1 edit
The post that was quoted here has been removedAll of which Deep Thought has now corrected his position on with the following statement!
"Yes, it is correct. It was that factor of 1/2 that bothered me, once it dawned on me that it had been introduced into the numerator in the first step then the correctness of the proof became clear to me." (DeepThought)
You are a lunatic! What do YOU think of the proof?!? Not Soothfast, not Blood on The Tracks, not Deep Thought... YOU , YOU , YOU...YOU crazy liar!
- Joined
- 11 Nov 14
- Moves
- 38428
Hi , Joe.
Thanks for the support.
All I did was suggest, in no challenging way whatsoever, an alternative method.
My problem on this forum is knowing where one has to 'explain to'. With no arrogance, it was clear to me that presenting the original expression in another form showed that it could not be cancelled any more.
For what it is worth, I do think D64 is 'good at Maths'. Unfortunately this poster's shrieking abuse to anyone she/he feels is in any way disagreeing with her/him is the reason that I rarely visit RHP now.
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracksYes, I'm burning out on it too.
Hi , Joe.
Thanks for the support.
All I did was suggest, in no challenging way whatsoever, an alternative method.
My problem on this forum is knowing where one has to 'explain to'. With no arrogance, it was clear to me that presenting the original expression in another form showed that it could not be cancelled any more.
For what it ...[text shortened]... she/he feels is in any way disagreeing with her/him is the reason that I rarely visit RHP now.
I assume that he/she would consider it a victory if we were all to leave.
Though, even if left alone...I'm sure the abusive debating would continue.
I have no idea regarding maths, but I'm just wise enough to recognize the existence of other roads to Rome.
4 edits
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracks"For what it is worth, I do think D64 is 'good at Maths'. Unfortunately this poster's shrieking abuse to anyone she/he feels is in any way disagreeing with her/him is the reason that I rarely visit RHP now."
Hi , Joe.
Thanks for the support.
All I did was suggest, in no challenging way whatsoever, an alternative method.
My problem on this forum is knowing where one has to 'explain to'. With no arrogance, it was clear to me that presenting the original expression in another form showed that it could not be cancelled any more.
For what it ...[text shortened]... she/he feels is in any way disagreeing with her/him is the reason that I rarely visit RHP now.
I disagree about her actual abilities:
1) Yesterday she couldn't verify that "your simple algebraic manipulation was correct" nor would she even try ( typically citing reasons like not having the time - meanwhile she makes lengthy posts all over the forums more than any author I know - probably the most active poster the site has ever seen )
2) According to her she is" absolutely mathematically brilliant" yet she couldn't complete verifying two lines of algebraic manipulation? Instead, she deferred to Soothfast, who if rendered a verdict she would jump on board? Sounds fishy to me?
3) She simultaneously criticized your and DT's mathematics (as sub par) in this thread, while using both of your positive remarks about her math skills in another thread ( https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/debates/a-difficult-question.177827 ) as a rebuttal to my accusation that she is a fraud! That's a huge red flag!
4) I have never seen her engage in mathematics that she hasn't initiated, nor has she ever openly discussed mathematics that she has. Its her way, followed by an attack on the solutions "elegance" to put the person wanting to have an open discussion on the defensive; naturally switching the subject from the math (as a focus) to the screeching attack. An essential maneuver for the fraud to escape the noose.
If she wasn't so boastful about her brilliance and degrading to other posters I would let all this nonsense go as well, so she may blissfully continue on with her deranged fantasy. But the Duchess loves the attention, so I think Ill give it to her.
- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
Originally posted by @joe-shmoYour sentiments against her, now exposed, fraud in mathematics, mirror my own regarding her political exaggerations and lies against the United States.
"For what it is worth, I do think D64 is 'good at Maths'. Unfortunately this poster's shrieking abuse to anyone she/he feels is in any way disagreeing with her/him is the reason that I rarely visit RHP now."
I disagree about her actual abilities:
1) Yesterday she couldn't verify that "your simple algebraic manipulation was correct" nor would she e ...[text shortened]... with her deranged fantasy. But the Duchess loves the attention, so I think Ill give it to her.
Keep up the great work!
Originally posted by @blood-on-the-tracksYou can Google most anything lol.
Hi Joe
In answer to point 4 above, D64 DID produce a neat proof that root 2 is irrational in that thread, which she/he didn't start.
Why I am putting forward a defence of a poster that frequently treats me to braying insult is beyond me.
But , anyway, there it is.