Philosophy Now Forum

I asked him to critique something I wrote, starting on page 70, there may be others who want to help the poor guy.

https://ia601309.us.archive.org/21/item ... 0Quest.pdf

Is this the first case of 'clickbait' on this forum?

I'm pretty sure you are the one who is in dire need of help.

accelafine wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:12 am Is this the first case of 'clickbait' on this forum?

I'm pretty sure you are the one who is in dire need of help.

Well, you are the kind of bait most use for fishing.

As I wrote Age, there are hundreds of thousands of equations in the work, demonstrated by both programs at the same time, I am sure someone can find that there is at least one or two, or maybe even three mistakes that both programs made at the same time. I would like Age to simply find them and show how, my work is not verified, or proven. I have faith in that boy.

Now I have several books of this type, if that one is too hard, try this one.

https://ia801309.us.archive.org/21/item ... ursion.pdf

It demonstrates arithmetic and geometric recursion. I once read an Algebra books claiming that what you see in this work is impossible in geometry.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:07 am I asked him to critique something I wrote, starting on page 70, there may be others who want to help the poor guy.

https://ia601309.us.archive.org/21/item ... 0Quest.pdf

Where and when did you ask me to critique any thing, let alone the some thing you are claiming, here?

Now, if you do not produce the actual words where and when you, allegedly, claimed that you asked me to critique the thing that you linked to, here, then you are, once more, just making False claims, here.

And, as someone has already pointed out, do 'we' have a clear example of what is clearly deception, disguised through 'clickbaiting'?

For someone who continually fails, absolutely, in backing up and supporting its claims, then surely you would hope that they would be wise enough to eventually learn to just stop making claims that they can not support in any way, let alone support at all.

Anyone can go to the Evolution posting, you think you can hide your habitual lying when it is plain sight. How pathetic.

A long time ago, before I started my work in geometry, I was asked to show mankind the standard by which every grammar can be proofed. So, put up or shut the fuck up. Prove that any of it is wrong.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:32 am As I wrote Age, there are hundreds of thousands of equations in the work, demonstrated by both programs at the same time, I am sure someone can find that there is at least one or two, or maybe even three mistakes that both programs made at the same time. I would like Age to simply find them and show how, my work is not verified, or proven. I have faith in that boy.

So, 'now' you ask.

you are not a being very trustworthy, here, "phil8659".

For one who wants to keep claiming that "america" was so-called 'discovered', and who can not acknowledge the Falsehood of this claim, finding, showing, and presenting your own inconsistencies, contradictions, and mistakes, which you make here, is enough for me, here.

By the way, I also would like you to simply find the mistakes in my writings, here, and show how, and why, my work is not verified, or proven. .

Unlike you though 'I' do not have faith 'you'.

The lying little man can do nothing but. You and your pathetic lying will soon be forgotten, my work in geometry is just a start and will last a very long time.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:48 am Anyone can go to the Evolution posting, you think you can hide your habitual lying when it is plain sight. How pathetic.

Where is 'it', exactly, and, what even is 'it', exactly?

you do not seem to be able to follow and grasp common grammar.

Once more, you want people to read loads of completely unnecessary text for some thing, which may, or may not even, be there.

What are you so afraid of, here, "phil8659"? Just present the actual words, and where, 'they' are, supposedly,
written?

Also, 'you' are being just like "atla", here, in that just because I ask 'you' or 'it' a clarifying question about 'your claims' that then this means that 'I' am saying some thing opposing.

you two do not seem to be able to discern, and grasp, the actual difference between 'an actual' from 'a question just posed for clarification'.

But, as I have been continually suggesting in this forum, it will be much better for you human beings if you do not read 'my writings' from your own preconceptions or pre-existing assumptions and beliefs. As you two keep showing and proving the reason 'why', exactly.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:48 am A long time ago, before I started my work in geometry, I was asked to show mankind the standard by which every grammar can be proofed.

Who or what supposedly asked you to show, to the men kind only, the so-called 'standard' by which 'every' grammar can be proofed?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:48 am So, put up or shut the fuck up. Prove that any of it is wrong.

I have already shown, and proved, how 'your grammar' about one human beings so-called called 'discovered' lands where human beings had been living for hundreds or thousands of year prior was absolutely not just Wrong, but also False, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

And, that is besides the other times that I have pointed and shown where your views and beliefs,here, have been False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and/or Incorrect.

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:50 am The lying little man can do nothing but. You and your pathetic lying will soon be forgotten, my work in geometry is just a start and will last a very long time.

Okay, but where, and when, exactly, have a, supposedly, said and written a lie, here?

And, once again, if you do not provide absolutely any thing, which backs up and supports 'this claim' of yours, here, as well, then who could be 'the one' who is actually 'lying' will be decided.

Also, and by the way, how long is a so-called 'very long time', exactly, or roughly?

I was asked to put the mark of the beast in the hands of man so that they comprehend judgment in their mind. It is a sorting process, of which you little man, stand on the wrong side. There is not even a shred of truth in you.

I was just replying to some thing written in another thread and just noticed that "phil8659" wrote some thing to me, and asked me to critique some thing that it wrote.

Now, just out of curiosity "phil8659", when 'I' asked 'you', 'Where and when did you ask me to critique any thing, let alone the some thing you are claiming, here?'

Why did you not just answer, reply, and thus clarify with some thing like, 'In the 'evolution thread', last post on page 2', and/or just provide a link to it?

Instead you went on like 'we', here, somehow knew that you had already written and asked 'that'.

If you had just been open and honest, and clarified, from the beginning, then would this not have saved a lot of unnecessary writing?

Also, claiming that 'I am, or was, lying', shows and proves just how absolutely narrowed, or closed, 'your thinking' really is. Had you, really, never 'considered' that 'I' am not 'up to date' with all of 'your writings', in everywhere you write in this forum?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 3:11 am I was asked to put the mark of the beast in the hands of man so that they comprehend judgment in their mind.

1. Who and/or what 'asked you' to do 'put the mark of the beast in the hands of 'men', only?

2. What these 'minds', of 'men', exactly?

3. What is 'the mark', exactly?

4. When you said and wrote, 'the hands', here, are you speaking literally or figuratively?

5. If the former, then how are 'you' going to 'do that', exactly?

6. If the latter, then what do you mean, exactly?

7. What is 'the judgment' in 'the minds' of 'men', exactly?

8. How are 'men' going to 'comprehend' 'the judgment' in 'the minds', exactly?

9. What have 'you' 'comprehended', in 'the judgment', in 'their and/or your mind', exactly?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 3:11 am It is a sorting process, of which you little man, stand on the wrong side.

What, exactly, is a so-called 'sorting process'?

Why do 'you' call 'me' 'little man' for, exactly?

Do 'you' believe that 'you' are a 'big man'?

Also, what is 'it', exactly, to which you believe and claim there is a 'right' and a 'wrong' "side" to, exactly?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 3:11 am There is not even a shred of truth in you.

And, 'this absolute belief and claim', of yours, in based upon 'what', exactly?

Phil8659 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 23, 2025 2:07 am I asked him to critique something I wrote, starting on page 70, there may be others who want to help the poor guy.

https://ia601309.us.archive.org/21/item ... 0Quest.pdf

Why, 'where' you asked 'me' to critique some thing, you said that you wrote 'it' just for you?

Are you absolutely sure that you wrote that 3,401 page document, ' just for 'me' '?

Also, you said and wrote, Will you critique it for me, every page, every line, and clearly write out your objections to how Sketchpad and Mathcad fucked up in each demonstration?

Simply how you so-called 'fucked up', when you used those two things, here, is by just 'doing it', itself, and then by expecting 'me' to write out, at all, let alone clearly, 'my objections' in 'each demonstration'. you 'fucked up' by just 'doing it', and, by expecting 'me' or 'another' to tell you, clearly, 'how you fucked up'.