HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: olson@mydual.uucp (Kirtland H. Olson)
Subject: Re: Hypertext FAQ is here! (intro)
Reply-To: olson%mydual.uucp@alliant.com
Organization: The Harvard Group, 01451-0667
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 16:15:38 GMT

In article <C19Fwx.4F@rice.edu> dorai@cs.rice.edu (Dorai Sitaram) writes:


> Is there a vanilla ascii hypertext
>system for Unix dumb terminals (comparable to Neil Larson's
>Hyplus for MSDOS)?  Thanks for any info.
>

>dorai@cs.rice.edu      !    It may be that the gulfs will wash us down;
>dorai@owlnet.rice.edu  !      it may be we shall touch the Happy Isles.

Hytelnet Software is a unix clone of HyperRez for DOS.  Available by
anonymous FTP from aces.usask.ca in directory /pub/hytelnet.

Contact Earl Fogel (fogel@sask.usask.ca) for details, but this system is
known to run on Suns and will use HyPlus/HyperRez databases directly.

Caution:  There's a database called Hytelnet also--not the same
thing--the database is a HyPlus/HyperRez content file.


-- 
Kirtland H. Olson                     olson%mydual.uucp@alliant.com
From: au462@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Robert Drake)
Newsgroups: alt.hypertext
Subject: Re: Hypertext and the Peer-Review Process
Date: 22 Jan 1993 05:26:07 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


>Are the precedents, perhaps in other fields than religious studies/
>historical studies, for the development of peer-review networks
>or more general academic publishing networks for hypertext documents
>and studies?

"Writing On the Edge" (Campus Writing Center, UC Davis CA 95616) 
published an issue, featuring several articles on hypertext fictions
and including a disk with examples.  Of course, they were primarily
writing *about* hypertext, not using ht as a vehicle for other info.
I bought my copy from EastGate Systems (134 Main Street  Watertown MA
02172)...

luigi-bob drake
cleveland state university
multimedia development
Newsgroups: alt.hypertext
From: dorai@cs.rice.edu (Dorai Sitaram)
Subject: Re: Hypertext FAQ is here! (intro)
Organization: Rice University, Houston
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:50:57 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.161320.3395@wam.umd.edu> liuxia@wam.umd.edu (New VaxHacker) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.171333.1@hamp.hampshire.edu> dhirmes@hamp.hampshire.edu writes:
>>                                                               Also, I only
>>have one hypertext system listed for UNIX based machines.  If you know of
>>any more, please post.  
>.......     
>
>Check out, Trellis, a petri net based hypertext system developed by
>professors Rick Furuta of U of MD at College Park and Dave Stotts 

I have a dumb terminal connected to a Sparc; therefore,
can't use suntools or X.  Is there a vanilla ascii hypertext
system for Unix dumb terminals (comparable to Neil Larson's
Hyplus for MSDOS)?  Thanks for any info.

--d
-- 

dorai@cs.rice.edu      !    It may be that the gulfs will wash us down;
dorai@owlnet.rice.edu  !      it may be we shall touch the Happy Isles.
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Who is Billy Graham?
Date: 21 Jan 1993 19:26:25 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, pierce@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Brad Pierce) says:

>At USA President Clinton's inauguration Billy Graham was given
>a prominent role. I seem to recall that Graham hung around
>with former USA President Bush on the night that Bush decided to
>initiate Operation Desert Storm.
>
>How did this theist gain so much access to the powerful in *both*
>major USA political parties?
>
>-- Brad Pierce --
>
>

	You mean he isn't the guy who makes those `Graham Cracker' I like
so well....=~(

-- 
A. TRENT PHILLIPS |" A mirror is a negative space with a frame and a place for
  also known as   | your face, it reveals what the rest of us see. It conceals
   WHITE  ROOK    | what you'd like you to be."--Blue Oyster Cult
--------------------------bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu--------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: snm6394@ultb.isc.rit.edu (S.N. Mozumder )
Subject: Atheism is False
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:25:52 GMT

Atheism has no evidence of there not being a Allah, so its just denial.
But Islam provides evidence for Allah, though.

-Bobby Mozumder
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: God exists. Proof within.
Date: 25 Jan 93 03:32:36 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <C1DEv4.BM1@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, zell@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Joseph Zell) writes:
|> pmetzger@snark.shearson.com (Perry E. Metzger) writes:
|> >not one but two arguments.
|> 
|> >First of all, there are statements in the Bible that are demonstrably
|> >FALSE, such as the indirect implication at one point that PI is equal
|> >to exactly three, and the apparent claim that the universe is only
|> >five thousand years old.
|> 
|> That apparent claim is false.  This fact is used over and over again, when
|> it is completely false.  (This is not a flame, but I am a bit upset that
|> this myth is allowed to continue as much as it had).

Well, you raise a good issue, perhaps without meaning to.  Who
are you to judge the value of someone else's interpretation of
the Bible?   What is your authority to do so?   Why should we
care if what Bishop Ussher thought the Bible said seems 'false'
to you?

IMHO, all this is is the oft repeated event of successive
generations bringing their current interpretation of the Bible
into line with what Science currently says, by declaring that
some of the wilder speculations about what the Bible is saying,
produced by previous generations, are now "false".

The irony here is that it means that Science determines what
people read into the Bible.

jon.
From: christen@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Carl Christensen)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: RELIGION & PRESIDENTS
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:31:28 GMT
Organization: Temple University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

As an atheist Clinton supporter (no flames from LImbaugh fans please :) ), I'm
curious as to how much he sold out to the Xian element.  Since I was in 
school all during the inauguration, did anybody happen to make notes of
specific extraneous Xian or theist stuff he did?

Well, what can we expect from a Bible Belter.  I just don't like seeing
Billy Graham there.  Especially since he's always been known for hanging
around 'war' presidents.  I don't want Clinton to start pandering to 
fundies, especially since they were totally against him!


--

Carl Christensen                      christen@astro.ocis.temple.edu
Department of Computer Science
Temple University
Philadelphia, PA  19122   USA         (215) 735-6787
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: foster@jed.cs.uidaho.edu ()
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: University of Idaho CS Dept.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:34:02 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.183943.16505@texhrc.uucp> pyeatt@Texaco.com (Larry D. Pyeatt) writes:
>In article <25JAN93.05173422@skyfox>, meagher@skyfox writes:

>Then there is the story of that fellow whom God wanted to test.  God
>told him to sacrifice his son.  So he did.  I don't even remember the 
>names on this story, but there are actually two versions with different
>names.  In one version, God tortures the father, but eventually lets the
>child live.  Anyone want to help me out with this one?

Other than the terribly obivious Abraham and Isaac story, there's the gospel:
the father created a batch of creatures in a petri dish called earth, and they
started acting badly.  His solution, have his own son tortured and killed.
You see, someone has to suffer, and this father preferred that it be his son
rather than these creatures.  Some call it love.  I call it revolting.

Oh yes, the son was also God.  So God had to be tortured and killed because
these created things acted badly.  They still do.  But religions whose followers
beleive that God was actually tortured and killed in case they might behave 
badly has an exaggerated opinion of humans and a depressingly grovelling opinion
of God.

-- 
James A. Foster                           foster@cs.uidaho.edu
Universty of Idaho                        Dept. of Computer Science
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice)
Subject: Re: Islamic proof of existence of god!!??
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 08:00:00 GMT

In <1993Jan19.144546.18395@bradford.ac.uk> L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk (Leonard Newnham) writes:

>darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan13.103010.28185@bradford.ac.uk>, L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk (Leonard Newnham) writes:
>>>> If you want a really good laugh then try reading the following article
>>>> in soc.religion.islam.  I'm still laughing.
[...stuff deleted...]
>>
>>While there is no *proof* (as in mathematical-type proof) of the
>>existence of God -- as many in soc.religion.islam have pointed out -- to
>>totally dismiss out of hand that there is no *evidence* for God's
>>existence given certain assumptions without having even seen these
>>arguments is just simply evidence of one person's very closed mind.

>Quite what are you saying here?  As for the article, if it was meant
>seriously, it was obviously complete bollocks from beginning to end.
[...stuff deleted...]

I agree in general with those in soc.religion.islam who have criticised
the article.  Sorry, I did not mean in my posting that the possible
evidence for God was necessarily in that particular posting (although I
think it may exist, given realist-type assumptions).  I was mainly
reacting to what I did perceive as closed-mindedness in the attitude of
the poster....

>I find it unreasonable that you seem to equate laughter with a closed
>mind.  Let's take a simple illustration.  Assume somebody claims the 
>Earth is flat.  I cannot 'prove' otherwise but my experience is such 
>that an overwhelming amount of evidence points to a spherical Earth.
>It would take something more than the sort of childish arguments in 
>the above mentioned article before I took the claim seriously.  I 
>assume you also do the same, otherwise we would both waste most of our
>lives taking seriously every crackpot we happened to meet!

>When childishly simple arguments are presented as sound intelligent 
>ones that will change the views of atheists then I think it is quite 
>reasonable to have a bloody good laugh.

Firstly, note that the article referred to was posted in
soc.religion.islam, not in alt.atheism.  This person was interested in
getting the reactions of *Muslims* to his arguments.  Muslims did show
him where his arguments were quite weak.  Now, for an atheist to call to
other atheists to see what a good laugh they can have with a particular
posting in S.R.I. shows that this particular atheist seems to suffer
from a "holier-than-thou" attitude.

Let's leave it there.  You may disagree with me... that's fine.

 Fred Rice
 darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au   

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Subject: REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE
Originator: era@teal.csn.org
Keywords: Extremists, Christian Right, Amendment 2
Reply-To: era@csn.org (Ed Arnold)
Organization: Citizens Project; Colorado Springs, CO
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 01:46:49 GMT

We of the Citizens Project (Colorado Springs, CO) are looking for people
who could assist us in re-distributing the Citizens Project Newsletter
to non-Internet computer services.  If you have an account on any such
services (CompuServe, FidoNet, Genie, Prodigy, America Online, and others)
and are willing to help us, please let us know via return email to
era@ncar.ucar.edu.

The Citizens Project is a Colorado Springs, CO - based group of volunteers
who seek to prevent extremists from eliminating our fundamental freedoms,
in the face of growing political and religious intolerance in Colorado.
--
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
-- 
Ed Arnold * Boulder, CO * 303-497-1253(voice,weekday) * 303-494-6949(voice)
internet: era@csn.org * compuserve: internet:era@csn.org * bitnet: era@ncario
From: revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: HOW CAN I GET CHICK COMICS?
Date: 25 Jan 93 14:52:12 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

christen@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Carl Christensen) writes:

> Wesley E Nicholson (wesnich@athena.mit.edu) wrote:
> : How can I get chick comics?  Perhaps I overlooked something,
> : but I couldn't find an address among all the praise.
> 
> : Can anybody out there clue me in?
> 
> I don't know about Boston but here in Philadelphia they're usually
> available from the loony with the billboard and megaphone that
> travels up and down the streets hollering at people to be saved.
> 
> --
> 
> Carl Christensen                      christen@astro.ocis.temple.edu
> Department of Computer Science
> Temple University
> Philadelphia, PA  19122   USA         (215) 735-6787

	Aha, another Chick fan located here in Philly. I should mention
that, for about eight bucks, you can order a Sample Pak with just about
EVERY Chick Tract currently in print. 

	Problem is, there are few that are OUT of print, which I'd love to
get. Best of all was "Soul Story," which depicted these Superfly-like black
radicals shooting each other up before their leader-- believe it or not,
he's named Leroy Brown-- finds Jesus.

	By the way, the large-format comics about The Crusaders have another
aspect which nobody has commented on. Hasn't anyone noticed that The
Crusaders-- two large-thewed, strapping Christian guys-- bear an uncanny
resemblance to Tom of Finland's gay artwork?

Note: I do a column for _The Humanist_ magazine, and I'm readying one on
Chick Comics. Information is appreciated, and if anyone has tracts of his
that are out of print, Xerox copies-- of good quality, blown up to
twice-normal size-- would be appreciated. Send me Email.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian "Rev. P-K" Siano                                  revpk@cellar.org

"Do I BELIEVE in the Bible? Hell, man, I've even SEEN one!!"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau)
Subject: Re: Strong atheism ought to explain theism (Was: Re: Atheism is dogmatic.
Organization: Technical University Braunschweig, Germany
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:49:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.091314.23002@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>
darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice) writes:
 
(Deletions)
>
>Now, many religious people, notably mystics, claim to have "experienced"
>God.  It is certainly possible that their experience of God was just as
>real as our present experience of our respective computer terminals.
>This then puts a belief in God for this particular person on a par with
>the vast majority of people's belief in the real existence of the
>material world.
>
 
No, the point is that I have not witnessed it myself, and these people
can not derive statements from their belief that I can validate and not
explain from another system.
 
They may have 'experienced godly', but they have not experienced 'god',
so to speak.
 
 
>Thus, a true "experience" of God may be a very rational reason for that
>particular person to believe in God.  Definitely as rational as the reason
>the vast majority of people have for believing in the existence of the
>material world.
>
 
I accept that. However, when I look at mystical practices, I am not impressed
that methods of for instance, sensory deprivation, hyperventilation, lack of
food, pain, etc., makes people think they have seen god. Especially when it
stops hurting.
 
It can be that they have a overwhelming experience, but simply it because it
was so overwhelming, people forget to make reality checks because noone cares
for objectivity after such an experience.
 
The only objectivity I see is that I might have such an experience myself.
But the way to it is hard, and it looks as if the experience would impair
my reasoning quality and therefore the quality of my life.
 
It can be that I wouldn't care then anymore, but the analogy to hard drugs
is too clear in my eyes.
   Benedikt
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: MANDTBACKA@FINABO.ABO.FI (Mats Andtbacka)
Subject: Re: >>>>Was Jesus the Anti-Christ?
Organization: Unorganized Usenet Postings UnInc.
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:14:15 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <cscope.728186655@camelot> cscope@camelot.bradley.edu writes:

> In <1993Jan27.093139.22347@abo.fi> MANDTBACKA@FINABO.ABO.FI
> (Mats Andtbacka) writes:
>> In <cscope.728067684@camelot> cscope@camelot.bradley.edu writes:

      (and so on a couple levels of attribution)

>>(Staggering deletions)
> 
>>      *Never*? Odd - I would've thought at least somebody had said
>>something down most any line you could think of on this subject in the
>>past two millennia or so... If one just bothered to dig through those
>>mountains of texts to try and find it, that is.
> 
> Considering that I'm relatively new at this (didn't start doubting
> seriously until about a year ago and didn't start exploring Christianity
> to determine whether or not I feel I can ever believe in it until this
> summer), I haven't had much time to dig through all those texts.

      Yeh, well, I wouldn't bother if I were you; I think one could
easily find sufficient logical reason to dump Xianity anyway. Getting
into mysticism would take a lifetime or two, and I doubt it would lead
much anywhere - unless you *like* that sort of thing... ;-)

> I believe in a lot of things, it's just that I'm trying to find out 
> whether I'm missing something blantantly obvious that does prove (at
> least within the Christian belief system) that Jesus could not have 
> been the anti-christ.

      If such a thing existed (and I doubt it), then it would probably
be very easy to reinterpret the bible passage in question to cover it
up. That's what's happened with most of the OT, y'know.

> As for a way to keep me from doubting something, sound theories or
> empirical evidence will always work.

      Well, that does it for Xianity, then. ;-)

> The main reason I am concerned is that I was brought up as a Christian
> and am struggling with that first.  If I decide to reject Christianity 
> completely, then I will worry about what, if any, religion to adopt.

      Best of luck, but try sucking on this: Does one need a religion
for anything, and in that case what, and why? Just to get you thinking a
bit down my lines...

-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-
 If you think I'm gonna be responsible for this crap, you're madder than I am.
    "No logic here today / Do as you got to, Go your own way..." -- G 'n' R
     ===>The Truth is still the Truth, even if you choose to ignore it.<===
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jen187@its.CSIRO.AU (Graham Jenkins +61 6 276 6812)
Subject: Re: CHRISTIANS ARE BEING DUPED!
Organization: CSIRO ITS
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:22:00 GMT


In article <1993Jan25.163632.3285@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:


|>       
|> 
|> 
|> 
|>           "2nd COMINGS"
|> 
|>                If a Perfect Living Master physically dies ("trans-
|>           lates") before a particular Initiate of His does, then when 
|>           that Initiate physically dies ("translates"), the Master will 
|>           meet him on the Astral level and take him directly to the 
|>           Soul Plane.  This is the ONE AND ONLY correct meaning of a 
|>           2nd Coming.  It is an INDIVIDUAL experience, NOT something 
|>           that happens for everyone all at once.  People who are still 
|>     
|>                The "SOUND CURRENT" manifests differently for different 
|>           Initiates, and can sound like a rushing wind, ocean waves on 
|>           the sea shore, buzzing bees, higher-pitched buzzing sound, a 
|>           flute, various heavenly music, or other sounds.  In Eckankar, 
|>           Members start hearing it near the end of their first year as 
|>           a Member.  This and other experiences (such as "SOUL TRAVEL") 
|>           REPLACE blind faith. 
|>     
|> 
|> 
|>                UN-altered REPRODUCTION and DISSEMINATION of this 
|>           IMPORTANT Information is ENCOURAGED. 
|> 
|> 
|>                                            Robert E. McElwaine
|>                                            2nd Initiate in Eckankar
|> 
|> 

YES! YES! I get radio messages from Venus beamed directly into
my head which say exactly the same thing so ot MUST be true.

Not only that but last week a UFO from a planet in the direction
of Rigel landed in my back yard and left me with golden tablets
with your very words inscribed upon them.  PRAISE THE LORD!
-- 

|  Graham Jenkins          |  graham.jenkins@its.csiro.au           | 
|  CSIRO                   |  (Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial | 
|  Canberra,  AUSTRALIA    |  Research Organisation)                |
From: eradm@wbst845e.xerox.com (Erik Radmall)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Buddhism - A religion of atheists?
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:49:47 GMT
Reply-To: eradm@wbst845e.xerox.com
Organization: Xerox Corporation

In article 1092@nuscc.nus.sg, cmtan@iss.nus.sg (Tan Chade Meng - with Dan) writes:
>BUDDHISM - A RELIGION OF ATHEISTS?
>
>Is there such thing as an "atheist religion"?  Surprise!  I found the
>answer to be "yes".

[stuff deleted]

>Notice that Spiritual development (instead of Faith) is strongly
>emphasized in Buddhism and NOWHERE in its Central Doctrine was the word
>"God" even mentioned.  Buddhism is probably the only religion in the
>world where the believe in God is not encouraged.  It is also probably
>the only religion where followers are encouraged to scrutinize its
>teachings and blind faith is frowned upon.  Hence, it was able to avoid
>the dogmatism, Holy Wars and other evils that plagued all other
>religions.  It is one of very few religions with no conflicts with
>Science, even though it is much older than Christianity and Islam.
>Indeed, Buddhism has more *positive* impact on modern psychology, for
>example, than any religion has on any field of science.
>
>Einstein once said, "If there is any religion that would cope with
>modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism ..... [Buddhism] has the
>characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the
>future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it

Avoiding dogmas is not entirely accurate. I have found dogmas in all of
the major sects. Compare Theravadan and Mahayana views on practice. Zen,
in particular, can be very rigid _in practice_. The philosophy is still,
IMHO, the most elegant around. However, one should look at the roots
of Buddhism, as well. In India, Buddhism has been re-absorbed into Vedic
Hinduism. The Buddha _never_ contradicted the teachings of the Upanishads,
he merely reinforced their points at a time when the Brahmanic system
had fallen into disrepair. However, one feature that I admit I really like
about it is the acceptance of _all_ paths as leading back to the source
of being. That includes Christianity. It's just a matter of how fast you
get there. Things like Zen, and the four Hindu yogas (jnana, the yoga
of knowledge and intellect; raja, the yoga of posture and breathing; bakhti,
the yoga of devotion; and karma, the yoga of labor) are merely the
"express" trains.

>covers both the natural and the spiritual, and it is based on a
>religious sense aspiring from the experience of all things, natural and
>spiritual, as a meaningful unity."
>
>He must have been as impressed with Buddhism as I am.
>
>C. M. Tan


---
Erik Radmall -- Erik_Radmall.wbst845e@xerox.com
Newsgroups: alt.atheism