hey, I'm new too - God, I hope no one flames me

[NAHTMMM]

[color=#000000ost_uid0][quoteost_uid0="NAHTMMM"][quoteost_uid0="Zeke"](And relevance isn't irrelevant; that's a common misconception. [iost_uid0]Logic[/iost_uid0] is irrelevant. Relevance is futile, and futility is illogical. Inanity, by contrast, is just inane.)[/quoteost_uid0]
Your inane attempt to confuse me with irrelevant statements is futile.[/quoteost_uid0]
[quoteost_uid0="Zeke"]No, it's illogical. Have you learned nothing?[/quoteost_uid0]

By your own suddenly-momentarily-relevant statement, futility is illogical. Therefore, using the irrelevance that is logic, by saying that your statements are futile, I also said that they are illogical. Therefore, your latest quoted post was extraneous and too-much-overly redundant. Furthermore, it was unnecessary and repetitive.

This concludes this irrelevant post. Unless I find a handy evil-grin smiley to add.[/colorost_uid0]

[Nan]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]I find we're conspicuously lacking in evil emoticons. What's that about?







Nan[/colorost_uid0]

[Captain Galactic]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Why don't we have evil emoticons? Because we are all law-abiding, good little boys and girls who eat cherry pie. Evil is bad. Barney told us this. All hail Barney! Sing along!

[iost_uid0]Barney is a dinosaur...[/iost_uid0][/colorost_uid0]

[Sa'ar Chasm]

[color=#000000ost_uid0][quoteost_uid0]. Evil is bad. Barney told us this. [/quoteost_uid0]

But Barney is Evil, which means Barney is Bad, which means we should ignore what he says, but then that means that Evil isn't Bad, so we shouldn't ignore Barney, but...

*Sa'ar's head explodes*[/colorost_uid0]

[PointyHairedJedi]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Maye we should just have little Barney emoticons to denote evil. That'd certainly make me happy.[/colorost_uid0]

[Saxamaphone]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Yup, Barney is evil - and if anyone is going to dispute this - I have proof:

[quoteost_uid0]Given: Barney is a cute purple dinosaur
Prove: Barney is Satan

Step 1: The Romans had no letter "U" so they used "V'' instead for printing.

Therefore, the Roman representation for Barney would be CVTE PVRPLE DINOSAVR

Step 2: Taking CVTE PVRPLE DINOSAVR, and extracting the Roman neumerals, we have:

C V V L D I V

Step 3: The decimal equivalent of these Roman neumerals would be:

100 5 5 50 500 1 5

Step 4: Adding these numbers together would produce:

666

Step 5: 666 is the number of the beast

Therefore: Barney is Satan Q.E.D. [/quoteost_uid0]

This can be found on a number of websites - so feel free to cross reference [/colorost_uid0]

[Sa'ar Chasm]

[color=#000000ost_uid0][quoteost_uid0]Sax's 'Proof'[/quoteost_uid0]

And women are the root of all evil.

Women = time * money
But money = time, so
Women = money^2

But money is the root of all evil,
money = (evil)^1/2
money^2 = evil,
:. Women = Evil.

My female friends love this.[/colorost_uid0]

[Things Are Good]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]I had not seen sax's proof before, so I laughed.[/colorost_uid0]

[MmeBlueberry]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Sa'ar, gotta ask how you got the first equation there. I'd accept women = time + money without much of a problem, but time * money? Doesn't make sense to me.[/colorost_uid0]

[Zeke]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Treating women right takes time and money. Mathematically, the "and" operation often translates to multiplication rather than addition.

On the other hand, you get a similar proof using your version:
women = time + money
women = time + (time)
women = 2 time
In other words, women are two-timers. I'd say that counts as evil. [/colorost_uid0]

[Celeste]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]:suspicious: are not.[/colorost_uid0]

[MmeBlueberry]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Hmm...I always thought "and" was addition while "of" was multiplication. Oh well, I was only a math major for one semester.

Trying to get my thoughts together for refuting your proof. Basically, in your scenario, spending twice as much time (without money) is equal to spending time and money. Most women would probably want the money part and wouldn't accept the time = money substitution. Therefore, they would leave. Thus you're left with 2 time = 0.

It needs work, I know.[/colorost_uid0]

[Anonymous]

[color=#000000ost_uid0][quoteost_uid0="MmeBlueberry"]...Most women would probably want the money part and wouldn't accept the time = money substitution. Therefore, they would leave. Thus you're left with 2 time = 0.[/quoteost_uid0]
That proves the "can't live with them" part, since women never stick around for any duration of time, and therefore you cannot do anything with them that requires duration (which rules out almost all action verbs, including "to live"). :smile: Now let's prove the "can't live without them" part if we can...[/colorost_uid0]

[NAHTMMM]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Well, all I can come up with to prove the second part is that you can't be born without a woman being involved. Lame, but that's all I can think of. [imgost_uid0]http://3sygma.com/fiveminute/forums/html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif[/imgost_uid0][/colorost_uid0]

[PointyHairedJedi]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]There's also of course the good ole' baby making machine...

Not that you sickos! I was referring to Huxley's [iost_uid0]Brave New World[/iost_uid0] of course.[/colorost_uid0]

[SimonBob]

[color=#000000ost_uid0]Zeke, my friend, I haven't learned a [iost_uid0]thing.[/iost_uid0][/colorost_uid0]