|
This is a spectacular thread, now. The truth tree has shown me the light. I can't believe I was so loving stupid before. Truth. Tree.
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:TobleroneTriangular disagrees. That dude was dedicated as hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 21:36
|
|
|
The North Tower posted:I miss the old days when this thread was interesting. IT's really got a lot of trolls in it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 21:43
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:That dude was dedicated as hell. I go back and read his "coming out" post every so often. Every single time, I'm amazed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
19 o'clock posted:This is a spectacular thread, now. The truth tree has shown me the light. I can't believe I was so loving stupid before. They are great for when you have a consufing set of premises to test whether they are consistent. I essentially wrote that one out on purpose so it wouldn't be inconsistent. It's also far from complete.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Your handwriting looks like a unicorn's pubes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:00
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I essentially wrote that one out on purpose so it wouldn't be inconsistent. It's also far from complete. You're like that wildly nonathletic kid on the playground saying "I could do that, if I wanted to." You're calling everyone stupid and refusing to actually go full-bore on explaining yourself and your truth trees then explaining it away as, "You all are too stupid to understand it, anyway."
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
19 o'clock posted:You're like that wildly nonathletic kid on the playground saying "I could do that, if I wanted to." You're calling everyone stupid and refusing to actually go full-bore on explaining yourself and your truth trees then explaining it away as, "You all are too stupid to understand it, anyway." I don't usually say that, but in your case, it might be true.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I don't usually say that, but in your case, it might be true. Define your variables.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:27
|
|
|
.
Mercury_Storm fucked around with this message at 07:49 on Nov 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:Define your variables. This would generally be important, huh?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:41
|
|
|
The attitude I get is so condecending, it's rediculous. They are defined, but I wanted people to see the logic is right, not focus so much on the variables.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:45
|
|
|
I get what you're saying if what you're trying to do is demonstrate that truth trees are useful for representing the relationships between groups of propositions, but without knowing what you defined the propositions to be I don't know what the tree actually means beyond the abstract.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I wanted people to see the logic is right, not focus so much on the variables.  e: i've changed my mind keep responding to the troll he's cool walk me through these truth trees. are you assuming each assumption has a 50% chance of being true or not true?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:05
|
|
|
Literally The Worst posted:I go back and read his "coming out" post every so often. Every single time, I'm amazed. Prester John posted:I've been thinking about the question of whether AddMeOnFacebook is a talented troll or legit. I can't really tell, but I lean about 80% towards him being semi-legit. Let me tell a little story that may or may not shed some light on this situation, because a few years back people on this very forum were having the exact same conversation about me, for much the same reasons. I was a Conspiracy Theorist trying to steer the board towards the "truth", but not in a (so I thought) blatantly obvious way. Relatedly, I find it a little sad that a lot of the conspiracy stuff boils down to either "mental illness" and/or an inability to accept the fact that "poo poo happens, nobody controls it, and you are not important". Ironically, "poo poo happens, nobody controls it, and you are not important" is actually rather soothing to me, for the same reason I find humanity's crushing insignificance in the universe rather soothing.  It's not all about you. fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:The attitude I get is so condecending, it's rediculous. They are defined, but I wanted people to see the logic is right, not focus so much on the variables. Can you please choose between calling people idiots and spelling ridiculous incorrectly?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I don't usually say that, but in your case, it might be true. Try me. Edit: I feel like I'm touching poo poo here, but this guy is just too good. 19 o'clock fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Nov 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:11
|
|
|
Mercury_Storm posted:Hi I'm a crazy person who is WAY CRAZIER than that pony facebook loser, so much crazier that I believe nazi aliens did 9-11 from a hollowed out moon base in concert with international banking lizards with mind/pain rays who are gangstalking me at this very moment. I am somehow comforted by the knowledge that someone out there truly believes just this.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:14
|
|
|
Maybe you can express your argument in the form of a proof? You can pull the steps of the proof from the truth tree, then caption each with natural language.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:
The truth tree has some unstated assumptions - for example the existence of Building 7 before its "collapse". A more thorough truth tree would come to the real truth: that the entire WTC has never existed and the fake attack of 9/11 was necessary to prevent the lie being exposed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:
No, of course not. http://us.yhs4.search.yahoo.com/yhs...da&p=truth+tree
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:40
|
|
|
I already explained. It starts with the literal that no plane hit the building. Then, if you believe the official story, you really have to buy a lot of un-evidenced premises. I think the logic demonstrates this pretty clearly. I think a five-year old can understand it. Your unwillingness to learn is what's holding you beack, not your ability, for most of you. This is easy stuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:41
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I already explained. It starts with the literal that no plane hit the building. Then, if you believe the official story, you really have to buy a lot of un-evidenced premises. I think the logic demonstrates this pretty clearly. I think a five-year old can understand it. Your unwillingness to learn is what's holding you beack, not your ability, for most of you. This is easy stuff. What does flight 93 not hitting a building have to do with anything?
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:44
|
|
|
AddMEonFaceook I have proven with a logic tree that you are a CIA plant. What do you have to say for yourself, government thug?!  Or you might just be a huge human being, the visions are unclear
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
Everything has a 50/50 chance of happening.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:AddMEonFaceook I have proven with a logic tree that you are a CIA plant. What do you have to say for yourself, government thug?! That looks like poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
I'm the only one still posting who isn't a troll. The truth must be heard!
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:52
|
|
|
 Here's the tree, again. All I'm demonstrating is logical thinking. The government pawns and story believers will say anything to discredit me. They even say proven logic is false and mock learning.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:55
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:
B isn't a real letter, false flag detected
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:No, of course not. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:
Your logic tree looks even shittier than mine. Seriously, explain your initial assumptions and the meaning of your variables you loving moron. At least my drawing of an ejaculating penis is somewhat self-explanatory, your chart is just meaningless symbolic gibberish
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:02
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:
You don't actually understand formal logic, do you?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Sneaksie Taffer posted:You don't actually understand formal logic, do you? Whoa now let's not make accusations we can't take back here. You saw his Linear Algebra textbook, he is clearly Well Learned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
In case it's unclear, a crude drawing of an ejaculating cock is more intelligent and logical than the garbage that you drew. Either explain your assumptions and variable definitions or get started on some nice dick drawings
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Your logic tree looks even shittier than mine. I already did twice. Hit the ?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Stop trolling, jeez. Add something or gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I already did twice. Hit the ? Hey idiot, posting your chart again is not the same as explaining your assumptions or variable definitions. That's what makes my chart superior to yours, because at least a few of my variables are explicit
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:10
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:Hey idiot, posting your chart again is not the same as explaining your assumptions or variable definitions. That's what makes my chart superior to yours, because at least a few of my variables are explicit I made two other posts explaining the variables.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
So if I'm understanding, starting from the given that no plane hit the building, then if you believe the official story you have a lot of things to explain (represented by the huge list of propositions above 'Truther') that you don't have to explain if you express skepticism of the official story? Are you saying anything else beyond that?
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 18:44 |
|
|
AddMEonFacebook posted:I already did twice. Hit the ? Yous till haven't explained why it's relevant that flight 93 did not hit a building.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 00:15
|
|