My Evolving Automobile Challenge

[Mobezom]

I know it wasn't you.

But please don't tell me I'm wrong, if you can't do it yourself.

I wrote it imperfectly, but I wrote it better than you did. You are wrong, and you're wronger than the technological limitations require me to be.

Whatever.

Go tell someone who cares.

AV doesn't care about being right or readable, apparently.

You two are the only two that are arcing and sparking about it.

We've been rather calm actually. We're only providing help and constructive criticism.

Everyone else had the consideration (respect) to address it as I wrote it.

Apparently, constructive criticism is disrespectful. If AV is wrong, you'd better shut up about it, because otherwise you're being RUDE!

 

[Nithavela]

Let's see you do it.

Or is C2H6O2 considered proper?

Yeah, that works. It's not perfect because those numbers should be lower case, but that's not supported by the board afaik.

Writing antifreeze (ethylene glycol) as CCOOOOOOHH would be like pronouncing sixty as tentententententen.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's not perfect because those numbers should be lower case,

-- What?

Writing antifreeze (etyl glycol)...

I would not normally write antifreeze as "etyl glycol," unless it was a typo or something.

 

[Nithavela]

-- What?

Sorry, wrong word. I don't know the proper english one.

Go to wikipedia and look up ethylene glycol. As you will see, the numbers in the formula are small and a bit lower than the letters.

As you will also see, the best way to write it's formula would be (CH2OH)2, because that one contains the structure of the compound. C2H6O2 might be something different.

 

[pgp_protector]

Yeah, that works. It's not perfect because those numbers should be lower case, but that's not supported by the board afaik.

Writing antifreeze (ethylene glycol) as CCOOOOOOHH would be like pronouncing sixty as tentententententen.

Pain but possible.
C2H6O2

 

[AV1611VET]

Pain but possible.
C2H6O2

I wish we had the subscript tags back.

 

[Nithavela]

It's not like chemistry is discussed often on this board, it's mostly biology, geography and astronomy.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Do you see why I call these "challenges" now?

So you can see how the challenged react to them?

 

[Paul Finch]

So you can see how the challenged react to them?

When it comes to believing in something for which there is no evidence I admit I am challenged because throughout my life I have never been asked to do it, consequently I do not understand how some people are able to do it, children believe without evidence but adults should not.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

 

[AV1611VET]

When it comes to believing in something for which there is no evidence I admit I am challenged because throughout my life I have never been asked to do it,

We both look at the same hardware (evidence).

Christians run it through an extra software program (Bible) before making their decision though.

 

[Paul Finch]

Christians run it through an extra software program (Bible) before making their decision though.

That's a very old program Christians use I bet it was written in the dark ages when they didn't know much about anything, using it you all end up with something different. But if it makes you happy then keep using it, no point upgrading at this stage of your life is there? by the time you come to terms with the upgrade it will all be over anyway.

I don't understand why you think your mind is going to continue once your brain has stopped working, you believe it will but you can't explain why you think it will, magic perhaps? is that why they refer to faith as gullibility? reality is really scary isn't it?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

C2O6H2 is not using subscript numbers.

Those subscript and superscript tags don't work here anymore.

You can just use a smaller font. It's not perfect, but makes it readable: C2O6H2

E.T.A. oops, gazumped by pgp_protector!

 

[AV1611VET]

You can just use a smaller font.

Or I could employ Occam's razor and say CC, instead of C2.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Or I could employ Occam's razor and say CC, instead of C2.

It depends whether you wish to communicate clearly or not. Your suggestion is not conventional usage and has poor readability in general.

 

[AV1611VET]

It depends whether you wish to communicate clearly or not.

Like when I called it "antifreeze" in the OP?

I'm not going to defend the way I wrote it anymore, since I have a feeling you guys are playing dumb.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Like when I called it "antifreeze" in the OP?

'Antifreeze' is fine, although rather unspecific - there are many antifreeze compounds.

I'm not going to defend the way I wrote it anymore, since I have a feeling you guys are playing dumb.

The point is, if you're going to use a chemical formula, there's a standard notation, just as there is a standard notation for mathematical or algebraic formulae.

 

[Kylie]

Cough ... didn't I go out of my way to mention chemical evolution?

Do you see why I call these "challenges" now?

People will act like they don't understand what I'm asking, in an effort to get me to keep adding to my OP (see Post 2), until it is ruined by feature creep.

They're only challenges because you don't understand evolution (despite having been told countless times - are you sure you aren't a troll?) and your challenges make no sense.