Doctor Steuss

Oh, man. Okay, but just one thing. That's not Stu. B) Elphie 'Tis true, 'tis true. 'Twas not me, 'twas you. There in the room With the bibliophile For I was out looking At a reference file. Mumsie, Can I go outside and play Missouri Anti-Mos and Danites please? Hugs, You'r son from another mum. *Blush*

Hi Stu,I’ve been working on this a lot and have some thoughts. But first I’m trying to figure out this letter you’re talking about. I found one that may be it, but it’s not an exact match. I found it in one of my books and in an online source. It’s a letter from Brother Sam Brannan, stating that the secretary of war and others of the cabinet were planning to prevent their moving west—alleging that it was against the law for an armed body to go from the U.S. to any other government; that it would not do to let them go to California or Oregon, but that they must be obliterated. Hist. B. Young, MS., 305. No mention is made of Backenstos, though both sources mention him elsewhere. Do you think it possible this is the same letter? If not, have you heard of this letter? Your "superior," Elphaba I have never heard of that letter. You are indeed my superior (seriously though, I'm just an infant when it comes to this stuff. You just have a habit of hitting me on good days when just the right info happens to be on my mind). Hopefully this link works: On This Page (413), Ford admits to the letter. Another source that you probably have access to (which must have been what was fresh on my mind when I gave the Reader's Digest Version as going back and re-reading it, I saw pretty much the same info that I posted) is Schindler's biography on OPR. In the Second Edition, it's on page 144. This is why I love you. The mention of the letter was just a periferal thing, yet it's got you all curious and searching. You are a true Gem. -- You inspire me (really). BTW, what's the dating of the letter from Brannan?

It is indeed a beautiful language, and religion (IMO). ------------ Speaking of building bridges. Anyone not familiar with Dr. Lynn Ridenhour might find his writings and views interesting.

Oft times when love is involved, our hearts and minds can override the promptings of the “spirit.” They need to meet first before any type of decision can be made. We are often a slightly different person on the internet than we are in real life. We all have the “face to meet the faces” [nod to T.S. Elliot], and more-often-than-not, that face changes with the medium. But, then again, I’m 27 and single. So, what the crap do I know…

<snipped pic> I think you'd make a lovely couple. Elphie Hubba-hubba

I was unaware that anyone was refusing to talk about it. So, as a moderate liberal with some conservative leanings with a tendency towards libertarianism, what would you like to talk about in regards to that particular event?

Shhhhhhhh... I'm actually an avatar of Vishnu.

I'm here for the chicks...

B'nai Shalom

Aww Pushka, you're so sweet to worry about me.But, please don't. I think if you'll take a minute to go back and read through this thread, you'll find my discussion partner and I have a mutual respect for one another that would never descend into dismissiveness or contempt. In fact, he has me stumped on an issue and I'm having to search and read up on it as we speak. But rather than questioning my intelligence (and education), he pretends I know more than he, which is hogwash. What a gentleman. I hereby dismiss the above post with a healthy dose of contempt.

Yeppers.

Wanna fight? Kidding. I don't think there are many scientists that currently hold the position that we are “causing” it. Most see us as contributing to it though (albeit a rather minimal contribution). In the end, I suppose we're doing more by creating "heat islands" than by emitting gases (it was hard to type that last line with a straight face... why must I be so immature?). Regardless, we are hurting our Mother, and seem to need some kind of a kick in the rear to stop (and by "we" I am most certainly including myself).

Tarski (the physicist/doctorate/professor from “The Board That Shall Not Be Named”) is actually the one that hooked up all that info. I don’t want to take credit for his brilliance. I’m really quite substandard when it comes to intelligence. But, as far as “causes” go, I understand where you’re coming from. Once you cut through the hype, I just don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Our stewardship is a precious thing. Now if only I could stop being a hypocrite and trade in my PT Cruiser for a Mo-ped.

Puh-leeze. You know that you are my superior when it comes to this stuff. I don't have a link, but the governor admits it in Ford's History of Illinois. Basically he wrote a letter to Backenstos** knowing that it [the letter] would find its way into Brigham's hands. The letter had misleading info that more-or-less stated that because of outstanding warrants, the federal government would most likely try to keep the Saints from leaving Nauvoo. His reasoning for this was to help "push" the Saints along in their promise of an exodus... and it worked. Hundreds of Saints then began receiving endowments in the partially built temple almost around the clock. Pretty much every building in the city (including the temple) was then converted into workshops, and by the time spring rolled around, the Saints had built over twelve thousand wagons to get out of Dodge. This also spurred the little real-estate dilly where many were forced to sell their homes for cheep (i.e. John D. Lee's house going for $12.50).At least that's the Steuss' Reader's Digest version of events. **Edited to add: Backenstos was the sheriff.

I suppose both. Although the only one that would technically be applicable to my train of thought would be after. It seemed to be a never-ending problem in that poor city. Brigham didn't have much more success stopping it than Joseph did. Although it did seem to come to an end (for the most part) once Ford did his little truffle-shuffle and drafted up the little letter that "somehow" found its way into Brigham's hands (regarding the warrants and the feds not letting the Saints leave Nauvoo). But, the only reason for the cessation was most likely because people then became too busy building wagons and doing endowments, and no longer found the time to pillage. Grrrrr... As long as you don't know my man-crush Terryl Givens, I suppose I'll get over it.

I just see how little control he had over one city (i.e. the looting, etc. that was occurring in Nauvoo), and wonder if he would be able to exercise even more control over an entire territory. Even by granting him prophetic abilities, I don’t see him as having all that much of real control. PS. Stop name-dropping... you make me jealous! It's like when Blixa over at MD mentions that she knew Harold Schindler. I can't take it gall-dernit!

tee hee! Thanks for the answer! Now I've got another question. What do you mean by not loving the principles? Typo... should be "live."

Hmmmm... Let's take a look at the "few" people that don't think it's a "hoax" (according to the ole IPCC report)... 11,885 individual scientists listed by name 52 Nobel Laureates, 63 National Medal of Science recipients, 195 members of the National Academies, and all of the following scientific societies: * Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil) * Royal Society of Canada * Chinese Academy of Sciences * Academié des Sciences (France) * Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany) * Indian National Science Academy * Accademia dei Lincei (Italy) * Science Council of Japan * Russian Academy of Sciences * Royal Society (United Kingdom) * National Academy of Sciences (United States of America) * Australian Academy of Sciences * Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts * Caribbean Academy of Sciences * Indonesian Academy of Sciences * Royal Irish Academy * Academy of Sciences Malaysia * Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand * Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences * NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS) * National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) * National Academy of Sciences (NAS) * State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC) * Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) * Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS) * American Geophysical Union (AGU) * American Institute of Physics (AIP) * National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) * American Meteorological Society (AMS) * Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS) And on the other side of the isle we have a lot of people that aren't climate scientists and one of the major players who actually is a climate scientist is receiving his funding from Exxon. Gosh-darn hoaxes!

LOL. Hopefully it was just a bit of a slip up (it wasn't in quotes after-all). If I remember correctly, Scott recently went on a trip with Turley and Bagley to MMM, and there was some lively debate between the two. Man, what I wouldn't have done to be a fly on the wall. And yes, you are correct that Bagley (after the little disclaimers are out of the way) did write a book well worth reading -- I think the first time I heard it recommended by someone LDS was when Gene Sessions gave it a qausi-thumbs-up. Speaking of which, I think the same talk that Sessions gives it an a-ok is one of the places where the “ad rumor” is put forth. Edited to add: Yup... New Light

Answer = Me Hope that helps clear it up for ya. Ok, I guess I'll give a better answer. It's basically someone that believes in the Church but doesn't live the principles.

When reading Bagley, keep yourself grounded and know that although his facts are good (other than the journal entry he deliberately altered to create fabricated evidence... "grain" to "allies"), some of his interpretation of the facts and conclusions aren't so good. I haven't seen any substantiated evidence for the rumor, but supposedly he responded to an ad in a paper to "pin it on Brigham." As I have only seen this rumor come from the LDS camp, take it for what it’s worth (we all know that we like to create myths and rumors). Ronald Walker is the other person. Latest I got from Scott Lloyd is that volume 1 should be coming out the first of next year (hopefully there won't be any more delays). The first volume will take it up to the eve of the massacre. Richard Turley gave a little dilly at the recent FAIR conference that should be up on the website soon. A brief overview of his presentation can be found in the last Church News. He basically went into the social/psychological aspects of what could have caused good people to commit such a horrific act.

The "Swearing Elders" may still have it from when I lent it to them.

If only the ADL was around to see this caricature. I saw a bumper-sticker a while back that said "No one died when Clinton lied." It was on a Hummer though, so I summarily dismissed the intelligence of the driver.

I have my copies of The Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 and the Communist Manifesto right here. Now, if only I could remember who it was that allowed the persecution of the Saints for so long, and what party they were, and how the ideology of parties has shifted over the past 9 decades... I might need a decoder ring for this one. Now where did I put my stuff on the United Order and the Law of Consecration...

Obama '08