HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen)
Subject: Re: Undecidability and the FAQ
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:35:12 GMT

In article <gmdn0zn@lynx.unm.edu> bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician) writes:

   >Yes, as I go through my
   >Real Analysis book, I see that the power function of generating a
   >series of transfinite numbers isn't defined as the aleph series...and
   >that the Continuum Hypothesis is that there is no transfinite number
   >between aleph-null and c (as defined in _Analysis:  An Introduction to
   >Proof_).

  A remarkable concession! You are in fact able to revise and retract your
assertions. I must admit that I doubted that this was the case, and I
stand rebuked.

  However, you have yet to grasp the irrelevance of your remarks to the
FAQ entry. Your lengthy quotations are quite irrelevant. You have been
misled by casual formulations. Take the continuum hypothesis and its
undecidability in ZFC. We do indeed know that it is undecidable in ZFC -
provided we know that ZFC is consistent. By Godel's second theorem,
however, it is not provable in ZFC that the continuum hypothesis (or
any other statement) is undecidable in ZFC. If you do in fact have any
serious interest in logic and set theory, I suggest that you return to
the literature to improve your understanding of the topic.
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik (Hacker))
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: priest observes
Date: 23 Aug 92 01:18:38 GMT
Followup-To: alt.atheism
Organization: Apple

In article <19AUG199209473845@rosie.uh.edu>, st1lv@rosie.uh.edu (McLeod,
Stephen) wrote:
> In article <parsons.714188187@cygnus.cis.ksu.edu.cis.ksu.edu>, parsons@cis.ksu.edu (Scott S Parish ) writes...
> >st1lv@rosie.uh.edu (McLeod, Stephen) writes:
> >Though Hubbard is dead? his "religion" does indeed live.  They call it 
> >Scientology.

> And according to TIME (I believe it was), Scientology has jumped into Russia 
> with both boots.  They are founding Scientology centers and making large amounts
> of new Scientologists.  Sigh...

What I've read Scientology is gaining followers in former communist and
third
world countries. Mostly because the people believe that anything that comes
from USA is the key to personal success. Sigh. People are people. Why not
also introduce the worshipping of Elvis?

Says Kent,
who destroyed most of the Elvis records his father gave to him when he 
was 5 years old. Speak about insanity.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: lemoine@chemvx.tamu.edu (Brett G. Lemoine)
Subject: Re: The Bottom Line
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University - Chemistry Dept. Programmer
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 03:42:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.003007.29471@dragon.acadiau.ca>, peter@dragon.acadiau.ca (Peter Steele) writes...
}God did not create us--we created God.
} 
}'Nuff said....
}-- 
}Peter Steele        Unix Services Manager            peter.steele@acadiau.ca 
}Acadia Univ., Wolfville, NS, Canada B0P 1X0  902-542-2201  Fax: 902-542-4364

such a winning argument, I don't know why we didn't think of it before...

}-IvArch->--------------------------Brett G. Lemoine-------------------->
}-Texas A&M University--------------Chemistry Department Programmer----->
}-Internet: lemoine@chemvx.tamu.edu-Bitnet: lemoine@tamchem------------->
}------"A person without a god is like a fish without a skateboard."---->
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 06:19:50 EDT
From: <MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: god is not relevant

In article <1992Sep02.193850.1579@bnr.ca>, ethridge@bnr.ca (Allen Ethridge)
says:
>
>Or is god relevant?  If so, how and why?  What's he/she/it needed for?

Definitely for political machinations, if the GOP is any indicator.
Also, some people just don't feel like working...they wear elaborate
costumes and preach...

Martin Schulte
From: A410JACQ@HASARA11.BITNET (Jacqueline Cote)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Contents of the 'Death Sea Scrolls': claim by Australian scientist
Date: 26 Aug 92 08:23:22 GMT
Organization: SARA - Stichting Academisch Rekencentrum Amsterdam

A few weeks ago there was an article in a local newspaper that an Australian
scientist (I forgot her name), who had studied (part of) the Scrolls claims
that they state that Jesus *did not* die after his crucifiction, was revived
with mirre and some other substance, and continued to live for another
30 years, travelling around and telling people about his visions. He married
Mary Magdelen and had three children with her, two sons and a daughter.
After the birth of his second son, he apparently left her to marry a Greek
female bishop (?????).
 
Does anyone else have heard this story? If it *would* be true, it would
have spectacular implications and it would also shed light why little
to nothing is known to the world about the contents of the Scrolls.....
 
The story reminded me of another story I once read *years* ago, about
one of the 'secrets' of the Vatican. That story claimed that there was
evidence (in some convent in France) that indeed Mary and Jesus were a
couple (after his 'death') travelling around and visiting places.
 
Comments, anyone?
 
Jacqueline
 
P.S.: just for the record: I'm an astrophysicist an (of course) an atheist.
________________________________________________________________________________
Jacqueline Cote'     | Astronomical Inst., Un. of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                     | and: SRON Space Research, Groningen, The Netherlands
jcote@sron.rug.nl    | phone: +31 (0)50 634014  +31 (0)50 418433 (home)
a410jacq@vm1.sara.nl | FAX: +31 (0)50 634033
From: cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: LORD, LIAR, OR LUNATIC?
Date: 31 Aug 92 08:30:23 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk wrote:
: By the way, check out talk.religion.misc for a Muslim view on what Jesus
                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: claimed to be. I am no Muslim, but I do feel that Islam hangs together

Oops. That is soc.religion.islam, Message-ID: <27352@life.ai.mit.edu>

Chris Ho-Stuart
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: LIFE GOES ON UNTIL YOU DIE
Date: 27 Aug 92 01:20:34 GMT
Followup-To: alt.atheism
Organization: Apple

In article <1992Aug24.080325.526@maths.tcd.ie>, djohn@maths.tcd.ie (Derek
John) wrote:
> I'm interested to know how atheists cope with death.If youre like me
> and believe that death means the total extinction of consciousness
> how do you cope with it?I mean it scares the shit out of me to think
> that in say 40 or 50 years time (maybe tomorrow) I am going to cease 
> to exist in the most final and irreversible sense,and that ultimately
> if you pursue atheism to its logical conclusion life becomes ultimately
> futile,meaningless and insignificant.This is something I just cant come
> to terms with and so most of the time I try not to think about it.
> I would be very interested to hear other peoples views on this.

Apologies, but I don't see the difference with one view that states
that we don't know what happens after death, and another view that 
says we do know. It's still something that happens after we die, so
why worry if you need to be a muslim, jew, Christian or atheist.

It seems in general that religious people worry a lot about the
after-life, while agnostics/atheists worry about the current life.

My standpoint is clear, there's enough people here on Earth
experiencing hell, so we should act here right here, right now,
instead of spending energies about something that no human anyway
knows about.

So even if I don't believe in afterlife, it does not mean that
I feel life being insignificant. Quite the contrary, we have a
very short time to live, and those who postpone actions have 
a meaningless life, indeed.

Cheers,
Kent                     

---
"George, sorry but I do look much better in my running shorts than you and
Bill..."
From: paulk@engin.umich.edu (Paul J. Kominsky)
Subject: Re: Shroud of Turin (was DOES GOD EXIST?)
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 13:52:11 EDT
Organization: Rarely
Distribution: na

daveb@pogo.wv.tek.com (Dave Butler) writes:
} That is the point I was making about the the coin on the eyes having been
} descended from the Greek custom and was still laden with the symbolism given
} it by the Greeks (which, according to the orthodox Jewish Rabbi's I've asked,
} would in itself make the practice offensive to Jews).  

And yet, there are Jewish burial sites with coins in them.  The BA article
you mention refers to one site in which two coins were found in a skull
stuck together, which would indicate that some Jews were not offended by
the actual Greek custom.  Since coins on the eyes have at most a symbolism
by association, it's hard to believe that they would be found more offensive.

Also, it's not self-evident to me that Orthodox Jews represent 1st century
orthodox Judaism.

} I do though appreciate your shift in position. At first you were saying that 
} the Roman coins on the eyes are evidence for the authenticity of the shroud:

} Now though you have changed that to insisting that the presence of such coins
} do not prove the shroud to be a fraud:

Perhaps I should have been clearer.  I was not saying that coins on the eyes
were evidence of authenticity because I thought such a thing was a common
1st century custom.  However, I think it is suggestive (the word I originally
used when I first mentioned the coins) because it seems to be a level of
detail unlikely for a supposed 14th century artist.  There is no record that
anyone saw this before the computer enhancement, so it would be useless work
for a medieval artist.  Also, depending on the state of Medieval numismatics,
it might have been unlikely for a 14th century artist to select a coin old
enough to be consistent with a 1st century Shroud.

So, I don't think the coins are direct evidence, but they seem to be suggestive,
indirect evidence.

} Now if you do come by historical evidence for coins being put on the eyes of 
} Jewish corpses, then I will be willing to listen.  Until then though I see no
} reason to accede to your statement:
} 	"In one specific case, though, it could have happened."

I thought the Jewish practice was to put something over the eyes.  Is it
so inconceivable that in a rush, coins might have been used?

I seem to recall a letter to BA in early 1982 (the one responding to Filas'
letter), in which the author denies any monolithic 1st century Jewish
aversion to coins on the eyes.  I don't think I'm saying anything much
different from that letter.  I have forgotten where I read this, but I
think that's also the letter that says that such a practive might have
been encouraged in some 1st century Jewish circles.

Sorry I can't get specific references, but I'm kinda busy.

pjk
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:16541 talk.religion.misc:15641 sci.skeptic:15933 alt.religion.kibology:3712
From: lizi@ocf.berkeley.edu (Cosma R. Shalizi)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: Pythagorean Reform Church
Date: 4 Sep 1992 21:23:31 GMT
Organization: Vampire Research Group at Berkeley :)
NNTP-Posting-Host: earthquake.berkeley.edu
Summary: Russell is God :)

In article <Bu0BxD.JG3@world.std.com> entropy@world.std.com (Lawrence C Foard) writes:
>I have a wonderful message to bring to the world!
>>Last night the number 4 came to me in a dream and told me that I
>must bring the pythagorean Gospel to the world!
>>The number 4 said that the message must be spread throughout the
>whole of the world, passed out in Airports, in Harvard Square
>and on the internet. The number 4 was saddened to see that the
>world has reverted to eating BEANS, and belief in false numbers!
>>With the divine guidance of 4 I am starting the Pythagorean Reform
>church to spread the Gospel far and wide. With the guidance of 4
>I hope we can soon bring the message to the world over the PBN
>(Pythagorean Broadcasting Network).
>>----          Join the Pythagorean Reform Church!         ----
>\  /        Repent of your evil irrational numbers        \  /
> \/   and bean eating ways. Accept the #4 into your heart! \/
>     Call the Pythagorean Reform Church BBS at 508-793-9568        

   Alright, confess, you've been reading Bertrand Russell again,
haven't you? The "Mathematician's Nightmare" in _Nightmares of Eminent
Persons_, to be specific. And besides, you know that the TRUE holy
number is not 4 but 137!!! Great Cthulhu will deal with heretics like you
when the time comes.
	Cosma Rohilla Shalizi
	lizi@ocf.berkeley.edu to friends
	larval physicist
	& Vice-President of the Campus Crusade for Cthulhu
Cthulhu in '92! Why choose the LESSER of two evils?
-- 
"Some savages are persuaded by the 'natural light' that it is their duty to
 eat people, and even Voltaire's savages, who are led by the voice of reason
 to hold that one should only eat Jesuits, are not wholly satisfactory."
-Bertrand Russell on Rousseau in _A History of Western Philosophy_, p. 694
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: amck@mcc.com (Alan McKendree)
Subject: Re: Bush no friend of atheists (but Clinton no better)
Organization: MCC, Austin, TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:16:28 GMT

In article <l9s456INNdiq@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
>What about Andre Marrou?  I'd guess the Libertarian stand on religion is that it
>should have nothing to do with governmment, but I'm curious about Marrou's
>religious beliefs
>
>-- 
>Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)	   For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
>Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
>Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham

I don't know, but there's a newsgroup alt.politics.marrou that might.

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: dmcanzi@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (David Canzi)
Subject: Re: God posts again
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 22:15:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug24.125646.305@doc.bmd.trw.com> jbrown@doc.bmd.trw.com writes:
>In article <1992Aug24.171141.22562@ccs.QueensU.CA>, 3005904@jeff-lab.queensu.ca (Colleen Davis (Dexter)) writes:
>> There is no God but Colleen.I'd 
>> really like to see someone prove
>> me wrong.
>
>In your case, Colleen, the following quote is apropos.
>
>"Never argue with a fool.  The fool will not benefit,
>and other people may not be able to tell the difference."
>                                     -Mark Twain

A wise person calls a fool a fool, and a fool calls a wise person a
fool.  Thus, when one person calls another a fool nothing is revealed
about which one is, in fact, the fool.

The wisdom of Colleen appears as folly to the "wise" people of the
false religions.

This idea is so stupid that it must be true.

-- 
David Canzi
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen)
Subject: Re: Paranoid musings on Jesus and the Buddha
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
	<1992Sep3.015542.3893@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:36:38 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.015542.3893@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> akbloom@aplcen.apl.jhu.
edu (Keith Bloom) writes:

   >There's some indication of indirect influence on St. Paul, through
   >Epimenides the Cretan, who was famous for saying "the Cretans are
   >always liars."

  This is fine scholarship! However, Conze's comments run a bit
differently. I quote from "Buddhism, its essence and development":

    The Christian Gospels have to some extent been influenced by
    Buddhist doctrines, which were known in Alexandria and other
    parts of the Mediterranean world. The miraculous side of
    Buddhism in particular seems to have appealed to the early
    Christians. Saint Peter, walking on the water, trod in the foot-
    steps of many Buddhist Saints. One of the favore miracles of
    the Buddhists was the "Twin Miracle". Fire streamed forth
    from the upper part of the body of the Tathagata, and "from
    his lower body proceeds a torrent of water." In John VII, 38,
    we find the curious statement: "He that believes in me as
    the Scripture has said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of
    living water." As a third example, we may mention that the
    the Tathagata could, if he should so wish, remain for the aeon
    just as the Christ "abideth for the aeon."
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bgl6000@zeus.tamu.edu (Brett G. Lemoine)
Subject: Re: LORD, LIAR, OR LUNATIC?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University - Chemistry Department
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 22:25:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.174621.11005@meaddata.com>, joyce@meaddata.com writes...
}You guys are all mistaken. I don't even own a copy of "Evidence That
}Demands a Verdict."

your source is irrelevant. your logic is suspect, and your assumptions
ignorant.

}-IvArch->--------------------------Brett G. Lemoine-------------------->
}-Texas A&M University--------------Chemistry Department Programmer----->
}-Internet: lemoine@chemvx.tamu.edu or bgl6000@zeus.tamu.edu------------>
}------"A person without a god is like a fish without a skateboard."---->
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: peter@dragon.acadiau.ca (Peter Steele)
Subject: The Bottom Line
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 00:30:07 GMT

God did not create us--we created God.

'Nuff said....
-- 
Peter Steele        Unix Services Manager            peter.steele@acadiau.ca 
Acadia Univ., Wolfville, NS, Canada B0P 1X0  902-542-2201  Fax: 902-542-4364
From: che755v@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Overpopulation
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:12:58 +1000
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia

Re: Overpopulation

Tags:
      DG - Douglas Graham
     DOC - Dan O'Connell
      EM - Eric Marsh
      KB - Kenn Barry

DG> Our current environmental crisis is due largely because there are too damn
DG> many people.  Energy shortages will probably become critical soon.  Hell,
DG> we just had a war over oil.  Acid rain.  Global warming.  Ozone holes.
DG> Polluted air and water.  Mass extinctions of other species.  Devastated
DG> rain forests.  etc. etc. etc.  All caused by the cancer which is our
DG> species.

DOC>That's one perspective.
DOC>Another is that although there are many people, there already
DOC>exists enough food to feed them all and space to house them.

EM>Actually, according to ZPG there is enough food to feed everyone on
EM>earth, providing that we are all willing to go on a grain diet. However
EM>the margin is not a large one. The same article said that there is
EM>enough food to feed about 3.2 billion people the diet of the average
EM>American. This is a number about 2.3 billion less than the current
EM>world population.

KB>        Are there really people stupid enough to pay attention to such
KB>tripe? Geez.
KB>        Food supply is not a constant.

EM>Even if everyone would go in a straight grain diet, a few more years and
EM>the population will outgrow our current ability to produce food. In
EM>addition, out ability to produce food is declining, due to soil erosion
EM>and a reduction in the use of chemicals that we are now starting to
EM>understand the dangers of using.

DOC>This perspective would say that the problem lies in the
DOC>distribution of resources.

EM>I have heard this most often from the very same conservatives who would
EM>squeal the loudest if we were to try to implement the type of
EM>redistrubution that would be necessary to feed everyone. When you think
EM>about it it won't take long to conclude that only a socialist society
EM>would provide such a redistribution.

There was a TV program in Australia last weekend that addressed this
whole question.
It was a BBC Horizons documentary called "Dodging Doomsday"
They talked to a number of people but came out largely on the side
of those who were advocating that there were much more important
factors than straight population size that influenced our impact
on the planet and its ability to sustain life (our own and other
biological organisms).

We usually get these things rather late.  Has anyone else seen it
recently enough to remember it and offer their thoughts on it?

Peter D. Thomas
Centre for High Resolution Spectroscopy and Opto-Electronic Technology
Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: Joe.Francis@dartmouth.edu (Joe Francis)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Is atheism experimentally refutable?
Date: 2 Sep 92 04:58:11 GMT
 <92245.005237U55870@uicvm.uic.edu>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a2@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <92245.005237U55870@uicvm.uic.edu>
U55870@uicvm.uic.edu (David James Alexander Hanley) writes:

>   The fine point you seem to miss is that atheism, in the sense most users
> here use it IS NOT A BELIEF!  It is the LACK of one.  Therefore 'faith'
> hardly gets involved.  Even the 'strong' atheist viewpoint should not be
> classified such, because we can hardly be held responsible for every stupid
> theory out there...  If you don't beleive that there are taffita lampcoveres
> following you around, I'm hardly going to say that you are accepting that they
> do not exist on faith.  Ditto for god, thought I find the taffita lampcovers
> more likely, interesting, and amusing.

Actually, a survey of alt.atheism readers found that the "Belief that
god(s) do not exist" definition was preferred to the "Lack of belief in
existence of god(s)" definition.  Your claim about "most users here" is
on a rather weak footing.

I do agree with you, though, that strong atheism does not entail a type
of "faith" similar to the Christian variety.  

And to parody a high school teacher I once had (public high school, no
less!):

RI know taffeta lampcovers exist.  TheyUre after me every day!S

(Her original quote was about the devil, rather than lampcovers.)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman)
Subject: Re: For all you believers
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 15:25:20 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.172701.22284@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> souissi@ec.ecn.purdue.edu (Ridha Souissi) writes:
>In article <1992Aug16.204444.22864@bmerh85.bnr.ca> dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham) writes:
>>
>>Nah, that's not bloody enough -- it would never make the news.  Tell you
>>what.  I'll have my God arrange for Mr. Bush to slaughter a bunch of
>>followers of your God pretty soon (before November).  Then you shall know
>>that my God is the one true god.  And my God is merciful, wise.
>
>It shows that the lives of humans have no importance to you to
>talk about them like that.
>
>My God will make Mr. Bush die one day, and you shall die too.
                  ^^^^^^^^
>Then you should know the truth.
>
>>--
>>Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.
>
>

If your god is indeed a god of mercy, he will make Mr. Quayle
die FIRST, then Mr. Bush.  And, mercifully, soon.



-- 
| Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
| U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

Xref: sparky alt.atheism:16297 alt.religion.emacs:394