Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Olcott seems to be willfully ignorant
Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Olcott seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant
Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Richard seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? --- Olcott seems to be willfully ignorant Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Yes to both for Peter Olcott Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Can ADD be this severe? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Can ADD be this severe? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? For Olcott: YES to both. Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Liar ??? Maybe... Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Ben thinks processor Sipser is wrong Re: Ben thinks processor Sipser is wrong Ben fails to understand --- supersedes the rest Re: Ben fails to understand --- supersedes the rest People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT Re: DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT Re: DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT Re: DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that can possibly exist DOES NOT HALT Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory Re: The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory Re: The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory Re: The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory, because Olcott doesn't undestand Re: The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory, because Olcott doesn't undestand Re: The Tarski Undefinability Theorem failed to understand truthmaker theory, because Olcott doesn't undestand 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 ---Boilerplate Reply Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH --- Richard proves that he is clueless DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure --- addendum Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Re: DDD correctly emulated by H0 --- Why Lie? -- Repeat until Closure Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Richard admits his error Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Richard admits his error Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Richard admits his error Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- Richard admits his error Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten Re: D correctly simulated by H proved for THREE YEARS --- rewritten