JohnsonJones

I was able to view it without paying the WSJ. Not sure if it's due to this being my old work computer or not (it allows me access to certain sites and such), but I was able to view it. Interesting video.

That's exactly what I said. In the very first post. If you are going to relate your anecdotal situation, I'll relate mine. That is, if we are going to relate anecdotal examples. For some reason, you then tried to demand that I my anecdotes must be facts or something strange like that. Which, I was kind of confused about, but shrugged and said...well...if that's what you want...I'm game. Not sure what you are aiming for, but sure...why not. My purpose was not to argue or fight, but see where you were wanting to go with this. Your complaint didn't make a lot of sense to me, but I wasn't upset about it, but kind of confused and curious where you were going with this and where you wanted to go with it. However, if it was going to go into the area where you were trying to back up your anecdotal experiences with fact (which I suppose you may have been wanting to do as you demanded me to back mine up with facts, AND, as my experiences were different than yours, perhaps you were wanting to prove that my experiences were less like what actually is reflected by the statistics and numbers than yours were) I didn't want to have to put up with a bunch of conspiracy information and fake information sites (such as I mentioned before...flat earthers, anti-vaxxers, etc). I wanted to be clear and up front that I am open to your opinion (whatever it was...as I said, I wasn't quite sure where you were wanting to go with this), but if you were going to go that route, please try to do things that would convince me rather than things that would do the opposite. (I'm open to valid discussion and debate, and open to being convinced, but if you are aiming to convince me of something, use resources that I consider useful rather than those I do not. I was trying to point you in that direction so that if you had valid points, you might be able to convince me of your viewpoints). In that light, I thought giving a few examples of what I would look for could guide you in the right direction. In that light, I actually started posting information on the lead causes of death as examples of what we are looking for in regards to facts. If we want FACTS, we can post FACTS. However, if we are going by anecdotal information, then demanding someone back up their anecdotes with facts for no apparent reason while you don't do the same is kind of...well...odd. Not offensive, but it didn't give me any idea of what you were actually wanting or after. This is the almost the exact same Phrase I used, except you separated two sentences with a comma (which is a common item to do with two sentences) and reversed their order. Otherwise, it's almost exactly the same thing I stated to begin with. However, as I admitted, what read as crystal clear to me, did not read crystal clear to others.

I am not really a big fan of AI. I'm glad I don't have to deal with it academically anymore (I am now...officially retired...finally). I didn't have to worry about it as much because my testing tended to be old school (you go to the testing center, they give you a blue book, you write your mid-term and final in the blue book) for under graduates, and the graduate students are held to a higher standard than what you will get out of AI (I think). I know some professors have had great difficulties with it. Personally, if it was something that they could use AI for in my classes, I think due to requiring sources and references, they would need to do just as much work to do prompts and other inputs to get an accurate report as they would if they just did it themselves without the AI, that they would learn what was needed either way. But AI is getting more complex and more advanced and I don't know if that would continue to work in the future. Some already felt that it had surpassed what we could monitor already during my last year or two at the university. It opens many ways for students to cheat, and that obviously is not what the Lord would probably want. I personally dislike a LOT of the AI we are seeing today. I want to turn it off of Google half the time I'm doing a search now as I would prefer the actual sources than a summation. I don't want it in my PC (but I have no idea how to turn this copilot thing off), and don't want it on my phone. It seems they want to put it everywhere, whether we want it or not. I can see that many kids these days will probably only read the first thing on Google (which is the AI summary) and accept that rather than do further research. With that type of mindset, with AI ideas or items getting more prevalent in every electronic device in our lives, I can see how these future adults and leaders could be easily duped into believing things without trying to look further than whatever the AI tells them to. In that instance, I could see how important being led by the spirit may be in the future. I don't know if this was the exact thing President Nelson was warning about (it could be part of it along with many other things) but I can definitely see how it could be.

What did I just watch???? Why would people use AI to make something like this? I had some kids watching behind me and they found it hilarious. I made sure to tell them that the entire video was fake, but they already knew this apparently. What a strange video.

This is what I claimed I bolded and underlined the part you missed. I thought it was obvious that when I stated we are going off of anecdotal information, you would understand that your statement on who died from being vaccinated was absolutely anecdotal, and that this also was stating MY INFORMATION was anecdotal (sorry about the all caps @NeuroTypical, but it seems when I don't do this, people may be missing something I've been saying, I've been trying not to use them though). Everything in the post was anecdotal. Thus, anecdotally, NO ONE WHO WAS VACCINATED DIED from Covid-19. That's 100% no one died. This is anecdotal information. It's 100% fact (once you realize, that this is anecdotal). Anecdotal doesn't mean it's true overall, but is based on what you have personally experienced. It's 100% fact that in my personal experience, I didn't see anyone who was vaccinated from Covid-19 die from the disease. In your anecdotal post you claim it was personally what you saw (but many of your posts besides that one, such as where you claim hospital workers are manipulating information don't say that it's an opinion, anecdotal, or anything of the sort, but are literally saying it like they are facts without anything to back them up). Why do you think I included that this was anecdotal information except to point out that what we both were doing was using anecdotal information in our posts? I thought you were wanting to try to prove that being vaccinated was a higher cause of death than dying from Covid-19, if we go off your personal thoughts or something. If that's what you feel or think, I'm am open for you to try to present your case. If not, I'm not sure why you are wanting me to prove something I already said was anecdotal (and I think I've been pretty clear since then, if you didn't catch it on the original post) as absolute truth rather than...as I said...anecdotal information. I can show that dying from being vaccinated was not as high a cause of death as Covid-19 was...or is, most likely. In fact, during 2020-2022 it (Covid-19) was one of the leading causes of death...while being vaccinated from Covid-19 was not and had a very SMALL chance of causing death (an even smaller chance than some of the other vaccines out there, so those going on about peope dying from the vaccine is a little odd to focus on this one rather than others which have a higher mortality rate). I posted some actual references to that above, but am open for you to show counter references to back something up that you feel is wrong, or of a different opinion of.

No, as I stated, this was anecdotal, just like @mirkwood had an anecdotal experience about the only ones he knew were those who were actually vaccinated. It's why I stated, it was anecdotal (meaning, based on personal experience. Perhaps I wasn't clear, though I thought by stating it was anecdotal information, people would understand my statement was anecdotal. I suppose what may have seemed clear to me, may not be clear to others). Personally, no one I knew that was vaccinated died from Covid-19. If we are going from anecdotal experiences, than I would imagine my experience is just as valid as anyone else's. I did know of people who died from Covid-19 (unfortunately), and I did know at least one member who had been vaccinated was seriously affected by it (he is older than I am, that was hospitalized [we did a fast for him] but he recovered luckily). I got rather sick during that time period, but not enough to go on a ventilator. I was blessed. I was also vaccinated. My spouse lost her sense of smell, and I know of one or two young people that experienced what one would term...long Covid, but most of those who died in from Covid were early on and were from my generation rather than the younger generations.

You gave an anecdotal reference, so I also gave an anecdotal experience. I'm not certain how you can claim an opinon or personal experience (rather than using statistics) is not anecdotal. Especially when I outright state it is anecdotal (you know what anecdotal means...correct?) That said I don't mind as long as you use an actual source that's not some far right conservative wacked out conspiracy laden site that claims we never landed on the moon, vaccines don't work, the earth is flat, or other nonsense like that (and unfortunately, there seems to be a LOT of those out there and for some odd reason the Trump "Conservatives" seem to eat that stuff up. Normal conservatives...not so much. But there's a lot of nonsense out there. Anti-Intellectualism, Anti-Science, and Anti-Education seem to be on the rise these days). (To be clear, I don't mind conservative or liberal sources, but those that go off about how evil and wrong all scientists and science is...won't convince me...and I think your point is to try to convince me rather than just be a sounding board). If it's from a reputable source, and can be sourced to something reputable...I'm game. Okay, let's check for the top death rates of those kids who were 18 to 25 Those are the kids I mostly was over and worked with in the University system (and thus, the ones I would know about the most). I didn't know of any of those students that died from Covid, vaccinated or not. I didn't know anyone of the younger generation (up to their 50s) that died of Covid in my Ward or stake (personally known. I heard about some, and read about others, but no one I knew personally from those ages died from that cause. That's anecdotal again, however). For those who are in my age group you are going to be looking at those 70+ and older. I'd probably shoot for the years between 2020 and 2022. This is a decent example... Top causes of death for ages 15-24 number of deaths from Statista ages 20-24 This is pretty good. I consider the CDC pretty decent for that time period, though I know a lot of uneducated anti-vaxxers and flat earthers were against it. CDC's National Viital Statistics I'm not certain what you are trying to prove to me (though, maybe it's the idea you think that more people died from being vaccinated from Covid-19 than died from other causes (or even from Covid-19 itself), in which case that's not supported by any of the data I looked at above. TLDR: I'm game for you to post some things to try to convince me (Which is more of a chance an opportunity than I think most people would give me here), but if you wish to do so, please use valid sources rather than something that would waste my time. I'm always willing to listen and consider other opinions, but I'd also prefer a strong argument with valid sources than not.

100% of the people my age who died from Covid were NOT Vaxxed. If we are going by anecdotal information. The only young people I knew who died during that time period, died from other things (suicide, accidents, and other sad situations).

Brigham Young is a...rather interesting individual. He tried to press a view of our Father Adam, as well as Father Adam, and their relationship between each other and our lord, Jesus Christ. Some of his views he tried to get into canon, but was generally prevented by at least one solitary vote who did not agree with that view. Thus, he never had unanimous support among the twelve for certain parts of the doctrine. One portion that I've learned about later that is scientifically false, was his idea regarding Adam and Eve. His thoughts were that since woman could not have any see of their own, (or, in our idea and language, she didn't provide any DNA to help create a baby, she was merely the place the baby grew), and only Adam had that ability, Eve was said to come from his Rib, but it really was from his loins. She was literally his offspring in that manner, and than as she was that, she also made him complete. A little confusing, but we know that's not how it works today. We know that the DNA for a child needs both parents, otherwise you only have half the genetic material required to make a child (at least, naturally). He was a very stubborn man though, and tried to push through some of these views regardless. He pushed them in some conferences. He pushed them in some sermons. He pushed them in the Temple, he pushed them at the churches. This, however, was the very reason he was Prophet. The saints HAD to have Brigham Young to be their prophet. He was the only one stubborn and strong enough to uproot them from their lands in the East, move them hundreds and over a thousand miles westward, to a desert land that seemed inhospital to human life in general, and then, with a willpower that really is remarkable, enable the Saints to form a thriving society. The church today, exists, because Brigham Young's willpower and stubborness was strong enough to make it happen. We had to have him as prophet so we could be. We can see this with other prophets sometimes. They are prophet at a specific time and they are the best ones to serve as leadership. The most recent is our Prophet President Russell M. Nelson. Do you think it was mere coincidence that we had one of the world's greatest doctors leading our church during a time of great medical difficulties in the world? I do not. This does not mean he is infallible, or perfect, or that he never makes mistakes or has misunderstandings. It is that he is the Prophet of the Lord and called to be such. As the Prophet he has missions that we know from the start, and missions that arise that were probably foreordained before the world was, but that he is called to serve in this capacity during their mortal ministry. I feel Brigham Young had some turbulent things he said and did, but when I see what he accomplished for the members and the church of the Lord against overwhelming odds that he would fail (and in fact, anyone else probably would have failed), there is no doubt that he was called to Lead the Church at the time he served as it's leader because he was the only one that could get the things done...completed as he did.

I have been thinking on some very similar items recently. I've come to some conclusions. Justice is not fair. Justice is not necessarily good. It's not bad, but it's not good either. Justice can be incredibly unfair. Justice can be incredibly inequal. When people talk about justice, many do not mean that. They do not want justice, they want equality or they want something to be fair. However, there's nothing fair about justice in our lives, or at least sometimes justice is invariably unfair. This is why we MUST have mercy, because without mercy, life would not be fair. Some would have far better chances then others in receiving rewards. A prime example. A man is starving and his children are starving. He has no job because he was fired for no reason. He is willing to work, but no work is to be had. He goes to the grocer even though he has no funds. He steals 1,000 dollars worth of food. He gives it to his children. He then is arrested. He is charged. His children starve to death. He goes to prison for committing a felony. Another man works at the store. He is a manager. He dislikes the man mentioned above. The man above is the hardest worker in the store, but because he is disliked by the manager, he is fired. The manager then decides he wants to steal 1000 dollars from the store. He gets arrested and charged. His father is rich and has connections. With the best lawyer, and tweaking those connections, he gets off with a minimum sentence and fine. The both committed a felony. They both did the crime. Even with equal justice, both should serve a jail time and pay a fine. There are those in society that would say that this is not fair. I would be one that would agree it is not fair. How is it fair that children should die because their father was fired for no reason by a petty man? However, Justice is blind, or should be. Society operates because Justice is applied in this way. It doesn't matter whether you are rich or poor, powerful or not, Justice will be served. In this life we have those born into comfort and wealth. They have every blessing one could desire. They have the blessings of the gospel. Others are born into the most severe poverty. They are tormented by the horrors of this world at every turn. They never receive the gospel. That one goes to the Celestial Kingdom and one does not if they both do not sin, is justice. However, many would say that is not even close to being remotely fair. It's not fair because the situations are not equal. This is why we must have mercy. This is why there needs to be mercy, because this world is inherently unfair, and justice without mercy can be a very unfair thing.

Faith can also be seen as believing something that is true. In that same light, if something has not occurred, but you believe it will, and it will occur as you think it will, and then you act upon that belief, then this is faith. A prime example. Your arm is on a desk relaxing. You believe that you can lift your arm up. It has not happened yet, but you have enough experience and reliably feel that you can lift your arm if you wish to. You then lift your arm. You have practiced your faith. You may do this without even thinking about it, and yet, if it has not happened, but you basically know it will, it is still faith, as it is something you believe will happen that has not actually occurred. In this same manner, the Lord can act in faith to make worlds and to enact various ideas that he fashions via his power and authority.

I've found the exact opposite. There are many people willing to do things, but only certain people are asked to do things. Or...the same 10 people are always put in leadership positions and asked to do things and everyone else is always ignored. I constantly have callings and asked to do things, but I have friends who never get asked and don't even have callings! They get to sit back in their old age...but not I! I think one problem that we see is that we don't ask people enough to be able to do things. People are more than willing, if only they were asked to do so. It's amazing how many show up to clean the ward house if you personally call them the week they can help out. But when you don't personalize it, you get the same 5 people every week. I find it horrible how we have the same person called to be a Elder's quorum president, the Bishop or Bishopric, High counsel, and Stake leadership. There are people that were in my ward that were worthy that never were called to such positions. Sometimes they were far more worthy than some of those I have known in leadership positions (I've known some pretty bad thieves in the Stake Presidencies and High Counsels, some rather dishonest individuals among those groups, and have horror stories that ensue due to that)! I feel the Church would be a more just and fair place if we gave everyone equal opportunities to attain the same blessings of high callings as each other. Instead, sometimes it turns into a nepo party (nepotism) or just a plain party of who's popular and who's not, and that's unfortunate. I would gladly enable some of the older brethren who have always been Elders (and no reason they should not have ever been a High Priest, some of them are the best people I know!) to be given the opportunities that they have been denied. However, I surely and truly hope that the Lord is right and honest when he says the first shall be last and the last shall be first, and it applies to heaven. I would imagine there will be some pretty high and lofty leaders that are the last in heaven, and some of those who were never given these blessings and opportunities in this life that will be first in heaven. I, myself, know that I am not close to being as righteous as some of these members who have been denied these blessings in this life. I strive to be better, but I am still far too worldly to compare to many of them.

While not all are able to serve a mission, missions are much more open and available for those who wish to serve today. Back in your time it was probably proselyting missions that were being pushed. This is not the type of mission that is well suited for every type of individual. These days, service missions are also a type of mission that one can serve and still get the "name tag" to wear proudly...if one wants to put it that way. Service missions can be tailored in various ways to enable the individual, no matter the disability, to be able to serve the Lord honorably. Due to these types of changes, almost anyone who wants or wishes to serve a mission and is worthy, can serve a mission in the capacity that they are able to do so. A Mission is a choice, and whether one serves a mission or not will not reflect on whether they go to the Celestial Kingdom or not. It does not determine what type of member they turn out to be in later years, or how faithful they will be to the gospel or the church after the missionary age. There are many who serve missions who fall away from the church, and many who do not serve missions who are faithful and strong members. --------------------------------------------------------------- However, it will not stop people from using it as a measure to weigh one's background. A mission can be a helpful predictor of what an individual was or is in their behaviour and attitudes. I have a grand daughter who was dating a young man. I found out that he did not go on a mission and I questioned her about it. She was very hesitant to tell me anything about him. I told her that from what I could see, very few reasons would disallow a young man from serving in his condition. It made me suspect about what type of quality of young man he was. Many times when one chose not to serve a mission it indicated that they were either... Inactive Had some sort of medical difficulty or problem Lacked a testimony Other problems which were serious, but didn't fall in the above Or...and through no fault of their own, simply could not acquire the funds to serve. Turns out that my feelings were correct. He didn't serve a mission because he got a girl pregnant and then got married to her. Later, when she had a major health difficulty, he divorced her. My grand daughter spent a good two years wasting her time with this fellow. At the time he just wasn't a committed individual. I wish she would have simply dumped him and moved on to better individuals in the dating field. This is not a condemnation of those that did not serve missions, but many members have seen the effects from some of those that did not serve missions. Having been burned by these types of individuals at times, they feel it better to avoid being burned again, even if it is only an illusion of fire rather than actually being a fire. It isn't that those who did not serve missions are bad people, but there are those among them who are and have done enough to spread that stigma about it. It's like that idea where you may see a bunch of people, and most of them are good, but sometimes there is that one individual that is bad that sours everyone to the rest of them. Today, with how much easier it is for young men to serve missions, questions arise even more when a young man chooses not to. Not serving a mission has become to vogue inside the church. I have over 20 grandchildren. I've only had one grandson that has served a mission thus far. One. It's not that the others cannot serve missions, they chose not to. ---------------------------------------------------------- I can understand the frustrations about not serving a mission. When others talk about their mission, I sometimes comment that I served several hundred missions (Military missions). My humor...is a singular wit at times. However, it places mee me alongside others who are not in that same LDS missionary field of experiences in the judgement of those I say this too. That said, I also feel that a young man who is worthy and able (and being able has never been easier) should serve a mission. Choosing not to do so (as many of my grandchildren have chosen not to) is a reflection of what they feel is important and their choices in life that will probably reverberate and effect them throughout the rest of their lives.

Vaccination doesn't mean one is completely immune with MRNA vaccines, or at least the Covid Vaccines. It lowers the chances of serious illness. Basically, if we look at it like gambling. Hypothetical numbers. Without taking the vaccine, you have a 1 in 10 chance (depending on age, the older you get, the more 1 in 10 it will be, for younger individuals it may be 1 in 10,000. At least for the initial strain, young children were highly resistant to the devastating effects) of dying. 1 in 5 of developing severe symptoms that could lead to hospitalization. If you take the vaccine, that gamble falls to 1 in 100 for death, 1 in 25 for serious complications or hospitalization. That means, in a department which has approximately 700 people, if everyone was vaccinated, and if they were all elderly like me, they could have up to 7 deaths and almost 30 people that are hospitalized due to Covid in this scenario. Better than 70 deaths and 140 hospitalizations. Most vaccines don't ensure total immunity. The amount given varies from vaccine to vaccine. The hope is that if enough gain that immunity then we get herd immunity, which lessens the chance for the disease to infect everyone. As less take the vaccines, herd immunity decreases and the number of cases increases. This is why measles is starting to make a comeback in the states (along with a few other diseases that were eradicated during my lifetime, only to come back because of stupid anti-vaccine ideas these days). People are not vaccinating their kids and enough are not vaccinated that the herd immunity is fading...so those that are not vaccinated have a chance to actually contract the disease now.

I'm glad we can still get the printed version. So much of the world forgets that, we, elderly people exist. I feel I have a better grasp on a lot of the technology out there than other peers my age, but I still feel lost in this world of technology. It's grown so fast that I just can't catch up!