Chronohistorian's Thread #1

[chronohistorian]

trollface-dont know. you should have known I would say that because I aren't any good at science.


Yes I remember the things about the lunarium now. I was using it as an example.


I answered your question on how global warming causes an ice age but you just don't understand. I have no idea of how to explain it in any other way.


The printing of the money was for both of them reasons because they never payed the reparations so the french invaded the ruhr so they printed more money.


1. shut up. the last time I learned about other subjects was over 12 years ago and I never thought I would need them again.


2. don't know. I am not a scientist or engineer but just think of a hoover.

3. they are xrays but they are just a bit different because instead of bouncing back at the first hard thing they hit some people can control how far the xrays go.


4. sorry you said something that looked like it was saying I was wrong. I couldn't think of the question so I thought I would be correct.


5. no as I can't think of an explanation


6. I was in a hurry. I could have done better if I wanted to.

7. I haven't

8. yes we are more intelligent

9. no. if you don't understand then what is the point?


10. I don't think I have contradicted myself.

11. I was confused.

 

[trollface]

dont know. you should have known I would say that because I aren't any good at science.

Which once more begs the question of why you keep talking about it. And, of course that of what you are good at.

Yes I remember the things about the lunarium now. I was using it as an example.

An example of how you extend the halflife of Lunarium. And now you claim that it doesn't have one. So, again, which of the two contradictory things that you've said am I supposed to believe is true?

I answered your question on how global warming causes an ice age but you just don't understand. I have no idea of how to explain it in any other way.

No, you haven't answered the question. I understand what you're saying, but you're simply not answering the question. I am asking for the mechanism by which this happens. I even gave you an example of the kind of thing I was looking for. Tell you what, find yourself an online encyclopedea, and think really hard (you know, until it hurts), and try again.

The printing of the money was for both of them reasons because they never payed the reparations so the french invaded the ruhr so they printed more money.

"Both of them reasons"? There are 3 reasons there, all three of which are mutually exclusive. It can only be one of the three. Pick one, explain it, and then explain why you've claimed the other two to be true, when they're not.

1. shut up. the last time I learned about other subjects was over 12 years ago and I never thought I would need them again.

Don't tell me to shut up. Is this more of your academic style? Do you often resort to ad hominem attacks, rather than addressing the issues at hand? Is this the wave of the future? Rather than people who can debate the merits of the issues at hand, the future of great learning is a bunch of inarticulate, immature louts shouting at each other? Pardon me if I prefer where we are now.

As for learning about other subjects 12 years ago, you claim that you're an academic with a speciality in 20thC history. So, how do you explain the fact that you've very bad at this, too?

2. don't know. I am not a scientist or engineer but just think of a hoover.

Yes, an x-ray hoover. Right...

Can you not even be bothered to try to make excuses any more? Exactly what are you getting out of your posting here? Do you get masochistic pleasure from being so thoroughly shown up and humiliated?

3. they are xrays but they are just a bit different because instead of bouncing back at the first hard thing they hit some people can control how far the xrays go.

Are they or are they not x-rays? Are they part of the electromagnetic spectrum? If not, what are they, and in what sense are they x-rays?

4. sorry you said something that looked like it was saying I was wrong. I couldn't think of the question so I thought I would be correct.

You are wrong. About pretty much everything so far.

5. no as I can't think of an explanation

So, again, you've been trying to bluff in an area where you don't know anything about the subject at hand?

6. I was in a hurry. I could have done better if I wanted to.

And you've been in a hurry in every post since? I mean, you're still getting facts wrong at this stage, and making obvious fluffs.

7. I haven't

Why do you say stupid things like this? I've explicitly layed out the things that you've said. They're there from when you originally said them for all to see, too. You wouldn't fool a 3 year old. I mean, exactly how stupid do you think I am? Even if I was very stupid, I can still read, for crying out loud.

8. yes we are more intelligent

You just know a lot less about everything, dont have as communication skills that are as effective (either in terms of understanding what's said to you or in terms of expressing yourself clearly), and are less able to understand simple concepts? Or are you in disguise? Because if you are, then it's a very good one.

9. no. if you don't understand then what is the point?

I understand fine. I'll say it again, you're not getting out of it this easily, you're the one that has made the stupid assertations, now you have to back them up. You can't just pretend that you haven't said the stupid things that you have. Now answer the questions.

By now you should have realised that I'm more than prepared to be ultra-dogmatic about this.

10. I don't think I have contradicted myself.

A child could see that you have. If you can't see it, then what does that say about you?

You have, and now you need to explain yourself.

11. I was confused.

Call Cilla, because that's a surprise.

If you're so much smarter than me and you're so much better at understanding things than I am, how come you get so easily confused over simple concepts, when I don't?

 

[chronohistorian]

I am good at history.

lunarium isn't radioactive,


give me the three reason about the ruhr which I said.


1. I aren't bad at history and if I am the history that is in history books must be wrong.


2. so I am getting humiliated because I don't know much about science?

3. The machine was built partly like an xray machine.

4. not wrong about everything

5. I don't bluff

6. I am not getting historical facts wrong

7. whatever you say

8. I only know a lot less science.

9. no

10. I explained myself good enough

11. you don't speak like people in the future do.

 

[Rho]

are you still talking?

 

[trollface]

I am good at history.

Keep telling yourself that.

lunarium isn't radioactive,

Okay, so once again the question is why did you say that it was? And how could it not be with such a high atomic number?

give me the three reason about the ruhr which I said.

What, you're incapable of scrolling up a whole two posts to see for yourself?

Very well, if you can't figure out how to do that, here:

Was it for some unspecified reason and that caused them not to be able to pay the repairations? Was it to try to pay the repairations? Or was it, as you've now said, because of the occupation?

You've now given three different versions of what happened with regards to that particular incident. Which is the correct one? And why did you say the other two?

Lordy! And you say that speaking to me is like addressing a child.

1. I aren't bad at history and if I am the history that is in history books must be wrong.

The problem is that you're not only contradicted by the actual history that happened, but also by yourself. If you "aren't" bad at history, then why can't you keep even simple facts straight? Why couldn't you answer my easy questions from when I first started posting?

2. so I am getting humiliated because I don't know much about science?

Actually, you're pretty much getting humiliated because you continue to post. Contrary to what you claim, you don't seem to know much about anything. you know, declaring that you're intelligent and knowledgeable doesn't work. You have to show yourself to be intelligent and knowledgeable, both of which you've managed to show the opposite of time and time again. And yet you keep coming back begging for more.

3. The machine was built partly like an xray machine.

Are they or are they not x-rays? Are they part of the electromagnetic spectrum? If not, what are they, and in what sense are they x-rays?

4. not wrong about everything

Even that sentence is wrong. You missed the capital letter and/or the words "I am" from the beginning. But, you're right, I didn't say that you were wrong about everything. I said you were wrong about "pretty much" everything. I have to give you the fact that you had a lucky guess with saying that there was a Gulf dialect in Arabic.

5. I don't bluff

So, of course not. What was I thinking?

6. I am not getting historical facts wrong

You have done, repeatedly. You even consented that as much was possible at the beginning of your latest post. Again, you can't even keep what you're saying consistant within the same post.

7. whatever you say

That's the attitude. It's a start. Now all you need to do is come clean about not really being a time traveller or a historian and apologise to everybody, and we'll be getting somewhere.

8. I only know a lot less science.

If this is what you truely believe, then I actually feel sorry for you.

9. no

Look, mate, you're the one making the stupid and outlandish claims. You're the one that wants us to believe you. You're the one that wants us to believe you. Now if you're not even going to continue to play the silly little game that you've set up for yourself, then I ask again why you're continuing to post. If you're not going to bother any more, then you might as well call it quits and 'fess up. I mean, if even you can't be bothered to continue with this fantasy, then why should anyone else? From what I've been able to see, you've not been banned so far because people are finding you entertaining in a "point and laugh" kind of way. If you're not even going to do that any more, then why shouldn't you just be banned?

So, just answer the questions, eh?

10. I explained myself good enough

That's not how it works. If you're talking to me (which you are), then I am the judge of whether you've explained yourself adequately or not. You haven't. Now do so.

11. you don't speak like people in the future do.

You've already said that the language hasn't evolved. You've argued very emphatically about it, in fact. If you're now saying this, then you're contradicting yourself yet again. I'm losing count, is that 4 or 5 things that you've now said completely opposing things are true about?

 

[chronohistorian]

I don't know anything about science and you were confusing me and I don't think I said that it was radioactive.
The atomic number thing- when there is a rule there is always an exception to the rule and lunarium is an exception.


please show what my three reason are because I can't understand what you are asking me about the ruhr.



1. I answered them correctly and if I got them wrong then the teachers were teaching me wrong or the history books were wrong.


2. I am intelligent and if I aren't then the information that I learned is wrong.


3. don't know the answer to the first two questions. I have told you how they are xrays.

4. I don't have to have "I am" in the sentence because you know what I mean and I don't say the words "I am" all the time.

5. don't know what you were thinking. maybe you are tired?

6. If I am getting them wrong then the history that I learned is wrong so don't blame me.

7. I am a time travelling historian

8. thats nice.

9. I don't know how to explain it to you so I aren't answering.

10. whatever you say

11. it hasn't changed but the people in my time talk more clear

 

[trollface]

[...]when there is a rule there is always an exception to the rule[...]

Not true. It's a trite thing that people say, but it's simply not true.

please show what my three reason are because I can't understand what you are asking me about the ruhr.

I posted them again in the last post, for crying out loud. What's wrong with you?

Okay, you said, initially, that Germany already had the hyperinflation. It was this hyperinflation that made them unable to pay the repairations, and that is why the Ruhr region (I've already told you that the Ruhr is the river. You keep using the incorrect terminology. A real academic would be mortified that he'd got even that wrong. I once got a hearty congratualtions from a media academic when I pointed out to him that in a 50-odd page article he had mis-splled the name "Voorhees" once. You don't seem to care whether you get even the big things right, let alone the details) was occupied. That's number one.

You've also said that Germany started printing the money to pay the repairations, and so the repairations themselves were the cause of the hyperinflation. This is a very different thing to say.

And, finally, you've said what is actually the correct version of events, that the occupation itself was the cause of the hyperinflation. True, you said it after much prompting and after I'd provided you with links and the like, but you've said that, too. Which is, again, very different.

Now, which do you believe to be true? One, two or three? And why did you say the other two? "I was tired" doesn't cut it, either, you've been going back and forth and generally faffing around on this issue for a couple of weeks now.

1. I answered them correctly and if I got them wrong then the teachers were teaching me wrong or the history books were wrong.

You didn't answer a single one of them correctly. Not even close.

And isn't this supposed to be your field of expertise? This is the area where you're supposed to shine. "Well, my teachers got it wrong" is a schoolboy excuse. I don't know if you've been paying attention to your own fantasy, but you're supposed to be a historian with a speciality in 20thC history. You should be able to point out to them where they have got their facts wrong. You shouldn't be making mistakes that a secondary teacher wouldn't make, and them blaming it on the teachers. You are supposed to know more than them. You're not supposed to base all your knnowledge on what you learned in high school.

2. I am intelligent and if I aren't then the information that I learned is wrong.

Intelligence and knowledge are two completely different things. It's not what you know, it's what you say, and you ain't got much that's sensical to say.

3. don't know the answer to the first two questions. I have told you how they are xrays.

No you haven't. You've said that they're like x-rays only different, and that they're not x-rays really. So why are they called x-rays? What is it about them that qualifies them to be called x-rays?

4. I don't have to have "I am" in the sentence because you know what I mean and I don't say the words "I am" all the time.

You don't have to, but it is correct to do so. Again, we're down to the issue of effective communication. A teenager from England I can see typing the sentence you did. An academic? Nope.

5. don't know what you were thinking. maybe you are tired?

Like it.

6. If I am getting them wrong then the history that I learned is wrong so don't blame me.

See question one.

7. I am a time travelling historian

No, you're not.

8. thats nice.

Ha! Again, I like it. For the first time, I can maybe sense that you're more playing a role and having fun, rather than really being as dense as you make out. That, and since it's been pointed out to you, you seem to have an almost pathological need to use the word "aren't" wrong. In fact, I'd say you were overdoing it now.

Do you read Terry Pratchett, perchance? That's a Nanny Ogg reply, right there, if ever I saw one.

If you're going to continue with this charade, let's have more of this kind of thing, please.

9. I don't know how to explain it to you so I aren't answering.

All you have to do is answer the questions that I've aked you. And I do mean answer the actual questions that I have actually asked you, rather than your usual guff.

10. whatever you say

Well, then do so.

11. it hasn't changed but the people in my time talk more clear

"More clear" like you? The word is "clearly", and you could hardly be accused of talking clearly. And still, I can understand a lot more of what you say than you seem to be able to understand of what I say. Odd that, isn't it?

 

[chronohistorian]

ok. lets see the prime numbers. every prime number is odd. 2 is an exception to that rule.


I know that the ruhr is a river.


number 3 is right. I did get the others right but I never put enough detail in.


1. if I am not supposed to base my knowledge on what I learned at school then what am I supposed to base it on?


2. it might make no sense to you but it does to the people in my time


3. the xrays bounce off the brain or skull which qualifies them as xrays


4. people do this in the future a lot.


5. what?

6. see answer to question one

7. yes I am. If my predictions come true will you believe me then?

8. never read any Terry Pratchett books but I have heard of him.
please give me some of the names of the books incase I have read them


9. I did answer the question.

10. whatever you say

11. maybe.

 

[trollface]

ok. lets see the prime numbers. every prime number is odd. 2 is an exception to that rule.

What's that supposed to prove? One rule has one exception to it. That does not mean that every rule has an exception.

I know that the ruhr is a river.

So why do you keep refering to the region through which it runs by that name?

number 3 is right. I did get the others right but I never put enough detail in.

Uh, you didn't get the other right. It's easy to tell that, because they contradict each other.

1. if I am not supposed to base my knowledge on what I learned at school then what am I supposed to base it on?

Further knowledge? Research? Outside sources?

No historian should be making schoolboy mistakes.

2. it might make no sense to you but it does to the people in my time

So, to the people of your time, spending half your time saying things like "I'm confused" is a sensical debate is it? Question Time must be a blast.

Oh, while we're talking about TV, if you didn't watch the Eurovision song contest on BBC 1 last night, then you missed out on what is possibly the cultural highlight of the European year. Well, second to the football, anyway.

And I really mean that, even if it's dreadful.

3. the xrays bounce off the brain or skull which qualifies them as xrays

That's how the term "x-ray" is determined in your day? If something bounces off bone or brain matter? So, say, a beer can or a brick would be called an "x-ray"? Was that your nickname at school, by any chance?

4. people do this in the future a lot.

That would be an evolution in the language, would it not? Yet again, this is something that you've argued vehemently against.

5. what?

It was a good answer. Showed signs of genuine wit. for the first time I got the impression that I might be laughing with you, rather than at you.

6. see answer to question one

Second verse, same as the first.

7. yes I am. If my predictions come true will you believe me then?

No you're not. And your predictions aren't going to come true. You can't even accurately represent the past, let alone the future.

8. never read any Terry Pratchett books but I have heard of him.
please give me some of the names of the books incase I have read them

http://www.terrypratchettbooks.com/

Everything you needed to know.

9. I did answer the question.

Don't start that again. There are many questions, none of which you've answered.

10. whatever you say

You keep saying you'll do whatever I say, but you've not actually done it yet. Quit flapping and start yapping.

11. maybe.

Yeah, you're right, it's not odd, really. It would only be odd if you were what and who you claim to be.

 

[creedo299]

Please note the conversation between Rock Hudson and one of the out of frequency Martians, in Ray Bradbury's, the Martian Chronicles, the meeting in the square, as shown in the movie between Hudson and Martian.

They came from different eras, so their social landmarks are totally different.

Trollface is an avowed caustic, and he admits this.

Of all the meetings in history, this has to be one of the funniest, as each other has no idea what the other is talking about, and yet they argue.

This is like or similar to a football expert, arguing scoring in the sport of hockey and each is trying to define what they are saying by their own particular sport.

I think if other time travelers should visit this board, they will kind-of grin; however after while shake their heads, as this conversation between these two, makes no sense what-so-ever?

 

[RainmanTime]

This is like or similar to a football expert, arguing scoring in the sport of hockey and each is trying to define what they are saying by their own particular sport.

Oh Creedo. Ye of so little distinction...

The only difference is that trollface knows his sports, and he calls chrono whenever he wants to change from one sport to another. So far, Chrono don't know squat about football OR hockey. All the more reason to think Chrono is not even a sport enthusiast, much less a practitioner of any sport!

as this conversation between these two, makes no sense what-so-ever?

Makes sense to me, Creedo. Do you think clarity, logic, and reason have any place in our society?

RainmanTime

 

[creedo299]

Neither one of them knows or understands what the other is talking about Ray?

I think that this is the biggest comedy that we have ever had at Time Travel Institute.

 

[chronohistorian]

ok most rules have an exception.


I refer to the ruhr as a place which it technically is.


1. I did get further knowledge at school and I researched and I did take it from other sources.


2. I never watched it but people in my time already have it taped.


3. how would you describe an xray then?


4. the language hasn't changed much.


5. whatever you say.

6. see first answer

7. you have not answered my question. if my predictions do come true will you believe me then. I just want a simple yes or no for this.


8. I looked and I never read any.


9. I answered it.


10. Thats an answer and I am not saying that I will do whatever you say.

 

[trollface]

ok most rules have an exception.

No they don't. Name 3.

I refer to the ruhr as a place which it technically is.

Yes, the problem is, though, the you refer to the region around the Ruhr as "the Ruhr" which, technically or not, it isn't. Any historian would be concerned about getting that right.

1. I did get further knowledge at school and I researched and I did take it from other sources.

And they all told you lies? And, if what you're saying here is true, then why did you blame your school? Why not blame your entire education?

2. I never watched it but people in my time already have it taped.

Do you think they could send me a copy of 2 or 3 years ago? I wish I'd taped that, as the interval music was wicked.

3. how would you describe an xray then?

I'd call it part of the electromagnetic spectrum with a low wavelength and high energy.

4. the language hasn't changed much.

When I said that just one word had changed, you practically wet yourself. Why have you now changed your mind?

5. whatever you say.

You'd better believe it.

6. see first answer

Isn't this fun?

7. you have not answered my question. if my predictions do come true will you believe me then. I just want a simple yes or no for this.

The question is moot, as your predictions are not going to come true.

9. I answered it.

Well, then, it's your turn to go and do some research, isn't it? Go find me where you've answered it, and I want the page number.

10. Thats an answer and I am not saying that I will do whatever you say.

Yes you did. I asked you to do something, and you said "whatever you say". So, go do.

 

[Rhudey]

ok. lets see the prime numbers. every prime number is odd. 2 is an exception to that rule.

No. Prime numbers are only divisible by one or themselves, that is the rule, there are no exceptions. That could be one of the worst examples you could have used. I realize that you probably have not reached prime numbers yet in your education.

 

[keeb333]

Every prime number but 2 IS odd. Not every odd number is prime, though.

 

[Rhudey]

Every prime number but 2 IS odd. Not every odd number is prime, though.

I realize that, but that is not what makes a number a "prime number". Therefore it is not a "rule" that "prime numbers are all odd but 2 is an exception". This is an observation, not a rule.

 

[Grinder]

Hey Chrono, here is my question. Do you still have sports in your time? if so, what kind?
Also I'm not sure I Believe you. You could convince me by telling me.....Who wins the SuperBowl in the year 2005? You get it right I believe you, its that simple.

 

[chronohistorian]

trollface-ok. I can't think of any right now but the exceptions to the rules are normally in maths and science.



1. I cannot tell you why because it is classified


2. I don't think so


3. ok

4. I have always said the language hasn't changed much. I have never said it has not changed at all.

5.ok

6.yes

7. that is not a yes or no answer. I will not answer anymore of your questions until you answer mine. are you scared they will come true or something?

9. I don't know how to answer it in a way you will understand


10. I was being sarcastic



Grinder-like I have already said I did no take sports or music history.
we still have sports in my time though

 

[trollface]

I can't think of any right now but the exceptions to the rules are normally in maths and science.

No they're not. Maybe you're thinking of linguistics?

1. I cannot tell you why because it is classified

You can't tell me why you feebly blamed your school for your failure because it's classified? You're entering a whole new realm of stupid lies, here.

2. I don't think so

Shame. Maybe I'll go back and tape it one day, if I ever become a time-traveller.

4. I have always said the language hasn't changed much. I have never said it has not changed at all.

Oh but you did. Remember how you were throwing a hissy fit because I'd dared to suggest that there being a new definition of the word "lightspeed" indicated that the language had changed?

I mean, you have said that it had changed a little bit, too, but you've contradicted yourself and said the other, too. True to form.

7. that is not a yes or no answer. I will not answer anymore of your questions until you answer mine. are you scared they will come true or something?

Really? If I don't give you a yes or no answer, you'll just go away? You promise?

Okay: Chronohistorian, your predictions will not come true because you are a liar who is only pretending to come from the future and to be a historian, and you are playing this role very badly and unconvincingly. How's that? Bye.