Lance wrote:Cyndi and I run it too, azazul, since 17 May 1999.
azazul wrote:Lance wrote:Cyndi and I run it too, azazul, since 17 May 1999.
Then why the hell aren't you on my team? You are dead to me.
Lance wrote:azazul wrote:Lance wrote:Cyndi and I run it too, azazul, since 17 May 1999.
Then why the hell aren't you on my team? You are dead to me.
Yeah, I'm there now, and in 4th place. Cool.
azazul wrote:Sweet, by the way, I am sure you know this but I was just kidding.
azazul wrote:Feel free to join any team you wish, I will not complain, the program as a whole is more important than any team.
Lance wrote:What ever happened to Orbit, anyway? The last update on their site was in November.
Enzo wrote:Are you suggesting that logic is done with calculus?
Bill_Thompson wrote:It seems common sense is not done with calculus.
Notice how what should be a level-headed scientific discussion has moved into the trash bin.
Original Post of Thompson's wrote:So stop being a SETI@Home, head-in-the-sand, ignorant ass hole and download the Rosetta@home software.
Afterall, Enrico Fermi was a hell of a lot smarter than you, dumbass. So stop dreaming of finding a vulcan to mate with and do something useful with your time and life on Earth.
Lonewulf wrote:Bill_Thompson wrote:It seems common sense is not done with calculus.
Notice how what should be a level-headed scientific discussion has moved into the trash bin.Original Post of Thompson's wrote:So stop being a SETI@Home, head-in-the-sand, ignorant ass hole and download the Rosetta@home software.
Afterall, Enrico Fermi was a hell of a lot smarter than you, dumbass. So stop dreaming of finding a vulcan to mate with and do something useful with your time and life on Earth.
Very level-headed and scientific. I am most impressed.
I mean, there is absolutely no reason why this wasn't destined for the Flames area at all. Nope, none whatsoever.
Halcyon Dayz wrote:I wonder if Billy Boy knows that Isaac Asimov was a scientist.
They do have standards, you know.
And regarding BOINC.
There are plenty of idle CPU-cycles to go around.
I bet all these projects will meet their goals.
Bill_Thompson wrote:The issue was how calculus was used to prove that Santa Clause just might exist.
Lance wrote:Bill_Thompson wrote:The issue was how calculus was used to prove that Santa Clause just might exist.
Okay, so you're saying that calculus can be used to prove stupid points. Cool, dismis calculus. What does that have to do with anything?
Khrushchev's Other Shoe wrote:Lance wrote:Bill_Thompson wrote:The issue was how calculus was used to prove that Santa Clause just might exist.
Okay, so you're saying that calculus can be used to prove stupid points. Cool, dismis calculus. What does that have to do with anything?
Why would anyone need to use calculus to prove the possible existence of Santa Clause? All you need to do is prove that the non-existence of Santa Clause is not included in or implied by your set of axioms.
Bill_Thompson wrote:Lonewulf wrote:Bill_Thompson wrote:It seems common sense is not done with calculus.
Notice how what should be a level-headed scientific discussion has moved into the trash bin.Original Post of Thompson's wrote:So stop being a SETI@Home, head-in-the-sand, ignorant ass hole and download the Rosetta@home software.
Afterall, Enrico Fermi was a hell of a lot smarter than you, dumbass. So stop dreaming of finding a vulcan to mate with and do something useful with your time and life on Earth.
Very level-headed and scientific. I am most impressed.
I mean, there is absolutely no reason why this wasn't destined for the Flames area at all. Nope, none whatsoever.
What does this have to do with what I am talking about? The issue was how calculus was used to prove that Santa Clause just might exist.
Bill_Thompson wrote:Lance got off on finding and posting a link where someone used logical inclusion rules to show that Fermi's paradox does not prove that there is no ETI. But the same sort of logical inclusion rules can be used to prove that santa claus just might exist. It is a misuse of calculus. Sure, santa clause just might exist. But this does not prove anything.
Bill_Thompson wrote:Halcyon Dayz wrote:I wonder if Billy Boy knows that Isaac Asimov was a scientist.
They do have standards, you know.
And regarding BOINC.
There are plenty of idle CPU-cycles to go around.
I bet all these projects will meet their goals.
That is true, Isaac Asimov was a scientist. But what was he primarily and how will he be most remembered?
Lonewulf wrote:How someone is remembered has nothing to do with what they were capable of, what skills they had, or what kind of education they had.
Bill_Thompson wrote:Lance got off on finding and posting a link where someone used logical inclusion rules to show that Fermi's paradox does not prove that there is no ETI.
But the same sort of logical inclusion rules can be used to prove that santa claus just might exist.
It is a misuse of calculus.
Sure, santa clause just might exist.
But this does not prove anything.
MM_Dandy wrote:I disagree in that that is not always the case. Leonardo da Vinci, for instance, is well-remembered for his artistic skill.
Bill_Thompson's argument, however, would discredit DaVinci's ability as a scientist because he may be better remembered as an artist.
Return to Infuriati (The Enraged Ones)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests