Guest
On Saturday, May 4, 2019 at 1:38:20 AM UTC+10, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
<snip>
If the second hand isn't moving, it's clearly not right, even if the time represented happens to match what a working clock would display.
The math is trivial (but you still managed to truncate your number prematurely).
The errors are all yours, and the biggest error is that you don't realise that you've missed the point.
But if the second hand isn't moving, nobody is going to be fooled into thinking that clock is sayign anything useful. Probably not even you.
It's true - up to a point. You are too dumb to sort out the point being made from the mechanics of the clock-face.
Which was that nobody is "always wrong". Some people are frequently wrong, but you can't rely on them getting everything wrong. You do come closer than most.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, May 3, 2019 at 11:08:19 AM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, May 3, 2019 at 10:26:46 PM UTC+10, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 10:57:28 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
On Friday, May 3, 2019 at 12:31:48 PM UTC+10, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
On Thursday, May 2, 2019 at 8:55:09 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
trader4@optonline.net wrote in news:56341c1c-429d-4a68-8a90-
70894c04ce1b@googlegroups.com:
<snip>
That;s another lie, why do you libs lie so much? It's absolutely true
that a stopped clock with a second hand is right twice a day.
If the second hand isn't moving, it's clearly not right, even if the time represented happens to match what a working clock would display.
And the
99.99% wrong flows directly from that. It's correct two seconds in a day!
Notably absent is your math, because, well you know you're wrong and lying.
The math is trivial (but you still managed to truncate your number prematurely).
The errors are all yours, and the biggest error is that you don't realise that you've missed the point.
He even got his dick wrapped around the axle by trying to use 1440 minutes in > a day, instead of SECONDS!
If a clock has a second hand, you can see it moving, so the idea doesn't work.
Totally irrelevant of course. The indicated time is correct, to the second,
twice a day.
But if the second hand isn't moving, nobody is going to be fooled into thinking that clock is sayign anything useful. Probably not even you.
Why do libs lie so much? Geez, it's a common expression,
even a stopped clock is correct twice a day! And it's true. Only morons
and screwy libs would argue otherwise.
It's true - up to a point. You are too dumb to sort out the point being made from the mechanics of the clock-face.
Which was that nobody is "always wrong". Some people are frequently wrong, but you can't rely on them getting everything wrong. You do come closer than most.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney