HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 31 Jul 92 19:37:32 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: na
Reply-To: sichase@csa2.lbl.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   

In article <1992Jul29.234236.17149@pbhyc.PacBell.COM>, djdaneh@pbhyc.PacBell.COM (Dan'l DanehyOakes) writes...
>In article <25032@dog.ee.lbl.gov> Scott Chase gives a marvellous demonstration
>of how ignorant anti-religionists really can be when they put their alleged
>minds to it.
> 
>Dan'l Danehy-Oakes, Net.Roach

Well, to be fair, you have demonstrated how easy it is to be ignorant yourself.
You quoted me out of context and deliberately misinterpreted what I was saying.
Never did I say that I thought that the Pope is foolish enough to believe 
that the Earth is 6000 years old.  I only said that I don't think he would 
tell you if asked.

Furthermore, what makes you assume that I am not religious?  And why 
am I an "anti-religionist" just because I have a criticism of the Pope 
(valid or otherwise)?  It seems to me that you get awful threatened
pretty quickly by someone just trying to add to the discussion.  All of 
a sudden I am "ignorant", "anti religionist" and possessed of an "alleged 
mind."  I think that you are way out of line.  If you don't have something
constructive to say in response to my claims, then that's fine.  But 
name calling is just stupid.

-Scott
--------------------
Scott I. Chase			"The question seems to be of such a character
SICHASE@CSA2.LBL.GOV		that if I should come to life after my death
				and some mathematician were to tell me that it
				had been definitely settled, I think I would
				immediately drop dead again."      - Vandiver
From: norbeck@pollux.cs.bucknell.edu (nancy norbeck `93)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: High Explosives Quote Results=Frustration--Help!
Date: 22 Jul 92 13:08:30 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Bucknell University, Lewisburg, Pa.



Hi again...About a week ago I posted, trying to find the source of a 
quote I'd like to use.  Since then I have been bombarded with mail,
but, sadly, I've seen no fewer than FIVE sources for it, and many
of the people who have answered seem quite certain that theirs is 
the right one.  This presents just a *slight* problem...

I know it's possible that it could have been used more than once,
but in five different things?  This seems a little odd to me.  
Anyway, in case this might strike someone as being familiar, here
is the quote again:

	"There are very few personal problems that can't be solved 
	with a suitable application of high explosives."

The contestants for the origin of the quote are as follows:

Apocalypse Now
Uncommon Valor
Monty Python's Flying Circus
Heathers
A few authors (no specific books as far as I can recall) such as 
	Martin Amis


Could anyone tell me, beyond the shadow of a doubt, where this quote
is from?  Choice is wonderful, but this is a little ridiculous..

Thanks..

Nancy

--
|Nancy Norbeck       | "I know that look."  "What look?"  "The look that says |
|....................|  you're going to be impetuous, vengeful, irresponsible,|
|norbeck@bucknell.edu|  and *stupid*!" --Lady Jane and Lovejoy, "Death and    |
|....................|     Venice"                                            |
Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13015 rec.arts.sf.misc:2205 rec.humor:24500 alt.folklore.urban:19735 alt.religion.kibology:3202
From: slick@netcom.com (Martin Veneroso)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 24 Jul 92 21:41:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

kaehler@zk3.dec.com (Todd Kaehler UEG) writes:

>In article <1992Jul24.075717.104265@zeus.calpoly.edu>, rcasey@zeus.calpoly.edu (Rosalie J Casey) writes:
>>
>>	If you had a bet to take, either for a god and go to 
>>'eternal bliss', or that there is no god and take your chances...
>>
>>where would your money be?
>>------
>>no sig , to cheep
>>rcasey@iris.calpoly.edu
>>
>Hmm...  Maybe you are right, wouldn't hurt to take up a religion for
>a little "after life" insurance.  As good a reason as any.  Now, which
>religion is the best "after life" insurance policy.  So many to pick
>from...  Hindu, Moslem, Christian, Jewish...  Maybe all...

I recall that Blaise Pascal used logic like this to conclude that it
was a good "bet" to attend church once a week against the chance that
god exists and give a flying f**k what you do with your time.  Given
the time and place in which he lived, he had little choice of
religions, simplifying his problem greatly.

I maintain that an agnostic is an atheist without the strength of
his/her convictions!
-- 
Martin Veneroso
slick@netcom.com
Jung'f vg gb ln?
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Re-reading (was RAH)
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:43:09 GMT
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com

In article <SWB.92Jul27102057@mitchell.cit.cornell.edu>  
swb@nr-tech.cit.cornell.edu (Scott Brim) writes:
> Boy, I'll say.  When I was a kid I loved Tarzan.  I went back and read
> the first Tarzan book again a few years ago and it might literally be
> the worst thing I've ever read.  My father had the same experience.  I
> have no idea why I ever got anything out of it.
> 

I had the same experience with Burroughs, though in my case it was
with his Mars books. As a kid, I loved the Barsoom books. About
a year ago, I read several of them aloud to my daughter.  I
was appalled at how bad the writing was.  I was also appalled by
Burroughs, writing in the 20th century, treating slavery as a
good thing, but that's a different issue.


--
Jim Mann       jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  Stratus Computer
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: lim@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Julie Lim)
Subject: Re: Arancia all' Orologeria
Keywords: Nadsat, tolchock, chelloveck
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 02:05:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.160212.21628@doug.cae.wisc.edu> bonness@cae.wisc.edu (Matthew Bonness) writes:
>I just read Burgess' _A Clockwork Orange_, a most
>interesting and compelling book. I especially liked
>his invention of a new language for the narration.
>Can anyone suggest any other books with this feature?


	Well, despite his, er, innovative use of language in _Clockwork
Orange_, Burgess didn't invent the brave new words _de novo_. I believe
all of the obviously non-English vocabulary are Russian, modified to some
degree or another. (Caveat lector: my grasp of the Russian language is nil,
so you may wish to get corroboration from people more knowledgeable than I.)

	If language invention is what you're after, I suggest you try
Tolkien.


-- 
MUDname: Sidera           "...If I seem to give a damn, please tell me. I would
University of Delaware      hate to be giving the wrong impression."
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: Job and melodrama
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:33:58 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Jul24.200655.21892@en.ecn.purdue.edu> wnoe@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Bill Noe) writes:
>In _The Book of Job_, it seems as though God forsook Job in order to prove
>Satan wrong.  Had Satan not badgered God, Job may have been spared much
>suffering.  Certainly, God knew whether Job would pass the "tests," (since He's
>omniscient) so the only conceivable reason for conducting them was for Satan's
>benefit.  If God is benevolent and just, He would not allow needless suffering,
>nor, presumably, suffering for Satan's benefit...

There's another conceivable reason for conducting, as you say, tests.
For _our_ benefit.  For those of us who will read the book thousands of
years later.  To help us begin to grapple with the whole issue of suffering.
From my understanding, Job's suffering wasn't needless.  And God didn't
forsake him.  He allowed him to suffer, which is not the same thing.
He never told Job why he suffered; as an answer, He simply pointed to
Himself.  But He also didn't tell Job his suffering was needless, nor did
He turn His back on him, as the end of the book demonstrates.

The newsgroup soc.religion.christian is once again getting onto the
thread of suffering, should you care to check it out.  It's a very
appropriate topic in any election year.




-- 
===============================================================================
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
"What a waste it is to lose one's mind, or not to have a mind is being very
wasteful.  How true that is."--J. Danforth Quayle to United Negro College Fund 
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mnemonic@eff.org (Mike Godwin)
Subject: Re: isolation
Originator: mnemonic@eff.org
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 22:38:42 GMT

Barbara Hlavin writes:

>	*No Exit*, Jean-Paul Sartre.  "L'enfer, c'est les autres," or 
>	something like that.

I went to a theater party once and came away with the conclusion that
"L'enfer, c'est les outres."


--Mike



-- 
Mike Godwin,     |"Of the many definitions of poetry, the   
mnemonic@eff.org | simplest is still the best: 'memorable speech.'" 
(617) 864-0665   | 
EFF, Cambridge   |                     --W.H. Auden
From: aad@lhdsy1.lahabra.chevron.com (Annabella Deck)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: What Katy Did to Little Men
Date: 23 Jul 92 01:11:49 GMT
Organization: Chevron Oil Field Research, La Habra, CA.

In article <1992Jul22.051212.9061@morrow.stanford.edu> francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir) writes:
>
>I have vague childhood memories of *What Katy Did* and the sequel, *What
>Katy Did Next*. Does anyone remember more about these? Their dates? Were
>they pre-Alcott?
>
>						Fido


I vaguely remember those books also.  I think they were about a girl
in boarding school.  They could have been from the 50s or early 40s,
but after Alcott, as I remember the setting as more recent than
Little Women.

I remember the Victorian children's books in my grandmother's house.
They were all very similar, the heroine was a brave little girl, who
had a terrible hard life - rags, poverty consumption .. but was a 
little angel to all around her.  In the end she died and everyone
around regretted that they had not treated her better.

                                                  Annabella
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From:  (jmhodapp@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu)
Subject: Re: WANTED: Something along the lines of "Pillars of the Earth"
Organization: haphazard, at best
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 12:58:34 GMT

In article <Brsu2E.4sF@hsi.com>, daub@hsi.com (Marshall Daub) writes:
> 
>    I am currently reading "Pillars of the Earth" by Ken Follett and find the 
> book fascinating. Can anyone recommend other novels of the same writing style 
> and pace, but not necessarily the same subject matter.
> 
Howz about a coma?  Geez, I hated that book.  Three generations o fpeople I could care 
less about.    Just tepid, blatant, and not overly inspiring.  Good is always beautiful and
wise, evil always ugly, malformed, smiling  crafty grins.  Yeach.  My recommendation:

A Winter's Tale, by H-somebody  

Winter's Tale is a phenomenal novel of New York (which I hate in reality) starting in the turn
of the century and finishing up about the year 2000.  A rich fantasy concerning the Lake People
who inhabit northern Jersey, a band of ruthless criminals, a magical horse, ---it can not be
described.  Just read it.  I'll lend it to you to read.

Jon  jmhodapp@aplcomm.jhuapl.edu
===============================
"My name is Indigo Montoya.  You killed my father.  Prepare to die!"  -Princess Bride

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Subject: Men writing as women (Was: Re: Gerald's Game
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 20:57:14 GMT


oopcv@Msu.oscs.montana.edu (Cheryl) writes:

>> Also, _Gerald's_Game_ just isn't as *nervy* a book as _Misery_: it
>> doesn't read as if Stephen King suffered through Jessie's torments with
>> her.  My first reading of _Misery_ was almost painful, so much did I feel
>> that Stephen King *himself* was sweating blood as he wrote that book.

> I propose that this may simply be a result of the difficulty of a man
> writing from a woman's point of view.  I can't recall ever having read
> anything where a male or female author wrote from the point of view of
> the opposite sex in such a way that the conflict wasn't detectable.
> Men and women tend to look at the world a little differently, IMHO,
> and their reactions reflect this angle.

I think that women have been more successful writing from the point of
view of a man.  I can't think of very many examples of men writing from
the point of view of a woman (using first person narratives).  Jay McInerney
does some interesting things with the narrative in THE STORY OF MY LIFE, but
the female narrator comes off as a man's version of a woman.

I thought Kazuo Ishiguru was the most successful in his A PALE VIEW OF HILLS.
The story is told by a Japanese woman who moved to England.  The action
alternates between present day England and post-war Nagasaki.

After reading his THE REMAINS OF THE DAY, Barbara Hlavin posted an article
stating that the character of Stevens had a certain feminine quality.
She wrote:

-> I can't recall reading any reviews of this book so maybe this
-> has already been discussed, but I was rather struck by the notion
-> that Stevens leads a stereotypically female life.  I don't refer
-> only to the fact that he is necessarily preoccupied with providing
-> domestic order and comforts, but that he has successfully achieved
-> the goal set for women at certain times and in certain places, and
-> even now by most fundamentalist religions.  That is, he submits
-> himself to another's dictates in all matters, including the realm
-> of the moral.

I hadn't noticed that, when I read it, but had to agree -- once I thought
about it.  But lately, I've been reading David Mura's TURNING JAPANESE, and
now wonder if these characteristics are more a reflection Ishiguru's Japanese
heritage.


Mark

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: torkel@sics.se (Torkel Franzen)
Subject: Re: Agnostics and Athiests
Organization: Swedish Institute of Computer Science, Kista
	<1992Jul23.194846.12902@news.cs.brandeis.edu>
	<1992Jul23.212023.1246@clarinet.com>,<3635@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>
	<1992Jul24.062039.5500@cco.caltech.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 07:23:35 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.062039.5500@cco.caltech.edu> lydick@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.
EDU (Speaker-to-Minerals) writes:

   >There's a big difference between not believing there is a god and believing
   >that there is no god.

  At last alt.atheism stretches its tentacles into the dens of bookishness.
You are about to learn that life isn't all beer and skittles and the
civilized exchange of labored witticisms. The Definition of Atheism is about
to grab you by your scrawny throats and shake you until you are dead.
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.horror
From: francis@oas.stanford.edu (Francis Muir)
Subject: Re: Revisited Classics (was Re: Little Men)
Organization: Stanford Exploration Project
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 19:47:26 GMT

Marcy Thompson writes:

	Jan Yarnot wrote:

		One of my favorites which has stood up to re-reading has 
		been DADDY LONG LEGS by Jean Webster.  

	If you liked DADDY LONG LEGS, you'll probably like DEAR ENEMY by 
	the same author. You do have to ignore some of the comments about 
	the poor and the mentally retarded, as they are based on the latest 
	theories of the 1910s. But it's a charming book anyway.

I am curious. How many others share Ms Thompson's view that we are now so
much more understanding of the problems of poverty and mental retardation
that we can afford to ignore earlier views?

							Fido



Xref: sparky rec.arts.books:13490 talk.philosophy.misc:1507
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Sincerity is Bullshit
From: zeleny@husc8.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
Date: 30 Jul 92 18:07:32 EDT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <9207271843.AA10070@cfdev1.shearson.com> 
mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto) writes:

>dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran) writes:

DM:
>> After all, verbosity *is* what philosphy mostly produces.

MT:
>I disagree.

Strangely, I agree: one aspect of the XXth century professionalization
of philosophical writing has resulted in its appearing as pointless
verbiage to an uninformed reader.  On the other hand, on a personal
level, I find that philosophical training mostly produces an unerring
ability to identify uninformed opinions, similar to those expressed by
Mr Moran, as bullshit.

>Mark

best wishes,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu



Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,rec.arts.sf.misc,rec.humor,alt.folklore.urban,alt.religion.kibology
From: gilmore@venice.sedd.trw.com (Larry Gilmore)
Subject: Re: help please, when did Isaac Asimov die?
Organization: TRW Systems Engineering & Development Division, Carson, CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:10:41 GMT

>>>
>>>RIP Isaac.
>>^^^^ ^^^^^
>>
>>NOT Isaac!  He's up there raising H*** with someone!
>>
>
>Ah, a-hem, that would be *down* there.

NOT!  Isaac is UP there, that's why he's RAISING it!

-- 
Larry A. Gilmore             Internet: gilmore@venice.sedd.trw.com
TRW SEDD, DH1/2849
P.O. Box 6213                Phone:    (310)764-3318
Carson, CA 90746             Fax:      (310)764-3946
From: jjh00@outs.ccc.amdahl.com (Joel J. Hanes)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Fiction with scientists (WAS Re: Asimov and the Decay of SF
Summary: LeGuin
Date: 29 Jul 92 15:42:20 GMT
Reply-To: jjh00@OUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Joel J. Hanes)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

Joanne Eglash wrote:
>
>      Can anyone recommend fiction (both by authors in previous
>      decades and current writers) in which the subject of science
>      and scientists is handled intelligently?


_The_Dispossessed_, Ursula Kroeber LeGuin

The unfortunate garish cover of the current paperback
edition disguises a wonderful novel.  Six stars out of
a possible five.

---
Joel Hanes
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu (Carl J.M. Alexander)
Subject: Re: origin of skid row
Organization:  Organization??? 
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 07:24:20 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.233215.12496@cs.yale.edu> loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore) writes:
>carlj@muppet.bt.co.uk (Carl Johnson) writes:
>
>   Well the subject pretty much says it all, does anyone
>   know the origin of the term?
>
>I've heard that it originates from a Skid Road that existed in Seattle
>in the 1800's.  It was used to skid logs down to the waterfront.
 
Correct.  The skid road took the path of what is now Yestler Way, if 
I recall correctly.  At the foot of the skid road was, of course, the 
waterfront -- and a rather rough and tumble part of the waterfront it 
was, where loggers & sailors met in saloons & whorehouses.  That area 
came to be referred to as "skid row" and, to this day, if you use the 
"skid row" in a sentence in such a manner as to indicate that you mean a 
specific place, most naitive Seattlites will think of the Pioneer 
Square area.
 
Carl Alexander
carl@silver.lcs.mit.edu


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: dmpowell@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Darin M. Powell)
Subject: Re: Upton Sinclair's _The Jungle_
Organization: Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 13:41:56 EDT

In article <1992Jul20.121313.9659@linus.mitre.org> jartz@mitre.org writes:

>I read The Jungle in college and thought it was the most powerful novel
>I had ever read (and still do).  I didn't think socialism was the answer, but
>I definately felt that labor unions were, after reading the book.  Now I have
>to wonder whether or not I was just dupped by some slick propaganda.
>I can see how my emotions were being manipulated, but that was because
>I thought that the story was at least plausible, if not based on actual case
>studies.  Was the whole story just an improbable fabrication ??

	You were duped.
	Everything is a lie.
	Don't believe anything,
	especially things you read.

	Darin Powell
	Syracuse University -- Ninth Circle of Hell


Newsgroups: rec.arts.books,alt.books.reviews
From: mandersn@iastate.edu (Mark A Anderson)
Subject: Re: RAH
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 06:06:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.163227.4521@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk> ccaajmf@ucl.ac.uk (John 
Franks) writes:
> I found a novel called "Farnham's Freehold"
>in a little second-hand bookshop near me the other day, and basically, I 
>thought it was among the best Heinlein I've read. But I've never seen it new, 
>this was a 1967 edition (1964 first published). Any comments? It just 
>intrigued me.

_Farnham's_Freehold_ is one of my 4 favorite RAH books (Out of ~20 I've read)
My copy is a signature edition (Ace paperback with RAH signature on right 
side of front cover).  

		"PRINTING HISTORY

	G.P. Putnam's Sons edition published 1964
	Berkley edition / April 1971
	Twenty-first printing / May 1986
	Ace edition / February 1987"


Back cover summary:

	"'This is naot a drill.  Repeat.  This
	 is not a drill.'  All the lights went
	 out and there was a noise like
	 giant subway trains ...

	As terrifying as _On_the_Beach_, as fascinat-
	ing as _The_Swiss_Family_Robinson_, this is
	the modern SF classic of catastrophe and
	survival.  It is the story of a man and his fam-
	ily who turned a nuclear disaster into a
	chance to start the world all over again.
	The right way this time.

	'One of the grand masters of science fiction.'
	-- _Wall_Street_Journal_

Hope this helped.
			/\/\ark
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: re:Dickens vs. Twain
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Date: 23 Jul 92 11:38:27

Sentimentalists about frontier days should also read Mark Twain's
_Roughing It_.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
From: mtaranto@shearson.com (Mark Taranto)
Subject: Re: Sincerity is Bullshit
Organization: Yale CS Mail/News Gateway
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:43:50 GMT


dougm@hal.com (Doug Moran) writes:

> After all, verbosity *is* what philosphy mostly produces.

I disagree.

Mark
From: liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz (Liam Greenwood)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.books
Subject: Re:  Young Adult Books
Date: 25 Jul 92 20:48:53 GMT+12
Distribution: world
Organization: It's Home, really...

In article <1992Jul23.195208.14488@csusac.csus.edu> yarnot@csusac.csus.edu (Jan Yarnot) writes:
>In article <23JUL199209322530@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov> calvo@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Sherri Calvo) writes:
>>
>>Does anyone remember the "Betsy, Tacy and Tib" series? I don't
>>
>Maud Hart Lovelace, and they have been reprinted in paperback.  The Betst-Tacy
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

    Could someone provide me with ordering-type info (pub., ISBN etc) for the
series? This is an Amewrican series and when we came to NZ I 'lost' them as
New Zealand tended towards Britain for childrens fiction in the libraries. I
partially remedied the situation when I worked in a library, however there
were only two or three of them in print. Thanks.
--
 Liam Greenwood ------ liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz ------ Wanganui, N.Z.
                Don't tell my Mother I'm a programmer,
              she thinks I'm a piano player in a brothel