Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #135664
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? |
| Date | 2025-11-15 15:27 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <20251115064228.304@kylheku.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <10f885k$3498l$1@dont-email.me> <10f8c83$34g43$1@dont-email.me> <10f8dft$35snn$1@dont-email.me> <20251114195648.251@kylheku.com> <10f93hl$3aiar$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2025-11-15, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/14/2025 10:04 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>> On 2025-11-14, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 11/14/2025 4:59 PM, dart200 wrote:
>>>> On 11/14/25 1:49 PM, André G. Isaak wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-11-13 17:08, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>>>> Can we get it out of our systems in just a bit over half a month?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I pledge not to reply to Olcott after November 30.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why November 30th? Now works equally well. You're unlikely to get
>>>>> anywhere new with Olcott in the next couple of weeks.
>>>>>
>>>>> André
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> why not today tbh?
>>>>
>>>> ur not gunna get anywhere with polcott by the 30th either...
>>>>
>>>> unfortunately he's gunna keep saying wrong things on the internet, and
>>>> because u lack total free will, ur just compelled to respond 😂😂😂
>>>>
>>>
>>> My primary reason for posting here was always
>>> to establish copyright priority I will keep
>>
>> You have more than enough redundancy over 20 years for that.
>>
>
><MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
> If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
^^
> input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
> would never stop running unless aborted then
^^^^
Did you notice your own if / then here?
The conditions between them never occur when D is the diagonal program
against H. H cannot correctly decide.
So you have "if false then ...".
This is always true:
P Q P -> Q
-----------------
F F T
F T T
T F F <-
T T T
The only combination of inputs for which "if P then Q" is false
is when P is true and Q is false. In particular, whenever P
is false, P -> Q is true.
> H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
> specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
Never mind that "P -> Q" is always true when P is false,
what you actually have above is "P -> P" which is always true!
Your statement is essentially just saying "If H decides correctly, it can
correctly report", which are the same thing; there is nothing to
disagree with.
>
> *Updated words*
> Simulating termination analyzer H simulates
> N statements of D according to the semantics of
> the C programming language. H does this until it
> matches a correct non-halting behavior pattern.
> This pattern conclusively proves that the simulated
> D cannot possibly reach its own simulated "return"
> statement final halt state for any value of N.
No halting pattern could ever be correct in the diagonal test case.
Separately from that, even buggered it it up in your Halt7.c
work even for non-diagonal test cases.
The test case
void DDD(void) { HHH(DDD); return; }
halts when we executed from main. HHH(DDD) could return 1 and it
would still halt---it is not diagonal! Yet HHH still detects a
non-halting pattern and returns 0.
We can complete the above DDD with the following trivial HHH,
which decides correctly:
// abort simulation after zero steps, pronouncing it halting
int HHH(ptr P) { return 1; }
Yet the complicated HHH actually given falters, wrongly returning 0.
> Then H aborts its simulation and returns 0 on the
> basis that that its input D specifies a non-halting
> sequence of instructions.
Unfortunately, your theory requires acceptance of an arbitrary doctrine
that the diagonal case D specifies two different behaviors;
tht it is terminating when simulated by UTM(D) but non-terminating when
simulated by H.
When you regard the design of your non-terminatation--detection
criteria as infallibly correct, you end up with the contradiction that D
is being called non-terminating, even though D demonstrably terminates.
The sane person would accept this as the conclusion of
reductio-ad-absurdum argument: D cannot be both terminating and
non-terminating, because every machine either halts or does not:
there is no non-determinism in it. Thus D being both terminating
and not is a logical contradiction, meaning thatthe assumptiont that the
non-termination-detection criteria are correct muwst be wrong.
It's as if you not trying to overthrow the Halting Problem,
but only using the Halting Problem as a pretext for trying
to invalidate the /reductio ad absurdum/ technique of inference!
If you could do that /that/, you would be much more famous
than someone who toppled the Halting Problem!
> When anyone challenges the foundations of a field
> the is always great resistance. People accept
> these foundations as if they were the infallible
> word of God.
Can you cite three examples of someone successfully challenging major
mathematical claim that was wrongly held by all non-cranky
mathematicians to be a theorem rather than just a conjecture?
> I needed people to help me to understand
> which words are the most effective.
So, like a marketing focus group for words?
> does not work when everyone begins with
> complete certainty that I am wrong.
Yes, sometimes macrketing focus groups tell the business that their
product is shit. Oops!
See, when your ideas are true, you don't need to find effective words
for convicing dumb people who are swayed by the right words.
Smart people pick up the idea and can follow its logic to see that it is
true, regardless of it not being given in the best words.
--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 00:08 +0000
Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 18:36 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 00:45 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 18:57 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 02:32 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 20:38 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 06:35 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 08:13 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:01 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 12:19 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:56 +0000
Defending against libelous assessments of my work olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 13:18 -0600
Re: Defending against libelous assessments of my work Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 19:45 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 04:42 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 20:39 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 06:39 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 08:25 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:22 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 12:31 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:48 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 13:08 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 19:54 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 14:17 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 20:33 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 15:13 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 21:28 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 15:33 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 21:44 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 15:42 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 21:46 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 16:10 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 03:52 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 23:26 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 06:42 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 10:23 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 19:59 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 14:02 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 20:19 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 14:38 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 16:02 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 20:03 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully --- LLM olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 08:36 -0600
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully --- LLM Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:25 +0000
Defending against libelous assessments of my work olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 12:35 -0600
Re: Defending against libelous assessments of my work Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 18:51 +0000
Re: Defending against libelous assessments of my work olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 13:13 -0600
Re: Defending against libelous assessments of my work Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 19:43 +0000
Re: Defending against libelous assessments of my work Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-14 20:13 +0000
Re: Will keep posting this every day until someone answers truthfully Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 09:38 +0100
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 20:53 -0500
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-13 18:00 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-14 02:16 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2025-11-14 03:08 +0042
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-14 03:52 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 12:57 +0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2025-11-16 01:06 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? --- Ben olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 19:18 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-13 21:03 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-11-14 06:21 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Mr Flibble <flibble@red-dwarf.jmc.corp> - 2025-11-14 17:41 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? André G. Isaak <agisaak@gm.invalid> - 2025-11-14 14:49 -0700
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-14 14:59 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 17:20 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 04:04 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-14 23:36 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 15:27 +0000
Kaz already admitted that the Sipser criteria have been met olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 10:29 -0600
Re: Kaz already admitted that the Sipser criteria have been met Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 20:04 +0000
Re: Kaz already admitted that the Sipser criteria have been met olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 14:16 -0600
Re: Kaz already admitted that the Sipser criteria have been met Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-15 21:41 +0000
Re: Kaz already admitted that the Sipser criteria have been met olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 16:04 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> - 2025-11-16 01:10 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? --- not a rehash olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 19:21 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? --- not a rehash Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-16 02:48 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? --- not a rehash olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 20:55 -0600
People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 21:01 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 12:10 +0800
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 22:41 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-15 23:13 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-16 19:56 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 19:02 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-17 02:21 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 21:47 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 21:49 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-17 04:01 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 18:35 -0800
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 04:29 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:40 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 05:03 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:47 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:48 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? --- not a rehash joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-16 14:39 +0000
Halt Deciders cannot report on the behavior of their caller olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 10:12 -0600
Kaz say that he is dumber than the Witch scene in Monty Python olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:19 -0600
Kaz PROVES that he is dumber than the Witch scene in Monty Python olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:25 -0600
Who agrees that Kaz is dumber than the Witch scene in Monty Python ? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-16 22:26 -0600
People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 07:12 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 18:06 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 12:14 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 22:47 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 18:16 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 12:22 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 22:49 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-17 19:02 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 13:05 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 13:11 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 13:42 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 21:28 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-17 22:24 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 17:02 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 23:49 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 19:52 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-19 16:28 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-19 11:10 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 17:40 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-19 15:51 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-19 11:04 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 18:23 +0000
People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- AKA Kaz olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 09:47 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- AKA Kaz Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-11-17 16:32 +0000
People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 10:48 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-11-17 17:42 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 11:48 -0600
How teach logic? [The Jokes] (Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-18 22:46 +0100
Re: How teach logic? [The Jokes] (Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-18 16:02 -0600
Enjoying some logic under a shadowy tree? (Was: How teach logic? [The Jokes]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-18 23:15 +0100
Re: Enjoying some logic under a shadowy tree? (Was: How teach logic? [The Jokes]) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-18 16:54 -0600
What did you do before 2001 ? (Was: Enjoying some logic under a shadowy tree?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-19 09:50 +0100
What are top ten books in set theory? (Re: What did you do before 2001 ?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-19 10:16 +0100
Slim Fermats Last Theorem (FLT) only for Lean4? (Was: What are top ten books in set theory?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2025-11-19 11:14 +0100
Re: How teach logic? [The Jokes] (Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things) "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-18 15:15 -0800
People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-17 11:41 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-17 22:58 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-19 16:35 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 17:48 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-11-19 17:57 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 18:31 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-19 12:39 -0600
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 18:54 +0000
Re: People that have a very shallow understanding of these things --- "reckless disregard for the truth" olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-19 11:23 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 6d] Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-25 19:13 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-12-01 19:14 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> - 2025-12-01 19:45 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-12-01 12:05 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-01 14:43 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-12-01 12:51 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-02 10:44 -0500
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-12-02 09:32 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-02 13:28 -0500
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-12-02 13:14 -0800
human understanding of true and proof are both flawed olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 15:23 -0600
Re: human understanding of true and proof are both flawed dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-12-02 14:41 -0800
Re: human understanding of true and proof are both flawed olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 17:03 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-12-02 17:32 -0500
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] polcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 12:10 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2025-12-01 20:22 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-12-01 21:48 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-12-02 14:56 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-02 09:33 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-12-02 16:04 +0000
Olcott is provably correct --- no one can correctly refute this olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 19:47 -0600
The quality of reviewers on USENET olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 18:11 -0600
Olcott is provably correct --- no one can correctly refute this olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 19:50 -0600
Olcott is provably correct --- no one can correct refute this olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-12-03 19:44 -0600
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-12-05 02:45 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? [t - 0] Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-12-01 23:42 +0000
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 00:03 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2025-11-27 00:04 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 00:29 -0800
Re: Stop responding to Olcott by December 2025: who is in? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-27 00:35 -0800
csiph-web