Why Darwinism isn't true.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Let me see... so u r talking about the portion
U even claimed tat science could not Again tis is not truth.
Ok lor. U r right. It seems to have been pasted in the wrong place. Then ?
Bullsh!t ? Tat is wat u WROTE. U asked me "where did i say Gravity is NOT truth ?". The only way is to show the rubbish u had written In tis case, it is
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
Tat is wat u wrote on the 16th Jan 216 am. U can go and refer to it.
I asked u tis question before. If something is not the truth, can it be true ? Wat is your answer to tis ?
Hoho.. So u think u r more qualified than the people writing english dictionary and just blatantly refuse to accept it. Yup I think u r talking cock and I am gonna let everybody know about it.
U know wat is the lie ? Previously u challenge me in the below
24th Jan 1011
And i NEVER said 1+1 = 2 is also truth no matter what happedn. I said its TRUE, but NOT the TRUTH. See... again, putting words into my mouth.
But then u said
on 18 jan 1253
Mathematically 1 + 1 = 2 is a true and a truth.
on 18th jan 106am
1 + 1 in a mathematical term is true.. is the truth. I agree.
SO now u r arguing MAthmatical Truth is not the truth ? Isn't "mathematic truth", a truth in the field of mathematics ? Is a dark horse a horse ? Your stupidity has shine out again
So now u r saying, u do not know how to define it in words. And the reason is, u think out of the box ? Wat is the link between the two ? There r tons of people who think out of the box and can still communicate their idea ! So in reality, u probably r just too stupid to describe it in words or too coward to make a stand
I have asked so many times before. Wat does divide by nothing means ? U just have no logic to even understand such a simple statement
Huh ? I think u r the stupid one around here ! U says substituting values into 0/0, is only true if u r talking about a DEFINED VARIABLE/UNKNOWN. But we r dealing with a UNDEFINED value. Did u really pass your maths or something ? Do u even know "X", the one used in algebra/solving equation is a VARIABLE, NOT UNDEFINED value ! If we substitute a value inside, since it is DEFINED, it is the same on both sides
But An UNDEFINED value could be anything ! It could be 1 on one side and 1000 on the other side etc. IT COULD BE ANYTHING and it doesn't have to be the same !
Why don't u define wat is "undefined" in maths ? Then u will know wat a stupid thing u said
As usual , u just cant get it when i said "What is TRUE.. may NOT be the TRUTH" And here u are, trying to put ur definitiong of truth into my concept. Of course its not going to work. U believe True = Truth. So, to you, " What is true.. IS TRUTH"
"I asked u tis question before. If something is not the truth, can it be true ? Wat is your answer to tis ?" - OF COURSE. LIKED I SAID, IT DEPENDS ON CIRCUMSTANCES. Acceleration of Gravity is TRUE, but u cant say its LIKE THAT, as Gravity on Earth and Moon are different. Its TRUE, i dont think of it as.. THE TRUTH.
Like i said, you have YOUR beliefs, and u keep trying to make me SWALLOW UR BULLSHIT. I accept your reasoning and ur beliefs, SIMPLE. But no, thats NOT ENOUGH FOR U.
So u are going to let everyone know i am talking cock while i let everyone know exactly how STUPID u are.
"
Mathematically 1 + 1 = 2 is a true and a truth.
on 18th jan 106am
1 + 1 in a mathematical term is true.. is the truth. I agree." MATHEMATICALLY U DUMBASS, I REPLIED ON THE SECOND TIME, KNOWING U ARE TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND AND PHRASHED IT 1 + 1 in a MATHEMATICAL TERM IS TRUE is the TRUTH. What lies ? I specified my CONDITION. U just .. too stupid n again, trying to make a lame attack. At least get something better. Do u have NOTHING else to say ?
Why am i too coward to make a stand, where u are just too ridiculously stupid to understand ? There is no POINT even going further if u keep disagreeing in my definition of the truth, if u keep putting UR Definition into MY beliefs, how the hell am i supposed to even move forward ? We are just stuck right here now, in tuotology.
"Wat does divide by nothing means ?" = Nothing. Not Mathematics. I am talking about one VERY specific 0/0 . I already said , 0/0 cannot equal 0 because it never touches 0 and its undefined. How many TIMES have i said it ? Are u dumb ? Are u stupid ?
I TOLD u already , the closes thing is Absolute Reality. U keep asking stupid questions again . U stupid ? Its there, if u want to read it, go ahead and understand it first.
"5) He made a lot of contradictions. He said gravity is not truth, then say it is truth before finally saying it is not truth again. He also said only theologist can come out with truth, then he says he cannot accept it as truth then he twist again and theologist can come out with truth too" - MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . PLEASE... u know, ur lies can stop here. SINCE when did i say Gravity is NOT TRUTH.
OH.. again u say ONLY theologist can come out with TRUTH ? Why u keep putting WORDS into my mouth ? Pls.. READ AGAIN. U know, its pretty pathetic to keep quoting NON- EXISTENCE STATEMENTS. This HAS to be a NEW LOW for you. IF that is the case here , here , here ,here , here , here and MUCH MORE. Guess u are just TOO DUMB.
"7) When u used the definition of truth = "actual existence" into applications of science such as water cycle, or strength of material, or mechanics etc, they r actual reality and they fit the description of "truth". However he just say they r just WHY and HOW and, I do not know why, becomes not truth. Can anyone else understand tis crap ?"
- ONCE AGAIN. THEY ARE ONLY THEORIES. ANYTIME, IT CAN BE WRONG. THATS WHY I ACCEPT THEM AS TRUE STATEMENTS, BUT NOT THE TRUTH. SO many times theories have been proven WRONG. Just because its wrong, doesnt mean its NOT useful. In certain conditions YES. In certain environment and conditions. Even if they explain they WHY and HOW , NO GURANTEE ITS THE TRUTH.
What the hell are u talking about ? I told u aready . I specify 0/0 , DID I SAY 10/0 ? Are u STUPID ? IF i give u maths questions/ 0/0 , u give me 10/0 whats wrong with u ? U JUST PUTTING THINGS IN TO SUIT UR LOGIC AND PUTTING THINGS INTO MY MOUTH.
8) And u also came out with another rubbbish statement 1+1=2 is not truth. U said 1+1=2 is not the truth and u came out with examples of eggs and sperms and apples and oranges. U claim 1 apple + 1 orange not equal to 2 apples. Isn't tat obvious ? U use the equation wrongly. Then u say sperm + egg = 1 fertilised egg. Then again aren't u using the equation wrongly again ? R we talking about chemistry equation here ? We r talking about maths and u talk about putting garbages into the right equation to proclaim the equation wrong. Tat is nonsense WELL DONE. U SEEM TO GET IT. BUT SAY ITS NONSENSE . So whats wrong ? Tell me ? Did i say anything ? I never SPECIFY. I told u from my previous statements, different situation different context. ARE U DUMB ? Thats why 1+1 = 2 Is a MATHEMATICAL TRUTH , but not THE TRUTH. I personally believe it can only work in certain conditions. When u treat it as a maths equation, but in reality its different. Thats why i consider it a TRUE STATEMENT. Like i said previously.
U are making FEEBLE attempts! To make sense. Are u THAT stupid ?
Are u even trying ? Its a pathetic attempt.
-
Originally posted by reservistsianz:
I like stupidissmart's explanation on undefined number. I don't know if it is true but it appears so.
Stupidissmart, just give up on this discussion la ! I believed badzmaro also know he is just talking rubbish but he just want to continue for the sake of saving face
I got no problem with you accepting stupidissmart's explaination on undefined number. Sure.
It means if u accept it , u have to accept that , it can proven 1 = 2 mathematically.
By all means. I got no beef. Feel free to.
Hey , i apologized before, i admit my mistakes, i got no problem with that. Its not about saving face.
-
Originally posted by Larryteo:
Both of you are equally stupid like pigs.
Fair enough u think we are stupid pigs.
I got no problem with that.
It sure beats being a maggot like you.
-
OF COURSE. LIKED I SAID, IT DEPENDS ON CIRCUMSTANCES. Acceleration of Gravity is TRUE, but u cant say its LIKE THAT, as Gravity on Earth and Moon are different. Its TRUE, i dont think of it as.. THE TRUTH.
Tis is again rubbish. The value of the force is obviously different but the fact is tat heavy mass exert a pulling force is true ! Who ever claims tat for all mass, the pulling force is the same ! The standard formula is really (g*m1*m2)/r^2 and on moon or on earth etc it is TRUE. Again u have came out with another rubbish example tat shows your limited capability of physical science
MATHEMATICALLY U DUMBASS, I REPLIED ON THE SECOND TIME, KNOWING U ARE TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND AND PHRASHED IT 1 + 1 in a MATHEMATICAL TERM IS TRUE is the TRUTH. What lies ? I specified my CONDITION. U just .. too stupid n again, trying to make a lame attack. At least get something better. Do u have NOTHING else to say ?
Again tis is another rubbish statement u made. Wat is the condition u asked for ? TRUTH FOR ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ! And wat does tat means ? U expect the formula, 1+1 to be able to cater for idiotic things such as 1 sperm + 1 egg to be 1 fertilised egg. The formula must still work in tis silly case. U might as well cater tat the egg hatch, then give birth to a guy who grew up and made millions of sperms. Your idea of truth means 1+1 must work for all those ridiculous notions !
The formula is the truth. U just use the formula wrongly, use the wrong context, throw garbage into the formula and claim the formula is wrong. Tat is plain moronic
Nothing. Not Mathematics. I am talking about one VERY specific 0/0 . I already said , 0/0 cannot equal 0 because it never touches 0 and its infinity. How many TIMES have i said it ? Are u dumb ? Are u stupid ?
Again another moronic theory tat is brought out by u. If I have 5 apples and I divide by 5 people, so idea is each will have an apple. Now I have five people and I divide by zero people. Wat does it means ? Nothing ? Tat is why u r stupid. LOGIC Experts already stated it clearly tat dividing by zero has no logical meaning. LOGIC EXPERTS. And again u think u r smarter than LOGIC EXPERT in here.
MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH
On the15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
On the 16 Jan 216am, u again specifically say gravity is not a fact but a theory and tat scientist never call theory the truth
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
On the 16 Jan, 952am Larry teo said
You do realise that the meaning of the word ''THEORY'' in science doesnt really mean the word itself right? The word THEORY in science means something that has sufficient proof and evidence in Science.
And your reply on 16th jan 1024am is
Do you even really know what you are talking about Larryteo ? But its not TRUTH.
SO
a) U said gravity is a theory
b) U said theory r not truth
c) Hence u do mean gravity is not truth
If u say the theory of gravity is truth, then evolution which is another theory is also truth then. SO is gravity a truth or not ?
OH.. again u say ONLY theologist can come out with TRUTH ? Why u keep putting WORDS into my mouth ?
Now remember your line on 15 Jan 1108pm
Science is not there to PROVE, it is to find out WHY, to EXPLAIN. They are not to discern what is true and false. Its not even thier doman. It is the Theologists.
ONCE AGAIN. THEY ARE ONLY THEORIES. ANYTIME, IT CAN BE WRONG. THATS WHY I ACCEPT THEM AS TRUE STATEMENTS, BUT NOT THE TRUTH. SO many times theories have been proven WRONG. Just because its wrong, doesnt mean its NOT useful. In certain conditions YES. In certain environment and conditions. Even if they explain they WHY and HOW , NO GURANTEE ITS THE TRUTH.
Isn't your defintion of truth=actual existence ? U don't feel force from a punch ? U don't see rain ? U do not see tat well engineered product used rightly do not fail catastrophically ? U don't see the computer in front and the marvel it had achieved ? If science r not truth, how do they make things like computer ? And u cannot define your "truth" ? U have a problem
What the hell are u talking about ? I told u aready . I specify 0/0 , DID I SAY 10/0 ? Are u STUPID ? IF i give u maths questions/ 0/0 , u give me 10/0 whats wrong with u ? U JUST PUTTING THINGS IN TO SUIT UR LOGIC AND PUTTING THINGS INTO MY MOUTH.
Did u read the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero,
Did u see the word, DIVISION BY ZERO in the title ? Tat is why u r stupid u see. 0/0 is zero divide by zero. It deals with the problem of division by zero. The view from the logic expert is commenting on the issue of DIVISION by ZERO. 10/0 is division by zero. 0/0 is division by zero. And they say it is meaningless. I think u r just talking cock
got no problem with you accepting stupidissmart's explaination on undefined number. Sure.
It means if u accept it , u have to accept that , it can proven 1 = 2 mathematically.
Wrong stupid dousch bag. I am saying 0/0 * 1 = 0/0 *2 could be true. I NEVER SAID TAT 1=2 ! The important crux is 0/0. But of course, someone who cannot tell the difference between variable and undefine value surely can't understand the concept of 0/0.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Tis is again rubbish. The value of the force is obviously different but the fact is tat heavy mass exert a pulling force is true ! Who ever claims tat for all mass, the pulling force is the same ! The standard formula is really (g*m1*m2)/r^2 and on moon or on earth etc it is TRUE. Again u have came out with another rubbish example tat shows your limited capability of physical science
Again tis is another rubbish statement u made. Wat is the condition u asked for ? TRUTH FOR ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ! And wat does tat means ? U expect the formula, 1+1 to be able to cater for idiotic things such as 1 sperm + 1 egg to be 1 fertilised egg. The formula must still work in tis silly case. U might as well cater tat the egg hatch, then give birth to a guy who grew up and made millions of sperms. Your idea of truth means 1+1 must work for all those ridiculous notions !
The formula is the truth. U just use the formula wrongly, use the wrong context, throw garbage into the formula and claim the formula is wrong. Tat is plain moronic
Again another moronic theory tat is brought out by u. If I have 5 apples and I divide by 5 people, so idea is each will have an apple. Now I have five people and I divide by zero people. Wat does it means ? Nothing ? Tat is why u r stupid. LOGIC Experts already stated it clearly tat dividing by zero has no logical meaning. LOGIC EXPERTS. And again u think u r smarter than LOGIC EXPERT in here.
On the15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
On the 16 Jan 216am, u again specifically say gravity is not a fact but a theory and tat scientist never call theory the truth
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
On the 16 Jan, 952am Larry teo said
You do realise that the meaning of the word ''THEORY'' in science doesnt really mean the word itself right? The word THEORY in science means something that has sufficient proof and evidence in Science.
And your reply on 16th jan 1024am is
Do you even really know what you are talking about Larryteo ? But its not TRUTH.
SO
a) U said gravity is a theory
b) U said theory r not truth
c) Hence u do mean gravity is not truth
If u say the theory of gravity is truth, then evolution which is another theory is also truth then. SO is gravity a truth or not ?
Now remember your line on 15 Jan 1108pm
Science is not there to PROVE, it is to find out WHY, to EXPLAIN. They are not to discern what is true and false. Its not even thier doman. It is the Theologists.
Isn't your defintion of truth=actual existence ? U don't feel force from a punch ? U don't see rain ? U do not see tat well engineered product used rightly do not fail catastrophically ? U don't see the computer in front and the marvel it had achieved ? If science r not truth, how do they make things like computer ? And u cannot define your "truth" ? U have a problem
Did u read the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_by_zero,
Did u see the word, DIVISION BY ZERO in the title ? Tat is why u r stupid u see. 0/0 is zero divide by zero. It deals with the problem of division by zero. The view from the logic expert is commenting on the issue of DIVISION by ZERO. 10/0 is division by zero. 0/0 is division by zero. And they say it is meaningless. I think u r just talking cock
Wrong stupid dousch bag. I am saying 0/0 * 1 = 0/0 *2 could be true. I NEVER SAID TAT 1=2 ! The important crux is 0/0. But of course, someone who cannot tell the difference between variable and undefine value surely can't understand the concept of 0/0.
Once again, we have different definitions. I am more then capable of understanding your definition put in your context, however, if u were to apply ur theory in my beliefs it cant work. Same goes with mine. And i have NO PROBLEM with your definitions. All i ask, is UNDERSTANDING. And see from my points of view. If u keep looking at it in your definition, of course u wont understand.
See, once again, regardint the 1+1 , long ago, i told u its TRUE, but its not wrong, and not the TRUTH either. Because it doesnt apply to all conditions , all reality. Do u agree with me on that point ? Thats all i meant. U are just an idiot trying to pick a fight. I never said it was false, u kept looking like i said it false, Just because i said its not the truth does not mean its not true.
I already said Nothing Divides by Nothing = Nothing right ? Logicaly speaking. The 0/0 shows fallacy in maths. Thats it. Whats ur problem ? U cant ready ? Are u that stupid ?
I told u AGAIN n AGAIN , Gravity is being explained by using Theory. I already said Truth , i only say the THEORY part may be WRONG. Thats it. Whats ur problem again ?
A) I said, Gravity is Truth
B) Theory tries to EXPLAIN the HOW the WHY
C) I DO MEAN Gravity is TRUTH.
What are u talking about ? Theories are threories. Do u need me to cut n paste for u after u shut up about the theory part in Wiki in my previos post ?(here) I didnt quote it doesnt mean i forgot about ur stupidity. That already proved theories. Are u stupid again ? HERE
Just because i am lazy ass at looking back to actually find ur bullshit doesnt mean i didnt FORGET ur stupidity and mistakes. I just overlook them.
Truth = Actual Existence = Gravity . So whats ur problem ? Again, i said Science is the How and Why.
So , if Science is Truth, then why does science make mistakes ?
"Wrong stupid dousch bag. I am saying 0/0 * 1 = 0/0 *2 could be true."
- What the fuck ? Please.. SIMPLIFY THE EQUATION. What do u get ? 1= 2
Dividing by zero gives:
Simplified, yields:
(THANKS TO UR WIKI ARTICLE) *BRAVO* I didnt have to look for it myself !*
Check this out, since u SO like to nit pick ? I just pick just one...
STUPIDISMART on the 23rd Jan 1.03pm
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter.
So..
So.. where the 0(zero) .. what the FUCK are u talking? Me no understand maths ? OR YOU NO UNDERSTAND MATHS ! ?
I wonder WHO cant understand 0/0 now...
So.. u want me to go for an ALL OUT NIT PICKING like you ? U know what, u actually got bupcuss.. nada... NOTHING... its getting pathetic.
-
Originally posted by laffin123:
it is amazing how huge a stamina people can have.
Hi stupidissmart, you can forget about arguing with Badzmaro. No point going on.
His definition of truth only applies to his thinking. Let him live in an island of his own.
laffin
At least he has an island to live on, you have none.
-
Originally posted by Larryteo:
At least he has an island to live on, you have none.
guys, stand one side , phd in action. do you have phd ? if yes, you may join in, if no, stand one side.what the world are they talking about? catch no ball. i have only primary school standard. i am very automatic, i stand one side.
-
Originally posted by Fairyfairy86:
guys, stand one side , phd in action. do you have phd ? if yes, you may join in, if no, stand one side.what the world are they talking about? catch no ball. i have only primary school standard. i am very automatic, i stand one side.
Finish University can already lah. Still Phd? -.-
I can actually understand what these 2 fools are talking about but I am not going to make an effort to read it since I won't get $$$ for it. =(
-
See, once again, regardint the 1+1 , long ago, i told u its TRUE, but its not wrong, and not the TRUTH either. Because it doesnt apply to all conditions , all reality. Do u agree with me on that point ? Thats all i meant. U are just an idiot trying to pick a fight. I never said it was false, u kept looking like i said it false, Just because i said its not the truth does not mean its not true.
Let me see... your defintion of truth is "actual existence". I never know u actually add "must work for all conditions" into it. Then in tat case, NOTHING is the truth. Gravity is not truth too, in your defintion, because it cannot pull freedom, or economy, or aspirations to the earth too. Since it cannot pull EVERYTHING, it is not a truth. In fact u, as usual, is talking cock here again. It is the truth if, for a small snap shot or small focus, is always true. But u r talking about rubbish scenario tat is not part of wat it describes or its scope
I already said Nothing Divides by Nothing = Nothing right ? Logicaly speaking. The 0/0 shows fallacy in maths. Thats it. Whats ur problem ? U cant ready ? Are u that stupid ?
Explain the above bolded word. Wat do u mean by divide by nothing ?
A) I said, Gravity is Truth
B) Theory tries to EXPLAIN the HOW the WHY
C) I DO MEAN Gravity is TRUTH.
For your above A,B and C, Is Theory a truth ? U mention gravity is a theory before. So is gravity a theory ?
I have shown u tat u had claimed gravity is not the truth.
a) U said gravity is a theory
b) U said theory r not truth
c) Hence u do mean gravity is not truth
U said all of the above and thus u did said at gravity is not truth. Is any part of A, B or C wrong ? The question here is, have u ever said tat gravity is not truth or not. I just need to show 1 example of u saying it is not truth, then I am right in saying tat u claimed gravity is not truth.
Truth = Actual Existence = Gravity . So whats ur problem ? Again, i said Science is the How and Why.
So , if Science is Truth, then why does science make mistakes ?
And I said, the WHY and HOW r truth. Science can be wrong, but it got most of the things correct. I never said science is always true, or always the truth. U SAID SCIENCE IS NEVER ABOUT TRUTH .
Saying tat science is never about truth is rubbish.
Dividing by zero gives:
Simplified, yields:
- (THANKS TO UR WIKI
ARTICLE) *BRAVO* I didnt have to look
for it myself !*
Check this out, since u SO like to nit pick ? I just pick just one...
Another rubbish from the stupid dousch bag again. Did u even read the article at all ? Read at the line just below your equation
The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation.
The article says the above equations r WRONG because they r dividing by ZERO. IT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE OPERATION TO DIVIDE BY ZERO. It is telling u only idiots treat these equations as the right approach and u exclaim u r one now !
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter.
So..
So.. where the 0(zero) .. what the FUCK are u talking? Me no understand maths ? OR YOU NO UNDERSTAND MATHS ! ?
U see the graph ? Looking from the negative 0 side, it goes to negative infinity. U look from the positive 0 side, it goes to positive infinity. SO where does 0 stands ? UNDEFINED. IT CAN BE ANY NUMBER.
So stupid idiot who do not even know the difference between variable and undefine, do u get it now ?
-
WOOHOO! BADZMARO IS PWNED!
-
See, once again, regardint the 1+1 , long ago, i told u its TRUE, but its not wrong, and not the TRUTH either. Because it doesnt apply to all conditions , all reality. Do u agree with me on that point ? Thats all i meant. U are just an idiot trying to pick a fight. I never said it was false, u kept looking like i said it false, Just because i said its not the truth does not mean its not true.
"Let me see... your defintion of truth is "actual existence". I never know u actually add "must work for all conditions" into it. Then in tat case, NOTHING is the truth. Gravity is not truth too, in your defintion, because it cannot pull freedom, or economy, or aspirations to the earth too. Since it cannot pull EVERYTHING, it is not a truth. In fact u, as usual, is talking cock here again. It is the truth if, for a small snap shot or small focus, is always true. But u r talking about rubbish scenario tat is not part of wat it describes or its scope"
Yes. Actual Existence. So when does actual existence mean it must pull freedom or economy or aspirations to the earth ? I didn't say it. I just said ACTUAL EXISTENCE. The 1+1=2 must work for all conditions because it deals with quantities. So therefore it must be able to apply for all quantities. Gravity only works on phsyical universe so therefore it must work only in the physical universe. Its got nothing to do with things like freedom etc etc etc because do not belong in the physical universe. Obviously you are just too stupid to understand that concept. Its like a feeble attempt at disproving me. I'm sure you can do better than that. Sad.
I already said Nothing Divides by Nothing = Nothing right ? Logicaly speaking. The 0/0 shows fallacy in maths. Thats it. Whats ur problem ? U cant ready ? Are u that stupid ?
Explain the above bolded word. Wat do u mean by divide by nothing ?
It is as I said above. If you do not understand than I don't know what else to say. Its a very simple statement to understand.
A) I said, Gravity is Truth
B) Theory tries to EXPLAIN the HOW the WHY
C) I DO MEAN Gravity is TRUTH.
"For your above A,B and C, Is Theory a truth ? U mention gravity is a theory before. So is gravity a theory ?
I have shown u tat u had claimed gravity is not the truth.
a) U said gravity is a theory
b) U said theory r not truth
c) Hence u do mean gravity is not truth
U said all of the above and thus u did said at gravity is not truth. Is any part of A, B or C wrong ? The question here is, have u ever said tat gravity is not truth or not. I just need to show 1 example of u saying it is not truth, then I am right in saying tat u claimed gravity is not truth."
Once again I never said Gravity is not truth. I just said the theory OF gravity can be wrong. Thats all. Obviously you misunderstand me or you are just trying pathetically to cover your ass.Truth = Actual Existence = Gravity . So whats ur problem ? Again, i said Science is the How and Why.
So , if Science is Truth, then why does science make mistakes ?
"And I said, the WHY and HOW r truth. Science can be wrong, but it got most of the things correct. I never said science is always true, or always the truth. U SAID SCIENCE IS NEVER ABOUT TRUTH .
Saying tat science is never about truth is rubbish."
Weren't you the one who wrote science=truth. SO base on what you said as above, you pretty much have contradicted your own ass. Now you say why and how are truth. You said earlier that science is not about the why and how. So what's with the turnaround ? Even if the why and how are truths, the problem is the why and how postulated by science have been proven wrong so therefore they cannot be truths, as you mentioned that SCIENCE CAN BE WRONG.
Dividing by zero gives:
-
Simplified, yields:
- (THANKS TO UR WIKI
ARTICLE) *BRAVO* I didnt have to look
for it myself !*
-
Check this out, since u SO like to nit pick ? I just pick just one...
"Another rubbish from the stupid dousch bag again. Did u even read the article at all ? Read at the line just below your equation
The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation.
The article says the above equations r WRONG because they r dividing by ZERO. IT IS NOT A LEGITIMATE OPERATION TO DIVIDE BY ZERO. It is telling u only idiots treat these equations as the right approach and u exclaim u r one now !"
Thats right. You got it. Once again that was the point I was trying to get through to you. You said earlier 1+1=2 is truth but all I said was that maths has fallacies as mentioned above. That is why they can't treat 0/0 as a legitimate operation. Since it can't do it means it is not perfect and therefore not truth. True yes. Truth no.
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter.
So..
So.. where the 0(zero) .. what the FUCK are u talking? Me no understand maths ? OR YOU NO UNDERSTAND MATHS ! ?
"U see the graph ? Looking from the negative 0 side, it goes to negative infinity. U look from the positive 0 side, it goes to positive infinity. SO where does 0 stands ? UNDEFINED. IT CAN BE ANY NUMBER.
So stupid idiot who do not even know the difference between variable and undefine, do u get it now ?"
I see you conveniently decided to not mention about the ZERO to infinity. So is this one of your pathetic attempt at covering your own ass. Since you have included ZERO in your previous answer, anything you say from that point was considered wrong and moot. So why are you still trying to argue with me. Until you admit your mistake in it whats the point continuing.
This reply is even sadder and more pathetic that your earlier attempt. I'm just so flabbergasted by it. I really don't know what to say. Words just escape me.
-
Yes. Actual Existence. So when does actual existence mean it must pull freedom or economy or aspirations to the earth ? I didn't say it. I just said ACTUAL EXISTENCE. The 1+1=2 must work for all conditions because it deals with quantities. So therefore it must be able to apply for all quantities. Gravity only works on phsyical universe so therefore it must work only in the physical universe. Its got nothing to do with things like freedom etc etc etc because do not belong in the physical universe. Obviously you are just too stupid to understand that concept. Its like a feeble attempt at disproving me. I'm sure you can do better than that. Sad.
Glad tat u realise tat gravity has to work on physical matter ! See, all truth only works with the valid scope in place ! Now u talk 1+1=2. It must be talking about things in the same context. I have been saying tis like forever and u just ignore it completely. If u talk about sperm, 1 sperm + 1 sperm = 2 sperms. If u talk about egg, 1 egg + 1 egg = 2 eggs. If u talk about things, 1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things. But u use it STUPIDLY WRONG tat even kindergarten student use it better than u. U just ignore the basic scope of the equation (same context) and throw in garbage inside. If u ignore basic scope within the equation, then gravity also should throw away your assumption of the physical universe and should pull aspiration as well
It is as I said above. If you do not understand than I don't know what else to say. Its a very simple statement to understand.
Wat a sissy man ! U say your statement is logical and when I ask u wat do u mean by three of the words within, u p!ss in your pants and refuse to answer it.
Once again I never said Gravity is not truth. I just said the theory OF gravity can be wrong. Thats all. Obviously you misunderstand me or you are just trying pathetically to cover your ass.
Isn't it your classic line "if it can be wrong, then I cannot accept it as truth" ? Since u say the theory of gravity could be wrong, then to u, u cannot accept it as truth. So wat is wrong with wat i said ?
Weren't you the one who wrote science=truth. SO base on what you said as above, you pretty much have contradicted your own ass. Now you say why and how are truth. You said earlier that science is not about the why and how. So what's with the turnaround ? Even if the why and how are truths, the problem is the why and how postulated by science have been proven wrong so therefore they cannot be truths, as you mentioned that SCIENCE CAN BE WRONG.
I then need to ask, maybe u can try to freshen my memory, where did u get the idea tat I said science is not about the why and how ? I really need to see the whole paragraph of wat I read before I comment
So u said science can be wrong so it is NEVER the truth ? (which u clearly said many times before) Then may I ask why r u using the computer in front of u ? If it is made based on falsehood, then it may very well explode suddenly ! Why do u dare to go to high rise buildings ? U r not scare science is wrong and the building collapse ? If science is not truth, how do they make things work ? Surely there must have some truths isn't it ?
Thats right. You got it. Once again that was the point I was trying to get through to you. You said earlier 1+1=2 is truth but all I said was that maths has fallacies as mentioned above. That is why they can't treat 0/0 as a legitimate operation. Since it can't do it means it is not perfect and therefore not truth. True yes. Truth no.
Get wat point ? Just now u r clapping and cheering bravo now suddenly u say u r trying to get the point across ?
The article had explained clearly. Division by zero is not legitimate and u cannot explain the meaning of division by zero. All the while the article has explained clearly why zero is a special number. The only problem is because u r so stupid tat u cannot know tat truth need to work within a certain scope, limitation. Addition has it scoe, division has its scope and gravity has its scope. There is no truth tat is scopeless.
Furthermore, why do u change your definition of the truth again ? U wanna add "perfect" to your defintion as well ? Wow man.. u have such a jumble up interpretation of "truth". No wonder u cannot put in words because if u said it out, people will laugh at it !
I see you conveniently decided to not mention about the ZERO to infinity. So is this one of your pathetic attempt at covering your own ass. Since you have included ZERO in your previous answer, anything you say from that point was considered wrong and moot. So why are you still trying to argue with me. Until you admit your mistake in it whats the point continuing.
Did u complete graph study ? I told u already from the previous explanation. At 0-, it reaches -ve infinity. At 0+ it reaches 0+. + infinity and - infinity r both extremes ! SO at zero, where could it be ? It can be anywhere between + infinity and - infinity, and tat includes zero !
Lets put tis simple equation for u to see. 0 here represent absolute zero while (?) represent anything
(?) X 0 = 0 (anything multiplies by absolute zero becomes zero)
0/0 = (?) (if u push 0 to the other side, it form (?) )
Get it ! 0/0 can be anything ! It can be zero ! Tis operation is completely not legitimate, it is just a simplified explanation for a stupid kid like u. An analogy. If I do not state it clearly, I wonder wat stupid conclusions can u reach
-
So let me write some of the stupidest thing badzmaro said
1) His only definition of truth comes from the dictionary, but he cannot accept the description of "science" (body of truth) from the dictionary. Somehow he thinks he is mroe qualified than the english professors in writing english words. And when he is pushed, he will add in additional definition such as "perfect" or "include all circumstances" whenever he need ! Stunning !
2) When it was shown to him tat even in his article, philosophers all can communicate their idea of truth in words, he still refuse to define his meaning of truth. And the reason is, because he "think" out of the box and thus unable to use english.
3) He keep saying "It's true but not the truth". To me tat sentence is grammatically wrong. If it is not the truth, how can it be true ?
4) He said Mathematical Truth is not Truth. Basic english user can know tat mathematics is an adjective here and thus the noun is still "truth". In fact u can read dictionary.com and it states
math⋅e⋅mat⋅i⋅cal
–adjective
of, pertaining to, or of the nature of mathematics: example mathematical truth.
Another stupid use of language by him. And now he never talks about the blunder of saying a mathematical truth is not a truth
5) He made a lot of contradictions. He said gravity is not truth, then say it is truth before finally saying it is not truth again. He also said only theologist can come out with truth, then he says he cannot accept it as truth then he twist again and theologist can come out with truth too.
6) He said 0 divide by 0 should be logically zero. However when asked wat is the meaning of dividing by zero, he refuse to answer. He just keep repeating his sh!t but it is as clear as day tat he has no idea wat dividing by zero means. Lets see wat the experts said about dividing by zero
"There is no way to distribute 10 apples amongst 0 people. In mathematical jargon, a set of 10 items cannot be partitioned into 0 subsets. So
, at least in elementary arithmetic,
is said to be meaningless, or undefined."So it really tells how logical he is. Then he framed me saying tat I pull an article on 10/0, not 0/0 so I am wrong. However the title of the article is really division by zero, which includes 0/0
7) When u used the definition of truth = "actual existence" into applications of science such as water cycle, or strength of material, or mechanics etc, they r actual reality and they fit the description of "truth". However he just say they r just WHY and HOW and, I do not know why, becomes not truth. Can anyone else understand tis crap ? He also says science never states Truth. NEVER. SO I wonder why does he think his computer in front of him works. Why does he think the engineering product of our world work ? IF science is never truth, then it is never right and thus should fail all the time
8) And u also came out with another rubbbish statement 1+1=2 is not truth. U said 1+1=2 is not the truth and u came out with examples of eggs and sperms and apples and oranges. U claim 1 apple + 1 orange not equal to 2 apples. Isn't tat obvious ? U use the equation wrongly. Then u say sperm + egg = 1 fertilised egg. Then again aren't u using the equation wrongly again ? R we talking about chemistry equation here ? We r talking about maths and u talk about putting garbages into the right equation to proclaim the equation wrong. Tat is nonsense
He cannot proved any of these allegations away. Mark my words... they will get longer and longer as the days go by
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Glad tat u realise tat gravity has to work on physical matter ! See, all truth only works with the valid scope in place ! Now u talk 1+1=2. It must be talking about things in the same context. I have been saying tis like forever and u just ignore it completely. If u talk about sperm, 1 sperm + 1 sperm = 2 sperms. If u talk about egg, 1 egg + 1 egg = 2 eggs. If u talk about things, 1 thing + 1 thing = 2 things. But u use it STUPIDLY WRONG tat even kindergarten student use it better than u. U just ignore the basic scope of the equation (same context) and throw in garbage inside. If u ignore basic scope within the equation, then gravity also should throw away your assumption of the physical universe and should pull aspiration as well
Wat a sissy man ! U say your statement is logical and when I ask u wat do u mean by three of the words within, u p!ss in your pants and refuse to answer it.
Isn't it your classic line "if it can be wrong, then I cannot accept it as truth" ? Since u say the theory of gravity could be wrong, then to u, u cannot accept it as truth. So wat is wrong with wat i said ?
I then need to ask, maybe u can try to freshen my memory, where did u get the idea tat I said science is not about the why and how ? I really need to see the whole paragraph of wat I read before I comment
So u said science can be wrong so it is NEVER the truth ? (which u clearly said many times before) Then may I ask why r u using the computer in front of u ? If it is made based on falsehood, then it may very well explode suddenly ! Why do u dare to go to high rise buildings ? U r not scare science is wrong and the building collapse ? If science is not truth, how do they make things work ? Surely there must have some truths isn't it ?
Get wat point ? Just now u r clapping and cheering bravo now suddenly u say u r trying to get the point across ?
The article had explained clearly. Division by zero is not legitimate and u cannot explain the meaning of division by zero. All the while the article has explained clearly why zero is a special number. The only problem is because u r so stupid tat u cannot know tat truth need to work within a certain scope, limitation. Addition has it scoe, division has its scope and gravity has its scope. There is no truth tat is scopeless.
Furthermore, why do u change your definition of the truth again ? U wanna add "perfect" to your defintion as well ? Wow man.. u have such a jumble up interpretation of "truth". No wonder u cannot put in words because if u said it out, people will laugh at it !
Did u complete graph study ? I told u already from the previous explanation. At 0-, it reaches -ve infinity. At 0+ it reaches 0+. + infinity and - infinity r both extremes ! SO at zero, where could it be ? It can be anywhere between + infinity and - infinity, and tat includes zero !
Lets put tis simple equation for u to see. 0 here represent absolute zero while (?) represent anything
(?) X 0 = 0 (anything multiplies by absolute zero becomes zero)
0/0 = (?) (if u push 0 to the other side, it form (?) )
Get it ! 0/0 can be anything ! It can be zero ! Tis operation is completely not legitimate, it is just a simplified explanation for a stupid kid like u. An analogy. If I do not state it clearly, I wonder wat stupid conclusions can u reach
Once again.. i NEVER said gravity cannot work on physical matter. I said Gravity is the Truth. It works where it should be. Where else 1 + 1 because it's work is supposed to be representation of quantity in this case as it is supposed to fullfill, fails in its role. While gravity has succeeded in where it's supposed to. Again, PLEASE, make sure u know what u are talking about.
U know how many times i have answered your answered ? Ur supposedly superior english , why do i need to KEEP SPOON FEEDING u ? U ask the same questions OVER n OVER AGAIN. There is no point i keep asnwering, like i said before earlier. I am not here to spoon feed your ass.
"I then need to ask, maybe u can try to freshen my memory, where did u get the idea tat I said science is not about the why and how ? I really need to see the whole paragraph of wat I read before I comment"
YOU SAID 18"JAN 5:55PM "Why is science not the search for truth ? Isn't discovering mechanics and how it works the truth ? Isn't discovering gravity and giving values again the search for truth ? Isn't discovering how the earth comes about or how life comes about a search for truth ? Isn't discovering how land eroded, how trees are thicker in the equator or why there r seasons all the search for truth ? Science searches for truth and discer wat is true or false." <--- So what was all that about since that day until now. I said its about the How and Why , and u said its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?
"If science is not truth, how do they make things work ? Surely there must have some truths isn't it ?" <--- From this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary. So what the hell was all that bullshit from the beginning and only NOW u seem to understand. THAT WAS MY WHOLE POINT FROM THE BEGINNING.I SAID SCIENCE IS NOT INFALLIBLE.
Do u agree with me that Theories can be wrong ? Do u agree with me that Science is the search of the Why and How ? And do u agree with me that Science is NOT TRUTH ? If u DO, we dont have a problem here.
Again, Theory is true, not truth , it may be wrong, SO I CANT ACCEPT IT AS TRUTH. But Gravity is there, it has always been. Its a Truth. Here I have said it since so long ago.
"Get wat point ? Just now u r clapping and cheering bravo now suddenly u say u r trying to get the point across ?" - I was cheering because u got my point. But often times, u suddenly dont get it. I was making sure u were getting my point. If u do , say u do, and thats it.No, there IS a truth that is scopeless, that is GOD. But then again, that is another matter.
Since i believe that God is scopeless, therefore i cannot accept your theory that TRUTH's must have scope.
"Since it can't do it means it is not perfect and therefore not truth. True yes. Truth no." I use the word "perfect" because it once again fails to show its infallible. Like my previos statement on gravity, it fullfills what its suppose to do. But Maths, unfortunately, failed. Gravity has NO fallacy. Maths however HAS fallacy.
U SAID:
"I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter."
U were the one who brought it up. Look at graph.. does the answer EVER TOUCHES ZERO ? NO . SO once again.. where FOOK did ur ZERO(0) come from ? Until u answer that, i cant be BOTHERED to answer ANYTHING ELSE on THAT SUBJECT.
Again your points of 1 to 8 , i answered them. AGAIN n AGAIN. N AGAIN, ALL I SAID, IS SCIENCE IS NOT TRUTH. ITS A HOW AND WHY. IT MAKES MISTAKES, AND I CANT ACCEPT IT AS TRUTH. LIKE MATHS. IS FALLACY.
U keep forcing me comply to the Dictionary or YOUR ONLY definition of Science = description of "science" (body of truth) from the dictionary. (AND U SAID SCIENCE CAN BE WRONG NOW.. SO HOW CAN U AGREE WITH THIS DEFINITION THEN ? U EQUATE TRUE = TRUTH.. TRUTH = TRUE, And ur stupid 3rd point of :-
3) He keep saying "It's true but not the truth". To me tat sentence is grammatically wrong. If it is not the truth, how can it be true ? "<---------(And u say) SO.. EXPLAIN TO ME.. DOES IT SOUND LIKE WHAT IS TRUE HAS TO BE TRUTH ? IN YOUR WORDS.
And U SAID:
"And I said, the WHY and HOW r truth. Science can be wrong, but it got most of the things correct. I never said science is always true, or always the truth. U SAID SCIENCE IS NEVER ABOUT TRUTH ." - WELL YOUR DEFINTION OFSCIENCE IS BODY OF TRUTHS . I dont see BODY OF SOME TRUTHS. So i guess, u are IN CONTRADICTION of your OWN DEFINITION. UNLESS, U THINK.... and want to REPHRASE ur definition ? I got no problem. Just dont BITCH TO ME about how I DONT follow the dictionary definition and YOU DO.
Again, i point to u that definition of Truth and Science is NOT CONFINED TO THE DICTIONARY.
DEFINITIONS OF SCIENCE
1. the systematic observation of natural events and conditions in order to discover facts about them and to formulate laws and principles based on these facts. 2. the organized body of knowledge that is derived from such observations and that can be verified or tested by further investigation. 3. any specific branch of this general body of knowledge, such as biology, physics, geology, or astronomy. - Academic Press Dictionary of Science & Technology
Science is an intellectual activity carried on by humans that is designed to discover information about the natural world in which humans live and to discover the ways in which this information can be organized into meaningful patterns. A primary aim of science is to collect facts (data). An ultimate purpose of science is to discern the order that exists between and amongst the various facts.
Dr. Sheldon Gottlieb in a lecture series at the University of South Alabama
Science consists simply of the formulation and testing of hypotheses based on observational evidence; experiments are important where applicable, but their function is merely to simplify observation by imposing controlled conditions.
Robert H. Dott, Jr., and Henry L. Batten, Evolution of the Earth (2nd edition)
Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceeding generation . . .As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.
Richard Feynman, Nobel-prize-winning physicist
Does ANY of these conform to YOUR Dictionary of Science ?
Again, u can claim that i am talking rubbish, but the Truth is.. WHAT IS TRUE, MAY NOT BE THE TRUTH, This is the GIST OF MY ENTIRE BELIEF IN TRUTH. Unfortunately, u are just TOO STUPID. And TOO IGNORANT.
As i already PREVIOSLY stated, regarding the meaning of True and Truth.
Scientific knowledge is human knowledge and scientists are human beings. They are not gods, and science is not infallible. Yet, the general public often thinks of scientific claims as absolutely certain truths. They think that if something is not certain, it is not scientific and if it is not scientific, then any other non-scientific view is its equal. This misconception seems to be, at least in part, behind the general lack of understanding about the nature of scientific theories.
We have been discussing some of the history of the concept of truth as applied to scienfitic knowledge. In light of that history, we can see that to regard scientific knowledge as true, or even as approaching TRUTH, is actually quite suspect. YOU SHOULD KNOW THAT BY NOW.
Yes, i take definition of Truth from dictionary, one of them yes. Men of intelligence can pick for themselves the dictionary explaination whether to follow or not, SO CAN I. These are scientists themselves. IF U HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ME TAKING TRUTH from DICTIONARY, SCIENCE FROM ELSEWHERE, TOO BAD. If these MEN of "science" "Philosophers" "Scholars" can do it... so can I.
BY ALL MEANS, i got NO BEEF with the pages getting LONGER n LONGER. I answered ALL YOUR QUESTIONS PAGES BEFORE. AND U KEEP PUTTING WORDS INTO MY MOUTH. So, there is NO POINT, i continue. I will JUST ask u to refer to my OLD POSTS. Its very clear, I wil just repeat the SAME THING how u REPEAT THE SAME QUESTIONS. U are just too stupid.
AGAIN, PASTE where i said Gravity is NOT TRUTH. Simple. U cant, u can only SAY i said. I am still waiting UNTIL NOW...
-
I can see tat u r really just denying everything and refuse to read other people's point.
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: god is a truth tat has no scope
My ans: God is not even shown to be true, thus not even truth and thus is just talking cock.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity.
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I can see tat u r really just denying everything and refuse to read other people's point.
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: god is a truth tat has no scope
My ans: God is not even shown to be true, thus not even truth and thus is just talking cock.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity.
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
OH.. now I am denying and refusing to answer and read other peoples point ? Gee... I wonder... who has been denying, refusing and not admitting to their mistakes, and understanding another's point of view and continuing to force feed down another's throat on his own opinions.
I said
17 Jan 10, 5.52PM
“Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth).”
17 Jan 10, 11.49PM
“Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth.. Newtons is true on this planet for now, until proven otherwise. But the existence of gravity will still be the truth. Are u putting words in my mouth now ? “
And many many instances leading up to our current post. Lets then we FAST FORWARD to 20++ January I said:
“They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ? “
As u noticed, I was referring to the Theory of the TRUTH fo Gravity. U dont call it the Fact of the Truth of Gravity ? Or the Truth of the Truth of Gravity ? U know, for someone who supposedly have SUPERIOR grammar skills, u clearly are not very smart.
23 Jan 10, 12:58PM
“Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. “
So, are u purposely trying to put words into my mouth ? U know u can give up on this point ? U can give up on trying to say i said gravity is not truth u know. Its kinda a pathetic attempt.
Now lets see,
18 Jan 10, 12.53AM
“I am trying to aim for a different truth. Mathematically 1 + 1 = 2 is a true and a truth. (Since I saw this one I might as well add it in” <---- oh.. whats this ? Is it no WITHIN the scope of my meaning ? But I guess, u just cant understand.
You dont believe in God, thats YOUR problem, u cant accept mine, I cant accept yours. Thats it. MOVE ON.
YOUR ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
Mine: The reason why the WHY and HOW are not truths because they have been wrong before.
And,
U said on 27 Jan10 5:20pm
“And I said, the WHY and HOW r truth. Science can be wrong, but it got most of the things correct.”
So, wouldnt that contradict your statements that the Why and How are Truths ? Since u said science can be wrong! And your Truth = True. U never specify. Its like the Definition, 'Science is a body of truths”, so , based on your previous statement “Science can be wrong” wouldnt that contradict with that statement too ? In that statement, it did NOT say “MOSTLY body of Truths” or “ SOME body of Truths” ...etc , so based on that, the definition u used would seem invalid at this point. SO how do u reconcile with these statements about science can be wrong ?
YOU said “My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. “
"STUPIDISMART on the 23rd Jan 1.03pm
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter."
So u agree with me that it is Undefined and NOT a legitimate operation? Hence if 0/0 can be defined, I can prove that 1 = 2 . Thats why I said , 0/0 IS A FALLACY in maths. If its a fallacy, how can it be the truth. And u said zero to infinity. Unless u wish to retract that statement and admit to the omission or u going to ignore it like you always do.
YES I claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
And YOU answered,
If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
Well, I guess then we have to once again have to bring us back to THIS statement again,
StupidIsSmart on 27 Jan10 5:20pm
“And I said, the WHY and HOW r truth. Science can be wrong, but it got most of the things correct.”
So, IF once again science can be wrong, and the science is the how and why, wouldnt that be unable to make your How and Why Truth ? Because they can be wrong! If u think Science is Why and How and Science can be wrong, therefore the Why and How can be WRONG TOO. Sounds simliar to MY POINT yes ?
And back to your definition of Science = BODY OF TRUTHS , Since, the top of the statement has already stated the How and Why can be Wrong, and also your LOGIC of :-
If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
So, wouldnt that ONCE AGAIN CONTRADICT your own DEFINITION OF SCIENCE ? SO.. TELL ME, at the end of the day, how do you reconcile with all these CONTRADICTIONS with YOURSELF ? So is Science Truth ? Is it ? OR isnt it ?Answer this simple question.
Sounds familiar ? Sound like you.
UR ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
Please before I even answer, explain to me first, how do u reconcile ? If u cant, and u have to change your definition, then I guess we have nothing to say on this point then.
What is True.. may NOT be the Truth. The gist of my whole point from beginning till now.
-
Aiya don't care about Badzie lah, this horrible rotten japanese sushi.
-
s u noticed, I was referring to the Theory of the TRUTH fo Gravity. U dont call it the Fact of the Truth of Gravity ? Or the Truth of the Truth of Gravity ? U know, for someone who supposedly have SUPERIOR grammar skills, u clearly are not very smart.
Let us see the sentence again
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
And furthermore, lets us see the below statement
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
Now your argument is, u r talking about the theory of truth of gravity ??! Now why is theory of gravity = theory of truth of gravity ? Your english is really horrible. "Theory of gravity" is obviously "theory of gravity". WHy u can suddenly add in two words inside one ? Like tat I can also play tis game
U said "Now lets see". Playing by your adding words game, I can make it become totally different like " Now lets see wat an idiot like u can say about the above"
oh.. whats this ? Is it no WITHIN the scope of my meaning ? But I guess, u just cant understand.
Why should we move on ? Tis is again evidence showing your cock theory. U claim tat truth must encompass EVERYTHING. It must work in ALL scenario. Tat is certainly rubbish because all facts has a certain boundary and scope. Gravity works only for physical matters. 1+1 only works for things of the same context. Medicine only focused on curing a certain illness, not all illnesses. Evolution talks about living things, not rock and sand. U see. They all have scopes.
Then u said god is truth. Why ? The moonies r wrong before. So is jehova witness or many other cults in tis world. According to u, since it is false, then all theologists r wrong, including christians theologists. Then god is false since it is a theory by them.
So, wouldnt that contradict your statements that the Why and How are Truths ? Since u said science can be wrong! And your Truth = True. U never specify. Its like the Definition, 'Science is a body of truths”, so , based on your previous statement “Science can be wrong” wouldnt that contradict with that statement too ? In that statement, it did NOT say “MOSTLY body of Truths” or “ SOME body of Truths” ...etc , so based on that, the definition u used would seem invalid at this point. SO how do u reconcile with these statements about science can be wrong ?
Science is a body of truth, and u r complaining because u said tat it has been wrong before, the statement is wrong. However did u realise tat if science detects something is wrong, it will correct itself and reflect the truth. SO it could be wrong before, but it is corrected instantly.SO there is nothing wrong with tis statement because it is always updated to reflect the truth
So u agree with me that it is Undefined and NOT a legitimate operation? Hence if 0/0 can be defined, I can prove that 1 = 2 . Thats why I said , 0/0 IS A FALLACY in maths. If its a fallacy, how can it be the truth. And u said zero to infinity. Unless u wish to retract that statement and admit to the omission or u going to ignore it like you always do.
Tis is rubbish. 0/0 is NOT DEFINED. So your assumption is wrong. SO all the cock here is all wrong
If u think Science is Why and How and Science can be wrong, therefore the Why and How can be WRONG TOO.
And so ? The answers to the WHY and HOW could be wrong and then ? If it is proven wrong, it is not true. But if it isn't wrong then it is the truth. And if I am not wrong 99.99% of the theories and law r never proven wrong.
U wrote wrongly (your false asnd true statements before) before so everything u write is wrong ?
Now lets see wat r the others things which u had no answers to
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
15 Jan 1108pm, u said
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity"
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: god is a truth tat has no scope
My ans: God is not even shown to be true, thus not even truth and thus is just talking cock.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U r still stuck in your elementary maths and think tat UNDEFINE value must have a cut in the graph like a variable
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth.
-
This is in reply to the original post.
Darwinism is still a theory. It is widely accepted because it is more credible han other theories. You are only discrediting the theroy by saying that fossilisation can take place in only a couple of years. While i'm not saying that this is untrue, you must also take into account that the time period the fossil is obtained can be measured by carbon dating. So we can be more or less sure when the fossil comes from
That aside darwinism does not exist to disprove religion. Have you considered that it may serve as a way to explain our existence with respect to religion.
Religion states that god placed man on earth. It is generally assumed that god just plucked us out of heaven and placed us literally on earth. Though this is the most obvious interpretation of the religions that are Abrahamic, in no text is this explicitly stated to be true.
Darwinism and evolution can explain how god made man come to be.
And can you other idiots learn to converse logically and not go around calling others stupid and using caps to shout your points.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
\Let us see the sentence again
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
And furthermore, lets us see the below statement
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
Now your argument is, u r talking about the theory of truth of gravity ??! Now why is theory of gravity = theory of truth of gravity ? Your english is really horrible. "Theory of gravity" is obviously "theory of gravity". WHy u can suddenly add in two words inside one ? Like tat I can also play tis game
U said "Now lets see". Playing by your adding words game, I can make it become totally different like " Now lets see wat an idiot like u can say about the above"
Why should we move on ? Tis is again evidence showing your cock theory. U claim tat truth must encompass EVERYTHING. It must work in ALL scenario. Tat is certainly rubbish because all facts has a certain boundary and scope. Gravity works only for physical matters. 1+1 only works for things of the same context. Medicine only focused on curing a certain illness, not all illnesses. Evolution talks about living things, not rock and sand. U see. They all have scopes.
Then u said god is truth. Why ? The moonies r wrong before. So is jehova witness or many other cults in tis world. According to u, since it is false, then all theologists r wrong, including christians theologists. Then god is false since it is a theory by them.
Science is a body of truth, and u r complaining because u said tat it has been wrong before, the statement is wrong. However did u realise tat if science detects something is wrong, it will correct itself and reflect the truth. SO it could be wrong before, but it is corrected instantly.SO there is nothing wrong with tis statement because it is always updated to reflect the truth
Tis is rubbish. 0/0 is NOT DEFINED. So your assumption is wrong. SO all the cock here is all wrong
And so ? The answers to the WHY and HOW could be wrong and then ? If it is proven wrong, it is not true. But if it isn't wrong then it is the truth. And if I am not wrong 99.99% of the theories and law r never proven wrong.
U wrote wrongly (your false asnd true statements before) before so everything u write is wrong ?
Now lets see wat r the others things which u had no answers to
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
15 Jan 1108pm, u said
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity"
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: god is a truth tat has no scope
My ans: God is not even shown to be true, thus not even truth and thus is just talking cock.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U r still stuck in your elementary maths and think tat UNDEFINE value must have a cut in the graph like a variable
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth.
Well, lets see.. i had to say the Theory of the Truth of Gravity to you, because u just too stupid when i kept telling u that Gravity is truth, theory is true, and the theory is used to EXPLAIN the WHY and HOW of the Truth and that is Gravity. And when i said, they dont go about saying Theory of Gravity as Fact of Gravity or Truth of Gravity , instead using Theory is because it can be wrong, hence Theory is safer and is true.
Theory of Gravity ? Whats wrong with that ? It took them ages. Gravity is the Truth, the theory took them ages to explain that phenomenon. SO where and what did i say wrong ? Can you like.. read man ? Are u .. are u stupid ? Its just that u cant understand. I just had to break it down for you.
I said
17 Jan 10, 5.52PM
“Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth).”
17 Jan 10, 11.49PM
“Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth.. Newtons is true on this planet for now, until proven otherwise. But the existence of gravity will still be the truth. Are u putting words in my mouth now ? “
And many many instances leading up to our current post. Lets then we FAST FORWARD to 20++ January I said:
“They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ? “
As u noticed, I was referring to the Theory of the TRUTH fo Gravity. U dont call it the Fact of the Truth of Gravity ? Or the Truth of the Truth of Gravity ? U know, for someone who supposedly have SUPERIOR grammar skills, u clearly are not very smart.
23 Jan 10, 12:58PM
“Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. “
So, are u purposely trying to put words into my mouth ? U know u can give up on this point ? U can give up on trying to say i said gravity is not truth u know. Its kinda a pathetic attempt.
U believe God doesnt exist, not true, not a truth, so be it. U can say i am talking cock all u want, but in the end of the day, to me , he is the Truth and scopeless. And to quote you, " I think that you not believing in God is also talking cock then" , i already said , move on. U still need to answer... guess u just cant accept others beliefs. I already , its a noted difference in opinion.. MOVE ON.
Again , another stupid question about the theory of Gravity, i already said, its a Theory , it can be wrong, i cannot hold it as Truth, but Gravity on the other hand , IS TRUTH. Are u dumb ? How many times u want me to say Gravity is Truth when i said it since the BEGINNING OF THE THREAD. Guess u ARE just too stupid. There is no other explaination in you continuing to think i dont think gravity is a Truth.
I got no problem with Theologians being wrong, but God IS Truth to them, they are just finding the evidence to support. I never said Theologians are Truth. They TRY to find the evidence. Simple.
Regarding your scope, I agree, Gravity works in its scope. I DONT agree with Maths because it has FAILED in its scopes in quantity, even within its context, it has failed. And i because i believe God is scopeless, and even IF ALL the truths work within its scope, i still cant say ALL truth's work within its scope, because God is scopeless to me, hence i believe that not all truth's have to have its scope. Thats why i said move on. Obviously this is a difference in opinion. N i am willing to accept yours. Simple. U dont believe God, but I do. SO MOVE ON.
"YOUR ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?"
What happened to your supperior grammar ? Thats beside the point. You already stated that Science = Body of Truths , Science can be wrong, and since u get True = True , therefore , that definition of science can also be wrong. You already admitted in falsehood. When there is falsehood, there is no longer body of truths. Unless ur definition includes.. SOME body of truths , or MOSTLY body of truths , which is NOT the case.
"My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U r still stuck in your elementary maths and think tat UNDEFINE value must have a cut in the graph like a variable"
"STUPIDISMART on the 23rd Jan 1.03pm
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter."
Oh wait.. didnt I SAY ITS UNDEFINED ? mmm... wonder who said zero to infinity. Hence u are defining it! So 1 =2 . =D
So u agree with me that it is Undefined and NOT a legitimate operation? Hence if 0/0 can be defined, I can prove that 1 = 2 . Thats why I said , 0/0 IS A FALLACY in maths. If its a fallacy, how can it be the truth. And u said zero to infinity. Unless u wish to retract that statement and admit to the omission or u going to ignore it like you always do.
YOUR Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
GUESS U LIKE TO CUT N PASTE UR UNANSWERED QUESTIONS WITH THE SAME THING. Be a man.. dun be such a wuss.
So, wouldnt that ONCE AGAIN CONTRADICT your own DEFINITION OF SCIENCE ? SO.. TELL ME, at the end of the day, how do you reconcile with all these CONTRADICTIONS with YOURSELF ? So is Science Truth ? Is it ? OR isnt it ?Answer this simple question.
YOUR ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
So, IF once again science can be wrong, and the science is the how and why, wouldnt that be unable to make your How and Why Truth ? Because they can be wrong! If u think Science is Why and How and Science can be wrong, therefore the Why and How can be WRONG TOO. Sounds simliar to MY POINT yes ?
And back to your definition of Science = BODY OF TRUTHS , Since, the top of the statement has already stated the How and Why can be Wrong, and also your LOGIC of :-
If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
So, wouldnt that ONCE AGAIN CONTRADICT your own DEFINITION OF SCIENCE ? SO.. TELL ME, at the end of the day, how do you reconcile with all these CONTRADICTIONS with YOURSELF ? So is Science Truth ? Is it ? OR isnt it ?Answer this simple question.
Your ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth.
What happened to your superior logic ? If your previous statement is already wrong , science is wrong already , and even if u correct it , u cannot negate the fact that it was wrong . Some theories are just so totally different and totally wrong that doesnt relect the truth. Like the Universe rotates around the Earth. Or how the Earth was Flat. If this happens more then onec, there are probably theories right now that are probably wrong, so must accet the possibility of fallacy in thoeries now accepted as correct.
If that is the case, science CANT be body of truths , u have to accept possibilities that the theories may be wrong.
So its cut n paste now ? At least add some extra substance and flavour. It gets boring .. yawn~~
How about this one:
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
Ur ans: All your other definitions is dealing with facts and truth. It does not run in contradiction with the dictionary
Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceeding generation . . .As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt.
Richard Feynman, Nobel-prize-winning physicist
Please.. show me.. do they even look similarr to yours ? I mean , with my supposedly bad grammar and sucky english , hmmm... doesnt really look like your definition of "Body of Truths" . I dont know abut you, maybe u can enlighten me.
-
Originally posted by Audiophile:
This is in reply to the original post.
Darwinism is still a theory. It is widely accepted because it is more credible han other theories. You are only discrediting the theroy by saying that fossilisation can take place in only a couple of years. While i'm not saying that this is untrue, you must also take into account that the time period the fossil is obtained can be measured by carbon dating. So we can be more or less sure when the fossil comes from
That aside darwinism does not exist to disprove religion. Have you considered that it may serve as a way to explain our existence with respect to religion.
Religion states that god placed man on earth. It is generally assumed that god just plucked us out of heaven and placed us literally on earth. Though this is the most obvious interpretation of the religions that are Abrahamic, in no text is this explicitly stated to be true.
Darwinism and evolution can explain how god made man come to be.
And can you other idiots learn to converse logically and not go around calling others stupid and using caps to shout your points.
You got your point. I got no problem.
I personally believe in Science and Religion together side by side. Advcancing together.
And i like my caps, i like to.. HIGHLIGHT my points.
What calling ppl stupid ? I am just calling him by his name.. i mean... isnt that his name ?
lol
-
Well, lets see.. i had to say the Theory of the Truth of Gravity to you, because u just too stupid when i kept telling u that Gravity is truth, theory is true, and the theory is used to EXPLAIN the WHY and HOW of the Truth and that is Gravity. And when i said, they dont go about saying Theory of Gravity as Fact of Gravity or Truth of Gravity , instead using Theory is because it can be wrong, hence Theory is safer and is true.
I said tis before. I only need to prove tat u said in one instance tat gravity is not the truth, then I am right in saying u said gravity is not he truth before. One instance. In the beginning, your view of gravity is tat it is false. Only after debating with reservistsianz then u change your stand and said it is the truth.If u check the date, on the 15th u keep saying gravity is not truth and science is not truth. Only at the 17th onwards then u changed your stand
Theory of Gravity ? Whats wrong with that ? It took them ages. Gravity is the Truth, the theory took them ages to explain that phenomenon.
SO wat if they took "so long". Tat is not important for the discussion. U said it is the theory of gravitation. From a scientific angle, gravity consists of a theory.SO if it is a theory, it is the truth ?
U believe God doesnt exist, not true, not a truth, so be it. U can say i am talking cock all u want, but in the end of the day, to me , he is the Truth and scopeless. And to quote you, " I think that you not believing in God is also talking cock then" , i already said , move on. U still need to answer... guess u just cant accept others beliefs. I already , its a noted difference in opinion.. MOVE ON.
If u do not like to talk about god, so be it. We can move on from there.
But u said all truth must be scopeless and can work under all situations. I do not agree. SO I will still paste the point about truth having a scope in
U claim tat truth must encompass EVERYTHING. It must work in ALL scenario. Tat is certainly rubbish because all facts has a certain boundary and scope. Gravity works only for physical matters. 1+1 only works for things of the same context. Medicine only focused on curing a certain illness, not all illnesses. Evolution talks about living things, not rock and sand. U see. They all have scopes.
I got no problem with Theologians being wrong, but God IS Truth to them, they are just finding the evidence to support. I never said Theologians are Truth. They TRY to find the evidence. Simple.
Well according to u, science is NEVER about truth. However u also claimed Theologists is the ONLY one tat can handle truth. Tat to me, obviously is a double standard and a bad one since theologist r the one coming up with the most lies
I DONT agree with Maths because it has FAILED in its scopes in quantity, even within its context, it has failed. And i because i believe God is scopeless, and even IF ALL the truths work within its scope, i still cant say ALL truth's work within its scope, because God is scopeless to me, hence i believe that not all truth's have to have its scope.
SO u r still bringing in God into the picture now ? Tis is again another double standard. U claimed god is a truth but u cannot produce any evidence supporting it. U claimed science is not truth, even when they had brought tons of evidences etc. In tat case, god has a scope as well. Only believers think it is a truth. And thus its scope is only to believers because to non believers, it failed to be even true. The god changes from one form to another as well since different religions taught different gods
What happened to your supperior grammar ? Thats beside the point. You already stated that Science = Body of Truths , Science can be wrong, and since u get True = True , therefore , that definition of science can also be wrong. You already admitted in falsehood. When there is falsehood, there is no longer body of truths. Unless ur definition includes.. SOME body of truths , or MOSTLY body of truths , which is NOT the case.
Nah.. there is something wrng with your grammer, not mine. I said before, science could be wrong, but the moment someone proves a part if wrong, tat part is no longer science. SO science is still a body of truth.
Another use of "body" in the form of the "science and its body of truth" could be "student body". The student body should consists of all students. However people from the student body do graduate from their school one day. But the student body is not grammatically wrong since those who had graduate simply leave the body. The student body is still consists of only students.
DO u understand now ?
Oh wait.. didnt I SAY ITS UNDEFINED ? mmm... wonder who said zero to infinity. Hence u are defining it! So 1 =2 . =D
U still do not understand the meaning of define. Define means it can be narrowed to ceratin values. I never narrow to any values so the answer I gave is undefined as well since it is any possible number. SO u r again wrong, with you tons of errors in tis subject
The rest of your message simply depends on the science definition part.
Now comes your other people definition
Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceeding generation . . .As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts
I think u need to know more about richrad feynman. The quote u gave about is nt complete. He said the following
Science alone of all the subjects contains within itself the lesson of the danger of belief in the infallibility of the greatest teachers in the preceding generation ... Learn from science that you must doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
The bottom line is simply saying one should doubt the experts and keep challenging science. Which is really nothing wrong. WHy not see wat other words he had about science and its truth ?
Our freedom to doubt was born out of a struggle against authority in the early days of science. It was a very deep and strong struggle: permit us to question — to doubt — to not be sure. I think that it is important that we do not forget this struggle and thus perhaps lose what we have gained.
The third aspect of my subject is that of science as a method of finding things out. This method is based on the principle that observation is the judge of whether something is so or not. All other aspects and characteristics of science can be understood directly when we understand that observation is the ultimate and final judge of the truth of an idea.
The remark which I read somewhere, that science is all right as long as it doesn't attack religion, was the clue I needed to understand the problem. As long as it doesn't attack religion it need not be paid attention to and nobody has to learn anything. So it can be cut off from society except for its applications, and thus be isolated. And then we have this terrible struggle to try to explain things to people who have no reason to want to know. But if they want to defend their own point of view, they will have to learn what yours is a little bit. So I suggest, maybe correctly and perhaps wrongly, that we are too polite.
It doesn't seem to me that this fantastically marvelous universe, this tremendous range of time and space and different kinds of animals, and all the different planets, and all these atoms with all their motions, and so on, all this complicated thing can merely be a stage so that God can watch human beings struggle for good and evil — which is the view that religion has. The stage is too big for the drama.
We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory. And, although you may gain some temporary fame and excitement, you will not gain a good reputation as a scientist if you haven't tried to be very careful in this kind of work. And it's this type of integrity, this kind of care not to fool yourself, that is missing to a large extent in much of the research in cargo cult science.
He is really very much a science person and believe science to be the truth.
-
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
15 Jan 1108pm, u said
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity"
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: god is a truth tat has no scope
My ans: God is not even shown to be true, thus not even truth and thus is just talking cock. And even if u insist it is true, it also has a scope because it ceases to be true to a non believer. Its scope is to believer only
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U do not even grasp the basic idea of wat is undefine. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U r still stuck in your elementary maths and think tat UNDEFINE value must have a cut in the graph like a variable. And any possible value from zero to infinity REINFORCE the idea it is undefined, and not being defined.
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts. And u just misquote Richard Feynman
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
-
All of you should just go and drink Kopi and eat french loaves. Don't ever come back again to mess up this forum.
-
Originally posted by BadzMaro:
You got your point. I got no problem.
I personally believe in Science and Religion together side by side. Advcancing together.
And i like my caps, i like to.. HIGHLIGHT my points.
What calling ppl stupid ? I am just calling him by his name.. i mean... isnt that his name ?
lol
They can be side by side, so long as they don't conflict or contradict each other