HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun
Date: 22 Nov 1992 11:46:20 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

Alan.Moorman@f31.n282.z1.tdkt.kksys.com (Alan Moorman) writes:

>  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?

It is not clear that "an electrical engineer" is the antecedant of "one."
"One" cannot be used in the same way that "he" or "she" can.  I suggest
that you use either "he" or "she" instead.  Perhaps you would offend less
people if you used "she"...

>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?"

No, this won't work.  We need a singular pronoun here, since "an electrical
engineer" is clearly singluar.  "They" is a plural pronoun.

You could solve the problem like this:
     Some electrical engineers specializing in analog design were given ...
     ...  What design approach did they likely 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.

Sorry, "they" is strictly plural.  However, in common speech, it is often 
misused, which is okay.  In formal writing, however, you should avoid this.

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

It implies plural, which is the problem...

When in doubt, alternate between "he" and "she".  Don't use such
bastardizations as "s/he" or "he or she" or "hir" or "yd"...

Hmm.. now that I have written this, I realize that this is the skeptics
group.  This message seems somewhat out of place, but I might as well
post it anyway.

keith

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (J. Giles)
Subject: Re: The guns of roston (wa
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 19:21:00 GMT

In article <BxLCw9.KKs@sdf.lonestar.org>, tad@sdf.lonestar.org (Tad Dowe) writes:
|> [...]                     If they uphold this ban, we will know that the
|> Constitution is, finally, dead; shot to death by the very body which was
|> designed to protect it.

That's already happened.  

For example: there was a program on ME/U over the weekend (a pre-law 
tele-course).  The instructor was going through the Constitution 
explaining the legal meanings and consequences (in general terms) 
of the various parts.  The tenth ammendment, for example, was described 
as a limitation on states to the effect that they could have no laws or 
regulations which conflict with federal laws and/or regulations.  This 
is, of course, exactly the *opposite* of the intended meaning at the 
time the constitution was written!  The most important thing the tenth 
ammendment says is that the federal government has no rights or powers 
*except* those explicitly provided under the constitution.  It was a 
limitation on the power of the *federal* government.

There are, of course, many federal laws on the books these days which
have no obvious constitutional justification, but the courts will never
overturn them: 1) because they have been on the books so long as to
make it unreasonable to change them now and 2) because the courts
now regard the tenth ammendment as a limitation on *states* anyway.

-- 
J. Giles
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Fundamentalist Nightmare
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov 17 1992
Date: 19 Nov 92  16:26:08

From: rbunge@eis.calstate.edu (Russell K. Bunge)
ID: BxrwH7.4yt@eis.calstate.edu
 
[id cut]
 
RK.B> "This message appeared on the GEnie online service. I am
RK.B> the sysop of the gay & lesbian issues forum and this was
RK.B> entered by one of our users:
 
[cut]
 
??> "Dear Fellow Christian,
??> 
??> As you know, we members and supporters of the O.C.A. have long
??> been engaged in a Holy War against the "MILITANT HOMOSEXUAL
??> LOBBY" and their pedophilic agenda to legalize sex with our
??> minor children. Many lessons have been learned. We know
??> that fighting the devil and his homosexual disciples within
??> our political system is fruitless.
 
[much silly nonsense deleted]
 
RK.B> The user has been discussing it there with others, and many
RK.B> expressed shock and outrage. I have asked for a copy of the
RK.B> actual letter, but I wanted to see if any of you in soc.motss
RK.B> or alt.politics.homosexuality land had seen or heard about
RK.B> this letter.
RK.B> 
RK.B> Based on the generalized advice in the last paragraph instead
RK.B> of an acctual address or phone number, I feel this may be a
RK.B> hoax letter sent out to look as if it came from the OCA, in
RK.B> order to further escalate the fight... but with these folks,
RK.B> you never know. How stupid is stupid?
 
While it SOUNDS like from a Christian organization (hate, fear,
paranoid), the Occult Christian Agenda (OCA) is usually a tiny
bit more covert in their propaganda. It looks like a hoax to me.
 
In Colorado there was a simular hoax, written on the Christian
cult's own letterhead, that was found pinned to the bulletin board
of a gay bar--- that letter advocated murdering homosexuals for
the Christian Gods. I have a copy of it somewhere on my BBS.
 
> ric@gnu.ai.mit.edu \/ Graffiti BBS 404 972-4999 \/

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: grant@psych.toronto.edu (Stuart Grant)
Subject: Re: Religion is great!
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:06:38 GMT

>-entpph@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>: .................  Apparently his relationship with God demanded that
>: he engage in stereotyping, scapegoating and hatred and other typically
>: Christian practices.

Ha-ha-ha! Oh-ho-ho-ho!
You _were_ trying to be funny, right?
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
From: billg@bony1.bony.com (Bill Gripp)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: LA&W RR
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 16:05:52 GMT

In article <LEET.92Nov18103245@dove.ims.com> leet@ims.com (Lee Thomas) writes:

>>First and foremost, it is said in the New Testament (sorry can't remeber the 
>>chapter and verse number or even book, but you'd recognize it) that one of the
>>members of the Sanhedrin, quieted the others by saying something like: don't
>>worry about him there were others before him and they appeared and disapperaed
>>and teh Jewish people forgotten about them, so this will also be his fate.

>Bill> I only recognize this as the end of a movie often on TV around Easter
>Bill> (The Greatest Story Ever Told?), spoken by Martin Landau.  If it's
>Bill> actually in the New Testament, I'd like to see a reference.

>Acts 5:34-39, wherein Gamaliel addresses the Sanhedrin.  One of the
>greatest arguments for the authenticity of the resurrection, by the way.

Agreed, however as several other posters have already pointed out, Avi's
description of the passage is quite different from the passage itself
and is more akin to what he may have seen in a movie than what he would
have gotten from reading the appropriate scripture.
From: avi@seal.imagen.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:48:56 GMT
Reply-To: avi@seal.imagen.com
Organization: none

>>>Jesus WAS stoned to death, then
>>>RS> hanged on a tree (as prescribed in Deut. 21:22-23).
>>
>>If you check the passages they either refer to someone with a totally different
>>name, or are not contemporary, or have wholly differing circumstances. 

>Not so fast. There's a whole "schtick" about whether or not the two are
>the same. Is "Yeshua ben Stada" the same as "Yeshua ben Panthera"? In the
>Middle ages, when Jews were prosecuted by the Church for maintaining
>"blasphemous" things, they (not surprisingly) argued, "Oh, those are
>two different guys, no problem". But how many different "Yeshuas" do
>you suppose were executed on the eve of Passover, and hanged on a tree?


 how many different "Yeshuas" do you suppose were executed on the eve 
 of Passover ?

 MANY DIFFERENT yeshuas. Why ? because:
 
 1) Yeshua is reasonably common jewish name for that era. Remember, there was
     a High Priest (Cohen Gadol) name Yeshua, and another man named
     Yeshua and Prachiah.
  2) MANY jews were executed daily, many with no appraent reason but the will
     of the Romans to just crush the moral, and secure the people subdued. 
     Now purely from a statistical standpoint, there would be MORE (many more)
     than one Yeshuas in the crowd, just like there would be more than one Jim 
     or John in any regular crowd on any City street (in the U.S.)
  3) On the Eve of Passover, a celebration of FREEDOM from OPPRESSION and SLAVERY,
     the Romans would especially ACCELERATE and INCREASE the crucifixion ratio
     as they wanted to break the people, spiritually and emotionally and what
     better time to do that than on a HAPPY Holiday, when people might have 
     thoughts of doing to the Romans, what their ancestors, led by Moses, did to 
     the Egyptians...
From: Joe.Slater@f351.n632.z3.fidonet.org (Joe Slater)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: 2 vs 14, P vs J, etc. [was: Would "Noah's Ark" have been large enough?]
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:43:01

Sunday November 15 1992, Carl J Lydick writes to All:

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.

The whole point of having two Talmuds was that one was written in Israel, which
was one centre of learning, and the other in Babylon, which was the other and
larger centre. Merging them would make as much sense as merging Hansard and the
Congressional Record.

There is no mysticism claimed about the origins of the Talmud. It's just the
canonical form of lecture notes dating back two thousand years.

jds

 * Origin: What horrors wait for me in this, the Phantom's Opera? (3:632/351)
From: save@cpva.saic.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Strange Lights in Southwestern Desert ??
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:53:17 PST
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego



Hey, It must have been at least a year ago that I caught a snippet
on a local eye-witless news program about some strange flickering
lights in a California, Arizona, or New Mexico desert.  They had
some actual video footage of the the phenomenon and, to the best
of my recollection, it looked like explosive flashes happening just
over the horizon.  The tape was shot at some road-side location
at night and included a bunch of other cars and people as well as
the surrounding terrain.  Does anybody else - John Winston not 
included 8^) - else rememeber hearing about this and, if so, what 
the resulting explanation was? Just curious.

Clark Wallace

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: jbv@IMD.Sterling.COM (James B Vacanti)
Subject: Skepticism
Summary: Just a short quote 
Keywords: skeptic 
Organization: Sterling Software
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 1992 14:16:18 GMT
X-Md4-Signature: 5fd610bcd51904fce345d82f8733c30e


  This post is not intended to comment on any other post I have seen in this
news group. I have been browsing the group for a week or so and this quote
jumped out from ny long-term (ie. old) memory, I believe it is from Sigmund
Freud :


   
   "If one is to regard onself as a skeptic, it is a good plan to have
    occasional doubts about one's skepticism".
   


-- 
Jim Vacanti   Grew up on IBM :-) mainframes, now I must learn UNIX(tm) :-(   
Sterling Software IMD    /*=============================================*/
uunet!sparky!jbv         /* "If you're not part of the solution, then   */
jbv@IMD.Sterling.COM     /*     you're part of the problem."   (??)     */
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: tad@ssc.com (Tad Cook)
Subject: Sai Baba Book
Organization: very little
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:02:41 GMT


The other day someone posted a request for skeptical info on
Sai Baba.

I am reading a book called SAI BABA'S MIRACLES; AN OVERVIEW,
by Dale Beyerstein.  In it he explains how Sai Baba does his
famous tricks, and he gives a good background explanation
about Baba.

I got the book for US $10.00 (postpaid) from:

Dale Beyerstein
Apt. 73
2985 East 56th Ave.
Vancouver, BC  V5S 2A2
Canada

I highly recommend this book!  Dale explains all of the tricks
seen in the popular videotapes of Baba, such as his materialization
of objects and "holy ash."


-- 
 Tad Cook     |  Phone:  206-527-4089  (home)     |   MCI Mail: 3288544   
 Seattle, WA  |  Packet: KT7H @ N7DUO.WA.USA.NA   |   3288544@mcimail.com 
              |  Internet: tad@ssc.com           or...sumax!ole!ssc!tad   
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:19668 soc.culture.african.american:11160
From: shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: AIDS and the CIA (was Question)
Date: 16 Nov 1992 20:34:41 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: hijack.berkeley.edu

In article <97795@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>In article <9706@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, pmmst8+@pitt (Paul M Mweene) writes:
>>They felt that a more likely source was combination of the luekemia
>>causative agent and the visna virus found in sheep.
>
>And it's gibberish.  Look at the sequences.  It's not difficult.

If anyone wants a copy of the sequences, send me email, and then you can
compare the sequences yourself.  There's no big coverup here: HIV-1 is
similar to SIV, HIV-2 is very similar to SIV, and neither are similar to
the human leukemia virus (HTLV) or bovine leukemia virus (BLV) or sheep visna
(OLV).  End of conspiracy theory.

Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: mancus@zaphod.JSC.NASA.GOV (Keith Mancus/MDSSC)
Subject: Re: When will K2 grow up?
Organization: IGOAL
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 01:13:52 GMT

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.

-- 
| Keith Mancus    <mancus@cheers.jsc.nasa.gov>                           |
|                 N5WVR                                                  |
|  "If I owned Texas and I owned Hell, I'd rent out Texas and live       |
|  in Hell." -General Sheridan                                           |
From: rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:22:49 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Nov17.150820.9288@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo) writes:
>The Dead Sea Scrolls are a masterpiece of the Aramaic Language.

The DSS are written in Hebrew (as is virtually all of the Jewish Bible).

   Robert
From: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightm
Date: 21 Nov 92 14:54:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 

EN> .>       I loved it (*not* him)
  > .Whom are you trying to reassure?  What would have been so terrible if
  > .you had?  Isn't it natural to feel warmth toward a pleasure giving
  > .partner?

He's not trying to reassure anyone.  He's making a very valid separation
between desire for the act, and desire for the person.

Is it natural to feel warmth toward a pleasure giving partner?  Not
necessarily.  The pleasure and the pleasure-giver are independent.
Perhaps it's better if you feel pleasure towards both, but it's
certainly not a requirement!

        D/

 * OLX 2.2 * Bring back A-N airways!!    Dick.Zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com
From: kanga.caltech.edu!magney (Michael Agney)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: 17 Nov 1992 19:47:26 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: itchy.caltech.edu
Originator: magney@itchy

In article <Bxt7qC.ILq@dcs.ed.ac.uk> pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)  
writes:
> In article <BxsHEB.5AL@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz>  
cctr114@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz (Bill Rea) writes:
> >G T Clark (gtclark@festival.ed.ac.uk) wrote:
> >> 
> >> 	The bible is patently not inerrant.Read Leviticus,chapter 18(or
> >> thereabouts) where it fairly clearly states that insects walk "upon  
all
> >> fours... fourfootedly upon the ground".That's quite clearly a  
mistake,
> >> no matter what stage it crept in at.
> >
> >This isn't a mistake, its an idiom.
> 
> This renders "inerrancy" a nonsense.  Any passage you might previously
> have argued was an error, you now argue is an idiom.
> 
> You can be a Christian and believe *anything you want*.
>   __                                ____

Yeah, but I'm sure someone can come up with an error so great that
claiming it's an idiom would be ridiculous.  Carl?

--
| 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 |
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: cel@nsscmail.att.com (clayton EDward LEIHY iii)
Subject: Re: Lotteries  (was Re: Innumeracy, humorous ... maybe.)
Followup-To: sci.skeptic
Organization: NCR Systems Support Center - New Jersey
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:41:50 GMT

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.

Anybody know??
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: skinner@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
Reply-To: g-skinner@uiuc.edu
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 18:35:25 GMT

I agree that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that Bible is
not in every way inerrant.  But we must be very careful to choose
accurate examples when we seek to demonstrate this to someone who
differs.  For this reason, I feel I must point out a possible mistake
in G T Clark's post:

> 	The bible is patently not inerrant.Read Leviticus,chapter 18(or
> thereabouts) where it fairly clearly states that insects walk "upon all
> fours... fourfootedly upon the ground".That's quite clearly a mistake,
> no matter what stage it crept in at.

The passage is this (from Lev. 11, NIV)

   All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to
   you.  There are, however, some winged creaures that walk on all
   fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on
   the ground.

We see that this portion of the Bible does not state that "insects
walk upon all fours," unless, of course, the translators have made
some kind of correction.
--
Gregg Skinner       I do not speak for any organization.
From: JHARTLEY@cmsa.gmr.com
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Homosexual Agenda (was: Fundamentalist nightmare)
Date: 18 Nov 92 16:42:57 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs

David Rice writes:
>millitary, and one who was against offically allowing homosexuals
>in the millitary.
>the millitary, in large numbers--- numbers equal to the ratio
>protecting current and future millitary personale from losing
>homosexuals into the millitary (as if they were not ALREADY THERE),
>millitary, who were "a moral problem" in "Desert Storm," because
>the current homosexuals in the millitary their right to be there,
>is going to hurt the millitary? Has there been studies?





Wow!  I am surprised that someone who knows so much about
the military cannot spell it correctly.  A simple typo?
Eight times in one page?  Unbelievable.  I guess expertise
is inversely related to spelling acumen.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:30:39 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.234856.20114@imagen.com> avi@seal.imagen.com writes:
> how many different "Yeshuas" do you suppose were executed on the eve 
> of Passover ?
>
> MANY DIFFERENT yeshuas. Why ? because:
> 
> 1) Yeshua is reasonably common jewish name for that era. Remember, there was
>     a High Priest (Cohen Gadol) name Yeshua, and another man named
>     Yeshua and Prachiah.
>  2) MANY jews were executed daily, many with no appraent reason but the will
>     of the Romans to just crush the moral, and secure the people subdued. 
>     Now purely from a statistical standpoint, there would be MORE (many more)
>     than one Yeshuas in the crowd, just like there would be more than one Jim 
>     or John in any regular crowd on any City street (in the U.S.)
>  3) On the Eve of Passover, a celebration of FREEDOM from OPPRESSION and SLAVERY,
>     the Romans would especially ACCELERATE and INCREASE the crucifixion ratio
>     as they wanted to break the people, spiritually and emotionally and what
>     better time to do that than on a HAPPY Holiday, when people might have 
>     thoughts of doing to the Romans, what their ancestors, led by Moses, did to 
>     the Egyptians...

Woah! Now I don't know just how many Jews were executed by the Romans yearly
around 30 C.E. (and probably nobody else does either), but I suspect it's
NOT as large as you claim.

BUT, we are talking here about a Jewish execution, not a Roman one. Remember,
Yeshua (ben Panthera & ben Stada) was (were?) stoned to death, then hanged for
display on a tree afterward (ref: Deut. 21:22-23), on the eve of
Passover. And this is from the Talmud, not from some Roman source. Now,
as you know, Jewish executions were relatively scarce. I presume you are
familiar with the Talmudic saying that goes something like, "A Sanhedrin
that executes 70 people in 70 years is a bloody Sanhedrin"? So there would
NOT have been a large number of such executions in the first place.

Besides, there are a number of other reasons for accepting that "ben Panthera"
is the same as "ben Stada."



-- 
  
        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"