packsaddle

We don't have museums nearby but we do have abundant natural areas so the troop tends to do outdoors stuff a lot. But while I was cubmaster we took several trips each year to museums in the region as 'sleepover' outings (cubs from different packs would be allowed to bed down in the museum for a fun overnight trip). I enjoyed very many sleep-deprived days back then. And the cubs were more fun than anyone could ever expect.

AKA, no intelligence allowed Well...the film has been released for a week or so now and because I was named in the original post on this thread, I might as well restart it to see if anyone has seen the film and find out what anyone thinks. Here's what Scientific American had on their web site: http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=sciam-reviews-expelled&sc=expelled_nws "...you wouldnt expect the producers of said filmin this case, Ben Steins Expelled: No Intelligence Allowedto offer the editors of said magazine a private screening. Associate producer Mark Mathis showed up at our offices with a preview of Expelled in hand. That's right, the unexpected screening happened." So Scientific American got a sneak preview, courtesy of the filmmakers...what were they thinking? The results were interesting. One of the reviewers had been a student at Pepperdine and he was surprised to see the setting for the film. He had entered college with a firm creationist background and belief. And after examining the evidence for evolution he had changed his mind: "It was with some irony for me, then, that I saw Ben Stein's antievolution documentary film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, opens with the actor, game show host and speechwriter for Richard Nixon addressing a packed audience of adoring students at Pepperdine University, apparently falling for the same trap I did. Actually they didn't. The biology professors at Pepperdine assure me that their mostly Christian students fully accept the theory of evolution. So who were these people embracing Stein's screed against science? Extras. According to Lee Kats, associate provost for research and chair of natural science at Pepperdine, "the production company paid for the use of the facility just as all other companies do that film on our campus" but that "the company was nervous that they would not have enough people in the audience so they brought in extras. Members of the audience had to sign in and a staff member reports that no more than two to three Pepperdine students were in attendance. Mr. Stein's lecture on that topic was not an event sponsored by the university." And this is one of the least dishonest parts of the film. So...anyone see it yet?

Wow, Lisabob that was fun! But looking over the list...I am not sure where the vote 'smart' part comes from. At least I finally found my candidate: HRM Caesar St Augustine De Buonaparte Emperor (no lie). "With a name like Smuckers..... But I suspect I'll need to have my pen ready for a write-in.

I didn't want to start a new thread and this one seemed related so here goes... A lot has happened since the thread started: McCain is annointed and everyone is speculating on the VP slot. Clinton is on the ropes but Obama hasn't quite crossed the finish line. And I just heard that Bob Barr may enter the race as a Libertarian candidate. This could be interesting. http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/stories/2008/04/04/barr_0405.html The follow-up views of Barr are, well, direct. Anyone else care?

Trevorum, all of a sudden I realized that without explanation, a simple yes or no answer could be interpreted both ways. The subject asks one question...are they equal? And then in your post you ask the opposite...are some more important? This is really confusing.

Hey, slash and burn (ahem, done constructively of course) can be fun! You get to improve the overall system by eliminating stuff. What could be easier?

Welcome to the forums Richard389 and bfloyd. Bfloyd, I have to note that drive-ins figure prominently in my childhood. I remember well watching the Ten Commandments sitting in the back seat with a bunch of other kids and my grandmother in the front passenger seat. And getting the stuffing scared out of me by The Fly and a whole bunch of movies with guys dressed in Godzilla costumes. Later when I was driving myself and dating, I experienced one of my first times at the drive-in. It was the first time I drove away and forgot to take the speaker out of the window. Also the last time.

Scoutldr, I hope you didn't get started. I have four sets of boots. My old originals (Vasque Whitneys) still work and they're nearly - oh my goodness - 40 years old. They're the ones with the best memories and I still use them occasionally. I too had a set of Nikes with tread separation. Shoe goop took care of that. By the way, if anyone is interested in sure-footed walking around in streams and river shallows, a good way to keep from slipping is to use goop or contact cement to glue Scotch Brite scouring pads on the soles of some cheap sneakers. Then, after they're really gross with toe cheese, mud, and mildew you can leave them at the X-ray machine in the airport...let the security drones contend with them.

Around these parts, we're lucky to use a blue card at all. But I get the spirit of the question and it varies. If I am doing a MB with a boy I'll ask him if he wants to fill out the card. If he doesn't, I do it for him. No big deal. FTR, I like the blue cards. But it might just be my tendency to be a traditionalist.

All I can say is WOW! I've never heard of anything this extreme before. I feel pretty much the same as all the others so far. Way beyond the call. Our reviews are little more than that, a review. To make sure everything is completed and to make sure the requirements were met. Takes about 20 minutes at the beginning of the BOR. I actually try to get the boys to be as concise as possible. Kind of like doing a briefing for top brass - who are too busy to read a thesis. I tell the boys that if they can't fit their project documentation into the spaces allotted in the workbook, they are allowed to add pages. This tends to make them more organized and focused. They don't add many. WOW!

I agree with Ed. I'm trying my best NOT to make a habit of this.

Hey Beavah, Yeah I do take personal matters very seriously...BUT (don't mention this to anyone else) speaking of holy prescience, heh, heh, I happen to sense that Rooster7 is lurking out there and about to be reincarnated (oops, I guess that's a Hindu thing?)...so I'm also trying to get his blood pressure up so that when he finally breaks the spell, he'll be fully charged and ready to go. And let me tell you what...we're going to have some fun! But gotta go just now, I think I see a frog that needs a kiss. Edited part: As long as I can edit this to respond I might as well...Trevorum's next post is right on. I shudder to think this has something to do with being in the 'Bible Belt' but I also understand Trevorum's concerns from personal observations. This is a concern for every BOR if the boy is NOT a member of some 'mainstream' flavor of Christianity in the area. Beavah, there are more of them down here as well. And...grits are gooooooooood!(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Eagledad, I salute your imagination as well. I wrote that "many", not "most" (your invention), consider these concepts unequally. I have no idea what are the views of a majority of scouters. Do you, really? I support my assertion by noting that BSA has singled out 'reverent' for special consideration and no other point of the law. Or am I wrong? If, as you claim, scouters view 'reverent' as a "gimme", then what was the need for BSA to issue the DRP? After all, in your view it should have been a "gimme". I also support my assertion by noting Trevorum's (and others) direct observations in BORs as well as my own BOR experiences. You are free to dismiss my comparison of 'thrifty' to 'reverent' as silly. I happen to think, however, that 'thrifty' is an important concept. Just as important as the rest. Nothing silly about it. In anticipation that OGE will respond with an anecdote about his BOR, they asked me about 'thrifty' too! (This message has been edited by packsaddle)

The best backpacking weather is almost over and I agree regarding the AT. In the summer it is hot, dry, and often physically challenging. Two alternatives come to mind immediately: The Chattooga River trail can be pieced together with the Bartram trail to get most of what you seek. That's all in the Clayton area. But the best alternative would be to do the Foothills Trail just across the border in SC. It runs along the Chattooga after starting at Oconee SP and then crosses the Jocassee Gorges area, ending at Jones Gap SP. The whole thing is about 60 miles and there are numerous access points to choose segments of various lengths. It crosses streams frequently so water is not a big problem and the boys will have numerous opportunities to wade, swim, and scare trout. Let me know your plans, wherever you decide to go, and I might join up if I'm in town.

Trevorum, I think it was Barry who made the argument for equivalence. Here's what he wrote: "If you are not treating thrifty equal to reverent in a BOR, or any other question for that matter, then there is a problem." Although I agree with him, I think many of us consider these concepts to be unequal and it was my intent to demonstrate that inequality. I think you are disagreeing with his statement. Edited part: I'm not sure about that 'straw man' characterization. Maybe, but it's not my 'straw man' but rather one belonging to BSA. And your admission of subjectivity is one element of the weakness of the inequality...these points are either of equal importance as several of us have argued, or they are not. But if they are not of equal importance, there is no guidance whatsoever as to what the priorities are and we are left with all permutations of priority...again supported by 'equally' good subjective opinions. Or is it simply a popularity contest?(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

I've purchased numerous handguns and the background check has never taken more than a few minutes. I'm in the store and out with a gun in less than 20 minutes. But then, this IS the South...eeeeeeehaaaaaa!

The background check will be a waste of resources for my application. And I'm fairly certain that BSA definitely WILL fail to keep my SSN confidential. But that's OK. I'm also certain that fairly quickly they'll accidentally mix my info with evmori's and probably others. They're that bad at keeping a database. So they can have my SSN. Anyone who wants to eliminate the problem of identity theft with regard to credit can do so by getting a credit freeze. It only costs $30 and if you don't give out your password, no one will be able to access your credit.

Eagledad is of the opinion that 'reverent' is of no more importance than 'thrifty'...or have I misinterpreted this? Evidently I missed BSA's Declaration of Thriftiness Principle. Anyway as Eagledad says, "I am an atheist" is the answer that is actionable. If we are to, as Eagledad says, treat "thrifty equal to reverent in a BOR", and if "I am an atheist" is grounds for failure or dismissal, then a boy's failure to be thrifty should warrant an equally decisive response, right? Quick survey... How many of us think that all boys are, in fact, thrifty? I see no hands. Anyone know of a boy who's been failed or ejected because he is not thrifty? No hands again.

Ed, could you be more specific about what you mean? Are you asking about 'God', the one in Christianity, or do you have some other god in mind?

Beavah, I agree that antagonism at a BOR has been rare in my experience. But that one time....wow, it was a doozy (sorry, technical term). Your comparison of the god question to questions about other points such as 'loyal' or 'thrifty' is interesting. It implies that you think 'thrifty' is equivalent to 'reverent' and yet I know of no boy or adult who has ever been rejected, ejected, or failed simply for not being 'thrifty'. The boys are quite aware of the 'hot buttons' we recognize as adults and a question about 'thrifty' is not the same as one about 'reverent'. I agree with the sentiment that we need to get the best people to do the reviews. I also see your point about tact. But consider the range of questions available.... The most objective would be something like: "Define 'reverence'". It's just like an exam question and the answer could be totally unrelated to personal belief. No more threatening than, "Define 'thrifty'." But the answer might be the gateway to discussion - it depends on the answer. The next question could be, "What are some of the ways that people can express 'reverence'?" Again, this is still abstract, not personal, but it allows another opportunity for the boy to explain any thoughts he wants to share. If the boy volunteers examples of 'reverence' that involve him, I could see questions regarding how he feels about the things he has shared. But the god question in the parent thread crosses the line. BSA made the god issue a 'hot button' and I recognize the inflammatory nature of the question. It assumes way too much and is almost impossible to answer satisfactorily...and it isn't in any way similar to a question about thrift. But who knows, maybe BSA will kick someone out someday for getting in over his head with credit card debt. It'll make for a whole new line of threads in these forums. Edited part: for the sake of clarity, here (again) is the question from the parent thread: "What do you think of a Eagle board of review that dares to ask the scout if he believes in a god?"(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

Ahhhh yessssss, that's one reason blue carpet just doesn't work well in the South. And white is out of the question. So my answer is that I keep a set of clothes that have no fashion relevance. It's called my entire wardrobe. Seriously, you're better off learning to live with it. If you ever go to the tropics you'll contend with it there as well. So I tend to wear a lot of dark colors, black lately, and people constantly ask if I'm from Seattle or something. I guess it also indicates a rather dark frame of mind. The Clorox approach might help if your clothes are 100% synthetic. But if they contain cellulose (cotton) you must be very careful. Strong Clorox is a powerful oxidizer and it will bleach your jeans and in stronger doses, it will eat holes if they're cotton. Skin too, so be careful. We use Clorox to digest biological tissues, for example. Works really well. You can test this by just briefly touching some Clorox and then feeling it as you rub your fingertips together under the faucet. It feels slick and soapy. That's because it just ate some of your skin and the oils reacted with the strong base to form...soap. Be careful. (is is also for this reason that I advise the boys in this unit to wear swim goggles in chlorinated swimming pools, but that goes back to another thread a long, long, time ago, in a galaxy far, far away) Edited part: Flowerchild (nice name, BTW), I think the product you mentioned might be Clorox Cleanup. Check to see if I'm right about this. If so, it's a diluted form of Clorox with some detergent added. It will also get the 'red' out of many garments whose color is 'dye' rather than red clay. I have demonstrated this empirically on several sad occasions.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

As long as LisaBob and Beavah are in agreement I might as well mention that I also agree with them. I also agree with the sentiment by eagle90 that the boys ought to be doing active things at camp, rather than contributing to the standing crop of lard. Edited part: WARNING! Hijack attempt...Dentistry MB reminded me: I am wondering how many of you out there are like me and reject that painkilling needle, just curious. I rejected the 'deadening' for many years only to find out later that I wasn't really saving any money. But by that time I was 'set-in-my-ways' so I still reject it.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

In that case it's time to have a friendly talk with the counselor about getting trained. You need to find a way to make him understand that HE doesn't get to set the requirements, only to make sure the boy has passed them. If he won't sign the card and release it until the boy has filled out his extra paperwork, and if a friendly conversation can't shake the guy, then contact someone at the next level, maybe the DE or the district advancement guy if there is one. Just make sure the boy gets the recognition and advancement that he has earned. That's the important thing.

If the counselor KNOWS the boy has finished the requirements, then that should be all that is needed for him to sign off on it.

Let's have some fun with this. It also mentions 'kinds', implying a biblical basis. The meaning for that is somewhat equivocal but perhaps it wouldn't count unless the boy found evidence of two of each kind...if it's raining at the moment. On the other hand, the level of specificity in the suggested list includes four classes and one phylum. So why not include the amphibians or the Urochordates? Moreover, if a boy finds evidence of a raccoon and separate evidence for a beaver, that takes the level of identification to the species level...and I'd allow them to count the arthropods if they could take it to that level of identification. I'd be very impressed, actually. Come to think of it, I could probably find two or three species of wildlife living ON the boys themselves, for that matter. Probably need a magnifying lens, though (yes, and some surgical gloves). Eeeeewww!