• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The sinking of MS Estonia: Case Reopened Part VII

JayUtah said:
No.

As the thread I linked to illustrated at length, your claim that ″ can be used contextually to indicate either minutes or seconds has no basis in either formal or common usage. It is simply something you invented in order to wriggle away from what otherwise would have been an inconsequential error—your admission of which would have precluded all this hub-bub that you seem to find so personally vexing. Your claims are based neither in logic nor in sound mathematical principles. As illustrated, again, at length, they fly firmly in the face of such virtues.

Further, your insistent on replaying that same years-old argument when you know full well it was thoroughly and conclusively debunked in a separate thread is extremely disappointing. Granted you have asked for some quarter owing to
your admittedly faulty memory. But that thread was 11 pages long and contained a substantial volume of claims, counterclaims, and evidence which you now seem determined to ignore. If you want to engage in serious debate, you simply must find a way to remember what was previously shown.


My spouse is a lawyer who knows calculus, so is isn't a universal rule that lawyers are bad at math. One of our friends in the same firm graduated fourth in his law school class and has an undergraduate degree in computer science.
Click to expand...
Please quit the 'airhead' insults.
 
Vixen said:
No, I haven't proposed any 'alternate universe in which the entire logic of the system is thrown into the leaf-shredder'. I was doing what I had always assumed was conventional.
Click to expand...
All covered in the linked thread, including your ever-shifting stories. You even manufactured a fictitious "maths PhD" into whose mouth you put the assurance that your made-up gibberish was somehow a kind of standard.
 
Last edited:
Vixen said:
Please quit the 'airhead' insults.
Click to expand...
If you believe you have been insulted, report the post for moderation. If not, do not insinuate as much for rhetorical effect. If you cannot remember what was previously discussed on a subject, it's your job to refresh your memory when others refer you back to it.
 
Vixen said:
It's because it is current affairs news and there has been updates.
Click to expand...
But your contribution completely ignores the updates and focuses al already settled (or at least already discussed) material. Even when the reopening of the investigation was a "current affair" (5 years ago), your contributions focused almost entirely on conspiracy theories that far predated any new information at that time.
 
JayUtah said:
All covered in the previous thread, including your ever-shifting stories. You even manufactured a fictitious "maths PhD" into whose mouth you put the assurance that your made-up gibberish was somehow a kind of standard.
Click to expand...
My ex- does have a PhD, plus joint BSc (Hons) Physics and Philosophy, two masters and the required teaching qualifications needed to teach Maths and Maths-related subjects, his profession. This is because he is an academic. Let me know if you have any objections.
 
Vixen said:
If that was me, imagine the uproar that would be kicking off.
Click to expand...
Notice how I precluded that uproar by first admitting that I had made a mistake, explaining it, accepting the correction, and then applying the correction in a way that both preserved the error (for honesty's sake) and updated the information to be accurate. Imagine if you had done that a couple of years ago!

You cause uproar because you persist in error, going to childishly absurd lengths to justify your persistence in the face of inconvertible proof. And then you expect to be taken seriously when you build arguments on top of such errors. You are the victim of nothing beyond your own stubbornness.
 
Vixen said:
My ex- does have a PhD, plus joint BSc (Hons) Physics and Philosophy, two masters and the required teaching qualifications needed to teach Maths and Maths-related subjects, his profession. This is because he is an academic. Let me know if you have any objections.
Click to expand...
Asked and answered in the linked thread.
 
Last edited:
JayUtah said:
But your contribution completely ignores the updates and focuses al already settled (or at least already discussed) material. Even when the reopening of the investigation was a "current affair" (5 years ago), your contributions focused almost entirely on conspiracy theories that far predated any new information at that time.
Click to expand...
You know it always amuses me when people come on to a forum for discussing topics to announce their disapproval of people discussing a topic.
 
Vixen said:
You know it always amuses me when people come on to a forum for discussing topics to announce their disapproval of people discussing a topic.
Click to expand...
If you want to talk about current events, talk about current events. If you want to talk about conspiracy theories, talk about conspiracy theories. You engender appropriate criticism when you present conspiracy theories falsely under the heading of current events.
 
Vixen said:
If that was me, imagine the uproar that would be kicking off.
Click to expand...
It couldn't have been you though, because Jay accepted he was in error. You're incapable of doing so.

Vixen said:
You know it always amuses me when people come on to a forum for discussing topics to announce their disapproval of people discussing a topic.
Click to expand...
Oh look, you're lying about what other people are saying again.
 
Vixen said:
If that was me, imagine the uproar that would be kicking off.
Click to expand...
Jay made an error, I corrected him, he conceded that it was an error.

If that was you, if you were consistent with your past performances you would now be arguing that saying that the base unit of time is the day, the first cut is hours, and the second cut is seconds is perfectly correct and that I am ignorant for not knowing this.
 
Vixen said:
We were always advised, 'state your assumptions', which is what I do.
Click to expand...
But you didn't do that. You simply wrote 35″ assuming that everyone would somehow understand that to mean "thirty-five minutes." And even after confusion broke out as the result of your unstated assumptions, you stuck to those misfiring guns. You chided everyone for their apparent ignorance and assured us that you were using an acceptable notation and were so much more clever than your critics for doing so. If anything, you withheld your assumptions so that you could make hay out of the resulting confusion.

The purpose of the good advice to state your assumptions is so that those who disagree with your conclusions can look for the cause of that disagreement in the underlying assumptions, where in fact they often lie. When we finally managed to eke out the assumption on which you had based your claim, it was indeed found to be in error. Except the notion that ″ can sometimes mean seconds and sometimes mean minutes wasn't really an assumption—more of a post-hoc rationalization. Be that as it may, you won't accept that your assumption was factually wrong. You acknowledge that assumptions should be stated rather than assumed tacitly. But you have no allegiance to the other half of that principle: the one that requires you to fix assumptions that are shown to be broken and reformulate your conclusion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom