HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz)
Subject: Re: Saga of the Family of Light I - Pleiadians13
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 13:36:50 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.153924.28437@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552) writes:
>
>Hey, Don, here's a wild idea:  Why not submit a skin or fluid sample to a
>reputable university bio department?  When we get the results back showing
>that your DNA is different from 98% of the population in a scientifically
>unexpected way (3 strands, glowing, no amino acids, whatever) you can post
>the results, and start buying a lot more hot tubs...
>
>C'mon, here's your chance to change the world and become as as famous as
>Darwin...

 RIGHT ON! PUT UP OR SHUT UP, DON! You've been space-gassing people here for 
several years with your far-flung and fancy fiction, now you've managed to
actually step over the bounds of what's tolerable. I'll wager $100 that your
DNA *ISN'T* different from 98% of the population in a fashion such as you've
described. The test had better be a serious scientific test series done by a
real MD that specializes in genetics and DNA. Go ahead bozo..stick your foot
in this one if you've got the guts. And don't weasel out with some wimpy, BS
New-Age excuses! If it's as different as you claim, then the current battery
of DNA tests should show it...jeez!

(UFOs I can believe...contacts, CE3K, even abductions, but this stuff is pure
fantasy, with nothing in the way of supportive evidence, not even a CHILD
would buy this garbage! I think you've been in hot tub too long...!) 

-Avatar-> (aka: Erik K. Sorgatz) KB6LUY           +-------------------------+
Citicorp(+)TTI                          *----------> panic trap; type = N+1 *
3100 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, CA  90405     +-------------------------+
{rutgers}!ttidca!sorgatz <- until 8/15/92 after-> (sorgatz@soldev.TTI.COM)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Rant! Rave! (was: Fermat( was: Noah's Ark))
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 14:34:52 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.140554.19739@engage.pko.dec.com> ed_eck@milkwy.enet.dec.com  writes:
>Wasn't it the Manchean heresy (not to be confused with the Manchean Candidate?)
That's Manichean heresy. Manchurian candidate.

>that claimed there was a Demiurge that created the world?
Hmmm....I don't remember the Manichean heresy that well. It's
certainly Marcionite, but:

It's quite definitely a Gnostic idea. I suggest you check out
the Apochryphon of John, Ptolemy's Gnostic Myth, or On the Origin of
the World.

>The idea that Jesus gave a special knowledge to _some_ of his followers
>but not others is Gnostic.
Yes, but not uniquely Gnostic. It's also Thomasite.
-Ekr




-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                     We hack anything.
                       I will hack Unix for food.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kadie@herodotus.cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: "Divining" thread
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 15:50:44 GMT

In alt.folklore.science there is a thread of discussion on "scientific
explanation for divining rods?"

- Carl



--
Carl Kadie -- kadie@cs.uiuc.edu -- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
From: dh4j+@andrew.cmu.edu (David O Hunt)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: mensa farce
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:09:33 GMT
	<6682@tekig7.PEN.TEK.COM>
Organization: Masters student, Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>|Whilst on the subject of mensa, can anybody explain exactly what
>|sigma xi, tau beta pi, pi mu epsilon etc etc are?
> 
>Tau beta pi is a national electrical engineering society.

Actually, it's the _pan_ engineering honor society.

David
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:14189 talk.origins:9438
From: jloucks@uts.amdahl.com (Jim Loucks)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
Subject: Re: Rant! Rave! (was: Fermat( was: Noah's Ark))
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:41:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo) writes:
>>>Thanks, but no thanks.  Waste your time praying for someone who thinks they
>>>have a soul to pray for.  While you're at it, pray for all the Moslems
>>>who are being slaughtered by all the followers of Jesus in what used to
                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>be Yugoslavia.  

>> Please provide documentation that the above is true. 

>Methinks that you need a short history of the Balkans.  Take a look at what
>happened between the Croatians and the Serbs in WWII.  Both as noted:
>"followers of Christ."  Please do me one favor.  Don't try to beg off with one
>of those "if they kill, they cannot be followers of Christ" answers.

I assume by "followers of Christ" you meant followers of Christ Jesus.
It appears you and I define "followers of Jesus" differently. It also 
appears this thread has continued too long. Later.

>GXKambic

-- 
Jim Loucks           jloucks@uts.amdahl.com 
{apple, pyramid, sun, uunet}!amdahl!jloucks
From: loki@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Kashko)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Inconsistency in the bible
Date: 19 Aug 92 10:50:07 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

Bear Giles writes
>Now, if mainline Christians would ever get around to telling the fundies
>to SHUT UP a lot of us would have a lot more respect for them....
>

	I agree. However the fundies just would not listen. Now a declaration
by the heads of the main churches that the fundies are not Christians might
have an effect, but I doubt it.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata FSO)
Subject: Re: Mensa (was Re: Kinesiology - how I heard about it)
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Distribution: world,local
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:45:13 GMT

In article <1992Aug17.144159.12775@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>Keywords: 
>
>In article <1992Aug17.092452.27338@cco.caltech.edu> keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>]The IQ isn't meaning less, but MENSA is.  That is, the IQ has some merit
>]for some abilities, but MENSA exists only for self-flattery and egotism.
>
>Hmm... when I was a member, I found very little of that going on. It was
>a social club, and a way to find those of similar intellectual
>interests (not easy otherwise in a place like Phoenix, AZ).
>
>
>-- 
>John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)

Does this mean that for two people to have similar intellectual interests,
they must have a certain IQ?  Now I know you really didn't mean that...
-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:     hfsi!ata@UUNET.UU.NET
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:     uunet.uu.net!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: 17 Supposed Evidences against Evolution
Keywords: evolution, creationism
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Distribution: world,local
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:04:57 GMT


Gee, not a ONE that hasn't been shown as a farcical nonissue years ago.
One would hope for at least a little imagination, since there seems to
be an abundance of ignorance.


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
From: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb)
Subject: Re: Rant! Rave! (was: Fermat( was: Noah's Ark))
Organization: Cypress Semiconductor Northwest, Beaverton Oregon
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 03:20:02 GMT

In article <3ahX039R59DK00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jloucks@uts.amdahl.com (Jim Loucks) writes:
>>	He claims to have found THE way to salvation; anyone who doesn't agree
>>is deceived or too proud, and will burn for it.
>
>It appears you have accused me of something I never said. If you 
>have proof that I have made such a statement, then please produce 
>it as soon as possible. Otherwise, please be more careful when
>making such claims...
>
>Why do you attack my character, Ben?

In article <77JG029O6b2q00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
        jloucks@uts.amdahl.com (Jim Loucks) writes:
>In case you were wondering:
>
>       No man will be provided an excuse to escape judgement
>       on the grounds that God hasn't revealed Himself to any
>       man through His creation.
 
I personally interpreted this as meaning that I was just too proud
or evil to see the plain truth of Jim's particular position, and that
unless I changed my mind, I was bound for hell.

But I'd like to invite Jim to clarify this remark - especially
since I found his beautiful apology for trusting the ICR's second
hand quote right after it.

>
>-- 
>Jim Loucks           jloucks@uts.amdahl.com 
>{apple, pyramid, sun, uunet}!amdahl!jloucks

	Max G. Webb
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Pt 1/3: Agnostics and Athiests
Date: 21 Aug 92 02:13:00 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <LEET.92Aug19084459@dove.ims.com>, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes...
>>>>>> On 18 Aug 92 03:54:00 GMT, lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) said:
> 
>James> In article <714083685.F00002@csource.oz.au>, joe@csource.oz.au (Joe Slater) writes...
> 
>>It classifies bats as flying things, because it calls a bat an "Oif" (in
>>Hebrew). Since we know that that bats aren't birds, an "Oif" must be a flying
>>thing, excluding insects.
> 
>James> If this is correct, why is it translated as "birds" and not
>James> "flying things"?  (I've checked KJV, RSV, NASB.)  Surely all
>James> these committees of translators would not have screwed up
>James> something so simple?
> 
>Did your KJV really have "birds" in Lev. 11:13?  All my copies of the
>KJV have "fowls" there (and, interestingly, in 11:20 also).

My KJV has "fowls" also.  My point was that it doesn't say "flying
things."

>NIV has "birds".  All the Bibles I've seen include a cautionary
>footnote at this point, to the effect that the precise identification
>of the animals in this chapter is not at all certain.  I wonder what

None of mine have such a cautionary footnote.

>the Greek word is in the Septuagint - it may have influenced the KJV
>(and possibly other) translators.  Recall also that concordances and
>topical indices depend on the translation itself, and *most* of the
>animals described in Lev. 11:13-19 are birds - so the translators may
>have opted for linguistic simplicity over scientific accuracy.

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
From: joe@csource.oz.au (Joe Slater)
Sender: acsnet@csource.oz.au
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Barbara Thiering's "Jesus the man". Any comments?
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 22:54:03 +1000

Tuesday August 11 1992, Albert van der Horst writes to All:

AvdH> I read in a German newspaper about the interpretation
AvdH> of the dead sea scrolls, laid down in a book, whose title is
AvdH> rendered in German "Jesus der Mensch". The Original title is
AvdH> probably "Jesus the man", the editor is Doubleday.
...
AvdH> Are these legitimate scientific conclusions? Sensational rendering
AvdH> of a newspaper from a scientific conclusions? Crackpot science?
AvdH> Is the book worth reading at all?
AvdH> Comments any one?

I have not read the book, but I listened to her explain and defend it on a
length radio program. In my opinion she exhibited astounding ignorance about
matters which are well known from contemporary documents, and her theory leaps
from one faulty argument to another.

For instance, she takes Jesus' alleged statement "I am ... the light" and says
that the contemporary Jews would read that as a reference to the Menora
(Candelabrum) used in the Temple; that by comparing himself to this he was
saying that he symbolised the Temple; that he was, in fact, the High Priest.

The essential flaws in this are that light is not used to refer to the Menora
(that is, if you used it as a simile you'd be referring to knowledge or
something); that the Menora was not a significant item in ceremonies (compared
to, say, the Altar); the High Priest was not the one who tended it, any more
than the Pope manages the lighting of the Vatican; and the Priesthood ran in
familial descent - it would be like someone claiming he was Queen of England.

jds


 * Origin: Come up to the lab... and see what's on the slab! (3:632/351)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: 17 Supposed Evidences against Evolution
Keywords: evolution, creationism
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 18:02:19 GMT

SCOTT I CHASE:
|> Sigh... I'm afraid that you have it backwards.  It's because of the 
|> abundance of ignorance that they can get away with century-old, long
|> discredited, arguments and have at least a certain segment of the population 
|> buy the whole argument.

Tero Sand:
|> There are *lots* of transitional fossils, however,
|> creationists refuse to call them such. I'm becoming convinced that
|> *NOTHING* would convince them, no matter how many transitional fossils
|> are found, ...

It is extremely unlikely that the "evidence" proposed by "creation
scientists" has anything at all to do with their belief in creation.
The belief comes first, the arguments are just fig-leaves to rationalize
the belief for public consumption.  IMHO, the only reason these claims 
matter at all is that they are often used to give political cover to 
the promulgation of these beliefs in ways that would be impossible 
without such cover.

See, perhaps, "Persuasions of the Witch's Craft", by T. M. Luhrmann 
(reviewed here recently) for a discussion of "irrational" belief 
and how pseudo-arguments are used to shore up strongly held beliefs.

(I should note that EVERYONE holds beliefs that are not "rationally" 
justified, and EVERYONE is prone to construct "logical arguments" to 
explain why what we believe is justified, although these "rational 
arguments" are not really an accurate account of why we have come 
to believe them.  Politics comes to mind, for instance. (Why did 
my fingers try to type "Folitics"?))

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: Young earth creationist logic NOT!
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 15:51:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.173540.444@acuson.com>, lawson@acuson.com (Drew Lawson)
writes:

                                [God a liar?]

> There is at least one misconception and one BIG assumption running
> through this.
> 
> The misconception is that omniscience implies that God is forcing
> actions upon us.  Simply knowing that we will do something does not
> imply that God intends us to do it.

   Right.  A highly competent expert builds a detailed frame involving 10^20th
seperate bits of information spread over 10^10th years but it wasn't his intent
to decieve us.  No, it was just a hobby kit he got down at Tandy corporation
and were supposed to ignore it.  
 
> The flawed assumption is that our mistakes are the result of God's
> deception.  If you become confused while reading my postings, it does
> not mean that I have tried to confuse you.

   You're not God.  We hold him to a higher standard than you.
 
> Likewise, allowing artifacts to be in the world which are now taken to
> indicate evolutionary origin is not the same as trying to lead us to
> believe evolution.  You have the choice of interpreting the findings
> with or without the context of faith and revealed truth.  If you choose
> to ignore God in the process and conclude that it happened without God,
> that is not evidence that your conclusion is correct.  It may be
> logically correct, but that is not the same as being true.

   Right.  Logic is the tool of the devil.  Only by accepting a twisted
trickster as God and denying the evidence that God imbedded in His handiwork
can we know the truth.  Pat Buchanan displayed more integrity in his speech to
the Republican Convention that this version of God you are pushing.  
 
> Since there is chocolate in the world, God obviously intended us all to
> be fat.

   Okay, then, Einstien, what is the purpose of chocolate?

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Mensas farce?
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:11:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: anasazi.1992Aug19.161159.22643
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA

Keywords: 

In article <GERRY.92Aug18170719@onion.cmu.edu> gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
]I easily meet their entrance requirements, but wouldn't be caught dead  
]in that group of ego-stroking losers who populate Mensa...

Well, I can't speak for all mensa groups, but the one's I went to were
not involved in ego-stroking. On the other hand, there was an amazing large
percentage of losers present. Who knows...


-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
- - "May you have the wealth of a Republican, and the sexual prowess - -
- -  of a Democrat." - Johnny Carson's joke writers
From: dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Mensa (was Re: Kinesiology - how I heard about it)
Date: 18 Aug 92 06:15:32 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Electrical and Electronic Eng., University of Adelaide

In article <1992Aug17.092452.27338@cco.caltech.edu> keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:
>dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott) writes:
>
>>In article <14AUG199221251122@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu> lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes:
>>>In article <BszE8J.LM@news.cso.uiuc.edu>, mrjg8679@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Michael R James) writes...
>>>>lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes:
>>>>
>>>>>For those jilted by Mensa, there's always Densa.  (Anybody have the
>>>>>address?)
>>>>
>>>>Oh _please_ elaborate on this!
>>>
>>>It's an anti-IQ-elitist organization.  I think I read about it in _Omni_
>>>about 8-10 years ago, so I'm afraid I can't give you any other details.
>>>
>>The elitism of Mensa is a big farce, anyway. They don't have the intelligence
>>to work out that the concept of IQ is completely flawed and meaningless.
>
>>Mensa is the most useless, aimless, tacky, idiotic  organisation in the world.
>
>The IQ isn't meaning less, but MENSA is.  That is, the IQ has some merit
>for some abilities, but MENSA exists only for self-flattery and egotism.
>

I agree with you that it serves to give people false self-esteem. However,
to be fair to them they don't flout it around, in my experience. So
it's only an internal ego trip, not one flouted on other people.

They way IQ is measured, though, is very arbitrary. There are too many variables
other than intelligence that affect the final score (preconditioning, culture,
training etc etc).
From: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov (SCOTT I CHASE)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Young earth creationist logic NOT!
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:13:01 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: na
Reply-To: sichase@csa3.lbl.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.198
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4   

In article <536@texbell.sbc.com>, lm8637@tnessd.sbc.com (Lou Montgomery (214+464-1049)) writes...

[Grossly outdated and well-refuted critiques of radiocarbon dating deleted]

Hello Lou.  What does radiocarbon dating got to do with the age of the Earth?

-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
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
From: vnelson@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Gerald Vernon Nelson)
Subject: Re: Young earth creationist logic NOT!
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 05:13:47 GMT

In <918@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen) writes:

>Now, unless you can show that the moral/spriritual principles being expounded
>in 1 Peter *depend* on a literal Noah, the fact that he didn't exist is of
>little theological significance.  (That is, does Noah being a myth necessarily
>imply that the *intended* *message* of the passage is also incorrect - I don't
>think so, so I attach no importance to such minor, irrelevant idiosyncracies
>of the individual authors).

If Noah is a fictional character, then he and the text that contains his
story has no more significance than any other folk story.

Do you also pray to the god Aesop and read blindly his book of fables?

Vern Nelson
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: help needed with a thought problem
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 20:34:43 GMT

In article <25429@dog.ee.lbl.gov> sichase@csa2.lbl.gov writes:
>>Let us be more specific. Pushing or pulling a rod propagates with the
>>speed of sound for that material. For all known materials the speed
>>of sound is of the order of Km/s at most. Much less than the speed
>>of light. Furthermore, there is theoretical insight in the
>>speed of sound, indicating that it must be less than the speed of
>>light in vacuum.
>I don't agree.  If I take a one kg rod which is one meter long and strike
>one end with a 10^6 Kg hammer moving at 99% the speed of light, I suspect
>that the far end of the rod will start moving much more quickly than
>the speed of sound in that material allows according to your reasoning.

It _propagates_ at the speed of sound.  This is not the same as saying that
the rod _moves_ at the speed of sound.
--
I am of course experienced in teaching and have read the writings of Socrates.
    -- Ed Nilges

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: zlsiida@fs1.mcc.ac.uk (dave budd)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Mensa (was Re: Kinesiology - how I heard about it)
Date: 17 Aug 92 12:43:33 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Manchester Computing Centre
Originator: netnews@uts.mcc.ac.uk

In article <1992Aug17.002420.5887@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU> dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott) writes:

>The elitism of Mensa is a big farce, anyway. They don't have the intelligence
>to work out that the concept of IQ is completely flawed and meaningless.

Obviously not a member - one of the biggest discussion points in Mensa is
'what do IQ tests measure, does it mean anything, should we do anything 
about it'



>Mensa is the most useless, aimless, tacky, idiotic  organisation in the world.

Oh maybe he is a member after all........



The elitism of Mensa is exactly the same as the elitism of any system that 
awards pass grades in any exam.  You don't like Mensa?  Better close the 
schools too.  How about a women-only organisation? - no can do, it's 
elitist.   A juggling club that only admits jugglers?  Sounds elitist to 
me...  You have to be a university teacher to join the Association of 
University Teachers???  Better put a stop to that!

there's a lot wrong with Mensa, but elitism isn't part of it.  you can't fix 
what's wrong from the outside, SO JOIN 


+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|           It all depends on the size of your ham sandwich           |
|  Dave Budd, MCC, Oxford Rd, Manchester, England   (44)061-275-6033  |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:14796 talk.origins:9886