Why Darwinism isn't true.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
The answer of just Yes and No is meaningless and misleading if we do not know wat the other is thinking.
If u do not like the elaboration, u just read the Yes or No and then decide if u wanna read the rest. If u do not like to read, then u skip lor
Oh.. so elaborations is not misleading ?
-
Wat questions r left unasnwered ? Put it down again. And I prefer to put my elaboration.
U can just ignore it and read the pink words if u just want the yes or no
-
I believe open communication is better than forcing the other not to say anything
-
gonna sleep now... lets see wat is your answer tomorrow
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I believe open communication is better than forcing the other not to say anything
Its just a simple Yes or No. Open communcations and elaborations can come after. I said i am willing to answer all your YES or NO in your first reply.
First of all, let me make it clear. That a lot of your explainations and these supposedly elaborations just further reinforces my point. Lets just do a simple cross-examination. And hopefully through this, we can cut the bullshit, and get down to the gist of it to clear any confusion and supposedly misunderstandings with all those long-winded supposely explainations and elabtorations that you claim is being directed at me, but unfortunately, I know that, and it seems to me, that you are actually explaining it to yourself. Bravo.
Let me just cross-exam our statements with a series of simple YES or NO questions.
1)U said: So do u agree tat u had said gravity is not the truth before ?
NO. I will quote you what u used on me.
“How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity”
As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” .
Did I not state clearly and constantly that Gravit is Truth ? YES or NO
2)U Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock. Before u do the summation, why not u state the question to ask first before doing the sums ?
All this time, I already clearly meant in different circumstances.
Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
3)U said I claimed: I did not say Gravity is not truth
NO. I will quote you what u used on me.
“How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity”
As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” .
Did I not state clearly and constantly that Gravit is Truth ? YES or NO
4)U said: Then let me ask u, why do u take medicine, or live in high rise building of use computers ? If they r not truth to u, these inventions could fail .
Can you tell me no high rise has collapsed ? Can u tell me no computer has faild? Can u tell medicine can work all the time ? Can you tell me all the machines in this world never fail ? Can you tell me your car never break down ? Can u tell me your windows never give u the blue screen of death ? YES or NO
5) U said “: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
U said u believe certain things to be true, but not the truth. In actual fact they contradict.If u think it is true, it is the truth. If u think it is not truth, it is not true.”
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Exmaple: I drive a Maserati and you drive a Hyundai.( Remember this is an exmaple, not trying to insult anybody) If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
6)U said “All of them r not science because they do not use the scientific method. Christians r the one tat is persistent in tis saying though
i)Flat Earth hypothesis
ii)Phlogiston theory
iii)Geocentric theory of the solar system
iv)The classical elemental theory
v)Aristotle's dynamic motion
vi)Ether as a carrier of light waves and radio waves
All these r not scientific method, so they r not science”
Are scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses ?
viii)Newton's Laws of Motion(which were improved upon by Einstein - while not really proved wrong, the were shown to be not quite right either. For example in relativity or on the very small scale they don't hold)
They r not wrong. They r just refined. U still have to use corpuscular theory of light (photon) with waves to fully described light. Motion of body still require laws of motion + einstein to fully describe it.
Does all these theories manage to explain what its supposed to explain ? YES or NO
Did it not fail to apply itself in its context ? YES or NO
7) U said : “If I said "it could be anything", is it different from saying "nobody can say what it is".
U have to tell me wat is the physical difference between the two. U again is just playing with words. If u read at the dictionary, it just says "unable to specify distinctly".Wat is wrong with saying it "could be anything" ?”
Let me ask you:
If we come across something that we dont even know what it is, and I asked you, “What is it ?” normally, if a person dont know, they will reply, “ I dont know” they dont say , “It could be anything!” because, by asking that question answering “It could be anyhing?” Is like telling me... it could be anything, which I KNOW. “If could be anything!”. thats why I asked you, “What is it ?
Now, is Undefined the opposite of Defined ? YES or NO
8)U said: And the HOW and WHY r truth. Nothing in it says tat the HOW and WHY r not truth.
All other aspects and characteristics of science can be understood directly when we understand that observation is the ultimate and final judge of the truth of an idea
The idea is the scientific hypothesis. It is judged if it is the truth or not
We've learned from experience that the truth will come out. Other experimenters will repeat your experiment and find out whether you were wrong or right. Nature's phenomena will agree or they'll disagree with your theory.
Again the experiments etc is the scientific method and is science. And he treat the theory as truth or not.
And u just misquote Richard Feynman
I answered: He is really very much a science person to explain the how and why , of the truth.
Both of us interpretated his definition of science differently. Now, let me ask you.
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
9 )I hope that helps clear all your doubt of where what I mean by Fallacy in 0/0 = Undefined.
U said: “I read it, but it just support my idea.
There is a distinction between a simple mistake and a mathematical fallacy in a proof: a mistake in a proof leads to an invalid proof just in the same way, but in the best-known examples of mathematical fallacies, there is some concealment in the presentation of the proof.
U putting 0/0 as X and then dividing it. U r concealing in the presentation.
Therefore these fallacies, for pedagogic reasons, usually take the form of spurious proofs of obvious contradictions.
It is obvious tat it contradiction using wrong ways to prove 1=2
The latter applies normally to a form of argument that is not a genuine rule of logic, where the problematic mathematical step is typically a correct rule applied with a tacit wrong assumption.
U assume division by 0 is correct. In actual fact it is wrong.”
Did I not say 0/0 is Undefined and its not a legitimate operation in the beginning of this subject ? YES or NO
Did u point out to me that “It can be 0 to Infinity depending on the subject matter.” YES or NO
After that:
Did u say “0/0 * 0 = 0/0 * infinity. Since 0/0 can be anything, the first set of 0/0 could be 1 while the second set could be 0, then it still come to the conclusion tat 0= 0 which is again right.” YES OR NO
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
10) DID I EVER SAY “SCIENCE IS WRONG” YES or NO
11)U claimed I said science is never about the truth, so it is false.
I said science is a collection of truths.
Did I say ever Science is false ? YES or NO
If you asked for a crate of good apples, and there are 50 bad apples out of 500. Is it still a crate of good apples ? YES or NO
12)Does science make mistakes ? YES or NO
-
Has Theories been wrong before ? YES or NO
-
If something is wrong, can it be Truth (True = Truth) ? YES or NO
Should be an extremely easy YES or NO. You have had enough time to explain, elaborate , spin and all that. I know what i said, u know what i said, i know what u said. So lets cut to the chase and work it out from here. U can choose not to answer a simple Yes or No. If that is the case, do not expect me to reply your questions that I have already answered so many times.
-
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
gonna sleep now... lets see wat is your answer tomorrow
Good night.
I hope you will answer a simple YES or NO in all the questions within the context. Its not unfair. Its not one sided. Its just a cross examinations from all our cumulative statements and opinions thats all. If i dont understand, i will refer back to your posts or i will ask you for your elaboration.
-
I answered and it is the below. U can simply ignore the other part and read the pink colored words. Why even refuse to do tat ?
Did I not state clearly and constantly that Gravit is Truth ? YES or NO
No
It is because u said gravity is a theory and thus not truth before. Therefore it is not constantly. Let me ask u a question back then. Yes or no too
Did u ever suggest that gravity is a theory or there is a theory of gravity ?
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
No
This is because u threw garbage into the equation. I also issue a challenge for u
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? Yes or no
Let me ask u another one
Can you Show me the example of 1+1 not equal to 2 again but state the question u want to ask first ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
But does your TRUTH and SCIENCE deviates greatly from the rest of the english speaking world ?
If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
Yes. I am sure the rear mirror or tires or steering wheel or seats is standardised and can fit nicely on any car
Are scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses ?
No
Not fully. I believe tat peer review and scrutiny should be included as well
Does all these theories manage to explain what its supposed to explain ? YES or NO
Did it not fail to apply itself in its context ? YES or NO
Yes. It did works FULLY for many cases. Let me ask u back,
DO u believe tat several truths should be studied together to obtain a better understanding ?
Now, is Undefined the opposite of Defined ? YES or NO
Yes
If we come across something that we dont even know what it is, and I asked you, “What is it ?” normally, if a person dont know, they will reply, “ I dont know” they dont say , “It could be anything!” because, by asking that question answering “It could be anyhing?” Is like telling me... it could be anything, which I KNOW. “If could be anything!”. thats why I asked you, “What is it ?
U r again saying rubbish. If someone shows a thing which we have no clue at all, a person saying "it could be anything" is justified. U know wat is the meaning of "anything" ? It means it could be something u do not know too. U could search at google and u can find the following usage in grammer
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100125181108AABia6T
What kind of Parrot is this (It could be anything!)?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/snappydessy/4267199946/
It Could Be Anything
But what IS it? I may give a clue soon if nobody gets even close... :)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Could_it_be_dangerous_if_you%27ve_had_swelling_for_3_days_now_and_you%27re_sweating_profusely
Could it be dangerous if you've had swelling for 3 days now and you're sweating profusely?
Well it could be anything. It is difficult to answer a question with so little to go on.
Let me ask u back
It is already certified tat 0/0 is a fallacy, a misinterpretation and there is no mathematical or logic error in it. Don't u think tat playing around with the equation just shows u giving off more silly fallacies and misinterpreting the whole situation ?
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
No. Let me ask u back
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
U r the one who quotes him first
Did I not say 0/0 is Undefined and its not a legitimate operation in the beginning of this subject ? YES or NO
NO. U say 0/0 is logically zero which is obviously wrong
Did u point out to me that “It can be 0 to Infinity depending on the subject matter.” YES or NO
Yes. I still stand by these words. It surely beats saying it is logically zero
Did u say “0/0 * 0 = 0/0 * infinity. Since 0/0 can be anything, the first set of 0/0 could be 1 while the second set could be 0, then it still come to the conclusion tat 0= 0 which is again right.” YES OR NO
Yes. I still stand by these words
Can you prove my above equation wrong ?
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So ? I have said many times tat it goes from -ve infinity to + infinity and it could be anything in between. Let me ask u back
Does y tend to positive infinity and negative infinty as x goes to zero ? Wat is the value of X=0 then ?
The answer u give is the answer of division by zero
DID I EVER SAY “SCIENCE IS WRONG” YES or NO
Yes. Because if it is not truth, it is false and wrong
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
If you asked for a crate of good apples, and there are 50 bad apples out of 500. Is it still a crate of good apples ? YES or NO
Don't know. A wholeseller who get 90% good apples could already be very happy. Normally the bad apples could be 80 or 90 per 500. Let me ask u back
If there r good apples in the crate, could u say the supplier has never provided any good apples in it ?
Does science make mistakes ? YES or NO
Yes
-
Has Theories been wrong before ? YES or NO
Unsure. U still has not given an example of a wrong scientific theory
-
If something is wrong, can it be Truth (True = Truth) ? YES or NO
Yes. Examples like "Wat u said r wrong". This is the truth even though u r wrong. Wat is not the truth is definitely false/wrong but wat is wrong may be the truth.
Let me ask u back here.
If a science hypothesis is wrong, does it means ALL the other established scientific theories and laws, like Einstein, Newton etc r all wrong as well ?
Now I have answered all your questions. Why not u answer mine with a yes or no as well.
-
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I answered and it is the below. U can simply ignore the other part and read the pink colored words. Why even refuse to do tat ?
Did I not state clearly and constantly that Gravit is Truth ? YES or NO
No
It is because u said gravity is a theory and thus not truth before. Therefore it is not constantly. Let me ask u a question back then. Yes or no too
Did u ever suggest that gravity is a theory or there is a theory of gravity ?
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
No
This is because u threw garbage into the equation. I also issue a challenge for u
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? Yes or no
Let me ask u another one
Can you Show me the example of 1+1 not equal to 2 again but state the question u want to ask first ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
But does your TRUTH and SCIENCE deviates greatly from the rest of the english speaking world ?
If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
Yes. I am sure the rear mirror or tires or steering wheel or seats is standardised and can fit nicely on any car
Are scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses ?
No
Not fully. I believe tat peer review and scrutiny should be included as well
Does all these theories manage to explain what its supposed to explain ? YES or NO
Did it not fail to apply itself in its context ? YES or NO
Yes. It did works FULLY for many cases. Let me ask u back,
DO u believe tat several truths should be studied together to obtain a better understanding ?
Now, is Undefined the opposite of Defined ? YES or NO
Yes
If we come across something that we dont even know what it is, and I asked you, “What is it ?” normally, if a person dont know, they will reply, “ I dont know” they dont say , “It could be anything!” because, by asking that question answering “It could be anyhing?” Is like telling me... it could be anything, which I KNOW. “If could be anything!”. thats why I asked you, “What is it ?
U r again saying rubbish. If someone shows a thing which we have no clue at all, a person saying "it could be anything" is justified. U know wat is the meaning of "anything" ? It means it could be something u do not know too. U could search at google and u can find the following usage in grammer
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100125181108AABia6T
What kind of Parrot is this (It could be anything!)?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/snappydessy/4267199946/
It Could Be Anything
But what IS it? I may give a clue soon if nobody gets even close... :)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Could_it_be_dangerous_if_you%27ve_had_swelling_for_3_days_now_and_you%27re_sweating_profusely
Could it be dangerous if you've had swelling for 3 days now and you're sweating profusely?
Well it could be anything. It is difficult to answer a question with so little to go on.
Let me ask u back
It is already certified tat 0/0 is a fallacy, a misinterpretation and there is no mathematical or logic error in it. Don't u think tat playing around with the equation just shows u giving off more silly fallacies and misinterpreting the whole situation ?
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
No. Let me ask u back
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
U r the one who quotes him first
Did I not say 0/0 is Undefined and its not a legitimate operation in the beginning of this subject ? YES or NO
NO. U say 0/0 is logically zero which is obviously wrong
Did u point out to me that “It can be 0 to Infinity depending on the subject matter.” YES or NO
Yes. I still stand by these words. It surely beats saying it is logically zero
Did u say “0/0 * 0 = 0/0 * infinity. Since 0/0 can be anything, the first set of 0/0 could be 1 while the second set could be 0, then it still come to the conclusion tat 0= 0 which is again right.” YES OR NO
Yes. I still stand by these words
Can you prove my above equation wrong ?
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So ? I have said many times tat it goes from -ve infinity to + infinity and it could be anything in between. Let me ask u back
Does y tend to positive infinity and negative infinty as x goes to zero ? Wat is the value of X=0 then ?
The answer u give is the answer of division by zero
DID I EVER SAY “SCIENCE IS WRONG” YES or NO
Yes. Because if it is not truth, it is false and wrong
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
If you asked for a crate of good apples, and there are 50 bad apples out of 500. Is it still a crate of good apples ? YES or NO
Don't know. A wholeseller who get 90% good apples could already be very happy. Normally the bad apples could be 80 or 90 per 500. Let me ask u back
If there r good apples in the crate, could u say the supplier has never provided any good apples in it ?
Does science make mistakes ? YES or NO
Yes
-
Has Theories been wrong before ? YES or NO
Unsure. U still has not given an example of a wrong scientific theory
-
If something is wrong, can it be Truth (True = Truth) ? YES or NO
Yes. Examples like "Wat u said r wrong". This is the truth even though u r wrong. Wat is not the truth is definitely false/wrong but wat is wrong may be the truth.
Let me ask u back here.
If a science hypothesis is wrong, does it means ALL the other established scientific theories and laws, like Einstein, Newton etc r all wrong as well ?
Now I have answered all your questions. Why not u answer mine with a yes or no as well.
Actually not yet.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
4)U said: Then let me ask u, why do u take medicine, or live in high rise building of use computers ? If they r not truth to u, these inventions could fail .
Can you tell me no high rise has collapsed ? Can u tell me no computer has faild? Can u tell medicine can work all the time ? Can you tell me all the machines in this world never fail ? Can you tell me your car never break down ? Can u tell me your windows never give u the blue screen of death ? YES or NO
And an ommited question regarding the Maserati and Hyundai. Its supposed to be vice versa on the engine parts.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
4) If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati engine part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ? Vice Versa
-
-
Can you tell me no high rise has collapsed ? Can u tell me no computer has faild? Can u tell medicine can work all the time ? Can you tell me all the machines in this world never fail ? Can you tell me your car never break down ? Can u tell me your windows never give u the blue screen of death ? YES or NO
Sure, all these devices could fail. (Your questions r phrased in a funny manner tat saying yes or no seems to imply none of these happened)
However why they failed is more due to human errors such as poor engineering, or use lousy equipment or ignore proper maintenance. Let me ask u back
Did u go to high rise building ? Do u use computers ? Do u take medicine ? Did u use any of the world's machine ? Do u take cars ? Do u use microsoft software ? YES or NO
If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati engine part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ? Vice Versa
No.
If you were to use HL milk and replace with Daisy milk for your coffee, is it going to work ? If u were to use kway teow and replace with mee pok, can most people accept the change ?
These questions r as relevant as your engine comparison
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Sure, all these devices could fail. (Your questions r phrased in a funny manner tat saying yes or no seems to imply none of these happened)
However why they failed is more due to human errors such as poor engineering, or use lousy equipment or ignore proper maintenance. Let me ask u back
Did u go to high rise building ? Do u use computers ? Do u take medicine ? Did u use any of the world's machine ? Do u take cars ? Do u use microsoft software ? YES or NO
No.
If you were to use HL milk and replace with Daisy milk for your coffee, is it going to work ? If u were to use kway teow and replace with mee pok, can most people accept the change ?
These questions r as relevant as your engine comparison
So below is just very simple to your answers. So hopefuly, u can understand my point of view. The gist of it, while i have no problem understanding yours. If u cant understand , there is nothing i can say anymore but repeat it again n again with more posts cut n paste from previous statements. My Answer and QUestions are all in RED
1) Did I not state clearly and constantly that Gravit is Truth ? YES or NO
No
It is because u said gravity is a theory and thus not truth before. Therefore it is not constantly. Let me ask u a question back then. Yes or no too
My supporting statements below
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
Did u ever suggest that gravity is a theory or there is a theory of gravity ?
No. Gravity is the Truth. And Yes, there is a theory of gravity.
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
No, To me, gravity is Truth.
2) Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
No
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
See, its not very hard right. We are actually both on the same page. We are already on agreement on this issue.
This is because u threw garbage into the equation. I also issue a challenge for u
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? Yes or no
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
So: Yes if its my definition of truth.
Let me ask u another one
Can you Show me the example of 1+1 not equal to 2 again but state the question u want to ask first ?
Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
We both said NO. You already understand. Why need to ask more questions ? Isnt it redundant ?
3) Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
But does your TRUTH and SCIENCE deviates greatly from the rest of the english speaking world ?
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
4) Are scientific method consists of the collection of data through observation and experimentation, and the formulation and testing of hypotheses ?
No
Not fully. I believe tat peer review and scrutiny should be included as well
Ans: Well, I guess u can add stuff into definitions so I can too right ? I guess we are kinda in agreement then is it not ? So please, its like pot calling kettle black.
5) Does all these theories manage to explain what its supposed to explain ? YES or NO
Did it not fail to apply itself in its context ? YES or NO
Yes. It did works FULLY for many cases. Let me ask u back,
YES OR NO ? I not talking about SOME or MORE or MOST or NEARLY ALL. Please just answer the question.
DO u believe tat several truths should be studied together to obtain a better understanding ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Are we dealing with your definition of the truth ? Or mine ?
Now, is Undefined the opposite of Defined ? YES or NO
Yes
I guess we are both in agreement.
(U said 0 to infinity is identical to undefined )
If we come across something that we dont even know what it is, and I asked you, “What is it ?” normally, if a person dont know, they will reply, “ I dont know” they dont say , “It could be anything!” because, by asking that question answering “It could be anyhing?” Is like telling me... it could be anything, which I KNOW. “If could be anything!”. thats why I asked you, “What is it ?
U r again saying rubbish. If someone shows a thing which we have no clue at all, a person saying "it could be anything" is justified. U know wat is the meaning of "anything" ? It means it could be something u do not know too. U could search at google and u can find the following usage in grammer
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100125181108AABia6T
What kind of Parrot is this (It could be anything!)?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/snappydessy/4267199946/
It Could Be Anything
But what IS it? I may give a clue soon if nobody gets even close... :)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Could_it_be_dangerous_if_you%27ve_had_swelling_for_3_days_now_and_you%27re_sweating_profusely
Could it be dangerous if you've had swelling for 3 days now and you're sweating profusely?
Well it could be anything. It is difficult to answer a question with so little to go on.
Response: If you say it could be anything, you are already implying that u have a pre-conceived notion that you are able to define it. U have a rough idea it could be anything, and that anything could be in the realm of comprehension. To me, undefined, just means I cannot define it. Unable to comprehend.
Let me ask u back
6) It is already certified tat 0/0 is a fallacy, a misinterpretation and there is no mathematical or logic error in it. Don't u think tat playing around with the equation just shows u giving off more silly fallacies and misinterpreting the whole situation ?
No. It was just an exmaple. So that you could actually understand. 0/0 = Falacy
Please, here (Even maths are fallible. 0 divides by 0 , should be 0 right ? logically speaking right ? But WHY.. MATHS cannot define 0 divide by 0 in a mathematically? 23 Jan 12.35pm)
But ifyou refuse to acceept the fact that I said logically 0 which is nothing divides by 0 which is nothing gets you 0 which is nothing, then there is no point continuing. Just like how I mentioned Theory of Gravit and u insisted I meant Gravity is a theory, then AGAIN, u choose not accept my truth in my statement.
7) Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
No. Let me ask u back
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
U r the one who quotes him first
No
I guess we are both in agreement again.
Thats why I believe my statement to be true, but not the truth, because only Richard Feynman is the ultimate judge to whether our statements are the truth to his definition or not.
8) Did I not say 0/0 is Undefined and its not a legitimate operation in the beginning of this subject ? YES or NO
NO. U say 0/0 is logically zero which is obviously wrong
&
(0 which is NOTHING divides by 0 NOTHING logically = Nothing. But MATHS cant say its 0. Why ? 23 Jan 11.58pm)
&
(Asumming 0/0 technically u allow it to exist, 0x1 = 0 , 0x2 =0 . The following must be true. 0x1 = 0x2 = 0 Right ? If the following is true, Dividing by 0 gives 0/0 x 1 = 0/0 x 2 . So simplify, you have 1 = 2 . The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
Isnt it obvious that it is NOT a legitimate operation ?
Then we are BOTH in agreement ? So why keep on telling me something I already know ? If u are explaining it to yourself, then say so.
9) Did u point out to me that “It can be 0 to Infinity depending on the subject matter.” YES or NO
Yes. I still stand by these words. It surely beats saying it is logically zero
( Again, if u keep on being wilfully ignorant
on my statement, so be it. Its right there, u can refer)Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So... how it can be 0 when you yourself says it never touches 0 ? …....
U said (I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter. 23rd Jan 1.03pm )
But as usual, u willfully deny it. So again, no point asking for an understanding on that matter.
10) Did u say “0/0 * 0 = 0/0 * infinity. Since 0/0 can be anything, the first set of 0/0 could be 1 while the second set could be 0, then it still come to the conclusion tat 0= 0 which is again right.” YES OR NO
Yes. I still stand by these words
Can you prove my above equation wrong ?
YES. Because If one side X= 1 , the otherside X MUST also = 1 in the same equation.
12 )Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So ? I have said many times tat it goes from -ve infinity to + infinity and it could be anything in between. Let me ask u back
Does y tend to positive infinity and negative infinty as x goes to zero ? Wat is the value of X=0 then ?
The answer u give is the answer of division by zero
Ans: And so what is it ? UNDEFINED. Please, look at the graph again..
13) DID I EVER SAY “SCIENCE IS WRONG” YES or NO
Yes. Because if it is not truth, it is false and wrong
“Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes”
Once again, is this YOUR definition of Truth ? Or Mine.
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No. I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
“Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes”
Once again, is this YOUR definition of Truth ? Or Mine.
So as usual, no point furthering the matter if no understanding is gained.
14) If you asked for a crate of good apples, and there are 50 bad apples out of 500. Is it still a crate of good apples ? YES or NO
Don't know. A wholeseller who get 90% good apples could already be very happy. Normally the bad apples could be 80 or 90 per 500. Let me ask u back
Thats not the point. Its a simple question. Just a YES or NO.
If there r good apples in the crate, could u say the supplier has never provided any good apples in it ?
No, obviously he supplied some good apples. But my point is, do u call it a crate of good apples if they are rotten apples in there thats all.
15) Does science make mistakes ? YES or NO
Yes
We are both in agreement again.
-
Has Theories been wrong before ? YES or NO
Unsure. U still has not given an example of a wrong scientific theory
Unsure, but u dare to say Science = Body of Truths? That must be some bold words! It has to be Yes or No. If u are unsure, please dont say anything to try to prove your point.
-
If something is wrong, can it be Truth (True = Truth) ? YES or NO
Yes. Examples like "Wat u said r wrong". This is the truth even though u r wrong. Wat is not the truth is definitely false/wrong but wat is wrong may be the truth.
Then there should not be any problem with “What is true may not be the truth”.
Let me ask u back here.
If a science hypothesis is wrong, does it means ALL the other established scientific theories and laws, like Einstein, Newton etc r all wrong as well ?
No. Obviously NOT.
16) U said: Then let me ask u, why do u take medicine, or live in high rise building of use computers ? If they r not truth to u, these inventions could fail .
-
Human errors ! BRAVO... So u should understand where science comes from.
Did u go to high rise building ? Do u use computers ? Do u take medicine ? Did u use any of the world's machine ? Do u take cars ? Do u use microsoft software ? YES or NO
Can you tell me no high rise has collapsed ? Can u tell me no computer has faild? Can u tell medicine can work all the time ? Can you tell me all the machines in this world never fail ? Can you tell me your car never break down ? Can u tell me your windows never give u the blue screen of death ? YES or NO
Sure, all these devices could fail. (Your questions r phrased in a funny manner tat saying yes or no seems to imply none of these happened)I am just pointing out to you these things can fail. Thats all. Its a simple question. Yes or No. U keep reading into the questions.
However why they failed is more due to human errors such as poor engineering, or use lousy equipment or ignore proper maintenance. Let me ask u back.
YES of course.
If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati engine part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ? Vice Versa
No. (bravo)
Then u wont have any problem with this other understanding, because
3) Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
If you were to use HL milk and replace with Daisy milk for your coffee, is it going to work ? If u were to use kway teow and replace with mee pok, can most people accept the change ?
YES, but wont be the same. Taste different thats all.
YES , I have no problem accepting, I dont know about other people, but it will definitely not be the same dish.
Summary: I was more then happy to answer a simple yes or no. But u wanted my elaboration as well.
See. Its not so hard right ? From then, we can gauge each other's understanding and intention.
Conclusion is simple. Obviosly there are mistakes made by both sides. However, only one side has admitted to mistakes and omission while the other side doesnt. So there is also no point furthering any points.Or discussions. Because i will repeat the same thing and so will u , while i again am being understanding while u are not.
-
-
I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
As said before many times, u had stated the below before on the 15th Jan
“How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity"
This is plain as day tat u said gravity is a theory and thus false. The word "of" just reinforce the idea u claim gravity is a theory. My objective is to show u had said gravity is not truth once. So I had done it.
No. Gravity is the Truth. And Yes, there is a theory of gravity.
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
No, To me, gravity is Truth.
Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
The whole point is truth always has a scope. No truth is true no matter wat the circumstances is. Since u claimed
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES
Then can gravity pull aspiration, or education, or economy down to the earth ?
Can you Show me the example of 1+1 not equal to 2 again but state the question u want to ask first ?
Is 1 + 1 = 2 True and the Truth IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES ? YES or NO
U r not really answering my question here. I said show me the equation example again, not ask me tis question.
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. Furthermore, u should include the word "science"
YES OR NO ? I not talking about SOME or MORE or MOST or NEARLY ALL. Please just answer the question.
I have already said the answer as yes. It works. So it is yes
DO u believe tat several truths should be studied together to obtain a better understanding ?
So u refuser to answer tis question ? U can avoid answering questions but I am just gonna write my points after all the end anyway
If you say it could be anything, you are already implying that u have a pre-conceived notion that you are able to define it. U have a rough idea it could be anything, and that anything could be in the realm of comprehension. To me, undefined, just means I cannot define it. Unable to comprehend.
Tat is your wrong defintion. Anything means "anything" right ? The things I do not know is also "anything" right ? The things u do not know is also "anything" right ?
But ifyou refuse to acceept the fact that I said logically 0 which is nothing divides by 0 which is nothing gets you 0 which is nothing, then there is no point continuing. Just like how I mentioned Theory of Gravit and u insisted I meant Gravity is a theory, then AGAIN, u choose not accept my truth in my statement.
Tis is because u refuse to answer wat is divide by zero. Tat is no logical meaning to it
Thats why I believe my statement to be true, but not the truth, because only Richard Feynman is the ultimate judge to whether our statements are the truth to his definition or not.
Tis only shows u, alone, believe tis is true
Then we are BOTH in agreement ? So why keep on telling me something I already know ? If u are explaining it to yourself, then say so.
Ok, then why did u bringing out the example of 0/0 in the first place ?
YES. Because If one side X= 1 , the otherside X MUST also = 1 in the same equation.
Wrong. As said before, u r dealing with undefined value, not variable.The left hand side and right hand side can be different. U putting X is trying to put another fallacy
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No. I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
Your reply on 16th Jan 1155
Science EXPLAINS WHY... it doesnt state the TRUTH.
I agree that Science EXPLAINS it,and its about WHY and HOW , not the TRUTH .
16th jan 1255
Because TRUTH is not what science does. And if they can be wrong, then Science is NOT TRUTH and FACTS
Science to me is How and Why and is not the Truth.
16th jan 211
All i am saying is Science is not TRUTH. Whats so hard to understand ?
I am just saying Science is not Truth.
17th jan 552
I am merely stating and no agreeing in Science = Truth/Fact as stated by reservist(dude)
All i am saying is, Science.. IS NOT TRUTH .
Then can u explain the above statements u made ?
If a science hypothesis is wrong, does it means ALL the other established scientific theories and laws, like Einstein, Newton etc r all wrong as well ?
No. Obviously NOT.
Then why do u keep saying tat since science is wrong before, why do we treat science as truth ?
Human errors ! BRAVO... So u should understand where science comes from
Yup I understand. So ? There r lazy people and hardworking people. Some lazy engineers built a lousy high rise building doesn't means Einstein is wrong isn't it ?
Did u go to high rise building ? Do u use computers ? Do u take medicine ? Did u use any of the world's machine ? Do u take cars ? Do u use microsoft software ? YES or NO
YES of course.
Then u must have treat science as truth otherwise u r endangering your life isn't it ?
YES , I have no problem accepting, I dont know about other people, but it will definitely not be the same dish.
So wat is the point of u showing the engine example again ?
-
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock. When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts. And u just misquote Richard Feynman
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
As said before many times, u had stated the below before on the 15th Jan
“How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity"
This is plain as day tat u said gravity is a theory and thus false. The word "of" just reinforce the idea u claim gravity is a theory. My objective is to show u had said gravity is not truth once. So I had done it.
No. Gravity is the Truth. And Yes, there is a theory of gravity.
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
No, To me, gravity is Truth.
Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
The whole point is truth always has a scope. No truth is true no matter wat the circumstances is. Since u claimed
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES
Then can gravity pull aspiration, or education, or economy down to the earth ?
U r not really answering my question here. I said show me the equation example again, not ask me tis question.
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. Furthermore, u should include the word "science"
I have already said the answer as yes. It works. So it is yes
So u refuser to answer tis question ? U can avoid answering questions but I am just gonna write my points after all the end anyway
Tat is your wrong defintion. Anything means "anything" right ? The things I do not know is also "anything" right ? The things u do not know is also "anything" right ?
Tis is because u refuse to answer wat is divide by zero. Tat is no logical meaning to it
Tis only shows u, alone, believe tis is true
Ok, then why did u bringing out the example of 0/0 in the first place ?
Wrong. As said before, u r dealing with undefined value, not variable.The left hand side and right hand side can be different. U putting X is trying to put another fallacy
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No. I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
Your reply on 16th Jan 1155
Science EXPLAINS WHY... it doesnt state the TRUTH.
I agree that Science EXPLAINS it,and its about WHY and HOW , not the TRUTH .
16th jan 1255
Because TRUTH is not what science does. And if they can be wrong, then Science is NOT TRUTH and FACTS
Science to me is How and Why and is not the Truth.
16th jan 211
All i am saying is Science is not TRUTH. Whats so hard to understand ?
I am just saying Science is not Truth.
17th jan 552
I am merely stating and no agreeing in Science = Truth/Fact as stated by reservist(dude)
All i am saying is, Science.. IS NOT TRUTH .
Then can u explain the above statements u made ?
Then why do u keep saying tat since science is wrong before, why do we treat science as truth ?
Yup I understand. So ? There r lazy people and hardworking people. Some lazy engineers built a lousy high rise building doesn't means Einstein is wrong isn't it ?
Then u must have treat science as truth otherwise u r endangering your life isn't it ?
So wat is the point of u showing the engine example again ?
I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
As said before many times, u had stated the below before on the 15th Jan
“How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity"
This is plain as day tat u said gravity is a theory and thus false. The word "of" just reinforce the idea u claim gravity is a theory. My objective is to show u had said gravity is not truth once. So I had done it.
ANS :) (How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
No. Gravity is the Truth. And Yes, there is a theory of gravity.
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
No, To me, gravity is Truth.
ANS) Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
The whole point is truth always has a scope. No truth is true no matter wat the circumstances is. Since u claimed
ANS) (I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES
Then can gravity pull aspiration, or education, or economy down to the earth ?
U r not really answering my question here. I said show me the equation example again, not ask me tis question.
(U DID NO ANSWER MY QUESTION TOO REGARDING CRATE OF GOOD APPLES )(I can equally say u are talking rubbish, when its clear u know what i mean)(ACTUAL REALITY)
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
So: Yes if its my definition of truth.
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. Furthermore, u should include the word "science"
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
I have already said the answer as yes. It works. So it is yes
So u refuser to answer tis question ? U can avoid answering questions but I am just gonna write my points after all the end anyway
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Tat is your wrong defintion. Anything means "anything" right ? The things I do not know is also "anything" right ? The things u do not know is also "anything" right ?
Tis is because u refuse to answer wat is divide by zero. Tat is no logical meaning to it
Tis only shows u, alone, believe tis is true
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Ok, then why did u bringing out the example of 0/0 in the first place ?
ISNT IT OBVIOUS THAT MATHS CREATED BY HUMANS HAVE ERRORS. THATS ALL.
THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE EXAMPLE. DO U AGREE THAT HUMAN MAKES ERRORS ? YES OR NO ? SIMPLEWrong. As said before, u r dealing with undefined value, not variable.The left hand side and right hand side can be different. U putting X is trying to put another fallacy
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So ? I have said many times tat it goes from -ve infinity to + infinity and it could be anything in between. Let me ask u back
Does y tend to positive infinity and negative infinty as x goes to zero ? Wat is the value of X=0 then ?
The answer u give is the answer of division by zero
Ans: And so what is it ? UNDEFINED. Please, look at the graph again..
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No. I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
Your reply on 16th Jan 1155
Science EXPLAINS WHY... it doesnt state the TRUTH.
I agree that Science EXPLAINS it,and its about WHY and HOW , not the TRUTH .
16th jan 1255
Because TRUTH is not what science does. And if they can be wrong, then Science is NOT TRUTH and FACTS
Science to me is How and Why and is not the Truth.
16th jan 211
All i am saying is Science is not TRUTH. Whats so hard to understand ?
I am just saying Science is not Truth.
17th jan 552
I am merely stating and no agreeing in Science = Truth/Fact as stated by reservist(dude)
All i am saying is, Science.. IS NOT TRUTH .
Then can u explain the above statements u made ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
THATS WHY TO ME ,SCIENCE IS NOT TRUTH. Simple.
Then why do u keep saying tat since science is wrong before, why do we treat science as truth ?
I NEVER SAID SCIENCE IS WRONG BEFORE. SIMPLE.
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Yup I understand. So ? There r lazy people and hardworking people. Some lazy engineers built a lousy high rise building doesn't means Einstein is wrong isn't it ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Einstein is human. IF he is human, there is a possibility. Thats why we call it Human Error. U admit human make errors ? Did i say he is wrong ?
Then u must have treat science as truth otherwise u r endangering your life isn't it ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
I ACCEPT IT AS TRUE, BUT NOT TRUTH . I STEP OUT OF A HOUSE ANY DAY, I AM ENDANGERING MY LIFE ALREADY. What u talking about ?U THINK DANGER ONLY COMES FROM SCIENCE ?
So wat is the point of u showing the engine example again ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Thats my whole point. I cant believe, u didnt get it.
Its a simply analogy of applying ur truth into my belief, and i apply mine to yours. I told u i totally understand yours, hence i cannot apply mine to yours, and i never did. All i was doing was explaining. Thats all, u were the one trying to force me to accept yours.
I hope all this.. further clarifies any misunderstading. Anything after this, and u still insist on misunderstandings, it is an obvious failing to compromise of understandings.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock. When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts. And u just misquote Richard Feynman
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
No. Gravity is the Truth. And Yes, there is a theory of gravity.
Let me tell u one thing first. Gravity is really a scientific theory similar to evolution.
No, To me, gravity is Truth.
ANS) Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
The whole point is truth always has a scope. No truth is true no matter wat the circumstances is. Since u claimed
ANS) (I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
Is the truth gravity which u claimed is TRUTH, TRUTH in ALL CIRCUMSTANCES
Then can gravity pull aspiration, or education, or economy down to the earth ?
U r not really answering my question here. I said show me the equation example again, not ask me tis question.
(U DID NO ANSWER MY QUESTION TOO REGARDING CRATE OF GOOD APPLES )(I can equally say u are talking rubbish, when its clear u know what i mean)(ACTUAL REALITY)
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
So: Yes if its my definition of truth.
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. Furthermore, u should include the word "science"
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
I have already said the answer as yes. It works. So it is yes
So u refuser to answer tis question ? U can avoid answering questions but I am just gonna write my points after all the end anyway
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Tat is your wrong defintion. Anything means "anything" right ? The things I do not know is also "anything" right ? The things u do not know is also "anything" right ?
Tis is because u refuse to answer wat is divide by zero. Tat is no logical meaning to it
Tis only shows u, alone, believe tis is true
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Ok, then why did u bringing out the example of 0/0 in the first place ?
ISNT IT OBVIOUS THAT MATHS CREATED BY HUMANS HAVE ERRORS. THATS ALL.
THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE EXAMPLE. DO U AGREE THAT HUMAN MAKES ERRORS ? YES OR NO ? SIMPLEWrong. As said before, u r dealing with undefined value, not variable.The left hand side and right hand side can be different. U putting X is trying to put another fallacy
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
So ? I have said many times tat it goes from -ve infinity to + infinity and it could be anything in between. Let me ask u back
Does y tend to positive infinity and negative infinty as x goes to zero ? Wat is the value of X=0 then ?
The answer u give is the answer of division by zero
Ans: And so what is it ? UNDEFINED. Please, look at the graph again..
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No. I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
Your reply on 16th Jan 1155
Science EXPLAINS WHY... it doesnt state the TRUTH.
I agree that Science EXPLAINS it,and its about WHY and HOW , not the TRUTH .
16th jan 1255
Because TRUTH is not what science does. And if they can be wrong, then Science is NOT TRUTH and FACTS
Science to me is How and Why and is not the Truth.
16th jan 211
All i am saying is Science is not TRUTH. Whats so hard to understand ?
I am just saying Science is not Truth.
17th jan 552
I am merely stating and no agreeing in Science = Truth/Fact as stated by reservist(dude)
All i am saying is, Science.. IS NOT TRUTH .
Then can u explain the above statements u made ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
THATS WHY TO ME ,SCIENCE IS NOT TRUTH. Simple.
Then why do u keep saying tat since science is wrong before, why do we treat science as truth ?
I NEVER SAID SCIENCE IS WRONG BEFORE. SIMPLE.
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Yup I understand. So ? There r lazy people and hardworking people. Some lazy engineers built a lousy high rise building doesn't means Einstein is wrong isn't it ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Einstein is human. IF he is human, there is a possibility. Thats why we call it Human Error. U admit human make errors ? Did i say he is wrong ?
Then u must have treat science as truth otherwise u r endangering your life isn't it ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
I ACCEPT IT AS TRUE, BUT NOT TRUTH . I STEP OUT OF A HOUSE ANY DAY, I AM ENDANGERING MY LIFE ALREADY. What u talking about ?U THINK DANGER ONLY COMES FROM SCIENCE ?
So wat is the point of u showing the engine example again ?
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Thats my whole point. I cant believe, u didnt get it.
Its a simply analogy of applying ur truth into my belief, and i apply mine to yours. I told u i totally understand yours, hence i cannot apply mine to yours, and i never did. All i was doing was explaining. Thats all, u were the one trying to force me to accept yours.
I hope all this.. further clarifies any misunderstading. Anything after this, and u still insist on misunderstandings, it is an obvious failing to compromise of understandings.
-
U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
I have said tis many times as well but your only defence is "theory of gravity" is "theory of gravity"
U DID NO ANSWER MY QUESTION TOO REGARDING CRATE OF GOOD APPLES )(I can equally say u are talking rubbish, when its clear u know what i mean)(ACTUAL REALITY)
I am sorry I miss tat.
If there r good apples in the crate, could u say the supplier has never provided any good apples in it ?
No, obviously he supplied some good apples. But my point is, do u call it a crate of good apples if they are rotten apples in there thats all.
Why not ? There r overwhelming good apples in the crate. I could call it a crate of good apples.
So do u wanna reply to the questions instead of avoiding it ?
Unsure, but u dare to say Science = Body of Truths? That must be some bold words! It has to be Yes or No. If u are unsure, please dont say anything to try to prove your point.
I am unsure because I do not know. If u can prove a theory tat is wrong before, then I will agree with u. Otherwise Theories may not be wrong before
My Answer: No. (In case u wish to argue the point ? Please check back to Wiki – Truth. Even the intellectuals are vastly different from the dictionary, hence I do not consider my definition deviate greatly from the rest of the english speaking world) (RED)
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. And they can define it in words. Wat happened to your word "science".
ISNT IT OBVIOUS THAT MATHS CREATED BY HUMANS HAVE ERRORS. THATS ALL.
THATS THE WHOLE POINT OF THE EXAMPLE. DO U AGREE THAT HUMAN MAKES ERRORS ? YES OR NO ? SIMPLEThere is no errors in the maths u had shown. U just shown a fallacy which is a misinterpretation
And human made errors doesn't means they never do the right thing. If they do the right things they could be truth
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
WHy not ? The graph shows it can be anything.
Maths make mistake. Not proven
Established scientific theory/laws make mistake ? Not proven
THATS WHY TO ME ,SCIENCE IS NOT TRUTH. Simple.
Then why do u lie ?
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No.
I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
SO your definition of science is different from the english speaking world isn't it ?
Einstein is human. IF he is human, there is a possibility. Thats why we call it Human Error. U admit human make errors ? Did i say he is wrong ?
Possibility of human make mistakes doesn't means he made mistakes.
I ACCEPT IT AS TRUE, BUT NOT TRUTH . I STEP OUT OF A HOUSE ANY DAY, I AM ENDANGERING MY LIFE ALREADY. What u talking about ?U THINK DANGER ONLY COMES FROM SCIENCE ?
Standing on a high rise building if u believe it is not truth is impossibly dangerous. People do take things like lift or high rise building for granted as truth and stable. However u use them and said they r not truth. Strange isn't it ?
Its a simply analogy of applying ur truth into my belief, and i apply mine to yours. I told u i totally understand yours, hence i cannot apply mine to yours, and i never did. All i was doing was explaining. Thats all, u were the one trying to force me to accept yours.
However your analogy is faulty since u said HL milk, daisy milk and kway teow mee pok r replaceable. Engine has totally nothing to do with your definition and mine
-
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock. When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)
Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
See, its not very hard right. We are actually both on the same page. We are already on agreement on this issue.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
-Its obvious, Theory the How and Why , explains the subject matter and that is Gravity.
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } -->
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Are we dealing with your definition of the truth ? Or mine ?
U DID NO ANSWER MY QUESTION TOO REGARDING CRATE OF GOOD APPLES )(I can equally say u are talking rubbish, when its clear u know what i mean)(ACTUAL REALITY
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
U tell me did i say Gravity is Truth.
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
U ARE UNDER YOUR IMPRESSION. ITS YOUR WORDS. EVEN WHEN I SAID THATS NOT WHAT I MEANT, U ASSUME EVEN WITH EXPLAINATIONS. YOUR INTERPRETATION. ARE U ME ? YES OR NO ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
U said (I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter. 23rd Jan 1.03pm )
I SAID:
&
(0 which is NOTHING divides by 0 NOTHING logically = Nothing. But MATHS cant say its 0. Why ? 23 Jan 11.58pm)
&
(Asumming 0/0 technically u allow it to exist, 0x1 = 0 , 0x2 =0 . The following must be true. 0x1 = 0x2 = 0 Right ? If the following is true, Dividing by 0 gives 0/0 x 1 = 0/0 x 2 . So simplify, you have 1 = 2 . The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
Isnt it obvious that it is NOT a legitimate operation ?
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
TO ME. THAT STATEMENT IS ALREADY WRONG. IF IT SAYS SOME BODY OF TRUTHS or MOSTLY BODY OF TRUTHS, I CAN ACCEPT. REMEMBER, THIS IS TRUTH, UNDER YOUR DEFINITION.
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
RECONCILE YOUR OWN BODY OF TRUTHS FIRST.
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts. And u just misquote Richard Feynman
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
No. Let me ask u back
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
U r the one who quotes him first
No
I guess we are both in agreement again.
Thats why I believe my statement to be true, but not the truth, because only Richard Feynman is the ultimate judge to whether our statements are the truth to his definition or not.
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
MY ANALOGY . CRATE OF APPLES.
DID I SAY EVERYTHING IS WRONG ? ALL I SAID IS THEY CAN BE WRONG LATER WITH NEW INFORMATION COMING UP. THATS WHY, I CANNOT ACCEPT BODY OF TRUTHS, BECAUSE OF SCIENCE IS CREATED BY HUMANS.
-
Misunderstanding ? Wat is your only argument left ? "My truth is different from your truth". Isn't your truth "actual existence" ? If tat is the case, u still have to answer all the questions left hanging.
And if u wanna talk about compromise and stop the whole thread. I can do tat. But if u reply and said more things which is totally unbelievable to me, I will definitely reply
-
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)
Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
See, its not very hard right. We are actually both on the same page. We are already on agreement on this issue.
So is 1+1=2 the truth ? If it is not the truth, then we do not have an understanding here
I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
I have stated hard evidence as well. However u just refuse to comment on it.
U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
So is the WHY and HOW truth ?
U ARE UNDER YOUR IMPRESSION. ITS YOUR WORDS. EVEN WHEN I SAID THATS NOT WHAT I MEANT, U ASSUME EVEN WITH EXPLAINATIONS. YOUR INTERPRETATION. ARE U ME ? YES OR NO ?
No I am not u. But your words r all for people to see. Unless your english is so bad tat u cannot represent wat u wanna say
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
Explained it before, U can refer
TO ME. THAT STATEMENT IS ALREADY WRONG. IF IT SAYS SOME BODY OF TRUTHS or MOSTLY BODY OF TRUTHS, I CAN ACCEPT. REMEMBER, THIS IS TRUTH, UNDER YOUR DEFINITION.
Did u remember I saying tat if it is proven to be untrue, it is not longer science. So science is always a body of truth.
RECONCILE YOUR OWN BODY OF TRUTHS FIRST
Reconciled. Now why do u refuse to comment on the point of logic for so long ?
Thats why I believe my statement to be true, but not the truth, because only Richard Feynman is the ultimate judge to whether our statements are the truth to his definition or not.
Then your examples, and all other corresponding definition of science is just your thinking. And the only thing left to compare is the dictionary version which u reject
DID I SAY EVERYTHING IS WRONG ? ALL I SAID IS THEY CAN BE WRONG LATER WITH NEW INFORMATION COMING UP. THATS WHY, I CANNOT ACCEPT BODY OF TRUTHS, BECAUSE OF SCIENCE IS CREATED BY HUMANS.
U have said science is never truth. How do u know ? So wat is wrong with science being created by human ?
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
I have said tis many times as well but your only defence is "theory of gravity" is "theory of gravity"
I am sorry I miss tat.
Why not ? There r overwhelming good apples in the crate. I could call it a crate of good apples.
So do u wanna reply to the questions instead of avoiding it ?
I am unsure because I do not know. If u can prove a theory tat is wrong before, then I will agree with u. Otherwise Theories may not be wrong before
The intellectuals basis is still tat truth is true. And they can define it in words. Wat happened to your word "science".
There is no errors in the maths u had shown. U just shown a fallacy which is a misinterpretation
And human made errors doesn't means they never do the right thing. If they do the right things they could be truth
WHy not ? The graph shows it can be anything.
Maths make mistake. Not proven
Established scientific theory/laws make mistake ? Not proven
Then why do u lie ?
Did u ever say Science is NEVER about the truth ?
No.
I already made it clear that its about the How and Why , if they stumbled upon the truth. Bravo.
SO your definition of science is different from the english speaking world isn't it ?
Possibility of human make mistakes doesn't means he made mistakes.
Standing on a high rise building if u believe it is not truth is impossibly dangerous. People do take things like lift or high rise building for granted as truth and stable. However u use them and said they r not truth. Strange isn't it ?
However your analogy is faulty since u said HL milk, daisy milk and kway teow mee pok r replaceable. Engine has totally nothing to do with your definition and mine
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
Like i said, Theory starts with a postulation. Thats why Gravity as Truth, is explained BY the Theory OF Gravity. I gues u REALLY are too stupid to understand.
"Why not ? There r overwhelming good apples in the crate. I could call it a crate of good apples"
O.K. fine.U can accept it as a crate of good apples, but I DONT call it a crate of good apples. See. Simple. Am I there to comply to YOUR definition ? NO.
"Possibility of human make mistakes doesn't means he made mistakes."
So he isnt human ?If u say he is not, I may be inclide to accept that , he makes NO mistakes. But the problem is he i still human. Means he still make mistakes. Unless U dont make mistakes? And u are not human ? U tell me.
"There is no errors in the maths u had shown. U just shown a fallacy which is a misinterpretation"
TO me its an error. Because Maths allowed it to happened. And there are plenty other errors. This is but one of it. Sorry, its not doing its job properly.
"However your analogy is faulty since u said HL milk, daisy milk and kway teow mee pok r replaceable. Engine has totally nothing to do with your definition and mine"
YES, but wont be the same. Taste different thats all.
YES , I have no problem accepting, I dont know about other people, but it will definitely not be the same dish.
Replaceable ? It tastes different. Its two different dish. U are the one telling me i said its irreplaceable. U were just asking me a question, and i was just answering your question. What does that have to do with my engine ?
Are u Mr Perfect ? Are u faultless? Are u human ?
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
Misunderstanding ? Wat is your only argument left ? "My truth is different from your truth". Isn't your truth "actual existence" ? If tat is the case, u still have to answer all the questions left hanging.
And if u wanna talk about compromise and stop the whole thread. I can do tat. But if u reply and said more things which is totally unbelievable to me, I will definitely reply
U dont have to believe me. I dont have to believe you too.
This can go on. Its just that you are forcing me to accept your definition in my belief.
So u like me fucking you la ? Thats what u are saying.
What questions ? I anwered them all. I am being nice calling it a misunderstanding. Unelss u want me to call u stupid again ? Which I will be more then happy to.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
So is 1+1=2 the truth ? If it is not the truth, then we do not have an understanding here
I have stated hard evidence as well. However u just refuse to comment on it.
U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
So is the WHY and HOW truth ?
No I am not u. But your words r all for people to see. Unless your english is so bad tat u cannot represent wat u wanna say
Explained it before, U can refer
Did u remember I saying tat if it is proven to be untrue, it is not longer science. So science is always a body of truth.
Reconciled. Now why do u refuse to comment on the point of logic for so long ?
Then your examples, and all other corresponding definition of science is just your thinking. And the only thing left to compare is the dictionary version which u reject
U have said science is never truth. How do u know ? So wat is wrong with science being created by human ?
1+1 is true. But not the truth.
So is the WHY and HOW truth ?
The How and Why is Truth is up to you. The point is do we both agree that its about the How and Why only? Thats it. U can believe that it is Truth, i dont care. All i am saying is , its about the How and Why thats all.
Then your examples, and all other corresponding definition of science is just your thinking. And the only thing left to compare is the dictionary version which u reject
Why do i have to follow the dictionary ? Intellectuals , scholars, philosophers dont follow the dictionary, why should I ? Again, i like to think OUT of the box. Simple.
U have said science is never truth. How do u know ? So wat is wrong with science being created by human ?
Its about the How and Why , it along the way they discover Truth, BRAVO. Nothing wrong with science being created by human. I got no problem . All i am highlighting is that human makes mistakes. Thats all. And science is by humans.
-
U wanna continue continue la
Like i said, Theory starts with a postulation. Thats why Gravity as Truth, is explained BY the Theory OF Gravity. I gues u REALLY are too stupid to understand.
Stupid ? Gravity is still a THEORY. U said u do not believe in evolution is because it is a theory. Now gravity is a theory and u simply believed it to be the truth. Double standard again ? U said THEORY OF GRAVITY, RIGHT ? U said then science cannot tell between truth and false right ? Theory of gravity is science domain right ? Then u said science is never about truth. SO how come gravity is truth now ? Aren;t u contradicting yourself ?
O.K. fine.U can accept it as a crate of good apples, but I DONT call it a crate of good apples. See. Simple. Am I there to comply to YOUR definition ? NO.
Then good. I wonder why u ever bring out tis stupid topic in the first place
So he isnt human ?If u say he is not, I may be inclide to accept that , he makes NO mistakes. But the problem is he i still human. Means he still make mistakes. Unless U dont make mistakes? And u are not human ? U tell me.
U see u make rubbish statements again. Let me show u
1) U claim an organisation/people/field makes mistake
2) Then u ask, if they make mistakes, how could they be truth
3) U r assuming they make mistakes for EVERYTHING. If they can do right things, why couldn't they be truth ?
4) Fact is they don't always make mistakes. They can do right things. Thus u cannot conclude they r never about truth
I am human, and so ? U r human too
TO me its an error. Because Maths allowed it to happened. And there are plenty other errors. This is but one of it. Sorry, its not doing its job properly.
The error is u mis-interpreting it. Sorry but tis is the technical term for your mistake. It's called fallacy. It is always true and interprete truth and facts well.Tat is why u r incapable to explaining the meaning of division by zero
Replaceable ? It tastes different. Its two different dish. U are the one telling me i said its irreplaceable. U were just asking me a question, and i was just answering your question. What does that have to do with my engine ?
It may taste different, but u yourself said yes it is acceptable. Your analogy about engine say different brand could not be substituted. Howver there r many things tat could be substituted such as brands of evaporated milk etc. So wat does it show ? Your example of engine is really pointless
U dont have to believe me. I dont have to believe you too.
This can go on. Its just that you are forcing me to accept your definition in my belief
Well, I am just pointing to u basic english. U said truth as "actual existence" and it doesn't make u escape from the earlier question. Unless u wanna say u don't mean wat u say and thus a lier ?
What questions ? I anwered them all. I am being nice calling it a misunderstanding. Unelss u want me to call u stupid again ? Which I will be more then happy to.
Sure no problem. Two can play tis game
1+1 is true. But not the truth.
So is the WHY and HOW truth ?
Then it comes to tis question which u refuse to comment
If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ? I am afraid not because u claimed 0/0 is logically zero
The How and Why is Truth is up to you. The point is do we both agree that its about the How and Why only? Thats it. U can believe that it is Truth, i dont care. All i am saying is , its about the How and Why thats all.
U don't care lor. So I said u r delusional, thinking answers to simple questions like why apples fall to the ground is not truth, or how rain comes about is not truth to u. I can't stop u from trying to be stupid right ?
Why do i have to follow the dictionary ? Intellectuals , scholars, philosophers dont follow the dictionary, why should I ?
Sorry to say but they generally have the same definition of truth, which is something true. And they can express their truth in words, u can't because u r grammatically challenged
Its about the How and Why , it along the way they discover Truth, BRAVO. Nothing wrong with science being created by human. I got no problem . All i am highlighting is that human makes mistakes. Thats all. And science is by humans.
Then u can refer to the above
-
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it. Why u refuse to provide a simple question for your ridiculous example ?
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u.
There r other ways to say tis. Gravity is a theory, U said theory r not truth. Gravity in in the domain of science. Since science to u is never about truth, then gravity is not truth.
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ? I asked u the following, why refuse to answer ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ? Why refuse to comment on the above ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts.And no matter who u quote, it is meaningless because u r not the person.
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
11) U claimed: It is my version of truth, not yours
My ans: When asked u to define truth, the only thing u came out is "actual existence". However u add in "must work under all situation", "perfect", "all truth cannot be viewed collectively for better understanding" etc. U just keep adding things u like into it. Wat does it show ? No integrity, lier, fickle minded and absurbness.
Even the philosophers etc can narrow their definition but u can't because u r grammaticaly incapable.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
U wanna continue continue la
Stupid ? Gravity is still a THEORY. U said u do not believe in evolution is because it is a theory. Now gravity is a theory and u simply believed it to be the truth. Double standard again ? U said THEORY OF GRAVITY, RIGHT ? U said then science cannot tell between truth and false right ? Theory of gravity is science domain right ? Then u said science is never about truth. SO how come gravity is truth now ? Aren;t u contradicting yourself ?
Then good. I wonder why u ever bring out tis stupid topic in the first place
U see u make rubbish statements again. Let me show u
1) U claim an organisation/people/field makes mistake
2) Then u ask, if they make mistakes, how could they be truth
3) U r assuming they make mistakes for EVERYTHING. If they can do right things, why couldn't they be truth ?
4) Fact is they don't always make mistakes. They can do right things. Thus u cannot conclude they r never about truth
I am human, and so ? U r human too
The error is u mis-interpreting it. Sorry but tis is the technical term for your mistake. It's called fallacy. It is always true and interprete truth and facts well.Tat is why u r incapable to explaining the meaning of division by zero
It may taste different, but u yourself said yes it is acceptable. Your analogy about engine say different brand could not be substituted. Howver there r many things tat could be substituted such as brands of evaporated milk etc. So wat does it show ? Your example of engine is really pointless
Well, I am just pointing to u basic english. U said truth as "actual existence" and it doesn't make u escape from the earlier question. Unless u wanna say u don't mean wat u say and thus a lier ?
Sure no problem. Two can play tis game
Then it comes to tis question which u refuse to comment
If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ? I am afraid not because u claimed 0/0 is logically zero
U don't care lor. So I said u r delusional, thinking answers to simple questions like why apples fall to the ground is not truth, or how rain comes about is not truth to u. I can't stop u from trying to be stupid right ?
Sorry to say but they generally have the same definition of truth, which is something true. And they can express their truth in words, u can't because u r grammatically challenged
Then u can refer to the above
Exactly. I am human. Hence, the most i can claim what i am not 100% sure is true. But not TRUTH.
If u can understand crate of good apples, u can understand why i cannot accept BODY of TRUTHS.
I explained Division by Zero perfectly.
"STUPIDISMART on the 23rd Jan 1.03pm
I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter."
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
You said : No
So... how it can be 0 when you yourself says it never touches 0 ? …....
U said (I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter. 23rd Jan 1.03pm )
But as usual, u willfully deny it. So again, no point asking for an understanding on that matter.
Did I not say 0/0 is Undefined and its not a legitimate operation in the beginning of this subject ? YES or NO
You said : NO. U say 0/0 is logically zero which is obviously wrong
&
(0 which is NOTHING divides by 0 NOTHING logically = Nothing. But MATHS cant say its 0. Why ? 23 Jan 11.58pm)
&
(Asumming 0/0 technically u allow it to exist, 0x1 = 0 , 0x2 =0 . The following must be true. 0x1 = 0x2 = 0 Right ? If the following is true, Dividing by 0 gives 0/0 x 1 = 0/0 x 2 . So simplify, you have 1 = 2 . The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
Isnt it obvious that it is NOT a legitimate operation ? But as usual, u refuse to accept mutual understanding and say I never said it, or I phrased it wrong, wrong definition , bad grammar... whatever bullshit. But its o.k.
"U don't care lor. So I said u r delusional, thinking answers to simple questions like why apples fall to the ground is not truth, or how rain comes about is not truth to u. I can't stop u from trying to be stupid right ?"
So when did i say apples fall to the ground is not truth ?When did i say rain comes down is not truth ? Please, show me my exact words and statements. By all means.
"( 24 Jan 12.26am )
-NO , ONCE AGAIN, U MISUNDERSTAND ME. Now, READ CAREFULLY. GRAVITY = Actualy Reality ( Existed Before Science)
-Science = WHY(Does the phenomenon of gravity exist?) And then, they find out the HOW, and from there , they call this phenomenon = GRAVITY.
-Gravity is the ABSOLUTE REALITY. The acceleration is the EFFECT of Gravity. Rain IS and ABSOLUTE REALITY, Science does not PROVE RAIN EXISTS, we can see it.. we know it exists, even if Science does not prove it, we KNOW it exists, because we can see it. All science did was explain HOW and WHY it comes down from the sky, and therefore condensation....yada yada...etc etc comes in."
Sorry to say but they generally have the same definition of truth, which is something true. And they can express their truth in words, u can't because u r grammatically challenged
NOPE. THEY ARE VERY DIFFERENT VIEWS .NOPE. I DONT AGREE. TO ME, THE DIFFERENCES ARE NIGHT N DAY.
"Have a look at Wiki of Truth. <----- REAAAAAAD.. PLEASE. 19 Jan 12.50pm"
I can't stop u from trying to be stupid right ?
And i cant stop u from being stupid either. I guess we are both in agreement on this statement.
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
If u were to tell me take a part of Hyundai in my Maserati engine, is it going to work ? YES or NO ?
If I try to fit my Maserati engine part into your Hyndai, is it going to work ? YES or NO ? Vice Versa
No.
So its obvious we cannot apply each other's definitions into each other's beliefs. I accept yours, and I understand. Thats it. Simple. But u dont want my understanding. U want my compliance.
U want me to fit your Hyundai engine part into my Maserati engine.
-
Originally posted by stupidissmart:
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock.
When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it. Why u refuse to provide a simple question for your ridiculous example ?
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u.
There r other ways to say tis. Gravity is a theory, U said theory r not truth. Gravity in in the domain of science. Since science to u is never about truth, then gravity is not truth.
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ? I asked u the following, why refuse to answer ?
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ? Why refuse to comment on the above ?
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts.And no matter who u quote, it is meaningless because u r not the person.
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
11) U claimed: It is my version of truth, not yours
My ans: When asked u to define truth, the only thing u came out is "actual existence". However u add in "must work under all situation", "perfect", "all truth cannot be viewed collectively for better understanding" etc. U just keep adding things u like into it. Wat does it show ? No integrity, lier, fickle minded and absurbness.
Even the philosophers etc can narrow their definition but u can't because u r grammaticaly incapable.
<!-- @page { margin: 0.79in } P { margin-bottom: 0.08in } A:link { so-language: zxx } -->
1) U claimed : 1+1 =2 is not truth. And based on wat ? U say 1 egg + 1 sperm = 1 fertilised egg. And thus u claimed 1+1 not equal to 2.
My Ans: Truth has to work within a certain scope. For 1+1=2, both must be the same context. (1 apple + 1 apple =2 apples, 1 apple + 1 orange = 1 apple + 1 orange, not 2 apples or 2 oranges). If u do not obey its scope, u r not using the equation right and talking cock. When I asked u wat to state the question which u wana ask for the above equation, u refuse to provide it.
(I guess we both agree. No problem there) That was the whole point I was telling in the beginning. 1 + 1 = 2 is true... but not really the TRUTH! (17 Jan 9.58pm)
Because it depends on circumstances. Thats my whole point. Hope u have finally understand in my context by now.
See, its not very hard right. We are actually both on the same page. We are already on agreement on this issue.
2) U claimed: U did not say Gravity is not truth
My Ans:
a) U say gravity is a theory.
15 Jan 1108pm, U specifically said gravity is a theory
How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity.
and obviously, "theory of gravity"="theory of gravity", not "theory of the watever sh!t u can add in gravity" And obviously it is easily understood as "theory of gravity" which
b) U claimed theory can be false thus it is not truth.
16 Jan 216am,
They are theories and theories can be right and can be proven wrong like newtonian laws that only works on earth. U dont call it the FACT of Gravity..U never hear Scientists call theory.. the truth right ?
c) So in other words, u said gravity is not truth to u
Didn't u say "if it is a theory, it cannot be the truth " ? So how come tis is true now ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
- I dont know about you, but I clearly stated from the beginning Since 15 Jan to current Gravity is Truth). But if you think I did not , then I guess even hard evidence is pointless and no point talking to you on this matter anymore. Because u are being willfully ignorant of the fact.
-Its obvious, Theory the How and Why , explains the subject matter and that is Gravity.
3) U claimed: truth has no scope and can works for all circumstances
My ans: When I ask u whether gravity can pull aspiration and etc, u admit tat truth has a scope. All truth has a limit on where it works.
Your Truth and my Truth is different . YES or NO ?
Yes
Are we dealing with your definition of the truth ? Or mine ?
U DID NO ANSWER MY QUESTION TOO REGARDING CRATE OF GOOD APPLES )(I can equally say u are talking rubbish, when its clear u know what i mean)(ACTUAL REALITY
4) U claimed: U said "its NOT about the How and Why.. but the SEARCH for TRUTH. Are we both finally in agreement that its about the How and Why then. And not about the Truth ?"
My ans: If u read wat I wrote, i said the WHY and HOW r truth. U said how and why, are NOT truth. Gravity is a scientific issue. It is the answer WHY things fall to the ground. Then is gravity truth to u ?
(How long did it take them just to explain the theory of gravity. 15 Jan 11.08pm)
(Hence its TRUE that gravity exist. Like i said again n again... it is Science's explaination of WHY Gravity works. The Truth is Gravity Exists. 16 Jan 11.55am)
(Even before man has walked the earth, gravity has existed(Truth). Man has taken advantage of the phenomenon of gravity, but that time it wasnt called gravity yes ? Science called it gravity. 17 Jan 5.52pm)
(Oh.. and i never said Gravity is not the truth. I explicitly said Gravity is the truth. 17 Jan 11.49pm)
(Gravity exists and is the truth before man even discover it , whether science can even quantify it or not YES ? NO ? 18 Jan 9.46pm)
(The existence of gravity is a truth, it is in actual existence too. 19 Jan 12.36pm)
(Like i said, GRAVITY EXISTED, SCIENCE DESCRIBES THE PHENOMENAN AS GRAVITY. 19 Jan 11.44pm)
(The gravity example is the most simple, Gravity exists, its a truth, u dont NEED science to state it, Science came up with the name Gravity . 23 Jan 12.11pm)
(Because the Truth, like Gravity, is in Actual Reality. 23 Jan 12:58pm)
(I did not question the existence of gravity. Again, you put things in my mouth. 24 Jan 2.51pm)
(Now, simply, refer to my examples regarding Gravity and Rain and all the stuff and see if u can GRASP the meaning of my truth. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(Even when science didnt discover it, the truth is already there. Hence the Gravity example. Actual Existence. True statement = Acceleration . 24 Jan 7.28pm)
(MISTAKE, i NEVER SAID GRAVITY IS NOT TRUTH. Again, that makes ur statement null and void. Gravity IS a TRUTH. Are u guys dumb ? Pls.. READ. Here , here ,here , here , here , here , here , here , here . 26 Jan 10,40pm)
(If it IS theory , it is NOT truth. Because Gravity is Truth, it has existed long before man defined it as Gravity. Theory is only True so far and on this planet. Simple. 30 Jan 11.21am)
(Again, regarding the Theory of Gravity, whats wrong with them taking a long time to explain the theory of gravity ? Gravity is a truth already. It just took them ages to postulate a theory to explain it. 31 Jan 12.26am)
(As u can clearly see, the word Theory is in reference to the subject Gravity. As u notice the word “of” . 2 Feb 1.02am)
U tell me did i say Gravity is Truth.
5) on this statement didnt u pretty much say Science Is Truth. And then u say science can be wrong, so isnt wrong, not true, hence not true = not truth. Because u derive True = Truth from the dictionary.
My ans: Science can be wrong, but it is mostly right. Since it is right, it is about the truth. However in your narrow definition, if science is ever wrong, it will never ever be right or truth ever again. Theologist r wrong as well. How come u still treat it as truth then ? Which profession is never wrong before ?
U ARE UNDER YOUR IMPRESSION. ITS YOUR WORDS. EVEN WHEN I SAID THATS NOW WHAT I MEAN, U ASSUME EVEN WITH EXPLAINATIONS. YOUR INTERPRETATION. ARE U ME ? YES OR NO ?
6) U claimed: 0/0 logically should be zero. U claimed tat u can substitute values into undefined equation and treat it like a variable. U claimed tat 1=2 in the article shows there is a problem with maths.U claim the graph never touches 0 so it is not zero. U claim I had define the value of 0/0 when I said it could be any value from 0 to infinity
My Ans: 0/0 has no logical meaning. Divide by zero is meaningless. U cannot differentiate between variable and undefined values. U paste a portion of the article showing tat only idiots will conclude 1=2 and u did tat. U fail to read my explanation tat the 0 in the graph has values from - infinity to + infinity. U provide an example of mathematics fallacy which really just means a misrepresentation of maths
Does the graph ever reaches 0 ? YES or NO
No
U said (I pointed to u, it is not. It could be zero to infinity, depending on subject matter. 23rd Jan 1.03pm )
I SAID:
&
(0 which is NOTHING divides by 0 NOTHING logically = Nothing. But MATHS cant say its 0. Why ? 23 Jan 11.58pm)
&
(Asumming 0/0 technically u allow it to exist, 0x1 = 0 , 0x2 =0 . The following must be true. 0x1 = 0x2 = 0 Right ? If the following is true, Dividing by 0 gives 0/0 x 1 = 0/0 x 2 . So simplify, you have 1 = 2 . The fallacy is the implicit assumption that dividing by 0 is a legitimate operation. 24 Jan 7.28pm)
Isnt it obvious that it is NOT a legitimate operation ?
THEN EXPLAIN TO ME WHY U PUT ZERO TO INFINITY ? UNLESS U ADMIT U MADE A MISTAKE. U ARE HUMAN. ITS O.K TO MAKE MISTAKES. THATS MY WHOLE POINT. I MAKE MISTAKE, U MAKE MISTAKE, SCIENCE MAKE MISTAKE, MATHS MAKE MISTAKE, ABSOLUTE REALITY DOESNT, BECAUSE IT IS WHAT IT IS.
7) U claimed: The dictionary definition of truth is wrong. And tis is because science has been wrong before
My Ans: Your only definition of truth is from the dictionary. The dictionary said tat science is a body of truth. But u refuse to accept tat explanation. Science has been wrong but it doesn't means it can never be right or truth. U also said u wrote wrongly before on true and false. So u can never write the right things again ?
TO ME. THAT STATEMENT IS ALREADY WRONG. IF IT SAYS SOME BODY OF TRUTHS or MOSTLY BODY OF TRUTHS, I CAN ACCEPT. REMEMBER, THIS IS TRUTH, UNDER YOUR DEFINITION.
8) U claimed: Wat is true may not be the truth
My ans: If it is not the truth, it is not true.
a) if a thing is not truth, it must be false
b) false is not true
It is a simple logic. Do u understand logic ?
RECONCILE YOUR OWN BODY OF TRUTHS FIRST.
9) U claimed: There r many other definitions of science
My ans: All mainstream organisations treat science as truth or knowledge of facts. And u just misquote Richard Feynman
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
No. Let me ask u back
Are you Richard Feynman ? YES or NO
U r the one who quotes him first
No
I guess we are both in agreement again.
Thats why I believe my statement to be true, but not the truth, because only Richard Feynman is the ultimate judge to whether our statements are the truth to his definition or not.
10) U claimed: Tat since science is wrong before, then it cannot be a "body of truth"
My ans: Science may be wrong before but when it detects a wrong, it instantly correct itself and reflect the truth. So it is still a body of truth. Similar to "student body" (the use of body is the same as science and its body of truth), its members will cease to be students one day. However the definition of "student body" is still intact because those who r no longer students just leave the student body and thus it is still grammatically correct.
If a small part of science is proven wrong, it just meant tat small part is wrong. However u r prejudiced and practise stereotype and thus claim the whole organisation is wrong because a small part is wrong. In tat case, politicians, policemen, philosophers , theologistsand in fact the whole world's organisation had commit a wrong before and thus should be wrong to u too.
If a scientific hypothesis is proven wrong, does it means all the established laws and theories from einstein etc r wrong ?
MY ANALOGY . CRATE OF APPLES.
DID I SAY EVERYTHING IS WRONG ? ALL I SAID IS THEY CAN BE WRONG LATER WITH NEW INFORMATION COMING UP. THATS WHY, I CANNOT ACCEPT BODY OF TRUTHS, BECAUSE OF SCIENCE IS CREATED BY HUMANS.