On 18 Mrz., 18:32, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > On 3/18/2013 6:43 AM, WM wrote: > > > On 18 Mrz., 07:26, fom <fomJ...@nyms.net> wrote: > > >> You turn to an outdated strategy directed to > >> a situation that no longer exists rather > >> than do the hard work of grounding your > >> claims. You do this to say that just > >> because you do not believe a particular > >> axiom, > > > Wrong. I prove that the axiom is nonsense like the axiom that a > > triangle with four edges exists. > > That would be more forceful if you used the > term 'trilateral'.
Then it would be trivial. My example requires a little bit deeper thought. > > Once again. You have *proven* nothing.
As your foregoing hint shows, you seem to welcome trivialities, but you seem to be not able to understand more difficult ideas.