I like to tell my children, "I have traveled through time to this moment from the year 1963 to bring you this message: Clean your room."
Usually I'm the only one laughing, but what can I say? It cracks me up.
I have heard nothing about this. My guess is that most Americans don't know about this at all, and those who do probably tend to think she should be held accountable for her actions. So the "venting fury" thing is nonsense, as you note.
So the US is now "venting fury" that Anne Sacoolas has been charged.
"Fury" that this woman should be subject to the same law as everyone else??? Oh to be sure...they don't have to comply with any extradition request. ("Might is right" and all that.) And they probably won't. But as for their "fury" I hope the UK tells 'em to "vent it at the hand, 'coz the face ain't listening".
(To be fair though, the title of this video is a bit misleading - there's nothing in it about US "fury". That's Sky News trying to provoke angry rants from people like me. And succeeding.)
The only one that looks familiar is 1. Though the others could be variants of hymns I know.
One hymn I loved as a kid was "when a knight won his spurs in the stories of old". That's gone the same way as "onward christian soldiers" for being too warlike. Sing it now and everyone will be up in arms about cruelty to dragons. Grumble grumble grumble.
That reminds me of my wicked money-saving plan for my daughter's birthday treat: to take her and her friends to "Pets at Home" and call it a "trip to the zoo".
You are correct and the book seems to talk about these Westerlies.
1 Nephi 18:12-14
12 And it came to pass that after they had bound me insomuch that I could not move, the compass, which had been prepared of the Lord, did cease to work.
13 Wherefore, they knew not whither they should steer the ship, insomuch that there arose a great storm, yea, a great and terrible tempest, and we were driven back upon the waters for the space of three days; and they began to be frightened exceedingly lest they should be drowned in the sea; nevertheless they did not loose me.
14 And on the fourth day, which we had been driven back, the tempest began to be exceedingly sore.
The thing to keep in mind is that MOST of the ideas that are prevalent today really have no basis in fact, but instead are complete guesses. The best laid idea is from the statement that Nephi states that he went East in their journey over several years. Some take it that this means they went into Saudi Arabia in a few months got to the South End of Arabia (regardless that this is a VERY long distance) and then took 8 years to travel less than half that distance after that (which beggers the imagination, much less many questions).
I posit that they went in a South Easterly direction as Nephi States, but figure it was more realistic to the travels of the day and time, traveling from Jerusalem to the northern borders of the Red Sea, and from there due east which would have taken them across Asia.
The problem with the former theory is that there are no routes from the South Eastern tip of Saudi Arabia to the Americas. It is, as you point out, not likely, but MORE likely that they sail around the tip of Africa and go Westward than it is that they could actually make it heading Eastward across the seas from there. The Winds AND currents are against them. If they left from the most Eastern part of Asia, or parts of the Eastern Coast of Asia it is probable they could have made it.
On the otherhand, ALL of these are just speculations with no evidence or even ideas that they occurred. We have no idea where they actually travelled or went. Joseph Smith is said to have inferred they went via Saudi Arabia but I have not read the actual sources that are traceable back to him on this.
This same idea is also true for the Central America Theories that place the Nephite and Lamanite civilizations in the Yucatan or anywhere else in that area. There is actually no evidence of this and the evidence we have found there actually points to civilizations that really do not line up with what the Book of Mormon talks about.
Everything is twisted out of what it actually shows to try to make things match up for Book of Mormon scholars who try to place the Book of Mormon in that small geographic region.
Basically, it is a complete guess out of nothing. An individual many years ago (that some feel has actually been discredited with their original theories) felt that this was so and went on expeditions to try to prove it. No actual evidence of a Nephite or Lamanite civilization that is peer approved or accepted by a Non-LDS scholarly community exists.
The Heartland map you see above is based a LITTLE on some facts, but not many. More than the Central America Model at least. These are NOT archealogical or physical evidence, but evidence from hearsay...or rather what someone said rather than any other actual evidence. This person who said this was Joseph Smith, though that is not acceptable evidence for the Non-LDS scholarly community.
Joseph DID talk about the Hill Cumorah. We know, we know where it is. He also talked about Zarahemla and it's location. He even said where it was, which is why the map probably shows it's proximity to Nauvoo. These two items do not correlate with the Central American model and why the Central American theorist thus have to basically claim that there were two Hill Cumorahs (and unless they ignore Joseph Smith...two Zarahemlas as well).
Now, Joseph ALSO referred to the land they currently were at throughout Illinois and Ohio that it was the land that the Nephites and Lamanites occupied when they were alive and that they inhabited the entire continent/land (one could take that to mean North and South America, or could just mean North America, or perhaps just the land in the area where the Saints were currently occupying...he wasn't clear).
All those statements do not seem to correlate with the Central American theory regarding where the Nephites and Lamanites lived and dwelt. The heartland model you see in the map above may also not be all that satisfying. Historically, it also does not seem to correlate with Book of Mormon Peoples...but I find it more acceptable than the Central American theory speaking personally.
In truth, we do not have any real evidence of where they lived or dwelt. Anything and everything is pure speculation.
Another thing to keep in mind is that most of the Book of Mormon Geography that people use in references to try to figure out similarities between the Americas and the Nephite Civilization comes from BEFORE the great changes prior to the Lord's coming to America. Right before he came the entire landscape was changed to a degree that one could claim it became unrecognizeable. Moutains were raised where there were none while Mountains that existed were tossed down. Waters came in to cover lands while lands were raised up where none were before.
In truth, the only real basis we can really look to is the Book of Mormon (the actual book in the Book of Mormon which is called Mormon) for any real relation to what the geography may have been after that, and there is very little to go off of in that regard).
Jamie123 got a reaction from mordorbund in Time Warp
Jamie123 reacted to Vort in Three rules for British royals. It's not hard, really.
Jamie123 got a reaction from Midwest LDS in Time Warp
Jamie123 got a reaction from Vort in Anne Sacoolas
Jamie123 got a reaction from Traveler in Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
Jamie123 got a reaction from NeedleinA in Star Wars Holiday Special
Jamie123 got a reaction from NeuroTypical in Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker
Jamie123 got a reaction from Still_Small_Voice in Tolkien Humor
Jamie123 got a reaction from Fether in Tolkien Humor
Jamie123 got a reaction from Sunday21 in Tolkien Humor
Jamie123 got a reaction from dprh in Tolkien Humor