NeuroTypical
-
Posts
14721 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
166
Posts posted by NeuroTypical
-
-
It's worth noting that you have to take the military ASVAB test to enter military service. And if you don't score high enough, you won't be joining military service. The ASVAB is roughly equivalent to an IQ test, so you roughly need an IQ of 83 or higher to join the military.
Maybe the most widely-known event was Muhammad Ali scoring a 78, and not entering military service. "I said I was the greatest, not the smartest."
It's a flawed and imperfect process, of course, but not a total failure at only letting people fight and die for our country who can actually choose to do so, rather than just following orders to stand in a line and sign your name and get on a bus.
-
"The mission of the United States military is to kill people and break things. Anything else is a distraction."
- Rush Limbaugh(Holy crap do I miss that guy more every day.)
- Jedi_Nephite, zil2, Still_Small_Voice and 1 other
-
3
-
1
-
17 hours ago, Ironhold said:
Only the first two books are in the public domain; the rest are still under copyright, and Disney's original characters (et al) are still protected for a while yet.
Yes, well, I'd warrant the fear of Disney lawyers is low on this topic. It ain't stopping anyone from cashing in. I got this for Christmas last year:
-
There's a bear or three within 10 miles of my house. I hear about them once every few years, loping across the street from one garbage can to another. They seem nice enough.
Also, Milne's Winnie The Poo fell out of copyright protection the other year, giving rise all sorts of money grab rebrands, including a horror film.
-
On 2/15/2021 at 8:49 AM, Traveler said:
Note the Lithium is on this list – Currently China supplies 85% of the Lithium we use. Two Lithium mines have been opened up in Nevada that will supply our needed Lithium. In fact China has been moving to control the world’s supply chain for almost all of these elements – I believe their thinking is that if they control the supply for these elements they will control the world. If we are to have solar or wind power we must have Lithium.
I've been thinking about @Traveler's dire warning in this thread since he made it in 2021. I note the following story in today's Wall Street Journal:
QuoteThe Great Salt Lake Is Full of Lithium. A Startup Wants to Harvest It.
This summer, a California startup plans to start construction on a project to suck up water from the Great Salt Lake to extract one of its many valuable minerals: lithium, a critical ingredient in the rechargeable batteries used in electric vehicles. The water will then be reinjected back into the lake, which Lilac Solutions says addresses concerns about the damaging effects of mineral extraction.
At its peak, Lilac says it will use a series of pipes to suck up 80,000 gallons of water a minute to harvest the mineral. The company plans to eventually produce up to 20,000 tons of battery-grade lithium a year at its site in northern Utah, located among fields of cattle and pickleweed.
...
At the Great Salt Lake, mineral extraction is nothing new. The lake has been shrinking for decades because of agricultural, industrial and other diversions of its feed waters. Extraction of minerals accounts for about 13% of its water diversion, according to a 2019 study. Meanwhile, the lake has become a concentrated soup of minerals, since it doesn’t have an outlet that lets it discharge the ones that flow into it.
Sounds like the Biden administration is down with all that.
-
-
There's a TikTok channel for ChatGPT shaming. Apparently it has a difficult time creating an image of a Big Mac without pickles or lettuce.
It knows all about pickles and can make pictures of them all day long. Same with lettuce. But the only thing it knows about Big Macs are all the billions of images out there of one, and they all have pickles and lettuce. It has no issues creating an image of a plain hamburger.
-
Hm. I've been assuming this was the preferred style for quite a long time. I remember in the late '90's arguing with trinitarians about our doctrine of exhaltation and inheriting all the Father hath and such topics. I made sure to ensure all speculation about the deification of humans to include the lower-case g (and the lower-case s when looking at D&C 103 9-10).
I haven't gone so far as to hyphenate God as is Jewish custom (and the custom of some non Jewish folks too), but I understand why they do it and I've got no issues. Always happy to talk about Hashem with folks, and avoid use of the "actual" name out of respect for their desires to keep holy things as holy as possible.
-
This link was looking for a joke thread, so I picked this one.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0hXNKyP5hO/?igsh=MTlrNjNicmIyYmJrOQ==
-
I'm slogging through it now.
7 hours ago, Emmanuel Goldstein said:"It is important for us to understand our enemy." I believe this interview is very important to watch for that reason.
I believe this interview is better thought of as "It's not exactly important, but still possibly useful, for us to understand what our enemy wants us to think about them." I'm sure he also talks to China, India, the Arab world, the Persians, as well as every country in Europe. When they ask them "how come you justified your invasion of Ukraine by saying you were reacting against a potential attack from the US", he gives a different answer to each one of them. Each answer specifically tailored to their understanding of history, and their thoughts about Russia and the West and the US.
I can't fault him. Every nation state in the world, from the beginning of human history through today, when talking to their neighbors, spin their conversations to individual audiences, to maximize their agendas. We all do it. It's how the earth is run. It's been this way since we got booted from the Garden of Eden, and it'll stay that way until the 2nd coming when Christ returns in glory and takes over, killing everyone who won't bend the knee.
-
Dang. You got my hopes up, but in the US, Easter Sunday is March 31, while April Fools day is April 1.
Furiously googling, I realize there's a lot I don't know about Easter. Astronomical Easter, Gregorian Easter, and Julian Easter? Are Americans Gregorian Easter celebrators? If so, we'll have to wait until 2029 for an Easter on April Fool's day.
Honestly, that will test my ability to prioritize important things. My often-irreverent sense of humor should take 2nd place to celebrating the birth of my Savior. I will be challenged more than usual.
-
5 minutes ago, LDSGator said:
I’m against alarmism and false stories about Chinese invasions though. Got me there.
That just means you need to watch more movies! And it ain't just humans - it's the dang aliens!
https://www.ranker.com/list/best-movies-about-america-being-invaded/ranker-film
-
Yeah, I don't care about Red Dawn notions of armed incursion. (The original was ok, the remake was boring.) But there are endless valid and real reasons nations sneak people into other nations where they operate covertly. And there are also endless valid and real reasons nations worry about the various impacts of illegal immigration. If you like our culture, standards of living, economy, and institutions and want to preserve them, there's plenty of cause to worry about the impact all of it has on that stuff.
History is fascinating. They tell me the reason our southern border is so porous, has to do with the terms they agreed to during the last US Mexican war in 1847. The US won pretty soundly, but was still in the process of inventing itself, and there were several American opinions at odds with each other. How a lot of the frontier lands were going to get populated , who got to be a "US Settler", how would citizenship work, etc. In the end, we signed treaties that officially made it illegal to be illegal, but everyone knew the border would see a lot of migration. There's been a flow back and forth ever since, especially seasonal as the US became a major food producer.
Trump wants to do what he's done in the past, build another massive monument to his ego with a solid gold TRUMP on it to make sure he goes down in the history books as building the wall. But his ego aside, there are plenty of good nonTrump, non-ego-driven reasons to have a robust southern border with tall walls and wide gates with good immigration laws. The wall is one component to that.
-
4 hours ago, LDSGator said:
99.9% of the “Chinese” that are illegal immigrants are here for a new life in America. Not for armed insurrection.
Well, let’s work the math. ~37,000 Chinese national apprehensions at the border last year. Maybe that many again got through without being apprehended. That makes ~74,000 entered our country illegally last year. If 99.9% of them are not here for nefarious evil, that means .1% of them are, which means last year ~74 murderous malign evil bad Chinese bad people came into our country last year, intent on nefarious stuff.
Maths. -
Quote
38.8.23.1 Involvement or Documents in Legal Proceedings
Church leaders should not involve themselves in civil or criminal cases for members in their units without first consulting with Church legal counsel. This same policy applies to speaking with or writing to lawyers or court personnel, including through email.
Leaders should speak with Church legal counsel if, in their Church capacities, they:
Believe they should testify or communicate in a legal matter.
Are being required by legal process to testify or communicate in a legal matter.
Are ordered to provide evidence.
Are asked to provide documents or information voluntarily.
Are asked to communicate with lawyers or civil authorities about legal proceedings, including sentencing or parole hearings.However well intentioned, Church leaders sharing information in legal proceedings can be misinterpreted and damaging. Such sharing can be especially harmful to victims and their families. Following the Church’s policy also helps keep the Church from being inappropriately implicated in legal matters.
38.8.23.2 Testimony in Legal Proceedings
Church leaders may not testify on behalf of the Church in any legal proceeding without prior approval from the Office of General Counsel. This policy also applies to sentencing and parole hearings. Church leaders may not provide verbal or written evidence in their leadership capacity without this approval.
Leaders should not suggest or imply that their testimony in a legal proceeding represents the Church’s position.
Leaders should not influence the testimony of a witness in any legal proceeding.
Contact information for Church legal counsel is provided in 38.8.23.
So, that has to do with leaders. I see nothing in the handbook about how missionaries can't be witnesses or testify in legal proceedings.
-
28 minutes ago, askandanswer said:
might be
might be
could end up
might come from
may have been
perhaps even
could give evidence
could be different
could be a
might have witnessed
could influence
may be the case
could result in
might otherwise have beenwhat is the moral and ethical thing to do in this situation.
How might you handle such a matter?Yeesh. I guess these are the two main principles at play:
QuoteWe believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
QuoteThou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
I'm also a big fan of these guidelines:
QuoteThird, to be righteous, an intermediate judgment must be within our stewardship. We should not presume to exercise and act upon judgments that are outside our personal responsibilities.
...
Fourth, we should, if possible, refrain from judging until we have adequate knowledge of the facts.The 3rd guideline is basically "mind your own business". If you're not personally witness to this story, then all of your claim to the 4th guideline is hearsay and gossip. Whenever I find myself in a situation like that, I'm happy to talk in principles to anyone who wants to listen to me, but I wouldn't be interfering with a criminal matter.
Example: My friend is telling me this story, and my friend was there. I might talk about the options my friend has, which include being brave and fighting a system with risk of blowback, or keeping silent and not doing the right thing. But at the end of the day, it would be my friend's action to take, not mine.
- zil2, mirkwood and askandanswer
-
3
-
Hey, this is a good place to scream into the wind.
That link is really interesting, as it gives us regular folk a look into the inner workings of SCOTUS and how they go about getting ready to think and reason and create findings and rulings that impact all our lives. I have no idea if the Trump-on-the-ballot issue is similar to other cases they prepare for, but I'm having fun watching it go by.
70 amicus curiae briefs submitted so far. I only scanned through the first dozen or two. But there are plenty, from all over the place. There are plenty from both sides.
QuoteJan 03 2024 Brief amici curiae of Senator Steve Daines & National Republican Senatorial Committee VIDED. Jan 05 2024 Brief amici curiae of Indiana, West Virginia, 25 Other States, and the Arizona Legislature Jan 05 2024 Brief amici curiae of Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee Jan 09 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Professor Seth Barrett Tillman Jan 11 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Landmark Legal Foundation Jan 11 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Vivek Ramaswamy Jan 15 2024 Brief amicus curiae of David E. Weisberg Jan 16 2024 Brief amici curiae of Public Interest Legal Foundation, et al. Jan 16 2024 Brief amici curiae of Ryan Binkley, Binkley for President 2024, et al. in support of neither party Jan 16 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Professor Kurt T. Lash Jan 16 2024 Brief amicus curiae of William Jones Jan 17 2024 Brief amici curiae of 102 Colorado Registered Electors Jan 17 2024 Brief amici curiae of Children's Rights Legal Scholars and Advocates in support of neither party Jan 17 2024 Brief amici curiae of Devin Watkins and Charles Watkins Jan 17 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Jack Coben in support of neither party Jan 17 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Pearl O. Madrial Jan 17 2024 Brief amicus curiae of The Claremont Institute's Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence Jan 17 2024 Brief amicus curiae of The League for Sportsmen, Law Enforcement and Defense Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Akhil Reed Amar, et al. in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of America's Future, et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Brennan Center for Justice, et al. in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Edward B. Foley, et al. in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Former Attorneys General Edwin Meese III, et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Former United States Attorneys Robert S. Brewer, et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Gavin M. Wax, New York Young Republican Club Inc., et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Indiana, et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Judicial Watch, Inc. and Allied Educational Foundation Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Kansas Republican Party and 32 Other State and Territorial Republican Parties Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Professors and Legal Scholars in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Republican National Committee and National Republican Congressional Committee Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Senator Steve Daines & National Republican Senatorial Committee Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of Terpsehore “Tore” Maras, et al. Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of The Secretaries of State of Missouri, et al. in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amici curiae of U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, and 177 Other Members of Congress Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Christian Family Coalition (CFC) Florida, Inc. Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Chuck Gray, Secretary of State of Wyoming Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Condemned USA Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of David Boyle in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Derek T. Muller in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of James Madison Center for Free Speech Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Kansas Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Larry Kidd Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Professor James T. Lindgren Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of The Association of the Bar of the City of New York in support of neither party Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of The Honorable Peter Meijer Jan 18 2024 Brief amicus curiae of U.S. Term Limits in support of neither party Jan 22 2024 Brief amicus curiae of G. Antaeus B. Edelsohn Jan 26 2024 Brief amici curiae of Professors Orville Vernon Burton, et al. Jan 29 2024 Brief amici curiae of American Historians Jan 29 2024 Brief amici curiae of J. Michael Luttig, et al. Jan 29 2024 Brief amicus curiae of Brian J. Martin Jan 30 2024 Amicus brief of Common Cause submitted. Jan 30 2024 Amicus brief of Floyd Abrams, Bruce Ackerman, Maryam Ahranjani, Lee C. Bollinger, Erwin Chemerinsky, Alan Chen, Kent Greenfield, Martha Minow, and Geoffrey R. Stone submitted. Jan 30 2024 Amicus brief of Marc Racicot, William Weld, Christine Todd Whitman submitted. Jan 30 2024 Amicus brief of Professor Kermit Roosevelt submitted. Jan 30 2024 Amicus brief of Professors Carol Anderson and Ian Farrell submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Capitol Police Officers Present at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021 submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Constitutional Accountability Center submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Constitutional Law Professor Mark A. Graber submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of David P. Cullenberg, Bryant "Corky" Messner, William C. Saturley submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Experts in Democracy submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Former Colorado Secretary of State Mary Estill Buchanan submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Former Republican Members of Congress submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Josh Autry submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Michael T. Worley submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Professor Sherrilyn Ifill submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of Retired State Supreme Court Justices submitted. Jan 31 2024 Amicus brief of San Francisco Taxpayers Association, The Honorable Pete McCloskey & The Honorable Quentin L. Kopp submitted. Maybe I'm a geek, but I find it fascinating to look through these as a layperson.
-
-
3 hours ago, LDSGator said:
Al Roker is not out to get you when he forecasts rain on the fourth of July.
You've got it all wrong. Roker isn't out to get me, because of my white privilege. But according to progressives, weather is racist. And not just TikTok millennial progressives either. We're talking institutional entrenched mainstream progressives.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220125-why-climate-change-is-inherently-racist
https://www.sierraclub.org/articles/2020/06/climate-crisis-racist-answer-anti-racism
https://time.com/5864704/environmental-racism-climate-change/
Nature: Racism is magnifying the deadly impact of rising city heat
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/22022022/racism-climate-change-research/
Yeah. Conservatives don't take liberal bias far enough!
-
On 1/28/2024 at 3:10 PM, LDSGator said:
Love it. My favorite part was at the end in the footer:
It took all my powers as a typist not to write, “Winter is coming.”
-
17 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Now, it is NO SECRET on these forums that I am not a fan of Trump. I think it should be clear then that I feel these moves are absolutely politically slanted. I DO NOT know who sent all the briefs, but I expect a majority to be those who would already be opposed to Trump more strongly than I am, not due to what he has supposedly done with any insurrection, but simply due to his other actions.
You can read all the briefs here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-719.html
As of the time I'm posting this, there are dozens of "brief amicus curiae". I read through the first dozen or so, and they were just about all in favor of Trump, making arguments like you're making. Perhaps some opposing briefs are in the ones I haven't read through.
-
Yep, from the "learning how to be married" crowd, this is what I've learned about the word "sorry":
Sorry 1: Oooh - I said/did something quite wrong and it had a negative impact. I'm truly remorseful, regretful, apologetic, and sorry. Consider this the first step of my overall repentance process where I promise to rid myself of whatever problematic beliefs or thoughts or character defects that had me say/do something so insensitive in the first place. (Excellent choice whenever it's genuine. You don't have to ham it up that much to mean it.)
Sorry 2: Oooh - I didn't mean to hurt you. You misunderstood me. I apologize, I could have said/did that in a different way. My intentions are good, just the execution was bad. Can I clarify or try again? (Good for anyone who wants to follow the 2nd great commandment, but you think you're right.)
Sorry 3: Oooh - that came back to bite me. That didn't get the reaction I wanted at all. I'm sorry I ended up on the receiving end of negative blowback for my words/actions. I am experiencing discomfort and want it to stop, so I'll say I'm sorry so you'll stop being the cause of my discomfort. (Popular with all narcissists, people who have no empathy, and people lacking in self-esteem. Also occasionally popular with most of us on occasion.)
Sorry 4: Yeah, sorry a [insert insult or negative judgment here] like you got offended. What a jerk you must be, to get offended by what I just said/did. Your reaction says an awful lot about you, and nothing about me. (A great way to argue with people when you're not feeling like following the 2nd great commandment, or you've got a passive-aggressive personality style, or HR is forcing you to apologize or get fired but you don't care either way. This was Justin Timberlake's apology after ripping off Janet Jackson's top and exposing her breast on national television during that superbowl halftime show.)
Unless you know what definition the person is using, then you don't know what they're saying. And people also might be trying to convey one of those, but they don't really mean it. It can be hard to judge. Mel Gibson, after going on a drunken driving binge complete with a massive rant about how Jews are the problem, did the best version of definition #1 I've seen in hollywood. But I don't know if he meant it or not.)
-
7 hours ago, zil2 said:
It my digital version of JoD, it's in volume 11 and says it was on page 272, was written/said by Brigham Young on 19 August 1866. It's on page 255 of the PDF I created when I exported this volume out of the Win3.1 "LDS Infobases" software.
When I search your link for "sin of blackness", it takes me to page 272, which matches up with what my version says.
Thanks! I always like to go to the source, and get some context.
I note this address was given one year after the US Civil War ended. Some quick googling and wiki-ing reinforce what I thought I had been taught earlier: Post-civil war Black Christians were all about self-segregation, and the LDS church was one of a very, very short list of "white churches" that would even have them as members.
From that lens, such statements as Brigham's were markedly progressive for the era.
Anyway:
-
15 hours ago, laronius said:
Brigham Young: "Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a sin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the Holy Priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the Holy Priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to."
14 hours ago, laronius said:That's a correct quote, but I can't guarantee the original transcription is correct. JD 11:266
Call for sources, please. When I go to the scanned digital copy of JD 11:266 located here, I do not see that quote or anything like it.
https://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/digital/collection/JournalOfDiscourses3/id/4493
Where does BY say what you say he says?
An Opinionated Rant
in General Discussion
Posted
I guess I should have clarified my thoughts more. It's nice that our government doesn't take our dumbest people, those least-able to advocate for themselves, and train them to act as cannon fodder and run into enemy machine gun fire. There are countless examples throughout human history where nations do exactly that. (Since long before machine guns existed.)
Wasn't thinking about morale, was thinking about crimes against humanity.