• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


1 Follower

About Ormond

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Omaha, Nebraska
  • Interests
    Besides ASOIAF:Given names, their usage and history

Recent Profile Visitors

9,135 profile views
  1. I suppose that depends on who "we" is. It probably isn't a term used by a lot of everyday people in the USA. However, "internal migration" is definitely the common term for people moving from one place to another within a nation, and the term for these people used by demographers and sociologists is definitely "internal migrants." http://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/internal-migration-0
  2. If you want to use "spiritual descendants" figuratively, fine. But there were no physical descendants of Joseph Smith at the Mountain Meadows massacre because all of his physical descendants were back East, never having moved to Utah.
  3. Nice to have you back! Are you a math professor or did I misremember your field?
  4. I know that Mormon men are eventually supposed to be the god of their own planet. I have no idea whether or no their wives would be "everlastingly pregnant". That doesn't seem logical or necessary to LDS theology. All Mormon (LDS) males are eligible to be ordained to the priesthood at age 12, and the great majority are. Within the church they would outrank women, but given what I know of Mormon culture, I doubt if that means 13 year old boys get to boss their mothers around at home. I think your last sentence is overblown. Most LDS members aren't actively "fighting" against critics of Mormonism. Also, none of Joseph Smith's descendants have been "homicidal." His only confirmed descendants are those through his first wife, Emma, and they didn't even become part of the main Mormon denomination, staying behind in the east and founding the Reorganized Latter Day Saint church (which never believed in polygamy) instead. There has been much speculation on whether or not Joseph Smith had other children by his other wives, but modern DNA research has so far shown that none of the proposed candidates are his descendants. If we want to discuss the LDS further, this should be moved to a separate thread outside of US Politics.
  5. Mormons are NOT Protestants. With their acceptance of the Book of Mormon as scripture, not to mention several very unusual doctrines, they are a separate branch of Christianity from Catholics, Protestants, or the eastern Orthodox churches. This is something both the Mormons themselves and other Christians would agree on.
  6. Yes, using the idea that there are twice as many homeless White people as Black people to claim that "white privilege" no longer exists is numerically illiterate. There are 198 million Whites in the USA and 46.8 million African-Americans. There are over four times as many Whites as there are African-Americans. So if there are ONLY twice as many homeless Whites as Blacks, that means that Blacks are actually TWICE as likely to be homeless as Whites are, given their proportions in the population. If Whites are only half as likely to be homeless as Blacks, that certainly would be one indication of "white privilege" still existing. P.S. To be completely clear, the 198 million figure is for "non-Hispanic Whites,"
  7. NO. I don't know of any pollster that predicted that Clinton would win "in a landslide". There were pollsters (or poll aggregators) who claimed her chances of winning were well over 90%, but that is NOT the same thing as saying she would win "in a landslide." The polling predictions for the 2016 election in terms of national popular vote were more accurate than they were in 2012. It's the distribution of votes between the states that goofed up the pollsters in terms of the electoral college. The overall polling was about as accurate as could be expected, and, again, nobody was predicting a "landslide".
  8. In September 2015 the Gallup poll found that 91% of Americans said they would vote for a Jewish candidate for President --which means the majority of those who would claim they are "evangelical" Christians must have said they would vote for a Jewish candidate. I know that answering an abstract question is different from one's reaction to a particular candidate, but I think if 91% will tell Gallup they'd vote for a Jewish candidate, a charismatic Jewish candidate could certainly get to 51% in a real election. And I know a lot of "devout Christians" who would vote for a non-Christian for President. Of course, I am a mainline Protestant who is a member of a liberal-leaning congregation. http://news.gallup.com/opinion/polling-matters/185813/six-americans-say-yes-muslim-president.aspx P.S. By the way, i would say I am a Christian first, a liberal second, and a Democrat way, way third.
  9. I think Obama was probably better known than Bullock at this point in the Presidential election cycle because of his famous speech at the previous national Democratic party convention. However, I would agree that there is still plenty of time for Bullock to become known and that being relatively unknown can be turned into an advantage. Though Howard Dean didn't end up winning the nomination in the end, I don't think he was any more "known" than Bullock and think an outsider probably has an even better chance of making a good run for the nomination in 2020 than Dean did back in 2004.
  10. It probably would be much better to put more discussion of intelligence and IQ tests in general in a separate thread.
  11. I think you have that a bit overblown. Alfred Binet never claimed he was testing everything that was intelligence, or that what he was measuring was hereditary rather than environmental. But he certainly thought what he was trying to measure was a part of "intelligence". And though his original test was for children, I really doubt if he ever said it was impossible for others to create valid tests of intelligence for adults. The introductory psychology textbook I teach out of (Myers & DeWall, 10th edition) uses "the mental potential to learn from experience, solve problems, and use knowledge to adapt to new situations."
  12. Was there anyone else in any of the rooms on that hallway when this happened? If not, I can easily see how no one would know this.
  13. Here is the link to today's column: http://www.omaha.com/living/evans-tanya-tonya-are-survivors/article_3c5e17cb-0083-53f2-b2d9-42214c5a07ae.html They edited out the information that although H. Rider Haggard's novel is set in Africa, the 1935 film shifted Ayesha's kingdom to Siberia, which may partly explain the use of "Tanya" for the new character. Also, I should point out that Tania has been extensively used in Latin America.
  14. It's always been hard to tell "on the net" or through email. There has been research showing that people are abysmal at telling sarcasm from sincerity in email-like communications even when they do know the other person well. It usually isn't wise to try to be sarcastic in an email unless you are using a stock phrase everyone understands as being sarcastic, or unless you specifically mark your statement as being sarcasm.
  15. Uh, if you do not want to discuss anything on this site other than things directly related to Westeros, simply stay out of the General Chatter area. Discussing things unrelated to Westeros is precisely what General Chatter is for.