FAQ  •   Login  •   Register  •   Subscribe 

Welcome to the Forum for InventorSpot.com, the most popular invention related website in the world. Read our welcome message.

Skip to content

Moderators: Michelle, Scrupulous, Roger Brown, citizen


Postby bottleslingguy » Thu Nov 01, 2007 6:59 pm

User avatar
bottleslingguy
Black Belt
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:41 am
"ALL people, with the exception of those whose parents NEVER married, were conceived before their parent's wedding anniversary"

I'm not sure I understand this. Do you mean the month or the exact year? What if I was conceived six years AFTER they got married? What if I was conceived the day after their one year anniversary day? Like if their wedding day was Jan 1 2000 and I was conceived Jan 2 2001? I don't know I'm not sure what your trying to say here.

I meant "anniversary" in the sense of the point in time by which you learn that there is such a thing as their wedding and understanding the significance of it being at least 9 months AFTER their wedding night. You're usually older than One year by the time you understand certain things like time and that you are not the only real person in this world and how people are conceived and what conceived even means (usually not until late childhood and sometimes never) so you probably wouldn't be able to connect the dots until much later than AFTER their anniversary. Way after their actual wedding day.

If that's the only thing you found questionable after all I wrote, then I must be doing ok, Road! :D

Postby Road Show » Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:15 pm

User avatar
Road Show
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: SoCal
You're over-thinking this, BSG. A wedding "anniversary" occurs AFTER the actual wedding. Could be a one day anniversary, or a ten year anniversary...you never defined a specific wedding anniversary.

Your statement was:

... Or 2 am on a Saturday night six months before your parents' wedding anniversary?

My statement is simply that all people whose parents were married before OR after conception were conceived before their parent's non-defined wedding anniversary. My statement would only be false if you had made mention of a particular wedding anniversary, such as a sixth wedding anniversary for instance. That's all.

Your move. :wink:

RSG

Postby Scrupulous » Thu Nov 01, 2007 7:47 pm

User avatar
Scrupulous
Black Belt
 
Posts: 2387
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 7:32 pm
Location: United States
Oh god.

Postby Road Show » Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:19 pm

User avatar
Road Show
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: SoCal
Scrupulous wrote:Oh god.


Exactly!

Postby Levi Porter » Fri Nov 02, 2007 2:34 am

User avatar
Levi Porter
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 889
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 am
bottleslingguy wrote:I'm extremely flattered with the shout out, Levi (not to mention Scroop's words). It's a great feeling to know people are thinking about my invention and that just goes to show how some things are more important than money.


I just wanted to say that you have an amazing attitude.

Anything to do with helping babies......... you gotta love that.

Sorry for thinking your sling wasn't patentable.

I want to see it successful for you.

It is worthy.

Postby bottleslingguy » Fri Nov 02, 2007 3:55 pm

User avatar
bottleslingguy
Black Belt
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:41 am
Road Show wrote:You're over-thinking this, BSG. A wedding "anniversary" occurs AFTER the actual wedding. Could be a one day anniversary, or a ten year anniversary...you never defined a specific wedding anniversary.

Your statement was:

... Or 2 am on a Saturday night six months before your parents' wedding anniversary?

My statement is simply that all people whose parents were married before OR after conception were conceived before their parent's non-defined wedding anniversary. My statement would only be false if you had made mention of a particular wedding anniversary, such as a sixth wedding anniversary for instance. That's all.

Your move. :wink:

RSG


I'M overthinking this? That's funny, Road. It's not that your point is false, it's more that your point is petty. Anniversaries are traditionally based on one year blocks, if you want to include ten day anniversaries or "non-defined" anniversaries it's still a petty point and really doesn't have anything to do with anything else I said in that post. I still don't get your point about ALL people being conceived before their parents' wedding anniversary. You never clarified that when I told you I didn't understand what you were trying to say. But you blew right past that. Don't you think instead of advancing this further you should clarify your original meaning of the original statement?

Don't worry about it though, I've made my point and don't need any more moves. :wink: :wink:

Postby Road Show » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:06 pm

User avatar
Road Show
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: SoCal
bottleslingguy wrote:...I've made my point and don't need any more moves. :wink: :wink:


Same here :D ! Agreed, it was a petty point to begin with. I should have killed it right after it was conceived :roll: .

RSG

Postby Michelle » Fri Nov 02, 2007 4:28 pm

User avatar
Michelle
Black Belt
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 7:27 am
Ok, that's all folks.

Let's talk about something else...

Umm...what do you think of the Time Inventions of 2007?

http://inventorspot.com/articles/iphone ... _2007_7870

Postby bottleslingguy » Fri Nov 02, 2007 5:32 pm

User avatar
bottleslingguy
Black Belt
 
Posts: 1753
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:41 am
Don't I get a chance to yell at anybody? :lol:

(really Michey that was funny!)

Road, it DOES get like a chess game doesn't it? I really do mean it though when I ask someone to clarify something (I'm not harping on you to clarify anything Road). They could reword their thought and I would agree or conceed. I'm not afraid to admit I said something wrong or untrue or not logically thought out or even just thought out. And I don't mean to sound upset or angry when I ask a series of questions or caps lock a word or two. I may just be emphasising something rhetorical and not yelling in anger. I'd rather get to a better understanding of someone's point rather than simply argue just to sound right. I'm sure it could drag on like Michelle and Jim's little thing. :shock: :lol:

It would be interesting to hear commentary from onlookers. Imagine a site where all people do is argue and argue about who's right and who's wrong and then others argue about it? I think it is a healthy outlook to be able to let things go. Maybe we should have an unwritten rule that in a disagreement or correction of someone's point, you have less than three replies to make your point or clarify your original message. If you can't do it by then it is a waste of time. We can call the method-CyberHyperChess tm. :D

Postby Road Show » Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:22 pm

User avatar
Road Show
Brown Belt
 
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 5:39 pm
Location: SoCal
Really, BSG, I don't understand why Michelle is so concerned over us having this animated discussion. I thought your "moon in Uranus" comment was rather good. It would have busted up the room had it been made over a couple of beers. Don't care if it is at my expense or not...funny is funny. I jumped on your "anniversary" comment that, like you said, may not have been fully developed when typed...oh well, is there context check function on this keyboard somewhere?? Yes, I was trying to put you in a corner, and no, you weren't going down easily. Blah, blah, blah. We live to joust another day!

Maybe we weren't cut out for a forum where gratuitous deference is the norm. Give me drama, or give me death (ok, maybe not death, but perhaps a good flogging!).

RSG
PreviousNext