Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong

Pages: 1 … 34 35 36 37 38 … 93

Index »
Community »
Everything Else »
Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong

2007-04-10 00:24:49

#876

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

nukchebi0 wrote:
NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
nukchebi0 wrote:

Using that explanation, you can just claim that we aren't aure anything actually exists, and therefore whatever is stated can be wrong. Thus, I will rephrase it again.

"There is a component of a perceived blanket around a perceived rock and metal ball in some area of perceived space that has been perceived to have negative benefits when taken away from perceived creatures that are bipedal and perceived to be able to speak and are perceived to be located on the surface of this rock and metal ball. These perceived humans refer to this perceived component as oxygen."

There you go. I've covered everything that can used against it by qualifying all aspects of existence. No matter if these humans, or the Earth, or the atmosphere, or space itself are real or non-existent, they are perceived by everyone.

(Don't try using rock ball against me, since the interior is molten rock.)
DeathUnlimited wrote:
Do not use my statements against me, you are not a police.
And if you want me to use something else to that previous statement:

There is no oxygen in the atmosphere, just atoms that are connected to each other in various ways. One of these patterns is called oxygen, but in fact it's just bunch of atoms.

Happy now?
No. A component refers to this particular form of atoms. So, the statement is still right.

... Can't read or what?

I'm done with this statement.

2007-04-10 10:18:21

#877

topal63: . . .; +533|6737

Prove that: "Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong" is not my favorite friendly fun thread about "thinking."

Good luck!

Last edited by topal63 (2007-04-10 10:18:50)

2007-04-10 10:31:39

#878

MoonShadow616: Doesn't read the Whole Thread; +16|6640|Japan

Prove this wrong: I have an index finger on each one of my hands.

or this: I have a feature on my face which is called a nose.

2007-04-10 10:40:34

#879

Hallvard: Member; +262|6541|North Norway

1. NaCl is what is usually called just "salt" in the English language(for cooking etc.)

2. there are about 6,0221415×10²³ paricles in 1 mole (I don't know the other 16 decimals.. it is usually shortned to 6,022x10²³)

3. There are about 78,08% Nitrogen in dry air (again, don't know the rest of the decimals, and the number changes so it's not possible to get the exact number)

4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)

5. 23 times 23 times 23 is not 12168

^^prove those wrong please...

Last edited by kmjnhb (2007-04-10 14:33:24)

2007-04-10 14:00:23

#880

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

topal63 wrote:
Prove that: "Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong" is not my favorite friendly fun thread about "thinking."

Good luck!

This thread is not about "thinking". This is place where stuff is proven wrong.

MoonShadow616 wrote:
Prove this wrong: I have an index finger on each one of my hands.

or this: I have a feature on my face which is called a nose.

Which one?

Well... If we say that for example in Finnish it goes like: Minulla on etusormi molemissa käsissäni. Then you wouldn't have "index finger" but "etusormi".

Same goes for nose.

kmjnhb wrote:
1. NaCl is what we usually call just "salt" (for cooking etc.)

2. there are about 6,0221415×10²³ paricles in 1 mole

3. There are about 78,08% Nitrogen in dry air

4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide

5. 23x23x23 is not 12168

^^prove those wrong please...

Figures...

1. You speak english in North Norway? I doubt... But if you do well then you just might be right.

2. & 3. About much? I could say that there's about one and half eyes in my face and I would be about right... Blah, stupid statements I'll leave them for DU.

4. You are stating it like it would be the only thing that it is but in fact it isn't. In different languages the name changes so...

5. If put differently that would be: 23*x*23*x*23*x is not 12168, but if x has certain value(just a bit above 1 like you most likely know) that equals in 12163.

2007-04-10 14:19:20

#881

Hallvard: Member; +262|6541|North Norway

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
1. You speak english in North Norway? I doubt... But if you do well then you just might be right.

Salt is salt in Norwegian

2. & 3. About much? I could say that there's about one and half eyes in my face and I would be about right... Blah, stupid statements I'll leave them for DU.

If you want the exact numbers.. that would have to wait as I don't know them... but those are as acurate as you get

4. You are stating it like it would be the only thing that it is but in fact it isn't. In different languages the name changes so...

that name is based on Latin and ican be used in any language and be understood... (if the person you're talking to have some basic education that is)

5. If put differently that would be: 23*x*23*x*23*x is not 12168, but if x has certain value(just a bit above 1 like you most likely know) that equals in 12163.

I mean 23 times 23 times 23...

you fail noobest I want answers from DU...

[edit] changed my original post

Last edited by kmjnhb (2007-04-10 14:28:54)

2007-04-10 14:39:14

#882

CruZ4dR: Cereal Killer; +145|6675|The View From The Afternoon

kmjnhb wrote:
NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
5. If put differently that would be: 23*x*23*x*23*x is not 12168, but if x has certain value(just a bit above 1 like you most likely know) that equals in 12163.
I mean 23 times 23 times 23...

you fail noobest I want answers from DU...

[edit] changed my original post

Well actually you'd have to say 23,00 x 23,00 x 23,00 to get 12168. Otherwise it's normal to assume there may be a certain off-value and thereby assuming the value may be 0,95 to 1,05 or wider.

2007-04-10 14:45:16

#883

Hallvard: Member; +262|6541|North Norway

but no matter what decimals you put after the 23s.. you won't get 12168 (that was not a statement that need to be proven wrong)

I'll quote the stuff I want proven wrong by DU:

kmjnhb wrote:
1. NaCl is what is usually called just "salt" in the English language(for cooking etc.)

2. there are about 6,0221415×10²³ paricles in 1 mole (I don't know the other 16 decimals.. it is usually shortned to 6,022x10²³)

3. There are about 78,08% Nitrogen in dry air (again, don't know the rest of the decimals, and the number changes so it's not possible to get the exact number)

4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)

5. 23 times 23 times 23 is not 12168

Last edited by kmjnhb (2007-04-10 14:47:19)

2007-04-10 22:01:43

#884

WinterWayfarer: Combat Medic; +21|6270|Spacetime

Everything is based on assumptions, so everything can be proven wrong if you just assume differently.

Well I'll try anyways.

Statement 1: If I am a teenager, then I am a teenager.

Statement 2: You are on the Internet right this moment.

Statement 3: You are reading this sentence.

2007-04-10 22:03:26

#885

Gates: Member; +1|6245|Westland

DeathUnlimited wrote:
surgeon_bond wrote:
1+1=2
This is a very nice statement. I'll try to fix out something... hmmm..
As you know, binary code is actually the right way to count things and 11 in binary code is actually 3, so 1+1=3..

good one =]

2007-04-10 22:03:29

#886

.robzored.: Roflcopter Pilot; +74|6295|Illinois

This thread is not a sticky (owned )

2007-04-11 00:07:20

#887

Ninja_Kid2002: Member; +119|6286|Floodsville, TN, (UK really)

DeathUnlimited wrote:
Ninja_Kid2002 wrote:
I think, therefore I am
The fact that you think isn't the fact that makes you be.

I don't consider that disproved. If you can define what does make you "be" which excludes the capacity to think i'll accept.
Because if I cannot think, I do not exist
If I can think, I do.

2007-04-11 00:24:04

#888

devildogfo: Member; +32|6341|Camp Lejeune

Gates wrote:
DeathUnlimited wrote:
surgeon_bond wrote:
1+1=2
This is a very nice statement. I'll try to fix out something... hmmm..
As you know, binary code is actually the right way to count things and 11 in binary code is actually 3, so 1+1=3..
good one =]

You cant have base 2 on one side and base ten on the other. 1+1 is still 2, its just expressed differently. 1b + 1b = 10b. 1 + 1 = 3 when referring to binary does not make much sense because obviously there is no "3".

2007-04-11 05:17:30

#889

Ninja_Kid2002: Member; +119|6286|Floodsville, TN, (UK really)

devildogfo wrote:
Gates wrote:
DeathUnlimited wrote:

This is a very nice statement. I'll try to fix out something... hmmm..
As you know, binary code is actually the right way to count things and 11 in binary code is actually 3, so 1+1=3..
good one =]
You cant have base 2 on one side and base ten on the other. 1+1 is still 2, its just expressed differently. 1b + 1b = 10b. 1 + 1 = 3 when referring to binary does not make much sense because obviously there is no "3".

How about 1+1 is not equal to 2 in binary, it's equal to 10 since there is no "2" in binary

2007-04-11 06:57:32

#890

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

kmjnhb wrote:
but no matter what decimals you put after the 23s.. you won't get 12168 (that was not a statement that need to be proven wrong)

I'll quote the stuff I want proven wrong by DU:
kmjnhb wrote:
1. NaCl is what is usually called just "salt" in the English language(for cooking etc.)

2. there are about 6,0221415×10²³ paricles in 1 mole (I don't know the other 16 decimals.. it is usually shortned to 6,022x10²³)

3. There are about 78,08% Nitrogen in dry air (again, don't know the rest of the decimals, and the number changes so it's not possible to get the exact number)

4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)

5. 23 times 23 times 23 is not 12168

... You don't remember the rules don't you?

DeathUnlimited wrote:
Don't use my owns statements against me.

Meaning you can't change your statements after they have been proved wrong.

WinterWayfarer wrote:
Everything is based on assumptions, so everything can be proven wrong if you just assume differently.

Well I'll try anyways.

Statement 1: If I am a teenager, then I am a teenager.

Statement 2: You are on the Internet right this moment.

Statement 3: You are reading this sentence.

1. Again... You stated like you would only be teenager when you are teenager, but in fact you are human (or some other animal) the same time.

2. When you posted that I wasn't on Internet, I was at school. And anyways I'm on my chair now that I'm posting this.

3. I finished reading it at the time I posted this, so no I'm not.

Last edited by NooBesT[FiN] (2007-04-11 07:05:16)

2007-04-11 07:00:47

#891

Undetected_Killer: Le fuck?; +98|6304|FIYAH FIYAH FIYAAAAAAH

How about this?

This sentence is in Spanish when you are not looking at it.

2007-04-11 07:00:50

#892

naightknifar: Served and Out; +642|6580|Southampton, UK

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)

C₆H₁₂O₆ is glucose.

Undetected_Killer wrote:
How about this?

This sentence is in Spanish when you are not looking at it.

You reflect the sentence off a mirror and look at the reflection you know if it is spanish or not.

Last edited by Knightnifer (2007-04-11 07:02:00)

2007-04-11 07:02:20

#893

Undetected_Killer: Le fuck?; +98|6304|FIYAH FIYAH FIYAAAAAAH

Knightnifer wrote:
NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)
C₆H₁₂O₆ is glucose.

You reflect the sentence off a mirror and look at the reflection you know if it is spanish or not.

But you are still looking at it, even if it is a reflection.

2007-04-11 07:03:32

#894

naightknifar: Served and Out; +642|6580|Southampton, UK

Undetected_Killer wrote:
Knightnifer wrote:
NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
4. C₆H₁₂O₆ is a monosaccharide (in English language, there are different ways of spellings in different languages)
C₆H₁₂O₆ is glucose.

You reflect the sentence off a mirror and look at the reflection you know if it is spanish or not.
But you are still looking at it, even if it is a reflection.

No, you're looking at the relfection not the sentence.

2007-04-11 07:06:26

#895

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

Knightnifer wrote:
Undetected_Killer wrote:
Knightnifer wrote:

C₆H₁₂O₆ is glucose.

You reflect the sentence off a mirror and look at the reflection you know if it is spanish or not.
But you are still looking at it, even if it is a reflection.
No, you're looking at the relfection not the sentence.

You are right Mr. Knight.

2007-04-11 07:10:36

#896

naightknifar: Served and Out; +642|6580|Southampton, UK

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:
Knightnifer wrote:
Undetected_Killer wrote:

But you are still looking at it, even if it is a reflection.
No, you're looking at the relfection not the sentence.
You are right Mr. Knight.

a-thankyou.

2007-04-11 07:11:17

#897

kylef: Gone; +1,352|6512|N. Ireland

Prove that I am not the IRC e-god.

2007-04-11 07:14:15

#898

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

leetkyle wrote:
Prove that I am not the IRC e-god.

According to bible human was made by god to be like him... So that way you would be god... At least in some sense.

2007-04-11 07:16:13

#899

naightknifar: Served and Out; +642|6580|Southampton, UK

leetkyle wrote:
Prove that I am not the IRC e-god.

Added to Noobest's:
Tayner is the top poster in BF2s IRC, so he therefore is IRC e-god.
- You're only fourth kyle.

2007-04-11 07:20:54

#900

NooBesT: Pizzahitler; +873|6487

Knightnifer wrote:
leetkyle wrote:
Prove that I am not the IRC e-god.
Added to Noobest's:
Tayner is the top poster in BF2s IRC, so he therefore is IRC e-god.
- You're only fourth kyle.

kyle, ignore this...

knight, read his statement again.

Pages: 1 … 34 35 36 37 38 … 93

Index »
Community »
Everything Else »
Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Claim anything, I'll prove it wrong

nukchebi0 wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

topal63 wrote:

MoonShadow616 wrote:

kmjnhb wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

kmjnhb wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

kmjnhb wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

surgeon_bond wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

Ninja_Kid2002 wrote:

Gates wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

surgeon_bond wrote:

devildogfo wrote:

Gates wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

kmjnhb wrote:

kmjnhb wrote:

DeathUnlimited wrote:

WinterWayfarer wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

NooBesT[FiN] wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

Knightnifer wrote:

leetkyle wrote:

Board footer