RE: Science anarchists

RE: Science anarchists (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 11:49:53 AM)
no such thing according to me shiteater. Integers having nothing whatsoever to do with time being set to zero so that you may divide by zero, according to RealDivideByZeroRetard. Integers certainly exist. time encompasses all numbers in the set {x\|x ≠ 0}

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:05:50 PM)
but according to you every numner must have interval and slope and found by ratio, that does not allow for an integer in the manner in which you are splaining it. [8\|]

WickedsDesire -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:08:34 PM)
Whats a time hack?

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:18:38 PM)
the number 4 is chronological and has a value of 4, I need no ratio to define it. that is when the clock is precisely 4, +/- 0, not 4 +/- a zeptocookie

WickedsDesire -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:24:19 PM)
No such thing can exist - dullard the dumbfukvoid There are no absolutes,ever, get that into your fuking pea brain-ever seem me argue an absolute? nah! Oo that reminds me the Babylonians had no zero

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:26:45 PM)
so in your world if 4 is not 4 what is it? [8\|]

WickedsDesire -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:29:40 PM)
You are to dim for me to try and explain why an absolute anything can exist. Next you will be telling me infinity is real

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:33:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne but according to you every numner must have interval and slope and found by ratio, that does not allow for an integer in the manner in which you are splaining it. [8\|] no dumbass. no single number need have an interval. here is one: 17. many numbers in several combinations need not have an interval. Do not say that I am saying that retarded shit, you are the only retarded shitbreather saying stupid shit. I have made exactly two points and two points only on this thread (aside from your being a profound fucking retard) Time can never be 0 it is not in the set of its numbers, as it is impossible, and it is a necessary and sufficient condition of the defintion of time that it cannot be zero. and no denominator can be 0. And for both, not fucking ever. Anyone who says to the contrary is a fucking retard, and that fits you.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Science anarchists (5/10/2017 12:39:50 PM)
There is no such thing as nothing - granted idiots pea brain comes close

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/11/2017 7:45:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WickedsDesire There is no such thing as nothing - granted idiots pea brain comes close thats true in the physical world not so in the abstract world.

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/11/2017 8:27:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne but according to you every numner must have interval and slope and found by ratio, that does not allow for an integer in the manner in which you are splaining it. [8\|] no dumbass. no single number need have an interval. here is one: 17. many numbers in several combinations need not have an interval. Do not say that I am saying that retarded shit, you are the only retarded shitbreather saying stupid shit. I have made exactly two points and two points only on this thread (aside from your being a profound fucking retard) Time can never be 0 it is not in the set of its numbers, as it is impossible, and it is a necessary and sufficient condition of the defintion of time that it cannot be zero. and no denominator can be 0. And for both, not fucking ever. Anyone who says to the contrary is a fucking retard, and that fits you. Oh thank you jesus, integers are safe from nutsuck politics, at least for the moment. Of course that doesnt say much for that shit mess you called math. the correct speed was 4 and the correct distance was 5, they are both single numbers on cartesian coordinate system, that you averaged, or divided to stuff your square peg in a round hole when the operation was entirely imbecile and incorrect. LOL Yeh and I did show that a point in space is instantaneous and has nothing to do with your relatives, and no dimension, if it had range or domain it would no longer be an interger. You dont need any math what so ever to read a ruler at 5 and the speedometer at 4.

thompsonx -> RE: Science anarchists (5/12/2017 6:44:20 AM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne ORIGINAL: thompsonx sorry tommy no one here by that name or description, you looking in the mirror and talking to yourself again I see. You are sorry alright. You, the Nazi buffoon who claims steel melts in a bonfire, have been shown to be a pathetic liar who when confronted with facts runs and hides and seeks to take the discussion into minutia and avoid the lies he has been found to post. This is your usual m.o. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. No tommy top shelf tardoid, melting steel is your claim, not mine. It is nice to see that after so many pages you finally admit that a bonfire cannot melt steel. Thank you.

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/12/2017 7:33:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Real0ne ORIGINAL: thompsonx sorry tommy no one here by that name or description, you looking in the mirror and talking to yourself again I see. You are sorry alright. You, the Nazi buffoon who claims steel melts in a bonfire, have been shown to be a pathetic liar who when confronted with facts runs and hides and seeks to take the discussion into minutia and avoid the lies he has been found to post. This is your usual m.o. Jesus you are phoquing stupid. No tommy top shelf tardoid, melting steel is your claim, not mine. It is nice to see that after so many pages you finally admit that a bonfire cannot melt steel. Thank you. Oh yes absolutely, I feel bad for you that you are such a asshelmet loser that is incapable of pulling your head out of your ass long enough to see daylinght. No tommy top shelf tardoid, melting steel is your claim, not mine. I do remember asking you if you know how to make an average fire melt steel and you had no fucking clue. Nah anyone can see I am the only one who actually backs up my positions with citations, and contrary to your lying spin, its you who never backs up what you claim. If I find a nazi apologist I will let you know, if you are ignoracnt enough to think its me, which you most likely are I have Orthodox Jews backing my 6, so if you meant that for me anyone with 2 brain cells can see you are lying again. [img]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/holycausts/zionismisnazism1.jpg[/img] see that tomy you dope, those are jews, not amish like snotty claimed, and they got my 6. geezus you are fucking braindead

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/12/2017 7:39:30 AM)
LOL, some amish guys in Dresden, they are gone along with 625000 more of their kind. They aint got your nothing, retard.

WickedsDesire -> RE: Science anarchists (5/12/2017 12:50:58 PM)
heh dumbfuk1 are you a "pathetic liar"...why dont you do some good proper conspiracy threads? this Dresden you will not win. You have lost the argument 500 000 times thusfar and yet you continue - why?

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/12/2017 1:02:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne but according to you every numner must have interval and slope and found by ratio, that does not allow for an integer in the manner in which you are splaining it. [8\|] no dumbass. no single number need have an interval. here is one: 17. many numbers in several combinations need not have an interval. Do not say that I am saying that retarded shit, you are the only retarded shitbreather saying stupid shit. I have made exactly two points and two points only on this thread (aside from your being a profound fucking retard) Time can never be 0 it is not in the set of its numbers, as it is impossible, and it is a necessary and sufficient condition of the defintion of time that it cannot be zero. and no denominator can be 0. And for both, not fucking ever. Anyone who says to the contrary is a fucking retard, and that fits you. Oh thank you jesus, integers are safe from nutsuck politics, at least for the moment. Of course that doesnt say much for that shit mess you called math. the correct speed was 4 and the correct distance was 5, they are both single numbers on cartesian coordinate system, that you averaged, or divided to stuff your square peg in a round hole when the operation was entirely imbecile and incorrect. LOL Yeh and I did show that a point in space is instantaneous and has nothing to do with your relatives, and no dimension, if it had range or domain it would no longer be an interger. You dont need any math what so ever to read a ruler at 5 and the speedometer at 4. I said the entire cartoon was fucked dumb ass. learn to read, retard. There was no point a. 5m over 4 sec (you know what the over means? (two meanings here) is 1.25. You have shown a point in space is instantaneous not ever. Space is real too my friend, and it is constantly changing OVER TIME. I do not exist in the same space today, even though I am sitting at the same computer in the same chair as any other day. sorry, retard. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBlAGGzup48

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/13/2017 10:22:51 AM)
there most certainly is a point, where 4 and 5 intersect, the hack marks at 4 and 5 give you the first clue, the second clue is that the letter 'a' shows you there is a point, the 3rd clue is it is 'given' a single point, the point itself has no distance and no time, if it had a range or domain like you are pimping it could not be an instantaneous value and therefore not an integer. maybe integers are not safe [8\|]

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/13/2017 11:17:03 AM)
NO, THERE IS NO POINT HAVING TO DO WITH a THERE IS NO POINT. YOU KNOW HOW POINTS ARE MARKED BY NON-RETARDS? OF COURSE YOU DONT EVEN PROFOUNDLY RETARDED FUCKWHISTLES ONLY SLIGHTLY ABOVE YOUR ABSENSE OF INTELLECT WOULD KNOW THAT A POINT NO DISTANCE AND NO TIME IS DEFINED IN THE CARTESIAN COORDINATE SYSTEM AND THE VERY FOUNDATION OF THE CARTESIAN COORDINATE SYSTEM IS X=0 AND Y=0 AND IS IDENTIFIED IN THE CARTESIAN COORDINATE SYSTEM AS THE ORIGIN. Keep your day job licking toilets, you will never make it in the real world. You are digging your head deeper in your ass, it will be coming out your mouth by next post.

Real0ne -> RE: Science anarchists (5/13/2017 2:56:48 PM)
so then 4 is the diameter or radius of your point? same with 5 diameter or radius? [8\|] its clear you have some pretty big points! [sm=abducted.gif]

mnottertail -> RE: Science anarchists (5/14/2017 5:46:55 AM)
grab up a basic course in cartesian coosrdinate systems, the point at 0,0 exists as do points at 9,8. and they are not instantaneous, nor are they at a, as 5,4 is not, or 4,5 or whatever the cartoon is. There is also a point on my pencil, and the end of a nail, you have no point. RealDividebyZeroRetard, you are tinfoiling and wrong and retarded, and that is the central point.

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875