·Theme
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Debate #1... GO!
Debate #1... GO!Follow
2+2 = 5 for extremely large values of 2.
catwho wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:
\ Because 2+2 still =4.
It also assumes you're working in Base 10. In Base 4, 2+2=10.
Not sure if serious but ill take the bait.
In base 4
2+2 = 10 = 1 Four, and 0 Ones.
Ergo 2+2 = 4 displayed as 10.
In base 10
2+2 = 4, 4 ones. or written extended as 04 which is 0 tens and 4 ones.
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.
Reminds me of the adage that there are 10 kinds of people in the world.
Those that understand binary, and those who don't.
Those that understand binary, and those who don't.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
I find it kind of sad catwho's so insecure about her own intelligence that she has to stoop to this kind of thing. It's doubly sad that in her bid to convince everyone she understands bases (honestly, who's impressed by that anyway?) she ends up getting it wrong. Notating it 2+2=4 doesn't mean you're working in base ten, it just means you're working in a base above four.
Honestly, I feel kind of embarassed for her.
Honestly, I feel kind of embarassed for her.
Samira wrote:
Reminds me of the adage that there are 10 kinds of people in the world.
Those that understand binary, and those who don't.
Those that understand binary, and those who don't.
I have the "Keepin it real" shirt with the "no i" logo. I think only two people understood it. I have a couple of nerd shirts. I secretly laugh at people who ridicule but don't understand.
I hate all of you right now.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
I hate all of you right now.
I'm a little disappointed to hear that.
Jophiel wrote:
I hate all of you right now.
You don't hate me.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Samira wrote:
You don't hate me.
mebbe a little bit
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
I was told there would be no math!
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Kavekk wrote:
I find it kind of sad catwho's so insecure about her own intelligence that she has to stoop to this kind of thing. It's doubly sad that in her bid to convince everyone she understands bases (honestly, who's impressed by that anyway?) she ends up getting it wrong. Notating it 2+2=4 doesn't mean you're working in base ten, it just means you're working in a base above four.
Honestly, I feel kind of embarassed for her.
Honestly, I feel kind of embarassed for her.
And I'm incredibly grateful you care so much about my well-being you had to criticize my one-off attempt at a joke. I need more people like you in my life.
Quote:
my one-off attempt at a joke
You're out of the comedy business for good, huh?
I'm glad, 'cause attempt is the right word for it.
Also you're dumb. Like, super dumb. And you smell. And...
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
my one-off attempt at a joke
You're out of the comedy business for good, huh?
I'm glad, 'cause attempt is the right word for it.
Also you're dumb. Like, super dumb. And you smell. And...
Yo' mama.
catwho wrote:
Kavekk wrote:
Quote:
my one-off attempt at a joke
You're out of the comedy business for good, huh?
I'm glad, 'cause attempt is the right word for it.
Also you're dumb. Like, super dumb. And you smell. And...
Yo' mama.
*********** just got real yo!
People don't like to be meddled with. We tell them what to do, what to think, don't run, don't walk. We're in their homes and in their heads and we haven't the right. We're meddlesome. ~River Tam
Sedao
Sedao
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Smasharoo,
I stopped reading after you said we haven't spent enough. That's the only I mean only liberal defense for your failed economic theories. The fact is we know that cutting taxes spurs economic growth. That's not even debatable. We also know that to many people are receiving government welfare of some sort. The solution is simple implementation is another matter altogether. When over 40 % of the people are on the take. So you take that liberal speak about not spending enough and shove it up your *** because that's what it's worth.
I stopped reading after you said we haven't spent enough. That's the only I mean only liberal defense for your failed economic theories. The fact is we know that cutting taxes spurs economic growth. That's not even debatable. We also know that to many people are receiving government welfare of some sort. The solution is simple implementation is another matter altogether. When over 40 % of the people are on the take. So you take that liberal speak about not spending enough and shove it up your *** because that's what it's worth.
Didn't you get the memo? This thread is now about math.
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
crazylegz1975 wrote:
Smasharoo,
I stopped reading after you said we haven't spent enough. That's the only I mean only liberal defense for your failed economic theories. The fact is we know that cutting taxes spurs economic growth. That's not even debatable. We also know that to many people are receiving government welfare of some sort. The solution is simple implementation is another matter altogether. When over 40 % of the people are on the take. So you take that liberal speak about not spending enough and shove it up your *** because that's what it's worth.
I stopped reading after you said we haven't spent enough. That's the only I mean only liberal defense for your failed economic theories. The fact is we know that cutting taxes spurs economic growth. That's not even debatable. We also know that to many people are receiving government welfare of some sort. The solution is simple implementation is another matter altogether. When over 40 % of the people are on the take. So you take that liberal speak about not spending enough and shove it up your *** because that's what it's worth.
Didn't you get the memo? This thread is now about math.
If you guys think math is hard for me.... well, just think of the poor trolls.
Hey I saw a number and a symbol of some sort in that post. Though the kind of math used to come up with that figure seems questionable...
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#421Almalieque,
Posted: Oct 14 2012 at 7:52 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Since we're talking about math.. I figured that I would bring up my favorite math post
well this thread got lame real quick.
HEY GOOGLE. **** OFF YOU. **** YOUR ******** SEARCH ENGINE IN ITS ******* ****** BINARY ***. ALL DAY LONG.
Don't worry, we'll have a debate #3 thread to make up for it real soon.
I didn't read that post the first time and I'm not going to start now.
Almalieque wrote:
Since we're talking about math.. I figured that I would bring up my favorite math post
Ok, let me prove it to you.
Suppose there are two groups of people, group A and group B.
Let intelligence be measured in a score from 1 to n
Assume that the lowest possible score considered to be human is n/2.
I was stated to have less than human intelligence, so let x represent the difference of intelligence that I have from the borderline intelligence, n/2. Or in other words (n/2) - x.
Since I represent the median intelligence for group B, that makes the range of group B to be 1 to (n-2x)
Therefore, as x increases, the range for group B decreases.
So, there is potential for some intelligent people, but not much if I'm as dumb as you say I am. Group B starts off at a disadvantage and the dumber you claim me to be, the dumber you claim them to be.
Just don't complain about semantics math.
Edit: Can't believe I forgot this..
Q.E.D.
Edit 2:
median != average
Almalieque wrote:
Kavek wrote:
Another word salad. Delightful.
Yes, and my point was that this was not the case, as anyone who takes you seriously enough as an intellectual to engage with you earnestly in debate is likely themselves stupid, because they can't recognise how pig thick you are. BT insults the general intelligence of this group by saying your intellect is average (median) within iy, which allows for specific individuals within that group being intelligent (and just having a particularly demanding sense of pity, say).
Yes, and my point was that this was not the case, as anyone who takes you seriously enough as an intellectual to engage with you earnestly in debate is likely themselves stupid, because they can't recognise how pig thick you are. BT insults the general intelligence of this group by saying your intellect is average (median) within iy, which allows for specific individuals within that group being intelligent (and just having a particularly demanding sense of pity, say).
Ok, let me prove it to you.
Suppose there are two groups of people, group A and group B.
Let intelligence be measured in a score from 1 to n
Assume that the lowest possible score considered to be human is n/2.
I was stated to have less than human intelligence, so let x represent the difference of intelligence that I have from the borderline intelligence, n/2. Or in other words (n/2) - x.
Since I represent the median intelligence for group B, that makes the range of group B to be 1 to (n-2x)
Therefore, as x increases, the range for group B decreases.
So, there is potential for some intelligent people, but not much if I'm as dumb as you say I am. Group B starts off at a disadvantage and the dumber you claim me to be, the dumber you claim them to be.
Just don't complain about semantics math.
Edit: Can't believe I forgot this..
Q.E.D.
Edit 2:
median != average
And yet your math, like your logic, is based on faulty premises, shaky inferences, falsified statistics and troubled fundamental operators, leaving the reader to wonder, "Wow, is this really the best this poor man can do?".
Just as Planned.
Recent Visitors: 263
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (263)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Debate #1... GO!
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC