HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Date: 13 Oct 1992 00:46:42 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1548@esl.ESL.COM>, markwc@barney.esl.com (Mark Christiansen) writes:
>And as a result of a wrong assumption, Columbus ventured out and found
>something the others never would have found.  Some great discoveries
>have been made this way.

And huge amounts of resources have been wasted by people who've taken your
attitude.

By the way, don't you think it's likely that eventually someone would've
gotten around to wondering why storms hitting the old world from the west
didn't bring larger waves?  Or listening to Scandinavian stories of large lands
to the west?  Or just wondering whether it was really likely that such a vast
expanse of ocean (Atlantic+Pacific+America) would have no useful lands?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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: wolfe@wolves.uucp (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Evolution and economics? (was: Clinton and Creationism
Date: 12 Oct 92 03:51:11 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Red Wolfe @ The Wolves Den
X-Md4-Signature: ce81ba7f1def38af1d78eb5c4acbbfea

In article <LEET.92Oct2093956@dove.ims.com> leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
>
> . . .  I refuse to be so rash as to draw any conclusions about science
>teaching's effect on economic viability of a nation, since both Japan
>and the former USSR have taught evolution exclusively during this
>century, and have not performed similarly in the world marketplace.

Well, the poor USSR was taught a "heretical" evolution, where acquired
traits could theoretically be inherited by back coding into the germ
plasm.  Lysenkoism, as opposed to Mendelian genetics, was the basis of
much Soviet science and agriculture policy for decades.  Its disasterous
effects on the agriculture of the USSR was a major factor in the
economic collapse of the USSR.

Just another datum.
-- 
G. Wolfe Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC         [use the maps!]
UUCP: ...duke!wolves!wolfe                            <Standard disclaimers>
Domain: wolfe@wolves.durham.nc.us   wolfe%wolves@cs.duke.edu
    Above all, we celebrate.   Celebrate the Circle Statement of Purpose
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,rec.org.mensa
From: ketil@spurv.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Astrology: Scientific Research (Was Re: Doubters Of Astrology)
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of computer science at the University of Bergen, Norway
	<1992Oct9.141222.7489@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <1992Oct10.084301.17772@tfs.com>
	<1992Oct12.012833.2496@m.cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: 15 Oct 92 04:11:45

In article <1992Oct12.012833.2496@m.cs.uiuc.edu> mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath) writes:

   Help me out a bit here--if there is, as you claim, theoretical underpinning
   for astrolgy, then explain what I need to learn to understand it and point
   me to some reasonable references.

As I understand it, the reason astrology works is that the stars
really are ancient assyrian (babylonian?) gods.  As everybody knows,
the gods rule the world, and by studying how these gods behaved in the
sky, of course one could learn a lot about the world, past, present
and future.

Of course, if you want to be 'modern' about it, and claim that the
gods really are huge balls of rock/ice/whatever drifting around in
nothing, there's no (analytical) reason astrology would work.

Remember that the babylonians (or was it assyrians) were pretty good
at empirical work (predicted eclipses etc. with astonishing accuracy,
in many ways much better work than the greek later produced with all
their theories) so if there was a connection, they probably found it.

:-)

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
From: ydobyns@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (York H. Dobyns)
Subject: Re: Can quantum terminology be flakeproofed?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:17:22 GMT

In article <5929@tuegate.tue.nl> wsadjw@urc.tue.nl writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.170626.16504@Princeton.EDU> ydobyns@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (York H. Dobyns) writes:
>>                                                       Regardless of the 
>>ultimate truth, falsehood, completeness or otherwise of QM, Einstein's view 
>>of a universe in which there are locally real events without "spooky 
>>actions at a distance" has now been *observed* to be false, for the 
>>universe we live in.
>
>This should not be interpreted that there is *spooky action at a distance*.
>The consequence of the locality hypothesis is s.a.a.a.d., which is
>unacceptable. So QM is a non-local theory, which is what its inventors had
>been saying all the time.

I was about to post an angry reply, based mainly on the meaning of
"nonlocal" versus "s.a.a.a.d"....

But then I realized, what's the point? All Jan and I would be doing is
rehashing, at a *much* less professional level, part of the debate that
has been simmering since the publication of the EPR paper. For people
who are really interested in the philosophical issues involved, I
recommend the same references I cited in the article Jan quoted
from above:

"Philosophical Consequences of Quantum Theory: Reflections on Bell's
Theorem," eds. James T. Cushing and Ernan McMullin, U. of Notre Dame
Press, 1989.

"Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics," by John Bell (sorry
but I don't recall year or publisher; most of the articles are only
mildly technical and all are highly readable.)

--and the QM section of "Boojums All The Way Through," by N. David
Mermin, Cambridge University Press, 1990.

York Dobyns		ydobyns@phoenix.princeton.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas)
Subject: Re: Gerry Roston, I'm sorry.
Organization: Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.
	<1b2765INNbq3@gap.caltech.edu> <5892@tuegate.tue.nl>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:43:30 GMT

>>>>> On 9 Oct 92 10:03:11 GMT, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) said:

Jan> In article <1b2765INNbq3@gap.caltech.edu> carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU writes:
>
>Jan never said he sees life as meaningless.  He simply said he doesn't need no
>steenking "holy book" to tell him where to find that meaning.  I understand

Jan> Carl, I appreciate your support, but this phraseology is yours
Jan> (at least not mine,... I think).

I think so, too.

Jan> I must admit that I came rather close to stating life is
Jan> "meaningless", namely in the sense that I don't believe that
Jan> there is any grand pattern or coherence in "life".

And the problem here is that this is a universal statement - if you
really believe that, Jan, then you must somehow believe it about my
life also.  When I pressed you on it, you suddenly made a case that
meaning was individual (an existential statement - in the sense of
formal logic, not philosophy), and I cannot reconcile the two
different statements.

Jan> [vivid imagery deleted] For me they have "meaning", but that's
Jan> what I have put there myself.  I think this is a different
Jan> "meaning" from The Meaning of Life and The Universe that other
Jan> people talk about.

It would be different if you could conclusively prove that you had put
the meaning there solely yourself, but this is a skeptical newsgroup ...

>that you've abnegated all responsibility for that sort of thing in you own

Jan> May I change that to "that you've constructed your
Jan> responsibilities as based on the Bible"?

>life, having chosen to accept what's said in one so-called "holy book" chosen,
>apparently, in ignorance of the existence of many competing holy books.  That
>doesn't mean that all of us are as pathetic as you.

Jan> Well, well, may I change that to: "all of us share your concepts
Jan> of meaning."?

Thanks for trying to soften these up, Jan, but this newsgroup's
attitude (rather, the attitude of the most frequent participants)
toward Christianity (particularly the evangelical and fundamentalist
varieties) is well-known.  Other posters in just *this* thread would
like to equate "born again" with "lobotomized", and would like me to
flame back at them so they could prove their point.  Rather than
generate more of that sort of flame-baiting, I'm dropping this thread.
--
Lee Thomas,  leet@ims.com      | "But foolish and unlearned questions avoid,
Integrated Measurement Systems |  knowing that they do gender strifes."
9525 SW Gemini Dr.             |  - 2 Timothy 2:23
Beaverton, Or 97005            |  
(503) 626-7117, ext. 1558      |                                         THUMP!
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:17639 talk.religion.misc:17847
From: wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Thread end (was Re: What did Judas betray?)
Date: 8 Oct 92 07:52:59 GMT
Reply-To: wsadjw@urc.tue.nl
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

In article <BvqMGy.6uA@bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au> kinsler@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Paul Kinsler) writes:
>I am about to jump into the middle of this thread, 

The end please.

>The reason Judas betrayed Jesus was simply that Jesus 

The issue raised (by me) was that Judas is painted as "betraying"
the whereabouts and the identity of Jesus, but that especially the
latter was so well known (according to the Bible) that is seems there
was not much to betray. 

The subject has been discussed enough. Let's stop it, and do 
something useful instead.  Like astrology-bashing.

JWN

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: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:03:47 GMT

In article <BvrJuG.M61@inews.Intel.COM> pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
>
>It helps to keep in mind that the center of Judaism at this time was in
>Babylon, outside of the known Greco/Roman/Christian world. The Hellenistic 
>Jews needed to translate the Hebrew scripture into Greek (Septuagint). They 
>were much more Greek than they were Hebrew.

While it is true that Babylon was an extremely important center of Judaism
during Roman times, The Temple was unique in its significance to Jews,
before which any other place seems insignificant. The Septuagint was completed
at least a century before Jesus' birth. Most Jews in Judea spoke Aramaic,
a language related to  Hebrew, and while many of them no doubt also
spoke Greek, they were NOT all that Hellenic. If the Jews thought
that creeping Greco-Romanism was just fine, then what was all the
FIGHTING about?????


-- 
  
        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"
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Subject: Re: The Question of Humanity's First Language
Reply-To: gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Organization: Field Robotics Center, CMU
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:41:50 GMT

The question that is begging to be asked, though, is this:
  What is a language?
I am not trying to be trite or start a long discussion, but it is
believed that as homo erectus evolved into homo sapiens, the evlution
of language was a key part of that evolution.  I strongly believe that
the early h.e. and h.s. communicated abstract notions by means of
grunts and arm motions.  Is this a language?  If not, just when does a
means of oral communication switch from being a pre-language to a real
language (TM)?

--
Gerry Roston (gerry@cmu.edu)    | I - Congress shall make no law respecting 
Field Robotics Center,          | an establishment of religion, or prohibit-
Carnegie Mellon University      | ing the free exercise thereof; or abridging
Pittsburgh, PA, 15213           | the freedom of speech, or of the press; or
(412) 268-3856                  | the right of the people peaceably to
                                | assemble, and to petition the Government
The opinions expressed are mine | for a redress of grievances.
and do not reflect the official | 
position of CMU, FRC, RedZone,  | 
or any other organization.      | 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: amorgan@csd-d-5.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog)
Subject: Re: LARSONIAN Physics and Astronomy
Originator: amorgan@csd-d-5.Stanford.EDU
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organizatoin
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 21:02:30 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.180626.15933@pixel.kodak.com> 
  jeh@raster.kodak.com (Ed Hanway) writes:
>CAPS lock key worn out FROM OVERUSE?  Are your EARTH-shattering theories TOO
>important for LOWER CASE?  Well, help is on the way.  The following filter
>will give YOUR TEXT THE EMPHASIS it deserves.
>
>/* Usage:					*/
>/* lex cap.l					*/
>/* cc -ocap lex.yy.c -ll			*/
>/* cap < mundane_text > very_IMPORTANT_text 	*/

Could someone PLEASE post some elisp TO DO this?  I have a VERY
important THEORY about why C and LEX are EVIL and I wish to POST
them at ONCE.

c "Real LUNATICS use EMACS" FROG
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,soc.men,soc.women,alt.feminism
From: stormo@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Gary Stormo)
Subject: Re: creationism-explained.gif (part 01/01) [cartoon]
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:25:02 GMT

Overheard conversation in the hallway between two people, A and B,
regarding the Larson cartoon "Creationism Explain":

A: I don't get it.

B: Why not?

A: What is this equation supposed to mean, between the earth and
   all that other stuff?

B: The teacher is explaining "Creationist Theory" to the class.

A: But it doesn't make any sense.

B: See, you do get it.


As several people have already pointed out, it may not make sense but
I have yet to see a better one.

Gary Stormo        | "Common sense is what tells us the Earth is flat and
MCD Biology        |  and the Sun goes around it."
Univ. of Colorado  |        [Anyone know the source of this quote?]
Boulder, CO 80309  |
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kinsler@newton.physics.uq.oz.au (Paul Kinsler)
Subject: Ulcer treatment (Re: Faith and sceptics)
Organization: Physics Morgue, The University of Queensland
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:59:16 GMT

In article <5221@daily-planet.concordia.ca>, gpkatch@alcor.concordia.ca (Gary Katch) writes:
|> Paul Kinsler writes [*]:
|> ...
|> >|> Do you know of any cases where a skeptic has retarded
|> >|> the advancement of knowledge?
|> ...
|> >I read one in the paper just today. Some Australian doctors
|> >came up with a new treatment for ulcers, but couldn't convince
|>                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >the skeptical Pharm Companies to support them.
|> ...
|> >But it was the skeptical reaction to something against
|> >conventional wisdom which held up the development of a 
|>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> >viable product.
|> 
|> It was skeptical reaction to a new treatment;  this is a long way
|> from conventional wisdom.

Paraphrasing, the article said (If my memory still works...)

The way ulcers are treated currently (conventional wisdom!)
is by supressing the production of acid in the stomach, to
avoid irritating the ulcer. This is the way "everybody"
does it.

The new treatment uses a combination of antibiotics to
kill the bacteria that cause the ulcer. This is not the way 
"conventional wisdom" (=antacids) treats an ulcer.

Nuff said.
-- 
+soluble fish+
"It's hollow, it goes on forever, and ... my God, it's full of shit!"
(apologies to ACC)
From: kentd@FtCollins.NCR.com (Kent Dalton)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Focus on Crucifiction (was: Cruxed for Prophecy?)
Date: 6 Oct 92 13:26:47 GMT
	<LEET.92Oct5105230@dove.ims.com>
Organization: NCR Microelectronics, Ft. Collins, CO
In-reply-to: leet@ims.com's message of 5 Oct 92 18:52:30 GMT

>>>>> On 5 Oct 92 18:52:30 GMT, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) said:

>>>>> On Sat, 3 Oct 1992 19:40:50 GMT, sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) said:

Robert> (Another significant deletion is that of Mark's youth who fled
Robert> naked in the garden, for reasons that might best be discussed
Robert> on "soc.motss".)

Lee> This has usually been interpreted to have been Mark himself, who was
Lee> probably the best individual to have known how well the youth was
Lee> dressed.  

I thought it was commonly believed among scholars that the Mark who
wrote the gospel was not one of the disciples and had in fact never even
met Christ? As I remember it, Mark is recognized as the oldest of the
gospels, but most of the stuff I've read concerning the history of the
gospels places it around 50 years after the crucifixion, at the
earliest.

Lee> He fled naked (much to his shame) rather than be caught and
Lee> arrested. So, Robert, how does "soc.motss" come into the picture?

He's implying that it might be construed as evidence that Jesus was
homosexual.

--
/**************************************************************************/
/* Kent Dalton                   * EMail: Kent.Dalton@FtCollinsCO.NCR.COM */
/* NCR Microelectronics          * Phone: (303) 223-5100 X-319            */  
/* 2001 Danfield Ct. MS470A      *   FAX: (303) 226-9556                  */
/* Fort Collins, Colorado 80525  *                                        */
/**************************************************************************/
All of life is a blur of Republicans and meat!
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Astrology: Scientific Research (Was Re: Doubters Of Astrology)
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 05:36:36 GMT

bluelobster+@CMU.EDU (David O Hunt) writes:
>
>Anyone want to comment?
>------------------------------
>Forwarded message begins here:
>------------------------------
>From: lmpm@teal.csn.org (L. M. P. McPherson)
>Subject: Astrology: Scientific Research (Was Re: Doubters Of Astrology)
>Date: 6 Oct 92 01:34:06 GMT
>Sender: news@csn.org (news)
> [[ very LONG post about astrological research, with a long list of
>    citations. Indicating that postive correlations have been found
>    between astronomical events and human characteristics and other
>    physical phenomena ]]

I'll only say: thanks for posting the information. Most of it I was not
aware of - I don't read in that area, so the Mr. McPherson has made a
contribution which I could not have, thanks much.

The Zuni Indians, I think, do not like, or do not believe, in electronics,
because they can't see the electrons themselves. Modern-day Zunis probably
accept the devices because they see them to work, even if their cultural
attitude hasn't changed.

Derek Bok and four others issued a joint statement saying that there was no
scientific basis for the claims of astrology. I doubt that Derek Bok has read
a book about astrology in all his life.

Let the article stand as a counterchallenge, then - I hope to be here for
months or more, and during that time I will answer flaks. Maybe one of them
can respond to the aforementioned post? I assumed this was what David Hunt
was driving at.

I think all of us who dabble in the occult should come forward and say so.
Salem would have had a harder time hanging witches when half the town turned
out to be witches. The ignorance of those opposed is no warrant to receive
their abuse.
From: green@plains.NoDak.edu (Brad Green)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: AIDS and Legislation of morality
Date: 14 Oct 92 03:33:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: ns1.Bw3Dvp.B9y
Distribution: usa
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

In article <1992Oct13.194212.22997@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552) writes:
>This "family values" stuff is just a nifty way of legislating moralism.
>It is hateful, being the core of the new Christian Conservative politics - 
>"You don't believe in family values?  What a sinner folks, this one would
>probably kill you and eat your kids without a thought!"  Just bush-league
>manipulation.  Please let me know when these family values we have supposedly
>lost produced a peaceful, loving American society.  Was it 30 years ago?
>90?  150?  Funny, all of our history has featured violence, whether or not
>people believed in the stereotypical values embodied in the current usage
>of the phrase.  The "Good Old Days" never were, and certainly never will be.

I'm getting a little tired of jerks putting down values.  The do your own thing
to hell with values attitude in the 60's might be the cause of all our 
problems now.  What are values?  (Forget the family part.)

We see rampant crime in large cities, and we also see a breakdown in the
family in the same areas.  If everyone believed (an impossible dream) in
things like honesty, responsibility, and (go ahead, laugh) the "golden
rule", crime would drop dramatically.  Maybe I'm old fashioned, and if
so, I make no apologies for it.  If you are taught that some things are
just plain wrong, and you don't do them, you go along way toward solving
problems.  When parents take responsibility in their kids actions, crime
goes down.  When parents take responsibility in their kids education,
the grade points go up.  When you accept responsibility for your actions,
teen pregnancy rates go down, as well as AIDS.  Morons that put down the
values issue are just that - morons.  Sure we have wars - no respect for
the other guy causes them, along with ego problems.  Slavery?  Lack of
respect for another person's rights.  You could go on and on.

>Graduation from high school does not imply intelligence, and sexual activity
>does not imply running around like minks.  Intelligence certainly does not
>imply knowledge of right from wrong.  Heck, that's even in the Bible - 
>remember Adam and Eve?

No, graduation doesn't imply intelligence, but this is North Dakota,
remember?  We don't just graduate people to get the numbers up.  And by
every measure of learning, ACT and SAT test scores for example, we're
right at the top.  Unrestricted sexual activity does imply a certain
animal instict, animals just mate with no thought of what they are doing,
it's an instinct thing.  I would hope people could think a little about
what they were doing.  Are you implying we have no more intelligence 
than a mink, and just act instinctivly?

As far as the failure rates for condoms go, I used to work for a drug
wholesaler, I know how many get junked because they cannot be relied on.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek)
Subject: Re: METEOR OVER SIBERIA-1908
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 05:57:06 GMT

One of the interesting things about the Tunguska event is the complete absence
of solid meteorite-associated debris.  I remember one theory (I don't remember
the source, or how reputable it was) that the object was made of frozen
volatiles.

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic