*blocks your path* >"What do you think about my

is the CTMU legit?

did he actually prove god exists? what is this meme

>>8775809
that guy is all talk does anybody even know if hes smart? Or did they just believe him when he said he was.

File: Alfred_Binet.jpg (721KB, 2188x2812px) Image search: [Google]

721KB, 2188x2812px

>>8777552
He's the only chance we've got.

>>8778850
what?

>>8775809
What's this nigga's IQ again?

>>8775809
It's the most retarded thing I've ever read.

>>8779427
Those ultra high iq tests are scams.

>>8775809
Reading this:
>http://www.ctmu.org/

First 5 paragraphs are nothing but a long winded and mathematical lingo laden way of saying:
>the universe is described by science as a circular argument fallacy up to the boarders of the universe.
He acts like hes never heard of a circular argument fallacy and has reinvented it himself. Which is fair because few people know critical thinking properly.

I havent read anything deeper in what hes saying and im not sure how this proves god exists.

Anyway i have to sleep now.

>>8775809
He's not as smart as he thinks he is, he is literally /sci/ incarnate.

>>8775809
He is using big words to hide his simple ideas so nobody calls him out on them. He doesnt even define half these terms he invents, then uses them in specific arguments. It gives him plausible deniability when someone calls him a fuckwit.

Also, the layout of his page reeks of a cult looking for a $5/month subscription fee for their newsletter.

Mathematicians view set theory as fundamental. Anything can be considered an object, even a space or a process, and wherever there are objects, there is a set to contain them. This "something" may be a relation, a space or an algebraic system, but it is also a set; its relational, spatial or algebraic structure simply makes it a structured set. So mathematicians view sets, broadly including null, singleton, finite and infinite sets, as fundamental objects basic to meaningful descriptions of reality. It follows that reality itself should be a set...in fact, the largest set of all. But every set, even the largest one, has a powerset which contains it, and that which contains it must be larger (a contradiction). The obvious solution: define an extension of set theory incorporating two senses of "containment" which work together in such a way that the largest set can be defined as "containing" its powerset in one sense while being contained by its powerset in the other. Thus, it topologically includes itself in the act of descriptively including itself in the act of topologically including itself..., and so on, in the course of which it obviously becomes more than just a set.

>>8775809
>smart a.f.
>ripped
>probably an 9''x8'' cock as well
>can grow a moustache and not look like a creep

we need to clone this man.

>>8782260
>ripped
What are you talking about? He's a fat fuck.