HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: weaver@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Dave Weaver)
Subject: Re: Quotes from the Bible.
Organization: SPS
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:36:04 GMT

In article 1v8@apollo.hp.com, stave@apollo.hp.com (Joel H. Stave) writes:
> One thing to note.  In the various arguments that I have had with
> people who believe the bible word for word, they invariably interperet
> what it says and twist the meanings to fit the facts.  In *no* case
> have I ever been able to get them to admit that they are twisting the
> words and not taking it literally any more.  The above interpretation
> of the pi = 3 problem is a perfect example.

The pi = 3 non-problem is a perfectly lousy example. 

30 and 10 can be significant to either 1 or 2 digits 
depending on the precision. In this case, it is to 1 digit, 
since without a stated precision, trailing zeros are not 
significant. Pi = 3 is correct to one significant digit. 
Rounding off is hardly twisting words.

---
Dave Weaver                | "The impression of design is overwhelming"
weaver@chdasic.sps.mot.com |       -Paul Davies (on the cosmos)

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: johnchad@triton.unm.edu (jchadwic)
Subject: Stupid Family Values
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 15:43:52 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: alt.atheism, alt.atheism.moderated

Hello folks,

I just read a story in the Albuquerque Journal today (12-18-92)
syndicated from a newspaper in Colorado Springs, Colorado. The story
was about the various fundamentalist groups in Colorado Springs, their
financial impact on the community, and their social impact on the
community. After reading some of the absurd activities some of the groups
are engaged in, I have hard time conceiving of anyone as stupid as these
folks functioning in a larger society.

Two recent episodes by two different groups strike me as incredibly
stupid at the very least, and a clear and present danger at worst.

The first episode is involves a group of people who called around a
local school district to gather the names of single teachers. Their
logic (or lack therof) is that if a person is single, then that person
must be either homosexual or bisexual. Aside from an obvious invasion of
privacy to ask a person's marital status, I am concerned that people
this stupid are allowed to drive and perform anything more than the
most menial tasks.

The second episode is so stupid that I really worry about the future of
the human race. A group calling themselves Cowboys for Christ (5
minutes of laughter here) filed a two-part lawsuit. Part one I agreed
with, which was to teach the bible in Greek and Roman mythology
classes. This makes sense to me. Teach the bible for what it is,
mythology, folklore, and philosophy. The second part of the lawsuit
sought to have the bible taught as the sole source of western law.
Fortunately the judge threw this lawsuit out.

My concern is that there are people this STUPID running around trying
to affect public policy. This is not Family Values (tm), but rather
mind control. What is next, public lynchings form breathing in when
everyone else is breathing out?

This post is not meant to imply that all Christians are stupid and
irrational. I have had some interesting discussions with
self-described Christians via e-mail. But what is happening in the
name of Family Values (tm) has nothing to do family or values. It is
a 20th century inquisition. And the movement is growing. I fear that
the concept of freedom of conscious, so valued by our founding
fathers, is being threatened by a group of bigoted idiots.

--john chadwick
johnchad@triton.unm.edu
























































































Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Just how much smarter are atheists?
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 05:43:28 GMT

Eric Sieferman (sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu) wrote:
: Hey, net.gang.  I've been reading the responses to
: (HEATHER LEE FYFFE) regarding her fondness for
: Christianity.  Do you think that she will
: (a) simply disappear from a.a,
: (b) post a "you flamed me, waaaah!" message,
: (c) post a "you are all closed-minded" message.
:
: Maybe we could establish a betting line.
: --
: | Eric Sieferman            |    sieferme@u.washington.edu          |
: | U. of W., M.C.I.S.        |    (206) 685-3104                     |

(d) Try to answer some of the real questions put to her in the replys.
-- 
(mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org) I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the 
whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law
respection an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise 
thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." Jefferson
From: d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se (Bertil Jonell)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Monitored by islam (repost)
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:30:45 GMT
Organization: Chalmers Tekniska Lekskola, G|teborg, G|taland

In article <1992Dec13.111626.1@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au> phs179b@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au (Dien Rice) writes:
>Muslims AS A WHOLE
>are slandered by people who, it is usually found, know practically nothing
>about Islam.

>(When I say most non-Muslims do not fully understand about Islam, I speak from
>my personal experience in dealing with people.

  Exactly how would you define 'understandning Islam'?

>Fred Rice

-bertil-
--
"It can be shown that for any nutty theory, beyond-the-fringe political view or
 strange religion there exists a proponent on the Net. The proof is left as an
 exercise for your kill-file."
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: lagrangj@unvax.union.edu (purplehaze)
Subject: Re: Just how much smarter are atheists?
Organization: Union College, Schenectady, NY
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 06:24:14 GMT

iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski) writes:

>In article <910773f.30.724186770@ace.acadiau.ca> 910773f@ace.acadiau.ca (HEATHER LEE FYFFE) writes:
>>>>Just how stupid must one be to believe in a God? [...]
>>
>>Sorry if this sounds like I'm bragging, but it is all true...
>>
>>All my life, I have been the smartest one in my classes.  My grades have 
>>always been high 90's, A+'s, whatever.  [...]

>Whatever, indeed.  Well, congratulations.  Though I hope you realise
>that this information is of extremely low value.  Your preformance in
>your courses is not necessarily a fair reflexion of your intelligence;
>neither are your musical skills or your popularity with your friends,
>and -- where can I read your play?


Good point.  I'm sure that we can all agree that the person with the best 
grades, or title, or whatever, is the most intelligent.   I would even say
that the most intelligent people tend to not have stellar grades.  I did not
have the best grades in my high-school class, but I know that I was accepted as the smartest person in that class.  I also don't see what musical talent has
to do with anything.  I maintain that blind acceptance ("faith") is ridiculous.
If you were "told" by "god" to walk off of a bridge, do you really think you'd
do it?   Or would you realize that your blind acceptance would not save you,
and that the god you so cherished was nothing more than a nice idea?  God
and "religion" seem to be, to a large degree, cop-outs.  They are a way of
shirking responsibility.  "It was God's will" when someone is killed by a drunk
-driver just doesn't cut it.  Someone (in that situation) died because someone
else made a mistake, not because god willed it.  I have relatives who are 
devout Christians, nice people, but I'm ashamed of some of their ideas.  They
don't have the money for the mortgage?  God will provide.  Well it's not god
that provides, it's other relatives.  Sorry that I'm ranting.
Flames to email, and post, just so I get them.
-Josh

-- 
Josh LaGrange                  *                    
lagrangj@unvax.union.edu       *           (cute stuff deleted  
Phone: (518) 370-6908          *
The views that I express are shared by very few responsible people.
From: bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Atheists should mind their own damn business
Date: 13 Dec 92 20:44:54 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Dec13.004700.5788@cis.ohio-state.edu> sheikh@boa.cis.ohio-state.edu (rizwan a sheikh) writes:
>
>At least we didn't make fun of your ORGANization, Hairy.
>
>And don't think that just because some of the newbies on a.a take you
>seriously that the rest of us do. You will have to do better than what you
>have done so far.  Keep trying.
>
>Jim Copeland
>on a friend's account

  Yup.  Seems being an atheist still doesn't necessarily allow you
  to see when the hook is firmly buried in your rectum, and Harry's
  toying with the reel.

  It's times like this I wish alt.atheism.moderated appeared on at
  sight.

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ 

Bob Beauchaine bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM 

"Look, I tried the cat experiment.  On the third trial, the cat was
dead.  On each of the subsequent 413 trials, it remained dead.  Am I
doing something wrong?"
			James Nicoll

Q.  How many Heisenbergs does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A.  If you know the number, you don't know where the light bulb is!

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: jwest@wisc (Jeff West)
Subject: Re: Ok, truce?
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: 18 Dec 92 12:21:27 CST

Dear The Buzzard,  (part II)

  First I agree completely with Brian in his previous post.  You seem like
someone that at least thinks about what you believe without just taking it
on 'faith' alone.  This may scare you some but you sound like your going
through a lot of the same questioning I did while in college.  The first
crack in my Christian armour was to try to "Explain At All Costs" why what
I grew up believeing was right.  It got to be a harder and harder job until
it finally got to the point that I stepped across the line.  You may or may
not come to the same conclusions someday but at least never quite questioning
what you believe.

  Aside from that I look forward to your continuing contribution here.


  Have a Happy Holidays in whatever way you celebrate them!

		- Jeff West
_____________________________________
It's not denial.  I'm just very
selective about the reality I accept.

    - Calvin & Hobbs
From: I3150101@DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (Benedikt Rosenau)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Religion = anything that's fun is bad.
Date: 12 Dec 92 18:46:13 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA10847; Sat, 12 Dec 92 06:33:52 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA02595; Sat, 12 Dec 92 06:33:41 -0800
X-Received: from DBSTU1 by DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 0361; Sat, 12 Dec 92 15:33:02 MEZ
X-To: alt.atheism.usenet

Harold Platypus types:

(Deletions)
>>Though these things are extremes it does seem to show the trend in religions
>>that if anything is fun it's out. i think it's because if you force a person
>>to invest a lot of their time and enjoyment into something it makes them
>>more convinced of the rightness of doing so. I beleive religion has actively
>>used this attitude bending method (only recently identified by psychologists
>>as Dissonance Theory) for thousands of very successful years. This is yet
>>another way that being an atheist opens your mind to the things around you.

>Being an atheist OPENS your mind? What a crock of shit!

Either give evidence for your assertions or switch to another newsgroup.

>So organized religion has perpetrated some of the most heinous crimes
>and practices ever... I don't have to be an atheist to get offended
>by the Inquisition. Just remember, not everyone who believes in a
>guiding intelligience subscribes to an organized religion. I think
>kids should be exposed to all kinds of beliefs so they can make
>their own choice. IMHO, telling kids there is NO GOD is just another
>form of indoctrinating them into a almost fanatical belief system -
>an evangelical anti-religion if you please.

You must be an idiot. We have a FAQ file defining an atheist as someone who
does not necessarily believe in no gods. It has been discussed recently, but
your cognitive equipment must have fouled up.
And you are holding up the fallacy that saying there is no god is a fanatical
belief system. What if, as many people on this list say, they can actually
produce rational reason for not believing in gods?

Do you even see a difference in there is no god and in there are no gods?

Your prejudices do not allow you think clearly. Don't blame on others what's
your fault.

>Frankly, I find the majority of people ballsy enough to publicly
>declare themselves "atheists" are nothing more than troublemakers
>who finally found a mission. They stir up shit, cost the taxpayers
>money and vanish into the woodwork having done nothing constructive.
>If this is you, go soak yer head...

Posting incoherent drivel or not reading FAQs costs the money of taxpayers
worldwide.

I understand that you generously allow people to be atheists but when they
use their right of free expression, you despise them.

Vote with your feet, leave this newsgroup.
   Benedikt
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus)
Subject: Re: Religion = anything that's fun is bad.
Organization: Big Bulging Buffalo Bladders -R- Us
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 21:36:37 GMT

In article <9212121433.AA02595@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> I3150101@DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (Benedikt Rosenau) writes:
>Harold Platypus types:
>>Being an atheist OPENS your mind? What a crock of shit!
>
>Either give evidence for your assertions or switch to another newsgroup.
>
Bugger off you pompous windbag... I'll post here if I damn well please!

>You must be an idiot. We have a FAQ file defining an atheist as someone who
>does not necessarily believe in no gods. It has been discussed recently, but
>your cognitive equipment must have fouled up.
>
I just tuned in... but I love a good argument. I especially enjoy rousting
complacent fixtures like yourself. So prepare... I might just like it here.

>And you are holding up the fallacy that saying there is no god is a fanatical
>belief system. What if, as many people on this list say, they can actually
>produce rational reason for not believing in gods?
>
I despise crusading atheists who waste taxpayers time and money and
subject their little children to public humiliation and media circuses
all in the name of their BELIEF SYSTEM: seperation of church and state.
It pisses me off and you'll all hear about it until it's out of my system.
I may choose not to subscribe to your frickin' FAQ as gospel, but I'll
air my laundry in this burg of anarchy if I so desire. If you don't like
this arangement there's a moderated group.

>>Frankly, I find the majority of people ballsy enough to publicly
>>declare themselves "atheists" are nothing more than troublemakers
>>who finally found a mission. They stir up shit, cost the taxpayers
>>money and vanish into the woodwork having done nothing constructive.
>>If this is you, go soak yer head...
>
>Posting incoherent drivel or not reading FAQs costs the money of taxpayers
>worldwide.
I don't think it's incoherent at all... and I help pay for this frivolous
use of taxpayer money like everyone else. This newsgroup is a forum for
exchange of ideas about atheism... You'll tolerate mine 'cuz you have no
choice, except that if you don't like it you can leave!

>I understand that you generously allow people to be atheists but when they
>use their right of free expression, you despise them.
I don't despise atheists... believe what you like.. I'll respect that!

>Vote with your feet, leave this newsgroup.
>   Benedikt
I'll vote with my keyboard and stay as long as I like. Feel free to
filter me if you dare... HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA...
- Harry
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: Quotes from the Bible.
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 02:53:59 GMT

hedrick@klinzhai.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes: >

>The Bible deals with astronomy naively.  It talks about the sun
>rising, standing still during a miracle, etc.  I have no reason to
>think that the authors of the Bible knew that the earth orbited the
>sun.  But even we talk about sunrise.  Similarly with references to
>things like "the circle of the earth."  One assumes this is the
>horizon.  As far as I know, the Bible does not have any specific
>descriptions of incorrect cosmology.  E.g. it doesn't specifically say
>that the earth is a flat circle riding on a turtle's back or something
>like that.  If you look at the descriptions and try to figure out what
>ideas are behind them, it appears that they envisioned the sky as a
>sort of half-spherical vault over a flat earth.  Above the vault was
>water, the reservoir from which rain came.  But this you have to infer
>this from poetic imagery -- it's not a specific teaching.  Gen 1:6 ff
>is a typical example.  (Make sure you use a modern translation -- the
>"firmament" is now generally considered to be the vault or dome of the
>sky.)

This is nonsense.  Isaac Asimov refers to the Biblical reference
of "Angles standing at the four corners of the earth" used as 
evidence that the Earth was not only flat, but also square.
Are you now saying that the historical Biblical interpretations
are wrong, but the modern ones are correct?  How can you tell?

You apologists are pretty amusing, but you're also misinformed.

                the TRUTH
                is still
                the TRUTH
                even if you
                ignore it.


-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: me@vikings.austin.ibm.com (Michael E)
Subject: Re: Atheists ... mind ... business, and so should you.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:11:54 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: IBM Austin
Keywords: bees' wax

*** My opin only ***

>> I don't have anything against atheists really... just leave me and
>> my world alone. If you don't like "In God We Trust" on US Currency,
>> don't look for it - ya know it's there. If a religious symbol in a
>> municipal seal is offensive to you, don't seek it out... After all
>> it's not a blinking neon sign in your face, you have to look for it.
>
Then I'll call on you to get rid of the Jehovah's Witless, the invisible Baptists that leave flyers on my door, the Christmas ornaments the government sticks up, the religious holidays *I* have to observe cuz my company does, ad nauseum...

BTW, the "just leave me and my world alone" phrase clearly indicates you do discriminate against atheists. Segregation represents a symptom of descrimination. 

Why should *I* cast a blind eye to government sponsorship of a particular brand of religion? Just turn a blind eye if I decide to ban religion when I become president, okay? *I'm* kidding about the latter statement of course, but only because I try to practice tolerance.

Have a day.
From: oser@fermi.wustl.edu (Scott Oser)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: >>> I concede, please don't kill me...
Date: 14 Dec 1992 17:29:41 GMT
Organization: Washington University Astrophysics
NNTP-Posting-Host: fermi.wustl.edu


In article <1992Dec14.081125.25913@timesink.chi.il.us> harry@timesink.chi.il.us (Harold Platypus) writes:
>
>Nor am I personally responsible for the enslavement of the dark race,
>the Holocaust, female "circumcision", or any other of the ridiculous
>or offensive things I've been e-mailed about. Look, I have no bone to
>pick with anyone personally. If I seem heady out here it's because
>from the beginning I have gotton offline threats of everthing from
>wholesale cancellation of my posts to bodily harm at the hands of
>knife wielding satanists - all from what began as an editorial. Some
>people in a.a take this way too far. Yeah, I do take threats of
>violence on my person seriously as would anyone... believe it or not.
>
>Oh, I can stand the heat of flames... I just wonder how many others
>have been threatened for expressing their views here? I must've wandered
>into a moral as well as a spiritual quagmire. I gladly leave you now,
>stupefied and wanting as I vanish into a puff of smoke... Puffffff...
>- Harry (please don't kill me) Platypus  :-)

	Come on, people!  I thought we had a little more class than this.
Bodily threats over e-mail are a no-no!
	Harry, I'm not surprised you got flamed (I was tempted to join in
myself!), but please accept my apologies on behalf of the readers of this
group for any of the unjustified threats you received.
	Lighten up, people!

-Scott O.
From: nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu (David Nye)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: YO! READ THIS (not an answer, a question) (W
Date: 20 Dec 92 02:24:47 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

[reply to rhuss+@EDRC.CMU.EDU]
 
>Well, it's been 2 days and there has not been a single response to my
>post titled Truth, and I realized maybe that the title suggested that I
>was providing the truth, and turned anyone off from reading it.  This
>isn't so.  Please look at what I had to say, and comment:
 
Philosophers have been debating this since antiquity.  The bottom line
is that there is no way to prove any of the various possibilities, so it
becomes a matter of belief.  This is probably the reason you haven't
gotten a response before.  Belief for most atheists is of little
consequence, a game, if you like.  I choose to believe that there is
only one Truth at any given moment (option 1), and what each of us knows
is only an imperfect approximation.  However, I reserve the right to
believe something else if the whim strikes me. :)

David Nye
nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: ml3e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Loomis)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: iq<->religion: connection?
Date: 20 Dec 92 23:47:29 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.alt.atheism: 19-Dec-92 iq<->religion: connection? by 
Iikka Paavolainen@mits.m 
> Am I seeing wrongly, or is there a connection between one's IQ and one's
> religiousness? Of all people I know, I know only about 8 exceptionally smart
> people (IQ>125), and all of them happen to be atheists. On the contrary, the 
> dumbest people I've seen (eg. unable to use a remote control) are the most
> religious. Observing other atheists that I don't know (from this group for
> example) leads me to make a conclusion that on the average, atheists have a
> much better sense of logic (and thus usually have a higher IQ) and think much
> more clearly than religious people. From my own experiences, I can say that
> freeing oneself from the grasp of religion requires a certain level of
logical
>  
> thinking. Coincidentally, all these 8 people are mathematically gifted.
> When I speak of atheism here, I mean it to be a lack of belief in any god or
> superstition.
> Opinions?

    Though I agree with the general idea behind Mr/s. Paavolainen's
post, that intelligence deters religious belief, I think that when a
intelligent person is ensnared into a religion that they are most
devout.  
    Let me attempt to explain the mechanism that makes them devout. 
Let's consider christian believers since I am most familar with
christianity. The Bible has much silliness and contradictions.  The
intelligent christian will have more ability to conjure up some way of
making silly passages seem intelligent and some way of reconciling
seeming contradictions than would a stupid christian.  By the act of
making the Bible make sense to himself, the intelligent christian has
reenforced his own belief in the Bible as the truth.  Thus, the
intelligent christian has a greater stake in christianity than does the
stupid christian.
    If my theory is right, then it has implication for atheists who
argue with chirstians on this bboard or elsewhere.  By poiniting out a
contradiction in the Bible to the intelligent christian, we may simply
be conditioning him to have greater faith in christianity.  (Atheist
should not forget that a clever mind can always find some way to justify
even the most blatant of contradictions.  This is called apologetics.)

Michael Loomis