Re: The s x construction
- From: Bart Goddard <goddardbe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 29 Mar 2007 12:35:20 GMT
tttpppggg@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
I think you are rabbid and without concession for the simplest bare
facts.
Who knows what "rabbid" means, (but I guess it has something to
do with a video game) but if you think that's
an argument, you are once again, wrong. It's funny how
crackpots are always frustrated that nobody "conceeds"
any of their facts.
But the plain fact is: You don't have any facts. You
keep saying:
Will you
concede that minus and negative carry the same meaning?
And of course I won't, because "minus" and "negative" don't
have the same meaning. Example: minus (minus 2) is not
a negative number. You can't prove your bat-blind,
ill-conceived, half-baked "theories" by merely repeating
self-contradictory nonsense.
Bart
--
The man without a .sig
.
- References:
- The common usage of "nonnegative real number" is ludicrous.
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The common usage of "nonnegative real number" is ludicrous.
- From: Bob Kolker
- Re: The common usage of "nonnegative real number" is ludicrous.
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The common usage of "nonnegative real number" is ludicrous.
- From: David C . Ullrich
- in fact zero _is_ neither positive nor negative. THIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: in fact zero _is_ neither positive nor negative. THIS STATEMENT IS NOT TRUE
- From: Bart Goddard
- The s x construction
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Virgil
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Bart Goddard
- Re: The s x construction
- From: Timothy Golden BandTechnology.com
- The common usage of "nonnegative real number" is ludicrous.
- Prev by Date: Re: Cantor For Dummies ...
- Next by Date: Re: randomness
- Previous by thread: Re: The s x construction
- Next by thread: Re: The s x construction
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|