You my friend are absolutely retarded. I thought I read moderator in your name. Is this the type of idiot SF chooses to judge posts? Bah, in any case. I stated... and I quote (not using forum quote but the symbols we use... simply because I am too lazy to type in all the coding)
"Yes you can prove the non-existence of something outside of mathematics. Where are you drawing these claims from?"
And as you have pointed out... they came from that air head yours... and I quote you again bahaha "As no one has yet proved the non-existence of things like unicorns, I simply concluded that such proofs are impossible." What proofs is he trying to refute?.. you ought to ask. Well I'll tell ya. He's referring to the so called "proof" (I am not calling it that because really it isn't, it's more of a claim) that "the non-existence of something can be proven outside of mathematics" (that's me just changing a few things in what I have said previously)
The proof is in the pudding pal. That is to say it's almost in the claim itself. What you should be asking yourself... pal, is... no asking me because obviously you are too dumb to figure it out by yourself... is 'how can the nonexistence of something be shown to be factuality or proven'
A claim is something that asserts some truth and this truth is a concept. (I say concept for a reason but I won't get into it to save time... let me be the one to save us time because obviously you trying to save yourself time didn't afford you the opportunity to catch an error... if you are even capable of catching the error and I doubt it) A claim is also a conclusion (at least any logical claim is) which is also to say from whatever facts which may be presented we can make the assertion. (The assertion that something else is also true given the factuality of the presentations) These presentations are premises if we are still sticking to strict logical jargon.. I doubt you ever do though. Now I claim "the non-existence of something can be proven outside of mathematics" from the premise that "the factuality of the nonexistence of something can be be proven if it is shown that it MUST not exist"
Now... when I gave you the claim, I gave you a chance to figure it out on your own Viz. figuring out how I can make such a claim. But you couldn't so now you are at step two. And that's figuring out the question you should be asking yourself now.. and I won't even tell you what you should be asking, I will only show you when you make more of fool of yourself.
Now I'm already predicting you will ask "okay what is it then", but let me point out before you make THIS error that I want to see you make more of a fool of yourself.
And maybe, just maybe, I will enlighten you... I will point out your fundamental error.
And by the way... logic is not math... you make me laugh. You crack me up sir. Keep on agreeing Viz. not thinking Viz. not coming to the conclusions on your own. God I feel like I'm talking to a complete imbecile... some infant of a man.
