Article 24791 of talk.origins:
From: brinkman@edseq4.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Who is he *really*? (was: two questions for Jim Loucks (+digression))
Message-ID: <1992APR15.124808.1@EDSEQ4.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:48:08 GMT
Sender: usenet@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV
Lines: 109
Nntp-Posting-Host: edseq4.llnl.gov
In article <84038@BU.EDU> colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby) asks Jim
Loucks...
Just to digress (I realize that I, sir, am no Jim Loucks)...
> One more question. I'm a grad student in evolutionary biology.
>Do you think that I am A.) part of some big commie/satan conspiracy
>B.) being conned by evolutionary biologists (the ones in the hypothesized
>commie/satan conspiracy) and am just too damn stupid to figure it out
>C.) attempting to do science to the best of my ability and just
>reaching the wrong conclusion (along with the rest of my field) or
>D.) [insert your own interpretation] (Or, how about E.) mastermind of
>the whole commie/satan conspiracy or F.) satan himself 8-)
A homework question?!? I hate homework questions, but okay...
If option A were correct, you would probably live in fear that your evil
masters (possibly the ILLUMINATI--gasp) would find out you were spilling
the beans. This fear would probably outweigh your curiousity, and you would
never ever even dream of asking this question. Therefore, option A is
definitely ruled out.
For option B to be correct, the evil masters would surely realize that
people would catch on sooner or later. To ensure that the conspiracy is not
uncovered, they (the evil masters) would have to make sure this possibility
NEVER occurred to their pawns (no offense intended, Chris). Since this idea
HAS occurred to you, it is clear that option B is incorrect.
Option C would be entirely possible (after all the evil masters must have
some ability at thought control). Unfortunately, this is the most prosaic of
all the options. Since one of the rules of conspiracy uncovering is that the
most prosaic explanation is never correct, we areforced to eliminate this as a
viable choice also.
This leaves us with options D, E, and F, as possible choices. I would
argue that it is highly unlikely that Satan would trouble himself to post
to talk.origins. Also weighing against option F is your posting of erudite
corrections to your own posts, since Satan is much too proud to ever admit
having made a mistake. For these reasons I would rate option F as having a
very low probability to be correct. This leaves only options D and E as
viable choices.
Since option D allows a multitude of possibilities, I will assume for the
moment it is not correct. I will attempt to prove that option E is correct,
and only failing that will I return to the rather unpalatable option D.
Now, if you really are the head of the whole conspiracy, you are spilling
the beans by publically entertaining the possibility that the conspiracy
exists. This toying with us makes it is likely that you would leave other
clues to who you REALLY are. Let us investigate this further...
All we really know about you is that you claim to post from Boston and you
claim that your name is Chris Colby. Now, others may argue that this is not
enough information to crack the case, but not so.
Boston is the home of the Celtics, which was an ancient tribe whose main
religion worshipped trees. Now, why did they worship trees? Well, Boston is
also the home of the Bruins, another name for a bear. Thus, the Celtics
worshipped trees because a special bear lived there. This bear was a demonic
familiar as can be plainly seen from the fact that Boston is also the home of
the Red Sox, and everyone wears red in Hell! Thus, you must be some
inhabitant of Hades--more specifically a shape shifting demon.
Now, the initials C.C. immediately bring to mind the classic song, "C.C.
Rider". C. C. Rider was a biker. One of the main biker groups is the Hell's
Angels. This means that you rank quite up there in the heirarchy, probably
an Demonic Overlord or such. Thus, the obvious interpretation is that you are
a shape-shifting Demonic Overlord, who frequently took a bear shape when
appearing to ancient tribes.
"Oh no," I hear you wailing (and gnashing your teeth), "but at least he
doesn't know my secret mission!" Not true, old horned and goateed one. C.C.
can be written as c^2, an obvious reference to one of the most famous equations
in all of science, E = mc^2. This means your mission must have something to do
with science. Now, C.C. is also an abbreviation for cubic-centimeter, a metric
unit of measurement. In the metric system a meter was supposed to correspond
to one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole. We
know this now to be incorrect, which means that the metric system is based on
lies! Thus, it is readily apparent that your mission is to disrupt science by
causing scientific ideas to be based on lies. Is there any better description
of the so-called "theory" of evolution? Therefore, you ARE the leader of the
commie/satan conspiracy more commonly known as the theory of evolution!
Therefore, by elimination and sheer deductive brilliance, it is obvious that
the correct answer is option E.
I must admit, I await my grade with some trepidation. After all, if option
E, which I have clearly demonstrated is the only logical solution, is actually
correct, I am probably opening a real can of worms. On the other hand, truth
must prevail! We must throw aside the powers of the Dread Demon Lord Chris
Colby (or as he was known to the ancient Celtics--Ybloc Sirhc), and realize
the folly of our ways.
>Chris Colby
--
Matt Brinkman brinkman@edseq1.llnl.gov
Digression: Chris, have you ever tried Old Washer Woman? Quite a nice beer
found around Pittsburgh (if my memory serves).
Disclaimer: No, I really belive what I wrote above. This hypothesis explains
so many things so economically that it just HAS to be true.
Andy Rooney
Imitation: Have you ever noticed how some people put in smileys, even when
the joke should be obvious to anyone with an I.Q. above a carrot?
Don't you hate that?
Article 24849 of talk.origins:
Path: cse.uta.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!olivea!bu.edu!bu-bio!colby
From: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby)
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: biologic diversity since the Cambrian
Keywords: scientific creationism
Message-ID: <84176@BU.EDU>
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:38:57 GMT
References: <83702@BU.EDU> <83986@BU.EDU>
Sender: news@bu.edu
Reply-To: colby@bu-bio.UUCP (Chris Colby)
Organization: animal -- coelomate -- deuterostome
Lines: 21
In article jsanders@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Justin M. Sanders) writes:
>In article <83986@BU.EDU> colby@bu-bio.UUCP (Chris Colby) writes:
>For E. Coli's amazing trick which a human can't do, I propose reproduction
>by fission. :-)
I would mention being able to live in a digestive tract, but
that is partially falsified just by reading t.o. There are clearly
posters on this board who are clearly living with their head inserted
in their rectum 8-) Gee, I hope I haven't invited any lawsuits with
that statement 8-( (I'll refrain from making any comments on how the
"felt effect" of sphincter contraction may be influencing anyones
ability to think or post clearly.)
>Justin M. Sanders "I can trace my ancestry back to a primordial,
>Dept. of Physics protoplasmal, atomic globule."
>Kansas State Univ. --Poo-Bah, in _The_Mikado_, Act I
Chris Colby email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu
"And will our voices be heard/Or will they break like the wind"
-Spinal Tap
Article 24791 of talk.origins:
From: brinkman@edseq4.llnl.gov
Subject: Who is he *really*? (was: two questions for Jim Loucks (+digression))
Message-ID: <1992APR15.124808.1@EDSEQ4.LLNL.GOV>
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:48:08 GMT
Lines: 109
In article <84038@BU.EDU> colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby) asks Jim
Loucks...
Just to digress (I realize that I, sir, am no Jim Loucks)...
> One more question. I'm a grad student in evolutionary biology.
>Do you think that I am A.) part of some big commie/satan conspiracy
>B.) being conned by evolutionary biologists (the ones in the hypothesized
>commie/satan conspiracy) and am just too damn stupid to figure it out
>C.) attempting to do science to the best of my ability and just
>reaching the wrong conclusion (along with the rest of my field) or
>D.) [insert your own interpretation] (Or, how about E.) mastermind of
>the whole commie/satan conspiracy or F.) satan himself 8-)
A homework question?!? I hate homework questions, but okay...
If option A were correct, you would probably live in fear that your evil
masters (possibly the ILLUMINATI--gasp) would find out you were spilling
the beans. This fear would probably outweigh your curiousity, and you would
never ever even dream of asking this question. Therefore, option A is
definitely ruled out.
For option B to be correct, the evil masters would surely realize that
people would catch on sooner or later. To ensure that the conspiracy is not
uncovered, they (the evil masters) would have to make sure this possibility
NEVER occurred to their pawns (no offense intended, Chris). Since this idea
HAS occurred to you, it is clear that option B is incorrect.
Option C would be entirely possible (after all the evil masters must have
some ability at thought control). Unfortunately, this is the most prosaic of
all the options. Since one of the rules of conspiracy uncovering is that the
most prosaic explanation is never correct, we areforced to eliminate this as a
viable choice also.
This leaves us with options D, E, and F, as possible choices. I would
argue that it is highly unlikely that Satan would trouble himself to post
to talk.origins. Also weighing against option F is your posting of erudite
corrections to your own posts, since Satan is much too proud to ever admit
having made a mistake. For these reasons I would rate option F as having a
very low probability to be correct. This leaves only options D and E as
viable choices.
Since option D allows a multitude of possibilities, I will assume for the
moment it is not correct. I will attempt to prove that option E is correct,
and only failing that will I return to the rather unpalatable option D.
Now, if you really are the head of the whole conspiracy, you are spilling
the beans by publically entertaining the possibility that the conspiracy
exists. This toying with us makes it is likely that you would leave other
clues to who you REALLY are. Let us investigate this further...
All we really know about you is that you claim to post from Boston and you
claim that your name is Chris Colby. Now, others may argue that this is not
enough information to crack the case, but not so.
Boston is the home of the Celtics, which was an ancient tribe whose main
religion worshipped trees. Now, why did they worship trees? Well, Boston is
also the home of the Bruins, another name for a bear. Thus, the Celtics
worshipped trees because a special bear lived there. This bear was a demonic
familiar as can be plainly seen from the fact that Boston is also the home of
the Red Sox, and everyone wears red in Hell! Thus, you must be some
inhabitant of Hades--more specifically a shape shifting demon.
Now, the initials C.C. immediately bring to mind the classic song, "C.C.
Rider". C. C. Rider was a biker. One of the main biker groups is the Hell's
Angels. This means that you rank quite up there in the heirarchy, probably
an Demonic Overlord or such. Thus, the obvious interpretation is that you are
a shape-shifting Demonic Overlord, who frequently took a bear shape when
appearing to ancient tribes.
"Oh no," I hear you wailing (and gnashing your teeth), "but at least he
doesn't know my secret mission!" Not true, old horned and goateed one. C.C.
can be written as c^2, an obvious reference to one of the most famous equations
in all of science, E = mc^2. This means your mission must have something to do
with science. Now, C.C. is also an abbreviation for cubic-centimeter, a metric
unit of measurement. In the metric system a meter was supposed to correspond
to one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole. We
know this now to be incorrect, which means that the metric system is based on
lies! Thus, it is readily apparent that your mission is to disrupt science by
causing scientific ideas to be based on lies. Is there any better description
of the so-called "theory" of evolution? Therefore, you ARE the leader of the
commie/satan conspiracy more commonly known as the theory of evolution!
Therefore, by elimination and sheer deductive brilliance, it is obvious that
the correct answer is option E.
I must admit, I await my grade with some trepidation. After all, if option
E, which I have clearly demonstrated is the only logical solution, is actually
correct, I am probably opening a real can of worms. On the other hand, truth
must prevail! We must throw aside the powers of the Dread Demon Lord Chris
Colby (or as he was known to the ancient Celtics--Ybloc Sirhc), and realize
the folly of our ways.
>Chris Colby
--
Matt Brinkman brinkman@edseq1.llnl.gov
Digression: Chris, have you ever tried Old Washer Woman? Quite a nice beer
found around Pittsburgh (if my memory serves).
Disclaimer: No, I really belive what I wrote above. This hypothesis explains
so many things so economically that it just HAS to be true.
Andy Rooney
Imitation: Have you ever noticed how some people put in smileys, even when
the joke should be obvious to anyone with an I.Q. above a carrot?
Don't you hate that?
Article 24849 of talk.origins:
From: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby)
Subject: Re: biologic diversity since the Cambrian
Keywords: scientific creationism
Message-ID: <84176@BU.EDU>
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:38:57 GMT
References: <83702@BU.EDU> <83986@BU.EDU>
Reply-To: colby@bu-bio.UUCP (Chris Colby)
Organization: animal -- coelomate -- deuterostome
Lines: 21
In article jsanders@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Justin M. Sanders) writes:
>In article <83986@BU.EDU> colby@bu-bio.UUCP (Chris Colby) writes:
>For E. Coli's amazing trick which a human can't do, I propose reproduction
>by fission. :-)
I would mention being able to live in a digestive tract, but
that is partially falsified just by reading t.o. There are clearly
posters on this board who are clearly living with their head inserted
in their rectum 8-) Gee, I hope I haven't invited any lawsuits with
that statement 8-( (I'll refrain from making any comments on how the
"felt effect" of sphincter contraction may be influencing anyones
ability to think or post clearly.)
>Justin M. Sanders "I can trace my ancestry back to a primordial,
>Dept. of Physics protoplasmal, atomic globule."
>Kansas State Univ. --Poo-Bah, in _The_Mikado_, Act I
Chris Colby email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu
"And will our voices be heard/Or will they break like the wind"
-Spinal Tap
Article 27564 of talk.origins:
From: livesey@solntze.esd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Subject: Re: Healing a tonsil isn't enough....
Message-ID:
Date: 16 Jun 92 23:42:15 GMT
References: <1992JUN10.222417.2098@DESIRE.WRIGHT.EDU> <1992JUN16.065442.21259@WELL.SF.CA.US>
Organization: sgi
Lines: 25
In article <1992JUN16.065442.21259@WELL.SF.CA.US>, keithd@well.sf.ca.us (Keith Doyle) writes:
|>
|> Which raises an interesting point. Would Lionel be willing to admit that
|> someone who experienced a miraculous healing event who isn't a Christian
|> has validated whatever belief he has about the source of the miracle? If
|> not, why not? And if not, why should anyone else consider that the tonsil
|> healing validates Lionel's belief system?
A few years ago, there were a bunch of wonderful postings from a
devotee of the god Ubizmo.
Ubizmo isn't particularly interested in being believed in: in fact
he's dead against it, since the whole belief and worship thing is
just a form of play therapy for young and immature Gods.
Ubizmo does miracle cures, but only on people who have never heard
of him, or if they have, have decided to ignore him and get on with
living their lives, which is what Ubiznmo wants.
These miracle cures are, of course, the so-called "remissions"
that the evil anti-Ubizmo forces have recently been trying to pass
off as random events. Or am I being the anti-Ubizmo by telling
you this?
jon.
Article 30266 of talk.origins:
Xref: cse.uta.edu sci.skeptic:29372 talk.origins:30266
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic,talk.origins
Path: cse.uta.edu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!news.iastate.edu!illuminati.gov!conspirator
From: conspirator@illuminati.gov
Subject: Re: Young earth creationist logic NOT!
Message-ID: <1992AUG20.165602@ILLUMINATI.GOV>
Sender: no-news@illuminati.gov
Reply-To: conspirator@illuminati.gov
Organization: The Illuminati
References: <84TL03XO571300@AMDAHL.UTS.AMDAHL.COM> <1992AUG11.092754@IASTATE.EDU>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 21:56:02 GMT
Lines: 16
In article , reus@klein.euromath.dk (Jens
Peter Reus Christensen) writes:
> Parts of This newsgroup and almost all of Talk.origin exist in order
> to educate the public in the IC (Intellectually Correct) way of
> thinking on issues of origin of biological and geological origin.
> It serves this purpose reasonable well and has no other purpose.
Well, I might as well face it: you caught me.
Of course, how long could I have possibly held out against the great Jens
Peter Reus Christensen? I knew I was in for it as soon as you showed up.
Well, I better go tell the guys in the fossil faking department to stop work.
Head of the Department of Misinformation
Illuminati Headquarters
Article 31056 of talk.origins:
Article 30378 of sci.skeptic:
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Path: cse.uta.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!csus.edu!netcom.com!anson
From: anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy)
Subject: Re: Proof: God wrote the Bible
Message-ID: <3QKN8AQ.ANSON@NETCOM.COM>
Date: Wed, 02 Sep 92 14:32:39 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
References: <1992SEP1.224623.29215@UCTHPX.UCT.AC.ZA>
Lines: 17
jkiley@andy.bgsu.edu (James H. Kiley) writes:
>Ohhhh, posts like this drive me nuts.
>The bible wasn't written in English originally, you fool. Vowel/consonant
>ratios will *not* be the same in, say, Hebrew.
Yeah, but I thought it was funny enough to save. When my newsreader asked
for a folder name, I entered "God." Then nn asked, "Create 'God'?" So I
pressed "Y" and *poof* God *now* exists. He's in my directory at netcom.
--
Anson Kennedy anson@netcom.com
Secretary of the Georgia Skeptics (but don't even THINK I speak for them!)
"If you don't watch the violence, \ "If I had been the Virgin Mary,
you'll never get desensitized to it." \ I would have said 'No.'"
-Bart Simpson \ -Margaret "Stevie" Smith (1902-1971)
Article 29577 of sci.skeptic:
From: haynes@cats.ucsc.edu (Jim Haynes)
Subject: Re: Coded Scientific Info in the Bible???
Date: 16 Sep 1992 05:45:05 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
Lines: 24
Message-ID: <196HL1INNDO4@DARKSTAR.UCSC.EDU>
References: <1992SEP14.201335.16562@LINUS.MITRE.ORG> <-+ZNZP-.PAYNER@NETCOM.COM>
There's also the Computer Science in the Bible - Matthew must have
been a computer scientist rather than a mere ordinary IRS agent.
On pushdown automata and stack architectures: Matt. 20:16
"So the last shall be first, and the first last:..."
On redundant coding for the binary symmetric channel: Matt. 5:37
"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever
is more than these cometh of evil."
On memory allocation strategy to prevent thrashing in multiuser systems:
Matt. 25:29
"For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have
abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that
which he hath."
--
haynes@cats.ucsc.edu
haynes@cats.bitnet
"Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an Art."
Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Article 29600 of sci.skeptic:
From: wsadjw@rw6.urc.tue.nl (Jan Willem Nienhuys)
Subject: Creating sci.creationism
Message-ID: <5445@TUEGATE.TUE.NL>
Date: 16 Sep 92 06:43:54 GMT
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, The Netherlands
Lines: 28
I think there should be a group called sci.creationism.
It must have a charter first. I propose that people try
to write a reasonable charter for this newsgroup. By
"reasonable" I mean that it must represent more or less
accurately the tenets of creationism.
Here are some first dabblings.
sci.creationism holds this one truth to be self-evident that
the Bible, and more in particular Genesis as understood by
some North American Christians, is a true and accurate account
of the origin of this world. Science, as handmaiden of religion,
is admitted only in sofar it can support this view. Scientifically
sounding statements that doubt this view must be ignored because
they are vile propaganda tricks of Satan. Each and every doubt
raised about Creationism is a direct attack on the Ultimate Author
of the book Genesis, and must be considered as un-American.
As Roman Catholics and Jews are known to doubt the Crerationist
interpretation of Genesis, they also are to be seen as products of
Satan (and un-American to boot).
Posters to sci.creationism are required to crosspost to at least five
other groups, but they are forbidden to take notice of any arguments
raised against Creationism.
Who else gives this a try?
JWN
"scientifical
Article 29604 of sci.skeptic:
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Subject: Re: Creating sci.creationism
Message-ID:
Date: 16 Sep 92 16:36:00 GMT
References: <5445@TUEGATE.TUE.NL>
Organization: University at Buffalo
Lines: 14
In article <5445@TUEGATE.TUE.NL>, wsadjw@urc.tue.nl writes...
>Posters to sci.creationism are required to crosspost to at least five
>other groups, but they are forbidden to take notice of any arguments
>raised against Creationism.
>Who else gives this a try?
Maybe we should just wait for it to evolve... ;-)
******************************************************************************
Mike Cluff * "If something about the human
v22964qs@ubvms or mike%luick@ubvms * body disgusts you, complain to
UB Language Perception Laboratory * the manufacturer." - Lenny Bruce
******************************************************************************