New telepathy test, the sequel.

RoboTimbo said:
But I give his answer low credibility because he said "...I'm wasn't kidding." Sorry, you'll have to throw it out using your own credibility rating.
Click to expand...
He probably wanted to say "I'm and wasn't kidding", and wanted to keep it short and brief. I see no serious ground for rejecting this (correct) answer. There is another possible interpretation, but I prefer not to say it, and leave it up to you to think a bit about it.
 
Michel H said:
He probably wanted to say "I'm and wasn't kidding", and wanted to keep it short and brief. I see no serious ground for rejecting this (correct) answer. There is another possible interpretation, but I prefer not to say it, and leave it up to you to think a bit about it.
Click to expand...

No, I'm sorry, your credibility ratings demand that this answer be thrown out because of the poor grammar usage. You've done it before and to avoid hypocrisy, you have to do it here also. Why do you not want to avoid hypocrisy?

Now, about that valid scientific method test for you and King of the America's to prove telepathy....
 
Dave Rogers said:
Sorry, why do you think that would be an improvement?

Dave
Click to expand...
I am a little bit surprised by your question, Dave. It seems to me that the sentence: "I'm and wasn't kidding" is a normal, properly constructed, with normal grammar, English sentence. I admit that "I'm wasn't kidding" is not, it seems to have been written in a hurry, but I don't see this as a reason for rejecting it as a non-credible statement.
 
Are you trying to prove that you do have a sense of humour, Michel, by pretending a meaningless collection of words makes sense? If so, you're not succeeding.
 
Michel H said:
I am a little bit surprised by your question, Dave. It seems to me that the sentence: "I'm and wasn't kidding" is a normal, properly constructed, with normal grammar, English sentence. I admit that "I'm wasn't kidding" is not, it seems to have been written in a hurry, but I don't see this as a reason for rejecting it as a non-credible statement.
Click to expand...

If either one is a normal sentence, then people must say either one. But they don't, except perhaps as examples of the bizarre.

Did you not say that English is not your first language?

A native English speaker in America (or in any British book I've ever read) would never say that.

So, your post was neither funny nor right.

You should allow yourself to be tested, or admit that you're not psychic and get on with the other parts of your life.
 
Pixel42 said:
Are you trying to prove that you do have a sense of humour, Michel, by pretending a meaningless collection of words makes sense? If so, you're not succeeding.
Click to expand...
I do not view the sentence "I'm and wasn't kidding" as a "meaningless collection of words". I view it as a completely normal English sentence, which means "I am not kidding (now) and I was not kidding (then)".
 
Michel H said:
It seems to me that the sentence: "I'm and wasn't kidding" is a normal, properly constructed, with normal grammar, English sentence.
Click to expand...

No native English speaker would agree with you. Even if it were possible to unpick the bizarre phrasing and the internal contradiction, the nearest to a coherent meaning it might suggest is "I was not at some earlier point kidding, but am now," in which case it should definitely be rejected as not credible. However, if you're not even capable of distinguishing between a properly formed sentence and a piece of gibberish, that may explain why you think you've been carrying out valid tests all this time.

Dave
 
Michel H said:
I do not view the sentence "I'm and wasn't kidding" as a "meaningless collection of words". I view it as a completely normal English sentence, which means "I am not kidding (now) and I was not kidding (then)".
Click to expand...


Sorry, no. "I'm not kidding" and "I wasn't kidding" are both meaningful, grammatical sentences, and either might have been what the writer meant to type. It's even more difficult to divine the intended meaning of someone who wrote "I'm and wasn't kidding" than it is for "I'm wasn't kidding". Neither is grammatical.
 
When I google "I am and wasn't", I get about 350,000 results. Difficult for me to resist the temptation to say that the bizarreness is more on the side of this forum than anything else.
 
quote 2 of them and discuss, simply.

I bet you can't.

eta: the only Google hit for your sentence that you said was "normal" is:

this thread
 
Last edited:
Michel H said:
When I google "I am and wasn't", I get about 350,000 results. Difficult for me to resist the temptation to say that the bizarreness is more on the side of this forum than anything else.
Click to expand...
Funny, when I google that phrase I don't see any hits for the actual phrase, just for phrases that do make sense and use some of those words. For example the first hit I get is "I am Nigerian and wasn't offended by the BA stewardess".
 
Michel H said:
I am a little bit surprised by your question, Dave. It seems to me that the sentence: "I'm and wasn't kidding" is a normal, properly constructed, with normal grammar, English sentence. I admit that "I'm wasn't kidding" is not, it seems to have been written in a hurry, but I don't see this as a reason for rejecting it as a non-credible statement.
Click to expand...

Sarcasm is normally written in coherent sentences. The simple fact that you have amply demonstrated an inability to distinguish sarcasm from honesty is merely evidence that your claimed affliction is likely true.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom