Quote# 1738

How easily you display your belief in IMAGINARY numbers, but yet pretend that a VERY REAL God is mythology.

Nutrider99, Free Conservatives 34 Comments [7/31/2005 12:00:00 AM]
Fundie Index: 9

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 | bottom


...This is so stupid it warrants comment, yet it's so stupid that I can't think of anything to say.

8/2/2005 12:35:18 AM


Oh, this guy again. Wasn't he the nutjob who thought sqrt(-1)=1?

8/2/2005 9:31:37 PM


The only imaginary 'Numbers' is the bible book of the same name.

12/15/2006 11:29:18 AM


Someone needs to take a math class.

2/3/2007 4:53:30 PM


Actually, Crosis, sqrt (anything) = God did it.

6/12/2007 9:14:36 PM


WTF? Are there two Crosises or does the one Crosis have MPD or something? *confused*

Oh right, the comment. Nutrider99 (what kind of name is that anyway) is either 13 and hasn't learned this kind of math or is older and declined the opportunity to do so.

6/12/2007 11:23:34 PM


Yes Nutrider99, God is very real, now go to sleep or Santa Claus won't come. You remember what happened when you tried to stay up and meet the Tooth Fairy don't you?

6/13/2007 1:44:31 AM


yes, we have a new cult, mathsology

6/13/2007 3:24:38 AM


i can just feel my intellegence being pulled towards the black hole that exists between this fucktards ears.
Question: What number isn't imaginary? they exist a priori. you can experince a number! retard.

6/13/2007 4:33:36 AM

Zero, the atheist number?

6/26/2007 5:15:55 PM


Arrr...we be Matheists.

6/26/2007 5:24:17 PM

Professor M

It sounds like Nutrider is a product of the A Beka math homeschool curriculum.

(Actually, I'm not sure about A Beka's policy on imaginary numbers; but given their doctrinal opposition to set theory? Yeah. That there's some grade-A batshit.)

6/26/2007 8:09:20 PM

Jack Bauer


6/27/2007 10:03:45 AM

Jack Bauer

Would Nutrider care to compare and contrast the Laplace Transformnation and the Fourrier Transform, paying particular attention as to the areas of validity of each?

How about a comment on tensors?

Let's be Boolean for a moment - I expect he believes that the empty set, Ø, is not actually empty but has god living in it...

6/27/2007 10:12:03 AM


...Okay, nutrider? Please change your name. It conjures up many hours of unpleasantness.

6/27/2007 11:34:07 AM


Technically an imaginary number still belongs to the set of reals.

6/5/2008 5:34:09 PM


He probably did not go to high school.

2/1/2009 5:54:01 AM



2/1/2009 6:05:49 AM


@Qubit: Uh, no it doesn't. Imaginary means non-real. They are a subset of complex numbers, quaternions, octonions and sedenions, though.

2/24/2009 10:45:52 PM


Numbers are representive of reality (it's not just the number six, it's six apples or whatever)

God is representive of ancient people without the sciences in place to recognize reality ( plus a lot of control the masses and women tossed in)

2/25/2009 1:02:22 PM


The square root of (-1) is refered to as imaginary, but is in fact a VECTOR quantity - a mathematical tool.
A god is as real as you wish to make it - they're ALL man-made anyway.

2/25/2009 1:07:04 PM


Nutrider99 = sqrt(_._)

2/25/2009 9:34:02 PM


eat a bag of dicks....that is all/

2/25/2009 9:56:45 PM

7/1/2009 12:41:34 AM


Lol. Numbers are tools. God is a tool. They are both product of imagination. The only difference is that numbers are much more usefull.

7/1/2009 1:23:16 AM

1 2 | top: comments page