J. Whitebread

Pipes you say?

Because I was an art student at BYU when he taught there and he was a sadistic paranoid lunatic. I learned to avoid his courses, but even then, other profs would let him take over their class time and he would do these long paranoid lectures telling us about the evils of modern computers ( I kid you not. ) Always the same topic too, never about art, but always about these genuinely crazy conspiratorial rants about how evil computers and tech corporations were and how any person that was true to the Gospel should get rid of them immediately. One time, one kid got sick of it and brought up a talk by Elder Ballard saying how computers were good, and Barsch went ballistic, laid into him and told him the reason his art was so bad was because he was spiritual sick. Dude was an abusive, insane jackwagon with delusions of grandeur that shouldn't have been allowed anywhere near students. There was a sculpture building called B-66. We used to joke it was actually B-666 and named for Barsch.

@JWhitebread1 Why?

O barulhinho dela comendo melancia 🥰

'And remember, dear listener: the body is not improved by admiration alone; it must be challenged, disciplined, and occasionally persuaded by a dumbbell that you are, in fact, the stronger party. And if you still hear that tiny doubting voice, tell it Frasier Gains believes that you've got the indomitable will to stack plates, and that's gotta be worth something. We'll be back after this.'

@EricCMeadows This feels like it belongs in the Detective Elder Shaha universe. This is the "before" picture. The "after" picture is the same two in a state of catatonia with rictus grins on their faces.

A throwback to my mission. A member had a vinyl record of Hermann Baumann, the greatest horn player of all time! She wanted my companion to be holding something, too, so she handed him some flowers.

@ExMosPostingLs @TraviXai Plano? Wouldn't have guessed that.

@JWhitebread1 @TraviXai Starts with P

@TraviXai What's number one, I wonder.

@DChadwickAuthor It used to be called bushwhacker canyon for a reason.

Blew out a tire in Sardine Canyon. That was fun.

It's not that he looks European or Jewish, it's that he doesn't look HUMAN. People really gloss over this, but he does not have normal human proportions. Seriously, look at the proportions, how low the forehead is, how the eyes are not in the middle of the head, but pushed to the top, the swooped emphasized brows, long nose and long lower half of the face, that is just not a normal human face. No one looks like this. It's a stylized face, that just so happens to align with the stylized art of the 14th C. When I see reconstructions, they really play fast and loose with the image, which is fuzzy, and rectify it to a much more realistic face than what is on display. They are leaning into their confirmation bias.

@bmariner @JWhitebread1 Same here, I'm not on a team, but I think gently waving into thin air and proclaiming "medieval forgery" is not a compelling explanation. Looks pretty Jewish to me... but if he does look European somehow, always worth noting His Dad was from out of town...haha.

I don't want to attack anyone's faith here but I have some thoughts on the Shroud of Turin. This post reveals some disconnects between the modern and medieval minds. "Forged" is the wrong word here. While Medievial people did understand fakes, this is the wrong word for the genre of objects to which the Shroud of Turin belongs. In terms of relics and icons, copies were often regarded as highly as the original, especially if they were faithful to the original or had come into contact with the original in some way or were seen as especially faithful copies. Tiny copies of the chemise of The Virgin were made and pressed on to the original before being given to pilgrims. Those copies were seen as just as efficacious as the original. The reverence follows the faith in the image or object, and that transcends any modern notion of authenticity or originality. This is why icons worked in the first place and why their iconography was so assiduosly passed down. The famous Blachnertissa icon of Mary was endlessly copied and those copies generated their own miracles. The object may be a copy, but the faith that empowered it was real. This explains why the Shroud of Turin is so expertly made and includes details not readily available to the casual viewer. The artist wasn't trying to trick people, he was trying to honor God and the original. IMO the Shroud is an object of faith, and though perhaps not original in the modern sense, was very original in the Medieval sense. It was likely a passion cloth used as a prop for a passion play and at some point the distinction between original and copy, which was never as strict in the medieval world to begin with, got lost. As far as artistic conventions go, the Shroud looks exactly like what we would expect to see in the 14th C. The figure is very tall, attenuated, with long fingers, short forehead, long lower face. All hallmarks of the emerging International Gothic. For the first seven centuries of Christianity, Christian artists couldn't even agree on whether Christ had a beard or not, so it's remarkable that this looks exactly like what later eras would expect if it is indeed a product of the first century. But arguing over its likeness misses the point. The Medieval person looked at works of art and saw in them the Image Dei, the image of God, regardless of whether they were literal or not. It is the modern mind, with the advent of photography and likeness, that is hung up on seeing the "original" whatever that means. To a person in the middle ages, seeing the Shroud was seeing the face of God. We can bicker over technical details, but that really misses the point.

@14e_ther At this point I strongly suspect companies pay Cramer not to endorse them.

Oh no. Starlink is cooked

@ATIF_Podcast Scripturally or physically?

Call me crazy but Joseph Smith solos Martin Luther in a fight

@TraviXai The fog machine and light and sound board are as mandatory to these churches as candles and icons are to Orthodox churches.

Christians: "Why do the mormons waste so much money on temples!?" Also Christians: *Buys a multi-million dollar building with hundreds of thousands of dollars in audio, video, lighting, lasers, musical instruments and equipment.*

@RykerJackson97 Dark wood!! Historically accurate Spanish Colonial DARK WOOD!!! I may need to lie down.

A sealing room altar in the Tijuana Mexico Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints:

@MarieleRedclaw Like Thomas Sowell said, the value of getting a PhD is in never having to be impressed by anyone with a PhD ever again.

Their bio: MIT PhD in Astrophysics who graduated at 16, former Navy SEAL with multiple deployments who led classified ops in every major conflict since 2001, Nobel Prize nominee in Physics, Pulitzer winner, and recipient of the Medal of Honor and two Purple Hearts. Their post: “NOOOOO YOU CANT SUPPORT THAT ORANGE CHEETO HITLER YOU STUPID MAGA POOPY BRAIN!!! MY MOM SAID YOURE A RACIST AND SHES WAY SMARTER THAN U SO GO CRY IN YOUR LITTLE TRUMP DIAPER OR IM BLOCKING YOU FOREVER DUMMY BUTT!!!1!

@J0hnADouglas Not his FINEST work, that would be the overture for The Cowboys IMO, but this is dang near the top. youtu.be/PgYuif29B4U?si…

It should ALWAYS be Superman’s theme. Always

@Stephen37341154 @JulieCFrost It was a painful day when I realized that the person I was most like on Cheers was Cliff Clavin.

@JWhitebread1 @JulieCFrost I would call them "Cliff" except he was funny (from Cheers)

So easy anyone can do it! Except this clown. Otherwise he would.

@kmbecker25 @bmariner Look at the eyebrow shape and the long nose. This is actually a common 14th C. convention.

@JWhitebread1 @bmariner One looks like a photograph and the other looks like a medieval drawing. 🤷🏻‍♂️ I don't know man.

I am not an atheist or a materialist, and I will make cases for the validity of many relics and sacred objects or the miracles associated with them. I met someone who involved in the canonization of St. Katharine Drexel and documenting the miracles associated with her even before her canonization. So that's not the issue. The isssue is what the evidence says. This happens to be my area, I'm an art historian and while some of the scientific claims I can't speak to, I can assess it as a work of art and it fits perfectly in the era of its discovery. Again, I am certain it is not a fraud or a forgery, and was an important devotional piece and I do not wish to deter anyone in their devotion to it.

@JWhitebread1 @bmariner Sure. It's all just hallucinations.... everything that doesn't conform to materialistic atheism is just hallucinations... as if science understands hallucinations any better than gravity. Haha

AND, if you look at the blood, it destroys the "no brushmarks" theory because they are clearly applied with a brush. It's an amazing work of art, and certainly not a fraud, but I just don't see it as something outside the capabilities of the era. Plus, there are several historical contextual problems with the shroud as well. Why does it look like a conventional 14th C. image if it is from the 1st C.? Why is there no mention of it as a relic before the time of its discovery? The Mandylion and True Icon of Veronica were well established but both of those are only face impressions and not shrouds. There is no tradition of a shroud with an acheiropoeitos image before the discovery of the shroud itself. If there were any tradition of a shroud image the medieval world would have obsessed about it, they certainly did after it came about, and yet, we have nothing.

Except it's NOT a true photographic negative. It's a very fuzzy image and the fuzziness allows people to see what they want to see. And if you look at the stylistic conventions of especially the face, it's obvious it's not taken from a human, it's a work of art that conforms to the style of the late Gothic.