Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote:
In <4e3ca3f5.1060...@bcs.org.uk>, on 08/06/2011
at 03:16 AM, CM Poncelet <ponce...@bcs.org.uk> said:
Is it perhaps because you forget that Fortran I was around in 1955
and the Lyons Electronic Office (LEO) was around in 1952?
No, it's because you've made enough erroneous statements that you have
no credibility.
But you seem to be saying that, unless I can cite from your book the
chapter and verse that supports my argument, my argument is false. Was
that not also pope Urban's (and his cardinals' and bishops') argument
for rejecting Galileo Galilei's assertion that the earth was *not* at
the centre of the universe, because Galileo could quote no passage in
the pontiff's book which supported his assertion? And did the earth's
being at the centre of the universe being 'useful' really matter in
determining whether Galileo was right or wrong? To paraphrase it, saying
"John and Jeremy" instead of "Jonah and Jeremiah" does not constitute
'erroneous statements' if "Jonah and Jeremiah" are irrelevant to the
argument.
As far as credibility is concerned, do you remember saying that my
proof that 0.999...<recurring ad infinitum> is equal to 1 was false -
and that, when I pointed out that this was not my proof but that taught
by my university, you said my university was wrong (or words to that
effect)? Would you like me to find your email in which you said that?
The University of Liverpool is renowned worldwide as a leading authority
in mathematics. So perhaps it is your credibility about my proofs being
wrong/false etc. (or words to that effect) that should be brought into
question.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
