HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 13:46:33 GMT

In article <C0D4Au.Cqr@ecf.toronto.edu> vanweer@ecf.toronto.edu (VANWEERDENBURG NICHOLAS JOHN) writes:
>In article <1993Jan3.151154.18933@cs.unca.edu> kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
>>>In return, the vatican got 10%(!) of germany's tax money, and a lot of
>>>dead jews and attheists( russians ) which is undoubtedly what they
>>>wanted.
>>
>>I think this is pretty outrageous, can I insult your mother?
>>Your hatred is showing....
>>The Vatican hid and protected Jews from the Nazis.  They had an immense fear
>>of the communists (with good reason) and chose the Nazis as the lesser of
>>two evils since the Nazis, at least, intended to let the churches survive
>>under Nazi control whereas the communists were destroying every church they
>>could get their hands on.  What the Vatican did had nothing to do with 
>>the Vatican wanting to kill Jews and Atheists, but if you insist that it is,
>>why don't you balance this with how many Christians were killed by the
>>Jewish Atheists of the Soviet Union Bolshevic leadership?  Ah...but that
>>would be politically incorrect. It's okay to be bigoted about Catholics
>>but not Jews or Atheists.
>
>Your last statement is of the worst type of argument- diversionary and
>misleading.  There is no mention or need to mention 'balance' or 'politically
>incorrect' or 'bigotry'.  The point is being made about how fucked up and 
>pathetic the Catholic Church is/has been.  Why the hell would anyone want
>to balance this with how fucked up and pathetic the Soviet Union was.  Where
>is the connection?  Take a vallium.  The point here was about the CATHOLIC

If someone is trying to make the claim that the evils in the world
are the result of the Christian religion itself, then it makes
sense to point out that similar evils have been committed by
people who do not espouse such religious views.  Thus it is very
relevant.

>the two popes.  Then the Catholic Church of Canada ( or whatever proper 
>name ) covered up that child abuse ( MANY cases ) in the 60's and in some
>cases even left the priests in positions of trust ( and preaching ) where
>the destroyed more children's lives.  I think its fair to say the CHURCH is
>fucked up and pathetic, and considering this, I would put little
>trust or better yet 'faith' in anything they say.  And a final point.  I don't

Perhaps you have never heard that ad hominem arguments are a
logical fallacy?  This old argument that Christianity is flawed
because some of its members erred is false.  Quoting misdeeds of
members doesn't change one iota the validity of the teachings of
Jesus.

>-Nick 
>


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22382 alt.atheism:25876
From: jaskew@spam.ua.oz (Joseph Askew)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Summary: Which devil was this?
Date: 13 Jan 93 01:23:48 GMT
Followup-To: alt.atheism
Organization: Statistics, Pure & Applied Mathematics, University of Adelaide

In article <1993Jan5.014645.6329@cs.unca.edu> kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:

>   You have a real hard time with  "lesser of two evils". How do you
>feel about Churchill given his "make a deal with the devil himself" to
>get rid of Stalin?

Which devil was this? Don't you mean that Churchill allied himself with
Stalin to get rid of the devil himself (aka Adlif Hitler)?

Wishful thinking?

Joseph Askew

-- 
Joseph Askew, Gauche and Proud  Barbarian horns draw out the northern wind;
jaskew@spam.maths.adelaide.edu  Paler than water lies the Thistle Pass;
Disclaimer? Sue, see if I care  Sky swallows up the road to Kokonor;
One China One Korea One Eire32  Moonlight, a thousand miles along the Wall.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up?
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:42:43 GMT

>moral authority.  Of course, their leaders are human and make mistakes, but
>they never admit it.  They can't, because after that admission, all of their
>decisions and positions on all sorts of issues would be suspect:

Oh?  I thought I read that they had recently found Galileo right, and 
themselves wrong, albeit some 400 years late :)

I don't know enough about the Catholic Church to say what they believe,
but I know something about Christianity and I suspect that there's a 
little more wind than light around here regarding how terrible the
Church is.  If they were as pure evil as everyone around here says, I'd
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: Technical University Braunschweig, Germany
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 12:52:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.035645.29331@hfsi.uucp>
ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
 
>
>It's interesting, but even from the very beginning we find that
>people who are in contact with God do the dummest things.  Take a
>look at the OT and the behaviour of David and Solomon for an
>example of this.  Solomon, who was reported to be the wisest man
>in the world made some mistakes.  Then looking at the first
>Christian leader Peter, we see that after three years in close
>contact with Jesus, he denied Him when push came to shove.  Is it
>really so incredulous, then, that Church leaders can make
>mistakes?
 
At least the RCC claims to be more than human. And there is the Jesus
among every threesome of Christians. Not to mention the Holy Ghost that
guides them ...
 
By the way, it is an easy way to get rid of JWs, and such. Tell them that you
have committed the sin that is not forgiven, and thus their proselytizing is
pointless. And since many do not know what is meant, it is nice to watch
their reactions and to listen to their assumptions then ;-).
   Benedikt
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:21991 alt.atheism:24930
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:23:40 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <12237@scott.ed.ac.uk>, iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan3.151154.18933@cs.unca.edu> kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
|> >What the Vatican did had nothing to do with 
|> >the Vatican wanting to kill Jews and Atheists, but if you insist that it is,
|> >why don't you balance this with how many Christians were killed by the
|> >Jewish Atheists of the Soviet Union Bolshevic leadership?
|> 
|> Okay, let's do some biting.
|> 
|> (1) How many Christians were killed by Jewish atheists?  Where, when
|> and under what circumstances?  (Reference.)
|> 
|> (2) How many Christians were killed by the Bolshevik leadership of the
|> Soviet Union?  Where, when and under what circumstances?  (Reference.)
|> 
|> (3) Do you make a distinction between "Atheists" and "the Soviet Union
|> Bolshevic [_sic_] leadership"?  Why or why not?

And if they can find an Atheist organization that supported the
genocidal actions of Stalin, I'll be happy to denounce it, and 
not indulge in any "lesser of two evils" waffle.

jon.
From: ramsay@math.ubc.ca (Keith Ramsay)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: It's Good In Theory, But... (Re: Characterization of quack theories)
Date: 10 Jan 1993 02:04:38 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: galois.math.ubc.ca

In article <1993Jan8.194315.20491@netcom.com> noring@netcom.com 
(Jon Noring) writes:
|In a private e-mail communication with a physicist e-mail friend who knows his
|quantum mechanics and does not totally agree with Sarfatti, he stated that
|some of these other physicists are just jealous, closed-minded, and react the
|way they do because they are afraid that the ramifications of Sarfatti's
|research would undermine many of the "paradigms" (sorry Russell) that they
|hold dearly (after all, if you've devoted 20+ years of your life with one set
|of "paradigms" (sorry Russell), it is emotionally difficult, and for some,
|impossible, to change course in mid-life.)

Speaking as an participant in some of these discussions, I feel
obliged to say that I don't find this very credible. It is true that
the social phenomenon you describe can occur. Having examined the
physics and participated in part of the discussion, however, I don't
believe that it is what has been taking place in sci.physics.

I am a young mathematician, and have no stake in any physics
"orthodoxy". I would have only to gain if I were among the first to
recognize a new breakthrough in physics. I would be happy to find that
conventional ideas about causality are incorrect; I would find it
interesting.

You don't have to take my word for this, of course, but please take
the claim that Sarfatti's ideas are not warmly received because of
fears that his ideas will undermine the orthodox "paradigm" with an
equally large grain of salt.

Keith Ramsay            "Being a computer means not having 
ramsay@math.ubc.ca       to say you're sorry."

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:56:45 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.134934.28892@eng.ufl.edu> mjw@mailbox.eng.ufl.edu (Mike Wohlgemuth) writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.022547.24574@cs.unca.edu>, kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
>|>   The Catholic Church is led by fallible men who make foreign policy
>|> mistakes and have many skeletons in their closets, and they can be 
>|> sanctimonious, just like others (I won't mentionany names). But who 
>|> hasn't made terrible mistakes, given a thousand years of history and rapidly
>|> changing moral values?
>|>    And looking back now with comfortable 20/20 hindsight and high moral
>|> indignation, who did behave correctly during that awful time?  
>|> Your accusation that the Catholic Church "wanted" the Jews and Atheists
>|> is revolting.
>
>Well, considering that the Catholic Church, or any organized Christian Church,
>claims to have direct contact with the highest moral authority possible, I would
>hope that their track record would be better than it is.  If I were communicating
>with God on a daily basis, and asking his advice, I don't think he would advise
>me to support the Nazis, even if the Soviets had conquerred the rest of the world.

It's interesting, but even from the very beginning we find that
people who are in contact with God do the dummest things.  Take a
look at the OT and the behaviour of David and Solomon for an
example of this.  Solomon, who was reported to be the wisest man
in the world made some mistakes.  Then looking at the first
Christian leader Peter, we see that after three years in close
contact with Jesus, he denied Him when push came to shove.  Is it
really so incredulous, then, that Church leaders can make
mistakes?

>Mike


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22197 alt.atheism:25388
From: mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: critique of Lyall Watson
Keywords: debunking
Date: 7 Jan 93 17:26:16 GMT
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.

In article <stevens.15@odie.ee.wits.ac.za> stevens@odie.ee.wits.ac.za (Fred Stevens) writes:
>Hi, 
>
>Does anyone have any info pertaining to the analysis of claims made by Lyall 
>Watson in his books and talks?
>

There are a couple of good articles with complete references on the
Hundredth Monkey business in "The Fringes of Reason: A Whole Earth
Catalog", edited by Ted Schultz for Harmony Books, ISBN 0-517-57165-X.

This book is wonderful and covers everything from hollow earth theories
to conspiracies to the Church of the Subgenius.



--
Ed McCreary                                               ,__o
mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com                       _-\_<,
"If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao."  (*)/'(*)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: lpzsml@unicorn.nott.ac.uk (Steve Lang)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Originator: lpzsml@unicorn.nott.ac.uk
Organization: Nottingham University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 10:05:18 GMT

In Article 38465 of alt.atheism, U16244@uicvm.uic.edu (David James Alexander Hanley) writes:
>  Really.  So the church chose to support the murder of millions of
>people, instead of the destruction of useless churches?  Interesting.
>This also means the Catholic church must have had inside knowledge
>that Germany would attack the Solviet union, since they were allies
>at the start of the war.  Thanks for supplying this crucial component
>to my theory.  And I think it's splendid that the CATHOLIC church is
>so concerned over Lutheran( German ) and Eastern orthodox( Russian )
>churches.  If only they could tell their people in Ireland to stop
>shooting protestants..

The Vatican do tell their people in Ireland to stop shooting protestants.
And the vast majority of Catholics, like most Protestants in Northern
Ireland do not participate in such violent actions.

Steve Lang.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A Jewish boy was walking home from school with a protestant friend, when
they were stop a bunch of protestant thugs.  The thugs asked the two
children whether they were protestants or catholics.  The friend said he
was a protestant, while the boy said he was a jew.  The thugs replied, but
are you a protestant jew or a catholic jew?  The boy not wishing to be
beaten up answered that he was a protestant jew.  The thugs, happy with the
answers, allowed the two children to pass.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: bluelobster+@CMU.EDU (David O Hunt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Satans E-mail.
Date: 7 Jan 93 16:34:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.sfHCUXa00Uh70537IJ
	<1993Jan7.010739.26915@tc.fluke.COM>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Thank you for that LONG sermon!  NOT!

Do you REALLY think that Satan is on the net?  Get a clue!

And if he _really_ is, well, then, my SO and I have a couple of soul sales
we'd like to discuss!  :)

David (and Lesley)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 06:36:31 GMT

In article <RICE.93Jan5114333@HPP.stanford.edu> rice@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (James Rice) writes:
>
>Yes, papal infalibility is an official dogma (axiom of
>faith) of the catholic church.  This was proclaimed in
>1870 by Pius (!) IX.

Yes there is, but it is widely distorted as this posting shows.

>
>To quote a passage that puts this bull in the broader
>picture of Catholic power politics, here's a bit from
>"Alone of All Her Sex" by Marina Warner (a very
>interesting book on the cult of the (virgin!) Mary, from
>my 1978 edition published in paperback by Quartet in the
>UK (I don't know if its available in this country, but
>it's worth looking for) p236-7:
>

You have taken a teaching of the church with one example, and have
totally distorted it with the commentary you have added from MW.
If you would like some valid information on the doctrine of
infallability, I will be happy to continue this discussion by
Email.

>
>Rice - 


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: beykema@infonode.ingr.com (Maurice Beyke)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 22:07:31 GMT

In article <1700@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
>
>My understanding of the Roman Catholic doctrine (admittedly second-hand) is
> that
>only certain statements by the Pope are infallible, namely those made 'ex
>cathedra' ("from the church").  It is also held (I believe) that the
> pronouncements
>of certain church councils are infallible.
>
>The issue you rmember was probably due to a number of U.S. bishops getting
> into
>'liberal' theology, and deciding to question fundamental Roman Catholic
> doctrines.
>
>An actual Roman Catholic could probably give you a more detailed answer.

 I guess this is my cue; I suffered through 14 years of Catholic education
 (yeah, right.  I got better) so maybe I can shed some light.

 While the Pope and the hierarchy of the church are considered to be a good
 moral compass, they are *not*, in general, considered infallible.  However
 there are instances where the Pope speaks Ex Cathedra (which is actually
 "from the chair"), and in these cases only his statements are considered
 dogma, infallible, and carry as much weight as the Bible itself.  Something
 to keep in mind, however, is that this has happened very few times in
 history; three if I remember correctly, though there may be more.  The first
 (I believe; it has been a while since high school) was a statement that Mary
 was assumed body and soul into heaven; the next stated that Mary was born
 untainted by sin; and the third was a statement that when the Pope spoke
 Ex Cathedra he was infallible (a circular argument if I ever heard of one).
 The last two of these statements (as is pointed out in another post), were
 made by Pope Pious IX (who was a pushy bastard, from what I gather) only
 last century, so it's not like the Vatican is spewing out these things like
 campaign promises.

 Now, in case anybody decides to flame this, I am merely reporting on
 Catholic doctrine, not claiming this is true.
<^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^>
< Boris Mikey            |"Here the ways of men part: if you wish to strive  >
< aka Maurice Beyke      | for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe;     >
< mab@batman.b11.ingr.com| if you wish to be a devotee of truth,             >
< These views are mine,  | then inquire."                                    >
< Ingr. doesn't want them|                                  Nietzsche        >
 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dannyb@panix.com (Daniel Burstein)
Subject: Re: Dvorak faster than QWERTY?
Organization: Panix, NYC
Distribution: sci
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 06:47:00 GMT

I know that I personally typed faster with a DVORAK keybd than with
qwerty, but since the typewriter was ripped off 10 yrs ago I can't make
any current comparisons.

sidenote:  It was great fun having it back during my time in a college
dorm.  People would come around asking to borrow the electric typewriters
from those of us who had them, and I had no problem offering mine (with
DVORAK).  Until... one of my neighbors actually took the time to get
familair with it, and kept claiming he couldn't use a standard keyboard.

dannyb@panix.com

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Some more predictions for 1993
Date: 10 Jan 1993 05:01:24 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


OK, so the Good Times (Santa Cruz weekly entertainment paper) doesn't
exactly compete with the supermarket tabloids, but anyway the cover
of the latest issue features the article in which local astrologer
Risa D'Angeles gives her predictions for 1993.

First she leaves herself a big loophole by prefixing the list with
"The following changes will begin to take shape in the new year:"
so if what's predicted doesn't happen, well, maybe it will next year.

Then most of the items are the sort of generalities that are obvious
or not clearly true nor false.  Such as, "Banks, insurance companies,
stocks and investors will go through a reorganization process, and
for some, a crisis.  Along with management and businesses, if the
needs and creativity of the people are not served, these institutions
and levels of authority will fail."

Now, here's one that seems more definitely testable.  "We will begin to
use cold fusion (another form of nuclear energy using a single isotope
of water) to supply our energy needs."

-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Ya can talk all ya wanna, but it's dif'rent than it was!"
"No it aint!  But ya gotta know the territory!"
        Meredith Willson: "The Music Man"

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From:  (David Ingham)
Subject: Re: Why does Eire get so much press?
Organization: Beer R Us
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 15:41:21 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism

In article <2935506688.1.p00168@psilink.com>, "James F. Tims"
<p00168@psilink.com> wrote:
> 
> >DATE:   7 Jan 93 09:41:39 GMT
> >FROM:   dave budd <zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk>
> >
> >NB in '92, the Unionists (broadly Protestant, want Northern Ireland to 
> >remain part of UK) killed more people than the other lot.
> >
> >The people in the south would like Ireland to be one country, but on the 
> >whole they're not into violent means of achieving this.  Go there for your 
> >next vacation, it's a very friendly place with lots of beautiful countryside 
> >and some damn good beer.  Even with an English accent and a noticeable lack 
> >of attendance at Catholic church services, nobody will be nasty to you.
> >
> >  No Trespassing: 4/17ths of a haiku.     D.Budd@mcc.ac.uk   fax 6040
> >  Dave Budd, MCC, Oxford Rd, Manchester, England    (44|0)61-275-6033  
> 
> I don't mean to slam Ireland, north or south, Dave, really.  What you 
> say affirms what I was saying -- Ireland is one of the safest, nicest 
> places around and the US in just the opposite.  The practice of bringing 
> children from Belfast (not Dublin - I dropped the ball, there) to 
> Detroit to escape the "strife" looks crazy to me, just based on the 
> numbers. 
> 
> Since Belfast is about 1/5 the size of Detroit, assuming that all 2000 
> or so deaths from "strife in N. Ireland" were in Belfast (which they 
> weren't, of course), they should match 1 year's Detroit totals with 5 
> years' of their own in Belfast.  Detroit kills about 2000 per year, and 
> it's taken Belfast 25 years to reach that total.  The Irish just can't keep 
> up with solid American-style violence.  For all the sound and fury on 
> US television coverage of N. Ireland, it's child's play compared with 
> Detroit, with drug warfare, muggings, rape, police brutality, etc.
> 

Well, I have actually been to Belfast (Guiness there is fantastic!!!) and I
think that the level of violence as portrayed by the US media is greatly
overrated (I also think the level of violence in as shown by the US media
in the US is also overrated).  I also got the same impression from talking
to the people there.  Sure the city has some bad spots, but every big city
does.  I predict that this year in the US we will be bombarded with how
"violent" suburban America is.  Crime in the big cities just won't sell
newspapers anymore because we have become so desensitized to it.

*************************************************
* David Ingham  *   Place wacky signature here  *
*************************************************
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic