Does this post offend you?
-
if this thread was a stock i would have made millions..
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I did not any lies. I am just trying to tell u tat your claims is unfair and cannot supercede the website information. If I am someone who is gonan go to germany, I may believe the words of a senior who went there. However u r a person trying to argue tat oral exams r more difficult here and your claims can be selfish and untrue and u cannot proved it out. As said before, if u claim tat singaporean felt it is more diificult, then u have to prove it out. Otherwise it is just an empty claim tat has little weight
It means u cannot read and conclude properly. And u had failed to prove I had made any errors
I think u need to know wat is software engineer. They do programming, not use photoshop to beautify things here and there. Beautifying a graphic is the role of a graphic designer. Look at the job scope of a software engineer first before u make a comment
Software engineering is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software.[1] It encompasses techniques and procedures, often regulated by a software development process, with the purpose of improving the reliability and maintainability of software systems.[2] The effort is necessitated by the potential complexity of those systems, which may contain millions of lines of code.[3]
I think u r the dumb ass here. The logic u derived in trying to prove an engineer lectures is the same in giving the conclusion an engineer manages the country. The logic flow is the same and it shows your logic sucks.
And so ? because he is a professor he is already different from an engineer. Your logic flow tat because he is a professor and he is an engineer at the same time, u push the professor job to be an engineer job. Tat is ridiculous isn't it ? I pointed it out to u by giving examples tat highlighted your stupidity but sad to say u persist in being one.
I did not any lies. I am just trying to tell u tat your claims is unfair and cannot supercede the website information. If I am someone who is gonan go to germany, I may believe the words of a senior who went there. However u r a person trying to argue tat oral exams r more difficult here and your claims can be selfish and untrue and u cannot proved it out. As said before, if u claim tat singaporean felt it is more diificult, then u have to prove it out. Otherwise it is just an empty claim tat has little weight
If the website is all the information that a potential student need because it is extremely accurate, then in your logic, there's absolutely no reason why the different exchange students and I are all required to meet the potential students and tell them what is going on.
Your logic clearly doesn't hold.
It means u cannot read and conclude properly. And u had failed to prove I had made any errors
Need i repost again to show you how you quote me saying 3000 as a salary, and then you telling me "tat is your takehome pay"?
And then now after you quoted me, you tell me you are referencing to another thread????
Don't bring anymore dumb logic please.
I think u need to know wat is software engineer. They do programming, not use photoshop to beautify things here and there. Beautifying a graphic is the role of a graphic designer. Look at the job scope of a software engineer first before u make a comment
Software engineering is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software.[1] It encompasses techniques and procedures, often regulated by a software development process, with the purpose of improving the reliability and maintainability of software systems.[2] The effort is necessitated by the potential complexity of those systems, which may contain millions of lines of code.[3]
Read again:
Software engineering is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software
1) Using photoshop is considered as operation of software.
2) Photoshop is not only for beautifying things here and there. Don't talk rubbish and take only 1 aspect of photoshop to prove a general point.
3) Your understanding of graphic designers is flawed
A graphic designer (also known as a graphic artist and communication designer) is a professional within the graphic design and graphic arts industry who assembles together images, typography or motion graphics to create a piece of design
Are you still going to tell me that within a team that is coming up with a game, a software engineer employed to do graphics designing as part of the overall package has to do with computer science and maths?
I think u r the dumb ass here. The logic u derived in trying to prove an engineer lectures is the same in giving the conclusion an engineer manages the country. The logic flow is the same and it shows your logic sucks.
And so ? because he is a professor he is already different from an engineer. Your logic flow tat because he is a professor and he is an engineer at the same time, u push the professor job to be an engineer job. Tat is ridiculous isn't it ? I pointed it out to u by giving examples tat highlighted your stupidity but sad to say u persist in being one.
And one more fact for you
The meaning of the word professor (Latin: professor, person who professes to be an expert in some art or science, teacher of highest rank[1]) varies. In some English-speaking countries, it refers to a senior academic who holds a departmental chair, especially as head of the department, or a personal chair awarded specifically to that individual. For example, in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand it is a legal title conferred by a university denoting the highest academic rank, whereas in the United States, Brazil, Canada and Hong Kong, individuals often use the term professor as a polite form of address for any lecturer or researcher employed by a college or university, regardless of rank. In some countries, e.g. Austria, France, Romania, Slovenia, Serbia, Poland and Italy, the term is an honorific applied also to secondary level teachers.
Professors are merely legal titles and a form of address. An engineer with the title of "Professor" coaches new engineering students; his main job is education. He is still an engineer.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
And i enjoy your ah pui style and teasing of me too..hehehe, me now an Angel ya.can't say right ? .... or you can't make up your mind what you want to be now ? ...
foreigner/PR/Singaporean ? .... Poly/Uni/JC ? ....
haiz ...
-
If the website is all the information that a potential student need because it is extremely accurate, then in your logic, there's absolutely no reason why the different exchange students and I are all required to meet the potential students and tell them what is going on.
Your logic clearly doesn't hold.
U can tell them things like how fun it is, wat problems they will face, some personal encounters, something unique in the other people country etc. As said before, if a senior tell me story of his exchange, I will tend to trust him. But a person debating over an issue cannot rely on his account as absolute. Otherwise why do we need judge or jury since all accounts r absolute ? My logic clearly hold and talk is cheap
Need i repost again to show you how you quote me saying 3000 as a salary, and then you telling me "tat is your takehome pay"?
And then now after you quoted me, you tell me you are referencing to another thread????
Don't bring anymore dumb logic please.
Did I need to repeat and tell u the "tat" refers to the >3000 amount which I has stated ? U love to go in circles ?
Read again:
Software engineering is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software
1) Using photoshop is considered as operation of software.
2) Photoshop is not only for beautifying things here and there. Don't talk rubbish and take only 1 aspect of photoshop to prove a general point.
3) Your understanding of graphic designers is flawed
U need to see the word "AND". U have to develop, operate and maintain the software. Not operate the software solely. If tat is the case I use Windows office to write a report and I am classified as a software engineer. In fact a kid who plays video game is a software engineer too. Is tat your flawed logic ?
My understanding of graphic designer is flawed ? Wiki agrees with me
A graphic designer (also known as a graphic artist and communication designer) is a professional within the graphic design and graphic arts industry who assembles together images, typography or motion graphics to create a piece of design. A graphic designer creates the graphics primarily for published, printed or electronic media, such as brochures and advertising. They are also sometimes responsible for typesetting, illustration and web design, or take a teaching position, although these specialties may be assigned to specialists in various graphic design occupations. A core responsibility of the designer's job is to present information in a way that is both accessible and aesthetic
Are you still going to tell me that within a team that is coming up with a game, a software engineer employed to do graphics designing as part of the overall package has to do with computer science and maths?
If he do graphic designing as his main job, then he is a graphic designer.
Professors are merely legal titles and a form of address. An engineer with the title of "Professor" coaches new engineering students; his main job is education. He is still an engineer.
U have a wrong understanding of professor. A professor is an occupation. If u see the person name card it stated "professor". If he tell people wat he do, he say he is a professor on which school and field. He is not an engineer with the title professor, he is a professor. It is completely different from an engineer. Do u know wat job do wat ? u clearly do not know wat tis occupation do and wat tat occupation do.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
can't say right ? .... or you can't make up your mind what you want to be now ? ...
foreigner/PR/Singaporean ? .... Poly/Uni/JC ? ....
haiz ...
Just be an Happy Angel in the arm of my God,
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U can tell them things like how fun it is, wat problems they will face, some personal encounters, something unique in the other people country etc. As said before, if a senior tell me story of his exchange, I will tend to trust him. But a person debating over an issue cannot rely on his account as absolute. Otherwise why do we need judge or jury since all accounts r absolute ? My logic clearly hold and talk is cheap
Did I need to repeat and tell u the "tat" refers to the >3000 amount which I has stated ? U love to go in circles ?
Read again:
U need to see the word "AND". U have to develop, operate and maintain the software. Not operate the software solely. If tat is the case I use Windows office to write a report and I am classified as a software engineer. In fact a kid who plays video game is a software engineer too. Is tat your flawed logic ?
My understanding of graphic designer is flawed ? Wiki agrees with me
A graphic designer (also known as a graphic artist and communication designer) is a professional within the graphic design and graphic arts industry who assembles together images, typography or motion graphics to create a piece of design. A graphic designer creates the graphics primarily for published, printed or electronic media, such as brochures and advertising. They are also sometimes responsible for typesetting, illustration and web design, or take a teaching position, although these specialties may be assigned to specialists in various graphic design occupations. A core responsibility of the designer's job is to present information in a way that is both accessible and aesthetic
If he do graphic designing as his main job, then he is a graphic designer.
U have a wrong understanding of professor. A professor is an occupation. If u see the person name card it stated "professor". If he tell people wat he do, he say he is a professor on which school and field. He is not an engineer with the title professor, he is a professor. It is completely different from an engineer. Do u know wat job do wat ? u clearly do not know wat tis occupation do and wat tat occupation do.
U can tell them things like how fun it is, wat problems they will face, some personal encounters, something unique in the other people country etc. As said before, if a senior tell me story of his exchange, I will tend to trust him. But a person debating over an issue cannot rely on his account as absolute. Otherwise why do we need judge or jury since all accounts r absolute ? My logic clearly hold and talk is cheap
Rubbish. That's not the main point of asking. Your logic of using the website to substantiate is already flawed. All those you stated above can be found in the websites of the different states.
Did I need to repeat and tell u the "tat" refers to the >3000 amount which I has stated ? U love to go in circles ?
Well, since you are so thick skulled and faced to tell me that your "tat" refers to a different thread when you quoted my post, it definitely needs more than one time to drive into your head that your quotes and referencing had an error.
U need to see the word "AND". U have to develop, operate and maintain the software. Not operate the software solely. If tat is the case I use Windows office to write a report and I am classified as a software engineer. In fact a kid who plays video game is a software engineer too. Is tat your flawed logic ?You like to play with the word "AND"? Check back your own definition of engineer of the "AND".
And I have specifically mentioned that it is a team work. Do you know what is team work at all? Your "AND" doesn't hold much ground here at all
If he do graphic designing as his main job, then he is a graphic designer.
Read again: Part of his software engineering team
I will have to add on that a person who operates or is in charge of an engine is also an engineer (as per dictionary.com). This is again not within your strict definition of an engineer.
There's a reason why your strict definition from wiki is limited and does not encompass everything. But I'm not going to tell as of yet.
U have a wrong understanding of professor. A professor is an occupation. If u see the person name card it stated "professor". If he tell people wat he do, he say he is a professor on which school and field. He is not an engineer with the title professor, he is a professor. It is completely different from an engineer. Do u know wat job do wat ? u clearly do not know wat tis occupation do and wat tat occupation do.
Now you are telling me wiki is wrong? Because wiki clearly did not state that it is an occupation. You can call Prof Lee, Prof Wong, etc, when addressing them.
But you don't call Politician Lee, Policeman Wong when addressing people
-
Rubbish. That's not the main point of asking. Your logic of using the website to substantiate is already flawed. All those you stated above can be found in the websites of the different states.
Flawed ? If tat is flawed then wat can be used ? Wat can be constituted as evidence in forum debate ? They r the expert in tis field and there is no institute in tis world tat can overwrite their view on tis matter. If u felt oral examination is better, than surely there will be some reputable university tat give high praise of such system. Wat do u produce ? Your stupid claims which is unverifiable and can easily be falsified
Well, since you are so thick skulled and faced to tell me that your "tat" refers to a different thread when you quoted my post, it definitely needs more than one time to drive into your head that your quotes and referencing had an error.
Tat represent the amount which I had stated and it is in the other thread and so ? Can u prove me wrong ? I am the one who write the message, i use the word "tat", I implied it to the amount I wrote before and not on the amount u stated. Tis is especially true since u have been pasting the wrong amount over and over again. Wat gives u the right to comment wat is right or wrong ? R u me ? Did I state tat "tat" represent 3000 exact ?
You like to play with the word "AND"? Check back your own definition of engineer of the "AND".
And I have specifically mentioned that it is a team work. Do you know what is team work at all? Your "AND" doesn't hold much ground here at all
Com'on... u stated i have a problem understanding "and" then u have to state wat is wrong with it. U have to do the 3 events to be considered as a software engineer. Wat is wrong with it ? U r so stupid u do not know wat is software engineer and dare to use it and u r so confused with a graphic developer tat u mixed up the two.
And if u talk about "team work", then I really wonder wat r u talking about. U mean I try to help the other people so I do his job for him, and u treat tat as his permanent job ? Com'on la... we go by the textbook definition of the word. Wat is a software engineer. Wat is classified as a software engineer. We don't go about looking at extraordinary examples and look at your poor friends who have to do multiple jobs at the same time
Any reason why software engineers study graphic designing?
Maybe the same reason why engineer study comm skill
will have to add on that a person who operates or is in charge of an engine is also an engineer (as per dictionary.com). This is again not within your strict definition of an engineer.
If u look at dictionary.com, there is a lot of different meaning for engineer, one of them is
a person who uses scientific knowledge to solve practical problems
Now you are telling me wiki is wrong? Because wiki clearly did not state that it is an occupation. You can call Prof Lee, Prof Wong, etc, when addressing them.
I think u r claiming one of the most funniest thing tat defied common knowledge. SO u r saying there is no such occupation as professor ? Why don't u stated it out loud for everyone to see. Clearly and explicitly state tis "There is no such occupation called professor" then I will reply on u tis point. Lets see how deep a sh!t u dug yourself into.
But you don't call Politician Lee, Policeman Wong when addressing people
Going by your stupid logic, then there is no such occupation as doctors since it is just a way of addressing.
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
GP paper ? ....
panadol doesn't cure schizophrenia you know ....
muahahhaahahahaaaaa -
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Flawed ? If tat is flawed then wat can be used ? Wat can be constituted as evidence in forum debate ? They r the expert in tis field and there is no institute in tis world tat can overwrite their view on tis matter. If u felt oral examination is better, than surely there will be some reputable university tat give high praise of such system. Wat do u produce ? Your stupid claims which is unverifiable and can easily be falsified
Tat represent the amount which I had stated and it is in the other thread and so ? Can u prove me wrong ? I am the one who write the message, i use the word "tat", I implied it to the amount I wrote before and not on the amount u stated. Tis is especially true since u have been pasting the wrong amount over and over again. Wat gives u the right to comment wat is right or wrong ? R u me ? Did I state tat "tat" represent 3000 exact ?
Com'on... u stated i have a problem understanding "and" then u have to state wat is wrong with it. U have to do the 3 events to be considered as a software engineer. Wat is wrong with it ? U r so stupid u do not know wat is software engineer and dare to use it and u r so confused with a graphic developer tat u mixed up the two. Really makes me wonder wat does NUS teaches.
And if u talk about "team work", then I really winder wat r u taling about. U mean I try to help the other people so I do his job for him, and u treat tat as his permanent job ? Com'on la... we go by the textbook definition of the word. Wat is a software engineer. Wat is classified as a software engineer. We don't go about looking at extraordinary examples and look at your poor friends who have to do multiple jobs at the same time
Maybe the same reason why engineer study comm skill
I think u r claiming one of the most funniest thing tat defied common knowledge. SO u r saying there is no such occupation as professor ? Why don't u stated it out loud for everyone to see. Clearly and explicitly state tis "There is no such occupation called professor" then I will reply on u tis point. Lets see how deep a sh!t u dug yourself into.
Flawed ? If tat is flawed then wat can be used ? Wat can be constituted as evidence in forum debate ? They r the expert in tis field and there is no institute in tis world tat can overwrite their view on tis matter. If u felt oral examination is better, than surely there will be some reputable university tat give high praise of such system. Wat do u produce ? Your stupid claims which is unverifiable and can easily be falsified
You are still telling us that you believe the webmaster of the website (of whom you have no idea about at all) more than a person with first hand experience? Are you very sure the webmaster is the expert that you are claiming?
Tat represent the amount which I had stated and it is in the other thread and so ? Can u prove me wrong ? I am the one who write the message, i use the word "tat", I implied it to the amount I wrote before and not on the amount u stated. Tis is especially true since u have been pasting the wrong amount over and over again. Wat gives u the right to comment wat is right or wrong ? R u me ? Did I state tat "tat" represent 3000 exact ?
ya la, you quote me, and you use "that" to imply things from another thread. Call yourself logical. When I quote your message and I mentioned the word "you", it wasn't talking about stupidissmart. My "you" is referring to some other forumer in another thread.
That's your logic, isn't it? Stupidissmart is not eagle, how would stupidissmart know which "you" eagle is referring to? Did I state that the NTU engineer earning $2.5k refers to a forumer nicknamed stupidissmart? Why did stupidissmart get so worked up over something not referring to him? Even the $3000 monthly salary that eagle talked about wasn't referring to stupidissmart. The "you" is referring to some other forumer.
Thus, going by your stupid logic, all your previous accusations are invalid.
Com'on... u stated i have a problem understanding "and" then u have to state wat is wrong with it. U have to do the 3 events to be considered as a software engineer. Wat is wrong with it ? U r so stupid u do not know wat is software engineer and dare to use it and u r so confused with a graphic developer tat u mixed up the two. Really makes me wonder wat does NUS teaches.
And if u talk about "team work", then I really winder wat r u taling about. U mean I try to help the other people so I do his job for him, and u treat tat as his permanent job ? Com'on la... we go by the textbook definition of the word. Wat is a software engineer. Wat is classified as a software engineer. We don't go about looking at extraordinary examples and look at your poor friends who have to do multiple jobs at the same time
You don't go about looking for extraordinary examples? I have said that all I need is one example to prove your "ALL" word wrong.
And what you said about a semi-conductor product engineer
Scientific knowledge and in tis case, sometimes maths had to be used
By using the word "sometimes", your strict definition of engineer from wiki already does not hold, because "engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints."
This still does not include poor understanding on your part of a product engineer because there are just so many different job scopes for them, of which one is merely looking and understanding the circuitry of the die. Even for an electrical engineer concerned with fixing of circuit boards for maybe TV or the fridge, does he require maths to fix the appliance to provide the solution??? Scientific knowledge, maybe, in that he has to know how to solder and where to solder, but maths??? And the electrical engineer in question provides a solution; he's not even concerned with "developing economical and safe solutions"!
Talk about textbook definition of the word. Indeed!
I think u r claiming one of the most funniest thing tat defied common knowledge. SO u r saying there is no such occupation as professor ? Why don't u stated it out loud for everyone to see. Clearly and explicitly state tis "There is no such occupation called professor" then I will reply on u tis point. Lets see how deep a sh!t u dug yourself into.
Don't need to put words into my mouth. Why don't you check both wiki and dictionary.com and tell me if the word "Professor" must necessary be an occupation too for a university or college, and tell me if it is stated anywhere that an engineer cannot be called a professor as a form of address, and thus has his main job as an educator.
"we go by the textbook definition of the word"
Take a further look at a professor who declared himself an engineer
http://www.ias.uwe.ac.uk/~a-winfie/And another engineer as a professor, where "he also makes a point to get out and practice his trade as a professional engineer. That's his way of bringing the real world of engineering to his students."
http://birmingham.bizjournals.com/birmingham/stories/2004/03/01/focus1.htmlAnd yet another engineer being named professor
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/marshall/news/news/releases/2004/H04-357.htmlLet us recap what was said in the first page
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper.
Of which there's no mention at all that the engineer in question must definitely be working in the engineering field. Yet time and again, you are trying to direct the discussion merely to the engineering field (because of your limited vision).
If you can say that the "more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper", then tell me to adhere strictly to
Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints.
you are already contradicting yourself. Writing a world class research paper, is that developing solutions? That is more in tune with educating the world on his research!
In addition, the job scope of a research engineer is to do research, probably come out with solutions, and then educate the world by writing his world class research paper.
You know what's limiting you in your wiki definition of an engineer? That's because they took their primary source of definition from a Professional Engineers Board. Research engineers and engineers as educators do not need certifications from Professional Engineers to start any project, nor are they really bound at all by any restrictions (or definitions) from any Professional Engineers Board; you don't get PE for research engineers or engineering educators.
What's the use of an engineer (like you) limiting yourself strictly to the definition of an engineer in wiki and telling me that engineers are all about developing solutions, when education is not even (to you) a main job? Without educating others, pray tell me, how will you be able to spread your solutions to others, and hence serve and contribute to the society (as what you have said, they serve and contribute by coming up with solutions).
In short, you are still one with limited vision, that an engineer must be "concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints" just because wiki states it, and education, to you, is not the main job of an engineer, even though it is the primary tool to spread your solutions to everyone else every time you come up with one.
A quick recap for you
Educating people is not the main job of an engineer and more like a training officer.
More examples for your limited brain
Position for sales engineer:
http://sg.jobstreet.com/jobs/2008/7/default/20/1931338.htm?fr=JGoing by your stupid logic, then there is no such occupation as doctors since it is just a way of addressing.
Do check dictionary.com before shooting aimlessly (yet again)
-
You are still telling us that you believe the webmaster of the website (of whom you have no idea about at all) more than a person with first hand experience? Are you very sure the webmaster is the expert that you are claiming?
U r talking RUBBISH here. The webpage is from the UNIVERSITY ! Tis is the PUBLIC STATEMENT issued from the university. Tis is approved for use by the university. Tis is not from a blog. Tis is from the school website. If u doubt their website, wat can u not doubt ? Anything in the internet is wrong. No evidence can ever be gather from the internet. Tis just show how stupid and ungrateful u r in trying to discredit the university u probably had attended before. I have issued tis challenge many tims for u. Show me a website from a prominent university tat support he use or oral exam over written exam. U cannot come out with anything. U only tell me your claims which u can never prove
ya la, you quote me, and you use "that" to imply things from another thread. Call yourself logical. When I quote your message and I mentioned the word "you", it wasn't talking about stupidissmart. My "you" is referring to some other forumer in another thread.
That's your logic, isn't it? Stupidissmart is not eagle, how would stupidissmart know which "you" eagle is referring to? Did I state that the NTU engineer earning $2.5k refers to a forumer nicknamed stupidissmart? Why did stupidissmart get so worked up over something not referring to him? Even the $3000 monthly salary that eagle talked about wasn't referring to stupidissmart. The "you" is referring to some other forumer.
Thus, going by your stupid logic, all your previous accusations are invalid.
Tis is really incredible. If u wanna pin point errors, then U R THE ONE MAKING THE FIRST ERROR. U claim I stated 3000 in the previus reply. Have I ever claimed 3000 ? I claimed >3000 ! Is >3000 the same as 3000 ? It is obviously NOT. If u wanna claim who made errors, u r the one and u made it first. I thought u refer to the amount which I stated which is >3000 and tat is why I say it is "tat". Then u use your own error and claim I made the error Tat is rich man.
You don't go about looking for extraordinary examples? I have said that all I need is one example to prove your "ALL" word wrong.
U can try. I still have not seen anything yet. Even ifu manage to find one example, wat have u proved ? U proved wiki to be wrong. And since I used the definition of wiki, u cannot default me for anything. Go on lor... try to redefine the word of engineer
By using the word "sometimes", your strict definition of engineer from wiki already does not hold, because "engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints."
Ok la. U wanna include math into the whoel definition, it is fine. Maths according to wikipedia is
Mathematics is the body of knowledge centered on such concepts as quantity, structure, space, and change, and also the academic discipline that studies them.
Nothing is wrong isn't it ?
This still does not include poor understanding on your part of a product engineer because there are just so many different job scopes for them, of which one is merely looking and understanding the circuitry of the die. Even for an electrical engineer concerned with fixing of circuit boards for maybe TV or the fridge, does he require maths to fix the appliance to provide the solution??? Scientific knowledge, maybe, in that he has to know how to solder and where to solder, but maths??? And the electrical engineer in question provides a solution; he's not even concerned with "developing economical and safe solutions"!
Looking at die is already about "shape" and "change" and "structure" and "quantity". Looking at circuitry on the fridge is already studying the "shape", "change", "structue" and "quantity". SO wat is wrong ? Seems u do not have an understanding of english words
Don't need to put words into my mouth. Why don't you check both wiki and dictionary.com and tell me if the word "Professor" must necessary be an occupation too for a university or college, and tell me if it is stated anywhere that an engineer cannot be called a professor as a form of address, and thus has his main job as an educator
I already ask u to state out LOUD and CLEAR. "Professor is not an occupation". State it out. Once u stated it out then I will start my attack on it. Tis is one of the most incredulous claim u ever made considering u come from a university. As said before if professor is a form of address and not an occupation, then doctors r just nurses but addressed as doctors.
Of which there's no mention at all that the engineer in question must definitely be working in the engineering field. Yet time and again, you are trying to direct the discussion merely to the engineering field (because of your limited vision).
Tis is rich. I say tat the important job for an engineer is to come out with solution. Engineer is obviously refering to the work doing engineering which is on providing solutions to practical problems. Tis is obviously in tune with definition on engineer.
Now u r saying engineer do not have to do "engineering". They can go to fiance or watsoever etc. If a trained engineer go to fiance, his job is not on engineering anymore. It is "fiance advisor/watsoever". If he go to become a police, he is not an engineer. He is a policeman. Just because he is trained before as an engineer doesn't mean his job has to be engineer. However tat doesn't mean engineer can be is working as fiance or police etc.
you are already contradicting yourself. Writing a world class research paper, is that developing solutions? That is more in tune with educating the world on his research!
In addition, the job scope of a research engineer is to do research, probably come out with solutions, and then educate the world by writing his world class research paper.
Why don't u read the previous statement I made
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper.
Now obviously I stated on research paper for research.
Now if u talk about research engineer, wat do they do ? MOST IMPORTANTLY, they have to find out the solution to a practical problem. THEN can they write a paper on it. So it is still not wrong to say the basic job of an engineer is still to find solution to practical problems
You know what's limiting you in your wiki definition of an engineer? That's because they took their primary source of definition from a Professional Engineers Board. Research engineers and engineers as educators do not need certifications from Professional Engineers to start any project, nor are they really bound at all by any restrictions (or definitions) from any Professional Engineers Board; you don't get PE for research engineers or engineering educators.
U r claiming something really tall here. Since u claim it, then u have to prove it. Prove tat they r ignoring the definition of other areas etc and only on professional engineering
What's the use of an engineer (like you) limiting yourself strictly to the definition of an engineer in wiki and telling me that engineers are all about developing solutions, when education is not even (to you) a main job? Without educating others, pray tell me, how will you be able to spread your solutions to others, and hence serve and contribute to the society (as what you have said, they serve and contribute by coming up with solutions).
U still have not come out with anything to support your stand why the wiki definition is wrong. U say tat they have to educate other people ? U mean like a professor ? Professor is not strictly engineering. If u say they must educate other people about the solution they found, obviously they still have to find out the solution first then can they tell others. It is still the most basic and primary job they have.
More examples for your limited brain
Position for sales engineer:
Now if u find sales engineer on wiki, which is directed to field applications engineer
A Field Applications Engineer typically provides technical support for a manufacturer (particularly, but not exclusively an OEM) of products, or a distributor that sells or represents products.
Then is still means they have to use science and maths to solve practical problems for their customers. Shows how limiting your brain is for me to give u all the definition for words
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U r talking RUBBISH here. The webpage is from the UNIVERSITY ! Tis is the PUBLIC STATEMENT issued from the university. Tis is approved for use by the university. Tis is not from a blog. Tis is from the school website. If u doubt their website, wat can u not doubt ? Anything in the internet is wrong. No evidence can ever be gather from the internet. Tis just show how stupid and ungrateful u r in trying to discredit the university u probably had attended before. I have issued tis challenge many tims for u. Show me a website from a prominent university tat support he use or oral exam over written exam. U cannot come out with anything. U only tell me your claims which u can never prove
Tis is really incredible. If u wanna pin point errors, then U R THE ONE MAKING THE FIRST ERROR. U claim I stated 3000 in the previus reply. Have I ever claimed 3000 ? I claimed >3000 ! Is >3000 the same as 3000 ? It is obviously NOT. If u wanna claim who made errors, u r the one and u made it first. I thought u refer to the amount which I stated which is >3000 and tat is why I say it is "tat". Then u use your own error and claim I made the error Tat is rich man.
U can try. I still have not seen anything yet. Even ifu manage to find one example, wat have u proved ? U proved wiki to be wrong. And since I used the definition of wiki, u cannot default me for anything. Go on lor... try to redefine the word of engineer
Ok la. U wanna include math into the whoel definition, it is fine. Maths according to wikipedia is
Mathematics is the body of knowledge centered on such concepts as quantity, structure, space, and change, and also the academic discipline that studies them.
Nothing is wrong isn't it ?
Looking at die is already about "shape" and "change" and "structure" and "quantity". Looking at circuitry on the fridge is already studying the "shape", "change", "structue" and "quantity". SO wat is wrong ? Seems u do not have an understanding of english words
I already ask u to state out LOUD and CLEAR. "Professor is not an occupation". State it out. Once u stated it out then I will start my attack on it. Tis is one of the most incredulous claim u ever made considering u come from a university. As said before if professor is a form of address and not an occupation, then doctors r just nurses but addressed as doctors.
Tis is rich. I say tat the important job for an engineer is to come out with solution. Engineer is obviously refering to the work doing engineering which is on providing solutions to practical problems. Tis is obviously in tune with definition on engineer.
Now u r saying engineer do not have to do "engineering". They can go to fiance or watsoever etc. If a trained engineer go to fiance, his job is not on engineering anymore. It is "fiance advisor/watsoever". If he go to become a police, he is not an engineer. He is a policeman. Just because he is trained before as an engineer doesn't mean his job has to be engineer. However tat doesn't mean engineer can be is working as fiance or police etc.
Why don't u read the previous statement I made
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper.
Now obviously I stated on research paper for research.
Now if u talk about research engineer, wat do they do ? MOST IMPORTANTLY, they have to find out the solution to a practical problem. THEN can they write a paper on it. So it is still not wrong to say the basic job of an engineer is still to find solution to practical problems
U r claiming something really tall here. Since u claim it, then u have to prove it. Prove tat they r ignoring the definition of other areas etc and only on professional engineering
U still have not come out with anything to support your stand why the wiki definition is wrong. U say tat they have to educate other people ? U mean like a professor ? Professor is not strictly engineering. If u say they must educate other people about the solution they found, obviously they still have to find out the solution first then can they tell others. It is still the most basic and primary job they have.
Now if u find sales engineer on wiki, which is directed to field applications engineer
A Field Applications Engineer typically provides technical support for a manufacturer (particularly, but not exclusively an OEM) of products, or a distributor that sells or represents products.
Then is still means they have to use science and maths to solve practical problems for their customers. Shows how limiting your brain is for me to give u all the definition for words
U r talking RUBBISH here. The webpage is from the UNIVERSITY ! Tis is the PUBLIC STATEMENT issued from the university. Tis is approved for use by the university. Tis is not from a blog. Tis is from the school website. If u doubt their website, wat can u not doubt ? Anything in the internet is wrong. No evidence can ever be gather from the internet. Tis just show how stupid and ungrateful u r in trying to discredit the university u probably had attended before. I have issued tis challenge many tims for u. Show me a website from a prominent university tat support he use or oral exam over written exam. U cannot come out with anything. U only tell me your claims which u can never prove
Sorry hor. If you cannot prove the webmaster as the expert you are talking about, then there's no point in believing it. So what other experts are you clammering for support now?
Tis is really incredible. If u wanna pin point errors, then U R THE ONE MAKING THE FIRST ERROR. U claim I stated 3000 in the previus reply. Have I ever claimed 3000 ? I claimed >3000 ! Is >3000 the same as 3000 ? It is obviously NOT. If u wanna claim who made errors, u r the one and u made it first. I thought u refer to the amount which I stated which is >3000 and tat is why I say it is "tat". Then u use your own error and claim I made the error Tat is rich man.
Going by your stupid logic, how would you know that the word "you" that I have used refers specifically to stupidissmart????
Any proof that my choice of the word "you" refers to stupidissmart?
U can try. I still have not seen anything yet. Even ifu manage to find one example, wat have u proved ? U proved wiki to be wrong. And since I used the definition of wiki, u cannot default me for anything. Go on lor... try to redefine the word of engineer
Prove wiki to be wrong? All the while, I have been telling you the definition is inadequate. Your limited vision limits you to what engineers can do.
Ok la. U wanna include math into the whoel definition, it is fine. Maths according to wikipedia is
Mathematics is the body of knowledge centered on such concepts as quantity, structure, space, and change, and also the academic discipline that studies them.
Nothing is wrong isn't it ?
So you know the exact job scope of a product engineer??
Looking at die is already about "shape" and "change" and "structure" and "quantity". Looking at circuitry on the fridge is already Looking at circuitry on the fridge is already studying the "shape", "change", "structue" and "quantity".. SO wat is wrong ? Seems u do not have an understanding of english words
Look back at your highlight of "developing" solutions and "and" word.
And you got do soldering before a not. You very sure the job scope of the engineer I mentioned do this?
Looking at circuitry on the fridge is already studying the "shape", "change", "structue" and "quantity"
I already ask u to state out LOUD and CLEAR. "Professor is not an occupation". State it out. Once u stated it out then I will start my attack on it. Tis is one of the most incredulous claim u ever made considering u come from a university. As said before if professor is a form of address and not an occupation, then doctors r just nurses but addressed as doctors.
Which statement have I said before that "Professor is not an occupation".
You are losing your stand here, thus you want to coerce or force me to saying something else?
And you fail to address "tell me if it is stated anywhere that an engineer cannot be called a professor as a form of address, and thus has his main job as an educator".
And by your stand, you are telling me that wiki is inadequate in its definition because it states professor as a form of address, as a legal title. Right?
U r claiming something really tall here. Since u claim it, then u have to prove it. Prove tat they r ignoring the definition of other areas etc and only on professional engineering
Please read/check their source.
Why don't u read the previous statement I made
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper.
Now obviously I stated on research paper for research.
Now if u talk about research engineer, wat do they do ? MOST IMPORTANTLY, they have to find out the solution to a practical problem. THEN can they write a paper on it. So it is still not wrong to say the basic job of an engineer is still to find solution to practical problems
Wrong. They can also write research papers on why things cannot be solved.
As long as they are writing a paper, they are educating.
To get funds for their research, they have to educate their sponsors.
To win awards, they have to educate the judges.
To gain recognition, they have to educate their peers
And you tell me that education is not a main job?
And now, you are changing your stand from a main job to a basic job of an engineer?
U still have not come out with anything to support your stand why the wiki definition is wrong. U say tat they have to educate other people ? U mean like a professor ? Professor is not strictly engineering. If u say they must educate other people about the solution they found, obviously they still have to find out the solution first then can they tell others. It is still the most basic and primary job they have.
Please point out the exact statement I said wiki is wrong.
I told you it is inadequate. Yes, they have to find out the solution first, then educate. But it is not necessary the main job. For time spent on one solution, you can spend much more time on education of that solution.
Now if u find sales engineer on wiki, which is directed to field applications engineer
A Field Applications Engineer typically provides technical support for a manufacturer (particularly, but not exclusively an OEM) of products, or a distributor that sells or represents products.
Then is still means they have to use science and maths to solve practical problems for their customers. Shows how limiting your brain is for me to give u all the definition for words
Please look at the job scope of the website I gave you.
-
Sorry hor. If you cannot prove the webmaster as the expert you are talking about, then there's no point in believing it. So what other experts are you clammering for support now?
Ti is rubbish lor. I can see u r already living in self denial here in a bid to prevent u from losing face. I stated tis is the official stand of the university which u yourself had used as an example below. Now u r rejecting the words from tis university based on silly reason like asking whether do I know tis webmaster personally. It is precisely I do not know him personally then is tis a credible evidence on your stupid oral exams.
Lets see. U cannot produce any website tat claims oral exams r better, u cannot find another university tat uses oral exams, u cannot prove TUD even emphasis heavily on oral exams and supercede written exams, u cannot explain why TUM had clearly stated oral exams as an easier substitute for written exams and u cannot cover the loop holes dealing with oral exams. And your only argument is u and your experiences which can be falsified, exaggerated and unverifiable
Going by your stupid logic, how would you know that the word "you" that I have used refers specifically to stupidissmart????
Any proof that my choice of the word "you" refers to stupidissmart?
I already clarify my stand. I already stated u made the first error. I already explained why I treat "tat" as the statement I made and why it resulted in an error is due to u. Again it is evident u r living in self denial here and refuse to give up just to save face. U already have nothing meaningful left to say. If u claim I make any error, u also drag yourself into the same sh!t.
So question is, have I made any error ?
Prove wiki to be wrong? All the while, I have been telling you the definition is inadequate. Your limited vision limits you to what engineers can do.
And have u succeeded in priving wiki to be wrong ? Nope. So can u conclude I, and wiki and probably the rest of the engineering field to be wrong ? Nope. Can u conclude the view fromt he professional engineer organisation to be wrong ? Nope
R u being stupid is trying to prove wikipedia to be wrong. Yes. R u stupid to try and prove dictionary to be wrong. Yes. R u trying to form your own definition for a word tat is in used for hundreds of years ? Yes. Do u think u r better than the group of professional engineers in saying wat is an engineer ? YEs
So you know the exact job scope of a product engineer??
Must I find out all definition for u ?
Product engineering refers to the process of designing and developing a device, assembly, or system such that it be produced as an item for sale through some production manufacturing process. Product engineering usually entails activity dealing with issues of cost, produce-ability, quality, performance, reliability, serviceability and user features. These product characteristics are generally all sought in the attempt to make the resulting product attractive to its intended market and a successful contributor to the business of the organization that intends to offer the product to that market.
Product engineering is an engineering discipline that deals with both design and manufacturing aspects of a product.
Which statement have I said before that "Professor is not an occupation".
You are losing your stand here, thus you want to coerce or force me to saying something else?
And you fail to address "tell me if it is stated anywhere that an engineer cannot be called a professor as a form of address, and thus has his main job as an educator".
Then professor can be the occupation and not just an address. And u still cannot push the job of a professor to be an engineer just because he can be both at the same time.
Please read/check their source
Then tis is richer. U feel tat the professional body of engineer is not professional enough to come out with their definition of the word ? So u claim tat research engineer is not a professional engineer ? Prove it
Wrong. They can also write research papers on why things cannot be solved.
As long as they are writing a paper, they are educating.
To get funds for their research, they have to educate their sponsors.
To win awards, they have to educate the judges.
To gain recognition, they have to educate their peers
And you tell me that education is not a main job?
And now, you are changing your stand from a main job to a basic job of an engineer?
I already told u before. They have to find the solution first before they can write a paper. Tat is the main requirement for an engineer. U claim u can write a paper showing they cannot solve it. However they have some results to it or proof tat the problem is not solvable. Tat is still a solution. U still have to have a solution first than can u publish a paper. U cannot publish a result showing nothing or give no knowledge to the world.
I told you it is inadequate. Yes, they have to find out the solution first, then educate. But it is not necessary the main job. For time spent on one solution, you can spend much more time on education of that solution.
It is not about spending more time but it is their main task. If u do not have result, u cannot publish anything. Tis is a fact. Tis is wat seperate them from clerks to engineer. And whether they spend more time on writing the paper than trying to find the content for it is very debatable. U sure the problem formulation, the literature review, the methodology and the experiment result is faster than just writing it ?
Please look at the job scope of the website I gave you
We r talking about the textbook definition.
-
OMG, another pandol taken..ok guys, i got enuf detail for my paper liao..
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Ti is rubbish lor. I can see u r already living in self denial here in a bid to prevent u from losing face. I stated tis is the official stand of the university which u yourself had used as an example below. Now u r rejecting the words from tis university based on silly reason like asking whether do I know tis webmaster personally. It is precisely I do not know him personally then is tis a credible evidence on your stupid oral exams.
Lets see. U cannot produce any website tat claims oral exams r better, u cannot find another university tat uses oral exams, u cannot prove TUD even emphasis heavily on oral exams and supercede written exams, u cannot explain why TUM had clearly stated oral exams as an easier substitute for written exams and u cannot cover the loop holes dealing with oral exams. And your only argument is u and your experiences which can be falsified, exaggerated and unverifiable
I already clarify my stand. I already stated u made the first error. I already explained why I treat "tat" as the statement I made and why it resulted in an error is due to u. Again it is evident u r living in self denial here and refuse to give up just to save face. U already have nothing meaningful left to say. If u claim I make any error, u also drag yourself into the same sh!t.
So question is, have I made any error ?
And have u succeeded in priving wiki to be wrong ? Nope. So can u conclude I, and wiki and probably the rest of the engineering field to be wrong ? Nope. Can u conclude the view fromt he professional engineer organisation to be wrong ? Nope
R u being stupid is trying to prove wikipedia to be wrong. Yes. R u stupid to try and prove dictionary to be wrong. Yes. R u trying to form your own definition for a word tat is in used for hundreds of years ? Yes. Do u think u r better than the group of professional engineers in saying wat is an engineer ? YEs
Must I find out all definition for u ?
Product engineering refers to the process of designing and developing a device, assembly, or system such that it be produced as an item for sale through some production manufacturing process. Product engineering usually entails activity dealing with issues of cost, produce-ability, quality, performance, reliability, serviceability and user features. These product characteristics are generally all sought in the attempt to make the resulting product attractive to its intended market and a successful contributor to the business of the organization that intends to offer the product to that market.
Product engineering is an engineering discipline that deals with both design and manufacturing aspects of a product.
Then professor can be the occupation and not just an address. And u still cannot push the job of a professor to be an engineer just because he can be both at the same time.
Then tis is richer. U feel tat the professional body of engineer is not professional enough to come out with their definition of the word ? So u claim tat research engineer is not a professional engineer ? Prove it
I already told u before. They have to find the solution first before they can write a paper. Tat is the main requirement for an engineer. U claim u can write a paper showing they cannot solve it. However they have some results to it or proof tat the problem is not solvable. Tat is still a solution. U still have to have a solution first than can u publish a paper. U cannot publish a result showing nothing or give no knowledge to the world.
It is not about spending more time but it is their main task. If u do not have result, u cannot publish anything. Tis is a fact. Tis is wat seperate them from clerks to engineer. And whether they spend more time on writing the paper than trying to find the content for it is very debatable. U sure the problem formulation, the literature review, the methodology and the experiment result is faster than just writing it ?
We r talking about the textbook definition.
Ti is rubbish lor. I can see u r already living in self denial here in a bid to prevent u from losing face. I stated tis is the official stand of the university which u yourself had used as an example below. Now u r rejecting the words from tis university based on silly reason like asking whether do I know tis webmaster personally. It is precisely I do not know him personally then is tis a credible evidence on your stupid oral exams.
You have yet to prove that what the webmaster has stated on the website is the official stand. Extrapolating again?
I already clarify my stand. I already stated u made the first error. I already explained why I treat "tat" as the statement I made and why it resulted in an error is due to u. Again it is evident u r living in self denial here and refuse to give up just to save face. U already have nothing meaningful left to say. If u claim I make any error, u also drag yourself into the same sh!t.
So question is, have I made any error ?
Nah, this is not saving face. This is about your stupid logic.
So have I made any accusations on stupidissmart?
And have u succeeded in priving wiki to be wrong ? Nope. So can u conclude I, and wiki and probably the rest of the engineering field to be wrong ? Nope. Can u conclude the view fromt he professional engineer organisation to be wrong ? Nope
R u being stupid is trying to prove wikipedia to be wrong. Yes. R u stupid to try and prove dictionary to be wrong. Yes. R u trying to form your own definition for a word tat is in used for hundreds of years ? Yes. Do u think u r better than the group of professional engineers in saying wat is an engineer ? YEs
Selective reading disorder
STATE WHICH STATEMENT THAT I SAID I AM PROVING WIKI TO BE WRONG
Try harder, and don't put words into my mouth.
Must I find out all definition for u ?
Product engineering refers to the process of designing and developing a device, assembly, or system such that it be produced as an item for sale through some production manufacturing process. Product engineering usually entails activity dealing with issues of cost, produce-ability, quality, performance, reliability, serviceability and user features. These product characteristics are generally all sought in the attempt to make the resulting product attractive to its intended market and a successful contributor to the business of the organization that intends to offer the product to that market.
Product engineering is an engineering discipline that deals with both design and manufacturing aspects of a product.
Job scope, dude. Your stand so far is ALL engineers
You need to prove ALL engineers follow it, not bring a textbook out.
And all I need to do is to raise a few examples to make you look stupid
Then professor can be the occupation and not just an address. And u still cannot push the job of a professor to be an engineer just because he can be both at the same time.
You still don't get the logic, do you? An engineer who can be addressed as a professor can have his main job as educating.
Then tis is richer. U feel tat the professional body of engineer is not professional enough to come out with their definition of the word ? So u claim tat research engineer is not a professional engineer ? Prove it
Do you even know what is meant by a professional engineer board, and what these engineers do?
You only need to prove me wrong by stating one example of a research PE, who will have to give approvals and his stamp so that others can start research. I say there's non of this bullshit.
I already told u before. They have to find the solution first before they can write a paper. Tat is the main requirement for an engineer. U claim u can write a paper showing they cannot solve it. However they have some results to it or proof tat the problem is not solvable. Tat is still a solution. U still have to have a solution first than can u publish a paper. U cannot publish a result showing nothing or give no knowledge to the world.
So what. You are now changing your definition from main job to main requirement???
Cannot defend yourself about the main job part is it?
It is not about spending more time but it is their main task. If u do not have result, u cannot publish anything. Tis is a fact. Tis is wat seperate them from clerks to engineer. And whether they spend more time on writing the paper than trying to find the content for it is very debatable. U sure the problem formulation, the literature review, the methodology and the experiment result is faster than just writing it ?
If you spend more time on something for work related purposes, it is your main task. Period.
If you say it is debatable, it means you do not have concrete proof of it. You cannot already prove your strict definition of engineer.
Oh, 1 more point to add:
A research engineer can mentor new engineers and IA/FYP students (education)
We r talking about the textbook definition.
We are talking about main job.
-
You have yet to prove that what the webmaster has stated on the website is the official stand. Extrapolating again?
Maybe because IT IS THEIR OFFICIAL WEBSITE. U mean their official website has nothing to do with the school ? How think skin skinned and stupid can u try to go
Nah, this is not saving face. This is about your stupid logic.
So have I made any accusations on stupidissmart?
ya la, you quote me, and you use "that" to imply things from another thread. Call yourself logical. When I quote your message and I mentioned the word "you", it wasn't talking about stupidissmart. My "you" is referring to some other forumer in another thread.
U know why I can say "tat" as refering to my original thread ? it is because all the figures should be refered to tis other thread. Tat is the first time the >3000 is shown. The only problem is u quote the figure wrongly. U quote it as 3000 instead of >3000 and tat starts the whole mistake. Being a forgiving person, I do not nitpick tis detail but still refer tat to my original quote of >3000. However u start to pick details and claim I make a calculation mistake when u r the one who do the reference error. And tat is why I can say "tat" as the figure I quote originally.
Therefore logic does flow since there is a reason for why "tat" refers to my originally quoted figure. And obviously the golden question is, did I make any error here ? Or r u in denial mode since all your arguments r spent ?
STATE WHICH STATEMENT THAT I SAID I AM PROVING WIKI TO BE WRONG
Then let me ask u, wat r u doing then ? Since I had already given u the definiton from wiki, my definition follows closely to theirs, and u implied u r at peace with with the definition from wiki, then wat r u arguing about ?
Job scope, dude. Your stand so far is ALL engineers
You need to prove ALL engineers follow it, not bring a textbook out.
And all I need to do is to raise a few examples to make you look stupid
I said "textbook". I said the work tat engineers r associated with. Why must it be "all" and not "generally" ? Did I state "ALL" ? And u still cannot come out with any example tat prove otherwise. And wat r u trying to prove here ? U find one example and use tat to prove me wrong, thus wiki wrong and the professional engineer society wrong ?
You still don't get the logic, do you? An engineer who can be addressed as a professor can have his main job as educating.
U don't get it do u. He is a professor tat is why he teaches. He is an engineer because he is involved in research. U r pushing his professor job into his engineer job. They r different. It is like a mother can be a teacher at the same time. As a mother she cooks, as a teacher she teaches. Then your twisted logic concludes a teacher cooks.
Do you even know what is meant by a professional engineer board, and what these engineers do?
You only need to prove me wrong by stating one example of a research PE, who will have to give approvals and his stamp so that others can start research. I say there's non of this bullshit.
Well clearly u do not know wat the national society of professional engineers r doing
The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is the national society of engineering professionals from all disciplines that promotes the ethical and competent practice of engineering, promotes licensure and enhances the image and well-being of its members.
and if u look at their website, they r talking about research and publishing research material
http://www.nspe.org/PEmagazine/pe_0408_Earthshaking_Rsearch.html
U say u want to find tis guy who only give approval for research and not even a scrap on research, then go and find la. If my guess is correct, either tis guy is a professor or he is a manager/vice president. U go and find la
So what. You are now changing your definition from main job to main requirement???
Tat is why I say u r nitpicking. If u want, use the word "job" into the above statement la. There is no difference in the end meaning
If you spend more time on something, it is your main task. Period.
If you say it is debatable, it means you do not have concrete proof of it. You cannot already prove your strict definition of engineer.
Com'on la, u claim writing paper is more time consuming then doing the actual work for it. U should prove it first. And tis is insane. How to write a paper without any "solution" ?
Oh, 1 more point to add:
A research engineer can mentor new engineers and IA/FYP students (education)
Com'on..he only teaches for a short time then he will concentrate on his research. Then in tis case ALL occupation has teaching involved because people has to pass down or teach new birds
We are talking about main job
The testbook definition is describing their main job
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
You have yet to prove that what the webmaster has stated on the website is the official stand. Extrapolating again?
Maybe because IT IS THEIR OFFICIAL WEBSITE. U mean their official website has nothign to do with the school ?
ya la, you quote me, and you use "that" to imply things from another thread. Call yourself logical. When I quote your message and I mentioned the word "you", it wasn't talking about stupidissmart. My "you" is referring to some other forumer in another thread.
U know why I can say "tat" as refering to my original thread ? it is because all the figures should be refered to tis other thread. Tat is the first time the >3000 is shown. The only problem is u quote the figure wrongly. U quote it as 3000 instead of >3000 and tat starts the whole mistake. Being a forgiving person, I do not nitpick tis detail but still refer tat to my original quote of >3000. However u start to pick details and claim I make a calculation mistake when u r the one who do the reference error. And tat is why I can say "tat" as the figure I quote originally.
Therefore logic does not flow since there is a reason for why "tat" refers to my originally quoted figure. And obviously the golden question is, did I make any error here ? Or r u in denial mode since all your arguments r spent ?
Then let me ask u, wat r u doing then ? Since I had already given u the definiton from wiki, and u implied u r at peace with with the definition from wiki, then wat r u arguing about ?
I said "textbook". I said the work tat engineers r associated with. Why must it be "all" and not "generally" ? Did I state "ALL" ? And u still cannot come out with any example tat prove otherwise.
U don't get it do u. He is a professor tat is why he teaches. He is an engineer because he is involved in research. U r pushing his professor job into his engineer job. They r different
Well clearly u do not know wat the national society of professional engineers r doing
The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is the national society of engineering professionals from all disciplines that promotes the ethical and competent practice of engineering, promotes licensure and enhances the image and well-being of its members.
and if u look at their website, they r talking about research
http://www.nspe.org/PEmagazine/pe_0408_Earthshaking_Rsearch.html
U say u want to find tis guy who only give approval for research and not even a sracp on research, then go and find la. If my guess is correct, either tis guy is a professor or he is a manager/vice president. Find la
Tat is why I say u r nitpicking. If u want, use the word "job" into the above statement la. There is no difference in the meaning
Com'on la, u claim writing paper is more time consuming then doing the actual work for it. U should prove it first.
Com'on..he only teaches for a short time then he will concentrate on his research. Then in tis case ALL occupation has teaching involved because people has to pass down or teach new birds
Maybe because IT IS THEIR OFFICIAL WEBSITE. U mean their official website has nothign to do with the school ?
So now you are telling me what a webmaster put on the school website is the official stand of the school?
Your "maybe" is not a strong enough conviction.
U know why I can say "tat" as refering to my original thread ? it is because all the figures should be refered to tis other thread. Tat is the first time the >3000 is shown. The only problem is u quote the figure wrongly. U quote it as 3000 instead of >3000 and tat starts the whole mistake. Being a forgiving person, I do not nitpick tis detail but still refer tat to my original quote of >3000. However u start to pick details and claim I make a calculation mistake when u r the one who do the reference error. And tat is why I can say "tat" as the figure I quote originally.
Yet a reply,
but didn't answer my question.
Going by your logic, how do you know the word "you" refers to stupidissmart?
Then let me ask u, wat r u doing then ? Since I had already given u the definiton from wiki, and u implied u r at peace with with the definition from wiki, then wat r u arguing about ?
You really selective reading disorder or what.
I told you it is inadequate.
You have a problem understanding the difference between inadequate and wrong?
I said "textbook". I said the work tat engineers r associated with. Why must it be "all" and not "generally" ? Did I state "ALL" ? And u still cannot come out with any example tat prove otherwise.
Oh, so now you want to change it to "generally".
It's either you tell me all engineers doing what wiki is describing
or it is not necessary for all engineers to be doing what wiki is describing.
From your post, it seems that you are implying the second statement because you want to use the word "generally", which means you are in agreement with me that wiki's definition is inadequate.
Well clearly u do not know wat the national society of professional engineers r doing
The National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) is the national society of engineering professionals from all disciplines that promotes the ethical and competent practice of engineering, promotes licensure and enhances the image and well-being of its members.
and if u look at their website, they r talking about research
http://www.nspe.org/PEmagazine/pe_0408_Earthshaking_Rsearch.html
U say u want to find tis guy who only give approval for research and not even a sracp on research, then go and find la. If my guess is correct, either tis guy is a professor or he is a manager/vice president. Find la
So how?
Is sales engineer of which the job scope I have posted out to you part of it?
Don't tell me you don't know the job scope of a professional engineer.
An engineer might not necessary be an engineering professional hor.
U don't get it do u. He is a professor tat is why he teaches. He is an engineer because he is involved in research. U r pushing his professor job into his engineer job. They r different
Your sentence in red.
You will now have to establish whether a research engineering job encompasses education as part of the equation. Something which I have been telling you all the way since the first 2 pages.
Tat is why I say u r nitpicking. If u want, use the word "job" into the above statement la. There is no difference in the meaning
Don't talk rubbish. The main requirement and the main job is different things. You are merely changing words to twist your argument.
Com'on la, u claim writing paper is more time consuming then doing the actual work for it. U should prove it first.
Nah, I didn't claim it is definitely more time consuming. Don't put words into my mouth again with your selective reading disorder.
I told you that the sum of all actions on education could be more than the actual work for it. You need to prove this one single possibility wrong to justify your statement that the main job of an engineer cannot be education.
Com'on..he only teaches for a short time then he will concentrate on his research. Then in tis case ALL occupation has teaching involved because people has to pass down or teach new birds
Look above. "Sum of all actions on education"
Each and every single points adds up to the time spent.
The testbook definition is describing their main job
Clearly, the job scope I showed you does not contain every single thing your textbook definition says
-
So now you are telling me what a webmaster put on the school website is the official stand of the school?
Your "maybe" is not a strong enough conviction.
U r really talking rubbish here. So wat is put into the school official website has nothing to do witht he school ? Wat r u really arguing about huh ? Wat appears in NUS website has nothing to do with NUS and wat appears in the gov website has nothing to do with the gov ? Tis is basic common knowledge. Do u know wat is internet ? Do u know wat is home page ? The more u argue on tis the more stupid u look
Yet a reply,
but didn't answer my question.
Going by your logic, how do you know the word "you" refers to stupidissmart?
I don't know wat "you" actually refer to here. But i know u do not have anything good left to say and is simply spurting out unrelated nonsense now
I told you it is inadequate.
You have a problem understanding the difference between inadequate and wrong?
Tis is comical. If u feel it is inadequate, then u want to correct wikipedia and professional society of engineer isn't it ? U r still trying to change their definition of the word isn't it ? Then u r still trying to prove them wrong (in their definition of the word engineer) isn't it ?
Oh, so now you want to change it to "generally".
It's either you tell me all engineers doing what wiki is describing
or it is not necessary for all engineers to be doing what wiki is describing.
From your post, it seems that you are implying the second statement because you want to use the word "generally", which means you are in agreement with me that wiki's definition is inadequate.
U see the statement
"The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper. "
And then u decide to bring out "extraordinary" examples tat engineers do not do the job. Do u know tat in engineering, they cater from the 5% to 95% of the whole population. Wat I described is generally correct, and u can consider it to be from 1% to 99%. Now u r trying to come out with insane crazy one shot example of somebody and then claim because u find tis one person, u discredit the whole definition. I can tell u one thing. Up till now u still cannot find out any examples tat contradict the defnition. But there r always freaks in tis world and u may come out with some crazy companies who just give title of engineer to people who fry kway teow or mop the floor and then u pronounce the word engineer as wrong. Tat is again lame to the extreme. But of course, u r running dry on things to say especially spending so much effort in trying to correct wiki, professional engineer society and then me
Is sales engineer of which the job scope I have posted out to you part of it?
Don't tell me you don't know the job scope of a professional engineer.
An engineer might not necessary be an engineering professional hor.
I already pointed to u wat is the job scope of a sales engineer. And the website also say u have to provide engineering duties. And I have already defined the word of professional engineer. So wat is your point ?
Your sentence in red.
You will now have to establish whether a research engineering job encompasses education as part of the equation. Something which I have been telling you all the way since the first 2 pages.
I am telling u the MORE IMPORTANT skill is still to come out with the SOLUTION to the practical problem. And if u look at my statement on research, it is to write paper too. If u do not come out with any results, r u even doing research ?? And if u consider "writing paper" as education, then my previous statement is still correct.
Nah, I didn't claim it is definitely more time consuming. Don't put words into my mouth again with your selective reading disorder.
Selective reading ?
For time spent on one solution, you can spend much more time on education of that solution.
Then later
If you spend more time on something for work related purposes, it is your main task. Period.
and finally
I told you that the sum of all actions on education could be more than the actual work for it
So wat r u implying ? U have already implied tat education takes more time. Did I put words into your mouth or u r putting your foot into yours ? If u claim tat it took more time, u have to prove it.
I told you that the sum of all actions on education could be more than the actual work for it. You need to prove this one single possibility wrong to justify your statement that the main job of an engineer cannot be education.
Now prove the statement in bold. Otherwise u r just talking rubbish here about wat u think and not wat is happening
Look above. "Sum of all actions on education"
Each and every single points adds up to the time spent.
Then look at the 2 words below
Prove it.
Clearly, the job scope I showed you does not contain every single thing your textbook definition says
Clearly the job scope involved had clearly stated engineering
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U r really talking rubbish here. So wat is put into the school official website has nothing to do witht he school ? Wat r u really arguing about huh ? Wat appears in NUS website has nothing to do with NUS and wat appears in the gov website has nothing to do with the gov ? Tis is basic common knowledge. Do u know wat is internet ? Do u know wat is home page ? The more u argue on tis the more stupid u look
I don't know wat "you" actually refer to here. But i know u do not have anything good left to say and is simply spurting out unrelated nonsense now
Tis is comical. If u feel it is inadequate, then u want to correct wikipedia and professional society of engineer isn't it ? U r still trying to change their definition of the word isn't it ? Then u r still trying to prove them wrong (in their definition of the word engineer) isn't it ?
U see the statement
"The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper. "
And then u decide to bring out "extraordinary" examples tat engineers do not do the job. Do u know tat in engineering, they cater from the 5% to 95% of the whole population. Wat I described is generally correct, and u can consider it to be from 1% to 99%. Now u r trying to come out with insane crazy one shot example of somebody and then claim because u find tis one person, u discredit the whole definition. I can tell u one thing. Up till now u still cannot find out any examples tat contradict the defnition. But there r always freaks in tis world and u may come out with some crazy companies who just give title of engineer to people who fry kway teow or mop the floor and then u pronounce the word engineer as wrong. Tat is again lame to the extreme. But of course, u r running dry on things to say especially spending so much effort in trying to correct wiki, professional engineer society and then me
I already pointed to u wat is the job scope of a sales engineer. And the website also say u have to provide engineering duties. And I have already defined the word of professional engineer. So wat is your point ?
I am telling u the MORE IMPORTANT skill is still to come out with the SOLUTION to the practical problem. And if u look at my statement on research, it is to write paper too. If u do not come out with any results, r u even doing research ?? And if u consider "writing paper" as education, then my previous statement is still correct.
Selective reading ?
For time spent on one solution, you can spend much more time on education of that solution.
Then later
If you spend more time on something for work related purposes, it is your main task. Period.
So wat r u implying ? U have already implied tat education takes more time.
Now prove the statement in bold. Otherwise u r just talking rubbish here about wat u think and not wat is happening
Then look at the 2 words below
Prove it.
Clearly the job scope involved had clearly stated engineering
U r really talking rubbish here. So wat is put into the school official website has nothing to do witht he school ? Wat r u really arguing about huh ? Wat appears in NUS website has nothing to do with NUS and wat appears in the gov website has nothing to do with the gov ? Tis is basic common knowledge. Do u know wat is internet ? Do u know wat is home page ? The more u argue on tis the more stupid u look
Don't be stupid. Just because a webmaster (of which you have no idea about) put it on the school website, you are telling me it is the official stand of the school
If everything can be gotten from website, then your original description on what I should share with other exchange students is totally out. Every information can be gotten from websites.
So if NUS website tells you that engineering is fun, are you going to tell me engineering is fun because NUS website says so?
I don't know wat "you" actually refer to here. But i know u do not have anything good left to say and is simply spurting out unrelated nonsense now
Obviously you are stumped by your stupid logic.
Unrelated? You quote my post and then tell me your usage of your "tat" word refers to something in another thread.
What's stopping me from quoting your posts, and then using the "you" word to refer to someone else?
Tis is comical. If u feel it is inadequate, then u want to correct wikipedia and professional society of engineer isn't it ? U r still trying to change their definition of the word isn't it ? Then u r still trying to prove them wrong (in their definition of the word engineer) isn't it ?
Still spurting rubbish eh.
Since when is the word "wrong" the same as the word "inadequate"
U see the statement
"The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper. "
And then u decide to bring out "extraordinary" examples tat engineers do not do the job. Do u know tat in engineering, they cater from the 5% to 95% of the whole population. Wat I described is generally correct, and u can consider it to be from 1% to 99%. Now u r trying to come out with insane crazy one shot example of somebody and then claim because u find tis one person, u discredit the whole definition. I can tell u one thing. Up till now u still cannot find out any examples tat contradict the defnition. But there r always freaks in tis world and u may come out with some crazy companies who just give title of engineer to people who fry kway teow or mop the floor and then u pronounce the word engineer as wrong. Tat is again lame to the extreme. But of course, u r running dry on things to say especially spending so much effort in trying to correct wiki, professional engineer society and then me
Running dry? You are obviously the one acting stupid.
Be more logical. I told you your view was only part of the equation. Note the word part. Then you tell me it must follow wiki's definition, and used it to defend your sentence that "Coming up with physical solution is their main job"
I gave you examples like education, and thus what you have stated is only part of it.
Now you tell me your's generally correct, which means you are agreeing that what you have stated is part of the equation, something which I have been telling you all along.
And now you make sentences to justify what I have said earlier, then tell me I'm running dry?
I already pointed to u wat is the job scope of a sales engineer. And the website also say u have to provide engineering duties. And I have already defined the word of professional engineer. So wat is your point ?
Read carefully. Providing engineer services is different from your strict definition of developing solutions.
I am telling u the MORE IMPORTANT skill is still to come out with the SOLUTION to the practical problem. And if u look at my statement on research, it is to write paper too. If u do not come out with any results, r u even doing research ?? And if u consider "writing paper" as education, then my previous statement is still correct.
I didn't deny what you said is wrong.
I have been telling you all the while that is only part of the scope
Now prove the statement in bold. Otherwise u r just talking rubbish here about wat u think and not wat is happening
I said could be. It is on your onus to prove such a possibility cannot exist, because it clearly makes your early generalisation invalid.
You know you are dumb when you make such a generalisation because you will have to prove all possibilities wrong for your generalisation to be valid.
Selective reading ?
For time spent on one solution, you can spend much more time on education of that solution.
Then later
If you spend more time on something for work related purposes, it is your main task. Period.
So wat r u implying ? U have already implied tat education takes more time.
Selective reading disorder
Writing of papers of your solution, presenting of your research/solution to sponsors, giving lectures and presentations of your solutions, etc,e tc
Are all not different actions on educating the same solution?
You have comprehension problems or what
Clearly the job scope involved had clearly stated engineering
"Provide engineering and quality support services to customers."
Providing engineering services
How close is that to your strict definition of
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
of which you gave a definition of developing solutions as
Develop is the key word. If he develop a new method to sweep floors, then congratulation, he is indeed an inventor and depending on the method, an engineer
-
Melissa has pretty low EQ...
The post doesn't offend me, but it does touch on a very important issue. Are our local graduates of a decent calibre?
Honestly, its hard to set a benchmark for every faculty and discipline. Engineers and Philosophers would probably rank each other pretty lowly.
Coming from an Arts and Social Sciences faculty, I do see a lot of "spewing of facts." Sometimes, its just paraphrasing what is printed in the textbooks and readings. Nothing wrong with that. Some people will learn these as facts and unbreakable truths... Yet some will go beyond and critically analyse the purported facts. And I guess, thats what really seperates the classes of honors these graduates get.
Just my 2 cents.
-
Don't be stupid. Just because a webmaster (of which you have no idea about) put it on the school website, you are telling me it is the official stand of the school
If everything can be gotten from website, then your original description on what I should share with other exchange students is totally out. Every information can be gotten from websites.
Now u r talking rubbish here. R u dumb or r u ian idiot ? U claim tat the information from the webpage from the school is not from the school ? Just because this information appears in the webpage of the school, it is the official statement of the school. Wat it had promised and said r true information directly from the school. The shcedule from the website, the staff working in it r all true and comes from the school. Why do u doubt the official webpage ? In fact the webmaster just follow the instruction given to him by the school.
It is because people like u can inspired people more to go to these university. Really tat is all u do
Lets put it into perspective
1) U claim oral exams r so damn good and so damn difficult and so much better than NUS system of written exam
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
5) I quoted official webpage of TUM to say tat oral exams r easier than written exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
7) Then u only claim "TUM webpage is not official statement of school" "do i know who is the webmaster of the webpage" etc. These r views from an IDIOT. The webpage is maintained by the school ! They provide true information on the school which is verifiable. Based on wat can u doubt the authencity of the webpage of the university ? Why don't u call up the number listed in their website and see if it is linked to their school
Obviously you are stumped by your stupid logic.
Unrelated? You quote my post and then tell me your usage of your "tat" word refers to something in another thread.
What's stopping me from quoting your posts, and then using the "you" word to refer to someone else?
U r just beating around the bush. I told u the explanation many times but u chose not to read it. U just chose to persist. Let me again put in perspective for u
1) U claim I made an error by the following statements
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
I replied with
Now tat is my take home pay.
2) u claim i made en error in the later sentence because 2880 then can give the result of 3600 full salary
3) Now the first error made is your statement
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
because it is clearly stated in my previous thread tat it is >3000. U derived a completely wrong conclusion to the previous thread and u lie
4) I try to told u tat is the >3000 amount I stated previously. Since the previous "tat" is unclear, i clarify, much like wat u did previousuly
Try again when you earn more. Someone not limited in views wouldn't have told me he's satisfied with $2.5k monthly. You are incapable because society has already told you so.
When i stated old folks r not earnign tat much either, u clarify by adding in more lins
As a NTU engineer, you must really be damn lousy to be earning $2.5k monthly when many others are earning near to $1k more => society's way of showing how incapable you are.
U added additional information to clarify your stand
Since "tat" is unclear and tat is why I clarify it to be the >3000 in the previous thread. Surprisingly, u refuse to let me clarify my stand here. Why can't i clarify the things I said ? Why can I let u clarify your stand before and now u refuse to let me clarify ? U got something to hide or u have nothing to say ?
5) then u go crazy, jump and then talk about incredibly crazy logic which made no sense. And u force your stupid logic on me sand say tat I derive it. If clarifying is illogical, then u started off tis trend as well
6) And then u just dwell on nothing but talking rubbish here. Wat is the main question u wanna ask ? Is there an error made ? U made the error here, u cannot properly even quote correctly and u do not know the difference between 3000 to >3000. Tat is really stupid of u
Since when is the word "wrong" the same as the word "inadequate"
Now tis is on another stupid topic u had raised before
1) I stated the below
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
2) Tis is in line with the definition of wiki and dictionary.com and professional engineer society
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
3) Now u find the definition of the real expert (professional engineer) in tis field "inadequate" and want to correct the definition of wat define them to tis experts. U r really thinking they, the professional engineer soceity, do not know wat they r doing
4) Then wat do u do, u come out with stupid examples which u had ceased using (die examination), u talk about software engineer then product engineering then sales engineer then graphic designer then try to claim professor is engineer and a lot of sh!t
5) then u claim if u come out with one example u can prove the definition wrong. I stated why should tat be the case. Tis is generally (generally means more than 95%) true and tat is correct alredy isn't it ? Why does freak examples matter
6) Then u claim research writing paper is education and therefore the definition is wrong.
7) Research is indeed about writing paper, which i have claimed before, but the main job and the most important skill is to come out with the necessary solution. Without tis solution, wat r u writing about ? U r just a clerk or a story teller and not an engineer. The whole content of the paper is ON the solution. Just the process of writing is not critical. Solving solution is the critical skill. It is their main job
8) then u just keep spurting out more nonsense and say tat writing is educating and educating is not solving solution. I have repeatedly told u without solution u cannot write. And the solution is more important than the process of writing. People see the solution in your paper to find a better solution for other process
9) U can keep trying to prove the professional engineer do not know wat their job is about. But the more u try to prove, the moe silly u become
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Now u r talking rubbish here. R u dumb or r u ian idiot ? U claim tat the information from the webpage from the school is not from the school ? Just because this information appears in the webpage of the school, it is the official statement of the school. Wat it had promised and said r true information directly from the school. The shcedule from the website, the staff working in it r all true and comes from the school. Why do u doubt the official webpage ? In fact the webmaster just follow the instruction given to him by the school.
It is because people like u can inspired people more to go to these university. Really tat is all u do
Lets put it into perspective
1) U claim oral exams r so damn good and so damn difficult and so much better than NUS system of written exam
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
5) I quoted official webpage of TUM to say tat oral exams r easier than written exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
7) Then u only claim "TUM webpage is not official statement of school" "do i know who is the webmaster of the webpage" etc. These r views from an IDIOT. The webpage is maintained by the school ! They provide true information on the school which is verifiable. Based on wat can u doubt the authencity of the webpage of the university ? Why don't u call up the number listed in their website and see if it is linked to their school
U r just beating around the bush. I told u the explanation many times but u chose not to read it. U just chose to persist. Let me again put in perspective for u
1) U claim I made an error by the following statements
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
I replied with
Now tat is my take home pay.
2) u claim i made en error in the later sentence because 2880 then can give the result of 3600 full salary
3) Now the first error made is your statement
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
because it is clearly stated in my previous thread tat it is >3000. U derived a completely wrong conclusion to the previous thread and u lie
4) I try to told u tat is the >3000 amount I stated previously. Since the previous "tat" is unclear, i clarify, much like wat u did previousuly
Try again when you earn more. Someone not limited in views wouldn't have told me he's satisfied with $2.5k monthly. You are incapable because society has already told you so.
When i stated old folks r not earnign tat much either, u clarify by adding in more lins
As a NTU engineer, you must really be damn lousy to be earning $2.5k monthly when many others are earning near to $1k more => society's way of showing how incapable you are.
U added additional information to clarify your stand
Since "tat" is unclear and tat is why I clarify it to be the >3000 in the previous thread. Surprisingly, u refuse to let me clarify my stand here. Why can't i clarify the things I said ? Why can I let u clarify your stand before and now u refuse to let me clarify ? U got something to hide or u have nothing to say ?
5) then u go crazy, jump and then talk about incredibly crazy logic which made no sense. And u force your stupid logic on me sand say tat I derive it. If clarifying is illogical, then u started off tis trend as well
6) And then u just dwell on nothing but talking rubbish here. Wat is the main question u wanna ask ? Is there an error made ? U made the error here, u cannot properly even quote correctly and u do not know the difference between 3000 to >3000. Tat is really stupid of u
Now tis is on another stupid topic u had raised before
1) I stated the below
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
2) Tis is in line with the definition of wiki and dictionary.com and professional engineer society
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
3) Now u find the definition of the real expert (professional engineer) in tis field "inadequate" and want to correct the definition of wat define them to tis experts. U r really thinking they, the professional engineer soceity, do not know wat they r doing
4) Then wat do u do, u come out with stupid examples which u had ceased using (die examination), u talk about software engineer then product engineering then sales engineer then graphic designer then try to claim professor is engineer and a lot of sh!t
5) then u claim if u come out with one example u can prove the definition wrong. I stated why should tat be the case. Tis is generally (generally means more than 95%) true and tat is correct alredy isn't it ? Why does freak examples matter
6) Then u claim research writing paper is education and therefore the definition is wrong.
7) Research is indeed about writing paper, which i have claimed before, but the main job and the most important skill is to come out with the necessary solution. Without tis solution, wat r u writing about ? U r just a clerk or a story teller and not an engineer. The whole content of the paper is ON the solution. Just the process of writing is not critical. Solving solution is the critical skill. It is their main job
8) then u just keep spurting out more nonsense and say tat writing is educating and educating is not solving solution. I have repeatedly told u without solution u cannot write. And the solution is more important than the process of writing. People see the solution in your paper to find a better solution for other process
9) U can keep trying to prove the professional engineer do not know wat their job is about. But the more u try to prove, the moe silly u become
Now u r talking rubbish here. R u dumb or r u ian idiot ? U claim tat the information from the webpage from the school is not from the school ? Just because this information appears in the webpage of the school, it is the official statement of the school. Wat it had promised and said r true information directly from the school. The shcedule from the website, the staff working in it r all true and comes from the school. Why do u doubt the official webpage ? In fact the webmaster just follow the instruction given to him by the school.
It is because people like u can inspired people more to go to these university. Really tat is all u do
Lets put it into perspective
1) U claim oral exams r so damn good and so damn difficult and so much better than NUS system of written exam
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
5) I quoted official webpage of TUM to say tat oral exams r easier than written exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
7) Then u only claim "TUM webpage is not official statement of school" "do i know who is the webmaster of the webpage" etc. These r views from an IDIOT. The webpage is maintained by the school ! They provide true information on the school which is verifiable. Based on wat can u doubt the authencity of the webpage of the university ? Why don't u call up the number listed in their website and see if it is linked to their school
Why don't you answer if NUS website tells you engineering is fun, are you going to tell me that it is the official statement that engineering is indeed fun?
Official website right?
U r just beating around the bush. I told u the explanation many times but u chose not to read it. U just chose to persist. Let me again put in perspective for u
1) U claim I made an error by the following statements
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
I replied with
Now tat is my take home pay.
2) u claim i made en error in the later sentence because 2880 then can give the result of 3600 full salary
3) Now the first error made is your statement
3000 a month is still on the lower end. Which means going back to my earlier statement, it means many are earning $500 more.
because it is clearly stated in my previous thread tat it is >3000. U derived a completely wrong conclusion to the previous thread and u lie
4) I try to told u tat is the >3000 amount I stated previously. Since the previous "tat" is unclear, i clarify, much like wat u did previousuly
Try again when you earn more. Someone not limited in views wouldn't have told me he's satisfied with $2.5k monthly. You are incapable because society has already told you so.
When i stated old folks r not earnign tat much either, u clarify by adding in more lins
As a NTU engineer, you must really be damn lousy to be earning $2.5k monthly when many others are earning near to $1k more => society's way of showing how incapable you are.
U added additional information to clarify your stand
Since "tat" is unclear and tat is why I clarify it to be the >3000 in the previous thread. Surprisingly, u refuse to let me clarify my stand here. Why can't i clarify the things I said ? Why can I let u clarify your stand before and now u refuse to let me clarify ? U got something to hide or u have nothing to say ?
5) then u go crazy, jump and then talk about incredibly crazy logic which made no sense. And u force your stupid logic on me sand say tat I derive it. If clarifying is illogical, then u started off tis trend as well
6) And then u just dwell on nothing but talking rubbish here. Wat is the main question u wanna ask ? Is there an error made ? U made the error here, u cannot properly even quote correctly and u do not know the difference between 3000 to >3000. Tat is really stupid of u
A long answer
But you fail to answer again
What's stopping me from quoting your posts, and then using the "you" word to refer to someone else? Any proof that the word "you" is referring to the forumer nicknamed stupidissmart?
If you cannot even give a satisfactory answer to the bolded question, there's no reason for you to say if I had made any error.
Now tis is on another stupid topic u had raised before
1) I stated the below
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
2) Tis is in line with the definition of wiki and dictionary.com and professional engineer society
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
3) Now u find the definition of the real expert (professional engineer) in tis field "inadequate" and want to correct the definition of wat define them to tis experts. U r really thinking they, the professional engineer soceity, do not know wat they r doing
4) Then wat do u do, u come out with stupid examples which u had ceased using (die examination), u talk about software engineer then product engineering then sales engineer then graphic designer then try to claim professor is engineer and a lot of sh!t
5) then u claim if u come out with one example u can prove the definition wrong. I stated why should tat be the case. Tis is generally (generally means more than 95%) true and tat is correct alredy isn't it ? Why does freak examples matter
6) Then u claim research writing paper is education and therefore the definition is wrong.
7) Research is indeed about writing paper, which i have claimed before, but the main job and the most important skill is to come out with the necessary solution. Without tis solution, wat r u writing about ? U r just a clerk or a story teller and not an engineer. The whole content of the paper is ON the solution. Just the process of writing is not critical. Solving solution is the critical skill. It is their main job
8) then u just keep spurting out more nonsense and say tat writing is educating and educating is not solving solution. I have repeatedly told u without solution u cannot write. And the solution is more important than the process of writing. People see the solution in your paper to find a better solution for other process
9) U can keep trying to prove the professional engineer do not know wat their job is about. But the more u try to prove, the moe silly u become
No matter what you are saying here, this is what you have told me when you conclude after 6 pages to justify my statements on the first page that what you have stated is merely part of the equation
Do u know tat in engineering, they cater from the 5% to 95% of the whole population. Wat I described is generally correct, and u can consider it to be from 1% to 99%.
Did you state the word "generally" in the first few pages when I mentioned to you that there are examples? After 1 big round, you come to justify my choice of the word "examples" and tell me I'm wrong?
Now, isn't that plain dumb of you?
And I have showed you examples like the electrical engineer and the sales engineer in which your definition does not cover. Product engineers and software engineers too. I stopedp using them because you are bent on only looking at some wiki definitions without even looking and understanding what is happening around in Singapore.
You decide to continue to stick to wiki definitions without bothering all what is the job scope, or the main job, of these engineers. An employment offer was also showed to you, yet you want to doggedly bring out wiki definition to tell me it is wrong? Go tell that to the company.
If everyone in this world is as limited in the brain and take definitions from encyclopedias as the absolute truth and nothing but the truth, the theory of special relativity wouldn't have been found. And humans would have never created a machine which can travel faster than the speed of sound. All because they limit themselves to the encyclopedia.
Truly a village graduate because you seriously have a limited mindset. To you, what wiki states must be the absolute truth, and nothing but the truth.
Then u claim research writing paper is education and therefore the definition is wrong.
Education is about imparting knowledge to others. Is writing a paper not about imparting knowledge to others? If not, what for write a paper if it is not planned to impart knowledge to anyone else? Write and keep till 500 years later and then burn it?
U can keep trying to prove the professional engineer do not know wat their job is about. But the more u try to prove, the moe silly u become
Any reason why you totally skipped answering the question? Is it because you are caught once again saying wrong things?
Providing engineering services
How close is that to your strict definition of
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
of which you gave a definition of developing solutions as
Develop is the key word. If he develop a new method to sweep floors, then congratulation, he is indeed an inventor and depending on the method, an engineer
Not only that, are you also speechless on this question?
Are all not different actions on educating the same solution?
-
mud slingling again
-
Why don't you answer if NUS website tells you engineering is fun, are you going to tell me that it is the official statement that engineering is indeed fun?
Official website right?
Now if NUS tell me tat Law is Harder to enter than Arts and Social science, where they have compared between 2 entities, r u gonna doubt their words ?
And how about
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
But you fail to answer again
What's stopping me from quoting your posts, and then using the "you" word to refer to someone else? Any proof that the word "you" is referring to the forumer nicknamed stupidissmart?
If you cannot even give a satisfactory answer to the bolded question, there's no reason for you to say if I had made any error.
If I am confused wat your "you" refer to, then I will ask u to clarify and u should obliged. So tis is the answer to your question.
R u gonna confess now u r stupid enough not to tell the difference between >3000 and 3000 ? Do u fail your PSLE maths ? Can u even quote something without error ?
No matter what you are saying here, this is what you have told me when you conclude after 6 pages to justify my statements on the first page that what you have stated is merely part of the equation
Part of the equation ? Well look at the words I have said before
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
Now u want to tell me the process of writing is "part of the equation". Ok la. Then ? I say the MORE IMPORTANT skill. Not ALL THEY NEED. Have u proved me wrong ? Nope. U r just agreeing with me
Did you state the word "generally" in the first few pages when I mentioned to you that there are examples? After 1 big round, you come to justify my choice of the word "examples" and tell me I'm wrong?
Justify ? Wat r u talking about ? Man has 5 fingers. R u gonna doubt tat fact ? However there r freak cases in tis world with more than 5 finges or have none. As said before, I am stating a fact but it is true for the general case, not extraordinary case. Do I have to state everything ? I told u the general fact of wat an engineer is all about and confirmed by the society of professional engineer and u r not happy ?
And I have showed you examples like the electrical engineer and the sales engineer in which your definition does not cover. Product engineers and software engineers too. I stopedp using them because you are bent on only looking at some wiki definitions without even looking and understanding what is happening around in Singapore.
U r talking rubbish here. I told u the textbook definition of the word "engineer" throughout the whole exchange and quoted to u the definition from the society of professional engineer. Then wat do u do ? U even show some examples of them looking at die, looking at circuits etc and all r engineering. Is tat the things u r trying to show ? Then u have failed to say they r not engineer. Since u r so good at singapore situation, why do u tell people using photoshop is a "software engineer" ? Is tat wat is happening to u ? Doing menial task now ?
U r just here talking cock and seeing your stand down one by one by fighting over the definition set by the real professionals. U think r u more qualified to set the definition of engineer for the society of professional engineer ? Just keep trying lor
If everyone in this world is as limited in the brain and take definitions from encyclopedias as the absolute truth and nothing but the truth, the theory of special relativity wouldn't have been found. And humans would have never created a machine which can travel faster than the speed of sound. All because they limit themselves to the encyclopedia
Now u r talking rubbish here. We r talking about things such as "software engineer" and "product engineer" and the problem is, ALL your definition is WRONG. Since our definition contradicts, then obviously we have to find out from the dictionary and other valid sources to know wat is the true definition of the word u r talking about. U r talking english isn't it ? Why is all your vocab wrong ? Why does your job scope differs from the one listed in dictionary ? WHen I use dictionary and encyclopedia to correct your lousy english, u say I have a limited mind. Maybe your mind wonder so far u forget how to use english. Wat's more, even when the definition had been give, why do I have to explain word by word for u to understand. HAve u even pass PSLE ? How come u cannot understand simple english and I have to spoonfeed u ?
Providing engineering services
How close is that to your strict definition of
See how lousy your english is ? I have to spoonfeed u again and show u wat is the correct definition of the word "engineering". Engineering according to wikipedia
Engineering is the discipline and profession of applying technical and scientific knowledge and utilizing natural laws and physical resources in order to design and implement materials, structures, machines, devices, systems, and processes that realize a desired objective and meet specified criteria.
Now isn't tat close to the definition of engineer ?
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
Even the first line is clearly stated
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering.
Why is "providing engineering service" different from "professionally engaged in a field of engineering" ? U know how to use a dictionary ? If there is any hard word u do not understand, please refer to the dictionary first to prevent embarrasing your standard of english.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
OMG, another pandol taken..ok guys, i got enuf detail for my paper liao..
angel,bonus material for your GP. lap it up while it all lasts....
p.s. pls pay special attention to word usage and word choice.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Now if NUS tell me tat Law is Harder to enter than Arts and Social science, where they have compared between 2 entities, r u gonna doubt their words ?
And how about
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
If I am confused wat your "you" refer to, then I will ask u to clarify and u should obliged. So tis is the answer to your question.
R u gonna confess now u r stupid enough not to tell the difference between >3000 and 3000 ? Do u fail your PSLE maths ? Can u even quote something without error ?
Part of the equation ? Well look at the words I have said before
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
Now u want to tell me the process of writing is "part of the equation". Ok la. Then ? I say the MORE IMPORTANT skill. Not ALL THEY NEED. Have u proved me wrong ? Nope. U r just agreeing with me
Justify ? Wat r u talking about ? Man has 5 fingers. R u gonna doubt tat fact ? However there r freak cases in tis world with more than 5 finges or have none. As said before, I am stating a fact but it is true for the general case, not extraordinary case. Do I have to state everything ? I told u the general fact of wat an engineer is all about and confirmed by the society of professional engineer and u r not happy ?
U r talking rubbish here. I told u the textbook definition of the word "engineer" throughout the whole exchange and quoted to u the definition from the society of professional engineer. Then wat do u do ? U even show some examples of them looking at die, looking at circuits etc and all r engineering. Is tat the things u r trying to show ? Then u have failed to say they r not engineer. Since u r so good at singapore situation, why do u tell people using photoshop is a "software engineer" ? Is tat wat is happening to u ? Doing menial task now ?
U r just here talking cock and seeing your stand down one by one by fighting over the definition set by the real professionals. U think r u more qualified to set the definition of engineer for the society of professional engineer ? Just keep trying lor
Now u r talking rubbish here. We r talking about things such as "software engineer" and "product engineer" and the problem is, ALL your definition is WRONG. Since our definition contradicts, then obviously we have to find out from the dictionary and other valid sources to know wat is the true definition of the word u r talking about. U r talking english isn't it ? Why is all your vocab wrong ? Why does your job scope differs from the one listed in dictionary ? WHen I use dictionary and encyclopedia to correct your lousy english, u say I have a limited mind. Maybe your mind wonder so far u forget how to use english. Wat's more, even when the definition had been give, why do I have to explain word by word for u to understand. HAve u even pass PSLE ? How come u cannot understand simple english and I have to spoonfeed u ?
See how lousy your english is ? I have to spoonfeed u again and show u wat is the correct definition of the word "engineering". Engineering according to wikipedia
Engineering is the discipline and profession of applying technical and scientific knowledge and utilizing natural laws and physical resources in order to design and implement materials, structures, machines, devices, systems, and processes that realize a desired objective and meet specified criteria.
Now isn't tat close to the definition of engineer ?
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
Even the first line is clearly stated
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering.
Why is "providing engineering service" different from "professionally engaged in a field of engineering" ? U know how to use a dictionary ? If there is any hard word u do not understand, please refer to the dictionary first to prevent embarrasing your standard of english.
Now if NUS tell me tat Law is Harder to enter than Arts and Social science, where they have compared between 2 entities, r u gonna doubt their words ?
And how about
2) U claim it is good, simply because u claim it is good. There r NO OTHER supporting evidence. I have challenged u repeatedly for other evidence which u give out NONE
3) I stated in TUD, even they do not put oral exams for all their modules.
4) I stated NO OTHER university other than your 2 examples r using oral exams
6) I also pointed to u the flaws of oral exams which u never answer
No no no, don't change the question yet.
You have a long reply, but you still failed to answer me
If NUS website tells you that engineering is fun, are you going to tell me engineering is fun because NUS website says so? Your support must be because it is on the official website and it is the official stand of the university.
Is it so hard to answer? Because if you still cannot answer the bolded question, there's no point in continuing.
If I am confused wat your "you" refer to, then I will ask u to clarify and u should obliged. So tis is the answer to your question.
R u gonna confess now u r stupid enough not to tell the difference between >3000 and 3000 ? Do u fail your PSLE maths ? Can u even quote something without error ?
Since I'm not referring to stupidissmart, who gives you the right to ask me? And if you don't have the right to do so, why should I oblige?
You have to get past this stage before you can continue other questions, because all other questions from you are totally invalid if you cannot give proof that the word "you" was referring to stupidissmart in those posts.
.
Part of the equation ? Well look at the words I have said before
The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper
Now u want to tell me the process of writing is "part of the equation". Ok la. Then ? I say the MORE IMPORTANT skill. Not ALL THEY NEED. Have u proved me wrong ? Nope. U r just agreeing with me
Well, have I ever tell you that it is not the more important skill? Did I even tell you that the more imporant skills is not what you have said?
PROVE THAT I SAID YOU WERE WRONG HERE. PROVE THAT I WAS ATTEMPTING TO PROVE YOU WRONG ABOUT YOUR "MORE IMPORTANT SKILLS". No point putting words in my mouth (yet again) and tell me I'm wrong. You will only embarrass yourself even further if you need to resort to such methods to further some hidden agenda of yours.
Now u want to tell me the process of writing is "part of the equation"
Don't put words into my mouth again.
Since when did I tell you that the process of writing is part of the equation?
Justify ? Wat r u talking about ? Man has 5 fingers. R u gonna doubt tat fact ? However there r freak cases in tis world with more than 5 finges or have none. As said before, I am stating a fact but it is true for the general case, not extraordinary case. Do I have to state everything ? I told u the general fact of wat an engineer is all about and confirmed by the society of professional engineer and u r not happy ?
I told you other examples of what engineers can do. I told you what you said was part of the equation. And what? You take wiki's definition and took it as the absolute truth even when the facts are so clear in front of you.
This is what you said
I am saying an ENGINEER has to provide answer on physical problems.
Then now you tell me it is generally correct when all the while, I was telling you that by saying what you said is merely part of the equation?
For your 5 fingers example,
You: Human has 5 fingers on one hand
Me: But there are examples of humans not having 5 fingers on one hand
You: How many fingers do you think there is then?
Me: For example, there are humans with 6 fingers on one hand.
You: (Show wiki's page) BUT WIKI SAYS HUMAN HAND HAS 5 FINGERS, NOTHING ELSE. YOU CAN'T CHALLENGE WIKI OR PROVE WIKI WRONG.
Me: I will only need to show you just one example of a human hand with 6 fingers. Wiki is inadequate in its definition.And finally, after many pages, you will tell me, what you said about the human hand is generally correct even though I had been telling you all along that those were examples. Wtf????
U r talking rubbish here. I told u the textbook definition of the word "engineer" throughout the whole exchange and quoted to u the definition from the society of professional engineer. Then wat do u do ? U even show some examples of them looking at die, looking at circuits etc and all r engineering. Is tat the things u r trying to show ? Then u have failed to say they r not engineer. Since u r so good at singapore situation, why do u tell people using photoshop is a "software engineer" ? Is tat wat is happening to u ? Doing menial task now ?
U r just here talking cock and seeing your stand down one by one by fighting over the definition set by the real professionals. U think r u more qualified to set the definition of engineer for the society of professional engineer ? Just keep trying lor
Rubbish again from your dumb mind.
You told me textbook definition, yes. Then after that you tell me it is generally correct.
So why can it not be that a software engineer is engaged in only using photoshop to design complicated graphics within a software engineering team tasked to program a game? Because of your "generally correct", it follows logically that not all software engineers will have to definitely do what wiki defined them to be doing.
Anything wrong?
Since you want to continue to talk about professional engineers.
I have asked you if there are any Professional Engineers for the field of research, and your reply implied no. Then now you tell me that the job scope and definition of a research engineer is also inside the definition from the Professional Engineers Board?????? There are no two ways about it.
And you want to talk to me about the job of the professional engineer? From wiki:
The earmark that distinguishes a licensed/registered Professional Engineer is the authority to sign and seal or "stamp" engineering documents (reports, drawings, and calculations) for a study, estimate, design or analysis, thus taking legal responsibility for it.
Clearly, you have told me that there's no such authority of a PE in the field of research engineering.
In that case, are you still going to tell me that the definition of Professional Engineer from the Professional Engineers board includes all there is to a research engineer?
Now u r talking rubbish here. We r talking about things such as "software engineer" and "product engineer" and the problem is, ALL your definition is WRONG. Since our definition contradicts, then obviously we have to find out from the dictionary and other valid sources to know wat is the true definition of the word u r talking about. U r talking english isn't it ? Why is all your vocab wrong ? Why does your job scope differs from the one listed in dictionary ? WHen I use dictionary and encyclopedia to correct your lousy english, u say I have a limited mind. Maybe your mind wonder so far u forget how to use english. Wat's more, even when the definition had been give, why do I have to explain word by word for u to understand. HAve u even pass PSLE ? How come u cannot understand simple english and I have to spoonfeed u ?
Acting stupid again.
Firstly, PROVE THAT I WAS DEFINING OR HAD DEFINED WHAT SOFTWARE ENGINEERS OR WHAT PRODUCT ENGINEERS SHOULD DO.
I told you the job scope. And why do the job scopes differ from those listed in wiki or dictionary???? This, why don't you go and ask all the different companies in Singapore, and see if all their engineers do what wiki has said? You want to talk about the main jobs of engineers, so I gave you examples of engineers who have a different main job from what you said. Anything wrong with that???? Obviously yes to you when you stated with conviction that the main job of an engineer is to come out with solutions.
In addition, this is what you have said:
And since I used the definition of wiki, u cannot default me for anything.
All the while, I didn't default you for using wiki's definition, but rather, told you that wiki's definition is inadequate because of the examples I listed. Then suddenly after 6 pages, you tell me what you said is generally correct????????? Are you running dry?
You mean you don't understand what is meant by the word "examples"??? Must it be numerous?
You are really still embarrassing yourself by telling me what I said was correct all along only after 6 pages.
I guess you are the one who needs to go back to PSLE for not being able to comprehend what is meant by examples.
See how lousy your english is ? I have to spoonfeed u again and show u wat is the correct definition of the word "engineering". Engineering according to wikipedia
Engineering is the discipline and profession of applying technical and scientific knowledge and utilizing natural laws and physical resources in order to design and implement materials, structures, machines, devices, systems, and processes that realize a desired objective and meet specified criteria.
Now isn't tat close to the definition of engineer ?
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering. Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
Even the first line is clearly stated
An engineer is a person who is professionally engaged in a field of engineering.
Why is "providing engineering service" different from "professionally engaged in a field of engineering" ? U know how to use a dictionary ? If there is any hard word u do not understand, please refer to the dictionary first to prevent embarrasing your standard of english.
Obviously you fail (yet again) to understand the question.
You gave this to me
Develop is the key word. If he develop a new method to sweep floors, then congratulation, he is indeed an inventor and depending on the method, an engineer
You are the one who tell me that
Engineers are concerned with developing economical and safe solutions to practical problems, by applying mathematics and scientific knowledge while considering technical constraints
I'm asking you how providing engineering service is the same as developing solutions. Because to me, providing engineering services clearly encompasses more things than your key word of "developing" (new) solutions.
If you want to agree that the first statement of your godly wiki's definition agrees with the job scope I sent you, yet unable to connect the 2nd sentence according to the same job scope, then truly, wiki's definition is, as I have said, inadequate.