On 3/20/2013 3:10 PM, WM wrote: > On 20 Mrz., 20:04, Virgil <vir...@ligriv.com> wrote: > >>> Corrolary 2: >>> The concept of quadrupede is absurd. >> >> You have WM's style of argument down pat! > > Another brilliant expert! > Now you can start to recite: When shall we three meet again.
omega omega+1 omega+2
> > On a more humorous note, your explanation of > quantifiers has been shown to lead to a > proof of an infinite unity. > > > >>>> Either you know that, or you don't. If not, then it is not my task to > >>>> teach you. > >>> > >>> You disappoint. > >>> > >>> You have often -- and explicitly -- stated that > >>> you have come here to teach me. > >> > >> Did I??? I had come to you? Not as fas as I know. > >> Nevertheless: Sometimes even I have to confess that I have failed. > > > > Providing opportunity to poor ignorant > > souls is never a failure. > > > > It may be that my statement above had > > been in error. I understood your many > > threads as directed to the conversion of > > *all* those mortal beings you label as > > heathens. > > > > I merely included myself. It seemed > > reasonable as we only know of finitely > > many mortal beings, and, you claim that > > to be a criterion for deciding quantification. > > > > If you are ascribing some other qualification, > > here is the logic: > > > > All mortal beings are finite. > > fom is not a mortal being. > > ============================= > > fom is infinite. > > > > Do you care to amend the logic of your implied > > reasoning? > > > > > > You have been asked a question. > > Instead of answering,... > > ...you post more nonsense. > > > > And you actually had the audacity to suggest > that the parrot learn to think for himself. >