HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Re: Repressed Memories, Ruined Lives
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:50:46 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.033758.20465@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>        Also  in  that same issue of the San Jose Mercury  News,  in  the 
>        magazine  supplement "WEST": An article, "The Accused,"  by  Mark 
>        MacNamara,  about  a  couple jailed for  child  abuse  on  highly 
>        dubious  evidence.  Bill  and Kathleen Swan seem  to  be  a  very 
>        typical,  church-going, middle-class American couple. However,  a 
>        day  care  worker who had prviously been fired from  several  day 
>        care  centers because of an apparent obsession with child  abuse, 
>        interpreted  (on  her  first full day  of  employment  there)  an 
>        ambiguous  statement by the Swan's 3 1/2 year-old daughter as  an 
>        indication  of  sexual  abuse by her parents,  and  called  Child 
>        Protective  Services.  Despite  an  absolute  lack  of  any  real 
>        evidence, the Swans were unable to prove themselves innocent, and 
>        are now in prison.

It wasn't that they were unable to prove themselves innocent.  No one
proved them guilty but they were still convicted.  They are still in
jail because they refuse to plea-bargain to a lesser charge.  They have
asserted their complete innocence from day one--and virtually all the
"evidence" that was used to convict them has been completely discredited
and proved false.

The Swan's have been in prison for 7 years.  Part of the "evidence" used
to convict this couple was a statement from a male nurse who examined
the daughter at age 3 1/2.  This male nurse testified that the girl's
hymen was not intact.  About a year ago the girl was examined by a
doctor who reported that her hymen was intact.  The hymen tissue doesn't
regenerate.

Also, the daycare worker who reported this abuse (on her first day on
the job), had also just been released from a drug abuse clinic before
she made the allegations (about a month earlier).  This person made
statements to a reporter from 60 Minutes that she was 19 before she knew
that not all parents have sex with their children and also stated that
she had been raped by over 200 different men. (The woman is fat and
ugly.)

As far as I know, the Swans are still in prison - costing the taxpaying
community $25k per year each.

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
TR@CBNEA.ATT.COM 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek)
Subject: Re: The Question of Humanity's First Language
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 01:53:03 GMT

lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:

>	Furthermore, the ubiquity of linguistic change insures that no
>existing language could possibly be humanity's original language,
>since it could not have survived unchanged. The Romance languages are
>noticeably distinct from Latin, Modern English looks different from
>Old English, Hindi looks different from Sanskrit, etc. etc.

But Lithuanian is stunningly similar to Sanskrit, according to Mallory's
sample sentences.

>And easy gene flow in that population
>would presumably have been associated with a high degree of mutual
>intelligibility for all the individuals in that population.

Heh heh.  This one sentence, taken out of context, is BEAUTIFUL.


Paul Ciszek, pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu | No nation was ever drunk when wine was
                                   | cheap.   -- Thomas Jefferson
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Addiction (Was Re: Soul)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:05:39 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.132912.7126@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552) writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.181140.8643@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

[...]

>>I'd like for you to explain your jump from a definition of an addiction
>>to "I must be extremely unusual". Because it does not follow. I also assume
>>that you have what you always seem to be asking for. Citations and numbers
>>to show why you think that you "must be extremely unusual". How about
>>sharing them with us?
>
>Your definition leads to the conclusion that anyone who stops is not
>addicted.

A better summary was posted earlier by someone else. But are you defining
a class of addicts who do not need their fix (whatever that may be)?

Because if you are, then I am addicted to cigarettes. I tried them long
ago, didn't like them, and havent smoked one since. 

You know, I have no clue as to what you are alluding to. How about just
saying it clearly, or some other surprise tactic?
 
>David Pipes
>robear@digex.com

Rich

payner@netcom.com		(the cigarette addict who dosen't smoke)
From: lopresti@henson.cc.wwu.edu (lopresti robert)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: about the flood
Date: 16 Oct 92 15:14:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: henson.1992Oct16.151415.10571
Organization: Western Washington University


 
    There is  an interesting article in Perspectives on
Science and the Christian Faith (v44 n4, 9/92 p 169-174).
 
    This is a magazine published by the American Scientific
Affiliation, which apparently requires its members to be Christians
but doesn't require belief in Creationism.
 
    This issue is mostly concerned with arguments against 
Evolution, which I won't go into - read 'em yourself if so 
inclined.  But this group might enjoy David Siemens' article
on "Some Relatively Non-Technical Problems With Flood
Geology."
 
    Some Creationists argue, of course, that virtually all
geological phenomena result from the Flood.  Mr Siemans 
describes some of the technical arguments against this and
then offers some arguments even a layman like me can follow.
 
    For example:
 
    Why did all of the monotremes (egg-bearing
mammals) and most of the parsupials (pouched mammals)
"head unerringly to Australia?  Why were there no stragglers
across Asia?"
 
    What did the carrion eaters find to eat outside the Ark,
since all flesh would have started rotting ten or eleven months
before?
 
    How did the flightless kiwi, kakapo and moa get to New
Zealand?
 
    How did salamanders get to America?  (they can't swim
or survive cold climates.)
 
    Finally he brings up Henry M. Morris's argument that
the current population of the world (and the time in which 
it doubles) argues for a young Earth.  Siemans says that by
Morris's argument the total population of the Earth in 
Abraham's time would be less than 60, making one wonder
about the cities described in the Bible.  He says Morris's
attempts to get around this problem  are "arbitrary, showing
that the entire argument is purely ad hoc, unwarranted
and irrelevent."
 
NO ONE'S OPINIONS BUT MINE............................
Rob Lopresti           "It is unquestionable that certain words 
Western Wash U.         and ceremonies will effectually destroy
Bellingham, WA          a flock of sheep, if administered with 
98225-9103              a sufficient portion of arsenic."
                                       
lopresti@henson.cc.wwu.edu                       -Voltaire
 
 
henson[6]: 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 14:44:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct11.035231.6903@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>
>Assuming that the Romans reserved the exclusive right to capital
>cases, which is my understanding, how does your conclusion make
>any sense?  Oh, they *could* have stoned him as they did Stephen,
>but it would have been illegal as far as Rome was concerned.  

Wrong understanding. According to "The Jewish Encyclopedia" (article:
Adultery), the Sanhedrin retained the authority for capital punishment
until A.D. 40, approx. 10 years *after* Jesus' execution. According
to Hiam Cohn, a contemporary Israeli jurist and legal scholar, the
Sanhedrin both could and DID order executions after the death of
Jesus (see his "The Trial of Jesus").


>>       "As for anyone who presumes to disobey the priest appointed
>>        to minister there to the LORD your God, or the judge, that
>>        person shall die. So you shall purge the evil from within
>>        Israel." [NRSV]
>>
>
>Fine, but again the Romans had different ideas.  You seem to
>forget that...
>
The argument being made was that the Jews COULDN'T have executed
Jesus, because Jesus committed no crime under Jewish law. When I
showed that that argument to be false, you change the subject and make 
*this* irrelevant comment.

-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Date: 8 Oct 1992 04:44:07 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <5803@tuegate.tue.nl>, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) writes:
>In a sense Carl is acting as if it is *certain* that Judas did the 
>identification and as if this *fact* can be explained somehow or other.

No, Jan, I'm just acting as if I think your assertion that the gospels' claim
that Judas accompanied the arresting party is some sort of a contradiction is
baseless.

>Now I'm willing to believe that this is the Sunday school approach, but
>once you doubt the certainty the arguments seem less convincing.

I *DO* doubt the certainty.  Have you considered doubting *YOUR* certainty in
the other direction.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Paul Hager)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Out-of-body near-death experiences
Date: 9 Oct 92 04:28:55 GMT
Distribution: sci.skeptic
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University

linley@qucis.queensu.ca (Richard Linley) writes:

>Maybe I missed it(?), but I didn't see anything about these in the FAQ file.

>The subject has come up twice today, once in a University lecture in which
>the Prof announced that "medical doctors" now "accept" these experiences as
>evidence that there is some awareness beyond life.

Oh, they do, do they?  Dr. Susan Blackmore has done extensive research
in this area and has published numberous papers.  She wrote a book called
"Beyond the Body" about 10 years ago which has been recently reprinted.
This book deals with various conjectures about NDEs and OBEs and offers
some tentative hypotheses.  Since then, Dr. Blackmore has homed in more
and more on the physical bases of these phenomena.

Last year, Channel 6 News in Indianapolis ran a multi-part series by
a talking head named Traci (y?) Horth which was a real puff piece
about NDEs.  She intermixed interview segments with Kubler-Ross and
?? -- can't remember his name but he's the fellow who first claimed
that the NDE was a real phenomenon -- with reconstructions of anecdotes
by people of their own NDEs.  The reconstructions had new age music
in the background and lots of religious symbology.  I found the whole
thing appallingly unscientific and called Ms. Horth to give her some
info that might elevate things a bit.  It was to no avail.

A final note:
Skeptical Inquirer has published articles by Blackmore that have
references -- try looking at recent issues in which her work has
appeared.  You really need to straighten your Prof out.
-- 
paul hager		hagerp@moose.cs.indiana.edu
"Run 'em down, Fred!  They don't belong here!  Run 'em down!"
-- Bobby Fischer to Fred Cramer, who was driving him through a
a crowd of spectators after Fischer adjourned game 1 in his
1972 match with Spassky.
From: moursund@hpcvnb.CV.HP.COM (David_Moursund)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Densa
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:03:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: hpcvnb.61040007
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Co., Corvallis, Oregon

>/ hpcvnb:sci.skeptic / zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd) /  1:29 am  Oct  8, 1992 /
>The Densa stuff finally arrived.  I typed in a full description yesterday, 
>but I tried to cross post to 2 groups and that doesn't seem to work from my 
>site at the moment, so I'll try to find time to type it in again later today.
>It was this group that was discussing Densa a while back, wasn't it?
>

Yes, this was THE GROUP which discussed Mensa AND Densa a WHILE BACK,
and a QUESTION was brought up at THAT time:  What PRECISELY are the
requirements for ELIGIBILITY into Mensa, specifically, WHAT would be
a sufficient S.A.T. score to QUALIFY one for admittance?

I am ASKING, because I am an intellectual SNOB, and desire to FLAUNT my
cranial superiority before my PEERS.

(WRITING in this style REMINDS me of the old SMITH-BARNEY commercial,
because of the odd EMPHASIS on certain WORDS...

Smith-Barney:  We make MONEY the old FASHIONED way; we EARN it.  )

p.s.  The part about flaunting my cranial superiority before my peers
wasn't quite accurate.  I don't really have any peers^H^H^H^H^H cranial
superiority.  =)

dm
From: kline@cs.arizona.edu (Nick Kline)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Clinton and Creationism
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:42:31 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

>
>I read somewhere that Clinton later stated that he would not have signed the 
>bill, but the whole incident does not give one an encouraging picture of the 
>Arkansas government.
>

I'm from arkansas (please don't tell anyone :-), so I guess I can
comment on this. Clinton was not governor during the time this
bill was passed.  We had this republican loonie (oops, oxymoron)
named Frank White.  He was an absolute idiot.  He signed the
creation science bill to the groans of many people in the state.
It was one of the major factors in his losing the reelection.
He claimed later that he 'never read the bill', so he should not
be blaimed for the embaressment the state suffered!

Arkansas is really a pretty conservative state.  Strangely, it has had
liberal senators for the past few years (Bumbers and Pryor, Wilber
Mills before them).  It is amazing to me that clinton has gotten
so many thing accomplished.

Some examples of how conservative:
	in many small towns, they outlaw high school proms because
		dancing is the devils work.  really.

	there are two major divison one universities in arkansas,
	The U. of Ark (at Fayetteville) and the much less prestigious
	Ark. State U.(at Jonesboro).  U of A does not want to play ASU
	since this would legitimize the smaller school's football.
	Some people tried to get the legislature to force the two
	teams to play.  This was averted after the athletic director
	at arkansas, Frank Broyles, went to the state legislature
	and said "We can't do this, this would lead to socialism"

	3 or 4 years ago a town wanted to put parents in stocks (like
	say Salem witch trial type stocks) if their children
	mis-behaved.

	coed dorms are illegal (probably mindboggoling to many)

	counties vote on the decision of whether they want to
	be dry or not.  Of course, the rich folks can all belong
	to private clubs in dry counties, like a country club which
	can sell booze 	to its members.

	no booze on sundays (except this has now changed to a you
	can vote on it deal)

	apparently there is still an all white country club in Little
	Rock, but I never knew about it when I lived there


So, given all this I think it is very impressive that clinton has
ever accomplished anything.

-nick
kline@cs.arizona.edu


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: cedric.silvester@rose.com (cedric silvester)
Subject: Dowsing Info Wanted
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 05:31:48 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 10-10-92 00:28

I am currently arguing with a co-worker about "dowsing" or "water
witching", using either a forked wooden stick or a pair of metal
rods.  He's convinced it never fails, I'm pretty sure it's all
luck.

Could someone please post a few references to this subject.  I
have searched through the message base here on Rose Media and
checked the FAQ, no info.  My site does not have a full Usenet
connection, so I may have missed previous discussion about
dowsing.

Thanks!

Cedric Silvester
---
   DeLuxe /386 1.25 #1182   Reserve your right to arm bears.
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
From: dmu5391@hertz.njit.edu (David M. Utidjian Esc stnt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: AMWAY: What's the scoop?
Summary: amway
Keywords: AMWAY, amway
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:00:58 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.
Originator: dmu5391@hertz.njit.edu

A good friend of mine, actually my best friend in California
has been bitten by the AMWAY bug.  I spoke to him on the phone
the other evening and he started spouting the AMWAY line.

I know virtually nothing about the AMWAY scheme, but it sounded
remarkably like most other pyramid scams.

Is there a FAQ on AMWAY?

If not can anyone send me some information on their scheme
and methods, please?

I have heard that their cleaning products can be quit good.
Does that mean that one pays less per load of laundry, or
say, less per floor washed, for instance?

Sincerely....
David Utidjian
"Don't sweat the technique!"
			Anon.
From: draper@odin.mda.uth.tmc.edu (E.J. Draper)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Artificial movement of trees
Date: 14 Oct 92 21:30:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: lib.7567
Organization: U.T.M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-XXMessage-ID: <A701FBA4A301019A@mdarpi1.mda.uth.tmc.edu>
X-XXDate: Wed, 14 Oct 92 16:30:28 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.084718.20664@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> rosemarie berg,
rberg@nyx.cs.du.edu writes:
>Is there a possibility to make move trees, tree branches, leaves by any
of the 
>following means:

What exactly do you mean by move?
In what context does the tree and observer exist?


      |E|J-  ED DRAPER
 rEpar|D|<-  Radiologic/Pathologic Institute
             The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
             draper@odin.mda.uth.tmc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: cotera@woods.ulowell.edu
Subject: Re: Focus on Crucifiction (was: Cruxed for Prophecy?)
Organization: University of Lowell
Distribution: world,local
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 17:20:39 GMT

In article <3OCT199211382553@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>, lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes: 
> Read verse six again.  The sacrifice must be "without blemish."
> Jesus, according to the gospels, was scourged, beaten, and bloody.
> Therefore, by your own reasoning, the sacrifice argument is not valid.
> 

Actually Jesus was without blemish, i.e. without sin.
--Ray Cote
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: AIDS and Legislation of morality
Date: 17 Oct 92 02:35:45 GMT
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct16.221638.18928@spectra.com>, johnson@spectra.com (boyd johnson) writes:
>Let's try substituting drugs, guns, alcohol, tobacco for sex in the
>paragraphs.
>
>I think the idea is that **** use should not be restricted (externally).
>However I don't think that implies people should not show any (self)
>restraint in terms of their **** use. ****s exist, and people will
>learn about it sooner or later, so it is better to prepare them for it
>rather than throw up a wall around ****s, and have them be completely
>unprepaired for it.

>Hmmm......the other things don't fit into the paragraphs.

Guns certainly do.  In my opinion so do alcohol and nonaddictive drugs.

>About half of the seniors are also going to have experimented with
>drugs, alcohol, tobacco or used guns, so why don't we show them how to
>do it right and give them free drugs and needles so they don't get any
>contaminated stuff, beer and cigarettes and "relatively" safe guns like
>22's or 38's.

Why don't we teach them how to use guns?  A couple of generation such training
was the norm, at least in rural parts of this country.  Why don't we let them
experiment with alcohol in a situation where they WILL be taken care of, let
them learn its effects, and so become less likely to use it unwisely.

It appears to me that your prejudices are showing here.  All you seem to be
saying is "Since I don't approve of X, and I don't approve of Y, we should ALL
try to hide the existence of both from out children."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Quit Judas / Crucifixion etc.
Date: 8 Oct 92 00:12:27 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: LNK Corporation, Riverdale, MD

In article <5850@tuegate.tue.nl> wsadjw@urc.tue.nl writes:
>I propose that we drop this subject.  No new points of view are
>raised.  And the subject is going farther and farther away from
>the empirically testable (unless you call provoking people with
>strong opinions an empirical test of their mind contents . . .).
>
>JWN

I concur. Despite Bob Schaeffer's considerable financial interest
in propagating the theories in his book, and despite the fact that he
has gotten in a few good licks in this round, the entire discussion is
going absolutely nowhere. I would advise the opposing side to make use
of the considerable body of historical opinion which does NOT support
Schaeffer, otherwise drop this subject.

Bill R.

"My opinions do not represent those of my employer or any
government agency."

-- 
Bill R.
From: jec@pilatus.zurich.ibm.com (Jean Cherbonnier)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Ezekiel Space Ship
Date: 9 Oct 92 15:49:46 GMT
Reply-To: jec@pilatus.zurich.ibm.com (Jean Cherbonnier)
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center


Does anybody have some information about this chapter in the
Old Testament, where Ezekiel describes what sounds like the
arrival of a space ship on earth, with extra-terrestrial creatures... ?

J. Cherbonnier
jec@zurich.ibm.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.newage,alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy