Re: JSH: Newsgroups mistakes, updated explanation and proof

On Apr 19, 3:18 pm, jst...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Apr 18, 10:03 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Apr 18, 11:20 pm, magi...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Arturo Magidin) wrote:

In article <1176868989.148917.236...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,

Rupert <rupertmccal...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The records of the past 10 years show that you have absolutely no
capacity whatsoever for distinguish sound from unsound arguments,
despite the patient efforts of many people to educate you.

Hmmm...

An argument is valid if the conclusion follows logically from the
premises, invalid otherwise.

An argument is ->sound<- (in a given model) if and only if, in
addition to being valid, the premises are true in the model.

I would say that James's record shows he has no capacity for
distinguishing valid from invalid arguments. While he may also be
incapable of distinguishing sound from unsound arguments, his record
rests mostly on invalid arguments.

--
======================================================================
"It's not denial. I'm just very selective about what I accept as
reality." --- Calvin ("Calvin and Hobbes" by Bill Watterson)
======================================================================

Arturo Magidin
magidin-at-member-ams-org

This is true in the sense that James usually starts his arguments with
statements that are true.

I have a record of actually trying versus acting like I am trying.


I don't think you do. I think if you were really trying to achieve
genuine mathematical success, you would pay attention when people
offer you help and you would realize that their criticisms were
correct the first time around, instead of the fiftieth. And you would
realize that if you want to have a chance of achieving anything you
need to acquire some background knowledge and get some mathematical
training.

One of the more profound things I realized some years ago was that
sci.math'ers were deliberately acting to confuse versus caring about
what was mathematically true

Why do you believe this silly nonsense? William Hughes just correctly
pointed out the mistake in your argument. I independently identified
the same mistake. It's the same thing that happens every time, except
that usually you evade reality almost endlessly before you finally
wake up. We're not trying to confuse anyone, we're just trying to help
you.

and that happened when I wrote a very
detailed rebuttal to "Nora Baron" only to have that poster delete out
everything and just repeat flawed claims.


I can virtually guarantee you the claims weren't flawed. You want to
post a link to the post and identify the mistakes?

It's easier to claim you are honest than to actually be honest.

I screw up. I make lots of mistakes in my search for truth and quite
a few times over the years I have been rude, very wrong, and regretted
things I've posted.


Well, if you regret being rude, why don't you make an effort to behave
better in the future?

But I at least admit my humanity.


Well, except for the times when you seem to be under the delusion that
you are some kind of superhuman, god-like being.

And in the world I thought I knew when I was growing up, human beings
do those things and then some, because they work harder at being
right, than just trying to look right.


Well, however it may be in your case, you don't seem to have much
success in being right. Maybe there's something wrong with the
approach you're taking? Maybe some radical change in the way you
approach things is needed? Like maybe you could ask people for advice
on what to read and actually read it? And politely ask questions about
things you don't understand and listen to what people tell you? Or
maybe you could just forget about mathematics altogether and try to
achieve in some other area?

If mathematicians proved me wrong I'd accept that because I know
fantasy, and I prefer knowing truth.


That's simply not the case. We constantly prove you wrong, and you
never accept it.

But to the extent that they claim they prefer truth and rip on me as
if the truth were the opposite, when I admit to being a very flawed
human being just trying to get some things straight while these
monsters pretend to be perfect--or very damn close to perfect--while
they lie, and lie, and lie then I say we have a serious problem
people.


Here's a simple challenge for you: Name one lie a sci.math poster
other than you has told in a JSH thread.

The monsters have taken the high ground, and made it illegal to be
human.

They spit on mistakes made in the search for truth.


They try to help you in your alleged search for truth.

And they piss on failures made in the pursuit of truth, to tell you
lies, when they do not actually try to know what is mathematically
correct--preferring only to rely on what they can convince you is
correct.

I fail. And I cheer my ability to not only fail in trying, but to
admit that I fail, and I fail, and I fail.

And through failing honestly, I find success, honestly.


Can you name a single mathematical success you've ever had?

While the demons tell you lies.


There are no lies, James. We are telling you the truth.

.