HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: "Extraterrestrials and Angels": Who Are these Clowns?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 03:33:43 GMT

        An  ad in the "San Jose Metro," Oct. 8, 1992. (Does anybody  know 
        anything  about  this  crowd?  My guess  is  that  they  must  be 
        associated with some already-existing New Age group or cult, else 
        the attendance at this seminar would likely be zero.)
        
        
        
        
                We Are Not Alone! They Are Here ... Who Are They?
        
                            EXTRATERRESTRIALS/ANGELS
        
                     Are Current UFO Sightings Linked to the 
                     Angelic Visitations of Biblical Times?
        
                   Join the Experts for a Provocative Inquiry
        
                     The U.F.O. Symposium. Speakers Include:
        
                           G. Cope Schellhorn, Author,  
                    "Extraterrestrials in Biblical Prophecy"
        
         Mary Taylor, Director, UFO Data Research & Intelligence Center
        
                    Joyce Allene, Director of Parapsychology, 
                     UFO Data Research & Intelligence Center
        
         Shirley Mitchell, Internationally Known, Director and Founder,
                       The Center for Unlimited Perfection
        
         Music Provided By: Jon Anderson, Lead Singer for the Band "YES"
                         NEW WORK! Previously Unreleased
        
        Join  Us in a Provocative Discussion as we explore the  Spiritual 
        and  Evolutionary  Implications  of  this  Phenomena  too   often 
        Overlooked by the TECHNO-CRAZED Scientists of our Day.
        
                            Epona Ulster Productions  
                   [Note: "t" in "Ulster" is Egyptian "Ankh"]
        
                    Saturday, October 24th, 9:00 am - 5:00 pm
                    San Jose LeBaron Hotel, 1350 N. First St.
                              Doors Open at 8:00 am
                           $75.00 Admission [!!!!!!!!]
        
                ($10 Discount for Registrations Paid by 10-16-92)
        
            To register and get more information, call (408) 292-7378
                         Limited Seating, Reserve Today
-- 
  
        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: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Focus on Crucifiction (was: Cruxed for Prophecy?)
Date: 9 Oct 92 20:02:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Oct9.200258.23886
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Oct8.024845.20434@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>Now here are the passages in John's Gospel where he refers to the John
>the Apostle:
>
>JOH 13:23   One of them, the disciple whom Jesus loved, was reclining next to  
>            him.                                                               
>                                                                               

   The Identification of John with "The Disciple Jesus Loved" is made ONLY
   in the final chapter of John, known to scholars as "The Epilogue of
   John." It was written by a different hand, at a later time. It was NOT
   part of the original manuscript, and was probably written to solve one
   or more difficulties.


>Now if someone want to make the perverse case that Jesus's love for his
>disciple and friend was sexual in nature, then it certainly doesn't need
>John and Lazarus to be the same person in order to do this. 

He wasn't, for the reason given above.

>Of course Robert, being a Scepticus Maximus (whatever that really is),
>I wouldn't really expect you to fall for such convuluted theories as
>you've espoused above in "The Makings of the Messiah" :)

Perhaps speculative, but less so than someone "raised from the dead," or
"conceived without sex."


-- 
  
        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"
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:17816 alt.conspiracy:11182 alt.conspiracy.jfk:3482 talk.politics.misc:51091 alt.politics.elections:16230
From: spl@pitstop.ucsd.edu (Steve Lamont)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: WHERE WAS BILL???
Date: 12 Oct 1992 17:16:42 GMT
Organization: University of Calif., San Diego/Microscopy and Imaging Resource
NNTP-Posting-Host: pitstop.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Oct12.131409.22881@Rapnet.Sanders.Lockheed.Com> babb@k2 (Scott Babb) writes:
>Mike Polen (mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com) wrote:
>: Tim Miller) writes:
>: |> 	Heh heh heh.  Man goes to Moscow, can't remember a thing about
>: |> it.  Anyone ever see "The Manchurian Candidate?"
>: |> 
>:  	Heh heh heh.  Man attends meeting in the white house on support 
>: 	to Iraq, can't remember a thing about it.  Anyone ever see 
>: 	"The Manchurian Candidate?"
>
>  	Heh heh heh.  Man is President for eight years, can't remember a
>	thing about it.  Anyone ever see "The Manchurian Candidate?"

  	Heh heh heh.  Man is President for eight years, can't remember a
	thing about it.  Anyone ever see "Bedtime for Bonzo?"

							spl
-- 
Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- (619) 534-7968 -- spl@szechuan.ucsd.edu
UCSD Microscopy and Imaging Resource/UCSD Med School/La Jolla, CA 92093-0608
"Twit twit twit/Jug jug jug jug jug jug/So rudely forc'd./Tereu"
                - T. S. Eliot, "The Waste Land," III. The Fire Sermon
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Addiction (Was Re: Soul)
Date: 12 Oct 1992 22:44:05 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct12.201008.29751@netcom.com>, payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>Well, yes and no.  Given sufficient reason to stop, addicts CAN break the
>>addiction.  When I was told that if I kept smoking, my ulcer would probably
>>take much longer to heal, I quit smoking.  Period.
>
>I did not say it was impossible, just that the nature of an addiction is
>not "I can stop whenever I want".

My point was that the nature of at least some addictions is "I can stop
whenever I want to enough.  For the time being, I don't want to stop that
badly."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
From: gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Subject: IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV Bullshit
Reply-To: gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Organization: Field Robotics Center, CMU
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 15:21:50 GMT

Last night, while brushing my teeth, I had occasion to reflect upon
Jeff's silly claims.  [Actually, I am psychic since my thinking about
this yesterday was precognitive.  Or, I am I like Jeffery and created
my own reality... puzzling...]

Anyway, lets consider the claim about the blinking. Consider a human
head on a 25" television.  The vertical height of such a tv is 15
inchs and this is comprised of about 480 lines (actually, there are
525 but some of them are used in the blanking interval, so only about
480 are really seen).  Let us assume that the announcer's head fills
the screen (it doesn't, but I'm being generous).  [I just measured my
head... from the top of my shoulder to the top of my head is about
11", the eye is about 1/2" tall, or about 4.5% of the total.]  

Let us simplify the problem by assuming that a tv does a frame refresh
at 30 Hz instead of a field refresh at 60 Hz.  An eye will use 
0.045% * 480 lines = 21 lines, which will acount for 21/525 = 4.1% of
the total time.  The period of time, therefor, that the image of the
eye is being scanned (again being generous since the time being looked
at is the time to scan the entire line, not just the eyes) is about
1.3 msec.  Now, the blink of an eye is just that, so we must ask:
 What is the probability that an eye blink will be captured by a
 television camera given the small amount of time that the camera
 spends scanning hte eyes and the short duration of a blink?

Of course, maybe Jeff is real talented and has arranged matters such
that the blinking occurs in sync with the cameras.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

SOrry, I just had to laugh at that...

--
Gerry Roston (gerry@cmu.edu)    | Liberty is to faction what air is to fire,
Field Robotics Center,          | an aliment without which it instantly ex-
Carnegie Mellon University      | pires. But it could not be a less folly to
Pittsburgh, PA, 15213           | abolish liberty, which is essential to pol-
(412) 268-3856                  | itical life, because it nourishes faction 
                                | than it would be to wish the annihilation
The opinions expressed are mine | of air, which is essential to animal life, 
and do not reflect the official | because it imparts to fire its destructive
position of CMU, FRC, RedZone,  | agency.  James Madison
or any other organization.      | 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas)
Subject: Johnson/Gould, Scientific American, and Warnke, too!
Organization: Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:03:02 GMT

(A colleague thinks this group is getting boring.  This should change
that ... "May you live in interesting times." - Ancient Chinese curse)

The September 17 issue of _Christianity Today_ contains the claim that
Scientific American will not allow Philip Johnson to respond in SA's
pages to Stephen Jay Gould's criticism (printed by SA) of Johnson's book.

The same issue contains an editorial-type piece taking the Christian
book-publishing/music-publishing industry to task for the Mike Warnke
debacle.  It also urges Christians to stop buying the stuff, and asks
Christians to be more sss..., ssk..., sskke... (C'mon, you can say it!)
ssssssssssssskeptical!

(Did I do good, Uncle Dave?)
--
Lee Thomas,  leet@ims.com      | "For I say unto you that except your
Integrated Measurement Systems |  righteousness shall exceed the righteousness
9525 SW Gemini Dr.             |  of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no
Beaverton, Or 97005            |  case enter into the kingdom of heaven."
(503) 626-7117, ext. 1558      |  - Matthew 5:20                         THUMP!
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:17597 talk.origins:12677
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
Subject: Re: Son of Creationist Crapola.
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:08:57 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1422@tecsun1.etl.army.mil> riggs@descartes.tec.army.mil (Bill Riggs) writes:
| The Newsweek article does NOT make the
|intellectual distinction which Stanley points out here, but rather establishes
|connectivity between SimLife and more sophisticated representations of
|knowledge about evolution/biology. This would, I think, be "transparent to
|the user" unless one took the trouble to point it out. Of course, maybe 
|we're speaking only of "naive users" and not real applications jocks.

I disagree, the difference is most *certainly* visible to the user.
A true genetic algorithm is capable of *innovation*, of doing something
unexpected, or even surprising.  The algorithm used in SimLife does not
even come close to this capability.

And I think that this confusion between mere change and evolution is a
symptom of the abysmal state of education.  It is a confusion that can
lead to many other misunderstandings of the theory of evolution.
-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
From: max@admin.mport.COM (Max)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Gerry Roston, I'm sorry.
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:09:26 GMT
Organization: Microport Inc., Scotts Valley, CA 95066 US of A

leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:

>>>>>> On 3 Oct 92 15:50:25 GMT, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) said:


>Jan> Those judgements have to be carried out by those who live that
>Jan> life themselves.

>Why?

are you seriously asking why one has to judge the meaning of life for
themself? would you like to have your meaning determined for you?

-max
From: wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Quit Judas / Crucifixion etc.
Date: 14 Oct 92 11:42:14 GMT
Reply-To: wsadjw@urc.tue.nl
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

In article <1992Oct13.175939.1@cstp.umkc.edu> dnicol@cstp.umkc.edu writes:
#In article <5850@tuegate.tue.nl>, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) 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 second the motion
#
#DLN

BTW, in case anyone wonders why I dropped out of that discussion ---
the whole stuff is in my KILL file.
JWN


Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:17598 talk.religion.misc:17811
From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Date: 7 Oct 92 18:11:03 GMT
	<1992Oct5.233348.6805@netcom.com> 
	<1992Oct6.142012.9167@engage.pko.dec.com>
Organization: I got more props than a cop!

In article <1992Oct6.142012.9167@engage.pko.dec.com> 
pub@riscee.pko.dec.com (Publius) writes:
>Apparently you are not aware of the fact that the high priests at
>that time were appointed by the Romans.  Whosoever came up with the
>highest bid got that job.  They were usually heavily Hellenized and
>had no respect for the Law of Moses or the Jewish tradition.  As they
>controlled the Temple - the official religious institution of Judaism
>in those days, they tried their best to pull Judaism in the direction
>of Hellenism, and in this endeaver, they were bitterly opposed by the
>conservative elements with the Judaism.

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.
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Gerry Roston, I'm sorry.
Date: 8 Oct 1992 20:47:19 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <LEET.92Oct6082132@dove.ims.com>, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
=>>>>> On 3 Oct 1992 22:32:32 GMT, carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) said:
=
=Carl> In article <LEET.92Oct2101243@dove.ims.com>, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
=>If (since) He is good, He would provide it (the meaning) for us,
=>written down, and we could then look it up as needed.  This dovetails
=>us nicely back into our other ongoing debate. :-)
=
=Carl> Then why the hell did he have so many different versions, most of them
=Carl> conflictind deeply with each other, written down?
=
=Hell is only one reason for the differing versions - some authors like
=Matthew were captivated by Jesus's images of Gehenna, some like John
=had other captivating images to record for posterity.  (I can't bring
=myself to add a smiley.)
=
=Answering the "most of them conflicting deeply with each other" clause
=will start up the call for "sci.skeptic.biblical" again, so I won't.

Er, no, it wouldn't.  Why do you assume that YOUR favorite "holy book" is
better than other peoples' "holy books"?  Christianity isn't the ONLY religion
in the world, you know.  It's not even the most popular.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:17773 alt.alien.visitors:7317
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Travis Walton "Abduction" (was: UFOS and BOOMY IN THE NIGHT)
Keywords: UFO
Date: 10 Oct 92 23:25:17 GMT
Distribution: World
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <gdavis.718655154@griffin> gdavis@griffin.uvm.edu (Gary Davis) writes:
>  I have always considered myself and open-minded skeptic. For those
>who need a closed minded skeptic at least two examples come to mind,
>Scientific American's Gardner and the Amazing Randy. These two
>indiciduals almost seem to have an ax to grind when it comes to PSI or
>UFOs.
>
>However,at least one rather bazzar UFO story was presented about two
>or so years ago on PBS's NOVA.
>I have forgotten many of the details,but I believe a group of forest
>workers spotted a UFO and one was allegedly abducted. The abductee
>remained missing for about a week,then after being found wandering on
>a back road,related an abduction tale that was cleared through giving
>him several polygraph exams.

This is the famous Travis Walton case, which even many pro-UFO types
sized up as a hoax. For a detail discussion of this case, see
chapters 18-23 of "UFOs, The Public Deceived" by Philip J. Klass.



-- 
  
        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: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Clinton and Creationism
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:33:43 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


In article <23559@optima.cs.arizona.edu> kline@cs.arizona.edu (Nick Kline) writes:
>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.

And J. William Fulbright (of Fulbright scholarships fame) before that.
-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an Art."
        Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.elections
From: kasprj@isaac.its.rpi.edu (Jim Kasprzak)
Subject: Re: WHERE WAS BILL???
Reply-To: kasprj@rpi.edu
Organization: The Big Wedge 
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:16:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.131409.22881@Rapnet.Sanders.Lockheed.Com>, babb@k2 (Scott Babb) writes:
|> Mike Polen (mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com) wrote:
|> : Tim Miller) writes:
|> : |> 
|> : |> On 08 Oct 92 02:20:55 GMT, doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) said:
|> : |> 
|> : |>  D> Washington, DC (AP) - Mary Matalin, designated Bush campaign attack-bitch,
|> : |>  D> followed up recent charges related to Democratic presidential candidate Bill
|> : |>  D> Clinton's secret meetings in Moscow with high-ranking officers of the KGB by
|> : |>  D> demanding to know why Clinton has no alibi for November 22, 1963, the date
|> : |>  D> of President Kennedy's assassination. Asked Matalin, "why won't Bill Clinton
|> : |>  D> come clean with the American people?"
|> : |> 
|> : |> 	Heh heh heh.  Man goes to Moscow, can't remember a thing about
|> : |> it.  Anyone ever see "The Manchurian Candidate?"
|> : |> 
|> :  	Heh heh heh.  Man attends meeting in the white house on support 
|> : 	to Iraq, can't remember a thing about it.  Anyone ever see 
|> : 	"The Manchurian Candidate?"
|> 
|>   	Heh heh heh.  Man is President for eight years, can't remember a
|> 	thing about it.  Anyone ever see "The Manchurian Candidate?"
 
        Heh heh heh. People elect corrupt, incompetent leaders year after
        year, never learn any better. Anyone ever read "The Marching Morons"?
From: eradm@brahms.Berkeley.EDU (Erik Radmall)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Can quantum terminology be flakeproofed?
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:21:46 GMT
Reply-To: eradm@brahms.Berkeley.EDU (Erik Radmall)
Organization: Xerox

In article <1bcfmjINNgvq@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, aa387@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Jim Kutz) writes:
|> 

[ much neatly formatted text deleted ]

|>  
|> I'd like  to see some  of the Heavy  Hitters of Physics  come out
|> with  quotable (and  above all  *understandable* statements about
|> the nature of 'observation', so that people will realize that the
|> universe *does*  still exist independent of  the consciousness of
|> the observer.
|>  

Once again I see pseudo-scientists dredging up the old objective/subjective dross.
It is a philosophical argument that has no place in sci.skeptic. Take it
to talk.philosophy for some entertaining banter. Take the existence of "Soul" and
"Reincarnation" threads someplace else as well. This metaphysical crap is about as
entertaining and enlightening as watching pro wrestling. It's fixed: we all die in
the end :-)

"Honey, go fetch me a beer, and where's that damn channel changer?"

|>  
|>                       - Jim Kutz
|>                         (aa387@cleveland.freenet.edu)

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Erik Radmall                    | Xerox Corp.
eradm@brahms.wbst845e.xerox.com    | Knowledge-Based Systems Competency Center
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gascan@dcst16.dc (Bill Gascoyne)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Clinton and Creationism
Date: 6 Oct 92 16:01:39 GMT
Reply-To: gascan@dcst16.dc
Organization: LSI Logic Corporation

In article 92Oct2093956@dove.ims.com, leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:
> 
> So the "fact" of evolution should be questioned, too?  Yow ...  I am
> still indebted to the sensitive college professor who reminded me that
> atomic theory, as taught in my chemistry classes, is still "just a
> theory".
>
"All things are to be examined and called into question.                        
There are no limits set on thought."                                            
        ANONYMOUS

Yes, absolutely, all scientific facts should be questioned all the time in
science education.  Science education should be about discovering answers,
not being told answers.

---
1. Bill Gascoyne
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic