HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: empathic links
Keywords: Re: empathic links
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 19:51:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.182516@cunix4.Prime.COM>, jasonp@cunix4.Prime.COM (Jason R. Pascucci) writes:
|> In article <1992Sep14.211640.19128@linus.mitre.org>, tucker@mitre.org (William Tucker) writes:
|> > 
|> > 
|> > Hi kids -
|> 
|> Hey, Dad. Can I have some money? :)
|> 
|> > 
|> >  "In 1964, physicist J. S. Bell published a mathematical proof called Bell's
|> >   theorem. Bell's theorem mathematically supports the concept that subatomic
|> >   'particles' are connected in some way that transcends space and time, so
|> >   that anything that happens to one particle affects other particles. This
|> >   effect is immediate and does not need 'time' to be transmitted. In Bell's
|> >   theorem, effects can be 'superliminal,' faster than the speed of light. Bell's
|> >   theorem is now supported by experimentation. We are now talking about a 
|> >   phenomenon that stands outside Einstein's theory of relativity. We are trying
|> >   to go beyond the wave/partcle duality."
|> > 
|> 
|> I'm sorry, maybe I'm a little rusty, but didn't Bell's theorem get 
|> superceded by, or perhaps was just explaining the effects of,  Quantum 
|> Mechanics? Wasn't it just that there is zero time lag between the 
|> observation of a particle, and the 'resolution' of the probability
|> wave-form. It's outside of relativity, because it doesn't have anything
|> (really) to do with it, not because of so-called 'superluminal'
|> transmission of data. 

Ahem.  Bell's theorum is a theorum about QM.  It is fully consistent with
QM and has apparently been demonstrated to be correct with laboratory
experiments.  It does not, however, provide any mechanism for transmitting
information (or anything else) faster than light.  It does, however,
undermine some cherished everyday notions of reality and causality,
but this is hardly the first aspect of QM to be non-intuitive.

To use a macroscopic example, the essence of the idea is like this:

1000 people buy a lottery ticket for the Friday drawing.

Up until the winner is drawn, all the tickets are neither winners
nor losers.  At 7PM a single winner is drawn.  This is the observation.

At that instant, one ticket becomes a winner, all the rest are loser's.
This transformation happens instantly, and because of the actions
of a remote observer.  However, the winners and losers do not know
the result until ordinary sub-light info arrives.  There is no way
to send information through randomly drawn lottery tickets.

If telepathic links indeed exist, they are not known to nor explicable
by current physics or psychology.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
From: oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Psychic Defence. Help needed
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:58:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BuBH49.Mwy@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v102qqq5@ubvmsc.cc.buffalo.edu (HIGH PRIESTESS) writes...
>In article <JOSHUA.92Sep8215745@bailey.cpac.washington.edu>, joshua@cpac.washington.edu (Joshua Geller) writes...
>> 
>>In article <1992Sep9.002535.4898@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au> 
>>braca2@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (BRAY CHRISTOPHER) writes:
>> 
>>>   Ok, I may be acting a bit silly but I feel that I may be the target
>>>   of a sub/concious psychic attack of some sort.
>> 
>>>   Anyone have any suggestions as to how I may overcome this???
> 
> 
>  If in fact you are truely convinced that you are under psychic attack I would
>suggest that you must begin by asking yourself if it is someone that you know,
>if it is someone that you know you can counter attack or shield yourself from
>this persons bad intentions, if you feel that it is from some spirit that you 
>do not know I think you better write back to me for some incantations, or get
>a bottle of holy water and pray hard.  
>                                          			
>					HIGH PRIESTESS

What if the spirit doesn't understand your incantations?

- Peggy -
From: rjb@milton.u.washington.edu (LeGrand Cinq-Mars)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: power points in general and geomancy
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:01:50 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

Very briefly (catching up on mail and articles after being much too busy).
--

"Feng-shui" is a compound of two words, "wind" and "water" (respectively).
It comes to mean "landscape," in addition to its more technical meaning.
Note that while "landscape" (land-shape) has a rather static quality,
"wind-and-water" focuses on the dynamic aspect of the environs.  A
synonym for the technical sense of feng-shui, quite frequently used, 
is ti-li (or di-li in another transcription).  The components of
the latter term are "earth" and "pattern," respectively; the term is
nowadays used as the equivalent of "geography."

The term "geomancy" is obviously not a Chinese word... it refers to
several things, but since etymologically at least it means "divination
by means of earth," it was used as a convenient translation for the
Chinese term.

All traditions are subject to constant reinvention, and Chinese borrow from
the Mysterious West as much as Americans and Europeans borrow from the
Mysterious East.  Feng-shui in Chinese societies has adapted to fit modern
circumstances, and even to fit non-Chinese social patterns.

That said,  it might nevertheless be fair to say that the "Chinese geomancy"
of earth-energy people like John Michell is to feng-shui as the doctrines
of the T'ai P'ing Rebellion were to American Protestant Christianity.

I'd like to point out, too, that the feng-shui master in Chinese
societies is a professional, rather like a physician.  Traditional
Chinese societies are quite entrepreneurial, and professionals charge
what their services are worth.  An even better parallel to the feng-shui
master would be the investment advisor.  People go to feng-shui masters
to find out how to get rich(er), or how to stop being poor, or to deal with
a run of bad luck.  They generally expect to pay, and they generally
do.

An even better parallel might be with freelance computer consultants.
The uncertainties and irritations of freelance work, and the need
for being one's own PR department (both advertising and complaints),
are similar for both sorts of practitioners....

--LeGrand
  
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino)
Subject: Teenagers
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:43:00 GMT

Someone made the comment that teenagers, as a group, are usually
acting some psycho-dramatic melodrama (I believe that was the
phrase) when reporting things like psychic attack and the like.

Remember, whether or not this is true, the event is still all too
real to them.  Treat them with the same respect you would give
someone your own age reporting the same thing.  Give them advice,
support them.  Let them work out their own problems, but give them
the tools to do it with.  You and they will be better for the 
experience.

Tammy
From: oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Love/Compassion in Eastern Traditions
Date: 14 Sep 92 01:19:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <65795@cup.portal.com>, Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva) writes...
>9209.13 e.v.
> 
>Peggy:
> 
>> When I made the comment about being disinterested, I did not rule 
>> out Agape, or compassion.  This is an impersonal love.  (A few, 
>> like Mother Theresa, make it personal, but that is an exception.) 
> 
> 
>Response:
> 
>I really think that there ought to be an entire thread on this one
>concept alone.  'Agape' is probably the most neglected term/idea in the
>whole of western culture, occult and religious worlds combined.  I
>don't claim to understand it very well myself, but I've seen enough
>to think that it cannot be categorized this easily.
> 

I don't understand it well either.  One thing that struck me is 
that agape is irrational.  I don't see that as "bad."  Nothing 
wrong with being irrational, as long as you realize it.  Its 
irrational because there are many people who do not deserve one's 
love.  What motivates this?  Identifying with other people?

In the same way, hate against a group of people is also 
irrational, because many of them do not deserve the hate.
Sometimes this type of hate is motivated by fear, in the same way 
people have irrational fears.  For instance, I have an irrational 
fear of spiders (especially the fuzzy ones that jump) or any 
insect with lots of legs - like centipedes.  But I don't think 
hate against a group of people is always motivated by fear, or is 
it?


Personal love on the other hand is usually rational in that its 
based on something valued by the lover.

- Peggy -
From: oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Psychic attack / shielding / empathy
Date: 12 Sep 92 05:29:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <199209102102.AA10533@intercon.com>, amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes...
>oispeggy@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Peggy Brown) writes:

>> Why is it that someone who is a teenager (or thereabouts) is 
>> automatically said to be acting out a psycho-melodrama?

>Because that's part of what teenagers do.  We all do it, or something 
>similar, in part to generate enough energy to break ties we need to break, 
>and form new ones we need to form.  

Sure, but its not something to be met with ridicule and 
condescending comments.  Its a mythic quest of great dimensions.  
We all went through it, didn't we?  

Some straightforward criticism might be useful, but not a downpour 
of ridicule.  I just didn't like the way Kethry was s* on en masse 
after her first post.  Just my peculiarity, as I only "do battle" 
with those who I judge can deal with it effectively.

>> There's an "inner circle" here on alt.magick that sets the standards for
> what is acceptable and what is not - to think, post, believe.

I'm genuinely surprised that some find this to be such an odd 
idea.  Ordinary group dynamics.  Its also interesting to think of 
alt.magick as a magickal entity - a composite of all the 
participants with all their different energies in turmoil.  There 
are roughly 2 classes of energies at work - those who seek group 
concensus and affirmation, and those who seek anarchy.  (Guess 
which group I'm in.)  Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned it though, 
since now the concensus-seekers might not exert as much energy.

>And just who do you think is in this inner circle?  

Anyone who posts frequently, or infrequently but with great 
effect.

>> An inner circle member can post something and *not* be subjected to 
>> the same level of critical thinking that outsiders endure.

>Nope.  I will say, however, that some people are better at writing pieces 
>which resist casual criticism than others.  However, I think that any 
>discrimination is based on writing ability and demonstrated insight, rather 
>than membership in any "inner circle."  This is Usenet--the worst possible 
>place to try and build an autocracy or oligarchy...

Survival of the fittest.  Those who are not proficient at getting 
their ideas across are knocked off early and never make it to the 
"inner circle."

>> Re: Kethry's spirit - I think she is really experiencing it.  I 
>> also think she created it and its manifesting some hidden parts 
>> of her psyche - and she can get rid of it.  Note - just my 
>> opinions, which are all judgements boil down to anyway.

>This is much what everyone else has been saying.  

You said that too?  With all the old-fartisms made to Kethry I didn't 
notice.  (Of course, she may feel my comments are equally full of 
s* as everyone else's.)

>Does this make you part of the inner circle?

*This* does not, but the fact that I post frequently does.

- Peggy -
From: Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: anger
Date: Wed,  9 Sep 92 18:44:00 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <lasld4INN9u7@news.bbn.com>

9209.09 e.v.

Dawn writes:

What would you suggest doing with anger?  I've tried so hard to be a good
little smurf^H^H^H^H^Hwiccan, but I do seem to have a hard time dealing with
some of these darker feelings.  I feel uncomfortable using any of these
types of spells, but I'm afraid if I personally dismembered and roasted 
the object of my disaffections the neighbors might look at me funny.


Response:

I suggest expressing it, directly, verbally, emotionally, at what you
perceive to be its source.  If this doesn't work, write it down and
express it to yourself.  Take it out on your stuffed animal, role-play
with a friend and take it out verbally with them.  Imagine destroying
the source of this stimulation.  Then, when you've cleared some of the
intensity, look at where your reaction is coming from.  Likely it
is from a previous experience in your life when you felt victimized and
did not react.

Anger-spells help to release this emotion.  It uses SYMBOLS, not the
actual entities.  Your neighbors might look at you funny anyway if you
were roasting an effigy of your sister in the front yard.  Do it in the
back yard if you're going to do it at all.  I still suggest attempting
to resolve anger directly with the person who 'caused it', no matter
how far back it goes, even if this means contacting the dead. ;>


Thyagi
--------------------------------------------------------------
I find it of extreme symbolic significance that the square root of 1 is 1.
Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Date: Fri,  4 Sep 1992 22:20:14 -0400 
From: Kerwin Yap Chua <kc3u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: power points in france
	<1992Sep4.222755.17942@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>

>What would be the purpose of this protective net? Is there supposed to
>be some sort of supernatural thingy out there that would otherwise have
>a jolly time psychically zapping the talking apes that enhabit this planet?
>
>Bill

I don't know.  This is the only theory I know, and I heard it from a
coven of Wiccans back in my hometown in Florida.  I have the vaguest
notion that it is "protective", and I really shouldn't have used the
word cause it might not apply. If anyone else knows more about what I'm
talking about then post, please.

Kendrick Kerwin Chua

kc3u@andrew.cmu.edu
Cthulhu for President, 1992!
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin)
Subject: Re: empathic links
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 15:53:20 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

Josh, I'm citing from memory.  If I HAD the cites, I'd provide them.

I posted them here to perhaps jog someone else's memory.

I think the "bunnies" trick was done by the British, but I can't swear
to that as fact.

--Friday
-- 
    - Friday -                      "Practice random acts of kindness 
      friday@netcom.com                         and senseless beauty."
      (aka Carol Anne Ogdin@Santa Clara, CA)
From: eburke@aludra.usc.edu (Kethry)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: Spirit in the house, and parents won't listen...
Date: 9 Sep 1992 11:41:15 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu


Why Josh, aren't we the cynical ones today.  I wouldn't post anything
based on psychological problems because that's not what this board is 
about.  I have had my suspicions well confirmed by a number of people,
and not just that one friend...A number means about four or five people.
And guess what...I didn't have to talk about it first to any of them...
They brought it up on their own saying such things as "Do you realize
that there is a male spirit in here...Is it driving you nuts, too?"

I also love the fact that you think I am nuts...I don't think so...As for
people out there trying to get me.  I don't beleive that there is anything
or anyperson out to get me.  It's setting residence in my house, and I 
think it's because of some of the things that my sister does because of
some of HER mild beleifs.  I also never said that I was special, and I 
don't think that I am, in fact never did.  So why don't you get off your
high horse of super-cynicism and try thinking that *strange* things may 
actually be out there. 

Also, if we are going to continue this train of thought, then why don't
we do it over private e-mail so that we don't  bore other readers...

Bright Blessings, 
Kethry
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: eshin@ddsw1.mcs.com (Eshin-Fun)
Subject: Re: The pentagram
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago IL
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 09:07:35 GMT

>>: ijd@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Ian J Dickinson) writes:
: 
: 
: >I seem to remember, although only vaguely, that there is at least one
: >method of geometrically constructing an accurate penta-{gram|cle|gon}. By
: >geometric I mean using a straight edge and a compass, rather than a ruler
: >and protractor. I had a go at trying to remember/re-invent it the other
: >evening, and failed.  Can anyone enlighten me?
: 
: >Thanks,
: >Ian.<<
                     e  *\
                        : \
                      a *  \
                        |   \f
                        :    \ 
                        :     \
                        :      \
               c........o.......\d
                        :
                        :
                        :
                        :
                       b:

first take the distance c-d and mark upwards from o to e, the highest point
of the illustration above. From point e a line is drawn to one of the arc
centers, d. Returning to the first upright length o-e  we divide it in half
and by placing our compass on the topmost point e, we then draw an arc to
cut diagonal d-e (at f); we then place the compass point on d and by opening
the compass to taking as the radius the distance of d-f draw an arc down to cut
the center axis. This gives the length of the side of the inscribed
pentagon and by making a series of arcs all the sides of the pentagon. 
With a compass open distance d-e put at c. make point along horizontal from
this point find other two points of pentagram.


I hope this helps you out.

Eshin-Fun
From: Tagi@cup.portal.com (Tagi Mordred Nagashiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick
Subject: Re: The pentagram
Date: Wed,  9 Sep 92 18:32:08 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <Bu9y0u.Js8@acsu.buffalo.edu> <BuAtD0.Ftp@mentor.cc.purdue.edu>

9209.09 e.v.

This is the last I have to say on the subject.  Perhaps I'm the only
one sensitive to it.  So be it.  Words are spells.  Use them carefully
lest you be trapped by them. ;>


Dartanyan the Witchling writes about my caution:

Does [Thyagi] understand what both types of terms mean?


Response:

Let's see.... consulting my Bible (Am/Her/Dict):


Upright - 1. In a vertical position, direction or stance.

[Note that the term implies that the associated orientation is CORRECT/RIGHT.]


Invert - 1. To turn inside out or upside down.  2. To reverse the position,
order or condition of.  3. To subject to inversion... 4. A homosexual.

[Note how the term has been used in the past to refer to those we 'don't
like'/'think are wrong'.]


Dart:

I get the feeling that Inverted, Point Down, Upright, and Point Up, are
ALL fairly easy terms to understand, and I HOPE that everyone reading 
this group
knows what all of them mean.  If not, inverted means point down, and upright
means point up.


Response:

This is what I dispute as both fallacious and ignorant.  What if I take
the 'correct' position to be point-down?  Then 'inverted' means point-up,
and so on.  It is an implied fundamentalism where none exists.



Dart:

Now we have two terms to use interchangeably for EACH variation of
orientation for the pentagrams we discuss.  If we add in "Right Side up" and
"upside Down" we have 3!


Response:

This provides us with another naive choice.  Both of these again presuppose
a 'correct' orientation.  I'd call it 'orientism' and can be applied, as
I mentioned previously, to those who think that 'North' belongs on the 'top'
of the globe.  It is myopic and silly.


Dart:

Now, isn't that special.  We can now say the same sentence 3 different
ways, and everyone will understand, right?  Good.  Now our sentences can be as
colorful as we please.


Response:

And those who use the two which are orientist in form will show off how
short-sighted they are.


Thyagi
--------------------------------------------------------
"Freedom's just another word for 'nothin left to lose'..." - J. Joplin
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: lib1p@rosie.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino)
Subject: Re: Psychic Defence. Help needed
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 22:59:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.002535.4898@sserve.cc.adfa.oz.au>, braca2@cspyr1.cs.adfa.oz.au (BRAY CHRISTOPHER) writes...
>Ok, I may be acting a bit silly but I feel that I may be the target
>of a sub/concious psychic attack of some sort.
> 
>Anyone have any suggestions as to how I may overcome this???
> 
>hook
> 

The one thing that I find hard to get people to realize is that
no one can hurt you unless you let them.  Let me repeat this:

NO ONE CAN HURT YOU UNLESS *YOU* LET THEM!!!!!

My teacher borrowed a line out of DUNE because it is sooooo
true: FEAR IS THE MIND KILLER.

Put these two together......No one can hurt me unless I let
them.  Fear is the mind killer.  I will not fear because I
am strong and no one can hurt me unless I let them.

Remember you must BELIEVE what you are saying.  SOME THINGS
HAVE TO BE BELIEVED TO BE.  Truly believe what you are saying.

Now, step back.  You have built a defense that no one can breach
unless you let them.

Blessed Be,
Tammy
Newsgroups: alt.magick
From: friday@netcom.com (Carol Anne Ogdin)
Subject: Re: NLP 1st exercise
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 04:18:53 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In <1992Sep5.210046.26111@reed.edu> kanderso@reed.edu (Karl Anderson) writes:

>... I found
>that I could either listen to what the person was saying or pay
>attention to the more subtle things it did, but never both with any
>success.  I will try it again in a conversation with more than two
>people, but I will have to figure out how to be subtle - it's easier
>to stare at someone when there is nobody else in the conversation.
>karl

My compliments for trying; you're right, it can be difficult at times
(that's why I recommend the conversation be "coffeshop" stuff so it
isn't crucial if you miss something being said).

When I was learning this stuff, I used the "doppelganger" technique:
Make a clone of myself and we *both* monitor the conversation.  Here's
how it works:
  1.  (Practice this part at home, alone, until you're comfortable with
        it)  Imagine a clone of yourself in an adjacent chair.  Talk
        to him (I do this part in my mind, not aloud).  Elicit his
        opinions.
  2.  Next, watching television, (say, a newscaster), have your clone
        listen for the words and the "content", while you concentrate
        on the noticing.  Every thirty seconds or so, ask your clone
        what the topic of discussion was.
  3.  Repeat #2, shortening the time down until you can switch back and
        forth at will.
  4.  When you take the method out into the real world, notice the pause
        at the end of someone speaking, and let that be your cue to check
        in with the clone for the "content" part so you can make an
        appropriate response (beside, the pause makes you look so
        *thoughful!*)
You can now add some subtlety with subvocal "mm's" and "mm-mm's" and nods
of the head--it keeps the other person talking (in practice we do this on
the phone and f2f every 7-seconds or so anyway).

Lemme know if these methods help.
-- 
---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---   ---
    - Friday -                   "If a miracle happens in your vicinity--
      friday@well.sf.ca.us                            take credit for it!"
      (Carol Anne Ogdin)