textfiles/messages/BACKWATER/bw831101.txt

LIST
FILE ON
MARGIN IS 60 
STATUS: ALL ALLOWED
NUMBER OF LINES: 629 
1 If you are in need of help, you need but ask....
2 ********************** REMOVED: 1 NOV 83 ***************************
3 Welcome to BWMS (BackWater Message System)  Mike Day System operator
4 ************************************************************
5 GENERAL DISCLAIMER: BWMS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY INFORMATION PLACED ON
6                     THIS SYSTEM.
7 BWMS was created as an electronic bill board. BWMS is a privatly owned
8 and operated system which is currently open for use by the general public.
9 No restrictions are placed on the use of the system.
10 It is intended that the system be normally used for messages and
11 advertisments by the users. As the system is privatly owned, I retain the
12 right to remove any and all messages which I may find offensive
13 to me. Additionally because of the limited size of the system, it will be
14 periodically purged of older messages. (only 629 lines of data can be saved)
15 The saved information will be cycled to drive 'B' while the information on
16 drive 'B' will be archived, and a fresh disk will be installed in drive 'A'.
17 To leave a message, type 'ENTER' and use ctrl/C or break to get out
18 of the enter mode. The message is automaticly stored.
19 If after entering the message you find you made a mistake,
20 use the replace command to replace the line.
21 To exit from the system, type 'OFF' then hang up.
22 Type 'HELP' to see other commands that are available on the system.
23 ========================================
24 
25 WELL NOW !
26 SOME ERRORS ON THE LAST TWO DISKS:
27 
28 1. THE REASON THAT PEOPLE GO HUNGRY IS NOT POPULATION, RELIGION, ETC. THE
29 REASON IS ECONOMICS. DESPITE THE RATE OF POPULATION INCREASE, SCIENTIFIC
30 AGRICULTURE HAS STAYED AHEAD OF THE PROBLEM. THATS WHY HUNDREDS OF THOUS-
31 ANDS OF ACRES ARE ALLOWED TO GO FALLOW EACH YEAR. THATS WHY YOU, THE 
32 AMERICAN TAXPAYER, WILL PAY TWENTY BILLION DOLLARS NEXT YEAR TO FARMERS 
33 NOT TO GROW CROPS. PLEASE DON'T ACT SO SUPERIOR TO PEOPLE WHO AREN'T EATING.
34 
35 2. THE ASSERTION THAT ANYBODY WHO USES THIS BWMS MUST HAVE SOME INTELLIGENCE.
36 I BOUGHT AN ADDITIONAL TERMINAL AND MODEM LAST WEEK FOR $175. MOST PEOPLE
37 CAN GET TOGETHER $175 IN THIS COUNTRY IF THEY WANT A CHEAP HOBBY. (COMPARED,
38 SAY, TO SKIING). INDEED, THERE IS A FAIR AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY
39 TO BE HAD HERE FOR THE READING OF IT. (YOU  *DON'T* KNOW WHO YOU ARE)
40 
41 3. EVOLUTION IS NOT IN DOUBT IN ANY WAY AS A PROCESS THAT EXISTS. CREATIONISTS
42 TEND TO TALK ABOUT EVOLUTION AS SOMETHING FAR IN THE PAST THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE HAPPENED.
43    THE FACT IS THAT YOU CAN WATCH EVOLUTION HAPPENING IN A BACTERIA CULTURE,
44 A COLONY OF MICE, YOUR BACK YARD, AND A THOUSAND OTHER PLACES. YOU CAN
45 WATCH IT HAPPEN OR MAKE IT HAPPEN. 
46    THE QUESTION THAT CREATIONISTS MUST ANSWER IS THIS: SINCE WE KNOW FOR
47 SURE THAT EVOLUTION HAPPENS IN THE PRESENT, HOW WOULD YOU EXPLAIN YOUR
48 PREMISE THAT IT DIDN'T HAPPEN IN THE PAST?
49 
50 4. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS NOT ON THE ATHEISTS - SCIENTIFIC PROOF ESPECIALLY.
51 THE SEQUENCE OF SCIENTIFIC 'PROOF' IS THIS:
52    1. INSPIRED HYPOTHESIS - BASED ON EVIDENCE OR NOT
53    2. FIND SOME EVIDENCE FOR HYPOTHESIS
54    3. WHEN ENOUGH EVIDENCE IS FOUND FOR HYPOTHESIS, CALL IT A THEORY.
55    4. PREDICT SOME HERETOFORE UNKNOWN EFFECT FROM THEORY
56    5. VERIFY PREDICTION - IF VERIFIED, THEORY IS NOW ON GOOD GROUND
57    6. FIND OUT SOMETHING NEW, DISCARD OLD THEORY, FIND NEW ONE.
58 
59 SINCE CREATIONISTS HAVE NOT GOTTEN TO STEP 2 ABOVE, AND THE SCIENTISTS
60 HAVE, THE BURDEN OF SCIENTIFIC 'PROOF' IS NOW ON THE CREATIONISTS.
61 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HROTHGAR, THE CRITIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
62 
63 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
64 LEONARD, I'M NOT IGNORANT OF THE WORDING OF THE LAWS RELATING TO THE SUBJECT.
65 THE QUESTION, AS IT NOW GOES TO COURT, IS THE PROPER INTERPRETATION OF THE
66 LAW.  ACTUALLY, THE LAW WOULD BE BETTER STATED AS "DEMODULATING" THE SIGNALS
67 RATHER THAN MERELY RECEIVING THEM, AS EMF IS CONSTANTLY RECEIVED BY ANY AND
68 ALL OBJECTS CAPABLE OF ACTING AS AN ANTENNA.  AND, UNLESS I SELL THE
69 DEMODULATED SIGNAL (WHICH IS THE POINT OF THE CURRENT CLASS ACTION SUIT), 
70 I CAN'T BE ACCUSED OF MAKING "COMMERCIAL USE" OF IT BY STRICT LEGAL 
71 DEFINITION.  I THINK THIS MAY EVENTUALLY COME DOWN TO A DEFINITION OF THE 
72 SOURCE OF POWER OF GOVERNMENT.  THE FCC INDEED "GRANTS TITLE" TO FREQUENCIES,
73 BUT ALLEGEDLY WITH THE PURPOSE OF SERVING THE GENERAL PUBLIC.  AND THE POWER
74 OF THE FCC (AND THE REST OF OUR GOVERNMENT) COMES FROM THE PUBLIC, OR AT
75 LEAST THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS ON THE BACK OF THE BOX.  SO I DO NOT DENY WHAT THE
76 LAW SAYS, BUT I AM IN DOUBT AS TO THE EVENTUAL INTERPRETATION OF IT.  IS IT
77 LEGITIMATE FOR THE FCC TO GRANT TOTAL CONTROL OF THE AIRWAVES TO A COMPANY
78 IN ORDER FOR IT TO SET UP A PRIVATE CLUB (MEMBERS ONLY)?  DOES THIS GO AGAINST
79 THE SPIRIT OF THE CONCEPT OF EQUAL ACCESS?  THE COURTS WILL SOON BEGIN TO 
80 DECIDE WHAT THE LAW MEANS, AND IF, IN FACT, THE LAW ITSELF CONTRADICTS
81 EARLIER LAWS RELATING TO BROADCASTING.  AT THIS POINT I SHOULD SAY THAT I
82 DON'T HAVE AN ANTENNA, NOR DO I INTEND TO.  I DO HAVE CABLE, BUT I ONLY TAKE
83 ONE PREMIUM (SO DEFINED) SERVICE, THAT BEING CINEMAX.  I AGREE THAT THE
84 PEOPLE THAT HAVE SET UP ANTENNAS TO RECEIVE THESE SIGNALS AREN'T "PLAYING 
85 THE GAME FAIRLY", AS HBO SAYS.  MY CONCERN IS THE ESSENCE OF WHAT THIS TOTAL
86 CONTROL OF ANY FREQUENCY BY A NON-GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY IMPLIES.
87 
88 HROTHGAR, YOU'RE SO RIGHT!  IT SEEMS THAT THE PROPONANTS OF "SCIENTIFIC"
89 CREATIONISM HAVE PROBLEMS UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY WHAT THE DEFINITION OF
90 SCIENCE IS.  PUTTING FORTH A BEAUTIFULLY STATED HYPOTHESIS IS FINE, BUT IT
91 ISN'T ENOUGH.  THE SCIENTIFIC PROCESS IS MUCH MORE INVOLVED, AND REQUIRES 
92 A LOT MORE WORK THAN MANY ARE WILLING TO DEVOTE TO IT.  CREATIONISTS MIX 
93 PHILOSOPHY WITH SCIENCE FREELY, AND DON'T DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN THE TWO.  
94 NOT THAT PHILOSOPHY IS INFERIOR (HEAVENS NO! AHEM...) TO SCIENCE,
95 BUT THE TWO ARE SEPARATE.  NICE ESSAY,  HROTH!                             
96                                        
97 [][][][][][][][][][][][]PAM&[][][][][][]
98 AARON: Chastise your acquaintance Larry for having inconsiderately forced
99 his way onto DB.  Any serious message such as Leonard's deserves to remain
100 intact, don't you think?Dave
101 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
102 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
103 I have been listening in on the great debate of evolution ver. creationism
104 for some time now.  Both sides have some very valid points and both sides
105 have some serious errors in their 'Theories', and that is just what they are
106 'Theories'.  Neither side can be proved or disproved.  What it boils down
107 to is what your beliefs are.  What will probable prove out is mitigated
108 evolution. (A combination of evolution and creationism). Something 
109 interferred with the fauna development on earth. Whether it was God or
110 another diety, or another race from somewhere else makes no difference.
111 ------------Tom---------------------------10/28/83 - 0941------------------
112 I SHOR DO LAK LISTENEIN TO YU FELLERS BUT IS THIS THE BULL-ETIN BOARD OR WHAT
113 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
114 To all:
115 After wading through the massed piles of bovine fecal matter that have been 
116 contributed to BWMS over the past few weeks, I feel that the contributors to
117 these discussions should be recognized for their achievements.
118 Therefore:
119 In my capacity as acting director for the Association for the Advancement 
120 of Scatalogical Studies, I hereby award to the users of BWMS for their
121 inspiring contributions in the areas of Politics, Religion, and Economic 
122 Theory, the title of PHD (Piled High and Deeper).  Congratulations, and 
123 keep up the good work!
124 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Dusty M.S. (More of the Same)^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
125      In a bit more serious vein---
126 While discussions of these subjects are valuable for both the participants
127 (allowing them to explore their own stand) and onlookers (exposing them to
128 alternative viewpoints), when expressing your own deeply held opinions, many
129 contributors become emotionally committed to the beauty of their own positions
130 and blind to valid points made by their "opponents".  Might I suggest a 
131 reversal of sides?  Those who have articulated a particular point of view
132 should take the opposite stance and vigorously defend another position, I.E
133 conservatives argue in favor of liberalism, christians as athiests, and 
134 athiests support a fundamentalist religious philosophy.  Perhaps we might all
135 learn a bit more about ourselves as well as other viewpoints.
136 
137 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Dusty^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
138 
139 This line of "Phantom Glitch" replaced by line feeds. 10/31/83
140 
141 #####################################################################
142 
143 Lets change the subject.  Want to start a pool?  The odds are now 
144 5 to 7 that Los Angeles WILL be the target of terrorists attacks
145 during the Olympics.  Will the terrorists set off the classic
146 elevator nucular device?  Will the fault line through California
147 break, then slide into the sea.  Is beach property in Denver in 
148 your future?
149 
150 
151 ########################B.S.R. incognito##########################
152 ANDY:
153 PUT UP YOUR CARDS AND BAGGAMON  BOARDS
154 AND CALL STEVE NOW!!!
155 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
156 
157 Larry: Nice to see you made it in-
158 tact to the Backwater. Almost as 
159 much fun as the Math Lab, eh? I 
160 do feel obligated to act on Dave's
161 suggestion; it really is considered
162 the height of bad form to type over
163 someone else's text. Gratutious 
164 inclusion of control charcaters or
165 lines 128 long seem to get auto-
166 magicly deleted, also. Have fun, and
167 thanks for the positive comment. How
168 goes the new job? Note: I set this
169 in 40 col so you could read it with
170 some ease; yet any further comm will
171 be in BW standard MA 76.
172                            Aaron
173 
174  Pam, did I leave midthought again?
175 
176  Still no replies my on my APB for help? Anon? Anyone?
177 
178  Mike? my inquiry re: Archives has elicited no response. Too frightening
179 think about digging up all those old disks filled with (deleted), i'll bet.
180 
181  All: I am moving to Lloyd center area. My compu-toys will be moved last;
182 but I may skip a disk during the transition. My apologies.
183 
184 
185  Hrothgar, the varied:
186    Your "error" metioned above (#2) is, of course, valid. Yet I believe the
187 spirit of the text you replied to eluded you. Few people drop $175 for the
188 pleasure (?) of using systems such as ours. I myself wouldn't. Yet the USERS
189 of this system (not to be confused with the abusers, ie. 
190 go ducks go!  
191 mad quacker
192 
193 
194 
195 off
196 exit
197 ) MUST have some sort of "intrinsic" capacity; few people write (or engage
198 in any form of dialog, for that matter) purely for the "entertainment" value
199 present. Indeed, few people (including computer enthusists!) ever master the
200 simple command structure of BW! I challenge that ANYONE who I can point to
201 as a BW "user" is, at least, in the 90th percentile. Care to argue?
202 
203                                                   Aaron
204 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
205 Regarding evolution vs. creationism, 100 years from
206 now people will still be arguing about it. And what
207 difference will it make? The arguments do not change
208 our lives. They are as ephemeral as the bits of energy
209 that display them on your computer terminal. Still,
210 sometimes they are fun to read.
211   -- Jim W
212 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
213 
214 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 28 Oct 83 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
215   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   19:39   <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
216      Dusty, your 'award' was quite amusing, but I derived even more
217 chuckles from the fact that you yourself have not dared to venture
218 forth YOUR ideas--at least not under that name--in order to have them
219 masticated; i.e. pored over, misinterpreted, applauded, assaulted,
220 and/or ignored...Can you really station yourself 'above it all' if
221 you have not risked your own pride by contributing to the Backwater
222 melee--or, can you claim to have changed the Inn's mood from that of
223 a brawl to one of good-natured banter?  Nonetheless, I commend your
224 suggestion regarding the reversal of stands; but I wonder how open-
225 minded these debators really are...?
226      Excuse me, Leonard:  DOM interpreted me correctly, though at the
227 time the issue of creation vs. evolution had not yet arisen.  I'm up
228 to the challenge of facing the lot of you regarding evolution, God
229 and the authenticy of the Bible--and I know that sounds terribly 
230 puff-headed and blind, but please let me explain why.  Pam, you noted
231 that the "scientific process...requires a lot more work than many are
232 willing to devote to it" in agreement with Hrothgar's assertation that
233 "the burden of scientific 'proof' is now on the creationists."  In
234 response, I say you're right on both counts, and I am willing to steal
235 the time from sleep, work and play in order to present this proof,
236 which even most Bible-thumpers & creationism-defenders are woefully
237 ignorant of because of not taking the time for serious study to back
238 up their faith.  Ironically, even the word 'faith' is misused by these
239 psuedo-Christians, for it is correctly defined as "the assured expecta-
240 tion of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though
241 not beheld." (Hebrews 11:1)  To 'make a hope assured', to recognize the
242 'demonstration of realities' requires more than emotional (or weak, as
243 DOM has observed) acceptance of a belief; it demands a dose of what some
244 call 'healthy doubt'--which I see VERY evident amidst this crowd--but
245 even more, it requires a suspending of previous prejudice in order to
246 consider the evidence impartially.  BOTH sides of the issue must be
247 examined, and that is why I have spent in excess of 260 hours/year for
248 some ten years (longer, in fact, but it used to be against my will) in
249 intensive study regarding the existence of a creator, his purposes,
250 his misrepresentation, his 'letter' to mankind PLUS an examination of
251 the beliefs that contradict the Bible.  [>Whew< long-winded sentence!]
252 So!  I'm willing to accept the responsibility of defending the above-
253 mentioned subjects, but I would like to request a little more civility.
254 I will not imperiously demand respect--I intend to earn it--rather, I'd
255 appreciate not being clumped with 'all the others' you've met; it is not
256 just to accord me with the scorn you may feel for them UNLESS I prove as
257 unreasonable.  I publicly declare myself not in league with Leonard,
258 and I ask a truce with all you agnostics & atheists--DOM, Pam, Hrothgar,
259 Dave-alias-Humbug, Mikey, Anon, Alex--as well as those whose beliefs
260 are unclear, like Aaron...[forgive me for my last irritable response,
261 dear Aaron; you are the shining beacon by the Inn's door for me!]
262 Aaeeii, the time!  I apoligize for monopolizing the Inn during its
263 usually-most-bustling hours, but my entrances are so few...DOM (may I
264 call you Sukebe?) you will forgive me if I ask you to reiterate, please,
265 but your remarks on non-random chance regarding evolution made me sit
266 up and take notice.  That assertation seems a departure from what is
267 usually believed by evolutionists, especially your surprise remark:
268 "Evolution...does not imply that anything has come into being on its
269 own."  Kindly explain what you mean; I & Deborah will be back Saturday
270 afternoon, and I hope not to miss your elaboration.
271 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     d     <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
272 
273 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
274 
275 AARON, DON'T BE TOO HARD ON YOUR FRIEND.  I DON'T THINK HE WAS RESPONSIBLE
276 FOR THE DELETION ON DB.  THE DISK (WHILE DISK A) FILLED UP QUICKLY, AND WAS
277 FILLED WHEN I CALLED EARLY IN THE DAY.  I CALLED AGAIN LATER, AND I NOTICED
278 THAT THE LAST 5 LINES OF LEONARD'S MESSAGE WERE TOTALLY GONE.  I CALLED AGAIN
279 LATE IN THE AFTERNOON, AND WHILE THE DISK HADN'T BEEN CHANGED YET, THE SPACE
280 WAS NOW FILLED WITH HIS MESSAGE.  SO, UNLESS HE DELETED THE LINES, THEN
281 CALLED LATER TO ADD HIS MESSAGE, I DON'T THINK IT WAS HIS RESPONSIBILITY.
282                                                                            
283      d, I FEEL NO SCORN, NOR WILL I CLUMP YOU IN WITH THE "BIBLE-THUMPERS",
284 AS IT IS OBVIOUS YOU AREN'T ONE.  YOU ARE THOUGHTFUL, POLITE, AND REASONABLE
285 IN YOUR STATEMENTS OF BELIEF AND DEFENSE OF SAME.  I CAN BE DEFINED AS
286 "AGNOSTIC" AS I DON'T KNOW THE ULTIMATE ANSWERS, BUT I DO HOPE TO FIND THEM.
287 I AM GLAD YOU ARE NOT IN LEAGUE WITH LEONARD, AS I TAKE UMBRAGE AT BEING 
288 REFERRED TO AS "IGNORANT" BY SOMEONE WHO DOESN'T KNOW ME.
289      I THINK SOME OF WHAT DOM REFERRED TO IN THE REMARK ABOUT RANDOM CHANCE
290 IS THAT, GIVEN AN ENERGETIC ENVIRONMENT AND THE PROPER ORGANIC COMPOUNDS, 
291 AMINO ACIDS SEEM TO FORM SPONTANEOUSLY (THIS HAS BEEN DUPLICATED IN THE LAB
292 MANY TIMES).  BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR WRITING AND HOPE MY FELLOW BW'S
293 CAN MAINTAIN A DEGREE OF RESPECT AND MATURITY IN THEIR RESPONSES.  AS FAR
294 AS "FACING THE LOT", DON'T INCLUDE ME AS I QUALIFY MORE AS THE AUDIENCE TO 
295 BE SWAYED RATHER THAN A PARTICIPANT,
296 DUE TO MY LACK OF BELIEF IN EITHER SIDE OF THE QUESTION.  BUT I HOPE TO SEE
297 YOUR STATEMENTS SOON!!
298                                                                           
299      A QUICK ASIDE:  IN A RECENT "MAN ON THE STREET" SURVEY, PEOPLE WERE  
300 ASKED "WHAT DO YOU THINK OF ANDROPOV?", AND THE MOST COMMON ANSWER WAS "I 
301 DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THE BALLET."  SO MUCH FOR THE "INFORMED CITIZEN".
302                                                                           
303 [][][][][][][][][][][][]PAM.[][][][][][]
304 
305 No believer I have ever been aware of has been anxious to try to 'prove' the 
306 existance of his chosen deity.  Why, you might ask?  Their exact reasons might vary, but I believe that this is the
307 fundamental motivation:  Suppose the religionists ask for, seek, or attempt a proof of the existance and quality of 
308 their deity.  They are thus demonstrating that they VALUE such a proof, and consider it important and significant.  But
309 conversely, if that proof is important, the LACK of such a proof is equally significant, and thus distressing to them.
310 And also, if the currently-accepted proof was proved incorrect, they would have had a unjustified belief, at least until
311 another 'proof' was devised.  Their position would be invariably precarious, since even simple challenges on the basis
312 of logical formalism could topple their ideas.  This is no foundation for a religion as we know it.
313 
314 It is much more convenient for religions to justify their ideas on faith alone.  Any reliance on a scientific-type proof
315 could eventually backfire.  Besides, considering the education of 90% of the world's population, it would be much simpler to 
316 explain 'I believe' than 'I have a hypothesis, then a theory, then a fact.'
317 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Anon ::::::::::::::
318 P.S.    "No one EXPECTS the Spanish Inquisition!!!!!!"
319 ########################################
320 'D'; YOUR PROOF IS BEING AWAITED, I ONLY ASK ONE THING, GIVE US YOUR PROOF WITHOUT ALL THE
321 QUOTES FROM THE BIBLE. IF YOU CAN MAKE SUCH A STATEMENT WITHOUT THE USE OF THAT BOOK THEN I FOR ONE WILL BE OF A MORE
322 OPEN MIND TO ACCEPPT YOUR STATEMENTS. I HAVE YET TO MEET ANY CHRISTIAN (SP(PSEUDO OR OTHERWISE) WHO COULD DISCUSS THE SUBJECT
323 WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE BOOK. IT WOULD TRULY BE REFRESHING IF NOT ENLIGHTENING IF YOU CAN MAKE YOUR POINT WITH THE ABOV
324 ABOVE LIMITATION. THANK YOU.
325 #######
326 
327 ################C.Y.M.################################10/29 1:45AM##############
328 PS: WHO LEFT THESE MARGINS SET ABOVE 76.SORRY IF SOME OF THE ABOVE CAN'T BE READ BY
329 SOME OF YOU.
330 ########################################
331 Bonne chance, d.Humbug
332 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
333 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
334  d;
335    Please forgive the mystery; I found the text I inclosed quite intri-
336 guing, It appeared it print just before you took up your nom de plume,
337 the author of it is a CLASSIC good christian, and the text is of a fantasy
338 nature. Shall I reveal the title, or leave some mystery? I am looking 
339 forward to your commentary/proof of Creationism.
340 
341                                                         Aaron
342 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
343 Yeah!!  Let's see some proof!!
345 
346 
347 
348 
349 *j***n***.*j************6***"***,**
350 
351 
352 
353 ***************************:**********
354 ============================================================
355 There's going to be a big Halloween party at The Court Club,
356 10501  N.E.  Fargo, Portland, Oregon, 97220 on October 29th,
357 7:00 pm.  It costs $2 if you bring something for other  peo-
358 ple  to  eat,  $5  if  not.  Bring a costume if you can, but
359 they're not needed.  Call 254-xxxx and ask Bill Flowers  for
360 details about the party.  See you there!
361 ============================================================
364 !?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
365 DOM.  You disputed my description of the Bible on the grounds that
366 it was written by a number of ancients "barely" evolved from cave
367 dwellers, who had none of the advantages of scientific methods, etc.
368 Well, my description was accurate, and you also have a valid point
369 about methods, equipment & study, but consider:  The Bible is
370 basically a religious book.  It was not meant to be a scientific
371 textbook, so equipment & etc. were not necessary.  But when the
372 Bible touches on science its very accurate.  For instance, the
373 Bible states:  "Star differs from star in glory."  When this was
374 written, there were no telescopes, of course, or other equipment
375 but science now knows there there are blue stars, yellow ones, 
376 white dwarfs and many other differences.
377 Centuries before naturalists were aware of migration, Jeremiah
378 wrote in the seventh century B.C.E.:  "The stork in the sky knows
379 the time to migrate, the dove and the swift and the wryneck know
380 the season of return."
381 Also, the Mosaic law (16th century B.C.E.) reflected awareness of
382 disease germs thousands of years before Pasteur.  That law contained
383 ordinances to protect against contagion.  (Leviticus chapters 13 & 14)
384 In 1907, medical science discovered that rodents caused plague.  
385 During a plague, 1 Samuel 6:5 spoke of this.  This was in the 
386 eleventh century B.C.E.
387 The Bible also said that the ant gathers food supplies even in the
388 harvest (Proverbs 6:6-8).  Critics scoffed that no ants do this, but
389 in 1871 a British naturalist discovered ants that maintained granaries.
390 They are called harvester ants.  Yet the Bible knew about them hundreds
391 of years before Christ.
392 In the eighth century B.C.E, Isaih wrote of Jehovah "dwelling above the
393 circle of the earth."  The Hebrew "hhug," translated "circle," can also
394 mean "sphere," as Davidson's "Concordance" and Wilson's "Old Testament
395 Word Studies" show.  Hence, Moffatt's translation of Isaiah 40:22 reads:
396 "He sits over the round earth."  You will recall the common beliefs
397 during the period of time were that the earth was supported by pillars
398 (Egyptians); the Greeks said by Atlas; others said by an elephant
399 standing on a turtle that swam in a cosmic sea.
400 A thousand years before Christ, Solomon wrote in figurative language
401 about the circulation of the blood.  (Ecclesiastes 12:6) Medical science
402 did not understand it until Dr. Harvey's studies in the 15th century
403 after Christ.
404 The genetic blueprint in the fertilized human egg cell contains pro-
405 grams for all the bodily parts, before any hint of their presence.
406 Compare Psalm 139:16:  "Your eyes [God's] saw even the embryo of me,
407 and in your book all its parts were down in writing, as regards the
408 days when they were formed and there was not yet one among them."
409 So from these (there are many others), DOM, I have concluded that the
410 Bible writers were not as previously described, and I used to wonder
411 how these men knew these things WITHOUT scientific methods and equipment.
412 I might add that according to the Biblical timetable, its only been
413 about 3,500 years ago that the Bible began to be written and IF we did
414 evolve from unintelligent cave-dwellers, they surely passed off the
415 scene before this!  The end.
416 Any-hey, I've really enjoyed my first coupla' weeks on the billboard
417 and I find that the topics discussed are stimulating & fascinating! (?)
418 Bye.  (Really!)
419 ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?  DEBORAH   4:48 pm
420 ########################################DEBORAH: YOUR "PROOF" ABOVE IS STILL 
421 QUESTIONABLE. THE WRITINGS YOU SO FREELY CITE HAVE BEEN TRANSLATED SO MANY 
422 TIMES AND IN SO MANY TOUNGS, THAT ANY OF THE SO CALLED SCIENTIFIC REVELATIONS
423 COULD HAVE BEEN EDITED INTO THE SCENARIO AT ANY LATER DATE JUST TO PLEASE THE
424 MANY DOUBTTERS OF THE "FAITH". NOW, AS I STATED ABOVE, SHOW US SOME PROOF W
425 WITHOUT CITING THE BOOK OF MYTHOLOGY. EVEN THE WORST NOVEL CAN CONTAIN SOME 
426 FACT BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE IT A WORK OF NON-FICTION.
427 
428 ##################C.Y.M.################################10/29 5:12PM#########
429 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 29 Oct 83 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
430   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   18:35   <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
431      Ach, your words are heartening, Pam!...Anon, I appreciate the
432 subtle difference in attitude; I can nearly picture the tilt to your
433 head of 'do say--and YOU will be different?' yet with eyes inquiring...
434 Dave, dear Humbug, my old antagonist:  you are here yet?...CYM, I will
435 respect your wishes when elucidating on the evolution vs. creation
436 issue, but your thoughts on the Bible's credibility I would like to 
437 take issue with at another time.  In the meantime, please don't confuse
438 me with Deb.  We enter by the same portal (yes, I AM quoting your long-
439 committed-to-dust words, Mikey!) but she takes her own tangents.
440      I wish to define straight off which issue I am tackling first,
441 so that it doesn't appear that my promises dangle ignored:  the
442 controversy of 'where we came from' has been stirred up most recently
443 at the Inn, so that is where I shall commence.  In fairness to DOM, I
444 shall restrain myself from a cross-examination of evolution until he
445 arrives with clarification of this 'random chance' bit, but I am eager
446 to share some quotes regarding the "insurmountable evidence" he spoke
447 of, from the evolutionists themselves!
448      Hrothgar, I accept your proof sequence and will endeavor to
449 follow its logic, though I am not trained in the formal logic that Pam
450 is.  My first assertation is the simple statement that a design argues
451 for a designer.  I found a quote regarding this--hypothesis?  theory?--
452 which comes from a book called "The Universe:  Plan or Accident?":
453     "The recognition of design in nature is no ephemeral scientific
454 conclusion based upon the researches of a decade or two in the history
455 of science--a conclusion which might at any time be reversed were a
456 few new facts to come to light.  Rather it is a conclusion which has
457 stood the test of thousands of years; a conclusion so certain that if
458 it should one day transpire that it was a gigantic mistake, man would
459 have every ground for doubting whether valid conclusions of any kind
460 can be reached by thinking."
461      Now, as I delve into some of the examples of such design, please
462 forgive me if my commentary appears dry and lacking personality, but
463 these examples--especially compared with men's imitations of them--are
464 essential to the proof!
465      Man has made very sensitive thermometers and other heat gauges,
466 but they are crude compared to the built-in abilities certain snakes
467 have exercised for thousands of years.  A rattlesnake, for example, 
468 can detect a heat change of one-thousandth of one degree Celsius.  A
469 boa constrictor responds to a heat change in 35 milliseconds, whereas
470 a sensitive man-made instrument takes a minute to make the same measure-
471 ment.  Such snakes use this heat-sensing ability to search out and
472 capture warm-bodied prey in the dark.  The heat sensors also indicate
473 the direction of the heat source.
474      Nerve-gas shells have two canisters of relatively notoxic chem-
475 icals, but when the shell is fired the chemicals mix and upon explosion
476 the deadly nerve gas is released.  Long before this, and strictly for
477 defensive purposes, the bombardier beetle had used chemical repellants.
478 Glands produce two different chemicals, stored in separate chambers
479 closed off by muscular valves.  When it is attacked, the valves open
480 and the two chemicals flow into a third heavily walled chamber.  There
481 an enzyme causes an explosive reaction, with an audible pop, and a
482 noxious mist shoots out of a turret that the beetle can aim in any
483 direction.  The bombardier beetle can fire repeatedly, dozens of times
484 in minutes, and predators retreat gasping.
485      Is is not so that men's works are said to be due to their genius,
486 yet the design exhibited in nature is attributed to chance?  What logic
487 is there in that?  Inventors draw their inspiration from creatures...
488 Bats & dolphins use sonar; octopuses use jet propulsion; wasps make
489 paper; beavers build dams; ants make bridges; bees & termites use air
490 conditioning; fish, worms & insects make cold light; birds weave, tie
491 knots, construct incubators, do masonry, build apartment houses, navi-
492 gate, desalinate seawater, & have compasses & internal clocks; beetles
493 use aqualungs; spiders use diving bells, make doors, are ballonists;
494 some fish & beetles have bifocals; snapping turtles & water scorpions
495 use snorkels; animal eyes turn light into electricity (like man's solar
496 cells); ants do gardening and tend livestock; a beetle prunes trees...
497      Picture a scientist who discovers an oblong stone with a groove
498 circling its middle in the rubble of an ancient cave.  "Eureka!  Its
499 an ancient weapon made by our ancestors, designed to be bound to a
500 stick!"  he announces triumphantly.  Enraptured by his find, he pays
501 no mind to the spider he whizzes past, one called Arenea.  This lowly
502 creature has six teats, each having some 100 taps, each tap connected
503 by an individual tube to a separate gland inside the spider.  It can
504 make separate threads or join them to produce a broad band of silk. 
505 Spiders manufacture seven kinds of silk.  No species makes all seven,
506 all have at least three, and our Aranea makes five.  Its 600 pipes do
507 not all make silk; some extrude glue to make some of the web sticky.
508 But to avoid getting stuck in it, Aranea oils its feet.  When con-
509 fronted with this marvel of design, the evolutionist say that the
510 spiders' legs evolved to make spinnerets.  Reflect:  our spider has
511 (1) the chemical lab to make the silk, (2) the physical mechanisms
512 to spin it, and (3) the instinctive know-how to make the web.  Any
513 one of these is useless without the other two.  They must all evolve
514 by chance, at the same time, in the same spider--?!  Which do you
515 think could more easily just happen:  the funny-shaped stone or this
516 arachnid [which happens to be the only thing that terrifies me]?
517      DOM mentioned Carl Sagan, and I have a truly interesting quote
518 from him regarding the intersteller radio messages they pulse out (or
519 propose to; I don't know) arranged in a logical sequence "which can be
520 recognized as emanating unambiguously from intelligent beings."  One
521 proposed picture (of a man, woman, child, solar system & some atoms)
522 requires 1,271 bits of information.  Reasoning on this, if these 1,271
523 bits in a planned sequence suggested order & design clear enough to
524 'unambiguously' prove our intelligence, what about the 10,000,000,000
525 bits of info that are encoded in the chromosomes of every living cell?
526 Can YOU dismiss the intricacy that is packed into each cell's 0.0025 cm
527 diameter--the wonders of which science is just beginning to explore--
528 so readily?  How can evolutionists blitely assign to chance the power
529 to design all complex living creatures, yet at the same time insist
530 that extremely simple objects require the existence of an intelligent
531 designer?  Logically, the more complex the design, the stronger the
532 demand for an even greater designer.  
533      This modest showing of evidence merely scratches the surface of
534 whether there is a Master Designer...But, forgive me for not continuing,
535 for my hands tremble with exhaustion, and I sense the rumbling of the
536 crowds waiting outside the Inn...  Aaeeii, I neglected to eat today--!
537 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     d     <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
538 ========================================================================
539 I reserve further judgement until I die.
540 ========================================================================
541 If God designed man as a 'stand alone device' sprung full-blown and 
542 perfect,  why do my feet hurt?  I have never talked to a Scientist
543 who knew what he was talking about who was a true blue Atheist.
544 But damn few of them can give credence to the biblical version of 
545 creation.  The evidence is building that the universe as we see it
546 is "patterned" to be a hospitable environment for life.  And the 
547 solar system is an incubator.  And the earth is getting ripe....
548 My problem with Creationists' is that they don't like the way the Game
549 of Science is being played and want to change the rules for their own
550 benifit.  Anyone can change a rule, but you have to obey the others,
551 and convince the other players that your rule WORKS BETTER!
552 The next time someone says it's only proper that both sides should be
553 tought is public school, ask him if this means he's in favor of teach-
554 ing Darwin in Bible School?  Turn-about is always more fun.
555 
556 (actually i have a soft spot for Creationism, the Norse version of 
557 course!  all others are lies told by heathen priests!  I know because
558 my dear daddy told me so!)
559                                 this Rant and Rave brought to you by,
560                                        the Phantom Glitch
561 #==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==##==#10/29/83#==#23:05#
562 p.s. if i have offended anyone, i humbly say i tried my very best.
563 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
564 Has anyone else been observing more domestic felines with more than 
565 the 'normal' five toes, as I have?  If this is indeed a factual 
566 obervation, would a Creationist, a Darwinian, or an atheist be most
567 confortable with his (the classical ungendered 'his', folks) 
568 explanation and why?      Humbug, just sittin' by the phone again
569 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
570 to:sysop mikey
571 sj:US DIGITAL
572 
573 How's it goin' Mikey??  You found a salesman yet???
574  
575 signed,
576   The Phantom Sorcerer
577 -----------------------
578 ********************************************
579 d:
580   I didn't mean to sound so harsh or to really direct 
581 my attack towards you and I realize it was very bad manners for 
582 someone as new to the system as myself and I do apoligize if it seemed
583 directed at you but I do agree with C.Y.M. that you could do better
584 without quoting from scripture. Personal experience has made me harsh
585 but even with all the crap that has happened in my life I still can
586 not bring myself to believe that all men are definatly evil from 
587 birth which is one of the main precepts of the book you quote!
588 in my experience all that I have ever found is some sort of rip off
589 going on. Sorry if this sounds bad but facts of life are facts of 
590 life. Who cares where I came from anyway? it is not having an effect
591 on me now. You see, that is when I really start to be concerned. 
592 when it spills into my life. otherwise...who cares...
593 Number one ... I will never admit to being a distant relative of the
594 ape. Nor can anyone show me where this is still happening. See any 
595 trout with legs?
596 
597 Number two ... neither will I bow myself in either mind or body to 
598 something or someone I  can't even see or feel!! I wouldn't even do
599 that to someone I could feel or see! and I am not evil...I love my
600 neighbor and commit no crimes against society...so as far as I am 
601 concerned no one has the right to demand my subservience.
602 
603 Well sorry there I go again...My name used to be "cynic" but then 
604 I realized that no matter what I discuss...It won't change things...
605 won't change your mind...won't change mine...but it is good to have
606 an opportunity to express my feelings and to live in a place that this
607 freedom is possible!
608 *********************************** a pathy*************************
609 
610 -----------------------------------------------------------
611 d:
612 I find your taking me to task for not exposing my beliefs
613 gently and nicely put.  True, I have not commented at length on
614 the subjects under discussion, but I felt (and still feel) that the
615 pace of the discussion rules out my full participation.  However--
616 I feel, as one trained in the physical sciences, that most subjective
617 evidence is quite suspect.  It seems to be the only evidence available
618 when dealing with the existance/nonexistance of a "PRIME CAUSE" 
619 (if every cause has an effect -- consider the universe as an effect)
620 I will certainly admit that this can be considered a tenable position
621 and a not unreasonable one.
622   From personal observation (suspect as above) i feel that there are
623 forces and phenomena that have not been addressed by scientific 
624 investigation.  (the essence of true scientific investigation 
625 is the attitude of the investigator-- he/she/it must first admit his/her
626 ignorance, then make an active and methodical attempt to correct it,
627 while still retaining an open mind)
628    Given these starting points, I can sympathize with both points of
629 SEE DRIVE A..LAST MESSAGE....