HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robd@cherry09.cray.com (Robert Derrick)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.origins
Subject: Re: A Theory of Creation (first draft)
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:51:09 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Darren Michael Forbes (dmf@aber.ac.uk) wrote:
: 
:                         A Theory of Creation,
:                                 by
:           Darren M. Forbes BSc. and Jonathan M. Ashley BSc.
:           dmf@aber.ac.uk                     jma@aber.ac.uk

Hoot!

Oh, people!  I can't remember how many points were given in the t.o.
home game, but this one is so precious that it deserves many points.

Pay attention kids!  This is humor without a smiley.  I know that 
really bothers some people, but trust me, there really was humor
before smileys, and people got along just fine.  I did not believe
anyone would be caught by this one.  Well I hoped no one would.
I thought about posting a warning, but I did not want to appear
patronizing.

But since one entry has already shown up at my site, I hope to
forstall anyone else from commiting a fox-pass and showing us their
posteriors.  Please, don't do it, it makes me uncomfortable.

I mean, really, how can you read

: [8] The Beginner's Bumper Book of Birds
:     C.P. Larch, et. al., Ladybird, 1972.
: [9] Fly Fishing
:     J.R. Hartley, Firebird Press, 1989, reprinted twice.

these references and still think that you have stumbled on a real
attempt at the GUTofC?  Did you just fall off of the potato truck?
Do you spell it 'potatoe'?

: [5] Private communication
:     The LORD, various dates.

Give me peace!  This is inspired hilarity.

: [7] Software Engineering Environments, vol. 3
:     ed. F. Long, Wiley 1992.

This noted reference is not even referenced in the article!
My sides are aching.

:                           ... In particular, we would like to see more time
: spent gathering contradictory supporting evidence, viz. fossils, geological
: dating, etc.

Oh, it hurts, stop it!

My compliments to Forbes and Ashley for laying an absolutely transparent
trap for unwary "evolutionists" to fall into.  Please t.o.'ers, you
can't fight against real ignorance if you are totally credulous yourself.

This is the second time in a couple of weeks.  Unbelievable!

As for the rest of you, and your sense of humor 
			- Don't leave home without it.
--

rob derrick				robd@cherry.cray.com
From: jmm25@po.CWRU.Edu (Jessica M. Mcgeary)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: "Jehovah" TRIBE OF SPACE CANNIBALS
Date: 15 Oct 1992 01:07:52 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


Er. I think perhaps, if it hasn't been stated already, that the belief in
the "Jehovah" TRIBE OF SPACE CANNIBALS is found only in one religion, to
the best of my knowledge:

The Church of the SubGenius.

Blame the man's ravings on the fact that he believes in Bob, okay?
-- 
Jessica McGeary
jmm25@po.cwru.edu
Case Western Reserve University
Remember! Arguments should be FUN!
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: "Jehovah" TRIBE OF SPACE CANNIBALS
Date: 15 Oct 1992 00:02:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


	I think the nut who posted the original posting about space
aliens ought to send me some Email. His post indicates he knows here
to score good acid



-- 
"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 | bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu | alias: White Rook
aa1439@freenet.lorain.oberlin.edu | NWROC Email: usr6418a@tso.uc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Homophobia
Date: 15 Oct 92 02:15:49 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Oct12.000124.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu> kmagnacca@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>>     This is true too. I am looking to sort my numbers better, but it is
>> a fact that most mainstream churches are anti-gay. I think that my post
>> holds true for the USA, which is a VERY different place.
>
>   Except that just because the official church position is anti-gay
>doesn't mean that all or even most of the churchgoers follow it.  Many
>of them would probably remain in the church they grew up in than leave
>over a single issue.
>

  My awareness of the position most churches have on homosexuality
  is that gays are people too, albeit ones in dire need of help.

  The Oregon Ecumenical Council, comprising some 17 major
  denominations (including RC, most of the Protestants, Quakers, and
  others), has come out (oops!) against the recent initiative on
  November's ballot that would declare homosexuality perverse in
  Oregon.  It was comforting to see that the majority of mainstream
  Christians aren't hate mongers like their fundamentalist brethen.

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

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_

"Above all, a god needs compassion"    James T. Kirk
From: jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jordan M. Wolbrum)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Anyone heard of Cliffe?
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:03:12 GMT
Organization: Freshman, CIT general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

The intervarsity Christian assoc here at CMU got someone named Cliffe to
come speak.  I went to listen to him, and while there was much he said
that I disagreed with, I went away respecting him.  He challenges all
people, including Christians, to not accept Christ's divinity on faith
alone.  He said the gospels could be vieved as a historically viable
source.  Having not read the gospels, I couldn't add anything to that
discussion, but wonder if anyone here has an effective arguement against
the gospels' validity.  I don't know how to approach this with my
limited knowledge of the New Testament.
Cliffe said "there is more than enough evidence, nobody has a right not
to believe in God."  I didn't agree, but I didn't know what to say
without sounding like some closed-minded moron.  Needless to say, some
students here just attacked Cliffe and went away looking like assholes. 
Others actually made him think, and he was reasonably open-minded- a
trait I have rarely evidenced before in theists strong in their
convictions.
Any comments?  I thought it was about time for a new thread anyway!

\begindata{text,17029828}
\textdsversion{12}
\template{default}
\majorheading{Jordan M. Wolbrum

}\center{\smaller{at jw67@andrew.cmu.edu

}}\enddata{text,17029828}
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: tompa@ida.liu.se (tpm@ida.liu.se)
Subject: Re: evil computers
Organization: CIS Dept, Univ of Linkoping, Sweden
Distribution: alt
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:11:52 GMT

"capsco one" <capsco.one@canrem.com> writes:

> A small group of Christian fundamentalists is giving educators in this
> city a devil of a time.  They want what might be called a religious
> version of sovereignty association - separate, computer-free
> classrooms in public schools.
>
> The special treatment is being sought because of the beliefs of the
> Christian Brethren.  Their faith is most easily characterized by what
> they reject.  They don't believe in a formal creed, ordained clergy,
> the theory of evolution or electronic media.  In recent years, that
> list has been expanded to include computers.
...
> "It's the kind of thing that has tremendous potential for evil," said
> Logan.  "We don't have them in our homes, we don't have them in our
> businesses, we don't want our children working with them in school."
> The church's opposition to computers isn't easy for those outside the
> faith to understand.  They believe programs run on computers have the
> ability - as do TV programs or books like Catcher in the Rye - to pass
> on morally unacceptable ideas, said Logan.  But they also believe
> computers have an innate power of their own and can exert what they
> describe as mind control.

Sounds interesting. Does this group have an Email address?

-- Thomas Padron-McCarthy, CS Dept, U of Linkoping, Sweden -- tpm@ida.liu.se
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: God's existence
From: kmagnacca@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 13 Oct 92 01:40:43 EDT
Distribution: world, public 
Organization: Wesleyan University

In article <1992Oct12.225123.4266@nmsu.edu>, sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe) writes:
> 
> What's this hatred thing you guys have?  If I came over to
> soc.religion.christian, and I posted an inane argument your FAQ had
> already dealt with, and you had seen that argument 10^12 times
> already, isn't it possible that you might be just a tad bit annoyed?

   Probably not.  They would never see it because the moderator
would cut it.  The whole point of a moderator, after all, is to
keep out arguments that have come up 10^12 times already, along
with whatever they arbitrarily deem unsuitable for the group.

Karl
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 19:03:52 EDT
From: <EXG106@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: "Teaching atheism"
 <1992Oct14.160506.23515@cbnewsh.cb.att.com>

I say that you should present all of the "facts" from both sides (those that he
can understand).  Explain what each side thinks in an unbiased manner and let
him make up his own mind.

When presented with both views in an unbiased manner, I would be willing to bet
that one would tend to chose atheism. (but that's just my opinion)


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eylon Geva            |   "Somebody please tell me that I'm dreaming,
geva@orville.psu.edu  |    It's not so easy to stop from screaming..."
exg106@psuvm.pdu.edu  |                            Iron Maiden
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: <tonyp@cnvxla.COM> (good, Conan - good!)
Subject: Re: Great Proposal !
Reply-To: tonyp@convex.COM 
Organization: CONVEX Computer Corporation, Richardson, Tx., USA
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 1992 00:23:57 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

}: ideas on why the human body is symmetrical and does not have 
}        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
}: two arms on one side and only one on the other 
}  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A Flounder has both eyes on one side of its head - does that count?

}What's the hangup with a symmetrical body?  If that's proof of god's exhistance
}then how to you explain those people who are born *without* such symmetry?
}Are they not god's children?  Did they do something wrong before they were born?
}Is a person with only one arm or one leg less than someone that has all his/her
}arms and legs?

No - everyone knows that people like that are being punished for their
parent's crimes. That, or it's the work of the devil.

---
How to have a happy, carefree, good ol' Christian life 
[a.k.a. McReligion Happy Meal]

Remember: if God didn't do it, then Satan did. - (that covers 1/2 the bases)

Remember: if God "wouldn't like it", he hasn't stopped it it is because 
	  he left it up to man's free will. - (that covers the other half)

Remember: if God did it, he had a reason - who are you to ask "why?"

Remember: if God did it, and you think "that's fucked!" who are you to 
	  judge god?

Oh, by-the-way God told me that if you don't send me $5,000,000,.oo he
isn't going to come 'round anymore.


--
    Tony J. Podrasky             BIBLE : 
     San Diego , Ca                       BUY BULL ? 
    tonyp@convex.com                                  ( NO ) 
QSL? QRU? QRZ? QLZ? QFA?                                      BYE, BULL !
From: kmr4@po.CWRU.Edu (Keith M. Ryan)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: To All Truth Seekers!
Date: 12 Oct 1992 03:16:40 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: kmr4@po.CWRU.Edu (Keith M. Ryan)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips) says:

> 
>	Creationism saying the earth is only thousands of years old is
>a little presumptuous.

	The thing that I don't understand, that if they want to say that
the Earth is only a few thousand years old- that half loads of plutonium
and dinosaur bones were placed to fool the "unbelievers" - then what is
to stop someone from claiming the world is only a hundred years old, with
equal validity? Or, even 2 seconds ago...


	"Shux, I know the world really began when I was born..."

-- 
	So there I was, snuggled in the leather seat of my brand new Ferreri.
I had the oiled wood gear shift in one hands, and the leather wrapped Momo in
the other. And, I had the stereo cranking _Born to be Wild_...
	Only one problem, I was unside down, under six feet of water...
From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: What an atheist thinks of the biblke.
Date: 13 Oct 1992 22:29:19 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:

>In article <1992Oct10.212402.11649@newshub.ariel.yorku.ca>,
>cs911461@ariel.yorku.ca (CHRISTIAN D. ARMOUR) wrote:
>> In article <gj156879.718726566@cunews>, gj156879@prince.carleton.ca ( gj student 156879) writes:
> 
>> >> PEOPLE 2000 YEARS AGO WERE MORONS:
> 
>> 	True.  I never really thought of it that way.

>I actually don't agree on this statement. People are people, still today.
>To cite Schiller:

>Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
>				Friedrich Schiller
>				The Maid of Orleans, III, 6.

Yes, but back then, there weren't any media to speak of.

keith

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: ttobler@unislc.uucp (Trent Tobler)
Subject: Re: PROOF OF GOD (based on atheist's prem.)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 17:28:35 GMT

Morgan Burke (morgan@sitka.triumf.ca) wrote:
: In article <92288.234739U52468@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U52468@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
: |> In article <6NNNsB1w165w@bluemoon.rn.com>, darist@bluemoon.rn.com (david stroop)
: |> >Postulate: Theism can only be learned.
: |>
: |>   Well, we've been skipping our ligic classes, haven't we?  1 is totally
: |> false.  A human being "created" religion for his own purposes, likely
: |> one of the following:
: 
: You've violated the postulate with that statement.  If theism can only
: be learned, then it certainly cannot be created.  Maybe it's you who
: should go back to your logic classes...

Theism is defined to be belief in God.  The postulate does not say that
one must learn theism from a theist.  Therefore, theism can be created,
but the being who created it is not a theist himself.  It would have
to be created by an atheist, by 'teaching' others and deceiving them
into believing in a god.

: To any other hapless atheists who feel compelled to respond:  don't bother 
: finding the fallacies in this piece of logic.  There are none.  The problem 
: is with the postulate, and that was exactly the point of the original 
: message.

There are flaws.  Are you trying proof by intimidation? ;)

--
  Trent Tobler - ttobler@unislc.slc.unisys.com  ttobler@csulx.weber.edu
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 10:28:33 EDT
From: <AMS176@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: ....

Beware of GOD
                         Antony Mikael Schiffbauer
From: scott@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Scott G Goddard)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: God's existence
Date: 9 Oct 92 17:52:01 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu

Hi everyone.  I posted something a few days ago, and I got a lot of responses,
mostly hate mail.  To tell you the truth, that doesn't bother me, actually it
seems kind of childish. Grow up!  I could tell that you all have a wonderful 
vocabulary, but I could also sense much hatred.  Personally, I don't care if
I sounded like a "preacher", as some of you put it.  And I also don't care what
the FAQ states.  You're salvation means more to me than that.  I don't know 
about you, but eternal damnation doesn't sound too appealing to me.  I just 
pray that one day you are not wishing that you listened to me, or anyone else
who has tried to get it through to you.  Call me in about a million years at
1-800-1HEAVEN.  Now, I'm not trying to make anybody mad, and I'm not 
condemning anybody either.  What I say is true, "THERE IS A GOD."
     What is it going to take to prove that He does exist?  Is God Himself 
going to have to come down from Heaven and perform a miracle?  Or would that 
not be good enough?  Well, I hope it would be. By the way, this is probably
going to be the last news that I post, but just think about it.

                              P.S.  Jesus loves you
                              P.P.S.  To Ray E., if you are seroiusly
                                      interested in knowing why you should
                                      become a Christian, e-mail me.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: rtsumn01@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: FAQ-finding difficulties
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 00:30:09 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

People here seem to have problems finding the FAQ in record numbers. I only
seem to be able to find it once every 6 months. When I see three new people
asking for it in one day I know there's a problem.

Perhaps we should appoint someone to e-mail the FAQ to everyone who posts to
alt.atheism asking "Where's the FAQ?" I have considered e-mailing the FAQ
myself when seeing this question, but hesitate for fear that 50 people have
beat me to it. If one person had the job, so to speak...

I know there is (or was) a FAQ about how to find the FAQ but I haven't seen
this in a while either.

Of course it will turn out that since I just mentioned this helpful idea
it was announced this summer and someone already is doing this on a regular
basis.

--Semhaza
"Well, when I leave a dead tooth under my pillow, the Tooth Fairy gives me a
dollar. When Santa Claus comes, the whole house is full of presents. But God
doesn't give me anything!"
	--Willian Randall, on why he believes in the Tooth Fairy and Santa
          Claus but not God
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: cochrane@spot.Colorado.EDU (Jim Cochrane)
Subject: Re: What brought you to atheism?
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:53:01 GMT

Well, I tried 3 times to e-mail this to Jeff and all three addresses
failed, so I guess I'll post it, as it's probably relevant to alt.atheism:

Hi Jeff,

In article <1992Oct6.171613.13624@walter.cray.com> you write:
>After reading the postings here the past few weeks I've noticed some
>similarities in many of your comments.  I would like to know how you
>[Deleted]

I found your account of how you came to atheism moving; it's a refreshing
change from the much more typical "I went through a very difficult period
in my life and ended up believing even more strongly in God than I did
before"-type of response.  Thanks for posting it.

>But I no longer have silly quilt trips nor let a "religion" dictate how I should
>run my life.  The ironic thing is that I truly believe that I'm a MUCH more
>humane person now.  I live each day as full as I can and I'm more willing to
>help others do the same.  I'm also much more tolerant of other people.

I think that qualities such as intelligence, compassion, and generosity
are attributes of the human mind.  People have made the mistake of
solidifying these qualities within the concept of a God, perhaps in
order to shift the responsibility for cultivating these qualities onto
someone else.  In so doing, though, they have created for themselves an
external (and imaginary) entity that they expect to help or "save" them.

> 
>I'm sorry for the this being a long post.  Being one who very seldom reads one.
>If you've read this far I thank you and am very interested in hearing your stories
>and points of view.  Many of you seem very openminded and have a peace of mind
>that many people do not know.  But I also sense a "longing" for something more.
>Is there something about humans that we long to have something to believe in,
>or is it just an outdated cultural thing that will take many more generations to

I think that there is a reason for that longing and that there's actually
something behind it; unfortunately, most people tend to create artificial
systems (belief systems) to deal with that longing instead of really looking
into what it is and where it's coming from.

If you're interested in an investigation of the mind and what might be
termed spirituality from a non-theistic viewpoint, you may want to do
some research into Buddhism.

>disappear?  How did you get to where you are?
> 
>Thank you for you time,
>  Jeff West
>

Sorry, I don't really have a story to tell, but I hope you find my
comments somewhat helpful.


Jim Cochrane
cochrane@spot.Colorado.EDU
From: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: soc.religion.christian is moderated.
Date: 11 Oct 92 04:09:45 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:

>I tried to post things on this group earlier, but the moderator didn't
>enter
>these due to 'already discussed issues'. Sounded like censoring for me,
>and even if I do think that newsgroups sometimes should be moderated,
>they should not be censored.

Of Kent's postings, 13 have been accepted and 4 rejected (at least
according to my log files -- it's certainly possible that they are not
perfect).

One of the primary roles I attempt to carry out in moderation is to
keep certain topics from continuing forever.  The overall goal is to
keep a reasonable volume of articles (I'm trying for 20 - 30 per day)
with minimum of redundancy.  Those who read talk.religion.misc will
note that without moderation, a discussion can often persist for
months, to a point where it's just the same thing over and over.
There are also certain subjects which you can't mention without
restarting the same month-long set of arguments each time.  Thus I
eventually mark discussions as closed, and on some topics I prevent
discussions from being restarted more than about every 6 months.
Those who would prefer to use a group that is not moderated will
presumably use talk.religion.misc.

Kent was responding to a complaint from tonyp.  Tonyp's article was
accepted.  My hypothesis is that he hadn't run into moderated groups
before, and didn't realize that there would be a delay introduced by
moderation.  I do not accept all challenges from atheists, since
sometimes the postings are redundant.  But I do try to accept enough
of a sample to make sure that the views are properly represented.
I've given up trying to make people happy, since many Christian
readers would prefer that I accept none, and many atheists will call
it censorship if I reject any.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism