Englebert

You still don't get it. Do you really think that if my brain cells die, I somehow now have more brain cells? You have more posts, but I have less brain cells. Inverse! Do you realize how many people are laughing at you?

So sad. Read my above post. Are you actually trying to imply that as things die, this signifies an increase? You are hilarious. I specifically chose to write an example of an inverse correlation this way. I figured it would confuse you a little at first, but I never thought it would be too much for you eventually realize. I would expect the sixth graders to get it correct, and I still think they would. You on the other hand...well, you know.

Frankly, this is like "debating" with a whiny 6 year old. So let's clear it up for your embarrassment. From a Duck Duck Go search: "Negative correlation or inverse correlation is a relationship between two variables whereby they move in opposite directions. If variables X and Y have a negative correlation (or are negatively correlated), as X increases in value, Y will decrease; similarly, if X decreases in value, Y will increase." My example: The more you post, the more of my brain cells die. Which means: As the amount of your posts (X) increase, the more of my living brain cells (Y) decrease. That fits the definition of an inverse (negative) correlation. It is a very, very simple concept. I would feel sorry for you that you cannot comprehend this simplistic reasoning, but you continually try to berate and belittle people base on your failed logic. That is just pathetic. It's like a kindergartner calling his degreed teacher a moron. Again, would you like to apologize or will you keep the hilarity rolling?

Please explain it. I thought I couldn't laugh at you more, but I'm sure you will up the level. Please explain how my example above is not a "negative" correlation. This should be good...for laughter. Go.

I wish WestEnd1 was still posting. He would give you the proverbial "lol" response. And is this case, it would be highly appropriate with nothing else needed to be added. Would you like to apologize for your mistakes or will you just keep the laughter going a little while longer? Let's see.

Only in a twisted mind can you equate dying brain cells as being positive. You cannot quit embarrassing yourself can you. My example was easy and clear. The more you post, the more of my brain cells die. That means, as most sixth through eight graders can attest, is that as the number of your posts increase, the number of my living brain cells decreases. That is a negative correlation...better known as an inverse correlation. And for some reason you laughably consider yourself an intellectual but failed a junior high level question.

I didn't say you did. Seriously, how deficient are your comprehension skills? But more importantly, how embarrassing for you to think I did. Lay out your evidence for you assertion that I don't know what a negative correlation is. I gave an example of one earlier in this thread. Did you miss it or did you just not recognize it? Sixth through eight graders would have spotted it. Should this lead one to conclude that you yourself doesn't know what it is? What evidence do you have that leads you to believe your contention?

You embarrass yourself and your only attempt at redemption is that I'm "a joke". It must be fun to live in a world where you can blame someone else for all of your shortcomings. Does the phrase "bless his little heart" ring a bell. I'm sure you've heard it quite often. Is there a correlation in there somewhere? Does that phrase tend the be more abundant the more you post? Most people know that correlations do not prove causality and should only be used as a basis for further research that tests for mitigating factors. But in this case, I'm fairly certain that no further research is needed. And like most people with average to even less than average intelligence, no Google search was needed for that assessment.

Let's check out your analytical skills. (Previous shortfalls notwithstanding.) What sort of delusional "evidence" can you point to that in some shape or form makes you conclude that I'm "in a pickle"? Please provide what you consider evidence that leads to your conclusion so we can all laugh at your exposed thought processes.

And your embarrassment continues.

If I posed this question to sixth through eight graders: When you post my laughter goes up. When you post some of my brain cells die. Which is an example of a positive correlation and which is an example of a negative correlation? I'm fairly certain most of the kiddies will answer the question correctly. I know it might be tough for you, since the concept is so new. But keep trying, you will catch up some day. And I was wrong. I thought you couldn't embarrass yourself any further...but your continuance on this topic proves you certainly possess that capability.

High school, and possibly even middle school kids know what the word "correlation" means, and what the word "negative" means. Are you really so dense as to think that these kids don't know what a negative correlation is? Really? My question to you is: do you think it is possible for you to embarrass yourself more than you already have? Author another post...let's see.

You basically are proving my assertion every time you post. Keep'em coming. High school, and possibly even middle school kids know what a correlation is. I guess you are proud to use the term since it must have been your "word-of-the-day" assignment for the week. Can you hear the laughter?

Was there a full-color illustration in the picture book where you gleaned that tidbit of wisdom. Hopefully the next picture depicted sarcasm, otherwise I don't think you will understand my use of the word "wisdom".

Hopefully he can provide for me one of his pop-up picture books so I can quickly get up to his level.

Insulting a person's intelligence in one sentence followed by childish name calling in the second sentence. How are you not embarrassed? You might want to get a more intellectually developed person to critique your posts...might save you some of that unnecessary embarrassment.

You need to work on your analytical skills. Maybe go read a psychology book, preferably grade school level with lots of pictures. You might progress one day to attain the ability to accurately analyze others internal thought processes without embarrassing yourself...as is the current standard. Then again, the comedic entertainment value you bring with your underdeveloped analytical "skill set" is comedic gold...so keep'em coming.

You've made many posts on this forum, and not once have you denounced pedophilia. Therefore we must conclude that you condone and even embrace the practice. And if you denounce it now, or show proof that you have denounced it in the past, according to your rules, we can just ignore it and still proclaim that you embrace pedophilia. Am I using your logical processes correctly?

Wow, what a comeback. After reading some of your posts, a sixth grader can see you have elevated sense of moral and intellectual superiority with no basis in fact. The arrogance is boundless. You are entertaining though. In fact, enough that I might have to start spending more time reading your posts for the cheap entertainment value alone. Keep'em coming.

I know the game you are playing. Say a word in one context then explain the intent away by using a different context. This could get fun. Are both sides allowed to use the same rules or will the typical double-standards be applied? Actually, I doubt you meant the use of the word "tribe" in a derogatory fashion (I could be wrong). But the woke liberals have set the rules that the interpretation of intended meaning of a word is based solely on how the liberal mantra interprets it, regardless of how the speaker meant it to be. It's fun to see those same rules being applied by both sides. Liberals usually hate it when they are also forced to walk on eggshells.

How long has the word "boy" been dated back to? And what does it reference? Now how can that word be derogatory?

This wasn't her first time dipping her toes in the pool of elitism. Let's make sure we don't forget her previous foray into "rules for thee but not for me" [Hidden Content] (To all Liberals on this site: The pasted URL was the first one that popped up on my DuckDuckGo search. Feel free to use you own search engine to verify. Even Bing and Google can't suppress this...although not without desperate attempts.)

I was highly upset because my reply contained some of the most eloquent, uplifting, though-provoking ideas that would have been jaw dropping to everyone on this board. Then again, it could have been just trite drivel. I'm gonna stick with the first one. 😀

I was in the middle of replying to one when it disappeared.

You continually miss the boat. It is amazing you have the gumption to actually post. And yes, if you want to question my ability to type out a little paragraph, I have the ability to question your intelligence. What disgusts me is not this little forum, or this little topic...it is the fact that you have the nerve to mock people while simultaneously hiding behind your wall that shields you from ridicule. Yes, I do take that seriously. That is childish, and does nothing but stifle true debate. When you think about why serious discussions cannot be had, you can thank yourself for contributing to that divide. You are the problem. And unlike you, I do not delve in sarcasm veiled as empathy. I don't know how old you are, but I am certain you need to grow up.