packsaddle

slontwovvy, Now that's one I don't understand. Why would anyone send their award back? I don't agree with the policy but I don't consider the awards tainted as a result. Oh well, I guess this is just another one of those things I don't 'get'.

Rooster, Man, when I think about it that sounds a whole lot like a few things my wife says about me...you know, the 'slug caterpillar' thing. And FYI, her name ain't Stella. don't you just love these smiley face things? Fat Old Guy, OGE, I used to use Cyrano Jones as a prop when teaching population growth models. I'd tell them to gather all the evidence they could from the episode and back-calculate the growth rate and theoretical starting population size. It's ok to torment students, isn't it?

Whew! Am I ever relieved to learn that there aren't 7 of you out there:) You know, kind of like when Harry Mudd discovered a multitude of cloned Stellas.

While everyone is weighing their personal preferences regarding when and when not to adhere to policy, don't forget what dsteele said, "Hazing in the Boy Scouts of America (is) prohibited. You can't do it. Period. This includes snipe hunts, encouraging younger Scouts to hang one another's underwear on the camp flag pole, forcing a Scout to sing at flag ceremony to recover his lost item, waving mail in front of other scouts at the dining hall and making them sing for it, etc." That's clear enough for me. See y'all in another topic.

The question that arises is: Why, then, would BSA associate with the NRA medals at all, if boys are not allowed to wear them? It is a BSA camp, using BSA-owned rifles (or whatever), BSA instructors, awarded in a BSA ceremony...and then after all that BSA says, "but you can't wear the medals"? It may not be exactly the same as the NRA medals but in an exchange regarding the snorkeling patch (and mile swim, etc.), questions about where to wear these patches if not on the swim trunks caused dsteele to respond, Quote [This is just a Dave Steele interpretation of a correct quote from the insignia guide. A BSA snorkeling patch is not a badge of rank and therefore can be worn on the back of the merit badge sash. I can assure you the world will not end if this is done. The purists among us will insist that because the Insignia Guide names a specific place on a particular item of clothing that it can only be worn as specified. Either argument can be justified, but I like mine better. It's now up to the Scout to pick a "camp."] Unquote This seems to leave some room for personal judgement. Anyway, like he indicates, the earth will probably continue to rotate, either decision. If a boy is proud enough to pin it on, I won't stop him. I called our council, they are OK with this too.

LauraT7, Thanks for clarifying (hopefully) the role of medication as well as the frustration of parents who are bombarded by suggestions from persons with little or no experience. We have been lucky to have teachers who are well-trained and a supportive community. ADD/ADHD children need support from the people around them, especially the parents, and medication is a useful tool (as you rightly note) not a substitute. We struggled with my son (WITH) until the middle of high school. I just could not take a 'sink or swim' approach with my son so we did everything we could to help him untie the knots in his life. Then he suddenly 'got it' and is now excelling in engineering at a top university. He still has medication available and manages everything himself. I credit everything that I mentioned before AND I credit his effort during his Eagle project. It was a real turning point for him, and one that he could look back on with pride. It can be done. Expect some premature hair color change - but it's worth it.

OGE, You are on to something there, but my observations have been that the deputies live next door, could be relatives. Wingnut, that has been one of our mainstay service projects as well.

Still in our planning stages. I'll be interested in what you guys think.

Back when I earned a raft of these things at scout camp, we were encouraged to wear them alongside our scouting medals. It seems just as valid as the religious award.

I think it depends on what the boy does. If he just makes a phone call and the local blood bank does the rest I would ask for more involvement. But if he organizes donors and arranges time and place and publicity, now we're talking a project.

From the Dictionary of American Regional English: packsaddle worm - A saddleback caterpillar (one with stinging hairs). (Esp southern Appalachians). For a photo of this see: http://www.ag.auburn.edu/dept/entplp/bulletins/caterpillar/photo1.htm I lived for years in a very old southern mill village. One of my neighbors was a very kind old man who had come down from the hills to escape poverty by enslaving himself to the mill (his words, not mine). One day we were talking in the yard and we spotted one of these on a tree. I had always heard of them as saddlebacks but he called it a 'packsaddle' and I liked the term immediately. I like to think it fits me but, alas, I'm not pretty enough.

hops_scout, In my area if you were to suggest some remedy for those American Flags flown immediately beneath confederate flags, you'd probably end up squealing like a pig.

Thanks dsteele and OGE, my co-leaders and I will pay close attention.

I have to weigh in on the side of OGE, regarding snipe hunts and similar (OGE, I sat all night once as well, later searched hard for the shelf-stretcher). But something Fat Old Guy said caught my attention. I don't want to misrepresent his statement but I think that 'weeding out' is something we should not want to do. If anything, we should take the boy whose native suspicions cause him to be shy or retiring and encourage him to be part of the team. Indeed I think we should try to give him the guidance and to help him build the confidence he needs to overcome whatever reason he has for mistrust in others.

Red Feather, I'm reading through the recent messages and I'm wondering, heh, heh, you ever get the feeling than no one is listening?

Errr...I knew that. I really did

Testosterone-smogged? TESTOSTERONE-SMOGGED? At my age...thank you, thank you, thank you.

I mean no criticism to the readers. As posed, I consider the original question to be, at best, impossible for Merlyn to answer to the satisfaction of the person asking. I doubt some of the other readers could be satisfied by anything Merlyn said either. That is the best to make of the question. At worst, the question may be a platform for another pointless argument, the content of which we are all by now familiar. On the other hand, to be fair, I would be interested in hearing from those who ask the question to Merlyn. Tell the forum just what it is that Merlyn COULD say that would satisfy your curiosity. Maybe that would be a better starting point. If there is no way that he could satisfy your question, admit it. Otherwise provide some guidance to aid his attempt...in the spirit of Scouting, of course. My attempt: I can't answer the question posed originally to Merlyn - only Merlyn can do that - but I do know and associate with many persons who claim to be atheists. This is fairly common on many campuses. While I can't claim to know what is in the heart or mind of any other person, I know of no person claiming to be an atheist who seems not to have made a careful, considered decision for their belief. For them the decision is rational and objective and it factors in all information and cognitive ability that they can employ. For to believe that there is no deity is a belief, nevertheless, and it is not a condition of simple ignorance (although I grant that it may be possible to arrive at this belief in a more casual manner). The one or two persons I know who merely dismiss religion, ("..give me a rational, objective reason to believe something and I will consider it...") - usually shut off the discussion and I get the message. In those cases, I have no way of understanding their belief so I make no judgement. The question, then, is how does a person thoughtfully arrive at such a belief? Especially in a world in which we are constantly bombarded by this or that religion each trying its best to convince us of their particular superiority? Can their decision be understood by anyone else, or is it just rebellion against the status quo? The few atheists with whom I have discussed this have caused me to try to answer this question prior to this forum. The answer is varied but there is some common ground for many of them. The common ground exists, for want of a better way to explain it, in the concept of the null hypothesis. Rational decisions often employ this concept. It involves posing what is currently understood (or the most conservative argument) as a positive statement (the null) and then posing a rational positive alternative that can be tested in some manner (the alternative). The null hypothesis could be the rather conservative view, for example, that a new compound (penicillin perhaps) will have no effect on cultured pneumonia bacteria. While we all know that the null hypothesis in this case is rejected (penicillin does usually inhibit growth of pneumonia bacteria), the test was necessary in order to change skeptical but objective minds regarding penicillin's effect. Should the results be negative, the idea still remains but is weakened by the test failure, more alternatives are sought and the original is retested. I think religious persons are sometimes suspicious of science because of this. I have sensed this suspicion in these forums. At its root, some persons think that the null hypothesis regarding deity is: 'No deity is necessary to explain everything'. And indeed some other persons do think in those terms - it is after all the simplest rational explanation (that which requires no supernatural force). And it is close to the logical positivist working assumption, 'There exist rational explanations for observable phenomena.' But such construct is a pointless exercise because there is no objective way to perform the test (the alternative depending on non-rational forces). And factions supporting one view or the other have no way to resolve the difference. The caveat of 'observable phenomena' excludes anything that cannot be rationally 'observed', preferably in a repeated, controlled manner by multiple persons working independently. Miracles are simply not available for such examination. Nor are visions, feelings, or manifestations of spirit. The inability to rationally or objectively examine these things is the limitation placed on science, not religion - indeed such unique phenomena are central to many religions. Here I do note that while one view would be delighted with evidence to the contrary, the other, historically, has not been so gracious. You guess which is which, or ask Galileo. Most atheists I know fully realize that the difference is unresolvable in a rational arena. Their belief has a more profound basis. And this is where I begin to see personal variation, just as there is personal variation among the deists and theists. One approach is to accept the difference and (while maintaining the 'null', that is, absence of deity) to look for evidence that provides either a pseudotest (they wait for a personal miracle or epiphany) or try to discover rational alternative explanations for the things that are written in religious texts. Once in a while such a person will have the epiphany. They readily admit an inability to rationally explain or communicate their experience but they claim to have had the experience. I accept their personal claim while admitting an inability to know it. However, most such persons usually are more successful in discovering those rational alternative explanations. In this manner the basic 'belief' in absence of deity becomes more robust (using the experimentalists' terminology) and their belief becomes stronger. Without taking a great amount of time, this is the kernel of the process that I have come to understand.

So...what effect will this 'condemnation' have? Probably none because there is nothing binding and BSA is free to ignore it. And...the legislature is not a chartering organization so their boys don't have to worry about wearing their religious awards. This is a snoozer. If BSA executives had the nerve, they would excommunicate members of the legislature who are Scout leaders and who voted with the majority. Maybe single out their boys who are scouts for 'special treatment'.

Nice observations, Twocubdad and NJCubScouter. I like to remind people that much of what Clinton accomplished was set as goals originally by Reagan and later left uncompleted by the Republican establishment. His accomplishments were much more conservative, actually, than the profligate spending and programs that Bush is promoting today. On names. One of the first lessons I try to teach my students is that applying a term or a name does not automatically annoint a person with knowledge or understanding. I find that few persons fit well into popular stereotypes. It is sometimes better to focus on the ideas and ignore the typographical conveniences.

Gifts have not been common in our Eagle ceremonies but as a leader, I always try to give each new Eagle something for him to remember me by. I try to make it something unique to him and, if possible, something that reflects his scouting experience. Not expensive, just sentimental. The parents sometimes use the occasion to give their son a gift as well (usually Eagle memorabilia). I would never consider giving money and I would not support such by others in the troop. There is, however, a tradition of writing for certificates of recognition from a large number of sources (mostly associated with, but not exclusive to, government). The family sets up a display that shows the scout's progress, photo albums, cub scout stuff, projects and finally the Eagle project materials and certificates. These displays are useful in providing incentive for the younger boys ("I'm going to do this someday.")

We don't do 'snipe' hunts, primarily for safety reasons. Or, let's see, running through the woods in the dark...now what's the term for that? Most of my leg-pulling consists of estimates of the distance left on backpack trips. For some reason, they all think I actually know distances better than they do...I try not to disappoint. Of course, most of my guesses end up way long. However, there was one instance that sort of fits this category: A couple of my guys were especially polite to me one afternoon at camp as they walked (skulked) past me toward their shelter. Of course, I knew immediately that mischief was in the air so the game was afoot for me too. I followed at a safe distance and quietly moved in behind the leader shelter so I could watch and see just what it was they had in mind. It was as I had thought...aerosol cans and matches. But I just watched, ready to spring if a serious accident was about to happen. They exhausted their can and matches and I strolled over to meet them coming out of from behind the shelter. I asked, "What have you guys been up to? I can tell you've been up to something." They went into shock and denial. After some discussion, I deduced out loud to them, from all sorts of tell-tale signs (smudges, they way their hair was parted, sweat on the sides of their faces), every part of their activity, down to minute details. They were speechless. I finished by giving them the safety lecture, absolving them, and letting them know that they NEVER get away with anything around me, I can always tell what they've been up to. All they could do was meekly apologize and promise they would never do it again. Years later they still haven't figured it out. I almost feel guilty.

Heavy canvas tents without floors or netting. Shivering through fall/winter nights with just a thin blanket (that's how the cowboys did it in the movies), sleeping pads were unknown to us. Homemade packframe built from steel conduit. Heavy canvas backpacks with no hipbelts. Competitions in the Scout Expositions (these don't seem to occur anymore, at least not around here). Skinny-dipping in cold mountain streams (nope, I wasn't a 'bankwalker'). Catching, cooking, eating nearly every form of wildlife we could see in the woods, no utensils...and liking it because we were hungry. Hiking to the river to play on the dam (100' tall unguarded spillway) to throw rocks at the carp and gar below. Catching the the same fish stranded below after a flood, cooking and eating them on the spot, again no utensils (yes, carp and gar ARE good to eat).

OK, what's a Powderhorn course? How do I find out where, when they are? Thanks.

Yep, I got up early, around 3am, and went out to see it. Clouds. It usually happens that way for me during meteor showers as well. But that's OK, rain is good.