Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Joe G.'s Tardgasm

Pages: (919) < ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... >

DaveH Posts: 49 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 05 2010,11:48    Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 05 2010,09:47) I've paid the price. "When you look into a TARDbyss, the TARDbyss also looks into you" A useful miner's mantra, if the protective shielding fails for any reason: "TARD is the mind-killer. TARD is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face the TARD. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the TARD has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain"

dnmlthr Posts: 565 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 05 2010,13:35    The set theory according to JoeG thread damn near made me break my nose facepalming. A more naked display of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action is hard to imagine. Fuck. I get angry just thinking about it. Quote Now I am become Tard, the destroyer of brains. ETA: Removed quotes. -------------- Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 05 2010,19:03    Quote (dnmlthr @ Aug. 05 2010,13:35) The set theory according to JoeG thread damn near made me break my nose facepalming. A more naked display of the Dunning-Kruger effect in action is hard to imagine. Fuck. I get angry just thinking about it. it's really a bizarre thread.  It reminds me of debating with afdave---you can show him to be wrong in any number of ways, and he will concede nothing.   I have to give him credit for not deleting any of my posts, though, when others would have.   Quote Sheik:  Will Upright Biped be joining the discussion? Maybe he'll tell us about his physically inert balls. Quote Sheik:  Let's say the set of items in your bedroom contains just three elements: a bed, a bureau, and a Justin Bieber poster.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 06 2010,08:12    Quote Sheikh (at bottom of page): Joe, I actually think it's more than likely you're joking here. No, he's not. From a previous thread. Quote Zachriel: Every set is a subset of itself. Joe G: That is false. The empty set is not a subset of itself. It's not that Joe G is ignorant. That's curable. It's that he refuses to learn. Addendum Quote Joe G: But yes if A={x,Y} and B={x,y}. Given two sets A and B, blah, blah, blah superset. Joe G, can two sets be equal? -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 06 2010,10:39    Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 06 2010,08:12)     Quote Sheikh (at bottom of page): Joe, I actually think it's more than likely you're joking here. No, he's not. From a previous thread.     Quote Zachriel: Every set is a subset of itself. Joe G: That is false. The empty set is not a subset of itself. It's not that Joe G is ignorant. That's curable. It's that he refuses to learn. Wow, I just noticed the date on that thread:  December 5, 2006, closing in on 4 years ago.  And Joe still hasn't bothered to acquaint himself with elementary set theory.  Which primary school students master in a matter of hours.

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 06 2010,11:45    Quote (socle @ Aug. 06 2010,10:39) Quote Wow, I just noticed the date on that thread:  December 5, 2006, closing in on 4 years ago.  And Joe still hasn't bothered to acquaint himself with elementary set theory.  Which primary school students master in a matter of hours. I tried reading some of it and my brain locked up. I had to go read some insurance claims just to reboot it. His posts just completely disrupt the fabric of reality; he's so much tard he actually creates a negative force of stupid on other matter nearby. I can't believe Zach and others can actually read his stuff for any length of time without severe medication and/or psychiatric help afterwords. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 06 2010,13:12    Quote (Robin @ Aug. 06 2010,11:45) His posts just completely disrupt the fabric of reality; he's so much tard he actually creates a negative force of stupid on other matter nearby. He's like the Chuck Norris of stupid---whenever he says something, the universe instantly reorganizes itself to make him wrong.   :D To be fair, I will give him credit for one thing---he has defended Muslims when they've been attacked by the ignorant on UD.

blipey Posts: 2061 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 06 2010,16:54    Quote (socle @ Aug. 06 2010,13:12) Quote (Robin @ Aug. 06 2010,11:45) His posts just completely disrupt the fabric of reality; he's so much tard he actually creates a negative force of stupid on other matter nearby. He's like the Chuck Norris of stupid---whenever he says something, the universe instantly reorganizes itself to make him wrong.   :D To be fair, I will give him credit for one thing---he has defended Muslims when they've been attacked by the ignorant on UD. Well, he did claim to be one... -------------- But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 07 2010,16:39    Well, feck, looks like Joe's bailed, just when we got to his favorite subject, dolls nested hierarchies.   Quote Sheik:  Here are all the dolls put together: {{{},{}},{},{{},{{},{},{}}}}   Quote Joe:  Nothing there. It is mothing but a bunch of {}. But anyways thank you for proving you are ignorant of nested hierarchies. I have nothing else to say to you. bye-bye... C'mon Joe, post my comments!  I spent 10 whole minutes on that tree diagram.   :angry:

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,07:07    Quote Zachriel: Is {} = {{}}? Joe G: Weigh the contents of each and tell me which weighs more.... We wonder about poor Joe G. {'kilogram of nickels'} = {'kilogram of dimes'}? Sheikh gives the smack-down. Quote Joe G: Then what is the difference between a set that contains nothing and a set that contains a set that contains nothing? Sheikh: There must be some difference. Otherwise why would people write things like this and this? -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

olegt Posts: 1405 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,07:37    Joe is unable to parse abstract math.  I've tried to explain the sequence object -> set of objects -> set of sets of objects on the example of Denton's books.  We'll see how receptive Joe is to real-life examples.  (The comments are in moderation still.) -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

olegt Posts: 1405 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,09:24    Joe spends a total of 5 minutes reading my example, digesting it, forming an opinion about it, and typing up his reply.  His verdict?   Ya see people do not need to understand set theory in order to answer your questions pertaining to those books. We don't need no stinkin' set theory.  Mwahahaha!   He then asks again: What, exactly, is the difference between someone holding nothing and someone holding a set of nothing? I don't think modern medicine is equipped to help this guy. -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,09:29    Quote (olegt @ Aug. 16 2010,09:24) I don't think modern medicine is equipped to help this guy. Well, maybe not modern medicine. But therapies from a few generations back might be appropriate. -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,09:44    Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 16 2010,05:07) Quote Zachriel: Is {} = {{}}? Joe G: Weigh the contents of each and tell me which weighs more.... Ow. Ow, ow, ow. More like "Which weighs more, a pound of intersection or a pound of union?" And when someone tries to explain set theory to GI Joe, suddenly it's not important. You'll notice he bailed out of that PT thread he was getting reamed on, too. -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

olegt Posts: 1405 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,09:53    Here is my example in which I tried to explain to Joe the difference between an empty set and a set containing an empty set. Quote Here is the difference, Joe. Let's go back to our favorite example featuring Denton's books, Evolution (E) and Nature's Destiny (N). Books are objects. We can ask all kinds of questions about books such as this: "Which books did Denton write?" The answer to that question, {E,N}, is also an object, but it is definitely not a book. Rather, it is a set of books. We can also ask "Which of these books did Joe G read?" The answer to that is also a set of books. It could be {E,N}, but most likely it is {E}. And when we ask "Which of these books did Oleg read?" the answer will again be a set of books, this time an empty set, {}. So far so good. Now we can go one more level up and ask the Big Question: "What are the possible answers to the question Which Denton's books did you read?" The Big Answer is of course a set of answers. And since each answer is a set of books, the Big Answer is a set of sets of books. In this case, it is {{}, {E}, {N}, {E,N}}. Again, the Big Answer is not a book, and neither it is a set of books. It is a set of answers, or a set of sets of books. Suppose now we go to a country where only one of Denton's books has been published. When we ask its citizens the question the answers (sets of books) we get are either {} or {E}. The Big Answer (a set of sets of books) is, accordingly, {{}, {E}}. Finally we travel to a far corner of the Earth, where no one even heard of Denton. The answer to the question is invariably the set of books {}. The Big Answer to the Big Question is the set of sets of books {{}}. Hope this example is pedagogical. That didn't help. -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,11:30    Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 16 2010,07:07)   Quote Zachriel: Is {} = {{}}? Joe G: Weigh the contents of each and tell me which weighs more.... We wonder about poor Joe G. {'kilogram of nickels'} = {'kilogram of dimes'}? Sheikh gives the smack-down.   Quote Joe G: Then what is the difference between a set that contains nothing and a set that contains a set that contains nothing? Sheikh: There must be some difference. Otherwise why would people write things like this and this? On Joe G's blog, we provided a link to the authors of the "authoritative cites." Here's Jaroslav Nešetril, award winning mathematician, at work. If we wake him, maybe we could ask him how much the empty set weighs. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,11:32    Amusingly Joe says: Quote The sources don't and making bald statements isn't good enough for me. But all Joe does is make bald statements. V.Amusing. -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,13:29    Quote oleg: Joe, the entire cladogram is also a clade. Quote Joe: Not true.

Reciprocating Bill Posts: 4265 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 16 2010,14:24    Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Aug. 16 2010,12:32) Amusingly Joe says:     Quote The sources don't and making bald statements isn't good enough for me. But all Joe does is make bald statements. V.Amusing. Bald? In my experience they have plugs or wear an ill-fitting toupee. -------------- Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be. "The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." - David Foster Wallace "Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down." - Barry Arrington

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,11:14    http://bilbos1.blogspot.com/2007/07/welcome-to-bilbos-blog.html Quote The Discovery Institutes wedge document clearly demonstrates that IDism is nothing but a tool to be used to help effectuate a cultural and political revolution to replace humanistic values with those of right-wing christian fundamentalists. ID says nothing about religion. ID does NOT require a belief in "God". An atheist can be an IDist. I am not a christian. I was but I grew out of it. ID is based on observation and scientific data. The DI did not start ID. The DI's biggest contributor is a christian reconstructionist who would like to see democratic government replaced by an old-testament based theocracy, complete with legalized slavery and execution by stoning of people such as gays, sabbath breakers and rebellious teenagers. Then why, when the DI explained the "wedge doc" do they flat out state they do NOT want a theocracy? IOW why take the word of those who misinterpret the document over the word from the DI? And as sir William has asked- who is the christian reconstructionist behind the curtain? Or are bald assertions the best you can do? BTW wouldn't a Christian want new testament based theocracy? Emphasis mine -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,11:59    Sometimes Joe G is just plain funny.   Quote Joe G: I can just come up with reality- That is given the theory hoiw can we apply that in the real world? Again we have two people- Person A has an empty set Person B also has an empty set (everyone has an empty set) but B has put that empty set inside of another empty set. Both A and B are in an otherwise empty room. You enter the room with the purpose of figuring out who has the empty set and who has the set containing the empty set. However you cannot ask any questions or say anything at all. All you have are your powers of observation. How do you tell which person just has the empty set? Weigh them? And if it weighs the same as a duck? -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,12:13    Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 17 2010,11:59) Sometimes Joe G is just plain funny. <snip> Here's part of my response to that, still in moderation: Sheik:  The short answer is, you can't hold the empty set in your hands. It's like I'm talking to a materialist here. :D The empty set is an abstract entity.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,12:35    Quote (socle @ Aug. 17 2010,12:13) Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 17 2010,11:59) Sometimes Joe G is just plain funny. <snip> Here's part of my response to that, still in moderation: Sheik:  The short answer is, you can't hold the empty set in your hands. It's like I'm talking to a materialist here. :D The empty set is an abstract entity. Quote Joe G: But how big does the box have to be in order to hold nothing? Not by weight, but by volume! -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,15:25    Quote Weigh them? And if it weighs the same as a duck? That could leave him a little down in the mouth? Quack!

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,15:53    Hey, Joe, which weighs more, a pound of pi, or a pound of e? -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,16:52    Joe sums it all up Quote We can never be sure we're observing "nature, operating freely", so it's impossible to falsify ID. So, Joe. Nobody can falsify ID. Nobody can falsify the idea that invisible unicorns did it either. So how does that make ID any different from invisible unicorns? So, you can't falsify it Joe but can you actually provide any evidence for it? Seems like the most you've got is that you can't falsify it. Add it to the list. ROFL. -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

qetzal Posts: 311 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,22:17    Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 17 2010,12:35)   Quote (socle @ Aug. 17 2010,12:13)   Quote (Zachriel @ Aug. 17 2010,11:59) Sometimes Joe G is just plain funny. <snip> Here's part of my response to that, still in moderation: Sheik:  The short answer is, you can't hold the empty set in your hands. It's like I'm talking to a materialist here. :D The empty set is an abstract entity.   Quote Joe G: But how big does the box have to be in order to hold nothing? Not by weight, but by volume! What if the contents have settled during shipping?

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 17 2010,23:06    Trying to explain math to Joe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTv6fFLVi4Q&feature=related

Timothy McDougald Posts: 1036 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2010,07:31    Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 17 2010,15:25) Quote Weigh them? And if it weighs the same as a duck? That could leave him a little down in the mouth? Quack! I do not agree with eider of them statements. -------------- Church burning ebola boy FTK: I Didn't answer your questions because it beats the hell out of me. PaV: I suppose for me to be pried away from what I do to focus long and hard on that particular problem would take, quite honestly, hundreds of thousands of dollars to begin to pique my interest.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2010,09:03    Quote (afarensis @ Aug. 18 2010,07:31) Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 17 2010,15:25) Quote Weigh them? And if it weighs the same as a duck? That could leave him a little down in the mouth? Quack! I do not agree with eider of them statements. For goodness drake.. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Pages: (919) < ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard