HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Chaotic brain behaviour and its influence on duplicating a person(was: Questions about other stuff(sorry, lousy title!))
From: emiddlec@mora.gac.edu (Eric Middlecamp)
Date: 9 Nov 92 22:28:22 -0600

In article <RICHARD.92Nov9172845@cantor.harlqn.co.uk>  writes:
>In alt.atheism jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jordan M. Wolbrum) wrote:
>
>> 2) Without a soul, could it be possible to clone a human and copy
>> all of the original's memories into the clone, creating two of the
>> same person?  I think so.  I'm just tired of hearing people say "It
>> just wouldn't be me," w/o any justification.
>
>I have a friend who is doing neuroscientific research.  He once told
>me about chaotic behaviour observed in the olfactory lobe.  His claim
>was that the brain was using a strange attractor to somehow control
>perception.  I didn't take in much of what he said -- it was just a
>brief conversation about what he was working on.
>
>Anyway, if the brain were to make use of chaotic behaviour, or at
>least be influenced by chaotic functions, then it is unlikely that
>duplicating a person completely (setting aside quantum physics for the
>moment, *ahem*) would duplicate their behaviour.  Their chaotic nature
>would cause them to diverge unpredictably.

My understanding of the term "chaos" in this instance is not "chaotic" but
"really really complex." Small errors in measurement cause chaotic functions
to diverge, but, if a clone could contain ALL the genetic/physical info as the
origional, they would be the same until environment made changes. 

I don't know how much info is really stored in DNA. I think the brain network
(the actual neural data/combinations) would not be stored in DNA but in cells
themseves. Otherwise the body could, concievably, repair some brain damage.
It seems improbable to me, anyway, that the body would duplicate the brain's
exact status in DNA. This means a clone would simply be a baby of the
origional, with near identical genetic potential.

Hope this applies, pardon me if this was out of place.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: Vatican Finds Galileo 'Not Guilty'
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 17:15:53 GMT

In article <kmr4.178.721586647@po.CWRU.edu> kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M. Ryan) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.154900.18279@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jcopelan@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (The One and Only) writes:
>>Yeah, yeah, and when you leap from that 10-story building and splatter
>>your brains out on the sidewalk below we can go up to what is left of your
>>head and point out exactly where in your head gravity exists.
>	Please, read Pirsig, and try to understand his position, before you 
>try to belittle him. He makes a very valid, and very important point. It 
>applies not only to gravity, but to science as a whole.
>	Let me try to help you along by asking a question, did gravity and 
>the law of gravity exist before Newton? Think about it for awhile, and the 
>implications of your answer.
Don't be stupid. People knew that things fell when you dropped them.
That wasn't Newton's contribution.

What Newton did that was important was make two observations:
1) The same force that makes things fall keeps the planets in their
orbits.
2) Figure out the mathematical relationship you needed to make this
all work.

It's also not a particularly interesting--or valid--point.
Gravity clearly existed, since we can make observations of events
that occurred before Newton that act in the fashion predicted by
gravity. Whether or not the "law of gravity" existed depends mainly
upon what you mean by the "law of gravity.":

-Ekr


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
                "Meet the new boss, same as the old boss."
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: petel@sequent.com (Pete Lancashire)
Subject: Re: Reasons for Atheism...
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Distribution: alt
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 00:44:36 GMT

dgray@menudo.uh.edu (Dennis Gray Jr.) writes:


>I am interested in finding out why you dear atheist are an atheist.
>For the most part, I expect alot, if not most of us have come from
>religious backgrounds and have "stayed" for one reason or another.  So
>that's what I am interested in -- why did you "stray" or why did you
>never fall for it?

>If I get enough replies I will compile and post them (so if you do not
>want what you say posted please tell me in the body of your mail).

>Take care,
>-dennis
>---
>Dennis Gray, Jr.                                         DGray@uh.edu

The reason I 'think' of being an atheist is that the one thing
my parents did (another long story see misc.kids soon) is not
force me to attend church. The had me goto sunday school when I
was around 9 or 10 and told me that after one month, if I did
not want to go, I would not have to. That was my last assocation
with the 'church'.

I guess I just don't need someone telling me what my morals
should be, and for one who workes with kids and seen what 'christian'
parents do to them, I'm very turned off by 'formal' religions.

I can't say more with out starting to FLAME....

-pete

petel@sequent.com
From: hbcs1010@blurt.oswego.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: possibly a stupid question.
Date: 5 Nov 92 21:11:52 GMT
Organization: SUNY College at Oswego, Oswego, NY

a question for any xtians (or whoever else who may have an answer) who might be
reading this:

 first we stipulate that there is indeed a god, who created life, the universe, 
and everything. (sounds pretty damn silly to me, but just for the sake of this
argument i'll do it)

 why would a being of such indescribable power, capable of creating the
universe in its infinite majesty, turn around and throw a hissy fit if some
poor slob of a human doesn't believe in it? why would any such putative
being *CARE*? face it, guys, we would be to such a being as a microbe is to us.
personally, i would tend to think that such a being would have much more
interesting things to do than to go around peeking through people's windows, or
whatever.

 anyone else have an opinion? am i inviting a major flame-fest?


-diedre hauptfuehrer

there's a hell of a universe next door- let's go!
                                                 e.e. cummings
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Don't believe a.... Sorry Mr Ryan!
From: 9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au (The Eidolon)
Date: 8 Nov 92 22:56:00 +1030
Organization: Oh look, a lifeform!

In article <19245.2afd9a59@levels.unisa.edu.au>, 9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au
(The Eidolon) writes:

> [some crap that Mr Schneider has already dealt with deleted]

Sorry Mr Ryan, I knew it was one of the Keiths around the place.

> John J McVey, Whyalla, Uni S. Australia    9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au
-- 
John J McVey, Whyalla, Uni S. Australia    9051467f@levels.unisa.edu.au
Electronic Engineering student & Terror Tekkie!
Any email can be posted unless I state explicitly otherwise.
+-----------------------------------------------------+    ________
|  Obligatory disclaimer: UniSA hates my opinions...  |  \/Darwin o\
+-----------------------------------------------------+  /\________/
An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it. Marquis
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Keywords: Cure
Reply-To: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1992 01:49:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.135913.3366@newstand.syr.edu>,
dwjurkat@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Jurkat) writes:
|>I am interested in making this world a better place to live, and in
|>order to do so I think it would be beneficial if this group would
|>think about ways of helping those who have religious leanings.  I do
|>relize it would be inapropriate to lock up all Christians, Muslems, etc.
|>in insane asylums, but surely there must be some way of stopping this
|>defective mindset(s).  Perhaps we should start with the most severly
|>disturbed individuals, such as priests and other religous leaders.
|>I think maybe someone could establish an anonymous "Believer" line.
|>This should be staffed by a psychologist and would give the Believer a
|>reality check (sort of a first step towards mental health).
|>I would like to hear some other suggestions - something that an individual
|>could do to cure a Believer.  Lets see some action please!  
            
We could go door to door, giving out extistential lit.
Or we could go on TV and preach the joy of atheism
(big, colorful sets. lots of singing.  We could invite
maimed people to come forth and not get healed.)
How about a theme park?

Brian /-|-\
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Interesting s.r.c posting...
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:29:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

One of the "thought of the day" postings:

>Wednesday, November 4:
> 
>     If you want to be perfect, go sell your belongings and give to
>the poor and you will have treasure in heaven, and come be my
>follower.  <Matthew 19: 21>
> 
>-- 
>Ralph.  N6BNO.  NOW LOOKING FOR A JOB!
[...]
>I do not waste time expressing others' opinions!

Note the .sig.  Did he sell all his belongings only to give up and try to get a
job?  And why does he waste his time posting Jesus' opinions?  Perhaps he meant
that when he hears another person's opinions, he wastes no time to express it. 

******************************************************************************
Mike Cluff				*  "If something about the human	
v22964qs@ubvms or mike%luick@ubvms	*   body disgusts you, complain to
UB Language Perception Laboratory	*   the manufacturer." - Lenny Bruce	
******************************************************************************
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Chaotic brain behaviour and its influence on duplicating a perso
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 11:39:10 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

"Jordan M. Wolbrum" <jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
> impulses.  With accurate enough recording/replicating devices, we could
> basically "install" the old person's memories onto the clone.  School
> would be pretty useless too.  Why go to school when you can have all
> this information just uploaded to your brain?

It's sad that there are people who believe that's the purpose of school...


mathew
-- 
Civilization is just a temporary failure of entropy.

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jcopelan@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (The One and Only)
Subject: Re: Assertiveness of Non-divinity
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:21:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.064224.13439@nmsu.edu> epowers@mccoy.NMSU.Edu (POWERS) writes:
>In article <1992Oct30.153523.18547@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk  
>(Simon Clippingdale) writes:
>> 
>> No, because the two positions are not logically equivalent. "There is no
>> God" is a position falsifiable by production of evidence of a God. "There
>> is a God" is not falsifiable because falsification requires that an  
>exhaustive
>> search of whatever space the thing is supposed to inhabit be conducted,
>> spanning all points of the space simultaneously (so that It can't dodge the
>> search), and that the search be fruitless.
>
>[Erik Powers writes:]
>	Even this would be useless, because it assumes God to be bound by  
>"space", something we Christians would claim He invented.  Also, you limit the  
>search for God to scientific methods, which have two main drawbacks in this  
>case:
>	The first is that scientific methods always assume the non-interference  
>of the supernatural (imagine if Newton had said "Oh, it was an ANGEL who  
>dropped that apple on my head"), so anything observable cited as evidence is  
>automatically discounted as having an unknown natural explanation.

Why is this assumption (the supernatural does not exist) a drawback of 
science?  Do you have any reason to believe otherwise?
What I am showing is that you are making some a priori assumptions that
don't hold.

>	Second, science proceeds by weeding out worse theories in favor of  
>better ones (which also get modified eventually).

Again, this is a strength, not a drawback

>  Nothing is ever known to be  
>true in science, it's just that some things are known to not be true in  
>particular situations.

Not true! ;-)  It is painfully obvious that science deals with truth all
the time.  You're not going to make me prove it now, are you?

-- 
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head
But it's not me            -- Pink Floyd
From: dpn2@po.CWRU.Edu (Damien P. Neil)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: What if there is a god?
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:22:35 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
NNTP-Posting-Host: b63519.student.cwru.edu

In article <1992Nov4.132702.164983@dstos3.dsto.gov.au> jsm@ibis.dsto.gov.au (James Marcus) writes:
>>2. Assuming that the God is as represented in the Christian image and
>>such, then all the atheists lose.   Big time.
>
>... and go to Hell.  Bad time.

If there is a god, and he sends people to some hell just because they didn't 
believe in it, I want nothing with it's heaven.
+-------------+------------------+---------------------------------+
| Damien Neil | dpn2@po.cwru.edu | Case Western Reserve University |
+-------------+------------------+---------------------------------+
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:20813 alt.censorship:8659 talk.religion.misc:20613 sci.skeptic:19156
From: dace@shrike.und.ac.za (Roy Dace)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,alt.censorship,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightmare
Date: 7 Nov 1992 13:11:48 GMT
Organization: University of Natal (Durban), South Africa
NNTP-Posting-Host: shrike.und.ac.za
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

mgmam@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Mark A. Morrell) writes:
: Well, there are plenty of arguments here -- but I think I'll skip the
: issue altogether by making the fight above irrelevant as far as my
: opinions are concerned.  (Besides, while those arguments are fun, they
: are kind of non-sensical.)
: 
: If my children could be happy without being homosexual I would prefer
: it.  If my children would be unhappy without being homosexual, I would
: leave them to their happiness.
: 
: However, now, in order convince me they should be homosexual (like they
: would ask my opinion anyhow...) they would need to convince me that is
: the only way they could be happy.  And regardless of what else they
: thought or did, I would still very much prefer if they were straight and
: happy.

Just a serious question now Mark... Why are you so judgemental?

BtW, I was in a shower room this am at the same time as a homosexual.  I 
did not get raped - so what's the issue?

	-Hal 
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen)
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Keywords: Cure 
Organization: University of Joensuu
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:40:33 GMT

dwjurkat@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Jurkat) writes:

>I am interested in making this world a better place to live, and in
>order to do so I think it would be beneficial if this group would
>think about ways of helping those who have religious leanings.  I do
>relize it would be inapropriate to lock up all Christians, Muslems, etc.
>in insane asylums, but surely there must be some way of stopping this
>defective mindset(s).  Perhaps we should start with the most severly
>disturbed individuals, such as priests and other religous leaders.
>I think maybe someone could establish an anonymous "Believer" line.
>This should be staffed by a psychologist and would give the Believer a
>reality check (sort of a first step towards mental health).
>I would like to hear some other suggestions - something that an individual
>could do to cure a Believer.  Lets see some action please!  

	This has been in action in North Korea and Albania. 
-- 

		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint

	No ITU, love, evolution.           Tuusniemi ! Siis imein suut !
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jwest@wisc (Jeff West)
Subject: Re: information wanted please!
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: 6 Nov 92 10:54:19 CST

Isn't this where Colleen went?  It's all starting to make
sense,,,,*again*.

Ours In Colleen,
	Cardinal Jeff
From: hbcs1010@blurt.oswego.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: God Is Silly
Date: 11 Nov 92 13:14:15 GMT
Organization: SUNY College at Oswego, Oswego, NY

In article <92315.021717MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu>, MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
> In article <n0de5t@ofa123.fidonet.org>, David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org says:
>>
>> I don't care if I have no evidence that God does
>>not exist, though I assert God does not exist. I assert the negative,
>>and it is up to the theist, whom asserts the positive, to produce the
>>evidence.
> 
> Where do you get this? Does no one understand that there are more than
> two sides to this? Anyone who asserts something had better be prepared
> to back it up. I don't understand why you think that the other side has
> to prove you wrong. As if you can assert a belief and get away with it.
> Both sides, since they are asserting something, need to prove their
> assertions. Otherwise, I'm left with nothing at all--my present stance.
> 
> Martin Schulte



no no no no no! didn't you read the pink unicorn bits? if i assert that there
are pink unicorns running around in my walls, it's up to me to prove that they
are, not up to you to prove that they aren't. 
  
 of course, if i tried to prove it, i'd probably get locked in a padded
room....

-diedre hauptfuehrer

there's a hell of a universe next door- let's go!
                                                 e.e. cummings
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: rolls@cis.umassd.edu (Frank Pinto)
Subject: Re: information wanted please!
Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 08:46:57 GMT

In <1992Nov6.135604.1@csc.canterbury.ac.nz> phys224@csc.canterbury.ac.nz writes:

>Hi everyone,i'm an atheist living in new zealand,and i am sick and tired
>of religious types forcing their opinions on the rest of us.
>I would like to know,are there any major worldwide organisations for atheism?
>if so,could someone post/send their address for me please?
>Or are there any in say the USA,that foreigners can join?
>Down here in new zealand,we are doing quite well;we have over 600,000
>non-religious people according to census figures,out of a total population
>of 3.3 million(i think.).Yet we too have a fundementalist problem,with
>a relatively scientifically illiterate population,very vulnerable to
>fundementalism.I was just the other day talking with a fast food retailer,
>he was trying to convince me the world was 6000 years old.I pointed out to
>him that we can detect stars,galaxies etc many thousands of lightyears away;
>unfazed,he told me the speed of light was faster in the past;so the stars
>also were created 6000 years ago!he told me recent experiments have proved
>light speed is not a constant.nonsense!I'm doing a P.hd in physics,that
>didn't matter to him,i'm still ignorant compared to him about such matters.
>Likewise,i have (almost) a degree in zoology,specialising in genetics/
>evolution,but can't count the number of times my fellow citizins have called
>me stupid for believing in evolution;my own aunt called me that!just because
>i have degrees dosen't make me smart etc;but at least shows i have some,no
>matter how meager,knowledge of science.In our country,people with university
>educations are looked down on;we are currently having a study done on
>whether to allow US nuclear ships back into our country,the research is
>being done by scientists mostly,to see if nuclear propulsion if safe enough.
>But most people want a referendum on it!how can people vote on whether 
>nuclear power is safe?especially when more than 1/2 adults in this country
>don't know the earth travels around the sun!
>see ya all later

>stephen botha,christchurch,new zealand.

Mr. Botha

If the name of your city reflects the beliefs of its
inhabitants, it appears to me that science has a long
climb ahead. (about 400 yrs.) Which is as long as it took
the church to agree with Galileo.

Respectifully
Frank Pinto
From: czl30@duts.ccc.amdahl.com (Chris Lee)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: An apology
Date: 7 Nov 92 15:00:10 GMT
Reply-To: czl30@DUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Chris Lee)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Nov7.021642.17286@nmsu.edu> epowers@spock.NMSU.Edu (POWERS) writes:
>
>                                                      I also know plenty of
>people who claim to be atheists but have never considered the consequences of  
>their beliefs.  So don't assume that someone fits under a particular label just  
>because they claim they do.
>					
>					Erik Powers 

And what beliefs are those?

Chris Lee
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: eradm@brahms.Berkeley.EDU (Erik Radmall)
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Keywords: Cure
Reply-To: eradm@brahms.Berkeley.EDU (Erik Radmall)
Organization: Xerox
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:12:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.135913.3366@newstand.syr.edu>, dwjurkat@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Jurkat) writes:
|> I am interested in making this world a better place to live, and in
|> order to do so I think it would be beneficial if this group would
|> think about ways of helping those who have religious leanings.  I do
|> relize it would be inapropriate to lock up all Christians, Muslems, etc.
|> in insane asylums, but surely there must be some way of stopping this
|> defective mindset(s).  Perhaps we should start with the most severly
|> disturbed individuals, such as priests and other religous leaders.
|> I think maybe someone could establish an anonymous "Believer" line.
|> This should be staffed by a psychologist and would give the Believer a
|> reality check (sort of a first step towards mental health).
|> I would like to hear some other suggestions - something that an individual
|> could do to cure a Believer.  Lets see some action please!  

Whoa! Down boy! Live and Let Live!

-- 
J. Erik Radmall
eradm@brahms.wbst845e.xerox.com

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jay@oclc.org (Jeff Young)
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Organization: OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:42:00 GMT

dwjurkat@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Jurkat) writes:
: I am interested in making this world a better place to live, and in
: order to do so I think it would be beneficial if this group would
: think about ways of helping those who have religious leanings.  I do
: relize it would be inapropriate to lock up all Christians, Muslems, etc.
: in insane asylums, but surely there must be some way of stopping this
: defective mindset(s).  Perhaps we should start with the most severly
: disturbed individuals, such as priests and other religous leaders.
: I think maybe someone could establish an anonymous "Believer" line.
: This should be staffed by a psychologist and would give the Believer a
: reality check (sort of a first step towards mental health).
: I would like to hear some other suggestions - something that an individual
: could do to cure a Believer.  Lets see some action please!  

As a fundamentalist turned atheist, I too had a strong drive to
convince other people that atheists were right and everyone else
was wrong.  I finally came to the realization that this drive was
the vestigial effect of being indoctrinated with the need to
proselytize.  Spend time exploring your own beliefs which for me
includes exploring other peoples' beliefs.  If I happen to make 
someone else think while I am challenging myself, great.

-- 
> Jeff Young <   "Why are we going in there again, daddy?"
> Personal   <   "Shut up," his father explained.
> opinions   <         Ring Lardner