Re: infinity

Jesse F. Hughes said:
> Tony Orlow (aeo6) <aeo6@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Jesse F. Hughes said:
> >> "Theo Jacobs" <t.jacobs@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >>
> >> > [...] I'm proud to be the OP of what must be one of the longest
> >> > threads recently.
> >>
> >> Only because the anti-Cantorian Defense League is on vacation.
> >>
> >>
> > I'm back! Unfortunately, vacation wasn't very restful, so I have to
> > finish my Bigulosity pages between other things. Did you miss me?
> >
> > Theo, you should be proud. It was a good question, which seems to have
> > demonstrated some of the confusion within this "theory". Nice job!
>
> You are delusional.
Ad hominem attacks are the hallmark of a weak argument.
>
> Theo didn't claim to create any confusion. On the contrary, he seems
> to have understood and been satisfied by the standard answer to this
> puzzle.
Oh Theo, do you feel you have gotten any sort of "correct" answer?
>
> But I don't suppose we should expect you to distinguish confusion from
> understanding.
Yes, more personal attacks. Very well spewed, Jesse.
>
>

--
Smiles,

Tony
.