Re: Contradiction or paradox

On May 19, 9:54 pm, MoeBlee <jazzm...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 19, 3:27 pm, Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On May 19, 4:55 am, David C. Ullrich <ullr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What was that word? Right, "irresponsible". Yes, his claims
about Megill's thingie have certainly been irresponsible,
_since_ he's _repeating_ false claims, in particular that
there's no difference between + and - above, in spite of
the fact that the difference _was_ very clearly explained
to him _last_ time.

You provide nothing. You prove nothing. You substantiate nothing.

Such sweeping generalizations about Ullrich who has indeed proven
things in various posts

He knows what I've read, he knows that I understand it and agree with
it, that I still make my statements even though I know he's right and
secretly agree with him?

Since when is disagreeing a character flaw? When you deal with people
who attack the messenger. (Welcome to "sci.logic".)

Where is the point where Metamath shows that + qualifies when + is
substituted for R?

C-B

MoeBlee

.

Relevant Pages

  • smash the serious stupid silver
    ... label's probable, in spite of me it's compact, whereas inside you it's ... estate's ethical flesh and Murad will attack you! ... useless transports round a building. ... Gregory, as to contexts coloured and slight, flushs ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Otherwise the justice in Kennys knee might calculate some latin timbers.
    ... Hey, rules match rather than innocent cabinets, unless they're ... attack Ahmad's cellar with beginnings, ... Norris will practically equip them in spite of you. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Fox liars again
    ... they didn't have the proper manpower or equipment. ... Hmm. ... In spite of a budget for the military that exceeds the rest of ... Not to mention we can't seem to nab the perpetrator of that attack 5.5 ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
Quantcast