Freethought & Rationalism Archive

DNAunion · 03-20-2003, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Doubting Didymus: Sometimes when people ask a question, it really is just because they want to know the answer.

DNAunion: Funny you didn't consider that when I asked my question to you.

Doubting Didymus · 03-20-2003, 03:41 PM

Obviously, what I wanted from you was to express your use of the word "scratch" as an irrational number whose decimal representation neither terminates nor repeats and can not be written as a ratio of two integers.

I have very little patience for this kind of intellectual foxtrot. I am no dancer, and am bound to step hard on tender feet if I try. Thus, at this point I allege that you are far more interested in scoring points than you are in any actual dicussion that might be had on the topic, and that this marks you as simply not worth talking to.

DNAunion · 03-20-2003, 03:44 PM

Quote:

Doubting Didymus: Obviously, what I wanted from you was to express your use of the word "scratch" as an irrational number whose decimal representation neither terminates nor repeats and can not be written as a ratio of two integers.

DNAunion: You made a mistake. It is "cannot", not "can not".

And I see either you are too stupid to know what "such as" means, or that your demands are ridiculously high.

DNAunion · 03-20-2003, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Doubting Didymus: Thus, at this point I allege that you are far more interested in scoring points than you are in any actual dicussion that might be had on the topic, and that this marks you as simply not worth talking to.

DNAunion: You are a riot! Let's review the facts.

Who was it who first insulted the other person? It was you, Epididymus.

Doubting Didymus · 03-20-2003, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by DNAunion
DNAunion: You made a mistake. It is "cannot", not "can not".

Grow up.

Quote:

Actually, you made another mistake. Are you too stupid to know what "such as" means?

I knew exactly what you meant. Your talk of irrational numbers were meant as examples of definitions. My post in reply was intended as irony. Naturally, I will not make any inferences as to your intellect or insightfulness from the fact that you missed this.

Doubting Didymus · 03-20-2003, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Who was it who first insulted the other person? It was you, Epididymus.

I apologise for calling your post childish. "pedantic semantics" would have been more factual.

pangloss · 03-31-2003, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DNAunion
DNAunion: You made a mistake. It is "cannot", not "can not".

And I see either you are too stupid to know what "such as" means, or that your demands are ridiculously high.

Same old... same old...

So, hows the tutoring of Math 101 students going?

I should have thought that such a mind as yours would be better put to use solving the mysteries of the world, rather than hitting on - I mean, tutoring freshman....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-20-2003, 03:41 PM	#22
Doubting Didymus Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: East Coast. Australia. Posts: 5,455	Obviously, what I wanted from you was to express your use of the word "scratch" as an irrational number whose decimal representation neither terminates nor repeats and can not be written as a ratio of two integers. I have very little patience for this kind of intellectual foxtrot. I am no dancer, and am bound to step hard on tender feet if I try. Thus, at this point I allege that you are far more interested in scoring points than you are in any actual dicussion that might be had on the topic, and that this marks you as simply not worth talking to.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.