HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dabrowsk@parc.xerox.com (Jarek Dabrowski)
Subject: Re: Did the world end already?
Organization: Xerox PARC
Date: 30 Aug 92 22:30:28 GMT

In <1992Aug29.003242.1@acad2.alaska.edu> Don (atdhb@acad2.alaska.edu) 
concludes Scott Oser's remark about the imminent end of the world with:

-Don:
>Conclusions:  Jesus (if he existed) and his followers thought the end
>"must shortly come to pass" (Apocalypse 1:1); they were wrong; ergo
>Christianity is wrong; 
>
... or misinterpreted. Solution: This world ends TO YOU when you die. 


Best wishes,
             Jarek
======================================================
 .-----.            Dabrowski@Parc.xerox.com       
 `-> <-'       I WANT DAN BREDY BACK TO THE NET
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Subject: Re: assholes
Reply-To: ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller)
Organization: St. Elizabeth Hospital, Youngstown, OH
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 00:54:56 GMT


In a previous article, mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) says:

>ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:
>> (the more fuckheads I see like this, the more convinced I am that we need 
>> a moderated group...<sigh>)
>
>We *have* a moderated group.  alt.atheism.moderated.
>

I was not aware of that...but it is not available at my newssite...
I'll have to talk to the sysadmin about it...
               
>
>mathew
>-- 
>"Even the most bizarre of the unions (probably that between a cat's gall
> stone and a single note 'G' from CNN's ident theme) managed to convey a
> sense of rampant impropriety."  -- 'Fortran Five', Simon G. Lawrence Leonard
>
-- 
*...your Friendly Neighborhood Atheist // "Peter...PETER!!  I can see    *
*      the KelleyMan:Kelley L. Miller // your house from here!"          *    
*                  ae642@yfn.ysu.edu // Jesus Christ, from the cross     *
****************Know God...No peace.  No God...Know peace.****************
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: assholes
Date: 3 Sep 92 10:22:48 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Humpty Dumpty) writes:
> Wouldn't you really have to see all of existence to make
> such a pompous claim as "there is no god"?

Wouldn't you really have to see all of existence to make
such a pompous claim as "there are no square circles"?

> I don't give two shits if you reject religion.

Actions speak louder than words.


mathew
-- 
"Even the most bizarre of the unions (probably that between a cat's gall
 stone and a single note 'G' from CNN's ident theme) managed to convey a
 sense of rampant impropriety."  -- 'Fortran Five', Simon G. Lawrence Leonard
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:05:58 GMT

In article <5313@news.duke.edu> infante@acpub.duke.edu (Andrew  Infante) writes:
>moral : [reprinted without permission from Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary]
>
>1: a. of or relating to principles of right or wrong in behavior : ETHICAL
><~judgments>
>b. expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a ~poem>
>c. conforming to a standard of right behavior
>d. sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgement
><a ~obligation>
>e. CAPABLE OF RIGHT OR WRONG ACTION (how's that one, Eric?)
Hmmm....

>Pick your favorite definition, then tell us why you don't believe in
>morality.
>Right and wrong - just word?
Hmmm....None of these is really applicable in a good sense.
While I believe in standards of right behavior, I.e. that people
have them, I don't believe them to be correct.

-Ekr


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
                       I will hack Unix for food.
From: torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: assholes
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:41:53 GMT
	<ocTiqB7w165w@mantis.co.uk> <1992Sep5.212728.3127@cs.yale.edu>
	<graham.715833468@galois> <TORKEL.92Sep7180250@bast.sics.se>
	<graham.715923740@galois> <TORKEL.92Sep8070754@bast.sics.se>
	<graham.71594
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista

In article <graham.715952861@galois> graham@maths.su.oz.au (Graham Matthews) 
writes:

   >As far as I can see it has everything to do with constructive logic.
   >As far as I understand the field it is one in which to prove that
   >there exists an X (having properties PX) satisfying some property P, 
   >one must produce an X having the property P. It is not enough to
   >derive that the propery P follows from the properties PX.

  1) The statement "there exists an X satisfying PX and P" does not
follow in any logic that I know of merely from a derivation showing
that "the property P follows from the properties PX". A proof of the
existence of something having properties PX is also needed.

  2) It is correct that in constructive logic, a proof of a statement
of the form "there is something X having properties PX and satisfying
property P" can always be unfolded into a proof yielding an explicit
instance of such an X.

  3) But what does this have to do what you have been saying? I quote:

   >I disagree. The point of the constructivist proof is that to say
   >that "there do not exist P that are Q" is meaningless unless you can
   >produce at leat on object staisfying P and one satisfying Q. 

  Here, and throughout this exchange, we have not been concerned with
proofs of existence statements, but with proofs of the *negations* of
existence statements.

  4) In constructive logic, in any standard sense of the term, the
meaningfulness of a statement "there is an object X satisfying PX and
P" in no way depends on the existence of objects satisfying PX or
P, and a proof of the statement "there does not exist any object X
satisfying PX and P" in no way presupposes the existence of any objects
satisfying either PX or P.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Logical Fallacies
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 92 18:42:36 GMT
Organization: Society For Putting Things on Top of Other Things

I noticed a couple of logical fallacies missing from the list
posted here yesterday.  Also, I believe the list would be much
more useful if each had an example. 

Thanks for posting it; it was very useful.  With examples, it 
would be a fine addition to the FAQ.

SLIPPERY SLOPE ARGUMENT

This argument states that should one event occur, so will other
harmful events.  There is no proof made that the harmful events
are caused by the first event.  Example: if we legalize marajuana,
then we would have to legalize crack and heroin and we'll have a
nation full of drug-addicts on welfare, so we cannot legalize
marajuana.

REDUCIO AD ABSURDUM

Similar to Slippery Slope, this argument trivializes a statement
into a ludicrous example.  One Reducio ad Absurdum example would
be: If you're going to let 18-year-olds vote, why not 12-year-olds?
Why not 5-year-olds?  Hell, let everyone vote!  Then big families
have more votes, and kids will vote for whoever promises free candy.


Anyone notice any others missing?
-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
From: brumleve@hermes (Dan Brumleve)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I still seem to be God
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:30:20 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Colleen Davis <cisc124@jeff-lab.queensu.ca> writes:

>bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)

>Bill is the third disciple and prophet.  Blessed is
>Bill, for he has found favour in the eyes of Colleen.

>colleen

Hail Bill, and may he live forever in Her glory.
QUIT
in Her glory.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.discrimination
From: lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry Swetsky)
Subject: Re: Net.Citizen.Arrest Of Net.Citizen Attempted
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Distribution: rec
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 11:40:43 GMT

In article <BuIKA6.Cpw@iat.holonet.net> bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams) writes:
>I wouldn't be surprised to learn that out of the TOTAL NUMBER OF TERABYTES
>OF PACKETS that travel over the internet backbone each month under 2% is
>devoted towards newsgroup forwarding.

    Please don't cross post this drivel to chi.general.  Thanks.

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: Christianic Sacrifices
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:27:50 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalno.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Sep9.194658.3028@ncsu.edu>, cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu 
(CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:
> 
>>I wonder if these are some of the "Traditional Family Values"
>>Kind George "baby butcher" Bush want to force Americans to
>>adopt?
>>
>>--- Maximus 2.00
> 
> 
> Be careful about generalizing Christians b/c of some bad apples.
> I could no more say that atheists were all incestious (sp) if the
> news reported that an atheist raped his/her daughter.

I think you are missing at least part of the point.  Lots of hubbub is made
about "Satanic sacrifices" these days.  What is being pointed out is that far
more people are killed in the name of YHVH than in the name of Satan.
-- 
Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                  | An It Harm None, Do What You Will
HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET      |
                                     | All Acts of Love and Pleasure are
Love doesn't subtract,               | Her Rituals
   it multiplies    - Heinlein       |
                                     | Speak the Word.
Disclaimer:  Fermilab's far too large to have an opinion, let alone mine.
From: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I still seem to be God
Date: 11 Sep 92 21:10:58 GMT
Reply-To: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.

In article <1992Sep11.103535.6674@iscsvax.uni.edu>,
marshall1198@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
|>In article <BuDID9.Hyn@knot.ccs.queensu.ca>, Colleen Davis
<3005904@jeff-lab.queensu.ca> writes:
|>> ...
|>> 
|>> So, here it is, one final time-- after this, I'm moving to 
|>> New Zealand.  If someone can prove that I'm not God, I
|>> will convert to Christianity-- or another religion as 
|>> appropriate.  Yes, that's right, the stakes have been raised
|>> from a mere opportunity for flaming and intellectual 
|>> smugness to ONE IMMORTAL SOUL.  But, wait, there's more!
|>> If you can prove me wrong, I will even instruct the disciples
|>> Steve and Dave to convert and spread the word.  That's *Three
|>> Souls for the Price of One!*
|>> 
|>> colleen
|>> (still God)
|>
|>If you were truly God, then we don't to prove you wrong.  You should have

Don't what? Speak English?

|>already revealed yourself as God.  But since you haven't, then you're
not God.

I thought she (sorry, She) reveled herself quite a few articles ago.

|>
|>Anyway, I'm part of the Kingdom of God and you are not in control.

Your address is from Canada.  The Kingdom of God (biblical) is
in the Middle East.  Where's your passport?  How do you know She
does not move the fates in your life's path?

|>
|>
|>In Him,
|>Evan
                             
In Her Glory,
Brian /-|-\
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: I still seem to be God
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 18:06:39 GMT

In article <BuMH89.Kq1@knot.ccs.queensu.ca> Colleen Davis <cisc124@jeff-lab.queensu.ca> writes:
}bwilliam@iat.holonet.net (Bill Williams)
}
}Erm, well, I don't really care for that cutting out of tongues
}and eyes stuff.  

Ah, unlike Yahweh you are a kind and loving diety!
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Theist Relatives
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Aug 21 1992
Date: 11 Sep 92  21:56:16

Tag: Scott Oser (oser@fermi.wustl.edu (Scott Oser))
Subject: Dealing with theistic relatives
 
  SO> "Does anyone have any observations on dealing with
  SO> religious relatives? How does one breach the subject
  SO> of being an atheist and deal with the inevitably
  SO> negative response?"
 
<Hack, spit!> Don't get me started! (Crooked smile.)
 
I presume you're an adult, since you wrote that you
visit your parents, and they haul you to church. You
wrote in part:
 
  SO> Personally, I still find myself going to church with
  SO> my parents when I visit them, because I know that if
  SO> I refused and explained why, they wouldn't be happy
  SO> campers, and I'd rather just waste an hour on Sunday
  SO> than deal with the hassle. And I'm absolutely positive
  SO> my grandparents would flip out if they knew I was an
  SO> atheist."
 
Is it your job to make your parents comfortable? If you feel
that you owe them the above concession out of love, devotion,
or duty, then consider the wasted hour or two as an act of
love and learn to live with it. If you resent having to please
them as if you were still a child, tell them you do not feel
like going next time they suggest it--- you need not tell
them why: an adult need not justify one's behavior.

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: charless@sco.com (charles stross)
Subject: Re: Proof: God wrote the Bible
Organization: The Somewhat Contagious Operation, Inc.
Cc:    
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 08:23:29 +0000

Lo, in article <1992Aug31.133413.202585@uctvax.uct.ac.za> it is written:
>======================================================================
>Extract from 'Seal of God' by F.C.Payne (1974):
>
>BIBLE NUMERICS - FIRST ASPECT
>
>The New Testament begins with the genealogy of Christ back to
>Abraham. It is interesting to note that this genealogy itself is
>divided into three sets of 14: Abraham to David (14), David to
>Babylon (14), Babylon to Christ (14). See Matt. 1:17. It has two
>natural sectiond, verses 1-11 and 12-17. I am but giving some
>examples from the section 1 to 11, the latter section contains
>similar phenomena which need not be enumerated. The following now is
>from the Greek, in whick the N.T. is written. The actual numerics are
>by Dr. Panin.

BZZZT wrong!

The N.T. was written in Aramaic and translated into Greek about one to
two centuries later.

... another one bits the bag ...

[ rest of this meretricious idiocy deleted ]

-- 
this signature rescued by the .sigfile liberation front
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: assholes revisited
Date: 8 Sep 92 09:58:12 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Humpty Dumpty) writes:
> It was amusing to see so many level-headed, objective athiests get so 
> frazzled at being labeled assholes. The vengefully rude, insecure
> and irrational replies to my original post was all I needed to confirm my
> obtrusive assumption.

I'm glad that you admit it was an assumption.  It certainly wasn't a fact.

> Maybe you all will figure the spiritual life out some frightful day,
> when you stop figuring.

That's your sales pitch?  Don't try to understand things, reason things out
or use imagination, become a Christian?  I don't think you'll convince many
people here with that line of argument.


mathew
-- 
Bush/Quayle in '92!
God Bless America!
From: jmm25@po.CWRU.Edu (Jessica M. Mcgeary)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Calling facts "theory"
Date: 13 Sep 1992 16:41:40 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


The Catholic church has, yes, accepted evolution. And has apologized
to Galileo, much good it'll do the poor man now. And even said that 
the Big Bang theory of the creation of the Universe is consistent with
what the Church believes, tho I don't think they're saying this is exactly
how they believe it was created.

But I'm still pissed at them for what they told Hawking and the other
cosmologists. No looking too closely into the moment of creation, because
that should be left a mystery and it's something that only God can under-
stand anyway.

And they want to know why people are afraid of Catholics!!! Geez...

>sigh<
-- 
Jessica McGeary
jmm25@po.cwru.edu
Case Western Reserve University
Remember! Arguments should be FUN!
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:16676 talk.religion.misc:15823
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Overpopulation
Date: 7 Sep 92 14:02:29 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
> mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes:
> >It may have escaped your parochial American attention, but currently in
> >Somalia the United Nations observers estimate that some 5000 children are
> >starving to death every day.
> 
> The problems in Somalia are primarily due to a civil war.  These
> discussions tend towards oversimplification.  There are a number of
> things contributing to hunger.  I think it's foolish to say that the
> earth has a precise maximum number of people it can support, and that
> we've exceeded it.

So do I.  I was pointing out that, if we're going by observational evidence
alone, it doesn't look like we have enough food for the number of people.  It
may indeed be the case that there's in fact plenty of food for everyone, but
nobody has yet shown it to be the case.  Given what's at stake, I therefore
think it's rather foolish to assume it.


mathew
-- 
Bush/Quayle in '92!
God Bless America!
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.religion.kibology
From: bsmart@bsmart.TTI.COM (Bob Smart)
Subject: Re: Pi and the US $$ system was (Re: Pythagorean Reform Church)
Reply-To: bsmart@bsmart.TTI.COM (Bob Smart)
Organization: Citicorp+TTI
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 08:39:42 GMT

In article <87mn6am@lynx.unm.edu>, jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes:
> Has anyone ever thought of making out a check for $Pi?  or for $e ?
> 
> I'm willing to take all these checks to the bank and see what they do when
> I cash them.

I doubt it will be very exciting, although you'll probably get to argue
with a branch manager for a while.  The final result will be that you
get paid $3.14 -- rounding and truncation take place all the time in
finiancial transactions (like 6.12% simple interest on $100.23).  When
interest rates or other functions don't come out even in pennies, the
result is jammed into something finite anyway.

For extra fun for your entertainment dollar, try writing such a check to
the IRS!

---------

A fanatic is someone who does what he knows that God would do if God knew the
facts of the case.

Some mailers apparently munge my address; you might have to use
bsmart@bsmart.tti.com -- or if that fails, fall back to
72027.3210@compuserve.com.  Ain't UNIX grand?
From: brumleve@gauss (Danny Brumleve)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Christianic Sacrifices
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:46:55 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:


>>I wonder if these are some of the "Traditional Family Values"
>>Kind George "baby butcher" Bush want to force Americans to
>>adopt?
>>
>>--- Maximus 2.00


>Be careful about generalizing Christians b/c of some bad apples.
>I could no more say that atheists were all incestious (sp) if the
>news reported that an atheist raped his/her daughter.


>Chris

     But the murders reported were commited as a result of the killers being 
Christians.  Ever heard of an atheist killing someone because they believed
in "god"?
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bt@bailey.u.washington.edu (bt garner)
Subject: Re: End of the World...
Organization: Process Modeling Group
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 01:14:12 GMT

millernw@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Neal Miller) writes:
>>I, for one, am scared.  Not of October, 1994, but of the decisions that
>Oops... My mistake... I meant September 1994, like it makes a difference. ;-)

It makes a *huge* difference.  I'd hate to throw a month long "End of the 
World" party in the wrong month.  I'd be the laughing stock of all my friends,
but at least it would only be for a month.  Or maybe we just wouldn't have 
a party at all.

bt garner			"Look to the future, forget about today; 
bt@cpac.washington.edu		 look to the future it's the only way."
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: dfm2@jaguar.uofs.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: pay attention!
Date: 8 Sep 92 19:59:17 GMT
Organization: University of Scranton

Hold on tight, readers, you're about to go for a ride...

TRUE OR FALSE
1.  According to the bible, When you die, you will be rewarded by going
 to heaven.  
hmm, I think more atheists got this one right than Xians.
The Answer is... 
FALSE. You get eaten by worms.  Then, Christ reanimates your body (or, 
more whatever dirt you've become).  Greeks, not Christ, made up this
bull about a seperation of body and soul.  One is an expression of the
other, and they cannot be seperated any more than drawings can be 
seperated from a page.
2. God exists.
TRUE by definition.  God is defined as that which exists, or literally,
"I am that am."  Its the nature of God and his works that can be debated.
If you only believe in randomly moving quarks, you should know that there
is no such thing as random.  God is whatever makes those quarks move, and
what makes quarks quarks.  If that is a mathematical equation, then God
is Math.
3. Mankind cannot know truth.
TRUE. Score one for the agnostics! That does not mean truth does not
exist, rather that man is unable to concieve of the truth that DOES exist.
The teachings of Jesus (or Yeshua, or whatever) are not that mankind should
live according to the law, which is man's feeble attempt at grasping truth,
but should recognize that he is powerless to know truth, and therefore 
abandon his will to power (excuse me for updating terminology).  Drunkeness,
promiscuity, gambling,gossip,JUDGING PEOPLE, homosexuality, LAWGIVING,
and deceitfulness are all ways that the early church saw as ways people 
cling to power over the earth (I'll call them addictions.  THESE ARE NOT
WHIMS OF POWER-HUNGRY MEN, OR A GOD THAT WILLS TO POWER, but the methods
of a God that wills to create.
4. The kingdom of God is in heaven.
FALSE. It is wherever people have abandoned their will to power (and, 
therefroe, their fear of death).  Because Jesus atught people how to do so,
it exists on Earth, and people can, while still alive, live in it.  I do
not know in my own life of anyone who has lived there, although many people
I know certainly have vistited.  I for one, I believe, stand near the door-
way and fear entering lest it slam behind me.  I think many Catholics are
Atehists because they've been told that they are already all the way in,
and connot figure out why the world isn't perfect.
   
Newsgroups: alt.atheism