Full Version: Is Trigonometry A Hoax?
It has always seemed a bit too convenient, you know? I mean, sin^2(x) + cos^2(x) = 1 always, for any x?? Wtf?
QUOTE (RodReynolds @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 7:18 PM) 
It has always seemed a bit too convenient, you know? I mean, sin^2(x) + cos^2(x) = 1 always, for any x?? Wtf?
Dude, I ALWAYS said trig was bull.
Those close-minded professors, though...
Euclidean space is for suckers.
The SIN function is just an outgrowth of the liberal media.
The SIN function is just an outgrowth of the liberal media.
Did you know Bush has changed pi at least six times since he's been in office?
This is seriously the most nerdtastic thread in the history of this forum, and it's like 4 posts long. Good work.
QUOTE (BigDMcGee @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 11:39 PM)
This is seriously the most nerdtastic thread in the history of this forum, and it's like 4 posts long. Good work.
ooh, sick burn.
QUOTE (Elias @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 8:03 PM)
ooh, sick burn.
Back to general, Christmas newbie.
An excellent gimmick choice..... but it doesn't have staying power
QUOTE (Elias @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 9:03 PM)
ooh, sick burn.
This, ladies and gentlemen, is a "Chav"
This thread to me, enjoyability-wise, is the anti-anything-in-General.
QUOTE (Dirtydutch @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 7:25 PM)
Did you know Bush has changed pi at least six times since he's been in office?
This is the new POTY. Easily the funniest thing Ive heard Dutch say.
While the Church of Scientology is still researching whether Trigonometry is a hoax or not, they have conclusive evidence that Calculus is most definitely a fraud.
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
QUOTE (Dirtydutch @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 11:25 PM)
Did you know Bush has changed pi at least six times since he's been in office?
What does his wife have to say about that?
QUOTE (tyfgine @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 4:24 PM)
While the Church of Scientology is still researching whether Trigonometry is a hoax or not, they have conclusive evidence that Calculus is most definitely a fraud.
That was amazingly funny. Not that I could make neither head nor tail of it.
Ok just so I can understand that long artice, is rate of change (f ( x )- f ( c ) )/ c
QUOTE (LongLiveYorke @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 3:46 PM)
That was amazingly funny. Not that I could make neither head nor tail of it.
All you need to know is that calculus was invented by the Luce Cult, in Rockefeller Plaza, NY. It is some sort of black magic operation, and has no practical use in either mathematics or engineering.
QUOTE (tyfgine @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 1:24 PM)
I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
This is my favourite part. The stance of an entire religion is based on one random engineering student that L. Ron Hubbard knew.
QUOTE (tyfgine @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 4:24 PM)
While the Church of Scientology is still researching whether Trigonometry is a hoax or not, they have conclusive evidence that Calculus is most definitely a fraud.
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
please.... PLEASE tell me that was a joke.
QUOTE (Rmunro @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 6:39 PM)
This is my favourite part. The stance of an entire religion is based on one random engineering student that L. Ron Hubbard made up.
FYP, but same idea.
6th year engineering student? Maybe he should've been using calculus a bit more often.
L. Ron Hubbard is a derivative of acceleration
QUOTE (zsta2k6 @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 7:05 PM)
L. Ron Hubbard is a derivative of acceleration
Stop being such a jerk.
QUOTE (mrdannyg @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 3:56 PM)
FYP, but same idea.
6th year engineering student? Maybe he should've been using calculus a bit more often.
6th year engineering student? Maybe he should've been using calculus a bit more often.
Wondered the same thing myself.
QUOTE (tyfgine @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 1:24 PM)
While the Church of Scientology is still researching whether Trigonometry is a hoax or not, they have conclusive evidence that Calculus is most definitely a fraud.
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
Audio Clip of L. Ron Hubbard on Calculus
Here is the transcript:
"Rate of change is this mathematics known as Calculus. Calculus, it's a very interesting thing, is divided into two classes -- there's Differential Calculus and Integral Calculus. The Differential Calculus is in the first part of the textbook on Calculus, and Integral Calculus is in the second part of the textbook on Calculus. As you look through the book, you'll find in the early part of the book on Calculus, "dx" over "dy", a little "dx", and a little "dy" -- and one's above the other on a line -- predominates in the front part of the book, but as you get to the end of the book you find these "dx" and "dy"s preceded by a summation sign, or are equating to a summation sign, and the presence of this shows that we are in the field of Integral Calculus.
Now I hope you understand this, because I've never been able to make head nor tail of it. It must be some sort of a Black Magic operation, started out by the Luce cult -- some immoral people who are operating up in New York City, Rockefeller Plaza -- been thoroughly condemned by the whole society. Anyway, their rate-of-change theory -- I've never seen any use for that mathematics, by the way -- I love that mathematics, because it -- I asked an engineer, one time, who was in his 6th year of engineering, if he'd ever used Calculus, and he told me yeah, once, once I did, he said. When did you use it? And he said I used it once. Let me see, what did you use it on? Oh yeah. Something on the rate-of-change of steam particles in boilers. And then we went out and tested it and found the answer was wrong.
Calculus -- if you want to know -- there is room there for a mathematics which is a good mathematics. And it would be the rate of co-change, or the rate of change when something else was changing, so that you could establish existing rates of change in relationship to each other, and for lack of that mathematics, nobody has been able to understand present time -- you just can't sum it up easily -- or let us say, for lack of an understanding of what present time was, nobody could formulate that mathematics. So, actually there's a big hole there that could be filled -- a thing called calculus is trying to fill that hole, right now, and it can't.
But the rates of change -- it comes closest to it. I think it was one of Newton's practical jokes. Here we have Calculus, and it's trying to measure a rate of change. Well, if we had something that was really workable and simple, it would be formed on this basis. The present time, and gradients of time were gradients of havingness, and as one havingness changed, you could establish a constancy of change for other related havingnesses. But because the basic unit of the universe is two, you would have to have a rate of change known and measured for every rate of change then estimated. The mathematics won't operate in this universe unless it has simultaneous equations. If you have two variables, you must have two equations with which to solve those two variables. In other words you have to compare one to the other simultaneously. Otherwise you just get another variable. Of course, people laughingly do this. They take an equation with two variables, and then they solve it. And then you say "What have you got?" And the fellow says "K". And you say now just a minute -- you got "K", huh? Well, what is "K"? Well "K", we have established arbitrarily as being -- well, say, why did you work the equation out in the first place? You had "K", didn't you?""
That is beautiful.
Now this is a conspiracy I can get behind. If aliens are involved, I'll lead this movement.
All of your Earthian maths are a hoax. If you could remove those Thetans that are clouding your vision, you would agree.
I would like to personally invite all of you to drop by one of my many nationwide centers to learn more about the wonders of Scientology and also to take a fun and enlightening personality test.
I would like to personally invite all of you to drop by one of my many nationwide centers to learn more about the wonders of Scientology and also to take a fun and enlightening personality test.
QUOTE (L. Ron Hubbard @ Tuesday, August 1st, 2006, 8:47 PM)
All of your Earthian maths are a hoax. If you could remove those Thetans that are clouding your vision, you would agree.
I would like to personally invite all of you to drop by one of my many nationwide centers to learn more about the wonders of Scientology and also to take a fun and enlightening personality test.
I would like to personally invite all of you to drop by one of my many nationwide centers to learn more about the wonders of Scientology and also to take a fun and enlightening personality test.
Guess who's back....
QUOTE (Golden @ Tuesday, August 1st, 2006, 5:48 PM)
Guess who's back....
Shady?
Should I tell a friend?
QUOTE (lvpro @ Tuesday, August 1st, 2006, 9:15 PM)
Shady?
Should I tell a friend?
Should I tell a friend?
Absolutely - HUbbard's back....back again
QUOTE (mrdannyg @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 4:56 PM)
FYP, but same idea.
6th year engineering student? Maybe he should've been using calculus a bit more often.
6th year engineering student? Maybe he should've been using calculus a bit more often.
well, except he's not a student.
calculus is only one of the most widely used math 'disciplines' around.
it's been used and proven over and over again..
it's been used and proven over and over again..
QUOTE (All_In @ Wednesday, August 2nd, 2006, 9:17 AM)
calculus is only one of the most widely used math 'disciplines' around.
it's been used and proven over and over again..
it's been used and proven over and over again..
oh.
LOL funny bump.
QUOTE (BigDMcGee @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 7:39 PM)
This is seriously the most nerdtastic thread in the history of this forum, and it's like 4 posts long. Good work.
That sigline is NEStastic.
Once upon a time, I took a stained glass course and was absolutely determined to make a stained glass image of Ryu from Street Fighter II throwing a hadouken at Jesus. After trying and trying and trying and constantly screwing it up, I soon realized that I had neither the talent nor inclination to actually achieve what I wanted, but I always said that if I ever got sick rich and could pay someone to make that very stained glass window, I totally would.
QUOTE (Elias @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 11:03 PM)
ooh, sick burn.
lol I thought this was a real poster for so long until I saw the movie last weekend.
QUOTE (Golden @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 11:09 PM)
An excellent gimmick choice..... but it doesn't have staying power
Golden made a nice call here.
QUOTE (AmScray @ Monday, April 21st, 2008, 2:17 PM)
That sigline is NEStastic.
Once upon a time, I took a stained glass course and was absolutely determined to make a stained glass image of Ryu from Street Fighter II throwing a hadouken at Jesus. After trying and trying and trying and constantly screwing it up, I soon realized that I had neither the talent nor inclination to actually achieve what I wanted, but I always said that if I ever got sick rich and could pay someone to make that very stained glass window, I totally would.
Once upon a time, I took a stained glass course and was absolutely determined to make a stained glass image of Ryu from Street Fighter II throwing a hadouken at Jesus. After trying and trying and trying and constantly screwing it up, I soon realized that I had neither the talent nor inclination to actually achieve what I wanted, but I always said that if I ever got sick rich and could pay someone to make that very stained glass window, I totally would.
I hope I'm not the only one that doesn't love this pig latin version of Scram. I think it's hilarious.
QUOTE (LongLiveYorke @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 11:22 PM)
Euclidean space is for suckers.
The SIN function is just an outgrowth of the liberal media.
The SIN function is just an outgrowth of the liberal media.
I
math nerdsQUOTE (Rmunro @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 7:39 PM)
This is my favourite part. The stance of an entire religion is based on one random engineering student that L. Ron Hubbard knew.
I heard Tom Cruise agrees, so it's all good
QUOTE (All_In @ Wednesday, August 2nd, 2006, 9:17 AM)
calculus is only one of the most widely used math 'disciplines' around.
it's been used and proven over and over again..
it's been used and proven over and over again..
One of these things is not like the others, one of these things just doesn't belong
QUOTE (fckthis @ Monday, July 31st, 2006, 12:12 PM)
This is the new POTY. Easily the funniest thing Ive heard Dutch say.
For what it's worth, two year later, I don't find that comment funny like at all.
QUOTE (RodReynolds @ Sunday, July 30th, 2006, 10:18 PM)
It has always seemed a bit too convenient, you know? I mean, sin^2(x) + cos^2(x) = 1 always, for any x?? Wtf?
exactly what i was thinking.
yes
Where Wilma had had had Wilson had had had had had had had had his teacher's approval.
I may know the Krebs Cycle, but I'm not smart enough to understand the above joke/reference.
QUOTE (speedz99 @ Monday, July 6th, 2009, 11:05 PM)
I may know the Krebs Cycle, but I'm not smart enough to understand the above joke/reference.
Where Wilma had had "had," Wilson had had "had had." "Had had" had had his teacher's approval.
I was given the above sentence, without punctuation, as a question on a middle school exam and we were asked to supply punctuation so it was grammatically correct.
Thank you, my upbringing.
Guys you're ruining my thread
QUOTE (RodReynolds @ Monday, July 6th, 2009, 11:14 PM)
Guys you're ruining my thread
I know! really guys! its not even 4 years old yet!!!!
wtf!
QUOTE (RodReynolds @ Monday, July 6th, 2009, 10:14 PM)
Guys you're ruining my thread
Sonofabitch I love you. Seriously.
I applied trig in my life as a grade checker for heavy equipment for 4 years.
It really is beautiful..math that works I mean...
I got a D in trig too.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.