HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Urantia? What's the story?
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Distribution: world,local
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:26:23 GMT

In article <10DEC199216252088@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu>, lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard) writes in part:
|> couple of years or so.
|> 
|> >   Also, has anyone read Dan Korem's "Powers: Testing the psychic and
|> >supernatural." I found the parts on 'cold reading' and the debunking of
|> >James Hedrich (the guy who appeared on That's Incredible years ago 
|> >turning telephone book pages and pencils 'with his mind', which turned
|> >out to be concentrated puffs of air), but I was disappointed when he
|> >went into the "the resurrection of Jesus Christ cannot be disproven so
|> >it's probably true" shtick. Can anyone recommend books on debunking
|> >psychics (esp. the 'cold readers') besides James Randi's stuff? Thanks.
|> 
|> Try David Marks and Richard Kammann, _The Psychology of the Psychic_,
|> published by Prometheus around 1981.
|> 
|> Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU

See also Ray Hyman, "The Elusive Quarry" (Prometheus), especially for
the reprint of his classic "How to give a cold reading".  Hyman used
to do cold readings for a living before he got a dishonest job as a
psychology professor.

By the way, cold readings really work.  They also do not necessarily
involve any deception at all, many palm readers, etc. are sincere,
honest, and even correct in asserting that readings "work".  However, 
there is almost certainly absolutely nothing paranormal going on.
Thus, one may heartily debunk claims of and explanations involving 
amazing powers associated with readings, but don't go crazy and claim 
that it is all fake, fraud, and deception.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
From: jcn@ecs.soton.ac.uk (Chris Nash)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Ritual abuse in crop circles
Summary: Appeal for information re victims
Keywords: Ritual abuse crop circles UFOS
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:54:55 GMT

It has been suggested that there is a link between the  recent
interest in ritual abuse of children and the phenomenon of crop
circles.  Is it just a coincidence that crop circles seem to be
concentrated in the Wessex region of England? We  would like to hear
of any instances of rituals performed within circles which involved
children, animals or drugs, particularly if well-known politicians or
media personalities were present.
Private communications from victims will be treated with the utmost
discretion.
From: rdnelson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger D. Nelson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: On God and Science
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:20:59 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

>In article <V1XuVB1w165w@kalki33>, kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us writes:
>
>=Quantum mechanics ties together chance and the conscious observer. Dyson
>=uses this as a loophole through which to introduce mind into the
>=phenomena of nature. But if random quantum events follow quantum
>=statistics as calculated by the laws of physics, then mind has no choice
>=but to go along with the flow as a passive epiphenomenon. And if mind
>=can make quantum events follow different statistics, then mind violates
>=the laws of physics. Such violations are rejected not only by physicists
>=but also by evolutionists, who definitely do not envision mind-generated
>=happenings playing any significant role in the origin of species.

I would be interested to have more information and a reference to
Dyson's "loophole through which to introduce mind ..."

Roger   rdnelson@phoenix.princeton.edu
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Repression (was Ritual Abuse Taskforce....)
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:06:50 GMT
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science

In article <6696@tuegate.tue.nl>, wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys) writes:
|> In article <2933430839.2.p00168@psilink.com> p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims) writes:
|> >
|> >All but 2-dimensional.  8^)  Psychologists have a proclivity for pointless
|> >neologism, and "cryptoamnesia" is not only a wasted expansion of the
|> >vocabulary but etymologically incorrect.  Amnesia is the loss of memory,
|> 
|> Ha! This is the very first time I see this word.  I know the word
|> "cryptomnesia", litterally: hidden memory.  It refers to the situation
|> that someone remembers something, but forgot the origin. Like the old
|> gentleman who tells an anecdote as if he experienced it all himself,
|> even when he is telling it to the guy who told him the anecdote some
|> time earlier.
|> 
|> It seems that in a state of deep relaxation all kinds of memories 
|> can surface whose source has been forgotten.  From what I gather,
|> such memories may or may not be accurate.

"Remembering" is an active, constructive, process.

Except in rare cases, a memory is not a reliving of experience, e.g., when
I remember that 2 + 2 = 4,  I am NOT remembering the situation I originally
learned this, nor all the times I recalled this.  In fact, I
simply can't remember these incidents, although they surely must
exist.  This is a trivial case of me "knowing" something the source
of which I cannot explain.

When one is hypnotized or otherwise put in a state of relaxation,
and especially when motivated to "remember", one may recall lots of
stuff.   The problem is that these memories are a combination of
memories of things that really happened, things similar to things
that really happened, things that logically could or should have
happened, and so on.  Without knowledge of the actual events, it
is usually impossible to untangle the original event from the
reconstruction and inferences.

In situations with strong "demand characteristics", that is where there
is a definite social goal that is important, the recollection process
may be highly influenced by this goal.  Incompetent hypnotists
may produce false recollections by feeding the subject hints about
the "right answer", which can strongly influence the reconstruction
of memories.  The really bad news is that once such a recollection
has been constructed, it often cannot be distinguished from a real
memory by the person.  Thus, cloddy hypnotists can not only lead
the subject's answer, they can actually create false memories.
This is, in fact, what Budd Hopkins and co-workers are doing to 
their abduction victims.

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: s0rah@exnet.co.uk (R A Hollands)
Subject: Re: Hollow Earth
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:22:38 GMT

Those interested in Hollow earth stories and similar should read "Can
You Speak Venusian?" by Patrick Moore.  It will also expose you to a
gentle style of scepticism that has a lot to recommend it.

It has amongst other things the presentation ofthe flat earth theory
that I've seen.  (It doesn't _support_ it you understand).

Richard
From: joe@csource.oz.au (Joe Slater)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:26:03

Tuesday December 15 1992, m23364@mwunix writes to All:

JM>> That's nice.  Do you think that God thought in Arabic, King
JM>> James's English, or any other mortal tongue?  And if not,
JM>> wouldn't ANYTHING that is codefied suffer the same "change and
JM>> loss of meaning"?

jds> Obviously the Divine Language is Hebrew. This can be easily
jds> demonstrated by the }fact that Adam spoke it before languages were
jds> divided, as recorded in the }Bible. I have no doubt that this argument
jds> will immediately win hearts and minds }in this newsgroup.

m> No, that is Adam's language (hack hack hack).  What did God think in
m> before Adam?  You know - what was "LET THERE BE LIGHT!" expressed as?

I don't think He'd thought of other languages at this time, as it was before
the Tower of Babel. I am glad to see that pressing scientific issues are now
being raised here. Next: Did Adam have a navel?

jds

 * Origin: What horrors wait for me in this, the Phantom's Opera? (3:632/351)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,sci.astro,sci.space,alt.alien.visitors
From: corbisier@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Subject: Re: STS-48 and "SDI": Oberg vs. Hoagland 
Reply-To: corbisier@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 08:26:07 GMT

Robert McGrath writes:

>You'd probably even like Phil Klass if you met him, Barb.  :-))

Well, guess what?  I _have_ met him at the MUFON conference in Albuquerque
last summer.  Did I like him?  Well, I respect his opinion, but I can't
see us hanging out for any extended period of time.  :)

All groups I belong to/think highly of?  Well, let's see, I was in 4-H as
a kid, I think highly of the Boy Scouts, Mothers Against Drunk Driving and 
the ASPCA...this would take an awfully long time to continue...            

Geez, people, why all this flaming?  WHY CAN'T WE JUST LIVE TOGETHER???

Peace on earth, goodwill toward men (and women),

Barb
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: rdnelson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger D. Nelson)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Goodbyes
Date: 16 Dec 92 22:10:15 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <BzD4wB.Ds8@cs.uiuc.edu> mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu writes:
>Several people have posted indicating they will not be reading
>this group any more.
>
>Why are these announcements posted?  Do we really care who
>says they don't want to read this junk anymore?  They seem to
>think we do.
>
>Personally I think this is spreading Perot-itis.
>
Right on Robert.  Though I agree with the sentiment of the dropouts, I
am reminded of the remark made by an actual president, Truman: "If you
can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

On the other hand, there is not much heat, and practically no light in
sci.skeptic at times.  Optimized to cultivate patience and forbearance.
Riiiight!

Roger
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.folklore.urban,alt.atheism,alt.feminism
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Repression (was Ritual Abuse Taskforce....)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 00:09:07 GMT

In article <2933430839.2.p00168@psilink.com> p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims) writes:
>
>The (Great, Amazing, Fantastic?) Kreskin once claimed that hypnosis
             ^^^^^^^
>doesn't even exist.  Does Dr. Baker reach a similar conclusion?
>

    Yes; more precisely, that hypnosis is *not* a unique mental state,
    but more an excercise in "social compliance".

    In fact, Kreskin spoke on a "Hypnosis" panel that Baker chaired 
    at the 1991 CSICOP Conference in Berkeley.

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


     "Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that
      they are not even superficial."

                   - Friedrich Nietzsche    (The Gay Science: 126)
From: wsadjw@rw7.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: homeopaty... NBC's dateline
Date: 18 Dec 92 10:52:50 GMT
Reply-To: wsadjw@urc.tue.nl
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands

In article <1992Dec16.170115.22994@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM> kraus@cheers.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus) writes:
>
>I do however have trouble with the idea that an extremely diluted substance
>could have any effect. My interest lies in substances with dilutions of
>reasonable strengths. I have been trying to determine if the definition
>of homeopathic includes specific numbers on dilution strengths. Also,

Originally (i.e. in the early 1800's) homeopathic remedies were not very
much diluted. Soon Hahnemann recommended dilution factors 100^30
and up. (C30). 
The trend to call more or less undiluted stuff "homeopathic" is quite
recent.  It's just herbalism profiting from the popularity of the
word "homeopathy".  Also, pharmaceutical companies (the ones that
make homeopathic medicines) wouldn't earn much from selling preparations
of which one need only take one grain per week.  There's an economic
reason for calling various stuffs "homeopathic": it is a sales gimmick.

JWN

From: tonyz@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Tony Zugates)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:56:50 GMT
Subject: Re: Tunnels #1.
Organization: the HP Mtn.View Resp. Cntr.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic

Oh, hell John, I knew about them stink'in tunnels long before you 
made it up... I used to take my bike down 'em all the time... You 
have no obstructions and can go up and down the walls.  I suggested
skateboarding to my friends and now the tunnels are full of skateboarders.
You cant even get around them to make serious scientific studies.

I suggest we go on and bypass this subject..besides even if they ban
the skateboarders, kids will be kids.  Why, the next thing you know
we'll have the Hare Krishna down there soliciting funds for Jesus.

Next....
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.bizarre
From: "James F. Tims" <p00168@psilink.com>
Subject: Re: No laughing matter.
Organization: Semper Excelsior
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:40:16 GMT
X-Mailer: PSILink (3.2)

>DATE:   10 Dec 1992 14:56:23 GMT
>FROM:   Scott Dorsey <kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov>
>
>In article <1992Dec9.152907.20896@walter.cray.com> jcarroll@ferris.cray.com (Jeff Carroll) writes:
>>
>>
>>>Nope.  Hell is DEFINITLY an .edu address.  Probably running a MUD, at
>>>that.
>>>
>>>Greg Trimper   trimper@edsi.plexus.com  
>>
>>Naaah. *Purgatory* is an .edu site. Hell is definitely .com.
>
>Hmm... that means Limbo is probably .mil or .bitnet.
>--scott

I think it's just a newsgroup -- alt.fan.RUSH-LIMBO, for the politically dead. 

-jim
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: Crucifixion of Jesus?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:33:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.180435.17980@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>
>If an author "copies" one account from another changing a few
>particulars as you characterize the Gospels (I think this is an
>unfair characterization, it is more accurate to say that they were
>based off of a common source),

No. For example, Matthew in particular simply copies many passages of
Mark line after line, changing it only very slightly if at all.
If they are, as you claim, all "based off a common source," then this
"source" must have been nearly word-for-word identical with the text
of Mark.


>
>Just curious, but how does Jesus being called the son of Mary
>imply illegitimacy?  Remember, at the time of the passage Joseph
>is believed to have been dead.  It seems quite natural to be
>labeled the son of a widow, doesn't it?

A number of New Testament scholars have raised the issue that the
*only* proper form for referencing a man's parentage is "X, the son
of (father)". Why would it matter whether the father had died? He would
still have been "Jesus, the son of Joseph". But in Mark 6:3, the form "X, the
son of (mother)" implies an illegitimacy, suggesting indeed that the father
is not merely absent, but unknown! (As perhaps does John 8:41, from the
other gospel lacking a birth narrative). Both Matthew and Luke are
sensitive to the insult, Matthew softening it, and Luke removing it
completely, in their corresponding passages. Contrast this with the
Talmudic "Jesus, the son of Panthera": here Jesus' birth is implied
to be illegitimate, since the father was not Mary's husband, but at
least the father was known.

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


     "Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that
      they are not even superficial."

                   - Friedrich Nietzsche    (The Gay Science: 126)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (JKF)
Subject: Koln/Kohn
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 05:30:21 GMT

In the Frequently Questioned Answers, there is a reference to a book on
scientific frauds called "False Prophets," and the author is given as one
Alexander Koln.  Having checked at the library, I find that the author's
name is given as "Kohn."  Unfortunately, the book's missing.  Sigh. 
Anyway, I'd like to get it through interlibrary loan but would like to
make sure of the author's name before I go bother people.  Anyone know
which is right?
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.folklore.urban,alt.atheism,alt.feminism
From: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath)
Subject: Re: Hypnosis and Repression (was Ritual Abuse Taskforce....)
Reply-To: mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:38:03 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.014837.19102@u.washington.edu>, twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:
|> In article <1992Dec15.000907.11845@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
|> >In article <2933430839.2.p00168@psilink.com> p00168@psilink.com (James F. Tims) writes:
|> >>
|> >>The (Great, Amazing, Fantastic?) Kreskin once claimed that hypnosis
|> >             ^^^^^^^
|> >>doesn't even exist.  Does Dr. Baker reach a similar conclusion?
|> >>
|> >
|> >    Yes; more precisely, that hypnosis is *not* a unique mental state,
|> >    but more an excercise in "social compliance".
|> 
|> 
|> I'd provisionally agree that hypnosis is not a *unique* mental state, 
|> being very close in my experience to lucid dreaming.  I've experienced 
|> hypnosis once, and though sceptical, even hilarious about it at the time, 
|> realized even when I was in a light hypnotic state that I was indeed in a 
|> trance.  It has nothing to do with "social compliance" as I understand it. 
|> [...]
|> Hypnotism is an effective means of dealing with certain conditions, 
|> and has absolutely nothing to do with moronic credulism or an 
|> eagerness to be "socially compliant." 
|> 
|> --Barbara 

Actually, psychologists are not at all sure how to explain or even
define hypnosis.  Some argue that there is a special mental state,
others see it as an example of more general mental states (e.g.,
Hilgard's dissociated state), and others see it as an interpersonal
or social phenomena, involving trust, expectation, and compliance.

Each of these points of view have merits, and none can be ruled out
on the basis of current knowledge.  Try to keep an open mind and
realize that the "one true right explanation" just is not known.

Since the "social compliance" hypothesis holds that the factors
involved are usually unconscious and unstated, I would be cautious
in interpreting the fact that one might not detect such factors 
as indicating they are not present.  For one thing, the mere fact
that one submits to the procedure indicates a certain level of 
trust and compliance!

-- 
  Robert E. McGrath
  Urbana Illinois
  mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: hathaway@stsci.edu
Subject: Re: Read this book or else
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 03:09:17 GMT

In article <Bz9H3I.JCC@cs.uiuc.edu>, mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu (Robert McGrath) writes:
> In article <1992Dec11.173737.1@stsci.edu>, hathaway@stsci.edu writes in part:
> |> 
> |>  "Villard Books recalled about 100,000 copies of 'Pen & Teller's How to 
> |> Play With Your Food' yesterday after discovering a 'sugar packet' included 
> |> with each book actually contains a chemical irritant."  
> 
> This is a pretty silly comment by the paper.  The reason for the recall
> is not so much what is in the packet as the fact that you weren't supposed
> to be able to get it open.  It wasn't supposed to be sugar inside it and
> it wasn't supposed to matter what was in it.  There is an 800 number to 
> call to get a corrected version of the packet if you  already bought the 
> book.  No I don't have the number handy.   Call the place you bought the
> book.
> 
> -- 
>   Robert E. McGrath
>   Urbana Illinois
>   mcgrath@cs.uiuc.edu

The same paper mentioned a day or so later that the packet contained 
cobalt chloride and the main problem was that many people found the 
packet only _too_ openable.  They said the reason real sugar was not 
used was because sugar is classified as a 'food' and therefore subject 
to food distribution regulations.  I agree the paper is silly - it 
is full of it.   BTW I buy the paper for the three pages of comic 
strips.   Also the first article was in their 'gossip' section, just 
above Doonesbury. 

WHH 
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: "dan mckinnon" <dan.mckinnon@canrem.com>
Subject: just a tagline post
Reply-To: "dan mckinnon" <dan.mckinnon@canrem.com>
Organization: Canada Remote Systems
Distribution: sci
Date: 18 Dec 92 11:43:19 EST

  I just had to post this tagline I captured in another conference.
Season's greetings to all.
---
  OLX 2.1 TD  Atheist problem #6: No one to call out to during sex.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
Xref: sparky sci.skeptic:21551 alt.messianic:3688
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Date: 21 Dec 1992 00:29:24 GMT
Organization: HST Wide Field/Planetary Camera
Distribution: world
Reply-To: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol1.gps.caltech.edu

In article <roelle.724628610@uars_mag>, roelle@uars_mag.jhuapl.edu (Curtis Roelle) writes:
>carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick) writes:
>
>>Before the Bible-thumpers respond, repeat their mantra after me (preferably
>>with as much whining as possible):
>>	But THEY weren't *REAL* Christians.
>
>There's more than one mantra out there.  How about:
>
>	But JOHN_-_WINSTON'S not a *REAL* Skeptic.

>He posts on sci.skeptic, therefore his views must be interpreted as being
>indicative of skeptics.

Bullshit.  He's never claimed to be a skeptic, and the charter of the group is
that it is a forum for discussion by skeptics of issues brought up by anyone,
be the person who brings up the issue a skeptic or otherwise.

>This doesn't sound narrow minded, does it?

No, it just sounds about as stupid as most of the other bullshit from Jesus
freaks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.