HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jbm@hal.trl.OZ.AU (Jacques Guy)
Subject: Fortean Times on Satanic Ritual Abuse
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 21:47:44 GMT

(Yet another plug for that excellent British bimonthly magazine).
Fortean Times recently featured several articles on Satanic
ritual abuse. Go and ferret them out.

Their conclusion: all the evidence points to fabrications by
mentally unbalanced individuals and impressionable children, 
often purposedly exploited by Christian fundamentalist extremists.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
From: I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: Technical University Braunschweig, Germany
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:37:40 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.134633.1868@hfsi.uucp>
ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
 
(Deletions)
>
>Perhaps you have never heard that ad hominem arguments are a
>logical fallacy?  This old argument that Christianity is flawed
>because some of its members erred is false.  Quoting misdeeds of
>members doesn't change one iota the validity of the teachings of
>Jesus.
 
This form of reasoning is a fallacy itself. For one, the RCC
claims to be guided by god, and when one looks at history, one
sees atrocities beyond comprehension done by the RCC in the
name of its god. The conclusion is that either the claim of guidance
is wrong or the guidance is not worth much. Note that both results
are not compatible with the doctrine of the RCC.
 
And secondly, the chain of events started by the teachings of Jesus
is good reason to doubt its content. Someone who is god, omnipotent,
all-loving, and all knowing should have better not started that. Apart
from that he blatantly failed at ensuring that his message got across
to everyone.
 
Call it an argument ad deum, if you wish.
   Benedikt
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22380 alt.paranormal:2784
From: u2nmh@csc.liv.ac.uk (N.M. Humphries)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
Subject: Re: California to be Destroyed May 8, Nostradamus Says
Date: 12 Jan 93 13:32:12 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,alt.paranormal
Organization: Computer Science, Liverpool University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

wood,christopher (ccw@prefect.cc.bellcore.com) wrote:
> In article <1993Jan11.115352.6063@linkoping.trab.se> ath@linkoping.trab.se (Anders Thulin) writes:

> >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, 

> N. predicts the Great Stock Market Crash of 1929! or 1987.  Or the fall
> of Ivan Boesky.  Or ...

> >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.

> Or is it the Berlin Wall?  N. got it right!  Waitaminnit, maybe it was
> the Great Wall of China!  Hadrian's Wall, perhaps?  

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

> Or which wall, or eagle, or lion, or ...

> That's the problem with post-hoc assessments of ambiguous predictions...
> so many events could have been predicted.

> >Anders Thulin        ath@linkoping.trab.se        013-23 55 32
> >Telia Research AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden


> -- 
> Chris Wood     Bellcore     ...!bellcore!prefect!ccw
>                          or ccw@prefect.cc.bellcore.com
Nostradamous' prophecies were written in a form of language that was very vague
most of the time. Historians and believers are trying to "bend" his prophecies
to match various events. I was going to say all events, but then I remembered 
some predictions he made about "Hister" and "The crooked cross" amongst other
things. Hitler and the swastika perhaps?
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Even so, he said that George Bush would be re-elected, the rest is history...
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: skinner@sp94.csrd.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner)
Subject: Re: interminable ad hominem argument
Reply-To: g-skinner@uiuc.edu
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 16:46:16 GMT

ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik ) writes:

>I ended up in trouble on one of the religious groups due to demonstration
>of logical validity, and where I personally was unable to quantify and
>draw a conclusion if premises such as sin, God and similar constructs
>ended up in a true or a false statement. 

Mr. Sandvik's trouble came from making the easily falsified claim
"There's nothing logical about Christianity."  When he rejected a
simple counter-example, it eventually became clear he claim relies on
a non-standard definition of logic:

     My personal interpretation of a logically valid argument is one
     where the outcome is clearly a known statement.

For Mr. Sandvik to find logic in an argument, the premises and the
conclusion must be true.  (If they are unverifiable, as in the case of
Euclidean geometry, he will admit to logic in an argument if there
some sort of "universal agreement".)

This notion can be contrasted with a passage from "Logic: A Modern
Introduction to Deductive Reasoning" by D.B. Terrell:

     An argument can be valid even though its premises and its
     conclusion are all false or the premises false (or one or more
     premises false) and the conclusion true.  As long as we must say
     that if the premises were true, the conclusion would have to be
     true as well, validity is not affected by the actual truth or
     falsity of the argument's component parts.

     From what has just been said about validity, it is clear
     that the mere validity of an argument does not insure
     the truth of its conclusion....



                                  Gregg Skinner

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: Psychics' Predictions Fizzle For 1992
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:47:11 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.171125.1@stsci.edu>, hathaway@stsci.edu writes:
>
              [B.A.S. fine list of psychic screwups deleted]
 
> Do you really think people actually believe ("swallows the "psychics'" 
> claims") this obvious entertainment?  Like, wow, next you'll be 
> worrying about whether people believe Soap Opera stories are real. 
> I mean, does _anyone_ put any $money$ on these things, like betting 
> in Las Vegas on the number of orgasms Madonna will have with Elvis in 
> February?

   I've met people from rural Iowa and inner city Los Angeles who thought 
soap operas were real.  They were exceptional individuals, I agree, but 
still you are crediting the 2-sigma level nitwits with more mental power
than they really have.

   Also, yes, obviously people put money on these things.  What is the
yearly cashflow of the National Enquirer?  People who buy that crap
sometimes buy it with money squeezed out of their children's food budget.

> Just being a pest - my three cars all have brake trouble and I'm feeling 
> nasty,  Wm. Hathaway 

   I've only got one car but the fuel pump blew out on the interstate fifteen
miles from anywhere, so I know how you feel.  I met one doberman, five
rabid animate dustmops (I think they were toy poodles) and a very nice hispanic
lady that spoke three words of English and had no phone before the state police
rescued me.

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
"Happy Hollidays"
-Kansas State Trooper, Dec. 24 1992.
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: <None>
Date: 8 Jan 93 17:30:08 EST

In article <1992Dec28.165941.28423@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
> In article <1992Dec27.235003.4413@rosevax.rosemount.com> grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards) writes:
>>tke@shep.att.com (Tom Epstein [415]) writes:
[...]
> This is of course faulty logic.  If I say that holy Christians
> always yield good fruit, I cannot make the statement that all
> people who yield good fruit are holy Christians.  What I can say
> quite logically, however, is that if I do not yield good fruit,
> than I am not a holy Christian.  And that is how people can
> disriminate between someone who falsely claims to be a holy
> Christian and one who truly is one. 

Now we simply have to define good fruit so  that all Christian's agree.
[...]
> I would advise you to start forming your opinion of Christianity
> from reading Jesus's teaching themselves just as I would advise
> someone to form their opinion of say the Moslem faith by reading
> the Koran, not the newspaper accounts of what some governments and
> people who are Moslems in the world are doing.

Which means, interpret the Bible in your own  way and interpretation, and that
opinion of Christianity is  as  valid as any other.

Sounds like,  to each his own.

George Kambic
standard disclaimer

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kenl@origami.cc.bellcore.com (Ken Lehner)
Subject: Anyone want to challenge GNC?
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 18:59:09 GMT

I don't feel like being too confrontational, so would anyone else be
interested in calling a General Nutrition Center (GNC) store, and asking
them exactly what is in those "Nature's Way" homeopathic remedies, and
how much they cost?
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kepley@photon.phys.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Subject: Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:17:52 GMT

In article <93011.084750SASTPH@vm.sas.com> <SASTPH@vm.sas.com> writes:
>In article <C0M0r8.5I8@ccu.umanitoba.ca>, ens@ccu.umanitoba.ca says:
> -------------
>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.

I think we better be careful that we don't just begin a new witchhunt with
the therapists as target.  If these "memories" are not real, the therapist
may be unwittingly providing the opportunity for these people to fantasize,
but that doesn't necessarily mean they are "causing" the "memories".  
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.atheism
From: kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 01:06:06 GMT


1) There were no Christians killed by the "Jewish Atheists".  That was
   sarcasm meant to show how absurd it is that the Catholic Church was
   responsible for what the Nazis did to the Jews.

2) If you doubt the murderousness of Stalin, you're behind even the
   Soviet Communist Party which has admitted it.  I suggest you
   take a look at "Harvest of Sorrow" by Conrad and "The Gulag 
   Archipelago" by Solzhenitzn (for Bolshevic attacks on Christians
   in particular and other particular groups).

3) Yes I do make a distinction between Atheists and communists and 
   (stupid as I am), I also think the Nazis did and I doubt their
   piety.  Again, I was trying to show that claiming that the Catholic
   Church conspired to kill "Atheists" is probably conceivable to really
   rabid anti-Christians (and maybe Oliver Stone), but I don't think 
   it's a worthy claim.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius)
Subject: Dvorak faster than QWERTY?
Organization: University of Central Florida
Distribution: sci
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 18:57:05 GMT

I heard there is some doubt as to whether using a
Dvorak keyboard actually makes any significant impact
on typing speed.  Can anyone confirm or deny that it
is actually faster? [I am currently reading a Stephen
Jay Gould article called "The Panda'a Thumb of Tech-
nology", about the QWERTY keyboard].


Mark Schnitzius
schnitzi@eola.cs.ucf.edu
University of Central Florida
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22152 alt.atheism:25288
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: 7 Jan 93 21:20:44 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <C0G4Eo.F2v@unixhub.SLAC.Stanford.EDU>, sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner) writes:
>
> Frankly, this whole business of people, typing safely away in their offices 
> or homes, trading on the suffering of others in a usenet flame war makes me 
> a little queasy.

My, that's an interesting thought.   Does this mean that we'll be hearing
a little less about some events that may or may not have happened two
thousand years ago?

Or is this one of those deals where Christians get to justify their religion 
on the basis of the suffering of one man, but the rest of us ought not to 
point out what it has done to millions?

jon.
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22320 alt.atheism:25676
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: 8 Jan 93 22:56:51 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan8.110856.25862@cs.unca.edu>, kepley@photon.phys.unca.edu (Brad Kepley) writes:
|> In article <1ij9ndINN48o@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> >In article <1993Jan8.060050.9321@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> >|> In article <1iatk6INNij4@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
|> 
|> Here's you jon:
|> >|> >
|> >|> >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.
|> >|> 
|> 
|> Now, here's John (Johnny?)
|> >|> Err, what does the German Catholic Youth Organization have to do with
|> >|> the Vatican?
|> 
|> >
|> >Is this a quiz, or do you have a point to make?
|> >
|> >jon.
|> 
|> Looks to me like the point he's making is that you won't let me put "everyone
|> on the same level" but you are trying to put everyone on the same level.
|> The German Catholic Youth Organization = The Vatican = Every Christian, to
|> you...or so you make it appear.  If I were to find evidence of "Budhists for
|> Hitler" would you really expect everyone to discount the teachings of
|> Buddha forevermore on the basis of that?

No, I don't think that can be the point.   When I pointed out that you
were trying to put everyone on the same level, it was because you were
equating dissimilar behaviours.

You were trying to make Churchill's willingness to deal with Stalin, 
while continuing to denounce Stalin's oppressions, appear the same as 
the Churches endorsement of Hitler

It had nothing to do with discussions about what organization equates to
what.

But to return to the point, since I have explicitly said that it's the
behaviour of the Churches *in* *Germany* that I complaining about, what
is the point of a question asking me if the German Youth League is the
same thing as the Vatican.

How did the Vatican get in here?   Anyone know?

jon.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dfox@quack.sac.ca.us (David Fox)
Subject: Re: My psychic predictions for the rest of 1992 (results)
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: 5 Jan 1993 05:56:00 UTC

In article <schnitzi.726173701@eola.cs.ucf.edu> schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:

>As you may or may not recall, at the end of last June I
>posted a list of my "psychic" prediictions for the second
>half of 1992.  I will now announce the results of these
>predictions.


>>6.  An airplane will crash in San Francisco; a famous
>>musical star will be killed.

I don't know about the airplane but didn't a light plane
crash somewhere in the Bay Area recently?  That's vague
enough to qualify, right?

>>7.  Celebrety fun:  Mickey Rourke will go into a coma;
>>George Burns will finally die; Madonna will be in an
>>automobile wreck.

Perhaps the psycho (I mean psychic) got Madonna and Sam
Kinisson (sp) confused.  I mean, it's understandable. Sam
did get killed in an automobile wreck, and he's famous,
sort of.

>Mark Schnitzius
>schnitzi@eola.cs.ucf.edu
>University of Central Florida
--
David Fox
dfox@quack.sac.ca.us


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 00:27:33 GMT

>  Really?  I thought the catholic church is lead by the pope, who,
>according to catholic doctrine, is infallable.

Well maybe you can enlighten me about Catholic Doctrine since I'm not
Catholic.  Which doctrine exactly are you talking about?  Which document
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:22263 alt.messianic:3945
From: mikeh@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Michael Hore)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Date: 9 Jan 1993 21:06:44 +1100
Organization: Kralizec Dialup Unix Sydney: +61-2-837-1183 V.42bis
NNTP-Posting-Host: kralizec.zeta.org.au


Chris Krolczyk writes, in reply to Edward Harbin,

>>which is not to say he [Galileo] had no problems with the religious establishment
>>of his day.
>
>The "religious establishment" of his day (i.e.,the Roman Catholic church)
>forced him to recant due to findings on his part which contradicted their
>interpretation of the bible and its interpretation of how the universe
>worked. So much for Christian thought's unwavering support of scientific
>innovation....

Come on, Chris, it would be great to have a reasonable discussion
about this, and we'll have a much better chance of doing so if you
at least speak to what Edward is saying and not some caricature of 
his position.  In the quote above he at least implied a difference
between a Christian worldview and the actions of the religious
establishment.  You should at least address that point and not just
assume it doesn't exist, by equating "Christian thought" with the
actions of Galileo's persecutors.

>>>society contribute to science?  Especially things that tend to throw doubt
>>>on religious teaching (e.g., evolution, cosmology, dendrochronology).
>>
>>Most Christians have trouble with none of the above.
>
>Oh,_please_! You've _never_ seen any attacks on evolutionary theory from
>Christians?

Here you go again.  Edward's point was valid (at least that's so here
in Australia).  And I'm sure he has seen those attacks.  That wasn't
the point he was making.  He used the word "Most".  There are as many
shades of opinion in Christianity as in any body of belief, including
atheism.  Trotting out only the far-out elements as though they
represent the whole doesn't help your position at all.

Cheers,  Mike.

--------------------------------------------------------
Mike Hore        Internet:    mikeh@kralizec.zeta.org.au
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: rosch@cpdw.enet.dec.com (Ray Rosch)
Subject: Laura Houghteling Murder
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:45:31 GMT


Over the weekend it has been reported locally that the Police are investigating
the murder of Laura Houghteling of Bethesda, MD.  Apparently she was murdered
at the end of October in Bethesda, MD.
It was reported by the local TV media - WBZ-TV, Boston - that the Police in
Bethesda, MD used a Psychic in their investigation.  The Psychic led Police to
a bloody pillow case a mile or so from the victems house.  The report further
stated that the very next day a bloodhound tracked the victem from the house
to the pillow case. A bloody fingerprint on the pillow case points to the main
suspect of the murder.

This _seems_ to be a case where a Psychic found evidence to a crime which was
confirmed by the Police. I say _seems_ as it's either an extrodinary coinci-
dence or the media has mis-reported the facts of the case.

Anyone in the Bethesda, MD area familiar with the case care to comment and add
anything. Are the facts true as reported?

*
*	Opinions do not represent my employer
*
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Zacharia Rifkin, The Twelfth Planet
Date: 9 Jan 93 03:52:38 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Distribution: world,local
Organization: (The Afterlife of Gogol, Inc.)

In article <7JAN199311372184@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>,
lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) wrote:
> 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.

I have the book somewhere on my 'fringe science' section in my
book shelf. If you are interested I might make a short overview
of the theories presented in the book. In one sentence the idea
is that there is/was a 12:th planet, and the beings cultivated
the young culture of Earth. Shades of Daniken, and if I remember
the book was written in the 50:ies before Daniken was active
with his quack-scientific theory.

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.		
Usenix member # 6110.
From: paj@uk.co.gec-mrc (Paul Johnson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Velikovsky Criticisms Wanted
Date: 7 Jan 93 13:22:59 GMT
Reply-To: paj@uk.co.gec-mrc (Paul Johnson)
Organization: GEC-Marconi Research Centre, Great Baddow, UK

In article <8341@lib.tmc.edu> draper@odin.mda.uth.tmc.edu (E.J. Draper) writes:
>It really shocked my that Sagan spent the amount of time he did in order
>to rebuke Velikovsky.  As a matter of fact, I can't understand why
>anybody would want to invest time and effort in dealing with such obvious
>nonsense.

Because to many people it is *not* obvious nonsense.  Some people lack
the background in science and archeology.  Remember that most
interested laymen (the sort of people who V. might influence) don't
really think about science, they just try to keep up with current
ideas.  This makes them ill equipped to distinquish between "the
Earth is 4.5e9 years old" and "Venus was a moon of Jupiter".  Also
remember that the average politician in charge of science policy will
be an "interested layman".  If you are lucky.

Paul.
-- 
Paul Johnson (paj@gec-mrc.co.uk).	    | Tel: +44 245 73331 ext 3245
--------------------------------------------+----------------------------------
These ideas and others like them can be had | GEC-Marconi Research is not
for $0.02 each from any reputable idealist. | responsible for my opinions