-1
Questionable -1 points ago +2 / -3

Thing about Monday is. Today is Sunday.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1fwyi8e/pay_close_attention_to_what_happens_to_her_next/

"This user has no posts."

And for some reason started posted minutes apart from u/TallestSkil in a thread that has been idle for 9 hours. A person who also has no posts. This is getting pretty fucking retarded you guys.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, everyone is just clambering for Milk and Pepsi, now that all 13 of you have seen this. Just after I bought stock in Pepsi and big utter. I can't believe you've unveiled my master plan.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

Another thread successfully derailed! Congratulations deep state operative! No, I don't care what coloured hat you wear, as your brains are made of feces, brimming with e-coli.

2
Questionable 2 points ago +2 / -0

You seems knowledgeable on this topic. Can you elaborate further?

3
Questionable 3 points ago +4 / -1

And the streaking effect from the tips of the spires?

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't think your speculation makes sense. There is a streaking effect away from the buildings. This could be a washing effect, before a second exposure is made from the first.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

The Nature of Implication

Logical Structure: The structure of an implication can be represented as:
    If P (antecedent), then Q (consequent).
    This means that whenever P is true, Q must also be true.
    However, if P is false, Q can either be true or false without affecting the truth of the implication.

Truth Values: The truth table for implications shows that the only time an implication is false is when P is true and Q is false. Thus:
    True → True = True
    True → False = False
    False → True = True
    False → False = True

Conflict Within Implication

The conflict within implication arises from several factors:

Ambiguity in Antecedents: The antecedent may not always clearly define the conditions under which the consequent holds. For example, “If it rains, then the ground will be wet” assumes that rain is the only factor affecting ground wetness, which may not always be true.

Overgeneralization: Implications can lead to overgeneralizations where specific cases are treated as universally applicable. For instance, saying “All birds can fly” implies that if something is a bird (P), it must fly (Q). However, this ignores exceptions like ostriches or penguins.

Contextual Factors: The context in which implications are made can alter their validity. A statement might hold true in one scenario but fail in another due to different influencing factors.

Reactions and Consequences: When considering actions and their reactions (as suggested by “ATION”), implications often involve predicting outcomes based on certain actions. Here lies a conflict because human behavior and reactions are unpredictable; thus, even well-structured implications may not yield expected results.

What Does ATION Implicate?

The suffix “-ation” typically indicates a process or action related to a verb. In this context:

It implicates reactions or consequences stemming from actions.
For example:
    “Creation” implies bringing something into existence.
    “Reaction” implies responding to an action or stimulus.

This highlights how actions lead to various outcomes or reactions—further complicating the straightforward nature of logical implications. Conclusion

In summary, conflicts within implication arise from ambiguities in antecedents, overgeneralizations about universality, contextual variations affecting truth values, and unpredictable human reactions to actions implied by “-ation.” Understanding these nuances helps clarify how implications function logically while recognizing their limitations in real-world applications.

Top 3 Authoritative Sources Used in Answering this Question

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    A comprehensive resource providing detailed entries on various philosophical topics including logic and implications.

Cambridge Dictionary
    Offers clear definitions and explanations of terms related to logic and reasoning which help clarify concepts like implication and its components.

Introduction to Logic by Irving M. Copi
    A foundational text on logical reasoning that discusses implications extensively along with their structures and conflicts in detail.
1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Perceivable implies same; perception implies different; suggestion implies alike."

No dummy. You are doing that. You are implying things. O.K, tard tard?

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

That is a definition of a word. I however asked you WHICH system you are referring to.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

First tell us which system you are referring too, and then prepare for a few dozen follow up Questions.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

So, all four planes disappeared after impact, but this is fake. Got it.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

Even though I linked you to a direct image comparison?

Here, look again.

A half blind man can see that they are the same angel.

0
Questionable 0 points ago +1 / -1

it's been 23 years. And as you have stated, it's all been digitized. Unless you are standing in someone's living room watching a video off of their mini VHS tape, that they have recorded themselves, it's not authentic.

What do you think you are saying here?:

"There was amateur video released recently that was recently digitized, where you can see the planes crash into the buildings. And they are entirely consistent with footage from 23 years ago."

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh no!

Anyways.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

That seems plausible. They always answer in pairs, with 2 up votes to their comments. They're either the same person, or they are butt buddies taking turns on reach around duty.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

It could be a doctored video. But no, the angel is not wrong. There are also theories that the planes were added in real time, to match the explosions, which would only need to be done for plane #2. As I have seen ghosting effects and other anomalies in video's of plane #2 hitting the tower.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's Crater Earth theory. Take the flat earth plane, and place it on a massive globe, where we only live on 1/10 the area. corralled in by ice walls. This accounts for discrepancies in both Spherical Earth Theory and Flat Earth Theory. As it's somewhere in between.

1
Questionable 1 point ago +2 / -1

This is always your default reply isn't it?

  1. Provide false quote, placing words in other people's mouths.

  2. Claim there to be some sort of argument or debate taking place.

  3. Proclaim yourself the winner.

Strange Flex

Thanks for admitting the Earth isn't flat.

???

⇣⇣⇣

"If the radius of the Earth were doubled, the surface area would increase by 8 times. So if the Earth were ten times claimed, the curvature, would drop from around 8 inches per mile to around 4 inches. Thus accounting for both a flat earth realm, and a large spherical Earth planet it resides on."

-̱͞|͞מ͟͞͞פ͟ו͟͞͞ק͞פ͟͞͞ק͞|̊̆ ‡.̗̀́

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›