[Quila]

Oh please. You've just lowered yourself to claiming that arguing semantics will show to the core of an argument's misapplication.

When someone bases his arguments on math and calls it a proof, I expect a proof somewhere in there. It may be semantics, but it's pretty serious semantics that show a lack of knowledge.

[Southack]

"When someone bases his arguments on math and calls it a proof, I expect a proof somewhere in there. It may be semantics, but it's pretty serious semantics that show a lack of knowledge." - Quila

That's a logically flawed conclusion. A semantic problem does not demonstrate a lack of knowledge, and arguing over semantics certainly doesn't prove such a claim, either.