• Re: Olcott is a Liar?

    From Richard Damon@21:1/5 to olcott on Fri May 17 21:07:28 2024
    XPost: sci.logic

    On 5/17/24 11:31 AM, olcott wrote:
    On 5/17/2024 2:41 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

    Again no proof. Now the excuse is that it is self-evidently true. A
    bad excuse, because it is self-evident only for olcott. That is what
    we call belief. It shows again that when olcott writes 'verified fact'
    we should read 'my belief'. Sorry, olcott, but with only your belief,
    your are not going to invalidate a proven theorem in computation
    theory. You will convince nobody if no proof can be supplied.

    It is self-evidently true to anyone having sufficient knowledge
    of the semantics of the C programming language.




    Which, since I posted over two weeks ago how to do it in C, means that
    you don't have the needed knowledge of the C programming language, or
    about what truth actually is.

    And the fact that you refuse to take up any of my challenges to have me
    repost the link (because you clearly prefer to just lie rather that try
    to do some research) it is clear that you are not actually certain of
    your claim, so you know you may be lying, but you do it anyway.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)