HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Coded Scientific Info in the Bible???
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:15:23 GMT
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science

In article <BuJHAp.n8@news.larc.nasa.gov>, claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon) writes:
|> When I was in Brazil I knew a guy which is a Medicine Doctor, has 
|> lots of technical papers published in his field and, I remember, was 
|> also involved in deciphering  old books in the *very original* like 
|> the Bible, for instance. He argued that books like that has coded 
|> information on scientific research done by scientists (alchemists??) of 
|> the epoch which could not make their discoveries public for fearing  
|> of being killed. 
|> 
|> This guy told me that in a passage of Geneses of the Bible there is an 
|> explanation on how to make false gold (no mention on how to make 
|> *real* gold) and he told me that other parts of the Bible have other 
|> kinds of information like that just waiting to be deciphered (of 
|> course, you have to get hold of the original document so the code is 
|> not messed up after being translated to other languages). Does anyone 
|> know anything about that? Whether it is true or not? I would be glad 
|> if anyone could point me out to any references.
|> 
|> Claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov
|> 
|> 

For a popular treatment of this sort of thing, see "Foucault's Pendulum"
by Umberto Eco.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle)
Subject: Re: UFO Abductions: A Lucrative Game
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
Date: 14 Sep 92 17:25:48 GMT

rpjday@cuug.ab.ca (Robert P.J. Day 277-3175) writes:

>  ............................................. From the Fri, Sept 11
>Calgary Herald,

>		"Psychic fair probing UFO calling cards"

>  Many people have "missing time" in their lives they can't account for,
>says a Langley, B.C. woman who believes she was abducted by aliens in
>a UFO.
>  "People who have undergone trauma may not be able to remember it.  It's
>like missing time," says Linda Taylor, a registered nurse and trauma
>counselor.
>  "It may have been that they suffered from sexual abuse or an accident
>or illness when they were young and it's been blocked from their
>consciousness."
>  Taylor said that until she was in her 30s she was plagued by the
>feeling that something happened to her when she was four.
>  "I thought I'd been a sexual abuse victim."
> .................................................................
>  Taylor says she feels more at peace with her experiences since going
>public with them several months ago and by helping other victims of
>aliens, childhood incidents and secual attacks.
>  Taylor and Ed Hicks will lecture about UFO experiences at the ninth
>annual Psychic ESP Fair today through Sunday at the Calgary Convention
>Centre, which also includes talks by psychics.
>  Hicks, a Tofield-born "research scientist," says that crop circles
>found in Alberta fields are mathematical signs given to us by aliens 
>that Earth is going through major weather, crop and environmental
>changes.
>  He says an alien gave him an idea for his invention, the Dream Dome
>(available soon for under $30), a canopy put over a bed which reportedly
>aids sleep.
>  .................................................................
>*** END OF ARTICLE ***

>  Comments, anyone?  As if I had to ask :-)

Just one.  The planet Tofield is in which galaxy?

>R. Day
>Member, Alberta Skeptics
>... the pit bull of skepticism ...
From: ingria@bbn.com (Bob Ingria)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Continuing ideal order
Date: 15 Sep 1992 00:40:46 GMT
Reply-To: ingria@BBN.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com
In-reply-to: Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG's message of 13 Sep 92 05:50:50 GMT

In article <716367852.1@wyrm.rbbs-net.ORG> Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Rick Moen) writes:

   In article <1992Sep10.130926.12626@dorsai.com>, idealord@dorsai.com
   (Jeff Harrington) wrote as follows:

   > Subject: Continuing IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV Activities
   > Organization: The Dorsai Embassy +1.718.729.5018
   > ...
   > As I have stated in my previous posts - IdEAL ORDER Psychic TV intends
   > to disrupt the media/state and spread beautiful, chaotic consciousness
   > globally.  This process has been kept secret by an ongoing cult of
   > secrecy which includes prominent members of the "skeptical" community.

   Damn it, Harrington!  You were supposed to keep this under wraps until
   the next Global Spiritual Independence Day.  If you don't stop messing
   up, I'm going to lean on the MJ-12 to revoke the Dorsai Embassy's
   diplomatic immunity.

My God!  The Dorsai are part of this?  Then we're doomed!  Unless we
can get Retief to act as negotiator (although it might be useful to
have Ffahrd and the Grey Mouser on standby, in case dirty tricks are
needed).

   Regards,
   Rick Moen, Director   "Skepticism is a good place to start from; that
   Bay Area Skeptics      way you won't go overboard when some 'IT' happens
   Editor, _BASIS_        to YOU."      -- Ivan Stang

Don't forget: ``You'd pay to know what you really think.''

-30-
Bob

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Coded Scientific Info in the Bible???
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 04:50:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep14.201335.16562@linus.mitre.org> m23364@mwunix (James Meritt) writes:
>In article <BuJHAp.n8@news.larc.nasa.gov> claudio@nmsb.larc.nasa.gov (Claudio Egalon) writes:
>}When I was in Brazil I knew a guy which is a Medicine Doctor, has 
>}lots of technical papers published in his field and, I remember, was 
>}also involved in deciphering  old books in the *very original* like 
>}the Bible, for instance. He argued that books like that has coded 
>}information on scientific research done by scientists (alchemists??) of 
>}the epoch which could not make their discoveries public for fearing  
>}of being killed. 
>}
>}not messed up after being translated to other languages). Does anyone 
>}know anything about that? Whether it is true or not? I would be glad 
>}if anyone could point me out to any references.
>
>Go read Nostradaemous.
>
>If you open with "coded" with unspecified code, you then get to justify
>anything at all.
>
Say, I bet that if we hooked the black box from the movie Sneakers up
to an ASCII version of Nostradaemous, we could find out -exactly-
what he meant!   :^)


Rich

payner@netcom.com

>


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Subject: Re: Brain and Mind (was: Logic and God)
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:13:57 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.221034.5533@meteor.wisc.edu>, tobis@meteor.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis) writes:
>>You
>>just stated a set of beliefs which should allow consciousness to arise without
>>a brain, just not dependent on complexity - ie, it could be anywhere.  But
>>we do not see consciousness in trees or rocks, and we do not see damage to
>>consciousness from a broken leg.  Only brain injuries do it.  The evidence is
>>against you.
>
>I suspect that trees and rocks are not conscious, but I am not certain of
>it. However, I will stipulate for the purposes of argument that a brain 
>or other information processing device is necessary for consciousness
>to exist. This does not prove that it is sufficient. My point is that
>no such proof is possible, because the phenomenon is unobserveable in
>any objective sense. 

You're on very shaky ground here, Michael.  Let's make a similar argument
in another field:  I will stipulate for the purposes of argument that atoms are
necessary for chemical processes to exist.  This does not prove that the
existence of atoms is sufficient.  No such proof is possible, because I can
postulate some unobservable sine qua non for chemical processes, and claim that
the atoms only mediate this unobservable stuff.

You can make exactly the same argument in ANY field.  You can ALWAYS postulate
that there's something unobservable that's REALLY the guts of that field, and
we're only seeing its effects.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL

Disclaimer:  Hey, I understand VAXen and VMS.  That's what I get paid for.  My
understanding of astronomy is purely at the amateur level (or below).  So
unless what I'm saying is directly related to VAX/VMS, don't hold me or my
organization responsible for it.  If it IS related to VAX/VMS, you can try to
hold me responsible for it, but my organization had nothing to do with it.
From: raicu@netcom.com (Eugen Raicu)
Subject: Re: Proof: God wrote the Bible
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 06:25:13 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

brendt@dip1 (Brendt Wohlberg) writes:
: [ Article crossposted from uct.chat ]
: [ Author was fllant01@uctvax.uct.ac.za ]
: [ Posted on 31 Aug 92 13:44:25 +0200 ]
: 
: ======================================================================
: Extract from 'Seal of God' by F.C.Payne (1974):
: 
: BIBLE NUMERICS - FIRST ASPECT

[numerologic "proof" of God's authorship of Bible deleted]

: If anyone is interested, I'll post more from the book. If anyone has
: a more comprehensive book on the subject ('Seal of God' has only 4
: chapters on it), I please mail/post title details.
: 
: Thanks in advance and grace be with you,
: Anthony Faull
: 
: Brendt Wohlberg                       |

This article reminds me of a book I read a long time ago. It used
unlikely properties of ancient monuments and passages from the Bible
to argue that the Earth must have been visited by extraterrestrial
beings.

I don't know whether the Bible was written by God but I am convinced
that it has been written by Him to the same extent as all other books
ever written.
-- 
Eugen Raicu
raicu@netcom.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: John_-_Marlboro@vax.ncsu.edu
Subject: Re: July 4, 1992 - Day After July 3, 1992
Reply-To: John_-_Marlboro@vax.ncsu.edu
Organization: sci.skeptic world headquarters
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 15:21:24 GMT


In article <65541@cup.portal.com>, John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com writes:
|> Dear Folks: I've been ask to repost this information in 75 characters
|> lines or less that can be read on the Portal System.
|>  The remains of as many as 100 captive Extraterrestrial Biological
|> Entities (EBEs), representing as many as 15 different species, are 
|> being secretly preserved in cryogenic storage [...] there are at least 70 
|> different species of aliens on Earth performing an infinite variety
|> of missions and there are also secret alien underground bases on
|> American soil. 
|> Source of information: Sept. 8, 1992 National Examiner.

John,
How many times are you going to post this crap?

The National Examiner ranks among the least credible of the tabloids,
which are in themselves the least credible sources.

I do not hold any ill-feelings toward John Winston.  My "fight", for
lack of a better word, is against his perpetuation of myths, hoaxes,
and plain lies which have no scientific basis.

Until you can present reasonable evidence for the existence of "EBE's"
and other such beings (not from grocery-store tabloids), you will 
continue to be laughed out of this group.

John "No relation" Marlboro
From: swf@teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Logic and God
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:42:07 GMT
Reply-To: swf@tdat.teradata.com (Stanley Friesen)
Distribution: na
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <26164@dog.ee.lbl.gov> sichase@csa2.lbl.gov writes:
|In article <5762@mccuts.uts.mcc.ac.uk>, zzassgl@uts.mcc.ac.uk (Geoff Lane) writes...
|>Isolation is not the only requirement for evolution - there must be some
|>`pressure' on the population which drives change.
|
|That's not necessarily true.  Genetic drift - random mutations which 
|accumulate over time but do not materially affect survival, can in the end 
|result in the inability of two groups to successfully interbreed - leading
|to speciation.
|

True.  Now add the that the 'rate' of genetic drift is effectively
inversely proportional to population size and you get another reason why
a small population of wallabies in Hawaii *might* speciate in a few
generation while the dingoes did not in many.
-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552)
Subject: Re: Brain and Mind (was: Logic and God)
Organization: just me
Date: Wed, 09 Sep 92 15:32:45 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic

In article <1992Sep8.221034.5533@meteor.wisc.edu> tobis@meteor.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis) writes:
>In article <1992Sep08.193157.14284@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep7.220009.16992@meteor.wisc.edu> tobis@meteor.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis) writes:
>
>>>I claim that [the mind] cannot be defined in a scientifically rigorous
>>>way, and hence its origin "in" the brain cannot be said to be demonstrated.
>
>>So why, then, would physical damage to the brain affect consciousness?  
>
>I do not deny that the brain is connected to consciousness in some way.
>
>>You
>>just stated a set of beliefs which should allow consciousness to arise without
>>a brain, just not dependent on complexity - ie, it could be anywhere.  But
>>we do not see consciousness in trees or rocks, and we do not see damage to
>>consciousness from a broken leg.  Only brain injuries do it.  The evidence is
>>against you.
>
>I suspect that trees and rocks are not conscious, but I am not certain of
>it. However, I will stipulate for the purposes of argument that a brain 
>or other information processing device is necessary for consciousness
>to exist. This does not prove that it is sufficient. My point is that
>no such proof is possible, because the phenomenon is unobserveable in
>any objective sense. 

But if we can selectively damage an organ, and produce the negation of
parts of consciousness, does that not provide some proof that there is a
(strong) connection?  This, to my mind, constitutes observation of the
source of consciousness.  Do you agree?
>
>>You cannot assert that the answer to the mind-body problem lies in the brain,
>>and then deny any connection between the brain and the mind.  
>
>I make no such denial. 

Okay, cool.
>
>>> Dennett, in "Brainstorms" 
>>>at least mentions the dualist hypothesis briefly, but in contrast 
>>>to his usual closely reasoned analysis, dismisses it by saying "I am not
>>>sympathetic to such an approach"! 
>
>>Because it would allow consciousness to arise anywhere, in anything, with
>>absolutely no susceptibility to test or inquiry, thus rendering his work
>>futile and useless.  No wonder he is "not sympathetic".
>
>Lack of sympathy does not constitute a refutation. I am afraid that the
>question of consciousness is indeed not susceptible to test, and that
>such inquiry must always be tentative and speculative on that account.

You are correct.  But his point is that if the duallist hypothesis is
accepted, it *would* *definitely* not be susceptible to test.  It is
therefore not worth considering until such a time as we can test for some
of the components of duallism.  Dennett certainly did not attempt to argue
on the basis of lack of sympathy, but on the obvious flaws which make duallism
untestable in the form described.

I would hold that reportable damage to consciousness constitutes testability.

>mt

David Pipes
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:16025 talk.origins:10941
From: mcirvin@husc8.harvard.edu (Mcirvin)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
Subject: Re: Bill Riggs _astounding_ ignorance of basic biology
Date: 7 Sep 92 04:11:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc8.mcirvin.715839083
 <1288@tecsun1.etl.army.mil> <95197@bu.edu> <1992Sep2.225641.3364@cco.caltech.edu> <1992Sep3.142904.23030@swbatl.sbc.com>

kamphau@oktext.sbc.com (Mark Kamphaus) writes:

>some researcher was trying to attribute the seasonal outbreaks of
>flu to extraterrestrial origin, the August meteorite showers bringing
>with them the virus.  Did this ever receive any serious attention?

This sounds like Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe.  They received 
mostly scorn from the biological community, I believe. 

Fred Hoyle is one of the great figures in 20th-century cosmology; he
was one of the founders of the steady-state theory, and I think he is
currently supporting yet another modified effort to resurrect it.
Hoyle has been a panspermia fan for some time.  It becomes more
reasonable in the context of something like the steady-state theory,
because you can push the origin of life back *forever*, though I don't
think this does much to explain how it is that life exists.
 
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe's first panspermia book, _Lifecloud_, merely
argued that the oceans, complex organic molecules, and possibly the
first living organisms arrived here in cometary nuclei.  The second
one was called _Diseases from Space_, and offered up the scenario of
disease organisms arriving continuously from space and filtering
down through the atmosphere.  This included human viral diseases; it's
unclear to me how these could possibly arise in comets not populated
by complex organisms, let alone humans.
-- 
Matt McIrvin, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
From: mturner@aris.ss.uci.edu (Matthew Turner)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,sci.classics
Subject: Re: Dead Sea Scrolls
Date: 10 Sep 92 23:53:06 GMT
 <ARA.92Sep9025434@camelot.ai.mit.edu> <1992Sep10.070739.7301@wheaton.wheaton.edu>
Organization: University of California, Irvine

In article <1992Sep10.070739.7301@wheaton.wheaton.edu>, kroth@david.wheaton.edu (Ken Roth) writes:
|> In article <ARA.92Sep9025434@camelot.ai.mit.edu> ara@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Allan Adler) writes:
|> >You can always look at Biblical Archaeological Review. It is not highly
|> >regarded among archaeologists, I'm told, having roughly the status of
|> >the National Enquirer, but it does keep up on stuff like the dead sea
|> >scrolls, the Ebla tablets, etc.
|> 
|> Yes, you can always look in BAR.
|> 
|> But, about your second statement, I am somewhat confused.  Every once in
|> awhile they do have joke articles (like the one about Hell being located below
|> Siberia) but on the whole they give very good scholarship.  Perhaps you are
|> thinking of Biblical Archaeologist?  I know that MOST archaeologists I know
|> (and they are many) read it.  Of course, if you talk to one who dislikes 
|> Evangelicals, you will get the same view.  Of course, this is not to say that
|> BAR is the BEST magazine out there (it ain't), but it is a valid resource.
|>



BAR is respectable, but it is not considered an important resource due to the fact that the articles are written at a level for the intelligent layman, not the professional.  They oversimplify and leave out far too much precise data in the hopes of explaining general ideas.  You might compare BAR's articles to those in Scientific American.  They both play the same role in their fields.



======================================================================
All the world's an analog stage and digital players only get bit parts
======================================================================
                      mturner@aris.ss.uci.edu
From: kentd@FtCollins.NCR.com (Kent Dalton)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Implementing a brain machine? (was Re: Voyager(TM) light... )
Date: 10 Sep 92 10:03:11 GMT
	<8257.427@stratus.SWDC.Stratus.COM>
Reply-To: Kent.Dalton@FtCollinsCO.NCR.com
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Microelectronics, Ft. Collins, CO
In-reply-to: lpb@florida.swdc.stratus.com's message of 4 Sep 92 19:04:15 GMT


>>>>> lpb@florida.swdc.stratus.com (Len Bucuvalas) said:
Len> ryb@microsoft.com (Danger Mouse) writes:

>It's a small walkman-like box, with headphones and opaque glasses with two
>LEDs 3/4" apart over each eye. There are eighteen programs ranging from 10 to
>60 minutes in length; each program is a different sequence of flashing the
>LEDs and making a tone at varying frequencies. 

Len> The are something like 36 (?) different programs yu can apply. All
Len> ranging in frequency from beta to delta state programming. 

This sounds like a fun home electronics project.... It sounds almost
trivial to build one yourself provided you know how the "programs" work.

Can one of you folks who actually owns one of these things tell me whether
both eyes' LEDs flash simultaneously or are they flashing alternately
(trying to match a certain brain wave via a beat frequency?)?

I would guess once that is established, you could then just alter the
flash rate to correspond to the desired brain wave frequency, mount it
on an old pair of cheap sunglasses and off you go! :^)

Anybody know any more about the theory of operation for these beasties?

Of course, I'd be willing to report back to the net with any "findings"
if I do get enough info to build one of these things. :^)


--
/**************************************************************************/
/* Kent Dalton                   * EMail: Kent.Dalton@FtCollinsCO.NCR.COM */
/* NCR Microelectronics          * Phone: (303) 223-5100 X-319            */  
/* 2001 Danfield Ct. MS470A      *   FAX: (303) 226-9556                  */
/* Fort Collins, Colorado 80525  *                                        */
/**************************************************************************/
All of a sudden, I want to THROW OVER my promising ACTING CAREER,
 grow a LONG BLACK BEARD and wear a BASEBALL HAT!!
 ...  Although I don't know WHY!!
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas)
Subject: Re: Faq List for skeptics
Organization: Integrated Measurement Systems, Inc.
	<iordonez.715476277@academ01>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:16:36 GMT

>>>>> On 2 Sep 92 23:24:37 GMT, iordonez@academ01.mty.itesm.mx (Ivan Ordonez-Reinoso) said:

Ivan> This is sci.skeptic, not sci.skeptic.pollitically.correct. The religious
Ivan> stuff should be included. In my humble opinion.

The problem is that some subjects attract flamers from other
newsgroups.  If I were to ask, for example, for skeptics' opinions of
"directed panspermia" in the light of decades of anti-UFO work, I
would attract talk.origins's Top Guns.  (Perhaps coincidentally, when
panspermia came up here, followups went to talk.origins ONLY.)

Are religious/scientific/new-age flames in this newsgroup acceptable?
I would say not.  Skeptical flames both pro and con, yes ...
--
Lee Thomas,  leet@ims.com      | "And the LORD God formed man of the dust 
Integrated Measurement Systems |  of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils
9525 SW Gemini Dr.             |  the breath of life; and man became a living
Beaverton, Or 97005            |  soul." - Genesis 2:7
(503) 626-7117, ext. 1558      | 





Newsgroups: sci.skeptic