For viewing pleasure of UTAlum and SW1966

[Englebert]

12 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, unfortunately you are a joke.  Talk to mama stevenash.

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.

[Englebert]

3 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, I did not say correlation means causality.  I just said you don’t know what negative correlation is.  You don’t.

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?

[Englebert]

1 minute ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you actually gave an example of a positive correlation with regard to brain cells.  Sorry, but that is a positive correlation.  And you brought up correlation and causality.

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.

[Englebert]

2 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you should just give up and throw in the towel.  Your buddies on here, including your mama on the site, will need approve of you.

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.

[Englebert]

18 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, I do not need to do so.  You just do not know what negative correlation is.  You think you do, but you do not.  Just admit it.  It is not a big deal.  Even though you will exit here thinking you do, you still will not.  Now, don’t be embarrassed.

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.

[stevenash]

20 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, I do not need to do so.  You just do not know what negative correlation is.  You think you do, but you do not.  Just admit it.  It is not a big deal.  Even though you will exit here thinking you do, you still will not.  Now, don’t be embarrassed.

Apparently it is a big deal because you cannot/ will not leave it alone in your quest to convince yourself you are a Mensa member.

[Englebert]

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?

 

[Englebert]

10 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

You example is a positive correlation.  A positive correlation occurs when both factors either increase or decrease together.  A negative correlation occurs when one of the factors goes in the opposite direction in which the other factor goes.  Therefore, your example is positive correlation because you are saying the more I post, the more your brain cells die.  So both factors are going in the same direction - increasing.  I am sorry, but that is it.

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.

[Englebert]

4 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

No Jack, you posted a positive correlation by saying every time I post (the more I post), the more of your brain cells die.  Both in same direction.  And you had to Google it.

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?

 

[stevenash]

4 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

No Jack, you posted a positive correlation by saying every time I post (the more I post), the more of your brain cells die.  Both in same direction.  And you had to Google it.

Number of posts increase vs the number of brain cells decrease.  Pretty elementary.    Hmm   Lets see-  As the number of posts go up, the number of brain cells go down.  If the two variables go in opposite directions, it is a negative correlation for those of us who use deductive reasoning.  SW1966 prefers inductive reasoning.

[NetCat]

Wow this is bad. 

🤣🤣🤣

[Englebert]

5 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you are trying.  You said the “more” your brain cells die.  Do you not get it?  Are you that dense?

And what does "the more my brain cells die" mean. (I'm losing a bunch now dealing with you.) Do brain cells dying create an increase or decrease in the number of brain cells?

[Englebert]

3 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Mama Stevenash, he did not state it that way. Take care of your babies though.

Are you still trying after your abysmal performance? You are a glutton for embarrassment.

If World War III broke out, at the end of the war do you think we would have an increase or decrease in population? What is your opinion? Now, think about my example again. You might get it one day...and semantics is not your friend.

[Englebert]

3 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, I admire your attempts to correct your original statement.  But it is what it is.  Have a good evening and relax.  It is Saturday.

Correcting and explaining are two different things, but you have proven you cannot comprehend either. The laughter all around you must be deafening.

I am relaxed and having a good evening. You I presume...not so much. Then again, I don't think you realize how embarrassing a performance you displayed. What is the saying...ignorance is bliss...so maybe you are having a good time.

[BS Wildcats]

4 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, did you consult with mama Stevenash?  Don’t you need to?  By the way, what those of you Trump supporters on here think about me matters not in the least.  I would be very concerned if you approved of me because this would lump me in with a group of evil minded chumps.

Evil minded chumps=antifa and BLM.  I think you are already lumped!

[Englebert]

7 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, did you consult with mama Stevenash?  Don’t you need to?  By the way, what those of you Trump supporters on here think about me matters not in the least.  I would be very concerned if you approved of me because this would lump me in with a group of evil minded chumps.

Wow, this is your retort? Really? Is this your way of apologizing...by stating that you don't care what people think about you. That attitude is the perfect one for someone that doesn't mind embarrassing themselves over and over.

Is the correlation between people that continually embarrass themselves and evil minded chumps a positive or inverse relationship? Do you feel qualified or even capable of answering? It's funny that the week you had to learn the word-of-the-day has proven that you need more time.

[BS Wildcats]

Seems one is obsessed with Stevenash.  Maybe that one wishes stevenash were his mama.

[Englebert]

2 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you must lose sleep writing down so many responses that you might need.  You need to get some sleep.  Maybe mama Stevenash will rock you to sleep.

How many posts have you made compared to mine in this thread? Typical liberal response. Even though you proved you cannot comprehend the most basics of concepts, you will surely maintain your Libby card. Accuse others of what you yourself are guilty of. Hypocrisy is the foundation of Liberal ideology.

[Englebert]

11 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you must lose sleep writing down so many responses that you might need.  You need to get some sleep.  Maybe mama Stevenash will rock you to sleep.

I'm guessing by your continual posts that you want to get this thread as far away from your earlier posts as possible in a feeble attempt to save humiliation. Just so people don't forget, you accused me of not knowing the meaning of a basic (high school level...tops) term that you proved you could not understand yourself. You actually tried to claim that as something dies, it's numbers increase.

[Englebert]

11 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you must lose sleep writing down so many responses that you might need.  You need to get some sleep.  Maybe mama Stevenash will rock you to sleep.

We can keep going, but you will still be haunted by your total ineptness.

I originally had these three posts in one post, but figured I would separate them as to get my post count up with yours. And I don't feel any increased fatigue. According to your elementary assumption, I should feel tired after all these posts. As par for the course, you continue to embarrass yourself.

[Englebert]

2 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, You are quite the comedian.

Can't hold a candle to you. Maybe if I killed a bunch of brain cells...oh wait, nevermind. According to you, that would increase my number of brain cells.

[Englebert]

Just now, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you just do not get your example that the more posts (increase) the more brain cells die (increase of brain cells dying) is not a negative correlation, or just cannot acknowledge it.  Maybe a little training is in order.  But seriously, if you just said what you were thinking but said differently (having less brain cells) with more posts, we both know that is a negative, or inverse, correlation.

No, you just don't get that the more you post (increase) the less brain cells exist (decrease). You really can't be this dense can you? Wait, you've answered that question on numerous occasions.

[Englebert]

You post, some of my brain cells die.

How many posts do you have now? (increase)

How many brain cells do I have now? (decrease)

Any questions?

[Englebert]

37 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

Englebert, you just do not get your example that the more posts (increase) the more brain cells die (increase of brain cells dying) is not a negative correlation, or just cannot acknowledge it.  Maybe a little training is in order.  But seriously, if you just said what you were thinking but said differently (having less brain cells) with more posts, we both know that is a negative, or inverse, correlation.

Gotta get the posts up.

Are you actually going to whine that your failure to comprehend my post is somehow my fault? Is this really your contention? I've known all along that you were confused (and actually called it many posts up). Finally you realize that the wording of my example fooled you. It's about time. Sixth graders are laughing at you. But blaming me for your lack of comprehension skills is just pathetic. Admit your mistake and move on. Ooops, forgot you are a libby. That's not possible for you is it...no matter how blatant.

[BS Wildcats]

58 minutes ago, SW1966 said:

BS Wildcats, you really hate black people?  BLM?  You sound like someone people avoid.

Why do you assume someone hates black people when they disagree with you?  No matter what you think, I do not hate black people.  Now, on the other hand, I think the BLM “movement” is a crock of 💩.  It is funny that the only thing black people can come up with is racism, when confronted on issues.  You have really worn it out, and it’s ridiculous you continually go back to it.  But when one has been raised to believe white people are racist, I would expect nothing less from you!!