Trevorum

... and heavy handed moderators. So, I'll take bets on how long THIS thread will be up before it, too, is deleted by the unnamed redactor.

Quoting Newton as an authority on religion is as ridiculous as quoting Muhammed Ali on modern jazz. Both have their opinions, to be sure, but we recognize each as an authority only in limited fields of endeavor. (btw, I suspect you may not have fully grasped Gallileo's point before quoting him here.) I stand by my interpretation that the rocks were viewd by the city as a science (astronomy) exhibit and that throwing in a religious elemet was totally inappropriate. At the same time, I would have no problem with having the same "God" rock on city property, IF it was in the context of a religious exhibit - containing for example, rocks also with quotations from the Qur'an, the Rig Veda, and the Tao te Ching.

"Legit"?? So, under what circumstances could this "theory" be tested? If it is not falsifiable, then it is not a theory and has no place in an astronomy exhibit. If the city had accepted the project as anything other than an astronomy exhibit, then they would have had no reason to remove the religious stone. Having a "god" stone in this astronomy exhibit is like having a figurine of Albert Einstein in a nativity creche. (Well,that may be a bad example since he was Jewish, too...)

Ed, the simplest solution would have been to not include the "God" stone in the first place. Arguably, it has no legitimate place in an astronomy exhibit - unless of course your objective is to promote your own religious POV (ie., the J-C-I God as the creator of those planets).

Way baaaack in the 1960s, I was in the Orion patrol. We made our own patches. Our nemesis in the troop was the Draco patrol. They made their own patches also, but they were an evil lot.

I always thought StarDates were only used in space and that on Terra everyone continued to follow the ancient ways. ?

Gern, I LIKE that! And on Purpleday of Grapeweek, and Yellow day of Bananaweek we all get to take an extra day off!! (This message has been edited by Trevorum)

Welcome, tree! Yes, the SM may delegate conferences to any specific Asst SM. This is advisable (though not required) for his own son and can also be a good idea for a new SM who isn't familiar with the older Eagle candidates. In each case, the candidate must get the SM's permission first, before requesting a conference with another Asst. SM.

Good thing I didn't mention the weeks of Bacon or Lobster.

Let's also get rid of the annoying Babylonian 24 hour day, 60 minute hour, and 60 second minute. Wasn't there a TV show where time was expressed in "centons" of some such? I think a decimal approach is much more reasonable than base 12. If we're going to rename the months, I've always thought that the weeks should have names too - all 52 of them. My idea is to name them for foods so that if someone says they'll be on vacation during, say, Strawberry or Pumpkin, you'll know exactly when.

Happy Wodin's day!

Our troop has a tradition of holding an Instructor Conferences prior to the SM Conference. While not a youth BoR, it serves many of the same functions as noted by Beav. Those Instructors take their jobs seriously.

Ho Ho Ho! Merry Christmas to all!

I'm surprised that the Eagle advisor did not anticipate the potential issue of installing a religious inscription on municipal property. Of course, maybe he/she did and the scout did mention it to the city sponsor who signed the project plan anyway. We just don't know from the sketchy information in the news report. Merry Christmas!

The news story doesn't have many details. I suspect that the candidates' project plan was approved by some mid-level city employee who either did not read it thoroughly or else did not understand the potential endorsement of religion issue. (Much less understand the science of 8 rather than 9 planets.) The city lawyers probably had a fit when they learned about it after the fact! I'm more surprised that the fellow's Eagle advisor - who should have known better - approved it.

I think OGE has it right. Our troop provides the opportunity for a new fellow to achieve 1st Class within a year of joining. We have an orientation for parents and let them know this is an achievable goal for their newly minted Scout. However, it is not expected. And the Scout has to work hard; just "showing up" won't get him very far. That said, GW has a good point: some sprouts aren't really into the goal-oriented achievement thing (yet) - they just want to have fun camping and hiking and swimming and fishing and canoeing and caving and, oh look! You've just earned First Class!

It's good question. I think we would all want proficiency in our Scouts, but as Beav notes that can become a real goal within age cohort patrols where the older fellows tend to hang together rather than actively teaching the young sprouts. I've often seen the new guys learn outdoor skills by simply trial and error over a period of many months. In the case of cooking, the meals cooked as a patrol months (or years) later were always noticeably better than the early efforts. So should we not recognize those early and flawed efforts? I think we should. Those grubmasters should should get the 1st C sign off on their weekend with oatmeal just as the later fellows do with breakfast tacos. If they hang together, eventually they will all become proficient (well, more or less), even the otameal fellow.

(Rather than starting a new greeting, I've resurrected our old one.) A very HAPPY SOLSTICE to all! As our sun once again lengthens his daily stay with us, may the coming year bring health and happiness to all my friends here on Scouter.com. -trevorum

Beav, ya beat me to it, heh, heh!

Ed, Pack is right; if Christianity hadn't taken hold in the Empire, we would probably still be celebrating a Mithraic mid-winter festival, or a version therof.

WB is in the top 3 of my adult Scouting experiences - after a Philmont trek and C.O.P.E. (but both of those I got to experience with my son). I'd give it an 8.5

de nada. I just finished reading Sykes' "The Seven Daughters of Eve" and am seriously considering popping for a mtDNA test. Not really useful, of course, but it would be fun to know.

Pack, I believe you are confusing mitochondrial "Eve", who lived about 140,000 BP, with the paleontological "Lucy", who is dated to ca 4.4M BP Interestingly, Y-chromosomal "Adam" was not a contemprary of Eve, living about 70,000 BP. The variance is due to different male and female reproductive strategies. (edited typos)(This message has been edited by Trevorum)

Greg, Welcome to the forums! I'd agree with mea's answer that the essay should be long enough to answer the question, and also with Ed's caution against interreting the requirement FOR the Scout. I've often been asked this question, and I generally tell the candidate to approach it as if it was an essay for English Class on which they really, really needed to get an "A". That said, I've seen answers as short as 2 paragraphs and as long as 2 pages. As an aside, I think this is the most overlooked requirement for Eagle. It's sorta buried in the application - fine print if you will - and is a pretty good indication of how well the candidate has prepared for the SM conference. At least three times, I have had to postpone conferences that had begun when the candidate discovered he did not have his ducks in a row afer all.

It's times like these when I miss Rooster. Really.