HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: greg@antizen.EBay.Sun.COM
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: What Do I Do?
Date: 23 Dec 1992 17:30:05 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: greg@antizen.EBay.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: antizen.ebay.sun.com

In article 72265@cup.portal.com, John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com () writes:
> Dear Folks: What do I do that is the question. I am part of a group
> who have volunteered to come to earth to enlighten everyone and help
> bring the earth into the next dimension of existence. Now how is that 
> for a serious answer?
> John Winston

John, 

You're losing it pal, no more Dead shows for you!

Greg


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: Biosphere II News
Organization: Semper Excelsior
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 06:55:10 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)

>DATE:   31 Dec 1992 05:53:56 GMT
>FROM:   Jon Livesey <livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com>
>
>In article <X5LmwB4w164w@cellar.org>, revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) writes:
>|> 
>|> 	Lord knows how reliable this is, but both Buzzworm and the Whole
>|> Earth Review are running articles about Biosphere this month. Whole Earth's
>|> article by Kevin Kelley-- who is an advisor of some sort to the project, so
>|> caveats up, gang-- reports that, while the Biospherians have managed to live
>|> for a year inside the structure, it hasn't been easy. 
>
>What do they mean when they say "while the Biospherians have managed 
>to live for a year inside the structure"?
>
>I thought I saw a newspaper report that one or more of them had left
>it temporarily, and then returned.   Was I mistaken?
>
>jon.

Seems I remember open back doors and a Pizza Hut delivery van, early on.
One of them got a hand stuck in somebody's zipper, or something, and 
had to go for outside medical treament.

  ,...,.,,
 /666;    ',    jim tims
////;    _~ -   p00168@psilink.com
(/@/----0-~-0
 ;'  . `` ~ \'
  , `    ' , >
;;|\..((   -C---->> Hope they're not recycling the pepperoni.
;;| >-  `.__),;;

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: bear@kestrel.fsl.noaa.gov (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Organization: Forecast Systems Labs, NOAA, Boulder, CO USA
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 01:53:29 GMT

In article <eharbin.725547983@convex.convex.com> eharbin@convex.com (Edward Harbin) writes:
>Nor is it accidental that
>wherever you find human suffering, Christians are in the forefront

I will definitely agree to that....

>with aid
>aid and comfort.

In my experience, the overtly Christians are generally there to gloat
about how that wouldn't have happened if the victim had just been a good
Christian.  Or they are contributing to the human suffering.  (Hang around
Planned Parenthood during a protest, for instance.  No matter what side
you take on this issue, you have to agree that the protesters make a bad
situation worse for the women).

Some of the people who _do_ offer aid and comfort are Christian, but they
tend to be quiet about it.  That is, they'll tell you if you ask or they
might perform a quiet religious service, but they don't ram the fact the
they are Christians Performing Good Deeds down your throat.

BTW, not everybody who volunteers for "Christian" relief organizations
is necessarily a Christian.  Habitat for Humanity is a good example --
it was founded by Christians and generally has a brief Christian service,
but (I think) they don't require volunteers to be Christian.


Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
From: sschaff@roc.SLAC.Stanford.EDU (Stephen F. Schaffner)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 00:36:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.050910.28064@udel.edu>, berryh@huey.udel.edu 
(John Berryhill, Ph.D.) writes:

|> People will always find a reason to do things like holler "BULLSHIT!!"
|> at each other.  Show me the group of humans that has never oppressed others
|> or would not oppress others given the opportunity.

[...]

|> However, it is always comforting to blame the worst aspects of the human
|> condition on the THEM of your choice.   Better yet, let's say nasty things
|> at THEM on the net!  And let's do it in a newsgroup that has nothing
|> whatsoever to do with the topic!

	This is one of the few sensible postings I've seen in this 
extraordinarily silly (even by sci.skeptic standards) thread (even if I 
do think humans are a bit more of a mixed lot than Mr. Berryhill seems 
to).  I don't know which I find more discouraging, the level of hatred in 
the discussion (mostly on the anti-Christian side) or the number of 
factual errors and bad arguments (pretty evenly split between the two).  
Oh well, happy new year to all concerned.

-- 
Steve Schaffner        sschaff@unixhub.slac.stanford.edu
	The opinions expressed may be mine, and may not be those of SLAC, 
Stanford University, or the DOE.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kelley@vet.vet.purdue.edu (Stephen Kelley)
Subject: Re: BiosphereII
Organization: Carps Underground, Malfunction Junction Division
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 21:19:01 GMT

- In article <1992Dec30.144509.27202@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu>, jacobson@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Eliot T. Jacobson ) writes...
-  
- Last I heard the ocean was dying, the co-2 was getting
- out of hand, and their farming was a failure.
-  

So what?  As long as they have spiffy jump suits to wear on
the talk shows and peddle their books about how horribly 
angst-producing it is to have to have sex with each other in
a small environment, and how much jealousy and inter-personal
conflict there were, and what ever-so-dedicated scientific pioneers
they are, thanks to the incredible vision of the incredible visionaries 
behind the whole scam, what else matters?


Steve 
	no the lack of smilies is not an oversight.
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Date: 3 Jan 93 05:41:37 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Organization: (Evil Eye Creature from Mars, Inc.)

In article <eharbin.725572135@convex.convex.com>, eharbin@convex.com
(Edward Harbin) wrote:
> >   On the other hand, in what non-Christian country would you choose to live?
> 
> >In the US of A, you moron!  The USA is NOT a christian nation,
> >regardless of what scum like Pat Robertson, Ronald Reagan, etc., like
> >to claim.
> 
> In fact, it's a Christian society with no established religion. I don't want
> an established religion any more than you do, but I do want a Christian
> country and I observe most of my countrymen are Christian - a state of affairs
> I approve. Even us morons may express a preference - or is that too much
> liberty for your taste?

Hehe, for Christians USA is certainly a Christian nation, for believers
of other religions this country is liberal. It's all in how you want to 
look at the system. Fortunately the US constitution allows one to label
the country to whatever you want, even as a Christian nation :-).

Cheers,
Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.		
"Don't just do something!  Stand there!"  -- Mystery Science Theater 3000
From: kuritzky@wheatena.berkeley.edu (Eric Kuritzky)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: homeopaty... NBC's da
Date: 28 Dec 1992 07:57:36 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: wheatena.berkeley.edu
Summary: References & comment


The following article was posted to misc.health.alternative.  I think that
people in this newsgroup might find it useful.
In article <Bzy5EB.9D@ssr.com> sdb@ssr.com (Scott Ballantyne) writes:
|In article <BSIMON.92Dec22130323@elvis.stsci.edu> bsimon@elvis.stsci.edu 
|(Bernie Simon) writes:
|
|   However, a number of controlled, double blind studies have
|   been performed which show the effectiveness of homeopathic medicine in
|   treating a number of diseases. The following is a brief list of some
|   of these studies.
|
|   D.T. Reilly, M.A. Taylor, C.McSharry et al., "Is Homeopathy a
|   Placebo Response? Controlled Trial of Homeopathic Potency with Pollen
|   in Hayfever as Model," Lancet (1986):881-886.
|
|   J.P. Ferley, D.Zimirou, D. D'Adhemar, et al., "A Controlled
|   Evaluation of a Homeopathic Preparation in the Treatment of
|   Influenza-like Syndromes," British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,
|   27(1989):329-35. 
|
|   P.Fischer, A.Greenwood, E.C.Huskisson, et al., "Effect of
|   Homeopathic Treatment on Fibrositis (Primary Fibromyalgia)," British
|   Medical Journal 299(1989):365-366.
|
|   E.Ernst, T.Saradeth, and K.L.Resch, "Complementary Treatment of
|   Varicose Veins: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Trial,"
|   Phlebology (1990): 157-163.
|
|   Kleijnen, Jos, Knipschild, Paul, ter Riet, Gerben, "Clinical trials of
|   Homoeopathy.", British Medical Journal, Feb 9, 1991 v302 n6772
|   p516(8).
|
|Have you actually read any of these, Bernie? I found the last one
|particularly interesting.  It's a meta analysis (a study of studies)
|of the quality of homeopathy trials. It was very critical of most
|trials, calling their methodology *poor*. They were also concerned
|with the possible role of publication bias (which they stated could
|not be determined at present.) The strongest statement in favor of
|homeopathy came when they said it could make a  case for further
|evaluation.  Hardly a hue and cry for its effectiveness. In fact, the
|positive trend statistics in the paper (on which they base their
|opinion that homeopathy should be considered for further trials) came
|from lumping together *ALL* trials, both questionable and
|unquestionable.
|
|While it's nice of you to put this somewhat critical of homeopathy
|trials paper in your list of references, it's rather misleading of you to
|describe it as a demonstrating "the effectiveness of homeopathic
|medicine in treating a number of diseases".
|
|sdb
-- 


                              kuritzky@math.berkeley.edu
                              Eric Kuritzky
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: nichael@bbn.com (Nichael Cramer)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Crucifixion of Jesus?
Date: 21 Dec 92 09:14:11
Organization: BBN, Cambridge MA
	<1992Dec14.034645.791@hfsi.uucp> <1992Dec15.002757.14586@netcom.com>
	<1992Dec17.180435.17980@hfsi.uucp>
	<NICHAEL.92Dec18095658@kariba.bbn.com>
	<1992Dec19.192457.26807@hfsi.uucp>
Reply-To: ncramer@bbn.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: kariba.bbn.com
In-reply-to: ata@hfsi.uucp's message of Sat, 19 Dec 1992 19:24:57 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.192457.26807@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
   ncramer@bbn.com writes:
   >ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
   >The authors of the various synoptic Gospels _aren't_ simply telling
   >the same the story.  They are by and large, in detail, using the _same
   >words_.  Moreover, where they vary from each other --including the
   >introduction and exclusion of specific materials-- it is done in a
   >consistent and clear manner.
   2) I think you exagerate a bit.  Yes, the passages are similar but
   I don't think a "diff" of the synoptic gospels will be very kind
   as you seem to imply.

On the contrary, it supports what I say _very_ well --that is the point.

Do this: get your self a good (Greek!) Synopsis of the first three
Gospels and spend some time comparing them.  Then report back to us on
what you find.

     [...]  As I said, IMO it is more accurate to think
   of them based off of a common source or working document.

And it is my point that your "opinion" does not coincide at all well
with the facts.

   >There is _no_ sign that these Gospels are the result of random,
   >independent creation.
   Did I ever say they were?  Please reread my texts again...

Fair enough.  "Random" was probably a bad choice on my part.  But it
seems that the description "independent" is the very core of your argument.

N
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.conspiracy,alt.paranormal
From: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: homeopathy (r)
Date: 24 Dec 92 07:22:29 EST
Reply-To: "eliot gelwan" <eliot.gelwan@channel1.com>
Distribution: sci
Organization: Channel 1 Communications

On 12-23-92 GREG wrote:

GIn short, it appears that I may be able to be asthma free, as opposed to being
Gstuck with it for the rest of my life. Considering that Western medicine claim
Gthat asthma is incurable and can only be managed, I pretty happy with the
Gresults of the last 3 days.

If this is what you think "western medicine" claims, I can see
why you'd prefer homeopathy. "Western medicine" acknowledges that
people become asthma-free too. Maybe you need a different
"western" doctor. "Western medicine" also identifies asthma as
one of the conditions most susceptible to mind-body (or
psychosomatic) influences. So, again, it makes sense that you are
benefiting from homeopathy, from a "western medicine" standpoint
as well. If it helps your susceptibility to the placebo response
(which is the means by which homeopathic remedies almost surely
work) to set up "western medicine" as a straw man, go ahead. But
such reductionistic generalization is, you must know, merely very
fuzzy thinking. Doesn't prove anything about the efficacy of
homeopathy in general. Show me a credible claim of a homeopathic
cure of cancer, for example.

                   |
...eliot          -*-              Postlink: ->CHANNEL1 [R/O okay]
                   |               Internet: eliot.gelwan@channel1.com

---
--
Channel 1 (R)   Cambridge, MA
From: carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: homeopaty... NBC's dateline
Date: 24 Dec 92 01:25:37 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <103062@netnews.upenn.edu> rubinoff@linc.cis.upenn.edu (Robert Rubinoff) writes:

>In article <1992Dec22.223557.6777@panix.com> carlf@panix.com (Carl Fink) writes:
>>In <1649@tdat.teradata.COM> swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen) writes:
>>>It is my understanding that one *can* develope a tolerance ('immunity') to
>>>arsenic over time by taking small, gradually increasing doses.
>>
>>  It's my understanding that increased cyanide tolerance, rather
>>than being an immune response, is the result of increased production 
>>of (liver?) enzymes which detoxify heavy metals, stimulated by the
>>earlier doses.

>Unlikely, since cyanide is composed of carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen; none of
>these are heavy metals.

>   Robert

  Absolutely true.  Of course, I meant "arsenic", as Stan Friesen was
referring to in the citation above.  Thanks for pointing out the typo.
-- 
Carl Fink          carlf@panix.com, C.FINK4(GEnie), or CF427620I@LIUVAX.BITNET
  "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our
  inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter
  the state of facts and evidence"     --      John Adams
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:21921 alt.messianic:3810
From: stoesser@i31s17.ira.uka.de (Achim Stoesser)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Date: 2 Jan 1993 13:13:02 GMT
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: i31s17.ira.uka.de

In article <1993Jan1.191432.13862@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> In article <1humf2INNniq@iraul1.ira.uka.de> stoesser@i31s17.ira.uka.de (Achim Stoesser) writes:
|> >In article <bruce.725729139@cortex>, bruce@cortex.dixie.com (R. Bruce Rakes) writes:
...
|> >|> It is my understanding that Nazi Germany was Xtian.  Can anyone else
|> >|> confirm this?
|> >
|> >- Hitler was Roman Catholic.
|> 
|> His regime and his government, however, were not founded on
|> Christian values.  That is the point that was being made (although
|> I agree that Hitler's "religion" can cloud the issue).  I don't
|> know of any Christian denomination at the time of Hitler that
|> espoused the killing of non-Christians as even remotely following

So the Pope was not a Christian? (You deleted my line "- Pope Pius IX (?) 
was the first one to make contracts with Hitler.")

|> Christ.  I won't even mention the superiority of one race over
|> another, etc.  Therefore the beliefs and actions of his regime are
|> in direct contradiction to the faith he claimed to have as well
|> the teachings of Christ.  Quoting his belief in a God doesn't

Probably _any_ beliefs or actions  ar in contradiction to "the(sic!) teachings
of Christ" because these teachings are contradictive by itself and/or subject
to contradictive interpretation. Hence, nobody is a Christian.

|> change that fact nor does it make his regime necessarily religious
|> at all.

Not necessarily, but it's a hint (as the other hints I posted and several others
I did not post).

 							        Achim
_____________________________________________________________________

I'm an anarchist, atheist, pacifist, and vegetarian.  This does _not_
mean that I'd bomb kings, worship Satan, let soldiers bleed to death,
or eat fish.


Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:21937 alt.messianic:3814 alt.atheism:24795
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Date: 3 Jan 93 04:24:13 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan3.025224.17784@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> In article <1i44cuINN86i@iraul1.ira.uka.de> stoesser@i31s17.ira.uka.de (Achim Stoesser) writes:
|> >In article <1993Jan1.191432.13862@hfsi.uucp>, ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
|> >|> In article <1humf2INNniq@iraul1.ira.uka.de> stoesser@i31s17.ira.uka.de (Achim Stoesser) writes:
|> >|> >In article <bruce.725729139@cortex>, bruce@cortex.dixie.com (R. Bruce Rakes) writes:
|> >...
|> >|> >|> It is my understanding that Nazi Germany was Xtian.  Can anyone else
|> >|> >|> confirm this?
|> >|> >
|> >|> >- Hitler was Roman Catholic.
|> >|> 
|> >|> His regime and his government, however, were not founded on
|> >|> Christian values.  That is the point that was being made (although
|> >|> I agree that Hitler's "religion" can cloud the issue).  I don't
|> >|> know of any Christian denomination at the time of Hitler that
|> >|> espoused the killing of non-Christians as even remotely following
|> >
|> >So the Pope was not a Christian? (You deleted my line "- Pope Pius IX (?) 
|> >was the first one to make contracts with Hitler.")
|> 
|> What do you mean by making contracts with Hitler?  Do you mean the
|> the Pope made a contract with Hitler to kill non-Christians or to
|> espouse the superiority of the Aryan race?

I recall that the play "The Deputy" by Rudolph Hochhuth contains an 
allegation that the Catholic Church contracted to supply mercury from
church owned mines in Spain to Germany for its war effort.

|> 
|> >
|> >|> Christ.  I won't even mention the superiority of one race over
|> >|> another, etc.  Therefore the beliefs and actions of his regime are
|> >|> in direct contradiction to the faith he claimed to have as well
|> >|> the teachings of Christ.  Quoting his belief in a God doesn't
|> >
|> >Probably _any_ beliefs or actions  ar in contradiction to "the(sic!) teachings
|> >of Christ" because these teachings are contradictive by itself and/or subject
|> >to contradictive interpretation. Hence, nobody is a Christian.
|> 
|> Sorry, this is pure nonsense.  Hitler's actions were not only in
|> direct violation of Jesus's teaching but also against the law and
|> norms of the RC Church in his day as well as today.

The Church collaborated with Hitler.   Now you say that Hitler violated
" the law and norms of the RC Church in his day".

All that tells us is that the Church will collaborate with Tyrants who
violate Church law.   So what's new?

jon.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: zellner@stsci.edu
Subject: interminable ad hominem argument
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 01:05:42 GMT


|> >>Thousands (if not millions) of people have been tortured and killed in
|> >>the service of christianity.  

 >  - Hitler was Roman Catholic.
 >  - Atheists were not allowed to become member of the SA 

There have been plenty of wicked people who really believed in the 
conservation of energy and momentum.  Does that imply that such beliefs
are incorrect?

Happy New Year, Ben

Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic,alt.atheism
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas betray?
Organization: HFS, Inc., McLean VA
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 04:14:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.194535.24358@maths.tcd.ie> pmoloney@maths.tcd.ie (Paul Moloney) writes:
>livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>> ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO) writes:
> 
>>|> [Hitler's] regime and his government, however, were not founded on
>>|> Christian values.  That is the point that was being made (although
>>|> I agree that Hitler's "religion" can cloud the issue).  I don't
>>|> know of any Christian denomination at the time of Hitler that
>>|> espoused the killing of non-Christians as even remotely following
>>|> Christ.  I won't even mention the superiority of one race over
>>|> another, etc. 
>
>>This is highly misleading.   In reality, most of the mainstream 
>>denominations in Germany expressed support for Hitler and for his 
>>regime at some time or other.
>
>[stuff deleted]
>
>One cardinal convinced the Nazis that instead of preventing Jews
>from breeding by sterilizing them, which of course the Church
>regarded as wrong, they should be sent to concentration camps
>instead. One more example of the warped mode of thinking that
>is Christianity.

No, if this is true then this is one more example of how one
cardinal thought about non-Christians.

>clive  P a u l   M o l o n e y    "I'm pretty witty and you're itty bitty    pe


-- 
John G. Ata - Technical Consultant | Internet:  ata@hfsi.com
HFS, Inc.		  VA20     |     UUCP:  uunet!hfsi!ata
7900 Westpark Drive	 MS:601	   |    Voice:	(703) 827-6810
McLean, VA  22102	           |      FAX:	(703) 827-3729
From: swf@tools3teradata.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Arnica: Homeopathic
Date: 22 Dec 92 17:25:42 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: NCR Teradata Database Business Unit

In article <1992Dec16.171033.23314@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM>, kraus@.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus) writes:
|> The question I am interested in is "how does Arnica work?" If it works
|> by stimulating the body to heal itself, but doesn't follow homeopathic
|> dilution guidelines, I'd be willing to call it a homeopathic-like substance.

Naah, I would call it a natural remedy.

As to how it works, I do not know, but my *guess* would be that it contains a
natural analgesic.

However, if you are truly serious about finding out how it works, I suggest you
go to a university library and research the matter.  A pharmacopeia might be a
starting point, or books on the medicinal uses of plants.  If none of these work,
you could try a literature search (via the medical abstracts) for research on
Arnica.

I am confident that if you look hard enough the answer is there.

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com