[Faith_Machine]

Re: Introductory Thread

Might it also be accurate to describe a hermaphrodite as someone who is wounded in the stones? Wounded by an accident of nature and genetics, to be sure, but wounded nonetheless.

[Wishindo]

Re: Introductory Thread

A gal attracted to a gal is gay.
A guy attracted to a guy is gay.
A freak with both genitalia is going to be attracted to either gals (making the gal side of her gay) or guys (making the guy side of her gay).

What if they're asexual?

48 / 2 (2+9)
48 / 2 (12)
48 / 24
2

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/005/548/yourewrong.png

Please ignore the troll/cool face

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Introductory Thread

What if they're asexual?

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/005/548/yourewrong.png

Please ignore the troll/cool face

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

Nobody cares about the maths thing. It's like the nerdiest thing ever and you know it. Are you trying to make a point?

Let's talk about Jesus and how He lovingly has angels assigned to burn you in Hell.

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Introductory Thread

Also 2

[Zechariah Smyth]

Re: Introductory Thread

What if they're asexual?

Asexuality (AKA "pussy shy" for guys, and "ugly" for girls) is not natural. You know it, I know it, everyone knows it. We were put on Earth to make babies (Gen. 1:28) and to praise Jesus (Psalm 150:1-5 among others).

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

Stop being a cut-and-paste math-fag and start praising Jesus, maggot.



Yours in Christ,

Z. Smyth

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Introductory Thread

Please ignore the troll

If you continue posting on this subject, we may instead ban the troll.

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

Dear Retard:

Brother F-M has posted this link before, and I have twice posted it. It explains in full how both answers can be achieved.

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/48293

Since following a link seems beyond your capabilities, I will quote from it:

Inputting the problem on different calculators can lead to different results depending on if the calculator is non-scientific or scientific, and how the calculator interprets order of operations.


There are considerable arguments for both answers, but the general consensus is that writing ambiguous fractions like “2/6x” makes solving such problems confusing, and it is considered bad form to write ambiguously written fractions in the first place.

Standard Order of Operations


If one strictly uses the standard order of operations to solve mathematical expressions, the answer to the problem would be 288, which is also the same solution provided by WolframAlpha[17] and Google.[18]

By convention, the order of precedence in a mathematical expression is as follows:

• Terms inside of Brackets or Parentheses.
• Exponents and Roots.
• Multiplication and Division.
• Addition and Subtraction.

If there are two or more operations with equal precedence (such as 10÷2÷5 or 7÷2*9), those operations should be done from left to right.

Therefore, the problem “48÷2(9+3) =” would be solved like this:

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
24 * 12=
288

PEMDAS


Solving for the answer 2 is sometimes a result of doing multiplication before division. Much of the confusion can be blamed on PEMDAS (sometimes known as, “Please Excuse My Dear Aunt Sally”) and other similar mnemonics used to teach order of operations in schools.

As an example, PEMDAS stands for:

• Parentheses
• Exponentiation
• Multiplication
• Division
• Addition
• Subtraction

Whereas BEDMAS stands for:

• Brackets
• Exponentiation
• Division
• Multiplication
• Addition
• Subtraction

The former can lead to the implication that addition always comes before subtraction, and that multiplication always comes before division. The latter can lead to the implication that addition always comes before subtraction, and that division always comes before multiplication.

If one uses multiplication before division (PEMDAS being especially popular in the United States), the problem would be solved like this:

48 ÷ 2 * (9+3)=
48 ÷ 2 * (12)=
48 ÷ 2 * 12=
48 ÷ 24=
2

However, solving the problem like this would be considered erroneous because multiplication and division hold equal precedence.[19]


It is helpful to remember that division and multiplication are inverse operations, and thus represent the same operation written in a different way. Division is the same as multiplication of the reciprocal, and multiplication is the same as division of the reciprocal. This is similar to how addition is the same as subtraction of the negative, and how raising to the nth power is the same as taking the 1/nth root.

Implied Multiplication


However, the answer 2 could be justified by the principle of implied multiplication. For example, consider the problem "2/5x."

If one strictly follows the standard order of operations, the correct interpretation would be “(2/5)*(x).”

But many calculators and textbooks state that a higher value of precedence should be placed on implied multiplication than on explicit multiplication:

Because “5x” is implied to be "5*x," it gets higher priority than "2/5." In this case, "2/5x" would be interpreted as "(2)/(5*x)."

Returning to the original problem, if one utilizes the principles of implied multiplication, then “2(9+3)” gets higher precedence than the explicit “48/2,” and would be solved like this:

48 ÷ 2(9+3)=
48 ÷ 2(12)=
48 ÷ 24=
2


However, there is a lack of consensus on the value of implied multiplication.

Now, we are here to talk about Jesus. If you continue idiotically jabbering about your little troll meme, you will not last long on this forum. Understand?

[Wishindo]

Re: Introductory Thread

... and to praise Jesus (Psalm 150:1-5 among others).

Let's talk about Jesus and how He lovingly has angels assigned to burn you in Hell.

Satan's entertainment hardly seems like the glorification of Jesus, more like the provoking of debates.

...lovingly...burn you in Hell

Oxymormon. (look it up, it's not a mormon with oxy)

[Didymus Much]

Re: Introductory Thread

Satan's entertainment hardly seems like the glorification of Jesus, more like the provoking of debates...

Scripture that says Satan will rule in Hell, please. Note: Heretical Catholic fiction (such as Dante's Inferno) and Adam Sandler movies are NOT Scripture.

Why not read the Bible and see what it really says?

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Introductory Thread

Satan's entertainment hardly seems like the glorification of Jesus, more like the provoking of debates.



Oxymormon. (look it up, it's not a mormon with oxy)

Leaving the magic underwear merchants out of it for now...

Why is burning you forever if you don't do God's bidding and worship Jesus and love God more than anything ever and praise Him not the loving act of a beneficent creator? Please explain. Because that's the deal.

[Wishindo]

Re: Introductory Thread

Scripture that says Satan will rule in Hell, please. Note: Heretical Catholic fiction (such as Dante's Inferno) and Adam Sandler movies are NOT Scripture.

Why not read the Bible and see what it really says?

SCRIPTURE!

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Introductory Thread

SCRIPTURE!

Um, yes. Read it.

[Wishindo]

Re: Introductory Thread

Um, yes. Read it.

I meant where in it.

Oh stop pouting!

The only thing that matters about any politician is if he believes in Jesus. Can there be anything more important?

>Implying you don't give a flying fart if someone who believes in Jesus became president and appealed the entire constitution.

True Christian™

That shouldn't be trademarked.

[Rev. M. Rodimer]

Re: Introductory Thread

I meant where in it.

Start at Genesis 1 and read straight through to Revelation 22. Then, and only then, will you know what the Bible says.

Impying you don't give a flying fart if someone who believes in Jesus became president and appealed the entire constitution.

I think you mean "repealed".

And we would be thrilled! We could finally get to the Great Purification!

As for True Christian™, who are you to say what can or cannot have a trademark?

[Didymus Much]

Re: Introductory Thread

SCRIPTURE!

Yes, I asked you for Scripture stating that Satan will do anything in Hell aside from burn in the lake of fire alongside all the other damned.

Well?

[Redeemed Papist]

Re: Introductory Thread

>Implying you don't give a flying fart if someone who believes in Jesus became president and appealed the entire constitution.
.

Implying? I thought I was quite explicit. Repealing any constitution in favour of God's law is the final harmonious act of any civilisation that cares about the immortal souls of its citizens.