HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: A gender neutral pronoun
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 17:24:00 -0600

  To: (CROSSPOST 2) ALL             Recvd: NO
Subj: A gender neutral pronoun,      Conf: (54) Sci.Skepti
___------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSW>  >Here's an example:
RSW>  >  An electrical engineer specializing in analog design was given the
RSW>  >  task of designing a widget with constraints A, B and C.  What design
RSW>  >  approach is one likely to consider?

Another approach is this:   Since the person in the discussion has
already been described as "an electrical engineer", the last sentance
could read "What design approach are they likely to consider?"

"They" works as a pronoun as long as previous reference has been made
which establishes whether we're talking about one, or more, people.

Its weakness is that is doesn't inherently possess an indicator of
whether it is singular or plural.

 * OLX 2.2 * I admire your problem, but don't what to do about it...

 * Origin: Dark Knight's Table (1:282/31)
From: kanga.caltech.edu!magney (Michael Agney)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Faith Healing
Date: 17 Nov 1992 19:41:57 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: itchy.caltech.edu
Originator: magney@itchy

In article <btd.721893016@pv7413.vincent.iastate.edu> btd@iastate.edu  
(Benjamin T Dehner) writes:
>
>	I haven't really been following this thread, but I saw something
>I just had to respond too.

Same here.

>	One of the fundamental precepts of Christianity is that mankind
>(peoplekind? :) are by there very nature evil and unworthy ('fallen'),
>and so all basic human desires should be surpressed.  In other words,
>it lays out a guilt trip for simply being human and having human wants  
and
>desires.  The only allowable way to feel good about yourself is in
>sanctioned behaviors.
>	In other words, they invent the crime, 'sin', and then say the
>only way out of it is to follow them.

Whoa.  All basic human desires?  Seems to me that most of the desires that
Christianity wants to be suppressed are the ones that are harmful to
someone, such as killing, theft, etc.

Of course, who chooses which behaviors are harmful?  For all I've seen,
homosexuality doesn't seem to be harmful in and of itself (i.e. any harm
it causes is due to people's prejudices against it), and yet it is pro-
hibited by Christianity.
In the Old Testament, while God is giving Moses the laws of Israel, he
says, "Do not lie with a man as one does with a woman; this is detestable"
[Leviticus - I don't remember chapter & verse].  Obvious question, of
course:  why is it detestable?

--
| Michael Agney          | Yd - gender neutral pronoun    |
|                        |                                |
|                        | Source:  Stories by Alison     |
| magney@cco.caltech.edu | Tellure, back issues of Analog |
-- 
| Michael Agney          | Yd - gender neutral pronoun    |
|                        |                                |
|                        | Source:  Stories by Alison     |
| magney@cco.caltech.edu | Tellure, back issues of Analog |
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Lotteries  (was Re: Innumeracy, humorous ... maybe.)
Date: 19 Nov 1992 15:27:12 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov18.214150.14239@nsscmail.att.com>, cel@nsscmail.att.com (clayton EDward LEIHY iii) writes:
=In article <GERRY.92Nov17131106@onion.cmu.edu> gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:
=>...where does all of that lottery money go?  
=
=NEW JERSEY LOTTERY COMMISSION SAYS:
=
=       "Lottery proceeds benefit senior citizens"
=
=It is left to the reader to determine >which< senior citizens benefit
=and >how< they benefit from these proceeds.

Aren't the New Jersey Lottery Commissioners getting on in years?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 17:35:04 -0600

Subj: Biblical Inerrancy?            Conf: (54) Sci.Skepti
___------------------------------------------------------------------------
BR>  >
BR>  >  The bible is patently not inerrant.Read Leviticus,chapter 18(or
BR>  > thereabouts) where it fairly clearly states that insects walk "upon all
BR>  > fours... fourfootedly upon the ground".That's quite clearly a mistake,
BR>  > no matter what stage it crept in at.

BR>  This isn't a mistake, its an idiom.

So... how many other things in the bible are idiom?

And, who is to decide????

Rocky

 * OLX 2.2 * I admire your problem, but don't what to do about it...

 * Origin: Dark Knight's Table (1:282/31)
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: By the Numbers
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 19 Nov 92  16:21:36

Who: ncramer@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
ID: lga8juINN2jd@news.bbn.com
 
NC> "The 'Information Please Almanac' has a section on record-
NC> breaking weather. It used to be _filled_ with errors of
NC> the form:
NC> 
NC>   Greatest two minute temperature rise: +23deg F (-5deg C)
 
Ah, that's PROOF that reality is based on how you measure it
(BIG SMILE!). If temperature is measured in F, it increased,
but if in C, it decreased. And that -IS- record-breaking!

--- Maximus 2.00
From: kanga.caltech.edu!magney (Michael Agney)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Efficacy of Prayer
Date: 15 Nov 1992 20:21:47 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: scratchy.caltech.edu
Originator: magney@scratchy

In article <721862719.AA09765@csource.oz.au>  
Joe.Slater@f351.n632.z3.fidonet.org (Joe Slater) writes:
> Monday November 09 1992, Gerry Roston writes to All:
> GR>    I personally use the term "Christian" to refer to any person who
> GR> believes that the Bible (Old and New Testament) is completely
> GR> accurate, and that the main ways in which various denominations  
differ
> GR> is in the interpretation of the Bible.
> 
It wasn't Gerry Roston, it was me.  And I would like to disavow it.

Another possible definition of "Christian" could be someone who believes
in the Apostles' Creed.  In essence, the Apostles' Creed professes a
belief in God as maker of heaven and earth; Jesus as being the son of God
and of the virgin Mary, crucified, resurrected after three days; and a few
other things, including the afterlife.  Implied is that God and Jesus (and
the Holy Ghost) have control over the general nature of humans' afterlife,
whether in heaven or hell.

Accepting God and Jesus as authorities requires yd, by self-consistency,  
to obey their commands; Jesus' commands dating later, to be of higher
priority.  The Bible is seen at the very least as the only possible
source from which one can learn the commands of God and Jesus.

I personally am very reluctant to accept the Bible as inerrant.  To give
a few specifics, I would accept the Gospels as being closest to inerrant;
on the other hand, I seriously doubt that the letters of Paul are divinely
inspired at all.

I realize that these beliefs are very watered down, almost to the point of
Deism; and I suspect Deism is where I very well may end up.

Comments, if incoherent, will be ignored; if flawed, will be disputed; if
correct, will be reluctantly admitted.

--
| Michael Agney          | Yd - gender neutral pronoun    |
|                        |                                |
|                        | Source:  Stories by Alison     |
| magney@cco.caltech.edu | Tellure, back issues of Analog |
-- 
| Michael Agney          | Yd - gender neutral pronoun    |
|                        |                                |
|                        | Source:  Stories by Alison     |
| magney@cco.caltech.edu | Tellure, back issues of Analog |
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Wednesday, 18 Nov 1992 15:31:24 CET
From: <RFLOOD@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject:    Making Your Telephone a Feephone

'Everyone' in England a few years ago knew of someone who had converted
his telephone so that no charge pulses were passed back to the person
who originated the call.....supposedly, the conversion consisted of
wiring a capacitor & resistor in the phone line, so that the incoming
charge pulses were blocked, and the exchange electronics 'saw' a phone
where the handset had been replaced, whereas sufficient dc still flowed
thru the phone to keep the circuit open. Was there any truth in these
rumours ? I never met anyone who had actually done it, but there was
always some guy three or four acquaintances across reputed to use it !

RaF
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: wvhorn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (William VanHorne)
Subject: Re: BIOLOGICAL ALCHEMY
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:35:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.111813.1@kean.ucs.mun.ca> bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca writes:

[ discussion of McElwaine posts deleted]
>while browsing talk.politics.drugs this morning, there was a post from
>said asshole, which if it did not come right out and say it, bordered
>on anti-semitic holocaust revisionism, or at least seemed to lean that
>way. Perhaps it was only Jewish Conspiracy Theory, but anyway...
>
Yes, I'm afraid that Robert McElwaine (B.Sc. Physics and Astronomy UW-EC)
betrays his membership in the so-far-to-the-right-it's-left Willis Carto/
Lyndon LaRouche lunatic fringe in several of his posts.  If you've seen the 
COSMOSPHERES post, you may have been puzzelled by the "BOLSHEVIKS in
Washington" reference or the Isreali pilots flying U.S. plane/subs.  You
see, the Jews (which he spelled JEW$ in one of his posts) *really* run 
everything, so loons like Robert have to be careful to use standard
euphemisms like "Bolsheviks" and "International Bankers" and "the Trilateral
Commission" so that they aren't "retired" (like in the movie Blade Runner)
by the JEW$ who are OUT TO GET THEM. 

You see.

---Bill VanHorne

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Mr. Dolphin, SRI, and the Speed of Light     
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 19:23:10 GMT

I recently received a query for information about a supposed "Invited
Research Report", of which I have seen only the title page. It bears
the imprint of "SRI International" in Menlo Park, CA. Its title is
"The Atomic Constants, Light, and Time" by Trevor Norman and Barry
Setterfield, Flinders University of South Australia School of
Mathematical Sciences, Technical Report. Prepared for: Lambert T.
Dolphin, Senior Research Physicist, Geoscience and Engineering Center,
Stanford Research Institute International.

Can anybody shed any light on this? Is this supposed report something
real, or possibly a hoax? I know that Barry Setterfield is an Australian
creationist, who claims that the speed of light was infinite during
Creation Week, but began to slow down after the Fall of Man (you know how
it is, everything started to degrade). I don't know who Trevor Norman 
is, but I'd assume he's another creationist. I know that Flinders
University is a "real" university; do these characters teach there?
And who is this Lambert T. Dolphin? Is he really a "Senior Research
Physicist" in Geoscience at SRI? Who knows anything about this?

-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.feminism
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Popkin lecture
Date: 21 Nov 1992 03:48:32 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

Dr. Richard Popkin, professor of history and philosophy at UCLA and author of
the book _The_Second_Oswald_, will be speaking at a Skeptic Society meeting in
Baxter Lecture hall at Caltech in Pasadena, CA, on Sunday, November 22 at 2:00
pm, PST.  According to the flyer distributed by the Skeptic Society, part of
his talk will be devoted to a critique of the Warren Report.

E-mail me for further details and/or instructions for finding Baxter Lecture
Hall.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: pal@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.dbp.de (Peter Loibl)
Subject: Re: When will K2 grow up?
Organization: Technical University of Munich, Germany
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 15:13:41 GMT

mancus@zaphod.JSC.NASA.GOV (Keith Mancus/MDSSC) writes:

>In article <1992Nov12.205129.21075@lsil.com>, gascan@dcst16.dc (Bill Gascoyne) writes:
>> If you measure base to peak, I believe one of the Hawaiian volcanos holds
>>the record.  Its peak is, of course, considerably below 29K feet, but the base
>>is far undersea.

>  What is the highest mountain on Earth measured base-to-peak, with underwater
>height excluded?  It may or may not be Everest, since Everest sits on the
>Tibetan Plateau at around 12000 feet or so.  I'd expect it to be a large
>mountain near sea level.

I don't remember the name of the moutain, but it's a vulcano somewhere
is the sea. But it's not on the hawaiian islands ...

Peter Loibl
pal@regent.e-technik.tu-muenchen.de
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kraus@.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus)
Subject: Re: Insults
Reply-To: kraus@cheers.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus)
Organization: NCR Corporation, Rancho Bernardo
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:15:13 GMT

In article <722073998.1@wyrm.rbbs-net.ORG> Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Rick Moen) writes:
>> From: marlowe@paul.rutgers.edu (Thomas Marlowe)
>> Message-ID: <Nov.10.09.17.11.1992.21575@paul.rutgers.edu>
>>
>> In the thread 'Gender-Neutral Pronoun', there has been some discussion
>> about whether someone can insult you without intending to insult you
>> in particular.
>>
>> I would maintain, yes, they can, in the same way that a gunman atop a
>> water tower can shoot into a crowd, not intending to kill any known
>> individual in particular, and still commit murder.  In fact, if a
>> bomber sets off a bomb, not knowing for certain whether there will
>> even be people present, but people die, it can still be murder.
>> ...
 
>I think the best solution is the only one that will absolutely,
>positively keep the bulk of this blithering out of newsgroups:
>universal insensitivity -- a truly liberating idea whose time has
>come.

Are you talking about robots, or are you talking about human beings?
It would be nice to be able to discuss ideas without emotion, but
it is human nature to become personally involved with ideas one believes
in. This is true for insulters and insultees alike. Ideally it would
be great if we could detach our emotions from our beliefs, but I have known
few who can do so.

>As long as proclaiming one's self "insulted" is an effective way to get
>attention, people who see themselves as power-deprived will continue
>to seek the eradication of "insults" as an alternative to substantive
>improvement of their condition.  Hypersensitive noisemaking, however
>emotionally satisfying to some, is a poor substitute for progress.

I would agree with you, except to add that the insult is often used
as a tool by the insulter to intimidate, or change the subject from
a discussion of ideas to a discussion of personalities.


---------------------------------------------------
Dave.Kraus@SanDiego.NCR.COM                       |
(619) 485-2504                                    |
---------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: wvhorn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (William VanHorne)
Subject: Re: aids and the cia
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 13:45:36 GMT

In article <17NOV199216042949@elroy.uh.edu> st1xu@elroy.uh.edu (Carr, Emery D.) writes:
>
>read AIDS and the doctors of death. 

read The True Believer by Eric Hoffer.
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:19878 alt.messianic:3473
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Date: 19 Nov 1992 15:19:06 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Nov16.233223.19865@imagen.com>, avi@seal.imagen.com writes:
=   Just for comparison sake, the Jewish Bible, even though written MANY
=   centuries before, and going through many hardships was NEVER revised. The
=   proof is (Gerry Roston, are you listening ?) in the Dead Sea Scrolls: A
=   document discovered about 30+ years ago, in the Dead Sea, Judea desert in
=   Southern Israel. These scrolls were written AT LEAST 2,000 years ago, and
=   that's acceptable BY ALL archeologists and historians who worked with it.
=   And yet, when compared WORD FOR WORD with the same documents Modern Jews
=   have today (for example the scroll of the Book of Issiah which is the best
=   preserved and thus easier to read and decipher) it checks out a 100% match
=   in every word !!!  Now that's an UN-revisable, One version Only, as it was
=   written, authentic document !!!

That's an invalid argument.  How many times has the Bible been altered
since, say, the fourth century A.D.?  How many times might the "Book of Issiah"
(by the way, is that some Jewish document with which I'm not familiar, or is
it a misspelling of Isaiah?) have been modified in the first few centuries
after it was written?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Article on Handwriting Analysys
Date: 19 Nov 1992 06:05:04 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: hobbes.ucsc.edu


I saw by the cover that the Nov-Dec 1992 issue of Psychology Today has
an article on the topic.
-- 
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet

"Ya can argue all ya wanna, but it's dif'rent than it was!"
"No it aint!  But ya gotta know the territory!"
        Meredith Willson: "The Music Man"
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re:Biblical Inerrancy?
From: carlis_jc@cs2.lamar.edu
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:04:21 CST

   Mr. gtclark@festival.ed.ac.uk writes in reguard to Biblical inerrancy,
(para.) Lev. 18 [or thereabouts] refers to "insects walk upon all fours...
fourfootedly upon the ground"
  >this is obvisiously an error no matter when it crept in........

   Granted folks this is not correct by our useages of the word "insects" today
but thats STILL not the point. 2000 years ago in the hebrew culture nobody gave 
a damn if Jesus steped on to A boat or if he steped onto THE boat, Hell that
was true even in our on western culture up until a few centurys ago. As an
example the King Arthur Mythos evolved quite a bit over the hundereds of years
that they they have been with us but nobody expects them to stand up in a court
of law because they don't have a religion formed around them. 
   The Biblical texts were never writen to be Scientific Treasts nor were they
ment to be taken as eye-wittness accounts capable of standing up in a court of
law. They were written by belivers of Jesus to and for other belivers of Jesus
and were ment to relay information of a moral type. To expect the stories to
try and prove that what is being stated is true is foolish. That would be like
going to a U.F.O.'s abductie suport group and trying to convince them that
U.F.O.'s are real.
   What is interesting (though not necesarily true) about the Bible is the
large span of time the book covers and the human wisdom that it's authors
decided to incorporate within it. Beyond that if you chose to go off and base a
religion on it then please be my guest but just because you may have a bone to
pick with organized religion doesn't mean you have to pick at the Bible. If
nothing else the Bible is a masterpeice of the english language. All I'm trying
to say here is that there are alot of wonderful things in the book but many
people seem to be turned off by the religious aplications of it and so never
seem to realize that apart from the "church" bit the Bible can stand on it's own
and prove as rewarding as any other great book.
   
(>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<)
(>carlis_jc@cs1.lamar.edu                Jay (I thought I was a student)      <)
(>     nobody                                (but found out that I was )      <)
(>                                           (wrong.......?            )      <)
(>----------------------------------------------------------------------------<)
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: 2 vs 14, P vs J, etc. [was: Would "Noah's Ark" have been large enough?]
Date: 20 Nov 1992 20:33:55 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <722312728.AA01606@csource.oz.au>,
Joe.Slater@f351.n632.z3.fidonet.org (Joe Slater) writes:
=
=jds>> Only in the sense that Webster's and the Oxford Dictionary are
=jds>> complementary. They're two separate collections based on the Mishna.
=jds>> Mind you, they don't pretend to be identical, or even similar, while
=jds>> the Christian Bible does.
=
=CJL> Sounds to me like multiple authorship is also a normal state of
=CJL> affairs. Perhaps someday someone will decide to merge the two talmuds.

=Why? They're collections written down over a couple of hundred years by a few
=people who grew concerned that falling standards of education meant that
=memorising fifty meg (or whatever) of debates was no longer a safe way of
=ensuring error-free transmission.

Well, you referred to them as "collections."  Who was the single author of all
the stuff that was "collected"?  Sounds to me like the oral traditions probably
had MANY authors.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.