Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- From: David C. Ullrich <ullrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 05:49:57 -0500
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:01:23 -0700, Peter_Smith <ps218@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On 4 Oct, 12:17, David C. Ullrich <ullr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:42:30 -0700, Peter_Smith <ps...@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
[...]
Not only are you utterly incompetent at logic but apparently utterly
incompetent at even following the simplest exchange written in plain
English.
Well, duh. That's been pretty clear since his first reply to a
comment.
Oh indeed! But let's keep bashing away at corruptions of thought where
we find them :)
Sure. My comment was really more for anyone new to the party, who
might have thought that you'd just discovered the phenomenon you
mentioned.
************************
David C. Ullrich
.
- References:
- A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidate Godel
- From: elsiemelsi
- Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- From: elsiemelsi
- Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- From: Peter_Smith
- Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- From: David C . Ullrich
- Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- From: Peter_Smith
- A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidate Godel
- Prev by Date: Re: Countable models of ZFC
- Next by Date: why we practice?
- Previous by thread: Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- Next by thread: Re: A simple paradox in Godels incompleteness theorem that invalidat
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|