HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Rick Moen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Insults
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:11:02 GMT

> From: marlowe@paul.rutgers.edu (Thomas Marlowe)
> Message-ID: <Nov.10.09.17.11.1992.21575@paul.rutgers.edu>
>
> In the thread 'Gender-Neutral Pronoun', there has been some discussion
> about whether someone can insult you without intending to insult you
> in particular.
>
> I would maintain, yes, they can, in the same way that a gunman atop a
> water tower can shoot into a crowd, not intending to kill any known
> individual in particular, and still commit murder.  In fact, if a
> bomber sets off a bomb, not knowing for certain whether there will
> even be people present, but people die, it can still be murder.
> ...

I think the best solution is the only one that will absolutely,
positively keep the bulk of this blithering out of newsgroups:
universal insensitivity -- a truly liberating idea whose time has
come.

As long as proclaiming one's self "insulted" is an effective way to get
attention, people who see themselves as power-deprived will continue
to seek the eradication of "insults" as an alternative to substantive
improvement of their condition.  Hypersensitive noisemaking, however
emotionally satisfying to some, is a poor substitute for progress.

Cheers,
Rick M.

 * Origin: The Skeptic's Board in San Mateo - Bay Area Skeptics (8:914/207)
From: Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Rick Moen)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Measurement & precisio
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:19:46 GMT

> From: gascan@dcst16.dc (Bill Gascoyne)
> Message-ID: <1992Nov10.172048.17508@lsil.com>

> No, I meant Hanlon.  If you can prove that Heinlein said this and give
> a reference I'll take his word for it.  However, I have heard this
> quote from at least two different sources, both with the same
> attribution.
>
> No, I don't know who Hanlon was (just as I don't know who Murphy was,
> and don't care).  I do, however, know who Heinlein was.

The MIT Jargon File calls this Hanlon's Law, too, stating that it's
derivation is unknown, but adding that a similar epigram was written by
William James.

Cheers,
Rick M.

 * Origin: The Skeptic's Board in San Mateo - Bay Area Skeptics (8:914/207)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Skeptical Scope
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:41:16 GMT

How does one cope with the volume in this group? I mean, I read 
alt.paranormal occassionally for amusement, and usually do not believe 
anything posted there, so you could call me a skeptic. But I started
to read this group the other day, and zapped all the unread messages.
The next day, the unread count was up to 300 messages!

Even this very morning, I zapped those 300 messages, turned around,
and there were 3 more. There are new messages every few minutes.

I am very skeptical that anybody reads all these messages. 8^)

Just imagine the feast that we would have if Rober McElwaine, the 
person most responsible for downgrading the value of my B.Sc.,
(B.Sc from which university ??) started posting to this group!!

|-------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
| If we had an index file, we could   | In fact, except for protecting |
| look it up in the index file under  | individual rights, no valid    |
| "Index File".                       | reason for government exists." |
|           -- Tegan in "Castrovalva" |      ... Dr. Frank Wallace     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Bill Garland = bill@kean.ucs.mun.ca |Commercial : Send me your money.|
|----------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: 16 Nov 92 12:51:47 GMT
Reply-To: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Organization: Do they make a washing powder called Caliban Automatic?

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*.
  __                                ____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk \  /
/\__/ "I'm the boy without a soul"   \/
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Blackmore references
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:35:58 EST

Here are some of the Susan Blackmore references that I promised (gulp!) to
post.  I haven't found the seminal one yet on some of her OOBE experiences, but 
these are a start.

Blackmore, S., Skeptical Inquirer, Near Death Experiences: In or out of the
body?, Vol 16, No. 1, Fall, 1991, p.34 

-, Skeptical Inquirer, Lucid Dreams, Vol 15, No. 4, Summer, 1991, p. 362

Of course feel free to read anything else in SI.

GXKambic
sd
From: kanga.caltech.edu!magney (Michael Agney)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Efficacy of prayer
Date: 17 Nov 1992 19:29:14 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: itchy.caltech.edu
Originator: magney@itchy

>>avi@seal.imagen.com (or someone) writes:
>>>>in common with such a charlatan. Ah well. An idea is not responsible
>>>>for who believes it.                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

See, Carl?  Christianity is not responsible for those who believe in it!

Sorry, I know, I'm taking it out of context.

Still, food for thought, isn't it?

Doesn't invalidate your other points about Christianity, though.

--
| 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: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: TALK ORIGINS COMMERCIAL
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:22:22 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.092244.462@panix.com>, arandia@panix.com (Joel Arandia)
writes:
> What are the arguments used by creationists against the theory of evolution?
> What do evolutionists say in return?
> Isn't there a file out there containing this info?  If someone has it could 
> s/he mail it to me?
> joel d. arandia

   The answers, the files, the information, flame wars second only to
talk.abortion, and all for the price of a usenet newsgroup subscription, yes
it's

                            T A L K . O R I G I N S 

See:

    Chris Colby's posts on biology (should be worth college credit to read).

    Herb Hustons epistle to the Nettites (yes, you can be Christian and accept
                                          evolution).

    Jim Merrit's FAQ FILES (from astronomy and math through biology and
                            Velikovsky, refutation seasoned with napalm)

    Kurt von Roeshlaub's POLITE REFUTATIONS!!!!!!!

    Stanley Friesen's technical discourse on taxonomy!

And in the opposing corner:

    Bob Bales (repeats the same creationist lies an almost infinite number of 
               times)

    Lionel Tun (has so many anti-evolution one liners we built a version of 
                the fortune program out of them forTun 2.0, just out).

    The K continum (posting on behalf og Hare Krishna Creationists everywhere).

From archeopterix and transitional forms to Noah's ark and those cute Hawaiian
wallabies, talk origins has it all.  Armor plated refrigerator toting
phytoplankton battle to the death with the fossils God put there "to test your
faith" under the anisotropic glow of the Saturn myth.  See:

   Flat, low flying, geocentric dinosaurs. (flap, flap, ouch!)

   Proof you can't stand up (via the Holden number).

   Proof the earth is 4000 years old (by citation of conspiracy).

   Proof that radioisotope dating is all in your head (by reference to biblical
         authority).

   Proof evolution is mathematically impossible (by incorrect mathematics).

AND IF YOU BUY NOW:

   Stunned Europeans wondering what on earth is going on across the Atlantic.  

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
Disclaimer: I recieve no financial support of any kind from talk.origins.  If
I seem partisan, well, no duh.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,alt.messianic
From: ata@hfsi.uucp (John Ata - FSO)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: HFS, Inc., McLean VA
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 02:56:43 GMT

In article <1992Nov14.201327.14051@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.203736.12929@imagen.com> avi@seal.imagen.com writes:

>>where he initially refused to heal the son of a non-Jewish woman, claiming to have
>>come ONLY for the Jews, and only after she said that the dogs get to eat the
>>crumbs of their masters tables, did he agree, or when he told the people NOT to
>>stone the sinner despite the ehavy sin (i.e. tolerance and forgiveness), not

I have always interpreted that passage (Mat 15:26) to mean the exact opposite
i.e. Jesus was presenting the conventional argument and then proceeding to
abolish it.

>        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com

-- 
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: cbettis@unlinfo.unl.edu (clifford bettis)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: sci.skeptic: The Frequently Questioned Answers
Date: 20 Nov 1992 15:23:20 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska--Lincoln	
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: unlinfo.unl.edu

tjfs@tadtec.uucp (Tim Steele) writes:

>It's remarkable how easy it is to construct problems from everyday
>things which are surprising in their behaviour.  Two examples (for
>which I am indebted to a friend and a book by Martin Gardner):

>a) A bottle of milk containing normal milk (cream on top) is shaken up
>and then left to settle.  Does the pressure at the bottom of the
>bottle increase, decrease or stay the same?


>Tim

>a) The milk loses potential energy as the denser water falls to the
>bottom and the less dense cream rises to the top.  This causes the
>pressure at the bottom of the bottle to increase slightly.

I don't understand your answer. Suppose the bottle of milk has 
verticle sides and we don't need to worry about the weight of the 
material the bottle is made of. Then the weight of the bottle of milk 
will be equal to the pressure at the bottom of the bottle of milk 
times the area of the bottom. Why should the weight of the bottle of 
milk change as the cream separates out? 
Cliff
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552)
Subject: Re: AIDS and the CIA (was Question)
Organization: just me
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 92 14:54:29 GMT
Followup-To: sci.skeptic

In article <BxnLF9.CEI@access.digex.com> wbrown@access.digex.com (William Brown) writes:
>
>In article <1992Nov12.202044.14862@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave
>Pipes x4552) writes: 
>
>
>>
>>That's interesting.  LSD was tested on white, middle-class psychiatric
>>outpatients, in Boston at least.  A psychiatrist my father saw at one
>>point was involved with these tests, as it turned out.  My dad was none
>>too pleased.
>>
>>Soldiers were used in the late 40's and early 50's to test the effects of 
>>atomic bombs.  At one point, I believe prisoners could volunteer to test
>>various medicines.  A contagious flu virus was released on a crowded subway
>>in New York City (?) in the 60's to test the epidemiology of bioweapons.
>>
>>	David Pipes
>>robear@digex.com
>
>David,
>   About that "flu virus" in the New York subway.  It was not a virus, it
>was a bacteria - S. marcesens (sp?) if I'm not mistaken.  And one very
>important point.  At the time it was released (and it WAS released to test
>the spread of potential biological weapons) it was NOT KNOWN that this
>bacteria produced disease.  In fact, the bacteria was thought to be
>harmless, but to easily trackable - that is why it was picked. 
>Unfortunately, all those subway riders started comming down with an
>unusual pneumonia...
>
>    Well, you live and you learn.  The hard way.
>
>Peace
>
>Bill
> 

Thanks for the correction.
	David Pipes
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Help
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:06:30 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.163058.13997@cs.yale.edu>, rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
> In article <1992Nov13.163138.15512@digi.lonestar.org> gpalo@digi.lonestar.org (Gerry Palo) writes:
>>The embarassing problem with OOBs is that the subject experiences things
>>that are evidentially confirmable.  
[...]
>>Skeptics are always looking for independently verifiable 
>>evidence.  Well, there is some, so don't spend your time trying to argue
>>apriori why the experiences and accounts thereof can't possibly valid. That
>>is dogma, not science.
[...]
> If this is in fact true, I
> trust you will be prepared to post evidence of studies which have been
> done. Journal citations, experimental descriptions, that sort of thing.
> Well?
I am presuming everyone has read Susan Blackmore's studies on OOB's.  I will
get the reference tomorrow.  

GXKambic
sd
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: rdnelson@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger D. Nelson)
Subject: Re: Masr effect
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 06:20:17 GMT

In article <168A39FF.SERTEL@ibm.gwdg.de> SERTEL@ibm.gwdg.de writes:
>My "Backstage news about the EUROSKEPTICS Proceedings"
>will soon disappear from this board. There was no reply,
>Dr. Nienhuys did not answer my questions and I don't even know
>whether anyone read my   message. Another long report about
>Mars effect research posted to this board had no response. Is this the wrong
>newsgroup for such messages or would you suggest another
>reason explaining the absence of reactions?
> 

Sadly enough, this newsgroup is the right one, but at the present time
is innundated with the wrong stuff -- endless discussions crossposted
from alt. and talk. groups, and lots of lines from apparently very
youthful people who like to see their timeless (and pointless) prose in
print.  As a result I suspect many serious and potentially interesting
contributors have gone to better ways to spend their time, and those
still participating seem to be distracted by non- or marginally
scientific issues.  

Now to the good news.  Things change, and I imagine it will be
worthwhile to post here again, possibly repost the article you mention.
As for Nienhuys, we can speculate that your questions were not easy to
answer, and it is taking him longer than usual to crank up a response.
Patience is essential for those who wish to use this group, for several
reasons, some of which are implied in my remarks, others more obscure.

Roger


Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: dickb@bilver.uucp (Dick Biow)
Subject: Re: What did Judas betray?
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 21:06:49 GMT

Pontius Pilate was removed from his position by Rome for "excess cruelty." Anybody who is too cruel for _ROmans_ has enough motive to crucify any innocent
he happens to dislike. Pontius P. needed no Jewish lynch mob to motivate him!
From: lampard@titan.trl.OZ.AU (Greg Lampard)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy?
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:16:29 GMT
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia

dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.AU (Derek Abbott) writes:

>In article <28064@castle.ed.ac.uk> gtclark@festival.ed.ac.uk (G T Clark) writes:
>>
>>       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.
>>

>It also says that pi=3.

Which is true, within 10%.
---
Greg Lampard                    | Showing you how you can turn your old
Telecom Research Laboratories   | nuclear physicist into a brand new
g.lampard@trl.oz.au             | communications engineer.
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: beede@sctc.com (Mike Beede)
Subject: Re: Genetic Algorithms References (was Re: Efficacy of Prayer)
Organization: SCTC
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 00:01:20 GMT

rice@sumex-aim.Stanford.EDU (James Rice) writes:

>I seem to recall a post from some dipshit only a couple of
>days ago saying "~evolution doesn't work."

Puh-leease!  We refer to them as ``cranially disavantaged.''

Thanks for the recommendation -- sounds interesting.  Think I'll get it.

	Mike

-- 
Mike Beede         Secure Computing
beede@sctc.com     1210 W. County Rd E, Suite 100           
------------------ Arden Hills, MN  55112
                    (612) 482-7420
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Strange Lights in Southwestern Desert ??
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Date: 21 Nov 1992 10:11 MST  
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <12994.2b0cedcd@cpva.saic.com>, save@cpva.saic.com writes...
> 
> 
>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

Sounds like the Marfa, Texas lights--which are car lights.
(See Herbert Lindee, "Ghost Lights of Texas," _Skeptical Inquirer_
vol. 16, no. 4, Summer 1992, pp. 400-406.)

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
From: kring@efes.physik.uni-kl.de (Thomas Kettenring)
Subject: Re: Masr effect
Organization: FB Physik, Universitaet Kaiserslautern, Germany
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 16:42:17 GMT

In article <168A39FF.SERTEL@ibm.gwdg.de>, SERTEL@ibm.gwdg.de writes:
>My "Backstage news about the EUROSKEPTICS Proceedings"
>will soon disappear from this board. There was no reply,
>Dr. Nienhuys did not answer my questions and I don't even know
>whether anyone read my   message. Another long report about
>Mars effect research posted to this board had no response. Is this the wrong
>newsgroup for such messages or would you suggest another
>reason explaining the absence of reactions?
> 
>Suitbert Ertel
>Institut fuer Psychologie. Goettingen. Germany.

It takes time to read long postings; there are other things that are
important too.  E.g. I have saved it to read it later.  Please don't stop
it, this subject is about the only interesting thing in this group at the
moment.

--
thomas kettenring, 3 dan, kaiserslautern, germany
...and then the dragon ate the princess and the knight, and he lived happily
ever after.   -- Grandma Addams telling Wednesday a story (paraphrased)
From: carl@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU (Carl J Lydick)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: The Guns of roston
Date: 20 Nov 1992 20:21:59 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 <722088096.0@wyrm.rbbs-net.ORG>, Rick.Moen@f207.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Rick Moen) writes:
>Perhaps you have by now seen the posting from my attorney friend, Terry
>Preston, analysing Thomas Carter's prior citations of case law.  I
>recommend it to you.  (Thomas's reference to the "Dred Scott"
>slave-ownership decision was quite riotously funny, but I wanted to pass
>it and the others past a good legal analyst, just in case.)

Yup.  We say your lawyer friend's response.  He said "The Dred Scot case wasn't
about the second amendment."  Didn't bother reading the opinion, though, where
the justices made some comments that DID bear on the second amendment.  I'd
recommend that you get yourself a different attorney.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
From: lippard@skyblu.ccit.arizona.edu (James J. Lippard)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Pronouns, again
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:10:00 GMT
Distribution: na,local
Organization: University of Arizona
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Nov20.040155.1@stsci.edu>, zellner@stsci.edu writes...
> >> I have noticed that I use the word "they" as a singular, gender unspecified
> >> pronoun.  Example:
> >> 
> >>     I saw someone the other day.  I was to far away to see what they 
> >>	looked like, but something was familiar about them.
> >> 
> >> I know that most people cringe hearing the strange mix of number in
> >> this sentence.  
> 
>The problem is that when I hear that, I hear the grammatical error and not
>the point that you were trying to make, like a jarring note in a piece of
>music, or a blot on a page I'm trying to read.  Or maybe I think you really
>do mean two or more people, and thus I have difficulty parsing what you 
>just said.
> 
>And it's especially jarring when it's done as a circumlocution to avoid 
>using the pronoun "he", under the misconception that "he" can only refer 
>to a person known to be male.  I hear the misconception, not the meaning.
> 
>I checked the Oxford English Dictionary, and "they" has NEVER been used 
>with a singular referent in good writing except occasionally when the 
>referent has a universal significance, as in "Everyone has a right to their 
>own opinions".  The OED is not making value judgements, just reporting 
>usage.  Even "good writing" means writing that is widely read and quoted.

I read an article as an undergrad on this subject from a linguistics
journal (I'm sure I have a copy lying around somewhere) which argued
otherwise.  It maintained that "they" was used as a singular pronoun as
late as the 18th century, when the prescriptive grammar movement began,
and gave examples from a variety of sources.

Using "he" for this purpose is incorrect in one feature--gender.
Using "they" for this purpose is incorrect in one feature--number.

> 
>Of course language changes, but we should welcome only changes that increase 
>the signal-to-noise ratio, not decrease it.
> 
>Ben

Jim Lippard              Lippard@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
Dept. of Philosophy      Lippard@ARIZVMS.BITNET
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ 85721
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic