HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green)
Subject: Re: ALIEN(S)(3)
Organization: CSIRO ITS
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 04:11:16 GMT

Firstly, what a great bio on the origin/lifecycle
of the aliens.

However...

>	So why don't I think there are any 
>fertile male aliens? Because I think the aliens 
>are a created species, not an evolved one (put 
>THAT in a pipe and smoke it, Darwin). I find it 
>difficult to imagine a planetary environment 
>where the aliens would have evolved into the 
>form and lifecycle that they have (and if they 
>did, what kind of species evolved as their 
>rivals?) Here's the idea. Two races are 
>involved in some sort of interstellar racial 
>war. One of them develops a killer organisn 
>(the alien we all know and love) and attempts 
>to seed it onto the planet or planets of their 
>enemy. The ship we saw crashed on Acheron was 
>likely one of the seeding ships, with an 
>architecture designed to transport thousands of 
>the eggs to the enemy. Somehow someone screwed 
>up and miscalculated, and at least one of the 
>aliens got free, killed the pilot, and caused 
>the ship to crash. Alternately, the ship could 
>belong to the original target race, which has 
>been "infested", or even to a third race which 
>wandered onto the scene after the aliens wiped 
>out both their designated enemies and their 
>miscalculating progenitors. Remember, the 
>Company wanted the aliens for their bioweapons 
>division. What better (in their minds) than a 
>creature that has already been developed for 
>such a purpose?

That is one possible scenario. But remember when
Ripley submitted the beacon signal to the computer
for analysis? The computer suggested it was a
WARNING _not_ an SOS. Why would either of the warring
species in the above scenario broadcast such a warning?

My pet theory is that the Alien IS a naturally occuring
lifeform that evolved on a VERY VERY hostile world, probably
with critters of equal ( or more nasty ) dispositions.
And latet spread to other planets ( galaxies? ) via contact
with one ( or more ) spacefaring cultures.

Given their predisposition to killing everything in sight
and being pretty damned hard to get rid of - they could
easily spread far and wide after making contact with
space faring civilisations.


-- 
* Steve Green     *  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat!"    *
* Comms Group     *  "That trick never works"                            *
* ITS Branch      *  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO"                     *
* CSIRO Australia *  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"       *
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:35:27 GMT

gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green) writes:

>>
>>	The Alien is misused once more. It can survive a dunk into molten
>> metal, but (after a cooling period) it can't take cold water? Bull. All
>>the stuff its taken should make that minor contraction period trivial.
>>And you say this thing doesn't ignore ALIENS? Bull again. Those things hated
>>the flamethrowers, and molten lead is a HELL of a lot worse than flame
>>throwers. At that temperature, any organic bonds would be shattered to nothing.

>A flamethrower is just a tad hotter than molten lead! And as for 'any organic

Really? I'm not a chemist, but I remember someone saying the exact opposite
during all the discussion about Terminator 2. The T-1000 walks out of the
petrol fire (a flamethrower basically just shoots burning petrol) but is killed
by the molten steel.

If 'throwers really were hotter than molten lead, (which I doubt they are),
wouldn't all the steel fittings lying around during the first two films have
melted when characters used 'throwers? You might want to check the melting 
points of steel and lead, and the temperature of burning napalm.

I'm pretty sure that the flamethrower is cooler, but I could be wrong.

>bonds would be shattered into nothing' - hey this thing is a silicon-based
>lifeform ( remember Ash's commentary from the first Alien movie ).

Ash says that the FACEHUGGER is growing a protective SILICON-BASED COVERING.
Far from conclusive evidence that the adult alien has a biochemistry which is
entirely silicon-based.
-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
JJ Glamma                          | "Hey look... The Sarge and Dietrich ain't
aka James William Patrick Bennetts |  dead, man... their signs are real low, 
jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU         |  but they ain't dead!"
-----------------------------------+ "Then we go back in and get them!"
When in doubt, use brute force.	   | "F*ck that!"
		-- Ken Thompson	   |	-- PFCs Hudson & Vasquez, on loyalty.
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: Aliens the Special Edition
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 08:31:29 GMT

u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner) writes:

>boyajian@ruby.enet.dec.com (The Man from Another Place) writes:

>>In article <4457@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, seawasp@vm2.cis.pitt.edu (Sea Wasp) writes...
>>At any rate, I'm glad that Cameron left the scene out, too, as it
>>violates the life-cycle of the Aliens that was established in the first
>>film (i.e. Burke shouldn't have been conscious again after so short a
>>time).

>But Newt was consious when Ripley found her. And she would have been cocooned
>for a shorter time than if Burke had been. But the is all just hypothetical

But she hadn't been 'hugged yet... Although time is very difficult to judge in
Alien, it looked like the hugger knocked Kane out for at least 2 or three hours.
Considering that we have a timing of Aliens as being four hours from the time
Bishop noticed the venting until the reactor blew, it's hard to see how Burke
could have that 2 or 3 hours to regain conciousness... especially since his
capture was probably near the end of that 4 hour period.

>since it does look like Burke was about to get his head ripped off(The alien
>had the same action (hissing, dribbling, opening mouth) as when Ferro was 
>killed).

Agreed. I wonder how an Alien decides whether a human is meat or a potential
host? Certainly Hudson looked like he was going to be host material...


-- 
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
JJ Glamma                          | "Doctor, I can have an airstrike here in 
aka James William Patrick Bennetts |  minutes."
jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU         | "That won't do any good, Brigadier!"
-----------------------------------+ "No, I didn't think so."
A bird in the hand is messy.	   | 	-- Doctor Who:Battlefield
-----------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: u906789@bruny.cc.utas.edu.au (Mark Julian Turner)
Subject: Re: ALIEN(S)(3)
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 08:42:50 GMT

daynem@byron.u.washington.edu (Dayne Miller) writes:
>	So why don't I think there are any 
>fertile male aliens? Because I think the aliens 
>are a created species, not an evolved one (put 
>THAT in a pipe and smoke it, Darwin).

How do you know this? I know this is just your opinion but there really isn't   and evidence either way. And the _Alien_ novelization suggests that the aliens
were NOT from the alien ship (i.e. not a bio-weapon). More likely senario
(IMHO) is that the alien ship landed on LV426, encountered the alien(s)(which
may or may not be indigeous(sp??)) implanted the pilot killing it. Then a 
queen laid the eggs in the ship which reamianed dorment until along came Ripley
& co....
  It just seems that if the aliens were manufatured by the beings on the alien
ship then they would take adequate precautions to prevent the eggs from hatchingand attaking the crew. If you accept that a stimulus is required to cause an eggto open then one of the crew would have to done it, which would seem rather a
silly thing to do if you knew how lethel the facehuggers were.


 I find it 
>difficult to imagine a planetary environment 
>where the aliens would have evolved into the 
>form and lifecycle that they have (and if they 
>did, what kind of species evolved as their 
>rivals?) Here's the idea. Two races are 
>involved in some sort of interstellar racial 
>war. One of them develops a killer organisn 
>(the alien we all know and love) and attempts 
>to seed it onto the planet or planets of their 
>enemy. The ship we saw crashed on Acheron was 
>likely one of the seeding ships, with an 
>architecture designed to transport thousands of 
>the eggs to the enemy. Somehow someone screwed 
>up and miscalculated, and at least one of the 
>aliens got free, killed the pilot, and caused 
>the ship to crash. Alternately, the ship could 
>belong to the original target race, which has 
>been "infested", or even to a third race which 
>wandered onto the scene after the aliens wiped 
>out both their designated enemies and their 
>miscalculating progenitors. Remember, the 
>Company wanted the aliens for their bioweapons 
>division. What better (in their minds) than a 
>creature that has already been developed for 
>such a purpose?
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: cooper@cos.com (Gary Cooper)
Subject: Re: Directors cuts in general
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems
Distribution: usa  
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 02:28:12 GMT

In <BD.92Aug8091747@fluent.UUCP> bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby) writes:

>Is there any kind of consensus on whether "dcs" tend to be better
>oir worse than released versions?  I ask this 'cause my impression is that
>there is usually a good reason why the editor and the director are two
>separate entities.

That depends on the REASON for the editing, doesn't it?  I mean, if the
suits want it cut so they can fit more showings into a day, does that make
the movie "worse" or "better"?  In general, I would sway towards "worse".

If the director's sense of flow and timing is off, I would lean towards
"better" - god knows that "Batman Returns" and "Naked Lunch" could have 
used a bit 'o trimming.  But when the added info, however "unnecessary"
or "extraneous" doesn't detract from the final product (i.e., the half
hour or so of extra "sand pans" in _Lawrence of Arabia_) then I would
be more than happy to have them added to lengthen my enjoyment of the
"final" product.

BUUUUT - when the added footage ADDS to the understanding of either/both
plot and character development (as _Aliens_ does and the dcs of the
forthcoming LD _Alamo_ - which IS out on tape - is supposed to do) then
I'll be one of those picketing the studios to include the footage.

"I rather fancy that he's nobodys son and heir now." - Michael Caine
							_Zulu_
-- 
Gary Cooper (not the dead one)
	Don't bother flaming or writing, I just quit my job and will only
be here for another day or two.  Sure - what the hell - I speak for the
corporation for open systems - sue me! 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (JJ Glamma)
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:24:21 GMT

jsbell@acs.ucalgary.ca (Joshua Bell) writes:

>Anyone see any problems with this sceme?

1) The Sulaco was a military transport. I can (just) by Weyland-Yutani tapping
into its telemetry in the third film, but I certainly don't buy them being
able to issue orders to the military hardware.

2) Even if they could, by the time they realised what was happening and issued
the orders, the Sulaco would be two weeks closer to home at FTL speeds. The
Marine Corps might notice if one of their ships started acting strangely.

3) The Derelict is just that - a derelict. The dropship can sit outside with its
doors open till the cows come home, and nothing will wander on board. Both Kane
and Jorden were grabbed when they went into the egg chamber and started poking 
at eggs.


-- 
  ___  __  __  __  ___ 
  \  \ \/ /  \ \/ /  /  WEYLAND-YUTANI BIOWEAPONS DIVISION
   \  \  /    \  /  /   "Bringing The Universe Back Home."
    \  \/  /\  \/  /    ------------------------------------
     \    /  \    /     JJ Glamma aka James William Bennetts
      \  / /\ \  /      jamesbs@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU
       ~~  ~~  ~~   
 Building Better Worlds
From: corwin@ensta.ensta.fr (Gilles Gravier)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Laser and tape questions
Date: 14 Aug 92 10:03:03 GMT
Organization: Ensta, Paris, France
NNTP-Posting-Host: ensta.ensta.fr

In article <1992Aug13.071219.24246@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu> rob@watney.eng.ohio-state.edu (Rob Carriere) writes:
>In article <16ar5jINN8va@ensta.ensta.fr> corwin@ensta.ensta.fr (Gilles
>Gravier) writes: 
>>	- Also, the people in UK have a different TV standard, called PAL, 
>>which uses a refresh rate of 50 Hz - European standards, versus 60 Hz - US.
>
>Just a quick note: 50 vs 60 Hz is by no means the only difference between PAL
>and NTSC.  You couldn't get an NTSC TV to display PAL by hacking the refresh
>rate. 
>
>SR
>---

	Well, sure, there are other differences... First, in PAL or SECAM (The
French standard), the image is encoded in FM, whereas in NTSC (Never The Same
Color) it is en AM. In PAL/SECAM, the sound is in AM (No stereo), whereas in
NTSC it is in FM (stereo possible).

	Also, the number of screen lines is different between NTSC and
PAL/SECAM. Color coding is also different!

	I won't go more into the details (I don't know them, I'm not an 
expert!). But if you wan't both standards, then either your TV has to
be able to display both, or you need a transcoder... Don't choose the
transcoder, you'll loose in image quality.

	Gilles.

	
-- 
 This message has been brought to you by Gilles GRAVIER - corwin@ensta.fr
                       ***** Amber Forever! *****
    I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am
       sure, you realize,  that what you heard is not what I meant.
From: stevek@hpfcmgw.FC.HP.COM (Steve Kauder)
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 18:18:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Alien3 in the UK
Organization: HP Fort Collins, CO
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies

>In rec.arts.sf.movies, leif@VNET.IBM.COM ("Leif Davidsen ", Leif@vnet.ibm.com) writes:
>
>    Does anyone out there know why Alien3 has taken so long to come out in the
>    UK, and still is not released until Aug. 21.
>    There have been rumours that it has been re-edited since the US release.
>    Can anyone tell us more?
>
>    Thanks,
>    Leif Davidsen

Well,

If it has been edited for the UK, it could only be improved.  

Save yourself time and disappointment -- buy a copy of Aliens and watch
it instead.

Steve Kauder                        Phone: 303-229-3541 
UTD Support and Learning Products   Unix Mail: stevek@hpfcmgw.fc.hp.com

"Computers, Music, Astrology, The Course in Miracles, what's next??"
From: singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick D. Singley)
Subject: Re: Natives Down the River (was re: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Organization: (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 21:11:03 GMT

Going on a human scale, fetal tissue studies are (as you may know) a sticky subject. On a biochemical basis, I recall nothing in classes (though someone with more journal background may be of help); but when it comes to the cell surface there are differences between adult and fetal glyco-proteins.
Dr. Bush, at UMBC, lectured on the researching dealing with the biochemistry & the synthesis of these surface protiens.  Cancer cell surfaces posses many of these supposedly 'fetal' protiens (these glycoproteins are linked to  a number of receptor functions..like cell growth).  I'd have to find my notes to continue... but the thread is that there are some pathways that change from fetal to adult.

Erick
From: jheath@CERIS.Purdue.EDU (Jim Heath)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: Movie indentification request
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:48:22 GMT
Organization: Center for Environmental and Regulatory Information Systems, Purdue University

From article <1992Aug14.111421.3464@desire.wright.edu>, by demon@desire.wright.edu (Stupendous Man):
> In article <92227.065231MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>, Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
> ...
>> We are trying to identify a movie remembered from about 1980.
>> Here is the plot:  A highly lethal virus escapes from an
>> experimental lab in Canada.  The first victim is a bird.  Some
>> children on a snowy playground bury the bird and in touching it,
>> start the spread of the disease.  A woman flees to the USA, not
>> realizing she is safe from the disease, but she is a carrier and
>> leaves death in her wake.  One stop she makes is at a fast-food
>> place that has just received an order for many sandwiches to be
>> delivered.  An employee touches the money she gives him and goes
>> on making sandwiches...
>> 
>> Can anyone identify the movie.  We've tried movie index sources
>> we know of, but hope someone's memory will help.  For all we
>> know, it might not be a theatrical release, but maybe a TV movie
>> or even an episode of a TV show.
> 
> 	I remember seeing this movie...for some reason I keep thinking
> "Cassandra Crossing" but that's not it because it's set in Eastern Europe.
> 
> 	It was definately a movie.
> 
> 	Did you try searching with common subjects like "plague" "black", etc.?
> 
> 	Post if you find the answer, you've piqued my interest in seeing it
> again.
>

I believe it was "Rabid".  It starred Marilyn Chambers as the
carrier.   
-- 
"Land of song, said the warrior bard,           Jim Heath
Though all the world betrays thee.
One sword, at least, thy rights shall guard, (The Minstrel Boy)
One faithful harp will praise thee."         (Thomas Moore)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: singley@helix.nih.gov (Erick D. Singley)
Subject: Re: Alien Physiology dissertation WAS: ALIEN^3 Eggs on Sulaco)
Organization: (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD)
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 13:35:49 GMT

l(t) can be the length of the lead casing at the final temperature (that of the water coming from the sprinkler)
l(o) is the length of the lead casing at temp of the molten (though cooling) lead.
The temp of molten lead (itsa thin coating, cools fast- but is maintained at temp by the heat of the alien (now at same temp as lead bath?)?) is 327.5C
Or, porportionally, a change of .0087% in length [ie a 6ft tall person would loose .6 inches] You can't just hunch over when it's shrinking on every surface!

Volume is similar [a is 29e-6 B is approx 3a] v(t)=v(o)(1+bt)

This assumes a coef at 25C.  The general idea is at stake, not quanitation.

Erick

Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
From: wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Hamill)
Subject: Re: Psycho (was Re: Directors cuts in general)
Followup-To: rec.arts.sf.movies
Organization: Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 21:16:04 GMT

In article moscatel@granite.ma30.bull.com (Joseph Moscatelli) writes:
>In article wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca (Tom Hamill) writes:
>>>
>>Or, perhaps, because in 'Psycho 2', Vera Miles portrayed the sister of the
>>Janet Leigh character who was murdered in the original movie.  Was Martin
>>Balsam the police detective in the original?
>>
>Yes for Balsam. However, I believe Vera Miles played the sister in the
>original. I think she and John Gavin were the ones involved in the cellar
>scene with Perkins (opps, Norman) at the end of the movie.
>
Unfortunately, the video store I was at last evening only had copies
of 'Psycho II' and 'Psycho III' on the shelf--the original was rented,
and is has been a long, long time since I've seen it so I have only
a vague memory of who played opposite John Gavin, but you might be
right.  But, Vera Miles was definitely the sister in 'Psycho II', and
I think you may have that one's ending confused with the original,
which ended, I believe, with Norman in a strait jacket, in a sealed
room behind heavy screening, talking to himself about showing the 
observers that he was so harmless he wouldn't even hurt a fly.

Btw, I also work for Bull, in Canada. There aren't many of us with
net access so I notice when the name pops up.

---tom

l~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~l
l      CRUSH---CompassionRespectUnderstandingSelfHonesty---CRUSH      l
l         How could you have ever lived your life without it?         l
l               Join Now, Apply Within.  Spread the word.             l
l____________________________      ---me, trying to save the world,   l
l wcstom@alfred.carleton.ca l                      from itself.       l
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: robrod@csa.bu.edu (Roberto Rodriguez)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Re: ALIEN 3
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:33:36 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA


   About those eggs in the Sulaco (please control your gagging).  I saw
Segorney (sp?) in the Tonight Show and she sayed that they first came up
with the premise, (i.e. she had to be alone, infested, and bald in a
planet full of repenting monk-like criminals), and then worked around that.  
Obviously they cared nothing about continuity, they just had their minds
set on making the movie this way.  It's a big disappointment for sf fans
but I guess they were just interested in having a money-maker.

   I too tried to tell myself there was a logical explanation, trying to
hide that horrendous decition by the producers to have the eggs
materialize in the ship.  I too came up with theories like maybe the
queen had time to lay them (contradicted by the fact that the eggs were
in the sleeping chambers), or maybe Bishop collected them (which is a
contradiction by itself), or maybe they were teleported by another
species which wanted to destroy human civilization.  However, I had to
admit to myself it was just a production decision.

   I hope I didn't upset you guys too much by maybe waisting so much of
your time and space with these comments.
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center
Date: Friday, 14 Aug 1992 06:52:31 EDT
From: Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.sf.movies
Subject: Movie indentification request

I am posting the following question on behalf of someone with
an internet address but no usenet access.  Please send replies
to Keith at the address at the bottom of his question.  Thanks.

We are trying to identify a movie remembered from about 1980.
Here is the plot:  A highly lethal virus escapes from an
experimental lab in Canada.  The first victim is a bird.  Some
children on a snowy playground bury the bird and in touching it,
start the spread of the disease.  A woman flees to the USA, not
realizing she is safe from the disease, but she is a carrier and
leaves death in her wake.  One stop she makes is at a fast-food
place that has just received an order for many sandwiches to be
delivered.  An employee touches the money she gives him and goes
on making sandwiches...

Can anyone identify the movie.  We've tried movie index sources
we know of, but hope someone's memory will help.  For all we
know, it might not be a theatrical release, but maybe a TV movie
or even an episode of a TV show.


Keith Boettcher
San Joaquin Valley Library System
Fresno, CA
Internet:  sanjoboe@class.org
Phone:     209/488-3229
Fax:       209/488-2965