Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:

Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!

He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.

In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.

NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.

Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!

Students:

My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH

Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH

EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article. Don't ignore it!

>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:51:56 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> >
> > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> >
> > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> >
> > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> >
> > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> >
> > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> >
> > Students:
> >
> > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article. Don't ignore it!
> >
> > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Students:

You will get many hand waving arguments regarding partial sums, infinite decimal expansion and other rot, but the fact is that any series IS defined by its partial sums!!!!!!

Look:

0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + .... IS A SERIES

{0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ... } IS A SEQUENCE

The above sequence is derived from the series' PARTIAL SUM S(n)=1/3[1 - 10^(-n)]

S(1)=0.3 S(2) = 0.33; S(3)= 0.333, etc.

So the sequence is:

S(1); S(2); S(3); ... = 0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ...

The limit of either the series or sequence is the same, ie, 1/3.

You will be surprised at all the bullshit of mainstream morons who will go the extra mile to try and convince you that S = Lim S is not what they are doing, but it is EXACTLY what they do. It is WRONG.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:57:37 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:51:56 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> > >
> > > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > >
> > > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > >
> > > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> > >
> > > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> > >
> > > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> > >
> > > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> > >
> > > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> > >
> > > Students:
> > >
> > > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> > >
> > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> > EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article. Don't ignore it!
> > >
> > > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.
> Students:
>
> You will get many hand waving arguments regarding partial sums, infinite decimal expansion and other rot, but the fact is that any series IS defined by its partial sums!!!!!!
>
> Look:
>
> 0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + .... IS A SERIES
>
> {0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ... } IS A SEQUENCE
>
> The above sequence is derived from the series' PARTIAL SUM S(n)=1/3[1 - 10^(-n)]
>
> S(1)=0.3 S(2) = 0.33; S(3)= 0.333, etc.
>
> So the sequence is:
>
> S(1); S(2); S(3); ... = 0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ...
>
> The limit of either the series or sequence is the same, ie, 1/3.
>
> You will be surprised at all the bullshit of mainstream morons who will go the extra mile to try and convince you that S = Lim S is not what they are doing, but it is EXACTLY what they do. It is WRONG.

0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + .... IS NOT a number. It is a SERIES.

Stupid arguments like "Can you find me a number between 0.999... and 1?" are irrelevant because there is always a number between TWO numbers, not between a number and a series. Then the stupid wankers proceed to talk about the partial sums as being the numbers! Tsk, tsk.

Then there is the bullshit 10x "proof" which fails because multiplication is not distributed over an infinite series.

See page 11 of:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mOEooW03iLS2pmTHMwel9fOTQ

I am violently opposed by the Cult of mainstream academia because once they admit they are wrong, ALL their mythmatics has to be redone. Chuckle.

Gauss knew that the areas under his normal density function is never equal to 1, but he knew that the wider the interval, the closer the area would be to 1. The Baboons of today also apply the Euler S = Lim S principle here:

The area = LIMIT (area) in the improper integral.

Everything the asswipes have been peddling will have to be revised.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 08:11:36 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:57:37 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:51:56 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > > > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> > > >
> > > > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > > >
> > > > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > > >
> > > > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> > > >
> > > > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ....&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> > > >
> > > > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> > > >
> > > > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> > > >
> > > > Students:
> > > >
> > > > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> > > >
> > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> > > EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article.. Don't ignore it!
> > > >
> > > > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.
> > Students:
> >
> > You will get many hand waving arguments regarding partial sums, infinite decimal expansion and other rot, but the fact is that any series IS defined by its partial sums!!!!!!
> >
> > Look:
> >
> > 0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + .... IS A SERIES
> >
> > {0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ... } IS A SEQUENCE
> >
> > The above sequence is derived from the series' PARTIAL SUM S(n)=1/3[1 - 10^(-n)]
> >
> > S(1)=0.3 S(2) = 0.33; S(3)= 0.333, etc.
> >
> > So the sequence is:
> >
> > S(1); S(2); S(3); ... = 0.3; 0.33; 0.333; ...
> >
> > The limit of either the series or sequence is the same, ie, 1/3.
> >
> > You will be surprised at all the bullshit of mainstream morons who will go the extra mile to try and convince you that S = Lim S is not what they are doing, but it is EXACTLY what they do. It is WRONG.
> 0.3 + 0.03 + 0.003 + .... IS NOT a number. It is a SERIES.
>
> Stupid arguments like "Can you find me a number between 0.999... and 1?" are irrelevant because there is always a number between TWO numbers, not between a number and a series. Then the stupid wankers proceed to talk about the partial sums as being the numbers! Tsk, tsk.
>
> Then there is the bullshit 10x "proof" which fails because multiplication is not distributed over an infinite series.
>
> See page 11 of:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-mOEooW03iLS2pmTHMwel9fOTQ
>
> I am violently opposed by the Cult of mainstream academia because once they admit they are wrong, ALL their mythmatics has to be redone. Chuckle.
>
> Gauss knew that the areas under his normal density function is never equal to 1, but he knew that the wider the interval, the closer the area would be to 1. The Baboons of today also apply the Euler S = Lim S principle here:
>
> The area = LIMIT (area) in the improper integral.
>
> Everything the asswipes have been peddling will have to be revised.

They'll be devastated to see their bullshit foundations flushed into the sewer where they always belonged because in REAL mathematics there are NO axioms:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1vlU-PJeIk672bFwZyULD1ASTRFF3jXg8

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Euler stated clearly that 1/oo = 0 . His exact words:

This fraction 1/oo is in reality nothing. (sic) Chap 7, pg. 23

And then this:

A fraction cannot be reduced to nothing, until the denominator has been
increased to infinity. (sic)

Euler called the expression 1/oo a "fraction"! What kind of a mathematician would say something as stupid as this?! He didn't stop there. The moron continued to conclude that the "fraction" 1/oo is in "reality nothing". Wow! People, WOW!

Euler believed in infinity!!!! He made no qualms about it. He believed that super tasks are possible!!!!!

Again, what kind of a mathematician writes things like this? Euler was WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. These toxic ideas are at the core of mainstream mathematics!!!!

It is impossible for anything to be increased to infinity. Infinity is not a place that can be reached. It's not a number or even a point representing a number on the mythological "real number" line. It tickles me pink when mainstream ignoramuses say things like "in the real numbers", followed by talk about infinity. After which they make retarded statements such as "there are no infinitesimals in the real numbers". But an infinitesimal is not possible, if infinity is allowed.

Eram semper recta <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:

> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 -
> a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1
> - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what
> the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!

> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa +
> ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a
> **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well
> please.

> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is
> CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about
> limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a
> super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any
> sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had
> identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.

> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall
> continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are
> ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for
> your benefit! LMAO.

> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more
> laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!

> Students:

> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics
> advocate but do not understand themselves:

> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH

> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Just as a matter of interest, John, if you carry on peddling falsehoods
mixed up with abusive language, you'll do a very good job of discrediting
yourself. At this rate, Dan C. won't need regularly to warn students
off, because your foul language will repel any sincere students anyway.

Like another poster said, you need to get away from this newsgroup for a
bit, because it clearly isn't doing you any good.

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 7:50:45 AM UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S.

That is utter nonsense. When you use the limit notation, you must specify the variable over which that limit is taken, e.g. n in the expression Lim(n-->oo): f(n)

> Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S}

Finally!!!! How many years has it been? Are you on some new meds?

> but what the fuck is 1/(1+a)

1 - a + a^2 - a^3 + ... is a geometric series with an initial term of 1 and common ratio of -a. It converges in the limit to 1/(1+a) if |a| < 1. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geometric_series

Dan

Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog at http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Students:

As you can see, the "excuses" are lame and from lackeys that are probably not being paid enough.

Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those who follow him will go down with him.

Euler wrote:

Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c

All else is hand waving bullshit.

Eram semper recta <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:

[ .... ]

> Students:

> As you can see, the "excuses" are lame and from lackeys that are
> probably not being paid enough.

> Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those
> who follow him will go down with him.

> Euler wrote:

At this point it is clear you are simply lying. Euler did NOT write "{lim
S}" or "S" in his text. These are your misunderstandings of what he
wrote.

> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1
> - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1
> - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.

> Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c

> All else is hand waving bullshit.

It is fair commentary on your personal state to note that you have to
fabricate falsehoods to make your rather weak point.

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 6:08:19 PM UTC+1, Eram semper recta wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> >
> > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> >
> > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> >
> > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> >
> > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> >
> > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> >
> > Students:
> >
> > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> >
> > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.
> Students:
>
> As you can see, the "excuses" are lame and from lackeys that are probably not being paid enough.
>
> Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those who follow him will go down with him.
> Euler wrote:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c
>
> All else is hand waving bullshit.

Dan Christensen has done an admirable job responding to this kind of drivel, and needs no assistance from me I am sure. I will simply say that you are starting to sound more and more like Archimedes Plutonium with each passing month. Is that the objective; mimic him enough and maybe some of his fame will rub off on you? I would hope that you would want better for your future than to be a poor man's Archimedes Plutonium, but keep in mind he is only 13 years older than you.

In the meantime:

1) Have you got a rigorous derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation within the 'New Calculus' yet, or is your great system still incapable of functioning as the language of quantum mechanics, classical mechanics and general relativity (you don't reject general relativity and quantum mechanics do you Mr Gabriel?).

2) Have you got proof of your claim to have an IQ of 4+ sigma above average yet, or are you still cowering away in a corner rather than taking a Mensa Test against me?

3) Have you got around to tackling any of the unsolved Erdos problems yet, given that you claim to have a better insight in mathematics in general and numbers in particular, than Erdos did himself?

4) Have you made an effort to read up on evolutionary theory yet or are you still an evolution denier? Have you read Susan Carey's work yet either?

Have a wonderful day
QB

Remain Calm and Keep Loving Real Analysis
[Recommended Book of the Day: Elementary Number Theory, by G.A. Jones & J.M. Jones]

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 14:12:16 UTC-4, Scott moron Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Eram semper recta <thenewc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> [ .... ]
> > Students:
>
> > As you can see, the "excuses" are lame and from lackeys that are
> > probably not being paid enough.
>
> > Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those
> > who follow him will go down with him.
>
> > Euler wrote:
> At this point it is clear you are simply lying. Euler did NOT write "{lim
> S}" or "S" in his text.

See what I mean, my dear students? You can't fix stupid. You cannot change religious fundamentalism.

Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c .

The above is what Euler wrote! Not I, but Euler!

Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S is the limit of the convergent series} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S is the series}.

Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c

All else is hand waving bullshit.

See, I told you students! You can't make up this sort of shit. It's as clear as can be, but the baboons of mainstream academia refuse to admit error and submit that their lack of intelligence leaves much to be desired.

> It is fair commentary on your personal state to note that you have to
> fabricate falsehoods to make your rather weak point.

And of course since there is NOTHING the idiot or his fellow idiots can say, they resort to platitudes, lies and insults. Typical mujahideen reaction.

Eram semper recta <thenewcalculus@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 14:12:16 UTC-4, Scott moron Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> Eram semper recta <thenewc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
>> [ .... ]
>> > Students:

>> > As you can see, the "excuses" are lame and from lackeys that are
>> > probably not being paid enough.

>> > Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those
>> > who follow him will go down with him.

>> > Euler wrote:
>> At this point it is clear you are simply lying. Euler did NOT write "{lim
>> S}" or "S" in his text.

> See what I mean, my dear students? You can't fix stupid. You cannot
> change religious fundamentalism.

You have a low regard for the truth, John. Euler did not write "{lim S}"
or "S" in his text.

It's a minor point, really, more to do with your misunderstanding of
series and limits, but you've blown it up into something big, a sort of
test of your manhood type thing.

> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa
> - aaa + ...&c .

> The above is what Euler wrote! Not I, but Euler!

Yes. There's not an S to be seen there.

> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S is the limit of the
> convergent series} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c
> {S is the series}.

Or, more idiomatically translated, "Therefore our fraction 1/(1+a) is
equal to this infinite series, 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...etc."

You're using the single symbol S in two different ways, which is
erroneous. Euler would never have made such an error.

> Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c

No. If you want to write what you seem to be saying properly, you would,
like Euler, say something like:

1/(1 + a) = 1 - a + a^2 - a^3 + a^4 - .....

which is something understood by all mathematicians, and most teenage
schoolchildren. The Symbol S is wholly redundant here, but if you must
use it, you need to use it either for the series, or for the sum of the
terms of the series. You need to make up your mind.

As I say, it's a fairly small point, but one you've invested a lot of
emotional energy in.

> All else is hand waving bullshit.

> See, I told you students! You can't make up this sort of shit. It's as
> clear as can be, but the baboons of mainstream academia refuse to admit
> error and submit that their lack of intelligence leaves much to be
> desired.

It's not even clear what this alleged error is.

>> It is fair commentary on your personal state to note that you have to
>> fabricate falsehoods to make your rather weak point.

> And of course since there is NOTHING the idiot or his fellow idiots can
> say, they resort to platitudes, lies and insults. Typical mujahideen
> reaction.

The falsehood you fabricated about the letter S is as plain as daylight.
And please note, John, I don't lie on Usenet, ever.

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

On Sunday, July 4, 2021 at 1:08:19 PM UTC-4, I am Super Rectum (aka John Gabriel, Troll Boy) wrote:

>
> Euler's S = Lim S is a major blight on his accomplishments and those who follow him will go down with him.
> Euler wrote:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> Because 1/(1+a) = Lim S and S = 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c
>

You admitted here yesterday that, "Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S}." Have those new meds worn off? Better up the dose. You were almost beginning to make sense there, Troll Boy!

Dan

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

I cannot imagine how embarrassing it must be to be so stupid so as to continue denying that Euler defined S = Lim S.
Mainstream academics are incorrigible morons.

Tsk, tsk.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

The baboons of the mainstream hate these facts more than they hate any other facts. It shows how stupid they have been and still are.

On 7/5/2021 5:56 PM, Eram semper recta wrote:

> I cannot imagine how embarrassing it must be to be so stupid so as to continue denying that Euler defined S = Lim S.

I cannot imagine how embarrassing it must be to be so stupid so as to
continue to insist that Euler is to blame for the virtual scribbling on
a copy of Euler's work that you yourself did.

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

All this evidence and the mainstream cranks still don't admit they're wrong.. Incorrigible morons.

söndag 4 juli 2021 kl. 13:51:56 UTC+2 skrev Eram semper recta:
> On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> >
> > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> >
> > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> >
> > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> >
> > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> >
> > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> >
> > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> >
> > Students:
> >
> > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> >
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article. Don't ignore it!
> >
> > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

a well written article is neutral, not hateful like yours is.

On Thursday, 15 July 2021 at 01:53:26 UTC-4, zelos...@gmail.com wrote:
> söndag 4 juli 2021 kl. 13:51:56 UTC+2 skrev Eram semper recta:
> > On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> > > Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
> > >
> > > Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > >
> > > Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
> > >
> > > In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
> > >
> > > He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
> > >
> > > In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
> > >
> > > NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
> > >
> > > Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
> > >
> > > Students:
> > >
> > > My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
> > >
> > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
> > EVERYTHING you need to know is in the above very well written article. Don't ignore it!
> > >
> > > Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.
> a well written article is neutral, not hateful like yours is.

I can only hate those mediocre brains like yours that refuse to be corrected in the face of overwhelming evidence.

You are a fine one to talk about hate, you despicable little bastard!

The article states NOTHING but the facts and makes fun of your stupidity in claiming otherwise:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH

"Bees do not waste time to explain the flies
that honey is better than shit."

So no comment needed.

Eram semper recta schrieb am Sonntag, 4. Juli 2021 um 13:50:45 UTC+2:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Mostowski Collapse wrote:

> "Bees do not waste time to explain the flies that honey is better than
> shit." So no comment needed.
>
> Eram semper recta schrieb am Sonntag, 4. Juli 2021 um 13:50:45 UTC+2:

mostoske, there are too many birds in your thinking. The capitalist
*public_servants* dare not even *fake_it* with *saline_water*. Enjoy.
Regret it later on.

Revealed, Kamala Harris' Fake Covid 19 Vaccination, Like Always, Hidden
In Plain Sight, Let This Guide You In Your Decisions
https://www.brighteon.com/cbc0f00a-3529-47d9-8372-581f26fb94ca

On Sunday, 4 July 2021 at 07:50:45 UTC-4, Eram semper recta wrote:
> Euler most definitely wrote in his Elements of Al-Gibberish:
>
> Daher ist uns Bruch 1/(1+a) {Lim S} gleich dieser unendlichen Reihe 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> Therefore is our fraction 1/(1+a) {Lim S} equal this unending series 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c {S}.
>
> In other words S = Lim S. Sure, Euler didn't write {Lim S} but what the fuck is 1/(1+a), you vomit worthy morons?!
>
> He also didn't write {S}, but what the fuck is 1 - a + aa - aaa + ...&c, you incorrigible fuck wads?! Euler even tells you it is a **series** and I can call it by any letter of the alphabet I damn well please.
>
> In other words, he didn't have to insert {S} and {Lim S} because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR that is exactly what he meant. Euler knew NOTHING about limit theory - NOTHING. Moreover, Euler believed completely that a super task is possible. To call such a one a "mathematician" of any sort is an insult to one's intelligence. One of the greatest Gauss had identical sentiments to mine. Gauss rejected infinity.
>
> NONE of your hand waving drivel will save you from my wrath. I shall continue to expose your syphilitic brains till my last breath. You are ALL filth that cannot be salvaged and my efforts are certainly not for your benefit! LMAO.
>
> Anyone who subscribes to bullshit like 1/3 = 0.333... or even more laughable 1 = 0.999... is and ALWAYS will be a FUCKING CRANK!
>
> Students:
>
> My efforts are for you! Study the very theory that mainstream academics advocate but do not understand themselves:
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH
>
> Ignore all the troll responses because they are vacuous vomit.

Students:

As you can see, mainstream math cranks are oblivious to facts. All that matters to them is what they want to see and hear.

The title of the following article is "Mainstream mathematics professors are incorrigible stupid creatures who cannot be corrected". To understand why, you MUST STUDY IT as if your mathematics future depends on the same, because guess what? It does.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/12oUJAfIMFMcXFb8DvgsYxuPfdaB99XYH

Eram semper recta wrote:

> The title of the following article is "Mainstream mathematics professors
> are incorrigible stupid creatures who cannot be corrected". To
> understand why, you MUST STUDY IT as if your mathematics future depends
> on the same, because guess what? It does.

This can't be true. Now about the vaccines:

You can trust us a source of information.

Otherwise, dismiss everything else.

We will continue to be your single source of truth.

Unless you hear from us, it's NOT the truth.

We will continue to provide everything you need to know.

Urbano Escobar wrote:

> Eram semper recta wrote:
>
>> The title of the following article is "Mainstream mathematics
>> professors are incorrigible stupid creatures who cannot be corrected".
>> To understand why, you MUST STUDY IT as if your mathematics future
>> depends on the same, because guess what? It does.
>
> This can't be true. Now about the vaccines:
>
> You can trust us, as a source of information.
>
> Otherwise, dismiss everything else.
>
> We will continue to be your single source of truth.
>
> Unless you hear from us, it's NOT the truth.
>
> We will continue to provide everything you need to know.

-- *Jacinda_Ardern*, the transgender prime minister of New Zealand.

historical. Year 2021. Nuremberg 2.0 tribunal : *guilty*.