₦airaland Forum

alexistaiwo:
Mad fanboys everywhere you go like MTN

vaxx:
A premises that is false even if it produce a true conclusion is invalid argument. An argument is valid if the premises lead to the conclusion. Your premises 2 is illogical as i have demonsrate its absurdity.

vaxx:
The premise is that a simple division of two integers can be calculated by cancelling common numbers from the numerator and denominator. wrong premises will generally produces incorrect answers.

but if you change the dynamic by applying it to 16 divided by 64, using the method of cancelling the 6’s from the numerator and denominator. there may be other solutions, but the correct answer (1/4) which is obtained by that mostly-false presumed method.

vaxx:
cus you refused to connect how such illustration reduce your question to reducto absurdum.

LordReed:
Exactly what I was trying to portray to him. Can you see how he is backtracking?

alexistaiwo:
Bro, I had to crosscheck the moniker twice.


Perhaps her account was hacked because I refuse to believe such an enlightened person can be that far gone in hypocrisy

Lxdd:
This violates some mathematical axioms. A valid paradox can only arise when you adhere to the various rules and still end up with a true and false statement.

LordReed:
In what way was I arguing out of point?

vaxx:
When I said you are ignorant of the discussion, it is even an understatement. You are even poor in your thinking process.

You yourself already establish that paradox is allowed in every language . Since true or false statement exist in every language. I push you further that statement is false. it is wrong mathematically and I demonstrate it by showing you evidence of your illogicalities.


In mathematical language, nonsense question can't be answered as it is lacking sense.

vaxx:
it is because you yourself is ignorant of what you are discussing. Deductive argument is meant to provide conclusive reasoning and not compelling argument.

The logic you’re referring to as deductive logic, which is a tool to ensure that your arguments work but based on illogicalities.. If you proof something illogically, you’re saying you want to design an argument that is ensured to be faulty. And that is what you are currently doing.

Octopusssy:
Mr Koontz is very talented in his own way. King and Koontz are my all time favs. I have a whole library of the two writers and I still haven't gone through half their books.

I think the edge Koontz has over King is Dean uses more humour in his writing than Stephen. You should read 'Ticktock'. I guffawed all the way. Then there is 'From the corner of his Eye'. It narrates the travails of a murderous, criminally insane psychopath who thinks the whole world is against him as he flees from justice. Very very funny book. I couldn't put it down for days.

Stephen and Dean are very talented and are at the top of their game, and even though they are both in their late 60s, very few American writers can stand shoulder to shoulder to them.

You should also note that only one Dean Koontz novel has ever been adapted for film- 'Phantoms'. Koontz always wants total creative control of his works, which is why his books hardly made it to the big screen because at some point you have to hands off and allow the producers take liberties that will nearly drive you the creator, insane. Why do you think King hated the film adaptation of 'The Shining'? Hollywood producers butchered the script and made rubbish of the book.

AHCB, you're a poet. Imagine some people come, pay you for the rights to use your poem in a movie or maybe dramatic presentation in theaters and then go ahead and turn it to a wack, 80's gangster rap. The thought makes you shudder, right?

That's how King felt. Your work is your baby and you won't allow your baby be manhandled by money grubbing philistines, would you? This is why Dean Koontz does not allow his books get to the big screen unless he has total creative control, and we both know that's not going to happen. Book adaptation for movies is very difficult because the stream of consciousness of the characters cannot be replicated on screen.

vaxx:
Your whole write up is full of logic abuse....You don't even understand your own illogicalities..... ....



Your postulation are logically inconsistent as i have demonsrate mathematically. Just check my reply to the next moniker. Stop abusing logic.

vaxx:
problem of logic 101......

You were able to ask this question because you asked in a language that allow paradox.

Check out similar question in mathematical language.

Is 5 still 5, if it is 50 ?

You see Nonsensical questions don’t have answers, they are only recognized as lacking sense.

budaatum:
Yea, be dissing me that my English is different structure! Don't confess that you can't read. As if it's my fault you are made in China.

budaatum:
Anyone noticed it's quiet around here?

malvisguy212:
oh , you're an atheist ? alright.

vaxx:
i can't be repeating myself. It is nauseating. If you or Him want ask any question. You can decide to ask it here.

malvisguy212:
the op mind is made up, ( son of perdition ) one thing I know , winning argument does not validate the truth.

vaxx:
Learn here....

https://www.nairaland.com/4069527/what-created-god-response-atheist

troubleseller:
Have you seen Piano Teacher? They actually showed séx. ACTUAL SÉX. I also collected one French film from a friend. She has a lot of them because she is learning the language and 20 minutes or so into the film, two guys were going at it and everything (penetration) was shown. Another one was about a woman who falls for her psychoanalyst and that was explicit too and I am not talking after hours movies. I am talking Palme d'Or winning movies.

troubleseller:
The Piano Teacher
Weird movie. I wonder why Europeans are far more explicit than their counterparts from the West.

MJBOLT:

hawkeye has been in 4 billion dollar movies,green arrow is the poor man here.


Drax is far better than cyborg who looks like a damaged toy,even those iron condemn aboki will reject him

Cheers01:
The Christians, the muslims and Jews always tell me that there is one God and that he is powerful. In fact, he is omnipotent and can do anything. He cares for us human beings and all we need to do is follow his commandments. This God also created our universe. He is perfect, he is the almighty creator.

However, I just cannot believe in this God. This God sounds like a fairytale super-alien.

How can a God be so powerful and yet so invisible? How is it that there is no physical or scientific evidence that can prove this God's existence? We cannot hear him but he supposedly answers prayers. We cannot see him but he heals the sick and cares for us. The only other invisible smooth operator is Santa claus. That fat bastard that delivers presents to children all over the world. Yet, we all accept that Santa is a fairy tale.

How can a God be omnipotent? Omnipotence is a ridiculous concept. An absurdity in principle. Being omnipotent means being all powerful without limits. Let's look at how ridiculous the concept is; if God can do anything, then he should be able to create a second God that is stronger than himself.

The funniest thing about this God is that most of the people preaching about him are not even sensible. If I were a powerful god, I would have sensible people representing me. Jesus and Muhammad were both illiterates by their own societal standards. Moses was literate but not a trained priest.

Going further about people who represent God, every believer is divided on who or what this God is. Some say that God is Male. Some say that God is gender neutral. Some represent him as an old white man in the sky. Some say God is a God of vengeance like the biblical old testament. Some say that he is a God of love.

Then, there is the philosophical problem of creation. Who created the creator? Where does God come from? Did he create himself or he just always existed? If he always existed, what was he doing with himself all those billions of years it took our galaxy to be formed?

MJBOLT:

which shazam?is it the one that looks like poor man power rangers?

MJBOLT:

which shazam?is it the one that looks like poor man power rangers?

Afobear:

MJBOLT:

rumour has it that iron man is batman role model

alexistaiwo:
Psychologists call this outburst of yours Transference

Afobear:
We have the time stone , and we have looked into the future 14500000000 times and sadly , none agrees with you and DC movie gaining 2billion

Afobear:
It's easier a yokuzona to pass through the eyes of a needle than for DC movie to make 2 billion

MJBOLT:

which swamp thing? i hope it's not the one DC cancelled after dropping one episode

Raalsalghul:
Just like I've just told him.
Follow up a horror flick with a comedy.