But you pick and chose what you want and then add to it, much like those who try to prove evolution. It is appropriate that the word that was added is “degenerated”.
It seems this argument has gone full ‘circle’. (or is it square)
Methinks ‘you are’ a weasel.
Yes; I'm serious. In what way did my example deviate from your "perfect" circle? It fits the definition for a circle, yes?
But that’s still not the point, I defined intrinsic for you and cited examples: “Do you stick square pegs in round holes? Drive on square tires or triangular tires? I guess you are one of those guys that I’ve heard about that actually believes the earth is square.”
But you pick and chose what you want and then add to it, much like those who try to prove evolution. It is appropriate that the word that was added is “degenerated”.
And this has what to do with the Mathematical issue of whether or not a square could be perfectly circular and still be square? Nothing. Which is why I ignored it.
It seems this argument has gone full ‘circle’. (or is it square) Methinks ‘you are’ a weasel.
Well, then it should be a simple matter for you to point out how my example conflicts with either the definition for a square or a circle.
I await your refutation, or your stipulation that there does exist a square that is also a circle.