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....