HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heflin@rtsg.mot.com (Suzanne Stratton Heflin)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:12:10 GMT

quest@iowegia.uucp (Steve J. Quest) writes:

>        Check out the library- how many factual verses fictional 
>books are there?  My opinion holds that the bible is about 10 
>percent fact, "jazzed up" with fiction to make their god represent 
>more power than the other gods of the time.  A bit of the old 
>childhood "my Dad can beat up your Dad" scenerio.  Fiction is 
>important and prolific in our society.  It is no wonder why the 
>bible is filled with it.................sq


Which 10% would you say is fact?  How do you explain the hundreds of
prophecies in the Bible that have proven true, verified by other ancient
historians and even modern archaeologists?  Many people, myself included,
wonder why there is so much "boring fact" in the Bible, particularly in the
Old Testament, when we'd rather have just the good "God stuff"  Well, that
"boring fact" is looking more and more interesting to those that feel, as
you do, that the Bible is 90% fiction.  Don't judge the Bible, or the
Christian faith, by hearsay alone, or what you see one believer do.
Investigate it as you would anything, by rigorous study and scientific
method.  I think you'll be surprised at astronomers and archaeologists that
have set out to disprove some aspect of the Bible, only to become believers.

Xref: sparky rec.org.mensa:8970 soc.culture.jewish:24178 alt.atheism:24478 alt.slack:3585
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Subject: Re: Re^2: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:40:06 GMT

In article <e3JiwB2w165w@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> waldo@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Todd J. Dicker) writes:
>But far beyond this, very little in the way of liturgy, custom, law 
>and tradition in Judaism can or should be taken at face value.  This is 
>apparantly what you seem to have done, and I find it a shame.  I see many 
>people who turn away from Judaism because they find the story of Noah and 
>the great flood or Sodom and Gemorrah too hard to believe, or they find 
>inconsistencies in the binding of Isaac.  Some study, some insight, and a 
>good teacher could help you to realize that there are social and 
>psychological~r meanings beyond the literal to these stories, and there 
>is room for advanced understanding of these stories.

But what does this mean?  Does it means that the _only_ meanings are the non-
literal meanings, or does it mean that the non-literal meanings are there, but
we are supposed to accept the literal meanings as true too?

If the latter, criticising the literal meanings still applies.
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:17:44 GMT

heflin@rtsg.mot.com (Suzanne Stratton Heflin) writes:

>Which 10% would you say is fact?  How do you explain the hundreds of
>prophecies in the Bible that have proven true, verified by other ancient
>historians and even modern archaeologists?  

Name one.  Just one.  Shouldn't be hard, if there are hundreds of them.

>you do, that the Bible is 90% fiction.  Don't judge the Bible, or the
>Christian faith, by hearsay alone, or what you see one believer do.
>Investigate it as you would anything, by rigorous study and scientific
>method.  I think you'll be surprised at astronomers and archaeologists that
>have set out to disprove some aspect of the Bible, only to become believers.

Don't tell me you believe the world is only 6000 years old.

mark
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: skh4161@mvs.draper.com (Kjeld Hvatum)
Subject: Re: Triple Nine Society
Organization: Draper Laboratory
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 07:22:00 GMT


>From: Chris Long <clong@romulus.rutgers.edu>
>Message-ID: <Dec.22.07.47.25.1992.5832@romulus.rutgers.edu>
>
>Are they still in business?  I haven't gotten anything from them
>in quite a while.  IMHO their journal is the most interesting one
>around.

As far as I can tell, they're temporarily out of business.  But they've
had a way of coming back to life in the past, and everybody eventually
got what they paid for.  But I will make some inquiries soon.  The
editor was supposed to produce two double issues right about now, to
make up for slippage, but I haven't heard anything.
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:47:25 GMT

In article <VXi2VB3w165w@iowegia.uucp> quest@iowegia.uucp (Steve J. Quest) writes:
>pamela@sscux1.ssc.gov (pamela gurd) writes:
>
>> 	It seems to me that the strongest proof of the non-existence
>> of God is the lack of obvious moral difference between religious
>> people and others.  Some of the most moral and compassionate people
>> I know are atheists.
>> 
>Pam,
>        One of the reasons why `god heads' tend to show no morals 
>or compassion is simply because they can do no wrong and suffer no 
>guilt.  You see, it is my understanding that these people will do 
>wrong, then pray for forgivness- which since god is something 
>created in the mind, they get forgiven (they get what ever they 
>want).

[anecdotal evidence deleted]

With all due respect, Steve, what you've given here is a valid
potential explanation of what you've observed, but remember that
the conclusion is a generalization which theists may not have
observed.  I myself have seen instances of that kind of "I've
killed a dozen people, but now I want to put that behind me"-kind
of reasoning, but there is no shortage of rationalizing in people
of all beliefs.

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: wiegand@rtsg.mot.com (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Reply-To: motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 19:14:40 GMT

heflin@rtsg.mot.com (Suzanne Stratton Heflin) writes:

>quest@iowegia.uucp (Steve J. Quest) writes:

>>        Check out the library- how many factual verses fictional 
>>books are there?  My opinion holds that the bible is about 10 
>>percent fact, "jazzed up" with fiction to make their god represent 
>>more power than the other gods of the time.  A bit of the old 
>>childhood "my Dad can beat up your Dad" scenerio.  Fiction is 
>>important and prolific in our society.  It is no wonder why the 
>>bible is filled with it.................sq

>Which 10% would you say is fact?  How do you explain the hundreds of
>prophecies in the Bible that have proven true, verified by other ancient
>historians and even modern archaeologists?  Many people, myself included,

Which prophecies would you say have been "proven true"? Your statement
has as little support as Steve's statements.

>wonder why there is so much "boring fact" in the Bible, particularly in the
>Old Testament, when we'd rather have just the good "God stuff"  Well, that
>"boring fact" is looking more and more interesting to those that feel, as
>you do, that the Bible is 90% fiction.  Don't judge the Bible, or the
>Christian faith, by hearsay alone, or what you see one believer do.
>Investigate it as you would anything, by rigorous study and scientific
>method.  I think you'll be surprised at astronomers and archaeologists that
>have set out to disprove some aspect of the Bible, only to become believers.

I'd be supprised to see a list of these "astronomers and archaeologists"
people seem to like talking about but never name.

People on both sides of this issue seem to like to throw around vague
assertions without supplying any hard evidence.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Wiegand - Motorola Inc.
motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net            uunet!motcid!wiegand
Disclamer: I didn't do it - I was somewhere else at the time.
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: jlacey@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (james.w.lacey)
Subject: Re: Politics and Intelligence
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:13:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.162033.17953@cbnewse.cb.att.com> gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart) writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.151856.1@happy.colorado.edu> etbeteille@happy.colorado.edu writes:
>>..
>>If it is generally true that the more "intelligent"
>>among us (i.e. university professors, and other 
>>alleged leaders of the mind) tend to be more liberal
>>politically, would it follow that those who are
>>considered extremely intelligent would naturally
>>be libertarian?
>>...
>You may have answered your own question.  Basically, you
>will have to define your terms more completely to enable a
>rational discussion.  "Liberal" can mean one who is open to
>others' points of view, flexible, "fair-minded", etc..  "Liberal"
>can also mean "not open to non-liberals' views", radical, oppresive,
>naive, a destructive to established values, regardless of their
>practicality.  Or anything in between.
>...

Here! Here!  I have come to the conclusion that the terms
"liberal" and "conservative" are used as such an abbreviated form of
intellectual shorthand to leave many arguments devoid of 
meaning.  The meaning also changes in various contexts leading
to more confusion.

For example, Liberal, wrt economics, means an advocate of
free markets (capitalism).  Politically,  such as view
is often termed Conservative.

In the last few years, in Communist and former Communist countries,
those in power that wanted to keep to a strict interpretation
of Communism were often termed "conservative" in the US press,
while in the normal political spectrum, they were far to   
the *left* of the reformists.  (Thus the leftists were termed
conservative.)

BTW, the original poster seems confused about liberal/libertarian.
Usually, (but probably not necessarily) libertarians are extreme 
*conservatives* or right-wingers.


-- 
     Jim Lacey  --  my own opinions    
     email:  att!cbnewsl!jlacey  or  jlacey@cbnewsl.cb.att.com
     D'ou venons-nous? Que sommes-nous? Ou allons-nous?
Xref: sparky rec.org.mensa:8955 soc.culture.jewish:24098 alt.atheism:24408 alt.slack:3573
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: Sick and tired of cries of sexism (was Re: 9 1/2 Weeks)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 16:15:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.045622.12559@psych.toronto.edu> anna@psych.toronto.edu (Anna Filippone) writes:
>In article <92364.185826U23700@uicvm.uic.edu> <U23700@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>>although research has been done that shows that men have a greater
>There was no significant difference found in the abilities of girls and boys
>in math up until the age of 11.  After that point there was an advantage on

I wonder if the types of math studied at different ages had an effect.

>the part of boys.  Hell, when you have things like Barbie dolls saying "Math
>class is tough" can you wonder how these differences are created?

Yes, because I have no idea how much an effect this could cause, and
I have witnessed differences in behavior among children that are hard
to explain solely with cultural pressures.

>As well, keep in mind that in all studies of differences between boys and
>girls, women and men, the differences are not overwhelming.  Sure, they're
>statistically significant, but that doesn't mean there isn't overlap.  
>When you look at math or reading or visual-spatial abilities, 95% of the
>boys and girls perform at the same level, only 5% of one sex have an 
>advantage.  So can we really say that these small differences allow for the  
>perpetuation of such well-defined stereotypes?
>
>Anna

Actually, there seems to be a wider statistical range in boys than
in girls, which might account for this.  Of course, that would suggest
that there would be more poor-performing boys in math than girls,
as well.

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: Favorite Beverages
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:57:17 GMT

In article <724978882.AA00000@blkcat.UUCP> Linda.Cunningham@p811.f70.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Linda Cunningham) writes:
>
>  SP> From: sderby@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Stuart P. Derby)
>  SP> In article <Dec.20.08.30.16.1992.5200@remus.rutgers.edu>
>  SP> clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
>
>  > To get off the other subjects:
>
>  SP> At last, a topic I understand!! :-)
>
>Me, too!  :-)
>
>Moet & Chandon Brut Imperial at 40 deg. F
>Laphroaig, neat, in a brandy snifter
>peppermint and vervain tea, hot
>homemade blackberry brandy with hot Russian Caravan tea on the side
>McNally's Extra Ale (Big Rock Brewery, Calgary, AB, Canada), draft
>
>Linda


Not to plunge this thread into mundane depths or to appear Mr.
Regular Guy, tu it strikes me that the beverage that gives me
the most bang-per-sip comes out of the watercooler at the gym
when it takes the most effort to walk over to it.  It's funny
that in that state, any flavorings added to the water that I'd
otherwise really miss become objectionable.

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:29:22 GMT

In article <heflin.725649130@cherokee30> heflin@rtsg.mot.com (Suzanne Stratton Heflin) writes:
>quest@iowegia.uucp (Steve J. Quest) writes:
>
>>        Check out the library- how many factual verses fictional 
>>books are there?  My opinion holds that the bible is about 10 
>>percent fact, "jazzed up" with fiction to make their god represent 
>>more power than the other gods of the time.  A bit of the old 
>>childhood "my Dad can beat up your Dad" scenerio.  Fiction is 
>>important and prolific in our society.  It is no wonder why the 
>>bible is filled with it.................sq
>
>
>Which 10% would you say is fact?  How do you explain the hundreds of
>prophecies in the Bible that have proven true, verified by other ancient

In all fairness, the "proofs" of these prophecies are generally debated
themselves, and are considered by the opposition to be more of the stuff
that the previous poster has referred to.

>historians and even modern archaeologists?  Many people, myself included,
>wonder why there is so much "boring fact" in the Bible, particularly in the
>Old Testament, when we'd rather have just the good "God stuff"  Well, that

Here, you are agreeing with the previous poster if you make a distinction
between "fact" and "God stuff".

>"boring fact" is looking more and more interesting to those that feel, as

There you go.  "Boring fact" apparently has less of an effect on you and
those you are referring to than the more dramatic material, and again,
this certainly isn't surprising, and agrees with the original poster.
I'd certainly be more impressed with a burning bush than with a guy
telling me he's "heard tell" of something.

>you do, that the Bible is 90% fiction.  Don't judge the Bible, or the
>Christian faith, by hearsay alone, or what you see one believer do.
>Investigate it as you would anything, by rigorous study and scientific
>method.  I think you'll be surprised at astronomers and archaeologists that
>have set out to disprove some aspect of the Bible, only to become believers.

I'd be interested in some names.  Perhaps you could post some?  You might
also be interested in the recent issue of Time that discusses that very
thing and exactly how the various scientists describe their personal
views of "god" and the Bible.

GMS
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa,soc.culture.jewish,alt.atheism,alt.slack
From: gmark@cbnewse.cb.att.com (gilbert.m.stewart)
Subject: Re: Re^2: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 00:11:22 GMT

In article <4339@novavax.UUCP> mitch@novavax.UUCP (Mitch Silverman) writes:
>tedwards@eng.umd.edu (Thomas Grant Edwards) writes:
>
>>I'd like to add that there is nothing wrong with developing 
>>a sense of spirituality while remaining an atheist.  I enjoy
>>Wiccan circles, catholic masses, technopagan rituals, etc.
>>I know the spirituality I experience is metaphorical and
>>not part of the reality which science reveals.
[...]
>So anyway, answer me this: does human spirituality, in any of its
>forms, necessarily require a belief in [a] god[ess, s, esses]?  Or
>may one be 'spiritual' without any more than a recognition that
>one is human, and thus [perhaps] one enjoys certain rituals for 
>themselves, and for the human contact they involve?

Not to be a party-pooper, but again, this is obviously an issue of
the definition of "spiritual".  If I were to define it as a "lofty"
feeling, or some kind of altered state, possibly pleasant/blissful,
I would say that meditation is a form of spirituality that does
not require any kind of "spirits" or deities.  I would say that
"spirituality" is another of those words that is tossed around
quite a bit without an agreed-upon, specific definition.

GMS
From: wanagin@kingkong.escape.de (Ulf Bahrenfuss)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re:  Mensa abroad--Germny?
Distribution: world
Date: 3 Jan 93 12:09:15 GMT
Organization: private

In article <1830@nate.UUCP> ken@nate.UUCP (Ken Gacioch) writes:
>In article <C04Mq4.5FK.1@cs.cmu.edu> dell+@cs.cmu.edu (Dellera) writes:
>>I have been living abroad for a while, and am interested in re-joining
>>Mensa.  Does anybody know if the group is active in Germany?  I don't 
>>have an up-to-date directory with names and addresses of international 
>>group contacts.
>>
>>I'd welcome mail (for the next week or so--home for christmas) from anyone
>>with thoughts or experience to share about Mensa abroad. 
>>
>>--Kim Dellera
>>  (dell@koz.garnet.cs.cmu.edu)
>
>From the International Mensa Directory in the September 192 Mensa Bulletin
>(No. 359):
>Germany:
>  Hans Lippmann, Chairman MinD
>  Kapuzinerstr 7
>  8390 Passau 12
>  Germany
>  (49) 851 2510    FAX: (49) 851 31532

The international bulletin is outdated. Look at the FAQ mensa-join.



  Margot Schmied,   Chairman MinD
  Saarlandstr. 22
  8940 Memmingen
  Germany

  Office:
  Mensa in Deutschland
  c/o John Plate
  Muenzstr. 6
  5000 Koeln 80
  Germany
  
  (49) 221 618215  FAX: (49) 221 622169


Ulf

LocSec of MinD in Braunschweig and editor of the newsletter "MumBS".
--
Ulf Bahrenfuss                    wanagin@kingkong.escape.de
From: ken@nate.UUCP (Ken Gacioch)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: What is God? (Was: Atheism and Intelligence)
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:37:01 GMT
Reply-To: nate!ken@cs.rit.edu
Organization: HealthChex, Inc.

In article <32820002@hpkslx.mayfield.HP.COM> seghers@hpkslx.mayfield.HP.COM (David Seghers) writes:
[...body of post deleted; part of sig follows...]
>
>Animist and general heretic (have religion, will poke fun),
>

Reminds me of a Robert A. Heinlein line, from the notebooks of Lazarus Long,
from Time Enough for Love:

        "One man's theology is another man's belly laugh."

Ken Gacioch
nate!ken@cs.rit.edu
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa,soc.culture.jewish,alt.atheism,alt.slack
From: howard@netcom.com (Howard Berkey)
Subject: Re: Re^2: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:47:24 GMT

>Even to a skeptical atheist ('skeptical' in the sense that the
>'Skeptical Enquirer' intends), there are phenomena that are
>scientifically *explainable* that have not yet been
>scientifically *explained*.  No one can deny the *existence*, for
>instance, of glossolalia (speaking in tongues) or the prevalence
>of similar interpretations of near-death experiences--or for that
>matter, even the existence of religions themselves.  Yet the
>*existence* of these cultural and/or neurobiological phenomena
>proves nothing about their causes.
> 

Hmm.  how about 'temporary insanity?'  Oh wait, I'm not catholic.
Nevermind.

-Howard, ArchBishop (tm) of Alamo Hill, Church of BoB Without Meaning


-- 
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Howard Berkey                       			   howard@netcom.com
Disclaimer:  I have been put into an evil trance by Ricardo Montalban.
It happened late at night whilst watching the 'Mr. Rourke hypnotizes the
devil' episode of Fantasy Island.  These words are his, not mine.
... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...    ... .. ...   ... .. ...   ... .. ...
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
From: kkirksey@world.std.com (Ken B Kirksey)
Subject: Re: Atheism and Intelligence
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:40:48 GMT

In article <schnitzi.725667464@eola.cs.ucf.edu> schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius) writes:
>>you do, that the Bible is 90% fiction.  Don't judge the Bible, or the
>>Christian faith, by hearsay alone, or what you see one believer do.
>>Investigate it as you would anything, by rigorous study and scientific
>>method.  I think you'll be surprised at astronomers and archaeologists that
>>have set out to disprove some aspect of the Bible, only to become believers.
>
>Don't tell me you believe the world is only 6000 years old.

Where in the bible does it say that the world is only 6000 years old?

                         Ken

-- 
+----------------------------+------------------------------------------------+
| Ken Kirksey                | "A man cannot be too careful in his choice     |
| kkirksey@world.std.com     |  of enemies."                                  |
| The World, Brookline, MA   |                - Oscar Wilde                   |
Xref: sparky rec.org.mensa:8966 soc.culture.jewish:24140 alt.atheism:24447 alt.slack:3579