HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Police use of psychics
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:05:00 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

I just got my copy of the latest _Skeptical Inquirer_ with the articles
on police use of psychics, and I have some observations to make:

1.  In the Sweat and Durm article, "Psychics: Do Police Departments
Really Use Them?", the authors conclude that "as this investigation
reveals, the overwhelming majority of those police who actually do
the investigations prefer to work with known tools rather than with
unknown ones."  Their own numbers show over 35% of the responding
police departments use psychics--over 1/3!  (All did say that psychic
information was less valuable than information obtained by other means.)
Contrast their numbers with those of Arthur Lyons and Marcello Truzzi,
in their 1991 book _The Blue Sense_, which on p. 89 reports that "In
the few surveys conducted in the field, less than 10 percent of the
departments polled say they have ever used a psychic, and of those
that had, considerably less have reported their use successful."
(This remark is footnoted as follows:  "Richard Guarino, 'The Police
and Psychics,' _Psychic_, June 1975, pp. 9-15.  There are some
indications that this percentage may actually be substantially higher.
See Eleanor L. Myers, 'ESP and Law Enforcement Seminar Survey,' research
report (SRI International, Menlo Park, CA), July 1979; and Carl Cowan
and Joan Luxenberg, 'Mind Science in Police Science: Applications for
Parapsychology,' paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Society of Criminology, Philadelphia, PA, November 8, 1979."  Sweat and
Durm mention none of this, despite the fact that they refer to Lyons
and Truzzi's book on the second page of their article (and wrongly
characterize it as a book that "proclaims psychic power").)

2.  Both the Sweat and Durm article and the Walter Rowe article,
"Psychic Detectives: A Critical Examination," favorably cite the
studies of psychic crime-solving abilities conducted by Martin
Reiser of the Behavioral Sciences Division of the LAPD, while completely
failing to mention Lyons and Truzzi's criticism of Reiser's methodology
(_The Blue Sense_, pp. 51-53)--even though both articles cite the book.
Lyons and Truzzi do have some good criticisms, and Reiser himself admits
the limitations of his work.  (Though Reiser does not agree with all
of the Lyons and Truzzi criticisms, and I have offered some responses
to some of them which should appear in Joe Nickell's introduction to
his forthcoming anthology of skeptical investigations of psychic
detectives.)

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
From: kepley@photon.phys.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: interminable ad hominem argument
Date: 7 Jan 93 23:24:24 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville

In article <1993Jan7.141123@IASTATE.EDU> danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.175751.699@rosevax.rosemount.com>,
>grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards) writes:
>> The church demands that it's pronouncements be believed without doubt
>> or evidence.  Science doesn't make that demand.
>
>   Speaking as an atheist and secular humanist I must take some issue with this
>statement.  Theologians in many churches argue til they're blue in the face,
>doubt things all over the place, and pile up mountians of historical and
>cultural evidence.  Likewise bible study groups often have ferocious arguments
>in which doubt runs rampant and evidence of all sorts is presented.
          ^^^^^

Yes, Malcomb Muggeridge said that only Atheists had no doubts.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten)
Subject: Re: Psychics' Predictions Fizzle For 1992
Summary: Lizzie Borden
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 13:47:02 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.213354.24375@newshost.lanl.gov>, jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (J. Giles) writes:
> In article <1993Jan4.192403.9288@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
> |> In article <1993Jan2.231655.12160@cs.unca.edu>, kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
> |> [...]
> |> > Last night I was watching a program where they were looking back at
> |> > the Lizzie Borden murders.  It was an intelligent program until they
> |> > brought in some "experts" to look into the case.  One was a criminal 
> |> > investigator and the other was a psychic and I turned it off.
> |> 
> |> You should have kept watching - it was a hoot.  A 10 year old
> |> could have duplicated the "psychics" reading.  "Wait, someone
> |> is coming in the room, they're coming closer, oh my God, they've
> |> got an AX!!!"  Truly idiotic, didn't even PRETEND to tell us something
> |> we didn't already know.
> 
> Anyway, you surely don't still believe in the lone ax-woman theory
> do you?  There was clearly a second assassin striking with the glassy 
> bowl....  And where was Nixon that day?  Or LBJ?

Still, if Lizzie was simply an innocent patsy, wouldn't she have been
killed while being moved in the courthouse?

marc colten
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 08:47:50 EST
From: <SASTPH@vm.sas.com>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media
 <1993Jan9.204153.2754@icaen.uiowa.edu> <C0LwJ6.4K7@cs.uiuc.edu>
 <C0M0r8.5I8@ccu.umanitoba.ca>

In article <C0M0r8.5I8@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca says:

(Many lines of debate deleted...)

>>And what purpose is served supposing that
>>the survivors *did* concoct the stories?  Think!!
>
>For therapists, $$$. For journalists, $$$. For the 'survivors', attention
>and maybe $$$.
 -------------
Well, I'm as cynical as the next guy, but even I can't believe that the
"survivors" adopt these "memories" for money.  It's much more likely
that they really believe in what their therapist is telling them: that
their current problems stem from horrible abuse when they were children.
This is what sickened me about the PrimeTime report.
One of the video segments showed a woman
lying on a couch, clutching and tearing at a pillow as she screamed in
terror, pain, and hate at the "memory" of being abused.  If in fact
she was not suffering at the (however remote in
time) hands of satanic abusers, then her therapist is the abuser.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Organization: HFS, Inc., McLean VA
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 13:15:58 GMT

In article <1i2tnfINN8rh@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>In article <1993Jan1.191432.13862@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>|> In article <1humf2INNniq@iraul1.ira.uka.de> stoesser@i31s17.ira.uka.de (Achim Stoesser) writes:
>|> >
>|> >- Hitler was Roman Catholic.
>|> 
>|> His regime and his government, however, were not founded on
>|> Christian values.  That is the point that was being made (although
>|> I agree that Hitler's "religion" can cloud the issue).  I don't
>|> know of any Christian denomination at the time of Hitler that
>|> espoused the killing of non-Christians as even remotely following
>|> Christ.  I won't even mention the superiority of one race over
>|> another, etc. 
>
>This is highly misleading.   In reality, most of the mainstream 
>denominations in Germany expressed support for Hitler and for his 
>regime at some time or other.

I disagree.  The point I was making is that Hitler and his regime did
not use Christian or Christ-like values when they devised their Nazi
state.  Nothing you have said has changed this.


>
>The Catholic Bishops conference in 1933 "expressed joy that through
>the new state Christianity had been promoted, morality improved, and
>and the struggle against Bolshevism and godlessness condicted with
>energy and success"

Your quoting single line statements from documents, is IMHO
potentially very misleading.  If the above quote, for example, had
been said with a qualifier decrying the human rights absuses that
were prevelant, then it certainly is misleading. Or if a
subsequent document had been published clairying matters, again
this would have been misleading.  These one line quotes really do
nothing to support the view that Hitler's regime was a Christian
one.

>
>It is also true that many individual Christians and Priests
>resisted Hitler.  However, the Churches themselves gave their
>followers a highly ambiguous and collaborationist message.

Churches, by their nature tend to be nationalistic and supportive
of their governemnt.  This is human nature.  Given any conflict,
I'm sure you will find the tendancy for most churches or religious
groups in that country to be sympathetic towards that country and
certainly not towards an avowed enemy.  Of course, this again has
nothing to do with Christian teaching and everything to do with
human nature.

>
>jon. 

-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: Tim.ONeill@english.utas.edu.au (Tim O'Neill)
Subject: Re: Glub Glub... Any Floods in Human History?
Organization: University of Tasmania (Australia)
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 02:02:11 GMT

In article <nkjrm.104@taxus.uib.no>, nkjrm@taxus.uib.no (Rolf Manne) writes:

> From other parts of the world, the original and now extinct human population
> of Tasmania is believed to have got there by foot, not by boat.

This is a little off the subject of the thread Rolf, but I don't think
the Tasmanian Aboriginies that I know would like you telling
everyone that they are extinct. It's true that there are no full-blood
native Tasmanians, thanks to the enlightened British policy of
shooting them on sight, but there are plenty of native Tasmanians
left I can assure you.
On with the flood-stuff.

Tim O'Neill
Tasmanian Devil
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: interminable ad hominem argument
Date: 6 Jan 93 05:30:56 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan6.043055.29548@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan4.193810.3651@rosevax.rosemount.com> grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards) writes:
|> >zellner@stsci.edu writes:
|> >: 
|> >: |> >>Thousands (if not millions) of people have been tortured and killed in
|> >: |> >>the service of christianity.  
|> >: 
|> >:  >  - Hitler was Roman Catholic.
|> >:  >  - Atheists were not allowed to become member of the SA 
|> >: 
|> >: There have been plenty of wicked people who really believed in the 
|> >: conservation of energy and momentum.  Does that imply that such beliefs
|> >: are incorrect?
|> >: 
|> >
|> >If the laws of conservation of energy and momentum were claimed to be
|> >the one-and-only source of morality and ethics, then the existence of
|> >"wicked" people who claimed to believe in the conservation of energy
|> >would be problematic.
|> >
|> >However, the laws of physics do not claim to provide any moral or
|> >ethical guidance.  Thus the existence of wicked people who believe in
|> >the conservation of energy and mementum says nothing about the
|> >validity of those beliefs.
|> >
|> 
|> I can't resist :) How about: Some scientists have been known to		:)
|> fradulently report their results which sometimes go undetected for	:)
|> a while, perhaps not at all.  Therefore, any scientific results		:)
|> that are published should not be believed. "What", you say?		:)
|> "These cheaters not "real" scientists"?  What is a scientist?		:)
|> After we get about two or three definitions: Well obviously, it is	:)
|> impossible to define a scientist since we can't make up our minds.	:)
|> Therefore a scientist is anything you define it to be. 			:)
|> 
|> Does this sound familiar?

Good grief.    Mr Ata, scientific results *aren't* believed.   Didn't
you notice the name of the newsgroup your are posting to?


jon.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
From: carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink)
Subject: Re: California to be Destroyed May 8, Nostradamus Says
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:26:09 GMT

In <C0rCI2.1JL@brunel.ac.uk> cs89ssg@brunel.ac.uk (Sunil Gupta) writes:
.
.
.
.
>yup and if you look closely in one of the quatrains theres a rhyme about some
>later. I wouldnt call Sadders a prince, but it is two years later and he has
>just put made his SAMs operational.

>Im sure I read that I'll have to hunt that one down again.
>-- 
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>           Sunil Gupta ---- a computer scientist in my spare time 
>	                   cs89ssg@uk.ac.brunel         
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  Of course, Saddam is completely non-Persian.  He's an Arab.  Arabs are 
not Persian.  Either a Persian or an Arab might beat you up for making
that mistake.
-- 
Carl Fink          carlf@panix.com, C.FINK4(GEnie), or CF427620I@LIUVAX.BITNET
  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
  inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter
  the state of facts and evidence"     --      John Adams
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22001 alt.atheism:24951
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Date: 5 Jan 1993 03:00:22 GMT
Organization: sgi
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan5.014645.6329@cs.unca.edu>, kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
|> Dear jon:
|>    You have a real hard time with  "lesser of two evils". How do you 
|> feel about Churchill given his "make a deal with the devil himself" to
|> get rid of Stalin?  


I think that the trouble you have here is the same confusion that
you have exhibited before, for example when you talked about
Chamberlain and Roosevelt.   You want to put everyone who had any
dealings with Hitler - and now Stalin - on the same level.

But they are not on the same level.   Chamberlain and Roosevelt
kept a distance between themselves and Hitler, and dealt with him
only when they had to.   Meanwhile the German Catholic Youth
Organization was describing Naziism as a "spritual breakthrough".
The point is that you *do* have to deal with a Hitler from time
to time, but you don't have to express that kind of enthusiasm.

In the same way, once Churchill found that he and Stalin were
fighting the same enemy, he was prepared to send supplies to 
the USSR to keep the Russians in the war, but he never un-said
any of the harsh criticisms that he had previously made of the
Stalin regime and its internal oppression.   In fact, his 
condemnation of the Soviet regime was as harsh as it ever had
been, hence the remark about dealing with the devil.

No-one, unless they were being perverse, could interpret the
actions of Chamberlain, Roosevelt or Churchill as recommendations
to follow Hitler or Stalin.    However, the German Churches *did*
recommend Naziism to their followers.

jon.
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22055 alt.messianic:3868 alt.atheism:25099
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Date: 6 Jan 93 05:27:20 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan6.035645.29331@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> 
|> It's interesting, but even from the very beginning we find that
|> people who are in contact with God do the dummest things.

I'd rephrase this.   People do the strangest things, and some of 
the people who do the strangest things seek to justify their actions
by claiming to be in contact with God.    And other people go along
with it.

Sometimes they carry out civil wars and put out one another's eyes
over intepretations of their favourite deities: Byzantium.   Some-
times they carry out Inquisitions: the Middle Ages.   Sometimes they 
associate themselves with people like Hitler.

And then later, other people come along and claim that there's
nothing basically wrong with the God method.   It's merely that
a few of these people had the details a little askew.   But
if we keep on making decisions based on our "contact" with God,
things will come out all right in the end, modulo a billion
victims or so.


|> Is it really so incredulous, then, that Church leaders can make
|> mistakes?

Not at all.   What's incredible is that they can make mistakes that
contribute to the deaths of millions, and still find stooges to
make excuses for them.

jon.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner)
Subject: Re: Zacharia Rifkin, The Twelfth Planet
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Distribution: world,local
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:25:05 GMT

In article <7JAN199311372184@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>, lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes:
|> Has anyone heard of the above book?  I am asking on behalf of a
|> friend who has a family member involved with some cult-like group
|> based on the ideas in this book.  I gather that it's some kind
|> of Jewish ancient astronauts theory.

Jewish ancient astronauts?  Is this a bow to multiculturalism -- ethnic ancient 
astronauts?


-- 
Steve Schaffner        sschaff@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu
	The opinions expressed may be mine, and may not be those of SLAC, 
Stanford University, or the DOE.
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22288 alt.paranormal:2771
From: ath@linkoping.trab.se (Anders Thulin)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: California to be Destroyed May 8, Nostradamus Says
Date: 11 Jan 93 11:53:52 GMT
Organization: Telia Research AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden

In article <1993Jan11.000706.3842@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>The Fox TV "Sightings" program January 8 contained the usual sensationalist
>drivel. They were dealing with "predictions" for 1993, and one guy named
> ...

Nostradamus' verses or prophecies are usually impossible to date.
Some of them mention astronomical events (planet conjunctions), so
there may be some way to get at those. Others are for some reason
dated by their number in the various Centuries of verses. It's usually
only the people who are heavily involved in Nostradamus business who
can make sense of it.

There has been once fairly well-known interpretation of a verse that
said something about a falling wall. Some claimed it predicted a
catastrophe at Wall Street, some that it referred to California
sliding into the Pacific some time during the 1990's -- I wasn't
interested enough to remember.  It may be that that verse is popping
up again.

Are there any references to exactly *which* verse is being
interpreted? 

-- 
Anders Thulin        ath@linkoping.trab.se        013-23 55 32
Telia Research AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
From: nichael@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Glub Glub... Any Floods in Human History?
Date: 12 Jan 93 17:41:35 GMT
Reply-To: ncramer@bbn.com
Organization: BBN, Interzone Office
NNTP-Posting-Host: kariba.bbn.com
In-reply-to: batman@apple.apple.com's message of 12 Jan 93 04:09:48 GMT


batman@apple.apple.com (Ken Laws) writes:

   Part 2: my friend said he'd heard of "geological evidence" of the ocean level
   rising a couple hundred feet sometime during humanity's existence. Sounds
   like creationist pseudo-science to me. Anyone know where this idea came from?

Certainly ocean levels have changed dramatically over human history.

The standard model of the human invasion of the new world often
invokes a land-bridge across what is now the Bering Sea.

Seems to me I remember reading of evidence that some of the Stonehenge
rocks may have been quarried somewhere around Northern France and
sledged across to their current location.  (Whether or not this
actually happened isn't the point, rather the archeologists in
question were working with a model that presupposed a dry path from
Paris to Salisbury.)

In any case, the bottom of the North Sea is covered with the stumps of
the trees that once grew there.

N
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Subject: Re: Velikovsky Criticisms Wanted
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:59:52 GMT

grant@psych.toronto.edu (Stuart Grant) writes:
>I'm looking for some criticisms of Velikovsky's _Ages in Chaos_ and
>_Earth and Upheaval_. 

Ask on talk.origins.  One Velikovsky nut (who also believes animals
in animals psychically talking with humans) has necessitated quite a
lengthy FAQ on this.
-- 
My arms are aching to hold you!  Or is it arthritis?
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Reply-To: ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO)
Organization: HFSI, McLean VA.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 13:25:46 GMT

In article <93004.025534U16244@uicvm.uic.edu> David James Alexander Hanley <U16244@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>In article <1993Jan3.151154.18933@cs.unca.edu>, kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
>says:
>>
>
>>The Vatican hid and protected Jews from the Nazis.  They had an immense fear
>
>  Yeah, and hitler was the founder of the united jewish college fund.

If your point is that the Vatican's hiding and protecting Jewish
people from the Nazis was token and therefore non-deserving of
merit, I would suggest that you are completely off base.  I do not
say this because of my religion but because such a point is
completely absurd.  I would say the same if you substituted
Communist for the Vatican.

>
>to my theory.  And I think it's splendid that the CATHOLIC church is
>so concerned over Lutheran( German ) and Eastern orthodox( Russian )
>churches.  If only they could tell their people in Ireland to stop
>shooting protestants..

This is more anti-Catholic bigotry which is really tiresome.  Your
suggestion: that all Roman Catholics are puppets that are
manipulated by the Vatican so that all evil committed by them are
the responsibility of the Vatican, is ridiculous.  Please take
such postings to alt.bigotry.catholic where they belong.

>
>  Also mentioning how the churches were allowed to survive under
>German control reminds me of these interestign stories I heard about
>priests divulging confessional information to the secret police
>that might get people killed.  Niiiiccceee.

Again, your willingness to quote "stories" when it suits you
speaks clearly of your motives.  Take this garbage elsewhere.

>SEND E-MAIL TO : hanley1@earth.eecs.uic.edu


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.religion.misc