14 Jul 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemWow aren't you the brain. Minor problem!? You must have something in your ears (I suspect it came from your colon), because the whole point of the problem is the actually READ the question. Therefore your suggested change destroys the whole problem.
The stipulation could easily be fixed to avoid this (minor) ambiguity.
"One of the men owns a fish. Which one?"
Of course this problem could be altered easily to make it fit the answer that the German owns a fish. Even easier would have been to state "The German owns a fish. Here are some other useless facts."
14 Jul 06
2 edits
Originally posted by GastelThe whole point is to deduce that the German owns a fish, and not to engage in overly semantic psychobabble, or play "Simon says" with the wording.
Wow aren't you the brain. Minor problem!? You must have something in your ears (I suspect it came from your colon), because the whole point of the problem is the actually READ the question. Therefore your suggested change destroys the whole problem.
Of course this problem could be altered easily to make it fit the answer that the German owns a fish. Ev ...[text shortened]... easier would have been to state "The German owns a fish. Here are some other useless facts."
I completely disagree with your interpretation of Einstein's intent.
EDIT: Interpreting the riddle your way makes it as worthless as FrenchQueen's "which word in the English language is most often pronounced incorrectly?".
15 Jul 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemYou're about as thick as it gets. 'Semantic psychobabble' You're career (if you are old enough to be out of nappies), must be in something that requires no brain, like siliva production.
The whole point is to deduce that the German owns a fish, and not to engage in overly semantic psychobabble, or play "Simon says" with the wording.
I completely disagree with your interpretation of Einstein's intent.
EDIT: Interpreting the riddle your way makes it as worthless as FrenchQueen's "which word in the English language is most often pronounced incorrectly?".
FIrst, after some research, you will find that Einstein cannot be definatively credited with the origin of this riddle. You will also find that about 98% of people try to get an answer like yourself and ignore the actual question and instead make a convinent other question. (Someone owns a fish, so who seemingly owns no pet?) This is where the author of the riddle traps everyone. This is not intended to be a huge problem solving venture, but rather an exercise into how the solver comes to grips with the problem.
Show where in the puzzle it DEFINITIVELY can be concluded that ANYBODY owns a fish. And do it without making an assumption that may or may not be valid. YOU CANNOT DO IT! (I'll save you the trouble, so that you can continue making drool.)
So although you believe that you have to deduce something from the questions, remember the source is a scientist or mathematician (as the author may not actually have been Einstein, but instead Lewis Carroll). These are not individuals who revel in assuming things and leaving questions not completely answered. So go troll elsewhere, you're input is irrelevant.
15 Jul 06
Originally posted by GastelJesus H. Christ, you're such a 'tard.
You're about as thick as it gets. 'Semantic psychobabble' You're career (if you are old enough to be out of nappies), must be in something that requires no brain, like siliva production.
FIrst, after some research, you will find that Einstein cannot be definatively credited with the origin of this riddle. You will also find that about 98% of people try ...[text shortened]... ing questions not completely answered. So go troll elsewhere, you're input is irrelevant.
The hilarious thing is that you fancy yourself an intellectual. You're about on the same level as eldragonfly.
15 Jul 06
Originally posted by mrstabbyThis isn't science. It's a riddle.
So I guess the answer is "not the Brit, Dane, Swede or Norwegian" if you take "a different pet" to mean each one owns only one pet. In science nothing can be taken for granted, such as there being a fish owner on any given street.
15 Jul 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemI guess the comments directed towards me are coming from a reliable source. On the other hand, maybe they are coming from an induhvidual who has sh!t for brains and isn't afraid to use it.
Jesus H. Christ, you're such a 'tard.
The hilarious thing is that you fancy yourself an intellectual. You're about on the same level as eldragonfly.
I think I know which one it is.
And what does the H stand for? And was his last name Christ? Joesph and Mary Christ don't sound like biblical people.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by GastelBehold! The true intellectual's preoccupation.
I guess the comments directed towards me are coming from a reliable source. On the other hand, maybe they are coming from an induhvidual who has sh!t for brains and isn't afraid to use it.
I think I know which one it is.
And what does the H stand for? And was his last name Christ? Joesph and Mary Christ don't sound like biblical people.
Thread 45865
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemGood comeback. That is known as a past time, not a pre-occupation.
Behold! The true intellectual's preoccupation.
Thread 45865
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by GastelPick one of the following options regarding Einstein's riddle:
I think this thread clearly points out that it is you who suffer from logical influenza.
Originally posted by Gastel
The answer is nobody. That is why it is only 2%, because everyone tries to answer a question that isn't there or isn't answerable.
- The answer is 'nobody'.
- There isn't even a question. That little hook-looking symbol thingy is just a figment of everyone's imagination.
- There is a question, but it is not answerable.
Or, you may entertain me further by continuing to assert all three at the same time, even though they all contradict each other.
Don't forget to monitor your temperature while thinking on this.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemThe answer could be nobody, or the answer could be somebody. The question is answerable, the point is that we do not have enough information.
Pick one of the following options regarding Einstein's riddle:
- The answer is 'nobody'.
- There isn't even a question. That little hook-looking symbol thingy is just a figment of everyone's imagination.
- There is a question, but it is not answerable.
Or, you may entertain me further by continuing to assert all three at the same time, even th ...[text shortened]... contradict each other.
Don't forget to monitor your temperature while thinking on this.
Of course, as I sit here in fever, I still find myself far superior in intellect to you. Hmmmm. I wonder what that says about people with names that have Dogg spelled with two g's? (Hook-thingy on the end is also known as a question mark, just to help you out.
16 Jul 06
Originally posted by GastelYer a gud speller? (yer punkshuayshun is purty gud 2.
You're about as thick as it gets. 'Semantic psychobabble' You're career (if you are old enough to be out of nappies), must be in something that requires no brain, like siliva production.
FIrst, after some research, you will find that Einstein cannot be definatively credited with the origin of this riddle. You will also find that about 98% of people try ...[text shortened]... ing questions not completely answered. So go troll elsewhere, you're input is irrelevant.