Iguana posted:Stormborn posted:Sorry, being a dimwit you cannot process simple logical sequences. I do not have to pretend. You do presuming the bilge above has some resonance to what was stated. Do you seek attention responding to this so far? If so it would be a continent excuse to your grotesque inability to grasp the simple fact that mere memorization without the explanation of the fundamentals never get anyone anywhere. It simply leaves us with mathematically handicapped as you.
Banna, you talk sheer skont! A myriad of words that mean nothing. Look fool, let me break it down for you.
a. I referred numerous times to the tables of weights and measures at the back of the exercise book. My reference is clear.
b. Said tables of weights and measures do NOT contain theorems and formulas. They simply state units of measurements such as
5280 feet are in a mile
16 ounces are in a pound
etc.Some of these are in use for over hundreds of years, these measures being stated as being so for a number of reasons. You do not "work them out" or calculate them. We're not talking about f(x) or Pythagoras theroem here.
I respond to further demonstrate what a complete imbecile you are, not knowing the difference between a table of weights and measures and mathematical formulae. You dragged the latter into this simple discussion on multiplication tables and units of weights and measurement on an exercise book in response to your natural compulsion to show off.
In so doing, you got your ass handed to you. You do not know the difference between the math formulas and what was at the back of the exercise book. In fact I highly doubt you ever saw the back of a Guyanese exercise book in the Burnham era. And you grossly misrepresented what William Blake meant and took a sound thrashing from Ronan on it.
You sir, are an intellectual fraud! A poser and a dunce! The simpletons here with subpar educations may fawn over your big words and long sentences that mask your idiocy, but others see thru your stupidity! You're just in love with your self and can't resist the urge to talk shit about something you know nothing about.
Are we now having verbal diarrhea given you are so "usually" parsimonious with your words? What you say you said changes by the instance. You said burnham was a genius and later said that was not your focus. Then I responded about learning a thing the right way first vs memorizing and you now threw a fit about formulas vs tables! Surely it takes a lot of swallowing your own spittle as you foam at the mouth to conclude I am ignorant of formulas!It must surely convulse your brain to believe you are in the presence of a dunce. I leave you to resolve that contradiction on your own.
BTW, I did not misrepresent what Blake said. I stated that I was transposing William Blake on truth to speak of good intentions with stupidly poor results beating all the bad you can invent. Now you and him in your desire to mine disputes think there is something wrong with saying that. Well...that is your problem not mine.