textfiles/messages/BACKWATER/bw831107.txt

LIST
FILE ON
MARGIN IS 22 
STATUS: ALL ALLOWED
NUMBER OF LINES: 629 
1 If you are in need of help, you need but ask....
2 ******************** REMOVED: 7 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 TO ALL THOSE TI OWNERS
26 WHAT HAPPENS TO US NOW.  I THINK WE HAVE
27 BEEN ABANDONED FOR CORPORATE PROFITS.  I
28 WONDER WHAT HAPPENS TO ALL THOSE SOFTWARE WRITERS THAT WERE GOING TO SELL
29 TO FUTURE TI BUYERS?
30           
31                BEAR 
32 
33 ****************************************
34 Unfortunately, BAD, you continue to engage in a demented form of mental masturbation, the motivation for which currently
35 escapes me.  I had decided to allow the entire subject to drop a few disks ago, believing that you were beyond logic.  I was,
36 and am, right.  You choose to claim that 'my opinions are those of a parasite' but you cited (and continue to cite) no proof.
37 Indeed, you fall into the typical logic trap of stating that the 'absense of proof is the proof of absense.'  You said
38 that because I cited no proof that I was not a parasite, I must be one!!!  Well, as even you should recognize, over 90% of the
39 users of the system have similarly failed to provide such proof of non-parasited-ness, so why don't you accuse them?  By your
40 logic you would be correct in all such cases!  What's wrong?  Your logic fails for the same reason as a person who 'proves'
41 God exists because no scientist has ever proved that he does not exist.
42      And no, I didn't claim that I have never owed society ANYTHING, contrary to your rantings.  However, I object to the
43 enslavement of the population based on the small amount they may owe.  (Example: Suppose I save your life, does that mean
44 that you are my slave forever?  Obviously not; any such claim on my part would be overstepping and distorting a FACT (that you
45 wouldn't be alive without me) to come to a silly CONCLUSION (that you must work for me forever.)  I merely point out that just
46 because I wouldn't exist without Society, that doesn't mean that Society can claim my eternal enslavement.)  Of course, you 
47 wanted to conclude that my statements were 'those of a parasite' so you deliberately misinterpreted them.  Oh well...
48 As you should be able to see by now, it is NOT MERELY NECESSARY that yo u claim or even prove that any particular person
49 'owes society',' YOU must also prove that the extent to which he 'owes society' justifies whatever demands you care to make on
50 him!  So: even if I state that I owe society 'something,' you can't stretch that 'something' to mean 'everything.'
51 Which brings me back to another item:  In my last message to you, I asked you to state, for the record, the extent and
52 degree of what you believe to be an individual's obligation to mankind (society, etc.)  I am not surprised that you "forgot" 
53 to do this.  My guess is that you have no clear understanding of your own opinions on this subject.  So once again, I ask 
54 you to tell all the rest of us:
55 To what extent are we obligated to society?  How many dollar bills?  How much blood?  How many hours of work?  In effect,
56 I'm demanding that you quantitize your opinions!  And I'm giving you free rein to state the extent; use any currency, time, or
57 item as a value.  If you want to claim that we owe society 15.7592 minutes of prayer per day, go ahead!  Or 38.5 bushels of
58 wheat?  Fine!  But even if you can't be so precise, I'd still like to know at least the character of such an obligation.  What
59 must we do for society?  Smile to somebody else each day?  Be kind to dogs?  Raise our children to act like sheep, like many 
60 of us are?  What?
61 But watch out.  You'd better make sure that a large fraction of people in society actually PAY what you claim they OWE.
62 Why?  If you clam, for example, that they owe their first-born son, and 99% of them don't pay off, then that's an excellent
63 proof that the other 1% really don't owe that, either.  Why should anyone be forced to pay off a 'debt to society' when nobody
64 else does, either.
65 And I openly invite anyone else to answer the same questions, too.  Go ahead, use your imaginations.  You have nothing to
66 lose but the respect of everyone else.  Here's a PREDICTION.  Most, if not all, of the people who believe such an obligation
67 is important will be too embarrassed to go into any detail concerning it, if for no other reason than they invoke it always as
68 a hand-waving argument.  But I say this:  C'mon, somebody, please demonstrate that my prediction is wrong!  (if you can)
69 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Anon ::::::::::::::
70 P.S. BAD:  Lest you think I'm picking on you, notice that I haven't even begun to attack the substance of your arguments, only
71 the logic.  And I've simply asked you to state your beliefs, I have not (yet) refuted them!  Go ahead, accuse me of doing the
72 easy part first.......
73 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
74 Just remember....
75  
76    All people are equal, no matter how stupid they are,
77    or how much better you are than they.
78 ::::::::::::::::::::::
79 The above message presented by the PHOOEY...
80 Pig Headed Onomonopolistic Oragutans for Equality in Yemen
81 Jesee Jackson -- President
82 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
83 THERE WAS A GREAT MAN ONCE , WHO SENT HIS WISE MEN IN SEARCH OF ALL 
84 KNOWLEDGE. THE WISE MEN RETURNED SEVERAL YEARS LATER WITH MANY
85 VOLUMES OF FACTS.THE GREAT MAN INSTRUCTED THE WISE MEN TO CONSOLIDATE
86 THE INFORMATION AS MUCH ASPOSIBLE. AGAIN, AFTER SEVERAL YEARS THEY
87 RETURNED. THE WISE MEN HAD DONE AS THEIR GREAT MAN HAD WANTED.
88        ALL THE KNOWLEDGE IN THE WORLD HAD BEEN CONDENCED IN TO FIVE
89 (5) SHORT WORDS ; THERE AINT NO FREE LUNCH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
90 MY ANSWER --BY BILL M.
91 ..........................
92 to Anon: the price society asks is defined by the society, not by an 
93 individual. the way society makes its demands known is called law.
94 The price includes taxes. (As defined by law.) I am glad to hear you
95 now recognise you do owe society something. I speak of your
96 attitudes expressed, not your lack of expression, in particular
97 your denial of the legality of taxes. The desirability is not in 
98 question, but as noted above about the free lunch.
99 /////////////////////BAD\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
100 Ps
101 Pam, you are right, I speak only of his expressed views, no more. Sorry
102 for the exageration. As to definitions of God, it is interesting to
103 read the Old Testament of the Bible, and see how the beliefs of the
104 Hebrews changed & how they saw Him first as only one among many, but
105 later He became omniscient, etc. But do't believe the descriptions
106 of them as stone age saveages, remember this was the area where all
107 science as we know it began. Even if their acts were correct about
108 say, infectious diseases doesn't mean they knew what bacteria were, or
109 had Godly help, only that they were able to see that avoiding
110 sick places helped one stay healthy. I see much reading into the Bible.
111 /////////////////////////////BAD, again\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
112 D:
113 Ah yes, comfort!  Beliefs are just that-- beliefs.  Their relative trueness
114 --as I spoke earlier-- is quite difficult to measure.  I prefer to use the
115 term comfort rather than *TRUE* because these beliefs we hold are measured
116 more by how we feel about them than how they measure by some external 
117 standard.  I find myself comfortable with my own beliefs, because i have
118 enough internal evedence than they approach (for me) the *TRUTH*, although
119 for you they might be like a set of ill-fitting robes.  In like respect,
120 i could adopt your set of beliefs, and work within them, although i suspect
121 that they might bind a bit through the waist and shoulders.  
122 
123 I am often releived that this inn is metaphorical rather than physical.
124 It would take little imagination to see some of the debaters dropping 
125 mugs of ale and drawing swords here.  It is much more pleasant to be amused
126 by a sharp wit than with a sharp blade.
127 
128 Since no one wishes to change sides on the liberal vs conservative
129 christian vs atheist vs other, could we add fuel to this fire by introducing
130 the subjects of morals, ethics and law?
131 
132 To what degree are these three subjects interrelated?  Are they dependent
133 on one another, or are they shades of the same subject.  Can defiance of
134 the law be moral or ethical or both?  I feel that some of the harsh words
135 between BAD and anon come from conflicts between their morals or ethics.
136 (Don't we all live under the same or similar sets of laws?)
137 
138 Like a sleepy patron at the innkeeper's table, i'll expose my offhand
139 thoughts on the matter:
140 i feel that morals are the personal code of conduct that we each feel 
141 impelled to follow.  These are formed from our cultural conditioning; i.e.
142 parents, school, and religion.
143 Ethics are the social codes that give group approval or disapproval to
144 the morals held by individuals in that group.
145 Law is the socially codified set of ethics of a society -- formalized ethics
146 if you will.  Law is more likely to be written than either ethical codes
147 or morals.  Religions tend to prescribe moral codes, ethics as the group
148 following of these moral codes, and law as the punishment for not following
149 these moral codes.  Secular governments tend to pass laws that prohibit
150 certain actions and require others, then teach that ethics and morals requir
151 e that everyone adhere to the law.
152 
153 Enough for now-- someone else should have their say.
154 --------------------Dusty----------------------------------------------
155 
156 
157 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]   2100   2-NOV-1983   [][][][][][][]
158 
159 ANON:  Just because 99% of the people do not pay a debt does not make 
160 the obligation any less valid.  (In my opinion at least).  In any case,
161 I like your suggestion, I will smile at at least one stranger on a 
162 daily basis.  It doesn't begin to pay what I feel is my debt, but it 
163 does tend to make one feel better.  
164 The problem, in its barest essence, is that no person does anything that
165 that person does not feel will give her/him something greater in return.
166 Even what appear to be charitable acts give you a sense of well being,
167 like the smile-a-day concept above.  I know that strangers can't help 
168 me in any tangible way, but by my actions to them, I can feel better.
169 Same thing with taxes.  We pay them, because we do not wish to go to jail.
170 Even hurling insults and demands on BW, we do because of our needs, not
171 to enlighten anyone for their benefit.  One reason is the ability to 
172 convert someone to our way of thinking is to support our own beliefs.
173 If there is anything that does not follow this law, I am not aware of it.
174 Even Jesus Christ, if he does exist, died for our sins for his purposes,
175 not ours.
176 The purpose of this meandering, Anon, is to say - Your debt to society
177 is just what you actually pay.  What is the use of trying to collect
178 more than that ?  You won't pay it because there is no internal 
179 compunction to do so.
180 
181 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]   DJJ   [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
182 
183 PS  d: give me a call at 245-xxxx some evening.  If the BBS is up, try 
184 the Y option, I may be there, and I would like to chat.  dj
185 
186 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
187 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 Nov 83 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
188   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   21:44   <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
189      I kept my promise to return, but Deb did not.  So now I have to
190 sludge home in the unrelenting sogginess >grumble, mutter<...instead
191 she made a rendevous with a used car, because their wheezing, gasping
192 contraption is about to crumple into an exhausted heap!
193      Though I'd like to do more research on mutants, I'll toss in a
194 stray quote I found from Theodosius Dobzhansky, cited as "a noted
195 evolutionist":  "Most mutants which arise in any organism are more
196 or less disadvantages to their possessors...mutants that would make
197 a major improvement of the normal organization in the normal environ-
198 ments are unknown."  Incidentally, I should make clear that I'm not
199 disputing "the process of working out or developing" as evolution can
200 be defined--therefore, insects that inherit DDT immunity, for instance,
201 can be said to have 'evolved'--rather, it is the evolutional THEORY that
202 claims that present creatures have their origin in preexisting types.
203 The insect (I believe it was fruit flies in that study) remains the
204 simple fruit fly; it has not become a bee or an ant.
205      I ask for a believers' definition of evolution, if I may--?
206 Meantime, the dictionary yields:  "a process of continuous change
207 from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better
208 state:  GROWTH" and at this I have to laugh, for I have heard much
209 grousing about the sorry state of government, politics, business,
210 religion, war, and education--to mention a few of men's exalted
211 accomplishments--here at the Backwater Inn...there must be some
212 logical explanation for this seeming digression--?  Another point
213 to ponder regards the staggering capacity of the brain that remains
214 unused throughout a lifetime--estimated at a *billion* times more 
215 than is actually used.  Why?  If the evolution theory is true, this
216 means that enormous demands were put on the human brain earlier in
217 time by the environment so that he had to develop this capacity for
218 survival.  Why is this potential lying slack now?  Doesn't the
219 axiom:  "What you don't use, you lose" apply to the brain, as well?
220 Or is evolution moving backwards in the case of humans?
221      (Yipes; I've unwittingly monopolized the floor again!)
222 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>     d     <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
223 DJJ:
224 I don't understand your statement, "Your debt to society is just what you 
225 actually pay.'  I presume this applies to each one in the world, so doesn't that mean that it is impossible to pay to societ
226 y less than one owes, since by your definition they are precisely equal?  And therefore, that if by some method I manage to
227 pay nothing to society some year, then by your definition, I owed nothing?
228    Something tells me that isn't quite what you had in mind, but I just don't know.  I'll wait until you elaborate.
229 
230 BAD:
231 At least you're toning down your statements.  Keep in mind that there is a difference between legality and Constitutionality.
232 I don't watch Johnny Carson much anymore, but every once in a while he used to have his writers pore through various lawbooks,
233 both old and new, to find all sorts of stupid laws.  The one example I remember is goes something like this: 'You cannot eat
234 onions in a public place during daytime.'  I assume the motivation of the writers of this law was to prevent bad breath, but
235 such laws (as I recall, there were some laws which were even worse) clash with our current ideas concerning Constitutionality.
236    Remember that no law can (should) be enforcible in a country if that law is unconstitutional.  So if a tax law happens to
237 have unconstitutional provisions in it, it should be unenforcible.  Examine the statement, 'taxes are legal.'  If one ignores
238 the constitutionality issue, then that statement could be quite correct.  After all, if some misguided legislator believes 
239 that one of the proper functions of government is to prevent bad breath among the citizens and is willing to pass such a law,
240 can a tax law be far behind?
241    So to answer the question, 'are taxes legal,' I would have to say it depends on the law(s) that are under consideration.
242 That's not an interesting answer.  A much more interesting question is, 'Are taxes constitutional?'  I'd answer the question
243 now, but I've already taken up too much time.  I'll wait until tomorrow.
244 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Anon :::::::::::::
245 <><><><><><><<<>
246 i am on
247 flagy -odem
248 sorry cant
249 le`ve messg
250 only read.
251 will fix
252 asap
253 GAPS COMMINF THRU MUCH
254 CLE@RER HAN L-CASE
255 WILL RETURN TO 
256 DIQCUSSIO^ ASAP
257 AARON
258 |><><><>
259 
260 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
261 
262      ANON, PLEASE DON'T GIVE US YOUR OPINIONS ABOUT TAXES AGAIN!!  YOU'RE
263 BEGINNING TO SOUND LIKE JOHNNY-ONE-NOTE ON HIS TRUMPET, ALWAYS TOOTING 
264 THE SAME THING.  IT SEEMS THAT, NO MATTER THE SUBJECT UNDER DISCUSSION,
265 YOU TRY TO DIRECT IT TOWARD TAXES, AND WE'VE HEARD YOUR SELFISH OPINIONS
266 ON THAT BEFORE (NOTE: YOUR OPINIONS ARE SELFISH, NOT YOU.).  AS FAR AS
267 THE QUESTION OF "CONSTITUTIONALITY", THIS IS ALWAYS DECIDED BY THE COURTS.
268 THEIR DECISION MAY BE TOTALLY WRONG, WE MAY DISAGREE AS TO THEIR FINAL
269 INTERPRETATION, AND IT MAY BE CHANGED BY A LATER COURT, BUT AT THE TIME
270 OF THE DECISION, THEIR DEFINITION IS THE LEGAL ONE.  YOU MENTIONED THE 
271 DRED SCOTT CASE AS A SAMPLE OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY, BUT IF YOU WILL NOTE,
272 THE DECISION HANDED DOWN BY THE SUPREME COURT WAS TO THE EFFECT THAT 
273 "THERE IS NO POWER IN THE EXISTING FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO MAKE CITIZENS
274 OF NEGROES, SLAVE OR FREE, AND THAT AT THE TIME FOR THE FORMATION OF THE
275 CONSTITUTION THEY WERE NOT, AND COULD NOT BE, CITIZENS IN ANY OF THE
276 STATES."  I DON'T AGREE WITH THE MORAL STANCE OF THIS DECISION, BUT FROM
277 A STRICTLY LEGAL STANDPOINT, IT WAS CORRECT.  AT THAT TIME, THERE WAS
278 NO LEGAL STANDPOINT TO SAY THAT BLACKS HAD RIGHTS, AND THAT IS WHAT MADE
279 THE 13th, 14th, & 15th AMENDMENTS NECESSARY.  OUR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
280 GIVES THE POWER OF INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW AND CONSTITUTION TO THE
281 COURTS, AND DESPITE ETHICS OR MORALITY, IT IS THEIR DECISIONS THAT STAND.
282                                                                        
283      d, I FIND THAT THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS A MATTER OF FAITH AS MUCH
284 AS MANY OTHER THINGS.  YOU SEEM TO ACCEPT THE CONCEPTS OF NATURAL SELEC-
285 TION AND ADAPTATION, BUT REJECT MUTATION AS A FORCE.  IT IS CORRECT TO
286 SAY THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF MUTATIONS ARE HARMFUL (EVEN DEADLY), BUT
287 THERE STILL ARE OCCASIONAL MUTATIONS THAT AREN'T.  OF THESE, MOST
288 AREN'T HELPFUL IN ANY WAY, AND SO DO NOT DOMINATE.  BUT, ONCE IN A GREAT
289 WHILE, A MUTATION WILL HAPPEN THAT IS BOTH HARMLESS (NOT FATAL) AND USE-
290 FUL.  AS AN EXAMPLE, THERE WERE MANY SPECIES OF MOTH IN PRE-INDUSTRIAL
291 ENGLAND, AND THEY ALL HAVE METHODS OF PROTECTING THEMSELVES FROM 
292 PREDATION.  EITHER BY BEING POISONOUS, CAMOUFLAGE, ETC., THEY PROTECT-
293 ED THEMSELVES SUCCESSFULLY. BUT WHEN THE INDUSTRIAL AGE OVERTOOK ENGLAND
294 THOSE THAT USED CAMOFLAUGE TO HIDE WERE SUDDENLY OBVIOUS AGAINST THE
295 SOOT-COVERED BACKGROUND OF THE TREES AND WALLS OF THE CITY.  THEY QUICKLY
296 FELL VICTIM TO THE BIRDS THAT USED THEM FOR AFTERNOON SNACKS, AND
297 DISSAPEARED FROM THE SCENE.  BUT FROM ONE OF THESE SPECIES, A NEW SPECIES
298 APPEARED THAT HAD A BROWN & BLACK MOTTLING THAT EXACTLY MATCHED THE SOOT
299 COVERED BACKGROUND.  IT DEFINITELY WAS A NEW SPECIES, AS IT COULDN'T
300 MATE WITH OTHER KNOWN SPECIES (NATURALISTS TRIED).  EITHER MUTATION
301 CREATED THIS NEW SPECIES, OR GOD DID.  PERHAPS GOD USED EVOLUTION FOR
302 THE PURPOSES OF CREATION?  OH WELL, IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, DOES IT?
303 WE CAN'T CHANGE THE UNIVERSE, OR REALLY UNDERSTAND IT FULLY, BUT IT'S 
304 FUN TO TALK ABOUT.  BY THE WAY, I DON'T "SUPPORT" EVOLUTION, BUT NOBODY
305 WAS STEPPING FORWARD TO YOUR CHALLENGE, SO I FELT I HAD TO.  I'LL NOW
306 GO BACK TO THE AUDIENCE.......                                         
307                                                                        
308 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]PAM.[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
309 
310 Query:  Is there a difference of mood in "PAM." vs. "PAM!" ?
311 
312 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
313  As an aside to your question of comfortable explanations and truth, d, I
315 find it interesting to note that some scriptures refer to the Holy Spirit as
316 "Comforter" and that Christian Science writings often refer to God as "Truth
317   Trying to avoid semantic debate:  may we stipulate that "comfortable" 
318 hints at soothed, relieved of distress, at ease;  and that "truth" (without
319 any limiting adjectives) involves verifiable actuality, conformity to
320 knowledge or fact.
321   No, I don't reason that an explanation based solely upon the comfort 
323 perceived by either the source or a recipient must generate truth.  The 
324 content must be the key -- I would prefer to test an explanation against
325 observations made objectively or, at least, widely, repeatedly, and
326 with consistency.  Truth stands by itself, not begging acceptance for
327 having been espoused by an "authority", nor demanding that voices be 
328 raised in emotional praise of it, nor expecting to be replaced by
329 tomorrow's re-interpretations.
330   Truth can be DIScomforting -- illustrative scenarios abound.
331   Your phrase "comfortable with an explanation" further suggests to me
332 that the source has placed a value upon it from his [neut.] personal
333 outlook; that it may well be an interpretation of fact, knowledge, logic,
334 or observation made to perform a soothing role in his thinking; and that
335 it may be offered as an absolute because of the personal satisfaction it
336 may have brought him.
337   Truth, to me, demands both objectivity and broad knowledge -- two
338 possessions not often exhibited by modern humans.  I suppose that a
340 discussion of point-of-view may be appropriate, but that may lead to
341 muddying truth with certain other abstractions.  And not now.     Dave
342 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
343 WELL NOW!
344 D: I DON'T HAVE MUCH TIME TODAY BUT I MUST ADDRESS YOUR REQUEST FOR RESEARCH
345 INFORMATION. FIRST OF ALL I MUST SAY THAT IF I COMPLY WITH YOUR REQUEST 
346 I'M LIABLE TO BE DOING A LOT OF WORK. THIS IS SOMEWHAT LESS THAN IT MIGHT
347 BE WERE IT NOT FOR THE RECENT PUBLICATION BY A NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
348 SCIENTISTS ATTEMPTING TO BATTLE THE INROADS MADE BY CREATIONISTS, OF A
349 LARGE BOOK OF EXAMPLES OF EVOLUTIONARY EXPERIMENTS, COMPLETE WITH DATES,
350 PEOPLE, NATURE OF THE RESEARCH, ETC. I ASSUME I CAN GET AHOLD OF THIS 
351 BOOK BY CALLING A COLLEGE BIOLOGY DEPARTMENT AND SPEAKING TO THE RIGHT
352 PERSON.
353    HOWEVER, I HATE TO SEE THIS DEBATE SHIFT TO ONE WHERE I AM ON THE 
354 DEFENSIVE AND YOU TAKE UP THE EASY ARGUMENTATIVE POSITION OF CRITIC.
355    IN ORDER TO MAKE THIS DEBATE MORE EVENHANDED, I REQUEST AGAIN THAT
356 YOU COMPLY WITH MY REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR BACKGROUND
357 DATA AND VEIWS. (I ASKED FIRST). TO WHAT EXACT RELIGION AND EXACT CULT 
358 OR CHURCH WITHIN IT DO YOU BELONG. AND EXACTLY WHAT VERSION OF THE BIBLE
359 WILL WE BE USING FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DEBATE?
360    I WILL BE WILLING TO DO THE NECESSARY FOOTWORK FOR MY SIDE IF PRACTICAL
361 AS LONG AS YOU PRESENT YOUR ARGUMENT IN A SIMILAR MANNER.
362 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HROTHGAR, THE PRIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
363 P.S. ANON IS ACTUALLY THE RESULT OF AN EXPERIMENT ON THE COMPUTER AT THE
364 HEART OF BWMS THAT WENT AWRY. IN THE DARK OF MIDNIGHT, MIKEY TOUCHED THE
365 WRONG CHIP ON THE MAIN BOARD WHILE IT WAS UPLOADING SOME DRIVEL FROM A 
366 GUY IN PALO ALTO A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. THIS RELEASED THE SINISTER SIDE
367 OF HIS LIFE FORCE TO PROWL THE NETWORKS FOREVER. CAN THIS MONSTER BE
368 LEASHED ONCE MORE? WILL WE ALL LIVE TO SEE IT? MORE LATER.
369 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
370 1
371 
372 
373 
374 help
375 stop
376 
377 exit
378 
379 
380 
381 
382 
383 
384 AS I SIT HERE AT THE END OF A LONG DAY, WAITING FOR MY WIFE TO BE DONE WITH
385 THE ETERNAL DEBUGGING, TESTING, AND GNAWING OF FINGERNAILS, I THOUGHT
386 MIGHT GET SOME PLEASANT ENTERTAINMENT ON OLD BWMS.  I CAN'T IMAGINE JUST
387 HOW WRONG I REALLY WAS.  I HEAR PETTY BICKERING ALL OF THE DAY AMONG ALL
388 OF THE STUPID CORPORATE CLIMBERS AT MY PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT.  WHY WOULD
389 ANYONE WANT TO HEAR EVEN MORE OF IT HERE?
390    I HAD A ROOMATE IN COLLEGE WHO ENJOYED A "DEBATE".  HE WOULD SPEND
391 HOURS ARGUING THE SMALLEST POINT WITH ANYONE THAT WOULD RETURN THE 
392 CHALLENGE.  HE WAS PROBABLY ONE OF THE FEW PEOPLE I NEVER REALLY LIKED.
393    LET'S FACE IT, THIS IS ALL IDIOTIC SELF-AGGRANDIZEMENT!  (JUST LIKE
394 THIS MESSAGE).  WHO NEEDS IT?  HOW ABOUT SOMETHING POSITIVE FOR A
395 CHANGE OF PACE?  I CAN GET DEPRESSED ENOUGH BY WATCHING THE EVENING
396 NEWS...
397 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ANALOG ALAN @@@ 1802 PST NOV 3, 1983 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
398 PAM:
399    You can be forgiven for believing that 'Our system of government gives th
400 e power of interpretation of the law and constitution to the courts, and despite ethics and morality, it is their decisions 
401 that stand.'  Your statement is almost correct.  Let me read from an article in the October 10 issue of the Oregon Libertarian
402 where this same subject is addressed:
403 
404     "Since the English Magna Carta in 1215, one of the major purposes of a citizen jury is to NOT CONVICT under laws they feel
405 are unfair.  Before the Civil War, there was a famous court case, the Dred Scott decision.  The U.S. Supreme court said the
406 fugitive slave had to be returned to his owner like any other property.  This judgment was unpopular with northern juries and
407 they wouldn't convict others being prosecuted under similar laws."
408      "The government saw this could get out of hand, if citizens wouldn't convict under the ever-increasing laws.  The juries
409 could veto political schemes.  The authorities wanted control and only wanted juries to decide the breaking of the law, not
410 the law itself."
411      "This question was debated back and forth.  Then in 1895 (Sparf vs. US 156 U.S. 51, 1895), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 
412 that although juries have the right to ignore a judges instructions on the law, the jury shouldn't be aware of it."
413      "Jury nullification isn't taught in compulsory government schools.  The term isn'T in your encyclopedia or dictionary
414 and it's dropped from law schools and references.  This is right out of Orwell's '1984', the concept doesn't exist if the 
415 phrase is banned."
416     "All judicial mention since the 1895 Supreme Court ruling acknowledges its existance only grudgingly, and judges refuse to
417 tell juries about the power to allow defense attorneys to refer to it.  This conspiracy of jury ignorance on the part of the
418 judiciary is one of the strenghts of government - IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH."
419    Many of the current powers of government could be abolished if juries knew their rights and responsibilities.  We see the
420 jury veto in modern times, naturally without being taught.  In many areas juries won't convict for marijuana and other
421 'morals' laws (as well as some income tax cases and drunk driving cases.  Ed. ), so they aren't enforced."
422     "Critics fear this will lead to anarchy and chaos.  Yet in Georgia, Indiana, and Maryland, the right to tell juries about
423 nullification is a constitutional part of the state judicial process.  These states haven't suffered and can be leaders in
424 a citizen reawakening."
425 
426 END QUOTE.
427 
428      Now, PAM, can you honestly tell me you already knew about JURY NULLIFICATION?  And now that you DO know about it, do you
429 persist in the belief (albeit commonly held, as explained above.) that the courts have the final right of interpretation of
430 laws?  Any jury member can, with total impunity, ignore ANY law or judges instruction in reaching his verdict.
431     Further, what is your opinion of a government that actually prevents its citizens (or most of them anyway) from learning
432 such a fundamental right?
433 :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ANON :::::::::
434 p.s.  The last time, I did not bring up the subject of the legality of taxes.  BAD did.  If you wish, blame him.
435 
436 p.p.s to BAD:  My essay on the constitutionality of taxes will have to wait until tomorrow.  I hope you have been entertained,
437 in the mean time, by the article on Jury Nullification.  By the way, did YOU know about jury nullification????
438 ****************************************
439 
440        It's been a long time since I have commented, but that last bit
441 needs some remarks.  Anon, you appear to be the Anonymous of old from 
442 your friendly tones.  An interesting comment about jury nullification.
443 All for the "people" as long as they don't ask for any of your money as
444 usual, too.  Seems that Pam said that the power of interpretation of the
445 law is in the hands of the courts, and that INCLUDES the juries. Juries
446 are part of the courts too, and if they refuse to convict, then that is
447 an interpretation. And in the case of Dred Scott, no matter how many 
448 juries refused, it still took a war and 3 ammendments before the *LEGAL*
449 power existed to grants rights to slaves. The referal to jury nullification
450 was interesting, but off the point. Since juries are part of the courts,
451 it is still a court decision. To quote you, "almost right" Anon (alias
452 unsigned).
453 
454 *************Captain America************
455 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
456    yes, all, that was me up there. just moved, and couldn't find the
457 good modem. for some unknown reason, the system loved to drop me
458 out of enter mode after about 10 <>..no touch-tone here either, have
459 to dial on a Bell circa 1960. back to normal, now (relative)...
460 
461    as pam (?) said, what would prevent  a "GOD" from creating a
462 planet with an intact fossil record?
463 
464    Anon, you havn't replied to me regarding my request on your
465 background pertaining to FFT et al...
466 
467    who's going to ORYCON?
468                                                         aaron
469 <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
470 Has anyone ever considered that the "Infernal Revenue Service" might be 
471 staffed with MUTANT ATHEISTS?  That would explain a lot, wouldn't it?
472 **********************************BSR the huge***************************
473 Arron,
474  whats ORYCON  and where will it be held ???
475     ----and why should anyone care???
476 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
477 WELL NOW!
478 DEAR d : 
479    BACK AGAIN WITH MORE TIME.
480 
481 TO TAKE YOUR POINTS SINGLY:
482    A. SORRY, NEVER HEARD OF THEODOSIUS. WHERE DID YOU GET THAT QUOTE, OUT
483 OF THE WATCHTOWER MAGAZINE? TYPICAL CREATIONIST DISTORTION. WHOEVER HE IS,
484 THE STATEMENT THAT "MUTANTS" (A WORD NOT TYPICALLY USED IN BIOLOGICAL RE-
485 SEARCH) THAT ARE POSITIVE ARE UNKNOWN IS NOT PART OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY,
486 BUT IS PART OF CREATIONIST DOGMA. IF BY 'MAJOR IMPROVEMENT' IS MEANT THAT
487 ANIMALS, FOR INSTANCE, DO NOT SUDDENLY GO FROM FOUR LEGS TO TWO, THAT MAY
488 BE QUITE RIGHT.
489    B. YOU ASK FOR A BELIEVERS DEFINITION OF EVOLUTION. ALL I COULD DO
490 IS GIVE YOU A BELIEVERS DEFINITION OF CREATIONISM OR RELIGION. THESE ARE
491 NOT THEORIES, IN THE SCIENTIFIC SENSE. EVOLUTION IS A THEORY, HOWEVER, AND
492 NO-ONE WITH ANY KIND OF SCIENTIFIC OUTLOOK SHOULD 'BELIEVE' IN A SCIENTIFIC
493 THEORY. THEORIES IN SCIENCE ARE WORKING MODELS, WHICH MAY BE IMPROVED OR
494 CAST OUT. THEORIES ARE JUST THE BEST ONE CAN DO WITH THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE.
495 THIS IS IN CONTRAST TO CREATIONISM AND OTHER TYPES OF RELIGIOUS DOGMA, WHICH
496 DO NOT RELY AT ALL ON EVIDENCE FOR THEIR FOUNDATION, AND THUS ARE SUPPORTED
497 BY FAITH ALONE.
498    C. YOU APPEAR NEVER TO HAVE CRACKED THE PAGES OF A POPULAR SCIENCE 
499 MAGAZINE OR TO HAVE TAKEN A BIOLOGY COURSE. THIS IS NOT UNUSUAL, OF COURSE.
500 EVEN MOST PEOPLE WITH TECHNICAL BACKGROUNDS HAVE NEVER TAKEN ANY KIND OF 
501 REAL STUDY IN EVOLUTIONARY THEORY, EVEN IF THEY DID TAKE A BIOLOGY COURSE
502 AT ONE TIME. THE REASON FOR THIS IS QUITE OBVIOUS - RELIGIOUS PEOPLE
503 SITTING ON SCHOOL BOARDS AND TEXTBOOK REVEIW COMMITTEES HAVE REFUSED FOR
504 DECADES TO ALLOW PROPER PRESENTATION OF EVOLUTION IN REGULAR COURSE MATER-
505 IAL. THIS IS WHY EVEN SCEPTICS OF THE RELIGIOUS VEIW HAVE SUCH A HARD TIME
506 DEFENDING SCIENTIFIC EVOLUTIONARY THEORY - THEY SIMPLY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT
507 THEMSELVES, HAVING HAD NO CLASSES OR SELF-STUDY IN THE SUBJECT OF ANY
508 SIGNIFICANT EXTENT. THERE IS NOW A NATIONAL MOVEMENT AMONG UNIVERSITY
509 TEACHERS (AT LAST) IN RESPONSE TO CREATIONISM, TO CORRECT THIS DEFICIENCY
510 IN EDUCATION OF FUTURE GENERATIONS. 
511    WITH YOU, THIS LACK OF BACKGROUND SHOWS UP IN YOUR REPEATED REFERENCES
512 TO MUTANTS. MUTATION IS NOT THE ONLY, NOR PROBABLY EVEN THE MAJOR CAUSE
513 OF EVOLUTION. GENES AND DNA ARE NOT FIXED IN THEIR CHROMOSOMES. THEY ARE
514 ALWAYS INVOLVED IN A PROCESS OF DYNAMIC RE-COMBINATION, THAT *AT THIS 
515 POINT* IN HISTORY IS ABLE TO GENERATE GENETIC CHANGES INTERNALLY. THIS
516 IS BEHIND THE PROCESS OF IMMUNITY TO VIRUS PARTICLES. WE CANNOT CARRY
517 GENES FOR IMMUNITY TO EVERYTHING. THE GENES RECOMBINE THEMSELVES TO
518 FIND THE PROPER COMBINATIONS TO PRODUCE AN ANTIBODY THAT IS JUST RIGHT
519 TO FIGHT OFF AN INFECTION. EVERY TIME A VIRUS PARTICLE INVADES ONE OF
520 YOUR CELLS, IT MAKES IT'S GENES PART OF THAT CELL. AND THE VIRUS CAN
521 BRING PIECES OF DNA WITH IT THAT WERE AQUIRED ELSEWHERE, EVEN PERHAPS FROM
522 OTHER ANIMALS. WHEN A NEW VIRUS PARTICLE LATER LEAVES YOUR BODY (E.G. IN
523 A SNEEZE) IT MAY TAKE SOME OF YOUR GENES WITH IT, PERHAPS TO BE DEPOSITED
524 SOMEWHERE (OR SOMEWHO) ELSE AGAIN. 
525    EVERY TIME YOU HAVE A COLD, YOU 'MUTATE' IN A USEFUL WAY!
526    C. WE HAVE TEN BILLION BRAIN CELLS OR THEREABOUTS. IF WE HAVE BEEN USING
527 ONLY 1-BILLIONTH OF THESE WE HAVE BEEN USING 10 CELLS. I THEREFORE DISPUTE
528 THE ESTIMATE YOU MADE. REDUCTIO AD ADSURBAM. 
529    ON A MORE SEROIUS NOTE THOUGH, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT THIS BIT
530 OF APOCRYPHIA (I THINK) ABOUT OUR ALLEGED UNUSED CAPACITY HAS BEEN FLOATING
531 AROUND IN THE POPULAR PRESS FOR GENERATIONS NOW WITHOUT THE SLIGHTEST 
532 BACKUP FROM RESEARCH. VARIOUS ESTIMATES OF IT ARE GIVEN, ALTHOUGH YOURS
533 MUST SET A RECORD. HAS ANYONE ON THIS BBS AN IDEA OF THE ORIGIN OF THIS
534 RIDICULOUS NOTION?
535    MY OWN VEIW IS THAT WE COULD USE ANOTHER TEN BILLION CELLS OR SO. AT 
536 LEAST.
537    D. ON YOUR REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTATION, I WILL RESTRICT MYSELF TO SUCH 
538 STATEMENTS ABOUT CURRENT THEORY AS CAN BE CONFIRMED IN THE PAGES OF
539 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN AND SCIENCE83 (-84,ETC). SCIENCE83 IS PUBLISHED BY
540 THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, AND IS GENERALLY
541 ACCURATE, AS IS SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN. THE SAME CANNOT BE SAID FOR POPULAR
542 SCIENCE, OMNI, DISCOVER, ETC, WHICH SEEM TO BE WRITTEN AND PUBLISHED BY
543 REAL ESTATE SALESMEN. (ACTUALLY, OMNI IS PUBLISHED BY PENTHOUSE, WHICH I
544 GUESS ACCOUNTS SOMEWHAT FOR THE LURID APPROACH THEY HAVE)
545    ANY OTHER STATEMENTS I MAKE THAT COULD NOT BE EXPECTED TO BE CONFIRMED
546 BY REFERRING TO THESE MAGAZINES I WILL GIVE SOURCE FOR, WHEN APPROPRIATE.
547 IF, THAT IS TO SAY, YOU WILL DOCUMENT YOUR OWN POSITION VIS-A-VIS THE
548 CHURCH YOU BELONG TO, IF ANY, AND WHAT VERSION OF THE BIBLE YOU WILL USE.
549 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!HROTHGAR, THE TERRIBLY INSIGHTFUL!!!!!
550 ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
551 An open letter to the visitors of the Inn...
552    While reading through these messages, and lengthy messages they are,
553 one thing came to mind. How is it that you have the time to leave such
554 lengthy unimportant reports on your ego for the general public? Do you
555 work? And if you do, do you work hard? Do you have any social life? How
556 is it that you find time to leave such, shall we say, pieces, on the
557 public BBS's for all to read and disagree with. Doesn't the Inn ever
558 close? Doesn't the Inn keeper ever get tired of the same old
559 customers who talk alot but don't say much? Don't the well intentioned
560 customers who stop by for a simple rest mind all the bickering in the
561 background? Now that the Inn has become somewhat popular do to the
562 increased traffic on the nearby road, are any of you worried that you
563 will be forcibly ejected from the warm surroundings due to your
564 over-verbifications and inane debates? I ask you, how much longer do you
565 think you will be allowed free reign of the Inn? Bw wary
566 
567 
568 =========================================================================
569 HERE HERE HERE. FINALLY A MESSAGE THAT DID NOT CONTAIN THE WORD 'GOD',
570 'CREATIONISM', 'MUTANT', 'EVOLUTUON', 'DEBATE', OR 'I DISAGREE'
571 IF I WANT TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE STATE OF THE UNION, AND OUR SOCIETY,
572 I'LL TUNE IN 'THE A-TEAM' RATA TATA TAT!
573 =========================================================================
574 
575 We need useful subjects to talk about to expand our outlooks.  So far 
576 the subjects discussed on BACKWATER are of very little interest and 
577 even less importance.  Get off the theology. BORING!
578 ****************************BSR the bored***************************
600 I VERY MUCH AGREE!!!!!!!!!THIS PLACE IS REALLY GETTING DEPRESSING!!!!!!!!!!!
601 
602 ****************************************************************************
603 Aaron:
604 Sorry about that.  Didn't know/forgot that you asked me about FFT.  Honestly, I only know enough about that to get
605 my face slapped.  As I said before, however, I admire your ambition.  I'd love to hear of your efforts.
606 
607 Captain:
608 Interesting point, though I still believe that even if a jury could be considered a subset of a court, it is slightly
609 deceptive (though unintentional) to say that 'courts make the decisions.' This is somewhat like saying, 'Congress must approve
610 US treaties' (In fact, the Senate is charged with treaty ratification.)  To be sure, this is minor, but it is important that 
611 people be aware of their rights, no matter how much the government wants them to be ignorant.
612 
613 All:
614 Pardon my comment on Biology, but a Biologist I know once quoted a professor on the question of why most of the mutations
615 that occur are defective/bad (called LETHAL by bio's).  He said that the likelihood of a mutation being good is somewhat akin 
616 to the probability of driving a nail through a pocketwatch and thereby actually IMPROVE IT'S TIMEKEEPING ABILITY.  Genes are
617 exceedingly complex, and nearly any accidental modification is not beneficial.  But since 'good' modifications result in 
618 better life forms, and since 'better life forms' succeed (i.e. live, breed, etc) then even if only one billionth of the
619 mutations were 'good,' then eventually life would improve.  My guess is that the proportion of 'good' mutations may be far 
620 smaller than this, even.  But over thousands of generations, such mutations can have a visible effect.
621 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Anon :::::::::
622 You are all in luck, there is not enough space here for me to comment on
623 all that has been said. I can, however speak of evolution, having personally
624 seen it. In high school biology I demonstrated it. Using some E. coli, I
625 tested it with antibiiotics, and killed the test colony. applying small dos-
626 ages did not kill the next one, but caused it to evolve toward resistance.
627 It soon came to be able to survive much larger doses than killed its 
628 ancestors. It evolved. It didn't become a bee, it just became able to live
629 better in a particular environment. Evolution invloves many small steps/BAD\