Jamie123

You may not know Thunderf00t (real name Phil Mason) on YouTube. I lost interest in him a couple of years back, but before then I used to follow him quite a lot. His videos on tanks, battleships and bee-keeping were worth watching. At one point he was invited by P.Z. Myers to be a regular contributor to "Freethought Blogs". He lasted about a month. At the end of that time he was chucked out, essentially for expressing "free thoughts". The problem was that Thunderf00t's "free thoughts" were not the same "free thoughts" that Myers and his Merry Men were "freely" thinking. Myers' "free thought" was only "free" in the sense that it was free from a mode of thought which hadn't been mainstream for about 30 years. Mason - though an atheist - was too conservative for the "free thought" crowd, so out he went!

Well if its publically editable you could argue it's a "whatever most people think" bias. But perhaps that's being naive. I've been involved in Wikipedia and Wikihow edit-wars, and it's whoever keeps going till the other guy gives up who wins the edit. It could be the leftists are better at that.

I was thinking also, the Internet is a wonderful learning tool but its full of misinformation too. A few years ago someone thought of creating "Conservapedia" - a more tightly controlled Wikipedia - with a view to creating a source parents could trust, without Wikipedia's supposed "left leaning bias". A worthy idea perhaps, but it was pretty soon teaching us that all evolutionists are obese and that Einstein's theory of relativity is an attempt to push moral relativism. It had all the same faults as Wikipedia (or worse) in the opposite direction. Edit: I'm exaggerating of course. But not much!

It's unrealistic for every parent to be as educated in every academic subject as every teacher, right up to High School level, but on the other hand, this encourages children to seek out learning for themselves. I was not totally homeschooled, but my father tutored me in mathematics somewhat beyond what the school was teaching me. He took me as far as basic algebra - like factorizarion and solving equations - but he knew nothing of trigonometry, vectors, complex numbers or differential and integral calculus. But having received a "boost" from him, I learned those things by myself from books. I was lucky to have him for a father. I often tried to do similar for my daughter, but she hadn't quite the zeal for math that I had. (Though I do remember when she was about 11 I showed her the proof of Pythagoras' theorem, and was impressed that she understood it.)

This is the elephant in the room of transgender rights. It's only Piers Morgan and people like him who ever dare to talk about it.

I'm guessing this is a "word to the wise" thing, but I'm not getting it. Are you saying that homeschooling is the answer to the problem Suzie described, or the source of it?

I'm still a child. I only know in part. I see through the glass darkly. The things I don't understand I commit to God in the hope He will one day reveal them to me. But that's not to say I don't sometimes rant about them a bit. It's the way I am.

I cheer for the USA against anyone except England. And Scotland, Ireland and Wales. And Australia and New Zealand. And possibly Canada.

I was reading recently about the My Lai Massacre in Vietnam, committed by ordinary American men. What they did that day was eerily similar to what the SS did in the death camps. Some, I admit, refused to obey orders, but others joined in with glee, raping girls as young as twelve before killing them. I think given the right circumstances we are all capable of extreme evil. Edit: OK maybe not all of us. (I don't want to get into trouble again for making generalisations.) But could most of us guarantee there is no set of circumstances that would make us do such things?

I vaguely remember you mentioning MU at some point

Exciting game though. I thought it was going to be the usual story of nil-nil right through to the end of extra time, and then England losing on penalties.

We lost. Boo hoo.

Ugh. Spain scored again...

Equaliser. 1-1 now

...is 1 nil down. Less than 20 minutes to go...

Another theory I've read is that Jesus did not want too many followers early on, because if everyone had become a disciple there would have been no crucifixion and therefore no atonement. He would have grown old, died an ordinary death and returned to his Father, and his whole life would have been pointless. After the crucifixion - and particularly after Pentecost - the number of believers skyrocketed, and these probably included many who had initially rejected him.

I thought there was something about his voice! It reminds me a bit of the poem The Hound of Heaven by Francis Thompson. (I keep a copy of it on my desk.) This is how I always hoped it would be, but I am always being perplexed by scriptures like Mark 4:11-12 or Isaiah 6:9-10 - that people hardly ever talk about. P.S. A quote from THoH: So totally true.

Hmmm...those aren't quite the lyrics I remember!

https://youtu.be/jL1dEyDMA-o?si=9SO3uS3BNx7V8Lt_

I mean claim not to know. If I claimed I did know the church was true, then I would not be admitting to the possibility that it was false. But if I claimed not to know, that would imply that I was open to the possibility that it was false.

It doesn't sound like what I remember. I think our masks were Spock, Kirk and Bones. Possibly Uhura was there too (for the benefit of girls) but I certainly don't recall any others. Still I was only 6 - or maybe only 5. EDIT: Looks like you're right... Perhaps the UK release didn't have all of them.

I've thought about this a little more. Perhaps in a sense I was wrong. Logically, the Church is either true or else it is not true. If it is not true then it follows that anyone who claims to know it is true must be mistaken. So if I claim not know myself that the Church is true, I am admitting to the possibility that it is false. I am therefore suggesting - albeit indirectly - the possibility that anyone who "knows" it is true is mistaken. (This is what I meant - though I didn't see it quite as clearly then - by my first post on this thread.) A few years ago there was a thread where people were arguing that disagreement with Church authorities should be forbidden on the forum. I attempted to argue that this would be tantamount to banning nonmembers, whereupon Prisonchaplain was held up to me as a shining example of a nonmember in good standing. I wanted to point out that Prisonchaplain, being a member (in fact a cleric) of another denomination was - by his very religious stance - disagreeing with the Church, and therefore with Church authorities. I couldn't though because the thread was shut down by mods. It would have been peevish to have started a new one just to get my point across, so I let it drop. I do still think that "nonmembers welcome but disagreement with the Church forbidden" is not a tenable policy; it's one or the other, not both. And (to give everyone due credit) I don’t think this is the case. The forum is by and large a safe place to voice your honest thoughts and get others' honest thoughts back. I stumbled into this forum many years ago and have always found it stimulating and enjoyable. About ten years ago I had a wobbly period when I deliberately got myself banned, but I cant blame anyone but myself. (It was when my wife miscarried what would have been our second child - but no one here was to know that.) Estradling helped me through it. I'm very grateful to everyone I've ever interacted with here. Thank you all. P.S. I miss Anatess. She was always knocking me off my perch - sometimes most deservedly. I hope she's doing OK.

Android? I think you're confusing Spock with Data. Edit: I get what you're saying though. I remember years ago the supermarket toy shelves being full of Callisto dolls (the Xenas presumably having sold out the first day!) The supermarket buyers probably had no idea who either Xena or Callisto were and goofed up badly! Callisto (in case you'd forgotten her):

Thanks - this story is new to me. The only mention I could find in the Bible to anyone called Clement is Philppians 4:3 (though apparently Clement was a very common name.) I did find your story here here https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/080401.htm. I've often thought I needed to study the church fathers more. Thanks.