Text 40869, 89 rader
Skriven 2006-10-06 11:29:24 av Roy Witt (1:397/22)
  Kommentar till text 40848 av BOB KLAHN (1:123/140)
Ärende: pi
==========
06 Oct 06 07:54, BOB KLAHN wrote to ROY WITT:

 MVDV>>>>>>>>> It does not matter if I agree or not any more than if I
 MVDV>>>>>>>>> agree that it would be better if pi would be equal to 3.0
 MVDV>>>>>>>>> instead of 3.12415.. It just isn't so.
 BK>>>>>>>>  3.14159...
 MvdV>>>>>>> 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494
 MvdV>>>>>>> 45
 RW>>>>>> So, how did you come to the conclusion above that pi is
 RW>>>>>> 3.124159?
 MvdV>>>>> Read again. This time for comprehension.
 RW>>>> true. Thus, the meaning of your statement leads one to
 RW>>>> think that you've stated that pi is 3.12xxx ... obviously
 BK>>>  I thought the same thing at first reading. Looking it over
 BK>>>  again, he actually did not say that.
 RW>> Actually, there is no other conclusion that can be made
 RW>> from what he wrote. What he meant may have been 3.1415, but
 RW>> he can't, or won't admit that he made a mistake. That'd be
 RW>> below his self-appointed station as the master of all
 RW>> universal knowledge.

 BK>  I thought he was just pulling your leg. It seems clear to me
 BK>  that's what he intended, but it is also clear he didn't actually
 BK>  say it. So, it looks like he took the opportunity to jerk you
 BK>  around.

Then it backfired on him. He's wrong and is afraid to admit it. See my
message to him with the explanation.

 BK>  OTOH, maybe not.

Like I said, if it was a ruse, it backfired on him.

 RW>>>> using the wrong word indicates that someone not familiar
 RW>>>> with the English language wrote the statement and is not
 RW>>>> familiar enough to use the proper word.
 MvdV>>>>> Then tell me where I wrote that I concluded pi equals 3.124159.
 RW>>>> See above. Misleading statements such as yours is why
 RW>>>> people argue with you.
 BK>>>  What else are you here for?
 RW>> To witness your lying diatribes into/about US politics...
 BK>  So, you admit you are here for no reason.

See above...where it starts out as; To witness

 MvdV>>>>> Hint: It does not matter if I agree or not any more than if I
 MvdV>>>>> agree that it would be better if pi would be equal to 3.0
 MvdV>>>>> instead of 5. It just isn't so.
 RW>>>> That is correct, but your previous statement doesn't say
 RW>>>> that.
 BK>>>  And is just as accurate.
 RW>> Not in the least.
 BK>  Yeah, both are wrong.

You are correct in that summation. But he wasn't correct in his statement
that pi equals 3.1214.

 RW>> Keyword; instead.
 RW>> "if pi would be equal to 3.0 instead of 5."
 BK>  Yeah. Exactly on target to be wrong.

Said just like any other evasive liberal. Don't evade the question; Who's
wrong?

 RW>> True, that simply isn't so!
 RW>> What he actually said; "if pi would be equal to 3.0 instead
 RW>> of 3.1214".
 RW>> That simply isn't so either! pi is equal to 3.14159
 BK>   That's what I said in my reply.

I know.

 BK>  See the tagline.

 BK> BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

 BK> ... 2+2=5 (for exceptionally large values of 2)

Well, that's not exactly true either. 2.4+2.4ó5 and 2.6+2.6ò5 so it would
have to be exactly 2.5+2.5=5 or a variation of 2.x+2.x=5 (example
2.4+2.6=5)

               R\%/itt


... ­Herman Nuet habla mierda holandesa del toro!

--- Twit(t) Filter v2.1 (C) 2000
 * Origin: SATX Alamo Area Net * South * Texas, USA * (1:397/22)