, but they should not threaten that foundation, and certainly should not ruin your life. So before you worry too deeply about these questions regarding Jews, I would suggest that you reestablish your own foundation. If you're investigating these questions in a panic and with a feeling that your life is in the process of ruination, you will find it difficult or impossible to be guided by the Spirit. My reasoning is thus: Solomon's Temple was recognized as a temple and as a holy edifice even when it was desecrated. A "temple" is from the Latin word templum, which means "consecrated space". What makes a space consecrated or hallowed? In the Church, we would say that God does so, but normal usage of the word allows people to simply agree that a place is hallowed, even without a formal Priesthood ordinance or prayer. So in this sense, I would say that, yes, the Jews could certainly build a temple to the Lord. The other side of the coin is that a temple that is hallowed by God will certainly, undoubtedly be constructed under the auspices of God's kingdom (the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) and will be dedicated and consecrated by the power of the Lord's Priesthood, which does not exist among men outside the kingdom of God. So to have a working, functional temple in any real sense (that is, whether or not it e.g. offers the endowment or proxy work for the dead) requires the involvement of the Church. So depending on what must take place at what time, the answer could be either way. Cursed by whom? By men? Absolutely. The Jews have been cursed and hated for literally thousands of years. Or do you mean a divine curse? No, I disbelieve that Jews as a group have been cursed by God. On the contrary, they are a covenant people. To the extent that the Jewish nation (meaning the people of the world called Jews, not necessarily the modern state of Israel) may not have kept its covenants with God, it's possible that they have suffered, and perhaps continue to suffer, the effects of a broken covenant. But the idea that God has somehow ordained the Jews to be cast out and persecuted through the ages? No way. I don't believe that for a moment. The historic persecution of the Jews is evidence that sinful, fallen mankind acts in a sinful and fallen way. It can be seen as evidence that those who follow Satan are taught to vilify and reject the people and the things of God. I think it's a grave error to suppose that the Jews are suffering because they are cursed by God or did such evil things two thousand years ago. It seems like that because that is how many of those who hate Jews have framed the issue. The examples you give are false or out of context. For example, Pornhub is owned by Mindgeek, the owners of many pornography websites. Mindgeek (now called Aylo) is not owned by a rabbi. It was created by a German businessman named Fabian Thylmann, who as far as I can tell is not Jewish. OnlyFans is owned by Leonid Radvinsky, a Ukrainian with a name that could possibly be Jewish, but I can't find evidence that he is Jewish. In any case, Radvinsky has publicly denied that he either made or pledged the supposed $11 million donation to AIPAC. Jews are vastly overrepresented in many areas of creativity and high intelligence, in Hollywood and in professions such as law and medicine. This can be explained by a wide variety of social and historical factors, but to my mind it is best explained by a biological factor: Jews as a group are more intelligent than other people. Not just a little bit more intelligent, either. Ashkenazi Jews, those found in eastern Europe, have been shown to test a full 15 IQ points—one standard deviation—above the population at large in Europe and the US. That is, where the average IQ is set at 100, Ashkenazi Jews test on average at 115. This is an enormous difference. It means that the average Jewish school pupil is as smart as the "smart people" in a given class. That means that: About half of a Jewish population will test in the top 15% of worldwide intelligence. Half. In the top 15%. Something over two-sevenths of Jews will test in the top 2% of worldwide intelligence. Top 2% of achievers? That group will include 15% of all Jews. Find the one-in-a-thousand people, those whose IQs test at or above 99.9% of everyone else. Call this group the One-In-A-Thousanders. Of a random group of a thousand people (non-Jews), on average only ONE will be in this group. Now, take a random group of a thousand Jews. How many do you suppose will be in the One-In-A-Thousander group? Answer: On average, about 23 Jews in that group of 1000. Is it any wonder that Jews are now (and historically have always been) very heavily overrepresented in positions requiring high intelligence and high achievement? I have a son that attended a fancy-pants, big-time law school. About half of his professors were Jewish. This is not a coincidence. Nor is it coincidence that among the famous physicists of the 20th century (surely the most amazing century of all recorded history for brilliant physicists), Of sixteen outstanding physicists in the 20th century that I can think of off the top of my head, ten were Jewish: Einstein, Feynman, Oppenheimer, Landau, Bethe, Wigner, von Neumann, Bohr, Pauli, and Gell-Mann. That's simply mind-boggling. I don't know what else to call it. The Jews are the ancient covenant people of God. They are a people of singular and amazing ability. Those who have such gifts can use those gifts for great good or for great evil, so we should not be surprised to find such people well represented on both sides of the fence. But I urge you to divest yourself of feelings of hatred or rage or anger toward Jews. Whatever certain individuals may or may not do, the Jewish people as a group do not merit your dislike. They have suffered from the hatred of others and from the evils arising from that hatred for literally millennia. Remember, Jesus was a Jew. So were literally all of His disciples during His mortal ministry. These are the historic people of God, people of the covenant, the people with whom we are adopted in to the family of God. Not sure why your questions generated such antipathy among so many here, most of whom are normally quite rational and kind in their dealings with others. I guess perceived anti-Semitism really rubs some people the wrong way. In any case, I hope my words were of some use to you. And again, welcome!

You're welcome! Get out! And get away from these people. Maybe you can be a positive influence on them at some point in the future, but right now, they're the ones doing the influencing. You cannot help others until you yourself are on a firm footing. You know what to do, so be brave and humble, and do it! You're welcome. We all struggle with something. You've been watching too much of the wrong media / videos / podcasts / whatevers without viewing the other side. A huge percentage of the content of the internet isn't news or information - it's extremist propaganda - on all sides. If someone out there is reporting objectively on anything, I haven't found them. Candace Owens may not be the most objective person to believe on this matter. Go watch some Douglas Murray to get another view. (Or just quit watching this stuff and hanging out with people who eat it up.) I'm inviting you to read the chapter headings for Alma 1-3, and then to read all of Alma 4. The culture and church are becoming corrupted. Note what Alma does in response to the corruption around him. Ponder and pray about that for a while. Seriously, Brother Gecko, take yourself out of this environment and strengthen your Spirit for a while.

One other point I’ll mention before undertaking a sizable relocation. My dad once told me the story of an old man who sat along a major highway back in the day. A traveler stopped and said, “Hey feller, I’m headed to that town up ahead and wonder if you can tell me what the people there are like?” ”Well,” says the old timer, “why don’t you tell what the people are like where you came from?” The traveler replied, “Those people?! Why they are some of the meanest people you’ll ever meet! Most of them need a good punch in the face and the rest also deserve but you haven’t found out why yet. They’ll talk behind your back, savage your reputation, separate you from your friends, and leave you wondering if you have any sanity left. I wish a pox on the whole bunch of thieving, lying, cheating slobs!” ”I’m sorry to tell you,” the old man started, “but you’ll find a lot of people like that where you’re headed.” The traveler swore under his breath and moved on. A few hours later another traveler headed to the same town stopped by the old timer. “Hey feller, I’m headed to that town up ahead and wonder if you can tell me what the people there are like?” ”Well,” says the old timer, “why don’t you tell what the people are like where you came from?” The traveler replied, “Those are some of the finest people you’ll ever know. They’re hospitable to strangers and even more generous with friends. They’ll cry with you, celebrate with you, root for you, and remind you there’s better days ahead. I’m almost sorry I left.” ”You’ll be happy to hear,” the old man started, “that you’ll find a lot of people like that where you’re headed.”

1. Whatever temple activity is done, and how, must be in concert with the First Presidency and under the auspices of the restored keys. Conversion is required for accomplishing anything with faith in Christ, and this is the aim of all the prophecies. 2. The Jews are treated as prophesied, in some ways well and other ways badly. 3. I would suggest reading books that address these very questions and several other issues from a Jewish person’s perspective, for example, “Uncomfortable Conversations with a Jew,” by Emmanuel Acho and Noa Tishby. The bibliography may be more helpful than the book itself because it provides scholarly research into these topics, but it is a good primer on these subjects.

Dude's frontal lobe isn't even done developing. Maybe he's being ridiculous, maybe he's not. We don't know enough yet. You people are as brutal and unforgiving as the LGBTQ+ mob attacking the Southern Baptists. In the absence of sufficient information you've decided he's a rabid anti-Semite. In the absence of sufficient information I'm willing to believe maybe he's just a confused kid. Do you people really think that attacking this kid is going to convince him of anything (other than maybe that this is a hateful place)? Do you think he'll give you a chance to reason with him and help him understand that he is indeed doing the ridiculous thing that LDSGator demonstrated? And does all that seem Christlike to you? What if OP really is a rabid anti-Semite? You're certainly not helping him to back off that position. How many scriptures and General Conference talks do I need to quote before you catch on that no matter how awful anti-Semitism is, responding to this kid with unfounded attacks, assuming the worst of him, is not the way to help him or anyone else?

Let's be fair, Carb. He said the questions are ruining his life. Obviously Presumably, in searching for answers to his questions, he has fallen into the anti-Semitism rabbit hole. Unjust, dude, unjust. Do you like it when someone tells you what you're thinking? Or that you're a liar? We have no just grounds for making such claims against @Gecko45. Give the guy a chance. Yes (or has fallen for other people's cherry picking). You cannot know this. Yes. To all of us. PS: No wonder we have so many one-hit wonders on these forums.

Yeah, and how many of you world travelers ended up in Idaho? Again, I've never heard such a story, and would like to hear more.

I spend more time than I should reflecting on my life and ruing certain choices and actions. If only I had done this instead of that, if only I had focused on a certain area instead of allowing my attention to be scattered, if only I had learned such-and-such a lesson in my youth, then things would likely have been oh so much better. I need to be reminded, often, that our lives are a gift from God, given exactly so that we can learn such lessons. It is said that a wise man learns from the experience of others, but we all learn from our own experiences. Part of the gift of life is that we are given space to err, to sin, and to repent, and thus learn by our own experience to distinguish between good and evil, to prize the sweet and reject the bitter. I sense much of this same sort of regret and even despair in what you write. Take heart, brother. Each of us has been handicapped by the actions of others, and not one of us has lived up to his or her potential. I cling to the belief that if we humble ourselves before God and give honest effort, never letting go of the iron rod, we will be justified in the last day by the blood of our Savior and will find greater joy than we can presently imagine. I actually just gave a talk in my new ward a couple of weeks ago based on President Benson's seminal 1989 General Conference address "Beware of Pride". It was a good experience for me.

Our view of WWII as a black-and-white affair with the Nazis playing the heavies and the Allies wearing the white hats is, to say the least, naive. There was immense profit-taking during WWII, and I mean on the Allied side. The cost of the two great European-centered wars of the 20th century was the atheization of Europe, which had already taken definite steps toward such in the 19th century. WWI and WWII sealed the deal, especially in France and Germany, but really throughout Europe. Religion in general and Catholicism specifically did not just go away, of course. But today, we have three generations of Europeans raised, in effect and for the most part, without religion. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine whether Europe and the world at large are better off for this. But for the record, allowing millions of African immigrants into Europe was not what has turned much of Europe into a dumpster fire. I met many African immigrants during my mission to Italy in '83-'84, and most of them were humble, sincere people just trying to figure out how to get by. It's more complex than this, of course, but simply laying the blame for Europe's many woes at the feet of African immigrants is wrong.

I think zil's explanation is the obvious one. Given the scripture-inspired view that only Noah and his family survived the flood, and every other person on earth was killed off, it appears to be the only explanation. But the original verse clearly says "found among". That would literally be like saying, "A remnant of my posterity shall always be found among my descendants." It's trivially true, and a weird, seemingly useless thing to say. I can think of two reasonable possibilities, which are not mutually exclusive (that is, both could be true simultaneously). The "remnant" does not refer to genetic lineage, but to some other trait, such as spiritual perceptiveness or willingness to covenant with God. Despite contrary interpretations of holy writ, Noah's family were not the only human beings to survive Noah's flood—which clearly implies that Noah's flood was not a worldwide phenomenon. I suspect that most Latter-day Saints who do not accept zil's explanation will tend toward the first view. Those who do not see Noah's flood as "universal", i.e. global, will probably mostly default to the second view, or some combination of the two. The scriptures do not say that Noah and his family were the only survivors on the entire planet of a global flood; that is a specific scriptural interpretation. So the second explanation is a possibility without denying any scriptural doctrine, though it certainly runs against many generations of traditional interpretation.

I grew up in a family of high achievers. My father was a workaholic. My oldest brother is a genius with a photographic memory. I am the least achiever of my family; I thought every family was like mine but discovered that my family was extremely rare. In most families I would be considered an overachiever. There were a few things I learned that I am thinking I ought to pass on. If something is not worth doing well – it is not worth doing. It is better to do a few things extremely well than to do a mountain of things poorly. Consider the scripture Mosiah 4:27 My last suggestion is that at the beginning of each day – go in prayer before your G-d present a detailed plan to accomplish all you need to do and how you plan to accomplish everything. Ask for His help and assistance. At the end of each day go again to your G-d in prayer with a detailed report of what you did. If something was undone – present it. If something was not done well – report it and explain why. For all the things that were completed – explain it and how you felt you did (good, well, okay, barely or poorly). As you do this G-d will inspire you to prioritize your next day. It may happen that there are days that you need to prioritize your work, other days your church callings, other days your family and some days things for you. We see such prioritizing of things in the Book of Mormon. There may be times of war where you do not even see your family for extended periods, even with your family your single highest priority. I believe it is important to not go through life alone. Consult often with your wife and keep her in the loop. Shair your sacrifices, efforts, dreams and accomplishments together. If you feel so, consult with your priesthood leaders (ministers, quorum members, quorum leaders, bishop and perhaps even Stake leaders.) The Traveler

Gecko also said: So, he has questions. He's learned things about the behaviors of specific Jews, and other things from history (at least some of which seem dubious). These questions and the answers he's found (presumably outside the Church) are "ruining" his life. That is not the same as saying, "Jews are ruining my life."

To be fair to Carb, Gecko said: I genuinely think these things I now know/see are ruining my life. He didn't say the questions are ruining his life but what he knows is.

@Gecko45, you have come to the right place. I am of pure European Jewish descent and a faithful member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. You've descended down a rabbit hole that goes into a very dark place, and I hope you can extricate yourself. My ancestors are among the generations of Jews who have suffered and died because of these beliefs. First, let's talk about "Jews." Ethnically, Jews are the descendants of people who lived in Judea after the 10 tribes living in the ancient northern kingdom of Israel were carried away into Assyria. If you are an Ephraimite, then you are still descended from a brother of Judah, Joseph. Most of the inhabitants of Judea were of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin (the smallest tribe), and Levi (temple servants). People nowadays with last names like Cohen, Kahn, and the like have some background in the tribe of Levi, for example. Lehi, however, would have been considered Jewish because he was from Judea. The Book of Mormon centers the guilt for Christ's death on the Jews at Jerusalem (2 Nephi 10:5), exonerating all other Jews. At the time, there were a HUGE number of Jews in the diaspora, including about 1 million in the Egyptian/Greek city of Alexandria, Egypt. That said, the world has considered all Jews as Christ-killers, and there lies the central problem for Jews to be safe. The Lord has seen fit to allow pogroms and mass killing of Jews through the centuries, but He also judges the world in part by their treatment of Jews. Jewishness has always been judged as an ethnicity and not just a religion. When this happens (as you are doing), it condemns all Jews and people of Jewish descent by race, which is anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism has all sorts of excuses for hatred of the Jews, many of which you have named. There are lots more, causing anti-Semitism in both the leftist and rightist movements in the US. Hitler actually conducted a census with 4 columns (among others) for identifying grandparents as Jewish or not. One Jewish grandparent qualified a person for the death camps. Interestingly, coming censuses in the US require all Americans of Jewish descent to no longer list themselves as white. I have always been White on various documents all my life, but now (even though I'm very fair-skinned), I must list my ethnicity/race as MENA (Middle East/North Africa). This change seems to justify Zionism and exonerate Jews of being invaders of their own ancient land, but I can't see any good in it. Although descendants of Jacob/Israel originated in the Holy Land, more recent locations have separated them into 3 ethnic groups--Ashkenazi (European), Sephardi (ejected from Spain), and Mizrachi (Middle Eastern Jews). Another interesting thing is that America's standard list of ethnicities contains no Jewish groups at all. As a religion, Judaism is not at all monolithic. The main groups are Ultra-Orthodox, Orthodox, Conservative, Reformed, and Humanistic Jews, from most religious to least. Two main things might increase your understanding. 1) The Law of Moses' purpose was to separate Israel from pagan people to keep them pure. This has isolated Jews (sometimes by choice) into their own separated villages and neighborhoods, especially because of the law to walk fewer than 1,000 steps to reach a synagogue. This separateness has caused rumors and suspicions to rage at various times among non-Jews. The Law of Moses also forbade Jews from entering certain professions but also approved of certain professions abhorred by Orthodox Christians (such as physiology and banking). These things have increased anti-Semitism. 2) There is very little information in the Tanakh (Old Testament) about an afterlife. Because of this, Jews focus very hard on mortality and improving the mortal experience. Whereas a Christian might concern himself about spending eternity in hell if he runs a porn site, there is no such concern in Judaism. It's also very easy to be an agnostic or atheistic Jew (like my father, who was a very moral, kind astrophysicist) because you are still a traditional or ethnic Jew.

I have an admittedly weird fascination with LLMs in general and ChatGPT in particular. I fear I might come across as pedantic and boring, yes, in general, but specifically on this topic. But maybe others will enjoy sharing ChatGPT or other LLM exchanges. Here's one from this morning, with an apparent moral that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, a process is just a process, and a coincidence is just a coincidence. ******************************** Consider the following words that contain the "itch" letter combination, apparently exceedingly common in English words, and seeming to constitute a suffix of sorts: itch, bitch, ditch, glitch, hitch, pitch, stitch, witch. Also consider these other "itch"-related or -adjacent words: aitch (or haitch in some parts of Britain), a spelling of the phonetic pronunciation of the name of the letter H; britch, the back-constructed singular of the plural "britches", a variation on "breeches"; filch; kitsch; the name Mitch, short for Mitchell; niche (pronounced "neesh"); stretch and etch and other "etch" words. What's up with "itch"? It seems a strange construction, and even looks kind of weird, yet it's all over the place. What is/are its etymology/ies? ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The "itch" letter combination is indeed curious. It appears in several English words, but its origins are more varied than one might expect. Here's a breakdown of its etymology and usage across different words. 1. "itch" (as a word and suffix) Etymology: The word itch comes from Old English gycce (noun) and gyccean (verb), related to Middle Low German jukken and Old Norse juka, all of which refer to the sensation of itching or scratching. It is ultimately of Germanic origin. Usage: In words like itch, bitch, ditch, hitch, pitch, stitch, and witch, the "-itch" is not actually a suffix but part of a full root that happens to have converged into a similar form through various etymological processes. 2. Words ending in "-itch" Bitch: From Old English bicce (female dog) of Germanic origin, related to Old Norse bikkja (female dog) and German Betze (female dog). The "-itch" part is not a suffix but the natural evolution of the original Germanic form. Ditch: From Old English dic (a dike or trench), related to Old High German tih (pool, pond) and Dutch dijk (dike, embankment). The "tch" sound emerged through linguistic processes like palatalization, where the "k" sound softened to "ch." Glitch: A relatively modern word, appearing in the 1960s, likely from Yiddish glitsh (slip, slide) or German glitschen (to slip), with possible influence from electrical terminology. It is unrelated to the Germanic roots of other "-itch" words but still follows English phonological patterns. Hitch: From Middle English hicchen (to jerk, pull), related to Old English hician (to hiccup or gasp) and possibly to the concept of a sudden, jerky motion. Pitch: Two meanings and origins: (Tar-like substance): From Old English pic (tar, resin), ultimately from Latin pix (pitch, resin), through Proto-Indo-European roots. (Throw or toss): Possibly from Middle English pichen (to thrust, push) from Old English pician. Stitch: From Old English stice (a stab, prick, or puncture) and stician (to stab, pierce), related to Proto-Germanic stikiz (point, prick) and Proto-Indo-European steig- (to stick, prick). The "-itch" comes from the natural evolution of sound changes in Old and Middle English. Witch: From Old English wicce (female sorcerer) and wicca (male sorcerer), connected to the Proto-Germanic wikkōn (to twist, turn, or conjure) and perhaps Proto-Indo-European weik- (to bend, twist). The spelling evolved to "witch," but the "-itch" is not a suffix. 3. "Itch"-related or -adjacent words Aitch / Haitch: This is not etymologically related to the "-itch" words. It comes from the Old French ache, which was used to refer to the letter H. The "H" sound in French went silent, but the form ache influenced the English spelling "aitch" as the letter's name. The variant haitch is a later hypercorrection, likely by analogy with other letters like "bee" and "dee." Britch (as back-formation from "britches"): Breeches (or britches) comes from Old English bryċ (plural brēċ) meaning "garment for the legs," related to Old Norse brok and Proto-Germanic brōkiz (trousers, leggings). The "-ch" ending isn't an "-itch" but is related to the plural form ending in "-es," which sometimes produced this sound shift (similar to peach from Latin persicum). Filch: From Middle English filchen (to steal), related to Old English fylcian (to marshal troops) and possibly Old English feolce (band of people). Its similarity to "itch" is coincidental. Kitsch: A German loanword, borrowed in the 1920s, meaning "tacky art" or "lowbrow taste." The original German word kitsch is thought to derive from the verb kitschen (to scrape up dirt from the street) or from verkitschen (to sell cheap, second-rate goods). It is unrelated to "itch" words etymologically but aligns phonetically. Mitch (from Mitchell): A diminutive of Mitchell, which itself comes from Michael (from Hebrew Mikha'el, meaning "Who is like God?"). The "-itch" in Mitch is coincidental and comes from the phonetic shortening of the "ch" in Mitchell. Niche: From French niche (recess, cavity, nest) from Latin nidus (nest). The spelling and pronunciation shift is unrelated to "itch" words but follows a common English-French borrowing pattern, where "ch" can sound like "sh" (as in "chic"). Stretch / Etch: These derive from different sources but converge in form. Stretch: From Old English streccan (to stretch, extend), related to Proto-Germanic strakkjaną (to stretch) and Proto-Indo-European streg- (to stretch, spread). The "tch" evolved naturally from "cc" or "ch" sounds in Old English. Etch: From Dutch etsen (to etch) and German ätzen (to corrode or eat away), from Latin acere (to be sharp, sour). The "ch" reflects phonological conventions from Dutch and German, and the "-itch" similarity is accidental. 4. What's up with the "-itch" pattern? Palatalization and Sound Changes: Many words ending in "-itch" come from older words that ended in "c," "k," or "g" sounds. Over time, English underwent a process of palatalization, where hard "k" and "g" sounds before front vowels (like "i" and "e") softened to a "ch" or "sh" sound. This process happened in other Germanic languages, like Old Norse and Old High German, but it was especially prominent in English. For example: Old English dic → Middle English diche → Modern English ditch. Old English sticce → Middle English stiche → Modern English stitch. Borrowings and Coincidences: Some "-itch" words were borrowed directly from other languages (like glitch from Yiddish and kitsch from German) or came from proper nouns (like Mitch), but their endings coincidentally align with the phonological "tch" sound pattern. Not a Suffix: The "-itch" segment is not a true suffix but the product of multiple phonological shifts over time. English phonotactics (rules for allowable sound patterns) make the "tch" cluster common at the end of words. This same process can be seen in words like fetch, wretch, patch, scratch, etc., which do not have "-itch" but follow similar patterns. 5. Summary The "-itch" sound and spelling aren't the result of a suffix or a single linguistic process. Instead, they result from: Palatalization: Hard "k" or "g" sounds softened to "ch" in Old and Middle English (e.g., sticce → stitch). Borrowings: Words like kitsch (German), glitch (Yiddish), and niche (French) were borrowed directly. Natural Sound Evolution: Words like ditch (Old English dic) and bitch (Old English bicce) naturally evolved their spelling and pronunciation. The "itch" pattern is more phonological than morphological. It is a remnant of older sound shifts in English, reinforced by borrowing from other languages. Its frequency comes from convergent evolution rather than the influence of any singular suffix.

So my home hasn't been smart. In fact, the only "smart" thing I've owned has been my phone...which I never used the "smart" aspects of it. Meaning the ask-it-questions or A.I. features. I guess my PCs have the same things...which I've also ignored. So.... 2 things happened: 1st. We went to my wife's parents house to take them to the temple, rang the doorbell...and within a few seconds my father-in-law was talking to us through the doorbell saying they weren't home yet. And I was like, "That's awesome!" 2nd. We got a new vehicle that had "Alexa" and we understood we could start it, lock or unlock it, check it's location, etc., etc., with an Alexa device. So.... We ordered an Echo Pop -- the cheapest Echo device. Well darn it all....I think I fell in love! Within a week, I bought a Ring doorbell, an Echo Show 21 for my wife to use in the kitchen (more on this in a moment), and have an Echo Spot ordered for the bedroom. And I've ordered a bunch of smart lightbulbs. You see... I didn't know. I didn't know I could control things so easily and so, relatively, cheaply. The echo pop was $40. The Spot is normally $80, but I found one on sale for $40. The lightbulbs I got were between $3 and $7. I got 5 at $6 ($35ish) and 6 at $3 ($18ish). (The "ish" is because I rounded, and there was tax, and etc.) The Ring was $50ish. So all in, minus the Show, under $200 to make our home "Smart". We already had a Nest thermostat that we got for free when we installed solar a few years back -- so I guess we have had a smart device. Well...and we have some Samsung TVs that are smart. They even include Alexa. Never used it though. Until now! So the only pricey thing was the Echo Show 21. That was $400. Yes, I splurged a bit. But here's the deal: It's an Echo device just like the others, but also...streams video with Fire TV (my wife likes turning on shows while cooking), and displays the ring doorbell camera when there's motion or the like. Plus video calls (she calls a family member when making dinner almost daily, often with video). And all the visual things like lists, shopping, etc. So I got it for her as a "Valentine's Day" gift (bought her 15 roses with it too...way cheaper in Jan than waiting till just before Valentines!...to make it more romantic). Of course it's a gift for the whole family. But she'll appreciate it the most. I live in my office (which is where the Pop moved after the Show arrived). So even making it $600... that's still, relatively, cheap compared to what I thought. I had no idea there were smart lightbulbs. I thought I'd have to rewire the house to make is smart. Or...something. I just thought it would be out of reach to make one's home smart unless wealthy or better and money management than I am. Maybe the novelty will wear off. But it's amazing! The best part is I changed the wake word in my office from "Alexa" to "Computer"... I'm freaking living in Star Trek! Anyhow... I know this is a case of an "old" man being behind the tech times to an extent. I'm tech savvy (I mean, I program computers for a living..so....), I just never got into the "Siri" or "Alexa" or A.I., or that side of things, so I didn't know. But it's SO cool. We had one smart lightbulb I'd purchased to test (the others are ordered but haven't arrived), and put it in a lamp on the kitchen counter. This morning I got up at around 5:30 and came upstairs and it was quite dark. Seemed darker than normal. I couldn't see...I went to fumble for a light switch, worried I'd crash into something on the way, and then remembered.... So I said (pretty softly), "Alexa, turn on the lamp"....and, yep. Awesome! No bruised shins! Feeling cold? "Computer, what's the temperature inside?" "Set it to 74." Music? "Computer, play my country playlist." Want to ask my wife a quick question? "Computer, drop in on the kitchen." (boom...talking to my wife!) Out of soda or gum? "Alexa, add Diet Dr. Pepper to the shopping list." "Computer, order some more cinnamon gum." Too lazy to find the remote? "Alexa, turn off the TV." And, of course, "Alexa, start the car." or "Alexa, lock the car." (It's a bit more than that because you need a code and have to go through a "skill" (basically an add-on to Alexa), but basically.) And so forth. As I was typing this it just said, "Someone was detected at your front door." And I went and got the package that had just been delivered. (Nothing related...just some daily delivery junk we tend to get most days.) Thanks Alexa! That was helpful! In fact the only real downside, so far, has been that for my wife to do her video calls the other end needs to install the Alexa app. That's only a problem for one of her brothers that she video calls...and he said he was willing if he could remember his Amazon login. Well...I guess one of the other issue is that I have 2 routers to cover the house, and that's caused some grief. I may have to spend more money to get a single wifi connection to cover the home. But I ought to upgrade anyhow as my routers are a bit dated. Eventually I'll get smart locks for the doors, Ring cameras for some rooms, plus a few more outside. I might actually start trusting babysitters....since I'll be able to watch them from my phone the entire time...and whatever else I decide will be awesome. I need to hold off on buying too much more now though. Otherwise I'll put the lie to "cheap" on making my home smart. To be fair, I didn't have to buy the expensive Show 21 to make it smart. I don't even think we needed any Echo devices. We could have just installed Alexa on our phones. And...there's a computer Windows App too, so I could have just run it that way. So the cheap thing still holds true. But, like with many things, you can get into it cheap, but then make it pricey pretty quick. But even smart cameras and lights and whatever. There are cheaper versions. You don't need to get the Echos and the Rings and the bigger brand names. There are cheap smart cameras for like $20. I can't say how good or bad they are. But...you can do it! But, like I said...sold my soul to Alexa. I'm sure Amazon is on the verge of developing a food replicator and a transporter! And I'm in! Amazon owns me now. Oh well. They sort of have for several decades now anyhow. When they require me to tattoo a 666 on my forehead to access my devices I'll know I chose poorly.

I've been to half a dozen states, and that's about it. In college I did take a 2 week tour of Europe, here are the highlights:

I'll play along. States Arizona California (lived) Colorado Connecticut Delaware (lived) Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana (lived) Kansas Kentucky Maryland (lived) Missouri Nevada New Jersey (lived) New York Oregon Pennsylvania (lived) Tennessee Texas Utah (lived) Virginia Washington Wyoming A couple of other states I have probably been in around Indiana, I just do not remember which ones as I was quite young. I have also spent large amounts of time in a couple of the states I have not lived in. Countries England France Germany Italy Switzerland Austria Belgium Jamaica Haiti Mexico

Honestly and transparently, I'm trying grapple with hearing that someone can be so well-traveled, and have completed a successful mission, and still end up stuck with the extreme perspectives I'm hearing. I have nothing in my experience of 50 years of people watching to compare. So I'm asking to know more about our puzzling new friend. The closest I have to compare was my dad. Came home from WWII to find women in the workplace, and stayed mad about it his entire life. He literally died mad about it, one day after yelling at a hospice nurse for not knowing her place. One of the last great "male chauvinist pigs" - he bore the title with pride and wondered why more people didn't see things the way he did. But he was not travelled, very much not LDS, never sought out different people or perspectives. From my perspective as his kid who knew him for 33 years, he was the dictionary definition of stubbornly set in his ways. From my experience, the only way such top-tier misogynist (or racist or anti-semite) can remain one, is only through closeminded stubbornness and a refusal to consider other perspectives. So here comes @Gecko45 saying he's a well traveled returned missionary LDS person, who grows more anti-Jewish with each new experience, not less. And I'm at a loss. So yeah, my interest in genuine. Please tell us more about your life.

Hopefully any European reading this won't be offended, but really, once you've seen one European city, you've seen them all, in a way. The same could be said of US cities. Sure, each city has its own uniqueness, but I've found that cities are cities. If you're going to travel, better to go to widely divergent places than a bunch of similar cities, I think. Please don't get yourself killed! While I know I've been through many states, I really can't say I remember much about many of them. The ones I've spend enough time in to remember things: New York Nevada California Utah Wyoming Montana Arizona Oklahoma Texas Colorado Washington, D.C. area Technically, some Church sites in Illinois and Missouri, but it was long enough ago that I don't remember much Technically, I remember hours of driving past corn through half of Kansas, and past lots of nothing across New Mexico, but I'm not sure that should count. Travel does make for good education, though, even if only subconsciously. I've driven through part of Idaho. Hopefully @Gecko45 returns to share some of his adventures...

OK, I'll do a bit of bragging. States: Hawaii California Oregon Washington Arizona Nevada Wyoming New Mexico Colorado Texas Oklahoma Kansas Missouri (Not sure if I went to Idaho or not--I may have gone through a corner or something) Nebraska One of the Dakotas (it was a business trip and I forget which one) (I also believe I may have hit both Dakotas, but not sure) Louisiana Arkansas Mississippi Tennessee Kentucky Illinois Iowa Alabama Florida All 13 colonies (Family trip to tour all of them). Countries: South Korea US Mexico Canada Japan Taiwan Germany Dubai Saudi Arabia (in the airport only) Afghanistan Kuwait Qatar Egypt There was a country near Nigeria that I did an overnight stay. But I can't remember which one. It wasn't Nigeria. But it was nearby. Honduras Cayman Islands Jamaica

I didn't get the impression that NT was saying he disbelieved him. It is just something that is highly unusual. When I was a newbie on this forum, people had difficulty believing that I'd visited over 30 states. And I'm a lot older than he is. As I recall, some people called *&%$ on me. But they were wrong. So, I can certainly understand people having doubts about someone in their 20s doing something similar. This doesn't mean that I disbelieve him. It's just that it is highly unusual.

Yes, one can do that without leaving Europe. During the three years I worked in Moscow, and on two business trips years later, I only managed 19, I think. Excuse me while I get a map and list them. A "(t)" after the name means I only transited through the country and didn't see more than a train station / airport / port / whatever was out the window. US (born here) Canada (pre and post Moscow; Montreal in January is colder than Moscow ever dreamed of being!) Russia (newly minted, missed the USSR by 3 months) UK (just London) Estonia (t) Finland (fabulous place - Helsinki has such an incredible variety of food from more ethnicities than you can count) Czech Republic (or Czechoslovakia - I'm not sure which... googled - both, actually - I went there twice; Prague is the best European city I've been to) Hungary Austria (2x) Germany (2 times) Belgium Spain Italy Sweden Turkey (Holy yums, Batman - the food is amazing here. The ruins are good, too. The Mediterranean was gorgeous.) Cyprus (t) Yemen (t; the airport security were most upset with my mini pocket knife, but apparently a diplomatic passport trumps upset airport security folk) Kenya (don't know if it's safe anymore, but I highly recommend a photo safari!; I believe we crossed the equator 4 times on this trip ) Tanzania (t; our driver informed us after we'd made a technically illegal shortcut through Tanzania to get from one part of Kenya to another, and asked us to please not tell anyone ) I think that's everywhere.

Remember the whole "Great American Melting Pot" bit from School House Rock? What's happening in Europe is that the UK, Sweden, and several other countries are host to large immigrant communities who have *refused* to meld into the overall public body. Rather, these communities are setting up enclaves in which they're basically trying to reconstruct the countries they left behind while still having the resources and privileges of the European nation they're in. The vast majority of incidents people are getting upset about are happening in these enclaves, but it's causing broad anti-immigrant hysteria across the board, especially given how loathe the local governments are to actually do anything about these enclaves. ...Hence why groups like Germany's AFD are seeing a surge in votes and support, and why people are now calling for the heads of several governments to resign. The more horror stories that emerge about what is or isn't happening in these enclaves, the more frenzied the overall anti-immigrant sentiment will likely become, as even legal immigrants who have melted into society are now finding themselves feeling the heat. Yes, I said "hysteria". I'm emphasizing that to make sure everyone understands what I'm talking about.

I think it would help to try to focus more on the “historian” than the “hobbyist” part of your self-description as “a hobbyist historian.” This will help diffuse some of the radicalization you’ve identified and its underlying causes, which have less to do exposure to extremist ideology and recruitment by radical groups than with personal vulnerabilities you may not be aware of. Examples of these might include a sense of alienation or marginalization, personal grievances or trauma and low self-esteem, which goes beyond a more disciplined approach to history and with which life in the Gospel can assist.

For a European to say that he has visited "more than 35 countries" is not too different from an American saying that he has visited "more than 35 states". It's a lot, but not unbelievable.

No need. That is essentially what my intended message was. But I did not necessarily mean that it was Satanic. I tend to believe that there are a lot of things that go on in this world that we would probably call "supernatural", but they are in fact processes that go on every day. We just don't know about it. So, whether it was satanic or simply "mysterious", the ability for that seer stone to see the plates was obscured. I had not considered the idea that "normally" they would be able to see anything, but "higher power intervened." That may be. And that could be a good argument to nullify this concern... if it is correct. Did he? I'm going to guess that you're saying that the clear stones were used to create the Jaredite interepreters. I hadn't heard that. If that's what you are implying, yes, I'd like to see a source. Yes, but that was part of a ritual specifically prescribed by the Lord. Otherwise, we might as well put trust in chicken entrails. Again, I agree that there is a separation from satanic vs divine, which I agree with. My position is that there are "neutral" ways of doing similar things that seem supernatural. I don't have any documentation for such things. But I know that I have personally witnessed "things" that seem to defy the laws of physics which I, as a pretty informed engineer, would think was impossible. Certainly so. But isn't this the same argument I'm making about the narratives? The source of the narrative is what I question. Therefore, that makes the difference. I had wondered what happened to them. But I had believed them to be the Nephite interpreters, not the Jaredites'. I'm not sure if they do have them in the vault. Has there been such a public statement? Based on all our interactions together, I believe you. I'll take that under advisement. On this, specific wording would be helpful. The thing is that in early days even Joseph and Oliver would use the terms interchangeably. If they didn't use the U&T at any time during the translation of what became the BoM, why would he keep them? Those are pretty good arguments. Thank you. Well, yes. It is the inconsistencies that still trouble me. What troubles me more is that the Lord tends to have patterns. He has Lehi use the Liahona to find a pair of (Nephite) interpreters. Once he has them, the Liahona stopped working. It was a preparatory tool only. Afterward, it was merely kept as a relic. It seems that patterns like this would continue: Joseph borrowed someone else's seer stone to find the one that was meant for him. Then he received the interpreters, why go back? What was the purpose?

Someone in their early '20's, who has visited more than 35 countries, and moved from England to Idaho? I don't think I've ever heard a story like that. Please tell us more about your upbringing.

Moses 7:52 And he sent forth an unalterable decree, that a remnant of his seed should always be found among all nations, while the earth should stand; This is the Lord speaking to Enoch about the flood. If Noah was Enoch's descendent how is it that only a remnant of his seed would be found among all nations? If the flood was universal and only the family of Noah survived should not everyone be the seed of Enoch?

Some things are just too important to ignore.

Maybe Noah is the remnant. Of Enoch's seed, only Noah (and his descendants) survived/remained; none of the others. Did you notice the footnote on "remnant" that takes us to Moses 8:2? Link to Moses 7:52, for convenience.

Which explains all the "Facts" that the OP has presented with no deeper meaning. Lots of people hate those that are smarter then they are, more so if they end up on the bad side of some deal or arrangement. The rest of the OP claims are opinions which are not subject to being disproven, and wild speculation and assumptions that do not have enough facts to support them. The Jew are like any other group they have good people and they have bad people there is nothing special about that. As for porn.. we as church members are the odd ones on that subject... the rest of the world (including Jews) do not have our understanding or opinion on it. To them it is just another job/business/chance to make money.

That was Sally Chase. IIRC her brother or uncle was a Methodist minister, and it was while digging a well on their property that Joseph had found one of his stones in the first place. IIRC, there's a quote out there from Brigham Young to the effect that Satan is a master of natural law (including that which appears supernatural) and is capable of generating whatever apparently-miraculous manifestation he wishes, unless a higher power intervenes. (If you compel me, I'll look it up; though I'm lazy at the moment). I'm not sure that it's as easy as saying "this means of revelation is always spurious"--that there's a discernible difference between a "Urim and Thummim" versus a "seer stone", and that the former is always godly and the latter is always satanic; or that the former is capable of doing things that the latter intrinsically cannot do. We know that God has given revelation through glass created by the Brother of Jared and touched by God's finger; we know He did it through the throwing of stones ("casting of lots"); we know He could give it through the Hebrew U&T (however they worked); we know He could do it do it through Oliver Cowdery's use of a divining rod; and the record seems pretty clear that (whether or not it was the source for some/all of the BoM text) Joseph Smith did receive true revelations through his seer stone. Further, he seemed willing to label other people's seer stones as "Urim and Thummim"--for example, per the autobiography of Wandle Mace, we have that instance where seer stones are brought to Nauvoo by some British saints; and Smith reviews them and "pronounced them to be a Urim and Thummim as good as ever was upon teh earth but he said, 'they have been consecrated to devils'". Ultimately I think it's the source of the power, not the means through which the power is manifested, that makes the difference. Another thing worth noting is that we have references to Joseph Smith having/using/showing people his "Urim and Thummim" well into the Nauvoo period (see generally, here). If that was the Jaredite interpreters, and Joseph never did return them to Moroni . . . then where are they now? And if the Church really does have them hidden away in the First Presidency vault, then why would they go along with this dog-and-pony show about some other seer stone being the instrument of translation? I've said it before and I'll say it again: Be really, really careful with the JSF. Their founder was not a good guy. Key personnel involved in the foundation today are not honest people. I'm sorry, I can't elaborate. I would almost never refer someone to the cesspool that is Reddit, but . . . there's a thread on the JSF's founder over there; and among the other nonsense that usually abounds in Reddit, someone has actually posted something that's pretty close to the truth. So, the true story about them *is* out there and can be discerned by a healthy combination of skepticism and revelation. Back to the primary sources, though: FWIW, both Emma Smith and David Whitmer supported the idea that the U&T (Jaredite interpreters/"spectacles") were used on the 116 pages; and the seer stone following the loss of those pages. But they are, of course, relatively late recollections. Still, the notion that the story of the seer stone's role in the production of the BoM was intended to discredit Joseph Smith strikes me as problematic for several reasons. First, David Whitmer didn't think seer stones were shameful. He, and his family, loved the idea of seer stones. Shortly after Joseph Smith gives his brown stone to Oliver Cowdery in spring of 1830 following completion of the Book of Mormon translation, Whitmer family son-in-law Hiram Page starts getting revelations through his own stone--and most of the Whitmer family is initially firmly in support of him, until D&C 28 reins them all back in. Whitmer's diminishing confidence in Joseph Smith's leadership coincided with Joseph Smith's resorting to the seer stone as a means of revelation less and less often. For his part, David Whitmer had his own seer stones; which he passed on to his descendants and which they used with some regularity. For David, citing the role of a seer stone in the origin story of the Book of Mormon does not diminish the book's credibility or miraculous nature; it enhances it. Second, I think it's assuming facts not in evidence to suggest that either Whitmer or Emma Smith "hated" Joseph to the point that they were willing to deliberately publicly lie about him. Yes, they disagreed with him--loudly and stridently, at times. But they were both fiercely devoted to Joseph Smith's early status as a prophet and the cause of Mormonism. Emma lionized him to the end of her days; and Whitmer--from what I see of his statements--tended to look back on his associations with Joseph with more regret and "pity" than actual animus. Third, both Whitmer and Emma were fierce proponents of the Book of Mormon to the end of their lives. I don't think there's anything in their histories suggesting that they would have deliberately tried to undermine or bring shame upon the authenticity of that book as an authentic, ancient, divinely-restored record. The fact that people disagree with Joseph Smith about various things, does not render them wholly dastardly. Fourth, the seer stone-as-translation-instrument account was confirmed by Martin Harris even when at times when he was quite friendly to the Utah church and would have no motive to tell an origin story that he thought would somehow debase the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith's ministry. And, finally: A lot of this pooh-poohing of any source who didn't cross the plains with Brigham tiptoes around a rather uncomfortable truth: Most of the people who were involved with the Smith family when the Book of Mormon was being written, didn't come to Utah with President Young. The BoM witnesses didn't. (Harris, of course, came decades later). The Smith family, didn't. Those of the Hales who converted, didn't. The Whitmers didn't. The Stowells didn't. The majority of the Twelve (as originally constituted in 1835) didn't. If we dismiss the accounts of all the people who were there and saw the BoM being translated, on the grounds that they failed to stay faithful to the Utah Church and are therefore somehow suspect in their recollections; then on this topic we're forced to retrench into a sort of historical know-nothingism. Because Joseph Smith himself isn't telling: He flat-out said that "it was not intended to tell the world all the particulars of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon". Yep. There have have been a number of articles about this; and not all of the accounts perfectly reconcile. There are a *lot* of inconsistencies--how many stones were there, what did they look like, when and where was each one acquired or used or given away (see, e.g., here). But I think the all-too-common response to simply throw all of it out and say "It was the Jaredite interpreters, and nothing but the Jaredite interpreters, all the time" is just not correct.

Does it matter? No. Here's what matters: Matt 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. D&C 64:9 Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. 10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men. This may not answer what you asked. But they are far more important than what you asked.

Hi @Gecko45. Glad to hear you're not one of the AI bots we struggle with on this board. I wonder how you balance your faithful pro-LDS claims with your anti-Jewish opinions. I'm assuming you know to which tribe of Israel you belong, from which you receive the Abrahamic covenant. Can I ask where you went on your mission? I find it odd that someone with such antisemitic notions didn't find them tempered any during your mission. Ofttimes folks who have grown up surrounded by certain people and viewpoints will find those viewpoints challenged when they do things like go live somewhere else and devote their lives to preaching the gospel.

Thanks for the response. I have been very far down the rabbit hole. That is why I am losing it. Thanks for your advice instead of just calling me a bot or an antisemite.

What am I missing? Where in the OP does he say he's addicted to porn or confess to other sins related to the law of Chastity? I see nothing there to suggest the OP is struggling with some sin, per se. Rather, I see him struggling with questions. I have no trouble believing that a 20-something in this culture went looking for answers and fell into the rabbit hole of anti-Semitism. You can't walk around in that age group without tripping all over it. Since when do we start accusing people of specific sins without an ounce of evidence?

I can say in all honesty that I do not know the purposes of Seer Stones or the Urim and Thummim nor do I have understanding of their differences. I have personally known a seer and asked them – they did not give me an answer. I suspect and speculate that both the Seer Stone and Urim and Thummim were used at different times and for different reasons to complete the translation of the Book of Mormon. I speculate that it is somewhat like a screwdriver and pliers. Each have their purpose. The Urim and Thummim was specifically provided for the translation of the Book of Mormon. Who know what else it is capable of providing? Seer Stones have their own purpose and are given for many things – including things related to scripture as well as covenants, ordinances and laws. Another sacred instrument was the Liahona. Though these devices operated as tools for various purposes – they all are subject to operation through covenant. I have speculated that as a seer becomes experienced in their craft and unique covenant – that such devices tend to become unnecessary. The Traveler

I was under that the impression that the U&T were used for the lost pages, and after Martin Harris has lost them Joseph Smith started using the Seer Stone as it easier, but still on occasion used the U&T. Without context, looking into a stone in a hat, is equally as nonsensical and strange as looking into stones held together with a wire frame, attached to a chest plate. So I don't feel David Whitmer's antagonism really discredits the story all that much.

My oldest brother absolutely *insisted* that I take pre-calculus as a preparation for college. I pointed out that I had trouble in algebra because I kept getting the formulas confused, I had met all of my mathematics requirements so didn't need to take another math class anyway, and even if they *were* concerned about me needing another math class to stay focused there was a math & money course that should help me on my plan for an eventual business major. Mom sided with my brother. The end result was life-altering, and not in a good way. Classes were 90 minutes every other day. The pre-calculus teacher would take the first 30 minutes of those 90 minutes to go desk by desk and grade our homework on the spot so she didn't have to take any of it home. This ensured that she *never* finished discussing the chapter during the assigned lesson period, but she also *never* understood why that kept happening. Instead, we were just to finish reading the chapter and do the assigned homework accordingly. If we had problems we could come to before-school and after-school tutoring time, but her classroom was always packed. It took her writing a note inviting me to leave the class for my parents to *finally* understand that I wasn't lying to them about what it was like in there. But I didn't get moved into another class until semester break, by which point this class had *badly* damaged my GPA. You see, I'm in Texas. At the time I was in high school, if you graduated within the top 10% of your class, you could get free tuition to any in-state college courtesy of the state. This utter nonsense drama with the pre-calculus class meant that I missed the top 10% by six slots, something like 0.07 of a grade point. Cue me and my parents having to struggle to pay for me to go to college, which I caught eight different flavors of flak for by the very same parents who doomed me to this existence when they listened to my brother instead of me in the first place.

Now how to waste the rest of Friday afternoon...

Here's one from yesterday that I thought was fun, based on a recent XKCD. ****************************************** True or false? To better than 1%, pi mph = e knots ChatGPT said: ChatGPT True. To better than 1%, the value of π miles per hour (mph) is indeed approximately equal to e knots. Here’s a quick calculation to see why: The difference is well under 1%, so the statement is true. You said: Take that, 22/7! ChatGPT said: ChatGPT Haha! Indeed — poor 22/7 thought it had the monopoly on π approximations. But here comes e knots, sneaking in with style and precision! Mathematical coincidences like this are oddly satisfying.