HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Tim.ONeill@english.utas.edu.au (Tim O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Shroud of Turin
Organization: University of Tasmania (Australia)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:39:12 GMT

(Oh Fuck, here we go again)
In article <V8d-B-+@engin.umich.edu>, paulk@engin.umich.edu (Paul J. Kominsky) writes:

> In the reading I've done, I've come across articles which question 
> and undermine all the major negative results that have been popularly
> reported.  It seems to me that it's still an open question.

Can you tell us how the University of Oxford's physics dept got their mass
accelerator spectrometry wrong? You may have heard of the University of Oxford,
it's a pretty repuatable place, and its physicists tend to know what they're
talking about. Can you give some good reasons why their carbon dating was
wrong? (and no vague stories about how the linen used for testing was taken
from an edge of the shroud which was repaired in the middle ages or how the
samples were contaminated by scorching, the people involved the tests were
not idiots and were highly experienced in selecting uncontaminated samples for
dating)
 
> I would love to see the Shroud put to a test which avoids the 
> questionable practices of the previous testing.

What questionable practices?

> I'd be 
> happy if people would just realize that the Shroud is unlikely the
> work of a 14th century painter--because no pigment has been found,
> because the image is too medically accurate to be a 14th century
> artist's work, and because some of the medical details are contrary 
> to the established Medieval iconography.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. Walter McCrone dismayed the rest of the STURP team by
declaring that he had identified iron oxide pigment on the cloth back in the 
late seventies. Medieval artists of the fourteenth century were quite capable 
of creating an image of the degree of medical accuracy found on the shroud 
(especially the out-of-proportion left arm and the over-extended fingers) and 
examples of depictions of the crucifixion from mid-fourteenth century gothic 
art show that the shroud image conforms in every way (including, before you 
mention it, examples of figures nailed through the wrists rather than the 
palms)

The artist of the 14th century had the know-how, the materials (herringbone 
twill woven linen, iron oxide pigment) the incentive (money), the market
(a huge market in relics), and the interest (the new gothic fascination with
the macabre). The image is 14th century in style, it first appeared in the
14th century and, lo and behold, it has been carbon-dated to the 14th century.
What does this say to you?
Tim O'Neill

P.S. Next you'll be giving us that old line that images of coins dated to the
prefecture of Pontius Pilatus can be seen over the figure's' eyes. Did you know
that if you also look at it in the right light the words 'See! the resurrection
*did* happen. Oh ye of little faith! (signed) God Himself' appear across the 
figure's forehead. It's true! I read it in a book. 
 

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: graham@maths.su.oz.au (Graham Matthews)
Subject: Re: Here is your proof=God Exists?
Organization: School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 00:26:56 GMT

jbrown:
>Here is another version of the argument:
>Suppose there exists an infinite number of parallel universes.  If it is
>[stuff deleted]
>And another:
>[more stuff deleted]
>
>You may find holes in these too, especially in the liklihood of the
>premises, but they are not as trivial as your Gold Cup example above.

Premises don't have likelyhoods. Second the argument is pretty pointless is
it not, as it is totally dependent on its premises. I could make a similar
argument for God's non-existence, so what is the point of this argument? It
can be twisted to "prove" anything you care to name.

graham
--
Graham Matthews                 And it's true we are immune
Pure Math, Uni.Sydney, Oz       When fact is fiction and T.V. is reality
graham@maths.su.oz.au
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:15228 talk.religion.misc:13983
From: jmeritt@rod.mitre.org (Jim Meritt)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: More on history
Date: 14 Aug 92 14:25:09 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Originator: jmeritt@rod.mitre.org


What I'm looking for is specific instances in which the biblical account is
different than that available from extra-biblical sources.  The major
things (the flood, exodous, egyptian plagues, creation) are obvious and I'm
looking more for things like misordered/matched rulers, for instance.
The history of the bible SHOULD be correct in a large number of places, since
a lot of the text originated when it was current events.  There are errors,
though, that should disallow claims as to it being used as a historical
reference book (much as I'd be slow to credit the Illiad, though it has a lot
of Med geography as a geography reference book).

Inclusions, anyone?  What is your favorite obscure mismatch?


-- 
James W. Meritt:  m23364@mwunix.mitre.org - or - jmeritt@rod.mitre.org
The opinions above are mine.  If anyone else wants to share them, fine.
They may say so if they wish. The facts "belong" to noone and simply are.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Evolution
From: kmoffatt@cstp.umkc.edu
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 06:44:37 GMT
Organization: UM - Kansas City, Computer Science

	This really doesn't have anything to do with any particular threads
I've seen in this newsgroup (I'm an occasional reader at best) but I was
recently surprised to discover that some people think that Darwin's famous
theory proposed that evolution occured.  That was essentially unquestioned,
even in Darwin's time.  Darwins was speculating on the MECHANISM of an obvious
trend.  Evolution DID and DOES occur.  Examples are all over the place.  
     Having said that this doesn't pertain to any particular thread, I do
remember a couple of postings refering to the "theory of evolution" as an
antithesis to Christianity.  That implies that Darwin's goal was to disprove
christian dogma, which is, of course, absurd.  

Keith J. Moffatt			Without the breath of freedom, every 
KMOFFATT@VAX2.UMKC.EDU			faith is its own curse--Sting
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Subject: Re: priest observes
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 18:45:34 GMT


	WAIT A SECOND......


	Gregg Skinner sez:


	*referring to the austin@apm.magadan.su address*

	This address is almost certainly bogus.

	*the points out you cannot send mail there*


	I think he is right. The system in the CIS that hooks to
the internet, "Glosnet", gets it's mail from NORWAY !!!!!!!!!!!!
Last time I looked , there was no direct way for E-mail to get there.
It is sent to a system in Norway and Glosnet gets it from there once
a day...........<that was as of a few months ago....>




	Hmmmm interesting




-- 
"Speak to me in many voices, make them all sound like one.
 Let me see your sacred mysteries, reveal to me the unknown tounge."--B.O.C.
A. Trent Phillips     |personal E-mail:bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu
alias: White Rook     |   NWROC E-mail:aphillip@heartland.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi)
Subject: Re: DOES GOD EXIST?  (different from previous posting).
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 16:06:10 GMT

In article <BszGvv.7up@acsu.buffalo.edu> v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.142630.7708@spdc.ti.com>, achenbac@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Jeff Achenbach) writes...
>
>>I'm tired of these lunatic ravings. I think I'll stop here.
>
>Agreed.  Has the original poster of these ravings ever replied?  I don't seem
>to remember any replies.  Guess his posts are the rough equivalent to running
>into a room with eyes shut and ears covered, and screaming out one's views, only
>to run back out of the room...
	This seems to be a recurring problem both here and on talk.abortion.
Every week or two we get the odd Foaming Fundie(tm) who drops a post (either
incredibly long or incredibly short) full of Biblical quotes and unsupported
assertions and then vanishes back into the ozone before he can get hit by
the flamethrowers.  I usually ignore 'em; they're not interested in discussion
or even argument, only in assuring themselves of their own righteousness by
telling the heathens what scum they are.

>
>******************************************************************************
>Mike Cluff				*      I'm the person that	
>v22964qs@ubvms or mike%luick@ubvms	*      the president
>UB Language Perception Laboratory	*      warned you about.    
>******************************************************************************

Chuck
No .sig, no frills, no foolin'

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Bob Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: DOES GOD EXIST?  (different from previous posting).
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:20:32 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <tjohn.25@elaine.ee.und.ac.za> tjohn@elaine.ee.und.ac.za (THIAGARAJ JOHN : THIRD) writes:
>
>I hope we can have a sensible discussion on some of the proofs presented 
>below.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>		 Can the existence of God be scientifi-
>		cally proved?  Where did the first LIFE
>		  come from? Can we know whether God
>		         possesses MIND power?
>

  Well, I knew exactly what kind of article was coming up as soon as
  I saw this little intro.

  My question:  Do you, John, actually think that you are
  accomplishing something with this kind of post?  I'd have to say
  that you probably are, but not the ends you sought.  What school
  of _Christian_Life_in_a_Secular_World_ teaches you people this style
  of debate? Where do they tell you that if "I just present
  a conversational argument, endear myself to the readers, and
  show how I was *exactly* like them, they will listen to what I
  have to say?"  Can you possibly be ignorant of the fact that we see
  this type of post at least every other week on this net; that
  you've presented nothing new, and proven nothing to no one?  In
  effect, wasted your breath and made you religion look worse in the
  process?  It's people like you who make me glad I'm not religious.


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ 

Bob Beauchaine bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM 

"If I have to resurrect you, I'll resurrect you, whether you like it
or not!"
	 Paul to Jesus, _The_Last_Temptation_of_Christ_

"For dying is not to be feared--it is the final comfort.  As we all
learn, eventually."

  --Robert Heinlein
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: 3005904@jeff-lab.queensu.ca (Colleen Davis)
Subject: Re: For all you believers
Organization: Queen's University, Kingston
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:39:56 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.182030.1520@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, souissi@ec.ecn.purdue.edu (Ridha Souissi) writes:
> 
> In article <1992Aug11.220433.6859@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips) writes:
> >
> >	NO !    I'm God !!!!!!!
> >
> >
> >
> >	I'll tell you all what......if ANY of you can perform a 
> >mirical I can prove I am God by toping it (performing a better
> >mirical !)  !!!!!!
> >
> 
> Forget the spelling test.
> 
> My God makes the sun rise from the east.  Can you make it rise from the west?
> 
> 
O thou of little faith!  It is only the weak 
who require a sign.  I will perform no miracles 
to impress the unbelievers!

colleen
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: re: Survey
From: kmoffatt@cstp.umkc.edu
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 06:56:17 GMT
Organization: UM - Kansas City, Computer Science

When I die, where will I go?  When snow melts, where does the white go?

My existence is not independent of my body.  When my body is biologically 
unable to function, my consciousness disapears too.  It is not a separate
entity, any more than the color of frozen water.

What will I tell god?  

How will I say anything?  My mouth, along with my body, will be in a disallowed
grave.
From: jbrown@doc.bmd.trw.com
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Here is your proof=God Exists?
Date: 12 Aug 92 16:25:20 MST

In article <1992Aug12.204328.20497@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>, arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
> In article <1992Aug12.110831.253@doc.bmd.trw.com> jbrown@doc.bmd.trw.com writes:
>>Suppose there exists an infinite number of parallel universes.  If it is
>>possible for an all-powerful God to exist, then He (assumed for convenience)
>>must exist in at least one of them.  And if He exists in one, then He can
>>assure that life capable of knowing Him appears only in that one (since He
>>is *all-powerful*).  Since we are capable of knowing Him, He exists in our
>>universe. 
> 
> A -> B does not imply B -> A.

Did I imply that?  Please explain.

> 
>>If there is a finite possibility that an all-powerful God could come into
>>existence over time, then from the standpoint of eternity such a God must
>>necessarily have come into existence before the universe began.  Therefore
>>God must now exist.
> 
> Where do you get this from?  Are you trying to say that if you add up finite
> possibilities over an infinite amount of time, you get a certainty?  If so,
> your math is wrong.

Yes, that is what I'm saying, and no, my math is not wrong.

Suppose I'm in Las Vegas and I play the "Super Jackpot Slot Machine".  Given
an unlimited supply of quarters and infinite time, I will eventually win.  
It may take me 2 or 3 billion years, but eventually I'll be the Super
Jackpot Winner.

Of course, I'll also be bankrupt and I'll have to pay taxes on winnings
that won't even get me out of debt -- but I'll be a Winner! 

> --
> 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)

Regards,

Jim

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde)
Subject: Re: Islamic revolution
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 19:57:19 GMT

In article <92233.093053RBNXHS@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com>, RBNXHS@rohvm1.rohmhaas.com writes:
|> In response to Griff's statement regarding the course of celestial bodies:
|> In the Qur'anic verse the word does not exclusively mean "circular" paths
|> traversed by celestial bodies. And I did *not* say that either. By rounded,
|> is meanst the path or trajectory traversed such that after some time the
|> particle orbitting comes to the same point. As such, circular, elliptical
|> and other such trajectories are included in "rounded." The problem of
|> translating the Arabic into equivalent English terms got into the way
|> of carrying the full meaning. I am sorry about the misunderstanding.
|> - H. Siddiqui.

	So the verse in question is not a prediction at all, but
	merely an observation.  The planets can be *seen* to move
	in "rounded" paths through the sky.  This was known thousands
	of years before the Koran.

	Try again.


						Bill Hyde
Department of Oceanography
Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia
hyde@Ice.ATM.Dal.Ca or hyde@dalac

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth)
Subject: Re: DOES GOD EXIST?  (different from previous posting).
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 23:18:35 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Summary: If this starts another flame war, sorry to all the regulars
Keywords:  Add this to your kill files

Well, I'm back from a sanity making hiatus.


In article <1992Aug17.160610.7592@samba.oit.unc.edu> Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi) writes:
>	This seems to be a recurring problem both here and on talk.abortion.
>Every week or two we get the odd Foaming Fundie(tm) who drops a post (either
>incredibly long or incredibly short) full of Biblical quotes and unsupported
>assertions and then vanishes back into the ozone before he can get hit by
>the flamethrowers.  I usually ignore 'em; they're not interested in discussion
>or even argument, only in assuring themselves of their own righteousness by
>telling the heathens what scum they are.

With all these Foaming Fundies(TM) running around, I'd bet that we would be 
better off if Mary had had an abortion.


Let the flames begin.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: souissi@ec.ecn.purdue.edu (Ridha Souissi)
Subject: Re: Islamic revolution
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 17:35:55 GMT

In article <graham.713696551@galois> graham@maths.su.oz.au (Graham Matthews) writes:
>(Ridha Souissi) writes:
>>Incidently, the people who didn't believe in Mohamed (PBUH) as
>>a prophet of God at his time said that he was insane.  They
>>also said that he was a poet and they asked (like you) why
>>this Qur'an was reveiled on a poor "desert nomad" man? all
>>this is reported in the Qur'an, so it is not new.  Yet there
>>is more than one billion people today following this "insane
>>nomad man" including millions of educated and intellectual people.
>>The Qur'an does not contradict any proven scientific facts.
>
>Why does this sound like "a million drunks can't be wrong" sort of
>argument?
>
>Ridha one could use this same kind of argument to support the consumption
>of alcohol, the use of drugs, the rightness of Chrisitianity, .... etc
>
>As an argument it doesn't really cut much ice.
>

I am not trying to use this as a proof of the truth of Islam,
just showing the person who is mocking prophet Mohamed as a
"desert nomad" man that this man is among the top who influenced
humanity with the message he brought.

>graham

Ridha
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Subject: Re: Famous Atheists?
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 01:51:20 GMT

lemoine@chemvx.tamu.edu (Brett G. Lemoine) writes:

>In article <1992Aug21.151452.26386@nmsu.edu>, amerritt@dante.nmsu.edu (Angela Merritt) writes...
>}Sorry if this is a FAQ but does anyone know of any
>}famous atheists?

>}I understand that some of our founding fathers
>}in america appeared to be non-christian by some
>}of the quotes I've read.  

>It is widley held that many of our country's founders were actually
>Deists. None were known to be self-proclaimed atheists.

I think that Jefferson, for example, was a Deist.  Thomas Paine, however,
was clearly an atheist.  His religion was "to do good."

keith

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Subject: Re: Survey
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 19:56:15 GMT


	Chris & Susan Colvin say:


	When you die, where will you go ? (in the ground is not a 
		      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	valid answer)

	If you where to die today, would you go to heaven ?
				   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


	If you were to die today and God asked you, "Why should I
				     ^^^            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
	let you into my heven?" What would you say ?
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^



	These questions, like where will we go, presume that we
beleave that there is a "spirit" or "soul" that will go somewhere.
Likewise "would you go to heaven", what if we think that there is 
no spirit/soul to go to a "heaven" that does not exist ? And again
if we do not beleave there is a "God" to ask us about letting us 
into a place that does not exist ?

	When I saw that the first question had "(in the groundis not
a valid answer)" after it, I woundered how to answer, for that is 
where I am sure most of us will go (the rest being cremated or "burried"
at sea....). How can I answer that when the question presumes the
neitherworld/spookland/heaven/asguard ?

-- 
"Speak to me in many voices, make them all sound like one.
 Let me see your sacred mysteries, reveal to me the unknown tounge."--B.O.C.
A. Trent Phillips     |personal E-mail:bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu
alias: White Rook     |   NWROC E-mail:aphillip@heartland.bradley.edu
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: For all you believers
Date: 12 Aug 92 21:07:00 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)


    >Ahh, I can spell.  Top that...



	Oh ye of little cheeze wiz ! Thou hast fail the dyslexic
spelling test of faith. And verily I say unto thee, do not test the
spelling of the "LAWD" least thee shall be judged to be "sinful" and
thrown into the lake of Velvetta !




P.S. You still have not performed a miracal I cannot top..I'm god !
-- 
"Speak to me in many voices, make them all sound like one.
 Let me see your sacred mysteries, reveal to me the unknown tounge."--B.O.C.
A. Trent Phillips     |personal E-mail:bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu
alias: White Rook     |   NWROC E-mail:aphillip@heartland.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG)
Subject: Re: A question
Originator: cmgrawbu@c00414-313mn.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 16:22:58 GMT




To respond to the post concerning my comments on homosexuality.

I feel the following about homosexuality:

1) Homosexuality is a choice, consciousness or sub-consciousness. At any rate 
   can be changed.

2) Homosexuality, as far as I've seen, has never been the issue that it is today.
   Why hasn't homosexuality been such a debated topic throughout history.

3) The Roman Empire was freat and powerful until the extreme moral decay 
   weakened it.

4) Homosexuals were the firing gun for AIDS.

5) Looking at the make up of a man and a woman, it is quite apparent that they
    were made to go together sexually. Not so with male-male or female-female.

6) I do not think that a law should be made against homosexuality b/c I said
   so or b/c it is in my religion.

7) I doubt very seriously that all the "prejudice" in the world to homo-
   sexuals is because of Christianity.


Chris 
 
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Subject: Re: For all you believers
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 18:28:49 GMT


	Dano sez:

	*after pointing out the word "cleveland" in my E-mail address*

	It is of course obvious beyond discussion that god could not
be from Cleveland !.........


	Who said I am from Cleveland, for all you know my origins could
be from Lakewood !!!!!!!!! For the ways of god to send E-mail is the
foolishness of man, from Cleveland that is.


	<besides, I get FREE access to all of usenet, I might be god,

	 but I am not a big spender !>


-- 
"Speak to me in many voices, make them all sound like one.
 Let me see your sacred mysteries, reveal to me the unknown tounge."--B.O.C.
A. Trent Phillips     |personal E-mail:bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu
alias: White Rook     |   NWROC E-mail:aphillip@heartland.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism