HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Taking Myth As History; Bewahahahaha!
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Aug 21 1992
Date: 15 Sep 92  10:58:16

Tag1: Tim Walters (twalters@world.std.com (Tim Walters))
tat2: Ted Holden (news@fedfil.UUCP (news))
 
TW>TH> "I assume Africans were well dispersed at the time of the
TW>TH> division of languages. All that would be required is that
TW>TH> they were living in separated groups for the initial period
TW>TH> of 100 years or so during which our present forms of speech
TW>TH> became necessary and developed. My standard article on
TW>TH> language follows.
 
TW> "Fascinating. Now, I assume that telepathy was a result of
TW> proximity to Saturn, right? And that loss of telepathy was
TW> a result of leaving the orbit of Saturn? So I guess that
TW> means that the flood and the radiation happened while the
TW> Earth was still orbiting Saturn?"
 
I see a trap in the making. Perhaps Mr. Holden will see it in
time and rephrase his assertions. Anyhow.
 
One of Ted's "proofs" (bewhahahahahahah!) is Aesop's tales. I
guess that means Mother Goose is next. Anyhow, he also quoted
Frank Water's book "Book Of The Hopi" in his "standard article
on language."
 
Mr. Water's book is seriously flawed by the introduction of
Christian occultism. Much of the "Hopi myths" in it aren't:
they are Hebrew, Jewish, and Christian myths retold as if
there were Hopi. In the book the author had the previous
world (the third) destroyed by water, while in the original
Hopi tradition it was fire: a blatent perversion by the author
so that it would fit his occultism ("Noah's flood"). The Hopi
leaders saved themsleved from burning by leaving the Third
World through a hole in the ground.
 
The book says that the Hopi tradition has the current world
(the fourth) destroyed by fire:
gh8r9058ej0rsy88u0594jtg
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Subject: Re: Question for Creationists
Reply-To: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:14:39 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.032126.21797@morrow.stanford.edu>,
salem@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Bruce Salem) writes:
> In article <1992Sep10.031339.22152@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> mls@cbnewsm.cb.att.com
(mike.siemon) writes:
> >Your rhetoric in this group constantly tends to urge that all Christians
> >are guilty by association with any damn thing that bothers you in the
> >postings of some Christian idiot to talk.origins.  Why?
> 
> 	Because the sole justification for the opinion is often because
> "I'm a Christian." and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it by
> saying "I'm a Christian too, and you are wong!" Neither statement
> is substantive, and the error is not corrected. It is repeated over
> and over again. I think that this is due to there being many contradictory
> currents of emotion and thought within Christianity, which give it vitality
> and flexibility, true, but make it untrustworthy as a guide for very
> much.

  Don't take me the wrong way, but the same thing can be said about anything. 
Niven's law: No cause is so noble that it doesn't attract kooks.  (Paraphrase)

  Name one movement anywhere that does not have some fringe wierdos making
rediculous claims?  Enviromentalism is certainly a good cause, but it is
currently ripe with kooks, the same goes for every area.  By your argument
EVERYTHING is untrustworthy.  And by the way, if you think your cause has no
kooks, you are probably one of the kooks.

 |  __L__   *******************************
-|-  ___    * Warren Kurt vonRoeschlaub   *
 |  | o |   * kv07@iastate.edu            *
 |/ `---'   * Iowa State University       *
/|   ___    * Math Department             *
 |  |___|   * 400 Carver Hall             *
 |  |___|   * Ames, IA  50011             *
 J  _____   *******************************
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Teaching Evolution
Organization: sgi
Distribution: talk.origins
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 21:26:37 GMT

In article <MAGUIRE.92Sep15133426@sunspot.clarkson.edu>, maguire@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Bill Maguire) writes:
|> I have just finished reading Henry Morris's "Scientific Creationism
|> (Public School Edition)" and Paul Kitcher's "Abusing Science."  I find
|> myself agreeing with something that Mr. Kitcher begins to propose,
|> both of these books could be presented together in a high school
|> biology/science class. 

How about in a High School Current Affairs class?   After 
all, creationism is as much a political movement as it is 
either a religious or Scientfic one, and learning to analyse 
the arguments used in creationism is a good start towards 
taking on those used by politicians, and marketeers.

When I was in high school - in the UK - we used to use
examples from C. S. Lewis's apologism when analysing fallacies
and emotional arguments.

jon.
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: macroevolution
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Date: 10 Sep 92 06:39:42 EST
Organization: Wright State University 

In article <1992Sep9.152055.12331@cs.joensuu.fi>, asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
> kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub) writes:
>>  I would be interested in your explaining how this is a "specific argument that
>>you think is impressive from that book".  Or are you doing the usual "that isn't
>>the question you asked, but the question I chose to answer" game again.  Will
>>you please give at least one _specific_ example of how the book disproves some
>>_specific_ part of Evolution that is not a misquote, misrepresentation, or blank
>>assertion.
> 
> 	It doesn't have that approach - it doesn't get deeply to any questions,
> 	that is what I wanted to say. 
> -- 
> 

Then how come you think the book is so wonderful?


> 		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint
> 
> 	No ITU, love, evolution.           Tuusniemi ! Siis imein suut !
From: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: correction/expansion
Date: 5 Sep 92 18:43:09 GMT
Distribution: talk
Organization: animal -- coelomate -- deuterostome

In article <95417@bu.edu> colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby) writes:

>I agree that the _same_ measure of similarity can be "recycled", but
                                               ^^^
>independent measures (DNA sequencing, protien sequencing, embryological
>studies and others) confirm phylogenies drawn by morphologists in
>the vast majority of cases.

Oops, that should be "cannot". Also, I should add that even in
cases where the morphological and genetic data don't coincide,
the tree provided by the DNA data is never wildly different.
I can think of two recent cases (both papers were in Nature) -- one
dealt with guinea pig phylogeny and the other with king crabs.
It turned out that guinea pigs were not rodents as was previously
thought, but were an outgroup. On the other hand, king crabs
were found to be a type of hermit crab, not an outgroup. These
don't seem to me to be a major shakeup in phylogeny -- i.e. they
don't shake the tree, just rearrange a few twigs. And, in both cases
there were discrepancies in the existing data (which is why the
molecular types stepped in). Maybe someone who knows something
about systematics can give an example of the most wildly incongruent
phylogenies drawn from morphological and genetic data (Mike?).
 
>In addition, patterns of biogeography
>from the present and past (as seen through the fossil record)
>support common ancestry.

I've just recently read a little about this. It sure is nice
to A.) have an actual theory to test -- and B.) to have a theory
that gets better and better the more data you look at. 

Chris Colby 	---	 email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu	---
"'My boy,' he said, 'you are descended from a long line of determined,
resourceful, microscopic tadpoles--champions every one.'"
 	--Kurt Vonnegut from "Galapagos"
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: keithd@well.sf.ca.us (Keith Doyle)
Subject: Re: To Joe Duffy and T.O. et al.  - re: Abiogenesis (fwd)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 05:56:58 GMT



duffy@aslss02.asl.dl.nec.com (Joseph Duffy) writes:
> One thought I am struggling with is
> why does science choose to rule out the "supernatural"?

Because as soon as a supernatural event becomes measurable,
it is no longer supernatural, it is natural.

Keith

Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: lking@athena.mit.edu (Loren King)
Subject: Re: Question for Creationists
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:44:29 GMT

In article <BRUCE.92Sep11164051@suprenum.supr.scm.liv.ac.uk>, bruce@supr.scm.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens) writes:
|> >>>>> On 10 Sep 92 09:59:49 GMT, lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun) said:
|> 
|> > If you want to question this, ask Him yourself.
|> 
|> Does anyone have His phone number?
|> 
|> --
|> Bruce Stephens


  Yeah, I think she has an office up the street at the Harvard Science Center,
but she's never in (it's always the same: you can never get hold of the famous
profs!)

__________

Loren King
Dept of Political Science
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.atheism,alt.fan.dan-quayle,sci.skeptic
From: mvp@netcom.com (Mike Van Pelt)
Subject: Re: worthless comic strips
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 00:54:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Keywords: creationist propaganda

In article <1992Sep9.150914@IASTATE.EDU> danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
>   It just gets worse.  B.C. is now replaying the entire Republican convention.
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>   In particular, Mr. Hart's claims in the last two weeks are:
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>   (I) Evolution claims to be a random process (it doesn't).
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>   (II) The fact the phrase "wall of seperation" doesn't appear in the
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>   (III) You have to be nuts to make fun of Dan Quayle (obviously a sign of
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>    (IV) RU-486 is nothing but an abortion drug and abortion is murder. (the
It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.

>    (V) Humans and dinosaurs are contemporanious. (B.S.! Thanks to those on
>talk.origins that pointed this out).

You needed talk.origins to point that out to you?  Hmmmmmmm.

It's a comic strip.  Get a clue and a sense of humor.
-- 
Mike Van Pelt                          Here lies a Technophobe,
mvp@netcom.com                            No whimper, no blast.
mvp@hsv3.lsil.com                      His life's goal accomplished,
                                          Zero risk at last.
From: skroger@zeus.calpoly.edu (Seth L. Kroger)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: macroevolution
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:29:58 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
>	Have you read the little blue book "Life - how did it get here, by 
>	evolution or creation ?". 

PFFFFTTTT! (Does that answer your question?)

>		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint


|======================================================================|
| Seth Kroger                       "If God made us in His image we    |
| skroger@pan.calpoly.edu               have certianly returned the    |
| Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo             compliment."  -Voltaire        |
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen)
Subject: Re: macroevolution
Organization: University of Joensuu
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:25:26 GMT

sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>Then how come you think the book is so wonderful?

	I give you a reverse answer: It doesn't contain trickery. 

	Trickery is what magicians do: They make audience look to the right
	hand when the left hand is working. The same is done in science, but
	using words, references and charts. 
	
	I have an example:

	a = 3b/2   =   4a = 6b   =  (14-10)a = (21-15)b  or 14a-10a = 21b-15b
	15b-10a = 21b-14a   =   5(3b-2a)  =  7(3b-2a)  =

		5 = 7
		=====

	I think you see the point. This was quite a simple example, I think 
	you can find the error. Another could be: Shto nahoditshia linki 
	vorubenniji ptitsi v evolutzeskiij protsess ? You use foreign 
	language or jargon. This is common. Magician uses two methods: Draws
	the attention elsewhere or hides the object. This is not honest 
	science.  
-- 

		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint

	No ITU, love, evolution.           Tuusniemi ! Siis imein suut !
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen)
Subject: Re: macroevolution
Organization: University of Joensuu
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 11:09:53 GMT

ds0007@buhao (Dale Skiba) writes:
>is false has been shown to be bogus.  The only rational conclusion
>for me is that most anti-evolution books are written by people who
>have no concept of what the theory of evolution really is.

	That is true.
-- 

		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint

	No ITU, love, evolution.           Tuusniemi ! Siis imein suut !
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From:  chorus@vntic.msk.su (ACADEMIC CHORUS BY S. STROKIN)
Subject: ACADEMIC CHORUS seeks for contacts
Summary: ACADEMIC CHORUS seeks for contacts
Keywords: ACADEMIC CHORUS SEEKS FOR CONTACTS
Reply-To: chorus@vntic.msk.su
Organization: AIST-VNTIC INFORMATION NETWORK
Date: Mon,  7 Sep 92 15:33:55 +0300 

                  ACADEMIC  CHORUS
                         by
                  Sergey   Strokin
                   Russia, Miscow

seeks for contacts in world for friendship and collaboration
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Holden Numbering
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Date: 9 Sep 92 21:16:11 EST
Organization: Wright State University 

In article <2900@fedfil.UUCP>, news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:
> In article <1992Sep8.061806.3949@desire.wright.edu>, sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>  
>> Says you!  After all, any statement from the man who said that new born horses
>> can't run, that horses can't comfortably carry any weight over 125 pounds,
>> that giraffes have enormous blood pressure in their heads *(ALL totally
>> untrue)*, is very suspect.
> 
> Sue Bishop is either VERY stupid, or a liar, possibly both.  I have never
> made ANY of the above statements.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ted Holden
> HTE
> 

OK, group, did or did NOT Ted say that giraffes have high blood pressure?
And Ted, you DID say that a new born horse cannot run.  Sorry I didn't save
it but I'm sure someone else can verify it.  And you also said a year or
two ago that anything over 125 pounds on a horse was a 'handicap', a mis-
information about horse racing, actually.

Sue
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Subject: Re: Antti's word
Reply-To: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:19:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.172320@IASTATE.EDU>, kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren
Vonroeschlaub) writes:
> Why don't we play the word game together?  How many words for "fool" are
there
>in Finnish?  In English there are [...]

> I am reasonably sure that even with this list people will be sending me email
>saying I missed one of their favorites.

  Well, it's been 4 days, and the only missed ones I got in the mail were
airhead, bozo, goober, twit, dimbulb, poltroon, maroon, and, of course,
user(*).

  Thanks to those who mailed in.

(*) This one reminded me of how hard I laughed the first time I heard McGruff
the Crime Dog sing "Users are loosers".

 |  __L__   *******************************
-|-  ___    * Warren Kurt vonRoeschlaub   *
 |  | o |   * kv07@iastate.edu            *
 |/ `---'   * Iowa State University       *
/|   ___    * Math Department             *
 |  |___|   * 400 Carver Hall             *
 |  |___|   * Ames, IA  50011             *
 J  _____   *******************************
From: news@fedfil.UUCP (news)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Holden Numbering
Date: 7 Sep 92 00:32:34 GMT
Organization: HTE

In article <1992Sep4.164500@IASTATE.EDU>, kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub) writes:
 
*> They carry their necks almost straight up;  it's the only way they can deal
*> with the weight.  One minor problem:  the blood pressure it takes to get
*blood
*> to their heads is immense.  It would blow our vascular systems apart.

*  Incorrect:

No it's not incorrect.  The statement plainly says, that a giraffe's blood 
pressure would blow a human's vascular system apart.  

The statement is true and easily verified by enquiring of experts.  The 
rest of your article, including the trite ending, indicates that you
totally failed to comprehend the meaning of a fairly simple statement.

What other problems are you having with the English language today?






-- 
Ted Holden
HTE

Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: sjc28473@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Steven Joseph Chmura)
Subject: 25,000,000 year-old BEE?????????
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 02:08:35 GMT

Driving home from my lab tonight I heard a blip on the local radio (WLS-Chicagf)

To kinda quote from our great memories :)   

"Scientists have found DNA from a bumble bee 25,000,000 (yes, million) year
old.  This is forcing science to re-think the Evolotionary clock.."

Well, as I have no backspace key I will not correct the spellings but....

1)  How old are Bees anyway?
2)  Was this a joke?

-- 
  "Given enought time the impossible becomes possible, the possible probable,
	and the probable inevitable..." - George Wald - "The Origin of Life"
	Steven Chmura /////////  University of Chicago School of Medicine (M1)
From: simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Alleged Incongruities in Geologic Column
Date: 10 Sep 92 19:11:34 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England

I'm currently embroiled in an e-mail conversation with a creationist
who claims that the existence of, for example, upright trees and shells
which span sedimentary layers is evidence that the column was deposited
in the Noachian Flood.

I faintly recall seeing this notion debunked on t.o. and I imagine
that one or more of the FAQs address this.

Can anybody point me in the right direction? Thanks in advance.

Cheers

Simon
-- 
Simon Clippingdale                simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science    Tel (+44) 203 523296
University of Warwick             FAX (+44) 203 525714
Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.            or 0203 etc. if you're in the sunny UK
Xref: sparky talk.origins:11126 alt.atheism:16915 alt.fan.dan-quayle:3524 sci.skeptic:16199
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.atheism,alt.fan.dan-quayle,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: worthless comic strips
Keywords: creationist propaganda
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 06:44:33 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

kachun@astro.as.arizona.edu (Ka Chun Yu) writes:

> If they want a semi-balanced view, newspapers should rerun old "Bloom County"
> strips (like they've been rerunning old "Doonesbury"'s lately).  At least
> the humor will be subtler and funnier than "B.C."
>

I think they weren't running the old Doonesburys by choice.  Based on last
week's Sunday strip, it looks like Trudeau put together a ton of Perot stuff
that had to be scratch when The Great Quitter decided to quit.

Of course, had he stuck to Dannikins, we'd all be the better...



>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
From: cust_ts@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Tero Sand)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Question for Creationists
Date: 8 Sep 92 12:21:08 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <1992Sep8.095840.247@city.cs> lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun) writes:
>God has given you a very precious priviledge called _free choice_.

To quote one famous superb biologist: bullshit. To have truly free
choice, you have to have enough information, and God is (apparently)
doing a damn good job of hiding Himself.
-- 
-Tero Sand
  EMail: cust_ts@cc.helsinki.fi     Snail mail: Auroran Sairaala os. 6-1
  (if that doesn't work, try                    Nordenskioldinkatu 20
   cust_ts@kruuna.helsinki.fi)                  00250 Helsinki 25, Finland
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Subject: Re: Holden Numbering
Reply-To: kv07@IASTATE.EDU (Warren Vonroeschlaub)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:55:09 GMT

In article <6@fedfil.UUCP>, news@fedfil.UUCP (news) writes:
> *The reason that it is hard to hold your arms out for an extended period
> *of time is that the force comes from the muscles in your shoulders.  Your
> *arm is much longer than the length the muscles are operating over; you
> *operating at a mechanical disadvantage. [Translation -- the leverage is
> *against you.]
> 
> I did mention that it wouldn't even matter if you held weight out from the
> shoulders (difficult), or out from the waist, elbow at the waist sort of
> (less difficult).

  ted, this doesn't adress the propblem.  The human arm isn't built to hold
weights that way either.  Look: a dog cannot stand on it's hind legs for a
significant amount of time, therefore nobody can do it.  Right?  You are making
the same error: the human arm is a completely different design than sauropod
necks, the comparison is pointless.

[tendon info deleted, as the only person who doesn't understand it is Ted]
> Were a sauropod's neck and tail to be permanently help up and supported
> by such a system, then he would die of thirst within one more day than
> as many days as he could go without water;  he would not be able to lower 
> his neck to drink.

  Why can't he just lift his tail?

> *Nice try, Ted.
> 
> Nice try, Rich.

Pretty rotten try, Ted.

 |  __L__   *******************************
-|-  ___    * Warren Kurt vonRoeschlaub   *
 |  | o |   * kv07@iastate.edu            *
 |/ `---'   * Iowa State University       *
/|   ___    * Math Department             *
 |  |___|   * 400 Carver Hall             *
 |  |___|   * Ames, IA  50011             *
 J  _____   *******************************
Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: salem@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Bruce Salem)
Subject: Re: Question for Creationists
Organization: Stanford Univ. Earth Sciences
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 03:37:43 GMT

In article <135665@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> dk@imager (Dave Knapp) writes:
>In Article <1992Sep2.130157.3954@city.cs> lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun)
>writes:
>
>> In article <dkristof.715431601@hq> dkristof@Pt.hq.af.mil (Capt
>> Dave Kristof) writes:
>>> What is the purpose of mankind?
>> To worship God.
>
>   As a Christian, I feel obligated to point out that this answer
>is a.) not Biblical, and b.) not the historical Christian view. 
>I doubt it is even a common Fundamentalist view.

	Well, so what? You haven't told us what the purpose of mankind
is, accourding to these groups you try to speak for. What is it?
To attone for the sin of Eve? Or something else as dire? Or is it
to Love one another? Or something as vague? Pray, tell us what it is
then?

Bruce Salem

Newsgroups: talk.origins
From: corey@sdf.lonestar.org (Corey Carroll)
Subject: Re: macroevolution
Organization: sdf Public Access UNIX, Dallas--unrestricted free shell access
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 19:54:35 GMT

In article <1992Sep7.180336.9540@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> zuber_rg@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Robert G Zuber) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.162127.4115@cs.joensuu.fi> asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
>>	It's a brief, comprehensive introduction to the evolutionary 
>>	questions in an easy-to-read-form. As such it doesn't go too far to
>>	individual cases, and thus successfully maintains the view to evolution
>>	in entirety. 
>
>	Didn't Correy (sp?) Carrol (sp?) e-mail you a list of objections to
>that book? Care to comment about them?
>
>>		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint
>
>Rob Zuber

Uh, I haven't done that yet...I think I'll go mail my "anthology" right now.

-- 
"All religions make me wanna throw up!"
"All religions make me sick!" - Dead Kennedys, Religious Vomit

corey@sdf.lonestar.org                       ..!uunet!convex!egsner!sdf!corey