Denial

MCes wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 3:26 pm

eslapion wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 2:20 pm Having an engineering degree(...)

Not documented information

Graduated at this fine institution: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89col ... 3%A9rieure

https://www.etsmtl.ca/

What about you ? Got anything interesting to use as a substitute for tapestry ?

eslapion wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 6:18 pm

MCes wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 3:26 pm

eslapion wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 2:20 pm Having an engineering degree(...)

Not documented information

Graduated at this fine institution: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89col ... 3%A9rieure

https://www.etsmtl.ca/

What about you ? Got anything interesting to use as a substitute for tapestry ?

We already know that universities exist.

The information remain undocumented.

MCes wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 11:46 pm We already know that universities exist.

The information remain undocumented.

So you want proof ? Is that it ?

As they say, I'll show you mine when you show me yours!

Seems we have reached the peak of the discussion

eslapion wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 2:20 pm Having an engineering degree(...)

Still not documented information

MCes wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:15 pm

eslapion wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 2:20 pm Having an engineering degree(...)

Still not documented information

Same thing for you buddy. You have no qualifications at all.

groepaz wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 8:38 am Seems we have reached the peak of the discussion

Yup! Please tell the Most Crappy Electronics Supplier...

eslapion wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 6:19 am

MCes wrote: ↑Sat Jun 27, 2020 11:46 pm We already know that universities exist.

The information remain undocumented.

So you want proof ? Is that it ?

As they say, I'll show you mine when you show me yours!

For exposing a thesis I always explain the elements that I found relevant and the line that link them, so I use the evidence of the facts for sustain thesis, this method let the possibility for having a serious exchange of ideas wit others: it is a not-dogmatic method based on the ideas, so who I am is irrelevant.
I never used my titles to pretend to be right, so I have not to demonstrate them.

Often you make direct and indirect allusion at your (not already documented) title to be believed dogmatically:
your behaviour imply that you have to come out from your hypocrisy state through the proof of (the level) of your title, because you are the person that founded on it the own credibility, you make it an element of the discussion that for be believed has to be proved.
"You must trust in me because I am who I am" is a concept that imply that you have to demonstrate who you are, you are the person that made it necessary.

The proof won't transform the idiocies to pearls of wisdom, but can help to clarify.

I love everybody in this thread.

Gyro Gearloose wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:35 am I love everybody in this thread.

Prove that

joshuadenmark wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:20 am

Gyro Gearloose wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:35 am I love everybody in this thread.

Prove that

I don't think I can. Legally I mean.

Gyro Gearloose wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 12:41 pm

joshuadenmark wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 11:20 am

Gyro Gearloose wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:35 am I love everybody in this thread.

Prove that

I don't think I can. Legally I mean.

MCes wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 11:51 pmFor exposing a thesis I always explain the elements that I found relevant and the line that link them, so I use the evidence of the facts for sustain thesis, this method let the possibility for having a serious exchange of ideas wit others: it is a not-dogmatic method based on the ideas, so who I am is irrelevant.
I never used my titles to pretend to be right, so I have not to demonstrate them.

No, of course not. All you have to do is repeat misconceptions that you know are popular with amateurs and then demonstrate a lot of people agree with you. That's a nice substitute for science.

Alternatively, you can post vitriolic comments in large and stylized typefaces and end that with 'good luck'.

The proof won't transform the idiocies to pearls of wisdom, but can help to clarify.

It's not my job to give you an EE course. When you don't understand something I post, you start acting like a pouty child.

As I said in the past, there is a technology custodian here on Denial and that's Mike. Sometimes I am on good terms with him, sometimes not but I ALWAYS consider him more competent than me in these things.

If you think I'm wrong about something, ask him if it's you who are in error first. If HE says I'm wrong then I am wrong. If not, the problem is you.

eslapion wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:56 pm It's not my job to give you an EE course.

This concept is based on supposition that you have the competence for do it, but..... this is a

MCes wrote: ↑Sun Jun 28, 2020 2:15 pm Still not documented information

MCes wrote: ↑Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:39 pm This concept is based on supposition that you have the competence for do it, but..... this is a

What you're doing is called 'rhetoric' and has nothing to do with science.

I don't have to prove anything to you. You're not a paying customer.

Peak of discussion - i knew it.