HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Arnica: Homeopathic
Date: 15 Dec 92 02:00:19 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1992Dec10.171113.6703@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM>, kraus@.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus) writes:
|> 
|> Of course dilution strength isn't the only measure of whether a substance
|> is homeopathic.
|> 
|> homeopathy: "A system of medical treatment based on the use of minute
								  ^^^^^^
|> quantities of remedies that in massive doses produce effects similar
|> to those of the disease being treated."

This is where I was quibling - I hardly think of a 8% solution as containing
a *minute* quantity of a supposed remedy.  I *might* call it small.

|> I have not personally analyzed the irritant qualities of Arnica, but I
|> have used it to reduce pain, and I know that it is sold by homeopaths
|> as a homeopathic remedy.

I do not doubt it reduces pain.  In fact, natural (herbal) pain relievers are
quite well known (aspirin being the canonical example).

I *do* seriously doubt that it has this effect due to the homeopathic mechanism.
I really believe it probably has some identifiable chemical in it that does it.
It *might* even contain aspirin!

|> >Since both Arnica and Tea Tree Oil have been described as aromatic, I am hardly
|> >surprised that they contain biologically active substances - that is the norm
|> >for aromatic plant substances.
|> 
|> Tea Tree may be aromatic. I don't think Arnica is.

Hmm, well, I may have misunderstood the prior posts here.

Still, bioactive substances are not restricted to aromatic plants, they are just
more common there.

Also, I have heard about the effects of Arnica from enough other sources to
suspect there is something to it.

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
From: pirtle@sri.com (Dave Pirtle)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Tunnels #1.
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:20:25 GMT
Organization: sri.com

In article <1992Dec14.223349.22014@pony.Ingres.COM>, kevinq@Ingres.COM
(Kevin Quinn) wrote:
 > 
 > In article <71604@cup.portal.com> John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com writes:
 > >Subject: Tunnels. 
 > [ silly tabloid nonsense deleted ]
 > >  So there you have it folks. Is it true? Is it false? Is it food for 
 > >thought? 
 > Sorry, John, but how about choice 4: pure unadulterated bullshit.
 > 
That would seem to be food for the garden.
From: pierson@cimcad.enet.dec.com (Dave Pierson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Ball lightning? (is there such a thing?)
Date: 20 Dec 92 16:28:59 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation


	(Whoops.  Lost the post to reply to.  O welll)

	On the reporting interval.  Sometimes they are past reports, sometimes
	not.  Some years ago, during a thunder storm, my brother saw one.
	(fairly classic gowing ball "dropped out of" intercom, floated across
	floor, lost sight of.)  It was "reported" at the time, within hours,
	to those around.  It was not reported to official science central, 'coz
	there's no such place.

	One of the "classic" reports involves a (commercial) plane full of
	people, including some from NASA (?) Huntsville, who saw one "float
	down the middle of the passenger compartment".  Reported immediately.
	Never, to my knowledge, disexplained.

	On color.  Reports cover all many, going on most colors.  TO say it is
	the "wrong" color is to disregard the reports.

	Try for a copy of Ball Lightning and Bead Lightning.  Author escapes
	me, probably out of print, Publisher is Plenum Praess.

	Quasi philosophical comment:  "science" is best/most powerful at
	explaining the reproducible, whether understood or not, 'coz it can be
	reproduced until it is understood.  If reproduction is difficult, the
	explanation takes a bit longer....

thanks
dave pierson			|the facts, as accurately as i can manage,
Digital Equipment Corporation	|the opinions, my own.
40 Old Bolton Rd		|I am the NRA.
Stow, Mass 01775 USA		pierson@msd26.enet.dec.com
"He has read everything, and, to his credit, written nothing."  A J Raffles
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Repression (was Ritual Abuse Taskforce....)
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:33:09 GMT

In article <6723@tuegate.tue.nl>, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) writes in part:
|> Thus, cloddy hypnotists can not only lead
|> #the subject's answer, they can actually create false memories.
|> #This is, in fact, what Budd Hopkins and co-workers are doing to 
|> #their abduction victims.
|> 
|> I submit that in many cases "multiple personalities" are also
|> created this way. 
|> 
|> JWN

This may be true.  However, from unfortunately close-up experience, 
I can say that many are created through simple contingent 
reinforcement, with no hypnosis required.

A lonely and unhappy "patient" discovers that a friendly 
supportative "therapist" gets really interested and pays a 
lot of attention when signs of alternative personalities
appear.  Since practically EVERYONE is capable of role playing, 
it is not surprising to see that motivated people can
explode into gazzillions of "personalities" when rewarded by
badly wanted/needed attention.  I have seen this happen to
a relative.  

Further support for my interpretation comes from two other
observations: when the particular therapist moved out of town,
and the new therapist wanted to see ONE personality, thank you
(pick any one, but no more than one to a customer), sure enough
the number of "personalities" dwindled drastically.  It was 
also interesting that only the original, normal, personality was 
ever displayed to nasty, skeptical, psychlogically trained me.

I note that everyone plays multiple roles as one goes through
the day ("dad", "teacher", "customer", etc.) which are close 
to full blown separate personalities.  I could speculate that
the reason we don't ordinarily see everyone exhibiting multiple
personalities is that there is STRONG social pressure for a
person to maintain a high degree of consistency.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:21525 alt.paranormal:2664 talk.bizarre:42454
From: mmm@cup.portal.com (Mark Robert Thorson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV on January Sabattical - Thursdays CB
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 00:29:30 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

This of course has nothing to do with my on-going program to affect
the _John_Hagee_Today_ ministry, by making televangelist John Hagee
make "the sign of the horns" with his hands while talking.  (And, yes
Dusty, I know it's on videotape;  I have no explanation how we can
affect events which happened in the past.)  In the SF bay area, _JH_
is seen on weekdays on channel 42, at 12:30 PM weekdays, 12 noon on
Sundays.  The "sign of the horns" is made by extending the index finger
and little finger while pressing the two middle fingers against the
palm.  This gesture is specifically referred to in Hagee's book
_Satanism_in_America_ as a sign of a Satanist, hence no other gesture
would be so appropriate for discrediting Hagee.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary)
Subject: Re: Hoagland?  What's the deal?
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 14:56:33 GMT

In article <athos-171292165134@kip2-16.apple.com> athos@apple.com (Rick Eames) writes:
>Most of the stuff I can find on Hoagland and the 'face on Mars' is over 2
>years old.  Has any new light been brought to bear on this subject?  Is he
>still an issue?

That's about right.  He came out with an updated book about a year ago.
He supposedly ties the "face" to crop circles and "lines of power".
(Weren't these called Ley Lines once upon a time?).

I actually bought his book a couple of months ago.  I figured if I
was going to keep claiming that the face was a pile of dirt I should
at least know what Hoagland was actually saying.  So far I haven't been
able to finish it.  A few minutes of the mystical applications of
e/pi is all I can take.

He also claims that the only reason the Mars Observer has a camera
is too investigate the "face" and that NASA knows something but
is keeping the public in the dark.

On another note, has Hoagland become more agressive in his advertising
recently?  I saw an add for a video tape of him lecturing on TV the
other day.  I don't remember seeing it before.  Wasn't he involved
in the claim that ice from a shuttle mission a few months back
was really a SDI test?

Anyway, to answer your question, there's no new information unless you
consider the ratio of angles from groups of rocks to other groups of
rocks to be significant.  We have two pictures of something that
looks similar to face.  We'll just have to wait and hope that the MO
gets a shot of it.


--
Ed McCreary                                               ,__o
mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com                       _-\_<,
"If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao."  (*)/'(*)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.news-media,talk.bizarre
From: idealord@dorsai.com (Jeff Harrington)
Subject: IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV on January Sabattical - Thursdays CBS News Za
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy, New York's Computer Consulate. +1.718.729.5018
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:51:05 GMT

The Thursday CBS Evening News Zap will be discontinued for the month of 
January.  On February 5 I will continue this ongoing demonstration of my 
illuminative capabilities.  

I will be at the Atlantic Center for the Arts as a resident composer for 
the month of January and will not have access to television.  I regret 
the interruption of the demonstration but my music has to come first 
sometimes.  

If you would like a text file about my paranormal (supra-normal?) 
capabilties drop me a line.  Briefly, I've developed the ability to cause 
broadcasting television cameras to become luminescent.  I meditate on the 
broadcast and the lens of the broadcasting television camera develops a
spot of light.  This effect is well known in the media and arts 
communities.  Many members of the "skeptical community" are aware of
this phenomenon, too.
 
The Thursday CBS Evening News zap is the _only_ proven demonstration of 
paranormal capabilities.  The public is invited to count the blinks of 
Dan Rather and the news crew on Wednesdays or Fridays and compare that 
with the increased number of blinks evident on the Thursday broadcast.
 
-- 
Jeff Harrington        IdEAL ORDER - Curious? - Write for a text file -
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dlb@fanny.wash.inmet.com (David Barton)
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Repression (was Ritual Abuse Taskforce....)
Organization: Intermetrics Inc., Washington Division, USA
	<DLB.92Dec18143616@fanny.wash.inmet.com> <BzH5Gv.Jqv@cs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 22:21:54 GMT

In article <BzH5Gv.Jqv@cs.uiuc.edu> mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert
McGrath) writes:

   What is the basis for this last claim?

   As far as I recall, one of the key features of the "hypnotised"
   state is susceptability to suggestion.  There is PLENTY of evidence
   that people who are hypnotized respond to suggestion much more
   easily and compliantly than even the same people when not 
   hypnotized.   That's how you tell they are hypnotized.

   Perhaps I am mistaken in this recollection.

Which claim?  The claim that I am not aware? :-)

I actually don't think there has been a comparative study.  Enhanced
suggestibility is certainly a characteristic of hypnosis; however, it
is certainly NOT unique to hypnosis.

Check out some of the recent work on eye-witness testimony in legal
mags.  I can't give the exact reference --- Mama is a lawyer, and I
read it when I go over there.  Some of the psychological journals have
undoubtedly duplicated this, as the law articles gave references to
them.

Basically --- have the same people witness the same events, then
divide them into two groups.  Ask a differnet set of elicitation
questions, which are not even particularly leading, but ask about the
events in a different order and with a different emphasis.  You will
get fairly consistent, VERY different stories that the people involved
are absoultely sure of.

Another remenant of my benighted education classes:  show someone a
fuzzy image, then sharpen it.  Measure the time it takes for them to
recognize the sharpened image.  Show others the same fuzzy image, and
get them to imagine what it is.  Have them discuss it, and defend it.
Then sharpen it.  It takes a LOT longer for them to recognize the
sharpened image, and some (even with a sharp image before them) will
persist in their original formulation.

Suggestion can be very subtle, and does not require a formal
induction.  At least one of the lawyer dudes said that, as far as he
was concerned, ordinary testimony was as unreliable (or as reliable)
as hypnotically elicited testimony.  This is NOT a scientific study,
but I found it convincing.

					Dave Barton
					dlb@hudson.wash.inmet.com
From: ecg@po.CWRU.Edu (Edward C. Goodwin)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: UFO sig
Date: 15 Dec 1992 15:48:24 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


	After reading that HUFON report I wondered if there is a
usenet SIG where such material might, actually be viewed as
credulous.  Is there some SIG concering UFO reports/research?

				Thanks,
-- 
Ed Goodwin (1 kyu)			"Facts do not cease to exist
ecg@po.cwru.edu				 because they are ignored."
ecg@po.cwru.edu@cunynm (bitnet)		 -Aldous Huxley
Molecular Biologist to the Stars!
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: idealord@dorsai.com (Jeff Harrington)
Subject: Re: SAVE SCI.SKEPTIC Re: HOW DO WE GET RID OF RUDE MORONS ON THIS FO
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy, New York's Computer Consulate. +1.718.729.5018
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1992 21:11:03 GMT

jb8285@guinea (Jeffrey R. Brown) writes:

> berryh@huey.udel.edu (John Berryhill, Ph.D.) writes:
> : I have had the same experience of writing to the people who are
> : posting the unwanted articles here and then being told to go suck
> : an egg.
> : 
> : It's a shame.  This used to be a preatty neat group.  Usually these
> : sorts of rantings unrelated to skeptical investigation tend to go
> : away, but it just doesn't look like it's going to blow over.
> : 
> : Someone with the patience and time should post a request for
> : sci.skeptic.mod - a moderated sci.skeptic - so that the bible
> : thumpers and the bible thumper thumpers can go on throwing
> : brickbats at each other while not intruding on what used to be
> : a fairly good group for discussing rational inquiry.
> : -- 
> :                                                 John Berryhill, Ph.D.
> 
> I agree 100%.
> 
> I bet there is a HUGE "silent majority" who would prefer to read
> postings about scientific testability, psychic debunking, "bad"
> science, and basically the kind of material published in _The
 
I'm with both Mr. Berryhill and Mr. Brown, although I can't count myself
as being with the "silent majority."  It's next to impossible to follow
a thread without running into vitriolics.  
 
My concern with a moderated news group would be that "remarkable claims"
not be posted because of a skeptical bias.  
 
> Skeptical Inquirer_.
> 
> Jeffrey R. Brown
> Internet: jeffrey.brown@medtronic.com             Voice: 1-612-574-4698
> UUCP:     uunet!medtron!jb8285                    FAX:   1-612-574-6150

-- 
Jeff Harrington             PGP 2.0 Public Key Available via Email
idealord@dorsai.com         
From: tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 22:01:38 GMT
Subject: Re: Prize
Organization: the HP Mtn.View Resp. Cntr.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic

That prize belongs to me! John Winston does not exist. I wrote that 
letter! That's my prize! I made John Winston up! I'm the one who should
get the prize!  

  I'm the CAT! I'M THE CAT! -ren


  Besides, it takes just as much effort to discredit John Winston's 
  babbling as it does to make it up.


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.folklore.urban,alt.atheism,alt.feminism
From: obrien@netcom.com (Robert O'Brien)
Subject: Re: Ritual Abuse Taskforce Alleges Poisoning
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 09:00:00 GMT

Related topic (at least in my mind) but different event.

San Jose Mercury News, Dec 16th  (local "extra" supplement)

_Two men held for trial in bizarre case_

by S.L. Wykes, MN Staff Writer

I suppose I could enter the whole article.  Would that violate (c) ??

First para:
 At the end of a preliminary hearing in a case even the judge
called bizare, two American-born Israelis were held for trial
last week on charges of conspiring to kill a Palo Alto child
psychiatrist and his wife.

My summary:  two brothers - one's a rabbi, claims to be psychologist to
the couple's 22 year old daughter.  Daughter recently alleged sexual abuse
by mother, father, and grandfather.  As a student at Columbia. she had accused
a fellow student of rape.  She had called parents just before her graduation
and according to the mother, said "If you come near me, I have friends who
would be willing to kill you"   Father, who runs a child/adolescent mental
health center, believes medication and therapy caused the problems.

On Nov 19th, the two were in a Safeway lot 'behaving suspiciously' 
according to arresting officer.  In their trunk: two large kitchen knives,
ski masks, gloves, plastic handcuffs [cable ties, I guess] women's stockings,
a rubber mallet, flashlights, scissors, and packing tape.  In one's
coat pocket, detailed, hand-drawn diagrams of the inside of the parents'
home, a key to it, family photos, and schedules of the comings and goings
of the parents. The father testified that the maps were drawn by the daughter.


My take on this is that this woman has serious problems, probably *not*
due to abuse by family members, but someone has "helped" her into
a total state of confusion. The rape at school last year may have been real,
but the followup to it really screwed over this poor gal's mind.


ObUL: the "statictics" on 'unreported' rapes finally got to somebody,
and they're manufacturing "rapes" in these unfortunate women's minds just to
see _someone_ get punished.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dickb@bilver.uucp (Dick Biow)
Subject: Re: Crucifixion of Jesus?
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:30:59 GMT

This whole issue is getting too involved. Obscure, not profound. We are getting like the guy who proved that Hamlet was not written by Shakespeare, but by
another author of the same name. The general weight of critical scholarship
is that Jesus was crucified. We can't go beyond that. Shaeffer's approach is
an interesting minority opinion. Mark Twain said that, in Europe, he saw two
different skulls of COlumbus in two different museums. One was of Columbus
as a child, and the other was as an old man. Let's argue about that for a
while. I will take either side, so long as I can accuse my oponent of sub-
jectivity, plus mopery with intent to gawk. -- Dick Biow

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal,alt.news-media,talk.bizarre
From: gerald@cs.UAlberta.CA (Gerald Oskoboiny)
Subject: Re: IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV on January Sabattical - Thursdays CBS News Za
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 20:23:21 GMT

Followup-To: talk.bizarre,misc.test,alt.job.gooley

idealord@dorsai.com (Jeff Harrington) writes:

>  Briefly, I've developed the ability to cause 
>broadcasting television cameras to become luminescent.  I meditate on the
... 
>The Thursday CBS Evening News zap is the _only_ proven demonstration of 
>paranormal capabilities.  The public is invited to count the blinks of 
>Dan Rather and the news crew on Wednesdays or Fridays and compare that 
>with the increased number of blinks evident on the Thursday broadcast.

This is easy. Every Wednesday night, Dan and the boys get together for a
few brews, cuz it's Wing Night[tm] at the bar across the street from the
CBS building. He can barely stumble into work the next morning, and you
expect him to be able to focus on his cues? Puhlease, give us some credit.

Gerald
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Miracles
Date: 15 Dec 1992 21:37:22 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Dec8.193236.1@stsci.edu>, zellner@stsci.edu writes:
=
=  > I have never had a christian tell me to do this or that because they
=  > had pondered the alternatives and decided for themselves what is
=  > good/bad and then explained their reasoning ...
=
=Good for them.  We believe that God, not man, makes the rules concerning
=virtue and vice, even as he made the laws of physics.  What would you
=think of someone who made up laws of physics by pondering the alternatives
=and deciding for themselves what would be good or bad?

I'd say they were doing good experimental science.  As opposed to the old
technique of looking up what Aristotle had to say on the matter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
From: "dan mckinnon" <dan.mckinnon@canrem.com>
Subject: disappointed
Reply-To: "dan mckinnon" <dan.mckinnon@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: sci
Date: 16 Dec 92 11:04:01 EST


CJL>You forgot
CJL>     5)  Readers of sci.skeptic frequently deal with people who make rather
CJL>         remarkable claims, then some time later assert that they never made
CJL>         the claim in question, despite having argued the claim sometimes fo
CJL>         several weeks.  One of their favorite strategies for achieving
CJL>         plausible deniability is to start the thread with "I just happened
CJL>         pick up this article from somewhere else...."

         Oh, well I haven't been around the conference long enough yet
to notice that. Yes, there are some people that don't have the courage
of their convictions. What surprised me was that some people assumed
that by posting the "Speed of Light" article, I supported it, when it
was posted at someone's request.

         Just caught the end of an item on CNN (doesn't everybody
multitask?), something about how the F-117 Stealth was kept secret for
years and "Friedman" saying that there was an aircraft out that was
several times faster than that, 'though all agencies deny it. If that was
STanton Friedman, is a surprise to hear him admit to a terrestial
solution for a UFO. (Ironically, to me, I grew up on the same small
street where he lives in Fredericton, NB).

---
  OLX 2.1 TD  ... But I'm feeling much better now!
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic