HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith)
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Keywords: mars observer, citys or rocks, confirmation one way or the other, side bets
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:56:18 GMT

Chip,

FIRST POINT>I wonder how many bets were taken that Chris (CRAZYMAN)
Colombus would sail off the end of the Earth? 


According to rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith):
>"WELL INFORMED PEOPLE KNOW IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO TRANSMIT THE VOICE OVER
>WIRES AND THAT, WERE IT POSSIBLE TO DO SO, THE THING WOULD BE OF NO
>PRACTICAL VALUE."

>>WELL INFOR... ahem.  Well informed people know the difference
>>between exploration and technological development (and commercial
>>exploitation thereof).  This "face on Mars" flap is relevant to the
>>former, while the quoted text is relevant to the latter; and there
>>is nothing in common between them.

Well, you ignored my first point entirely & then let me have it about
something you don't feel is relevant. Should I type real
ssslllooowwwlllllyyyy so you can make the connection?

My point being that if it were up to the neysayers & doubting Thomases in
the world, we as a species would still be gathering nuts & berries. We
would still
all think the world was flat. All crowded in Europe,Asia,Africa,etc.
Fearing the
unknown big water, ignoring the fact that birds can fly & that with a
little ingenuity we could too.

It is the mindset of the skeptic that I am making reference to. The out &
out denial of an issue before all the evidence is in. Taking the walk off
of the well beaten path to discovery. Whether it be technological
exploration,physical exploration,mental
exploration,etc.,etc.,etc..................................
...........................................................................
....

I hope this clears things up a little. Lets get another thing straight
while we are at it. I am not saying that the unusual features on Mars are
artificial structure(s). What I am saying is that they are unusual enough
to warrant further study. I am not alone in this theory. Why must people
always scoff at new or different ideas. Oh well, just read my .sig that
might reveal a clue. :-)
   						V
						V
--						V
						V
						V
-- 						V
Rod Beckwith     |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 
Datacom I/S      |"The great obstacle of progress is not ignorance,
rodb@corp.sgi.com|but the illusion of knowledge."
                 |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


			

Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Keywords: mars observer, citys or rocks, confirmation one way or the other, side bets
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 02:38:43 GMT

In article <1992Oct7.220808.6718@odin.corp.sgi.com>, rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith) writes:
|> Robert,[you write]
|> 
|> >I'm typing as s-l-o-w-l-y as I can.  You are still not getting it.  Try
|> >to pay attention this time:
|> >"out & out denial" is NOT "the mindset of the skeptic".  The mindset 
|> >of the skeptic is "That's an astonishing claim, what is the evidence 
|> >for it?"
|> 
|> 
|> The evidence sir is the photographs that were returned by the viking probe.
|> There is not enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what the
|> structure is, so we must go back & re-photograph, re-analyze, re-evaluate,
|> etc. Most skeptics say "What for, it's just a clump of eroded rock"
|> 
|> That Bobby my boy is what I am talking about. Skeptics will not open their
|> eyes
|> enough to allow that they might not know everything beforehand.
|> 
|> Just a wait & see attitude is all that it takes. What a difficult concept
|> to grasp. 
|> 
|> Human nature is a labrynth that is as boundless & as confounding as the
|> universe as we know it. Nuff said!!!
|> 
|> Rod

I simply refuse to accept your characterization of what "most skeptics" 
say, because you are just plain wrong.  Because, Roddy my lad, I know 
an awful lot of skeptics, and every damn one of them says, "Sure, as 
long as we're sending a probe to Mars, let's be sure to look at that 
place."

As to the "evidence": there are, in fact, not one or two, but many 1000's 
of photographs from many missions to Mars, and plenty of other data 
about the planet.  Of all the gazillions of bits of information we 
have about Mars, all but a tiny handful tell a consistent story of a 
dead planet that has never been inhabited.  THESE ARE THE FACTS.  

YOU are the one who is ignoring the facts and the evidence.

Like most skeptics, I agree with you that we should collect more data
about Mars (and every other aspect fo the universe). 
Please stop saying that, because I am willing to predict what will 
be found, that somehow I am unable or unwilling to grasp the fact 
that we don't actually know yet and I might be wrong.  Try to
get it through your head that, even though one can't be sure,
there actually is very good reason to expect that the structures
that you think are ambiguous, are in fact rock formations.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 23:23:56 EDT
From: <JBK4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: 2-mile long gun
Distribution: world

I too recall the Discover article.  it talked about magnetic coil guns or
something.

JK
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: steven@syacus.acus.oz.au (Steven Malikoff)
Subject: Re: 2-mile long gun
Organization: ACUS Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Sydney
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 06:42:46 GMT

wellison@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:
<intro about railguns>
: few nanoseconds later, the cap bank is discharged into the rails. The puck
: begins to travel forward, but the rails collapse so fast, that the puck is sort
: of squirted out of the barrle, to the tune of the fastest speed attained by
: mass by man, 335,000 MPH ! ! ! Gueniss book of world records mentions the

Hmmm... I seem to remember it is the intense electric field that propels
the puck along the rails, not the rails collapsing upon the puck. The heat
generated does not completely ruin the rails (just mostly!) so while it's
ok for small devices, a large one would be very expensive due to the fact
you'd have to rebuild it all the time.

Steve Malikoff.
steven@syacus.acus.oz.au
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: jagnow@al.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Jagnow)
Subject: Re: Portable Ufo detector, is it out there?
Reply-To: jagnow@al.weeg.uiowa.edu (Al Jagnow)
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:51:34 GMT

In article <Bw43ov.C75@cck.coventry.ac.uk> aph016@cch.coventry.ac.uk (ozzy)  
writes:
> Is there anyone out there on the net that has a copy of the portable
> Ufo detector? I would be very happy if some-one could send it on to me.
> Methinks the net address is aph016@cch.cov.ac.uk
> 
> Many thanks in advance
> 
> ozzy
> 
> -- 
> aph016@uk.ac.cov.cch
If I remember correctly, UFO's produce magnetic disturbances - simply hang a  
magnet from a bare piece of copper wire. Place a loop of bare copper wire  
around, but not touching the wire from which the magnet is hanging - as close  
to the magnet as possible. Connect the two wires in series with a battery and
an electric bell or buzzer. When the magnet moves, the wires will touch,  
completing the circuit and sounding an alarm. Building the magnet assembly  
inside a wood or plastic box will prevent the wind from causing false alarms. 
The longer the pendulum and the stronger the magnet, the more sensitive the  
alarm. Needless to say, the support for the pendulum must be made of wood or  
plastic. Try not to use any magnetic materials in the construction of the  
detector. 

If the magnet were massive enough, the wire flexible enough, and the contact  
loop small enough, this might also serve as an earthquake detector.

I suppose you could do something with a Hall Effect device.....  It would be  
more elegant, but probably not any more effective :-)

Jag
 
Xref: sparky alt.alien.visitors:7261 sci.skeptic:17666
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Face On Mars An Other Other Time
Date: 8 Oct 1992 20:05:15 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <1992Oct8.135701.27891@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com>, mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary) writes:
=    The Mars Observer mission will carry an extremely high-resolution
=    camera, and better images of the formation will hopefully settle this
=    question in a few years. In the meantime, speculation about the Face is
=    best carried on in the altnet group alt.alien.visitors, not sci.space or
=    sci.astro.

The above paragraph should now be amended to something like:

    The Mars Observer mission carries an extremely high-resolution (2m)
    camera, and better images of the formation will hopefully settle this
    question in a few months. In the meantime, speculation about the Face is
    best carried on in the altnet group alt.alien.visitors, not sci.space or
    sci.astro.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Xref: sparky alt.alien.visitors:7276 sci.skeptic:17694
From: rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Keywords: Carl is an abrasive clown.
Date: 9 Oct 92 00:27:11 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.

>The evidence sir is the photographs that were returned by the viking
probe.
>There is not enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what the
>structure is, so we must go back & re-photograph, re-analyze,
re-evaluate,
>etc. Most skeptics say "What for, it's just a clump of eroded rock"

>>There never WILL be evidence enough to prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt"
what
>>the structure is unless we actually land there and check it out up close.
>>After the MO sends back pictures showing it to be merely a natural
formation,
>>I'm sure there will be true believers out there (probably including
Hoagland)
>>who will claim either:
>>	1)  It was actually artificial, but weathering over the milennia has
>>	    worn it down to the point where it now looks natural;
>>and/or	2)  It's camoflaged.

>That Bobby my boy is what I am talking about.

>>You're talking about proving a negative.  See the FAQ for a detailed
>>description of why your bullshit is so unreasonable. There's no way in
hell
>>that it can be proven "beyond a shadow of a doubt" via photographs that
the
>>feature is natural. Of course, it's also impossible to prove "beyond a
shadow
>>of a doubt" that there do not exist nine reindeer on this world that are
>>capable of flying.


Carl,

NEVER say NEVER. Denial denial denial......we've seen this before Carl.
Your blocking Carl. What are you afraid of Carl? Soh nuch!!!!

Laughing all the way to Tahoe...............Rod


-- 
Rod Beckwith     |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 
Datacom I/S      |"The great obstacle of progress is not ignorance,
rodb@corp.sgi.com|but the illusion of knowledge."
                 |$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$


			
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: THURSTEW@ctrvax.vanderbilt.edu ()
Subject: Re: Pioneer Probe & The Venusians
Organization: Vanderbilt University 
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 07:00:55 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.21

In <1992Oct9.231349.14076@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu writes:


 
> 	The Pioneer Venus Probe's orbit has decayed and it
> has fallen down through the atmosphere of Venus where we
> can no longer receive data for it.

  Did you hear if any worthwhile data was obtained about Venus when the 
satellite was in its fatal downward plunge into the atmosphere?


Xref: sparky alt.alien.visitors:7312 alt.conspiracy:11137
From: clc=clone@dcs.ed.ac.uk (The Clone of Claudio Calvelli)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: INVASION!!!
Date: 10 Oct 92 15:05:05 GMT
Reply-To: clc=clone@dcs.ed.ac.uk (The Clone of Claudio Calvelli)
Organization: The Alternative Universe

In article <1992Oct9.201953.1332@netcom.com> Gary Stollman writes:
> 
> I have just returned from a foree into the world of the unknown for the
> umteenth time, where I learned exactly who and why this has all been
> happening to me.  It turns out that I am a special angel put here by God
> to bring peace and happiness to the world.  I was taken over by Jesus, and
> he in turn saved my family and friends.  I drove all over California in my

Wow, now we all feel better. You know, all this talk about people being
replaced by clones really worried me and a lot of other people. But if
you are Jesus, or part of Him, and what you called "clones" are really
angels, there is nothing to fear.

> car, although the distances were altered by God moving my car through
> space, and one minute I was driving near Santa Barbara, and then the next
> minute I was back in Pasadena, where I was taken out of the car by angels

Now, that's good news. You could drive up to here (just ignore that small
ocean in the way :-) and tell us your story. We have people who would be
very happy to listen to you, but we cannot come there because it's too far.
But with the help of the Lord you could be here in minutes! Please tell us
that you can!

> after stopping as told by God in the middle of an intersection.  I
> performed other functions for God as well, including being the vehicle
> through which Jesus has started the Second Coming.  It would take a VERY
> long article to explain it all in detail, but suffice it to say that I am

Well, don't worry, just type it all. We are eager for all the details.

> back in the real world now, except that now I have Jesus(a small part of
> him) inside me to guide me, and I met an angel of an old girlfriend of
> mine, who put her soul into me, and I have both inside me now.  I KNOW
> this sounds like channeling or something like that, but this is the truth
> as best as I know it.  God was speaking to me directly, and through his
> commands, I was transported through places unimaginable by anyone of
> normal standards, if there is such a thing.  I will get back on tonight,
> and give you some more details.  

Yes, please!

> 	Gary Stollman

--
The Clone of Claudio Calvelli
From: John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Ezekiel's spaceship
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 06:37:07 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <Oct.15.21.15.21.1992.5057@dropout.rutgers.edu>

One of these days maybe I'll get the time to tell about meeting the 
of the present incarnation of the prophet E. 
John Winston
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: gvb@TEFS1.acd.com (Gregg Brown)
Subject: Re: TALK WITH ALIENS!
Organization: Applied Computing Devices, Inc., Terre Haute IN
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:24:22 GMT

In article <1at2d3INNk6e@roche.csl.sri.com> boucher@csl.sri.com (Peter K. Boucher) writes:
>
>In article <BvFvqA.9n@dcs.ed.ac.uk>, clc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Claudio Calvelli) writes:
>|> In article <66960@cup.portal.com> Don_-_Showen@cup.portal.com writes:
>|> > 
>|> > I heard somewhere that there is a law against talking to aliens,  we could
>|> > get a $10,000. fine from the federal govt. for communicating with aliens.
>|> > Has anyone else heard this?  I think I heard it from G. Green so I am
>|> > not sure how true it is.
>
>This applies only to illegal aliens.  you can talk to them if they have a 
>green card.
>-- 
>Peter K. Boucher
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Computer Science Lab, SRI International             Software Engineer
>333 Ravenswood Ave. #EL-237                         (415) 859-3927
>Menlo Park, CA  94025                               boucher@csl.sri.com

Well, if thats the case, I could just cut up a few old Christmas cards
and give it to them. Or does it have to be ALL green? I would think actually
the card should be grey. Green applied only back when people thought aliens
were little green men from Mars. We need to update our practices. 

Gregg.


-- 
Let the Greys come. If they are friendly, I will shake their hands and wax
their saucers. If they are not, I will do what I can to blow them off the
planet.
This .sig was prepared by a professional editor. DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME.
From: kauffman@slab.unt.edu (DON KAUFFMAN)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: Re: Re: alt.alien.visitors.sewage.garbage....
Date: 14 Oct 92 02:37:43 GMT
Organization: School of Library & Info Sci, UNT

jlg@naucse.cse.nau.edu (James Gibson) writes:
>Subject: Re: alt.alien.visitors.sewage.garbage....

>I agree with the statement that if people want a 
>SERIOUS discussion of the issues of abductions and 
>contacts, a seperate area should be created for that
>purpose.  This way, eductaed debate could take place
>without New Age propaganda being tossed around.

	If by an "educated" debate you mean one
	in which those involved can't spell, you
	and the gentleman whose idea this schism
	was are certainly welcome to it.

>I have also been reading up on the subject and (IMHO)
>believe that enough cases of abductions are valid
>to encourage honest debate.

	As opposed to dishonest debate?

>jlg@naucse.cse.nau.edu
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: rkrouse@netcom.com (Robert K. Rouse)
Subject: Re: Comments on Berkeley Symposium
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 04:41:51 GMT


  The highlight of symposium for me was John Salter.  He expressed the 
way I feel about ETs better then I could myself.

  "No creature that is intelligent and has the right values is
   an alien to me."

 
-- 
==========================================================================
            Robert K. Rouse		rkrouse@netcom.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
 "VOTE! - use it or lose it" 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
From: grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Reply-To: grante@aquarius.rosemount.com (Grant Edwards)
Organization: Rosemount, Inc.
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 18:22:24 GMT

chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
: According to rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith):
: >I wonder how many bets were taken that Chris Colombus would sail off
: >the end of the Earth?
: 
: Good point... NOT.  You're the CRAZYMAN if you think that educated
: people of Columbus' time considered the world to be flat.  They knew
: it was round!  They had known that it was round since Greece was the
: dominant world power.  They were just wrong about its diameter.
: 

As I heard a historian on PBS last night say "Only a few of the most
wildly superstitious people of Columbus' time beleived the Earth was
flat."  Most of the educated people even new the correct diameter.
Only Columbus and a few others wildly underestimated the diameter of
the Earth.  Columbus first approached the King of Protugal with his
proposal to sail west to the Indies.  He refered to the matter to his
council of scientific advisors.  They knew how large the earth was,
and how big Asia was, and they told the King (correctly) that Columbus
was way off base, it would be easier to sail to the Indies by going
around Africa to the south.  And that's what they did.

--
Grant Edwards                                 |Yow!  First, I'm going to
Rosemount Inc.                                |give you all the ANSWERS to
                                              |today's test..  So just plug
grante@aquarius.rosemount.com                 |in your SONY WALKMANS and
                                              |relax!!
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Subject: Re: Anti-Gravity Flying Saucer
Reply-To: kevinq@Ingres.COM (Kevin Quinn)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 16 Oct 92 20:29:55 GMT

In article <1992Oct16.070907.14099@netcom.com> vere@netcom.com (Steven Vere) writes:
>   I saw the following in sci.research and thought people here might
>be interested too.
>_____________________________________________________________________

[ a lot of phoney drivel rerouted to /dev/null...]

>                                        Robert E. McElwaine
>                                        B.S., Physics and Astronomy, UW-EC
                                         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Steve -

Beware.  You've forwarded junk from one of the most extreme examples of
net.whacko.off.my.rocker.make.gary.look.sane posters...

BTW, no one has, to my knowledge, ever been able to verify that Bobbie has
ever even _attended_ college, let alone graduated.


kbq

--
Kevin Quinn                         | kevinq@ingres.com
                                    | {mtzinu,pacbell,ll-winken,sun}!ingres.com
My opinions are my own.  Should you think otherwise, think again.
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
From: kevinc@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE ()
Subject: Re: Greetings of the worst sort
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:45:10 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

Colleen Anderson (Colleen_Anderson@mindlink.bc.ca) wrote:
: To Stone Cold Gentleman:
: Jeez!  Some males are all the same, whether they're Earthlings or from the 34th
: planet.  You're obviously not very advanced if that's the way you still see
: women and I suggest you obliterate yourself.  (A giant, moist raspberry to you)
: You are neither a gentleman nor an alien.  Aliens have no use only for AMERICAN
: politics,

: You think the world centers on you?
: 


.....YA, SO ?!!


Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
From: stanley@verga.enet.dec.com (Hail Eris)
Subject: Re: Exploration is not Technology
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:26:14 GMT


In article <1992Oct9.002711.24286@odin.corp.sgi.com>, rodb@slugo.corp.sgi.com (Rod Beckwith) writes...
>>The evidence sir is the photographs that were returned by the viking
>probe.
>>There is not enough evidence to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt what the
>>structure is, so we must go back & re-photograph, re-analyze,
>re-evaluate,
>>etc. Most skeptics say "What for, it's just a clump of eroded rock"
> 
>>>There never WILL be evidence enough to prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt"
>what
>>>the structure is unless we actually land there and check it out up close

Sure there will be enough evidence.

If they find multiple faces and other structures laid out in distinct 
patterns then that's proof as far as I'm concerned.


You guys really would be in denial to claim that kind of artifact as 'natural'
From: buxduac@dct.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors
Subject: <None>
Date: 15 Oct 92 09:49:17 GMT
Organization: Dundee Institute of Technology

In article <1992Oct13.185033.9039@acd4.acd.com>, gvb@TEFS1.acd.com (Gregg Brown) writes:
> 
> Its is boldly appearant to me that alt.alien.visitors needs to split.
> Lets leave these bozos to their wild tales of entertainment and go
> somewhere where we can have more "MEAT" to feed on. I haven't the
> faintest idea how to create a group and I don't know what we should
> name it. I am sure some interested party would be willing to help.
> Anyway, I will write a FAQ for it (with the help of others, I am
> sure) and we can have some real alien/ufo controversy talking without
> some of the intrusions of this other (I will be polite) "stuff". All
> in favor...
> 
> gvb@acd4.acd.com
> 


Lets just say, I'm all in favour of this if you can find a way to "police" it.

Andy C