Re: perfection by amanda3	21-Nov-04/7:23 AM
You are a deeply confused, silly person.
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	21-Nov-04/4:25 AM
lol
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	21-Nov-04/4:21 AM
You don't understand. I'm not skipping letters, I'm simply adding on an additional letter, Z, whose value is 35 (contrary to the idiotic error in my last comment). A's value is still 10. Let us use base 10, where letters A-F are used to represent numbers 10 through 15. Then DEAF = (13 * 1000) + (14 * 100) + (10 * 10) + (15 * 1). This doesn't magically make it hexademical, in which DEAF = (13 * 4096) + (14 * 256) + (10 * 16) + (15 * 1).
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	20-Nov-04/1:50 PM
To further add to your humiliation, your second comment is not even true. We can hijack the letters A-Z, or indeed any other symbol representing any number, and use them perfectly well in base 35, base 10, or any other base. In particular, Z0 in base-35 = 25*35 = 875. Given that your first error revolved around this exact phenomenon, this is inexcusable. 8th time the charm.
Re: a comment on Ambiguous Love Poem For A Girl I Once Knew by poetandknowit	20-Nov-04/1:37 PM
Do you still think this?
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	18-Nov-04/12:38 PM
I don't have to address what you've said, because I'm not the one who said the things you're talking about.
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	18-Nov-04/12:37 PM
I must also hasten to add that although the dictionary definition of "converse" does turn "I love you" into "You love me", the philosophical definition doesn't. And anyone who (like you) fills their absurd comments with a barrage of philosophical catchphrases they barely understand must face the consequences of trying to fall back on the dictionary definitions of words they've used in a philosophically incorrect sense. The consequences are being sellotaped to a bulging scarecrow in the middle of the night and being forced to compete in a staring contest with him until one of you fills your shorts.
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	18-Nov-04/12:30 PM
I must also hasten to add that there is no such operation as "reversing the elements of a proposition." Perhaps you mean "switching the order of the variables in an application of a dyadic predicate."
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	18-Nov-04/12:28 PM
A typical woman's position: "You are wrong because you aren't obsessed with your own emotions." Also a typical woman's idea of a typical man's position: "I am right because I am logical."
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	18-Nov-04/12:23 PM
Those aren't "official" scripts, you mincing oaf. "Transcribed by Mike Mahoney". TRANSCRIBED BY MIKE MAHONEY. They are Mike Mahoney's idea of A REAL GOOD TIME. Of course he's made the same mistake as Dovina has. They're both major thickos!!!!!1
Re: a comment on Dictionary Lesson by Dovina	16-Nov-04/12:24 PM
Then you're probably even worse at philosophy than you seem.
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	13-Nov-04/12:31 PM
Your mastery of base 35 doesn't excuse your gross misunderstanding of the situation, Dovina. Just admit that the amount of power required by the Delorean is 3.1 jigawatts, and you can dig yourself out of this rather ugly hole.
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	13-Nov-04/11:03 AM
1. "1.21 is 1.21 regardless of anybody's phrasing of it." An astounding insight. But "one point twenty-one" is not the same as "1.21", as you will see if you manage to understand the following: You are doubtless familiar with binary or hexadecimal arithmetic, or at least the concept of using bases other than 10. Let's use base 35, where digits above 9 are written using letters A - Z. Then how is the following pronounced? 1.L The answer is "One point L", or "One point twenty-one", since the value of L is 21. In base 10, this evalutes to 1 + (21 / 35) = 1.6. Still in base 35, how is the following pronounced? 1.21 The answer is "One point two one". In base 10, this evaluates to 1 + (2 / 35) + (1 / 1225) ~= 1.058. Not at all the same as "One point twenty-one". I bet you still don't get it. Then think about this. What is the value of "one point a million"? Is it the same as "one point ten" or "one point one"? No. And only a massive thicky could possibly think otherwise. 2. The unit is a Jigawatt. 1.21 gigawatts is a paltry amount, much less than the amount of power delivered by a lightning bolt.
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	12-Nov-04/4:07 PM
You're an immense balloon of idiotic wrongness. 1. The error in the calculation is 3.1 - 1.21 = 1.89. This is about 150% of 1.21, and about 60% of 3.1. Neither of those numbers is MORE THAN 200%. 2. If you had actually seen the film, you would know that it is "Jigawatts". It's pronounced differently from "Gigawatts". 3. All girls are well thick at science.
Re: a comment on Quest! by ?-Dave_Mysterious-?	12-Nov-04/3:41 PM
It's commonly quoted that the amount of electricity needed to power the DeLorean's time-travelling in Back to the Future is 1.21 Jigawatts. However, what Doc actually says is "One point twenty-one jigawatts", in other words 1 in the units place and 21 in the first decimal place. That is to say, (1 * 1) + (21 / 10) = 3.1 Jigawatts -- an error of nearly 200%.
Re: a comment on Jesus by Dovina	11-Nov-04/8:32 PM
Yes. Your a dunce.
Re: Jesus by Dovina	11-Nov-04/8:13 PM
The only circumstances under which I would describe a poeme as "Reflections on/after something" are circumstances of extreme jest. Yet this is no jest. With your very soul exuding conviction, you have actually begun a poeme with the dumpling: Reflections After Reading The New Testament. I suggest you go away and reflect on what you've done.
Re: a comment on A Better God by Dovina	11-Nov-04/7:55 PM
Listen to you big time not getting it.
Re: a comment on A Better God by Dovina	11-Nov-04/7:54 PM
Then what, pray tell, is an Parp!?
Re: a comment on A Better God by Dovina	11-Nov-04/1:49 PM
Both of you shrivelled old man's sacks have misunderstood the use of the word 'trump' anyhow: 'To trump' (intransitive) is to produce a smug, trumpet-like sound from between one's buttocks.