phoenixgw said:
While the text regarding the Hebrew knowledge of pi was obtained from the web, I was aware of it before as were others. The poster of this info was passing along info and my transcription wasn't 100% word for word.
Certainly your not under the impression that a stolen quote needs to be 100 % identical to its source to be plagiarism. Please say no.
In any case I think it's interesting to look at just how closely your plagiarism is to the original.
ABARIM PUBLICATIONS said.
You said
ithe word for measuring line is usually (q-w), while in 1 Ki 7:23 it's (q-w-h)
The word for measuring line is usually (q+w), while in 1 Ki 7:23 it's (q+w+h).
Now establish the numerical value of each word: q+w = 100+6 = 106; q+w+h = 100+6+5 = 111.
Now establish the numerical value of each word: q+w = 100+6 = 106; q+w+h = 100+6+5 = 111.
Now divide 111 by 106 and multiply the outcome with the 3 for dummies. What do you get:
Now Divide 111 by 106, andmultiply the outcome with tby 3 for dummies what and you get:
3,1415094339622641509433962264151! Hah! Holy is the Lord!
3.1415094339622641509433962264151 This was about as accurate as one could expect in this time.
Sorry to say, changing a few inconsequential words doesn't save you from plagiarism.
This is not an academic forum so anything from the net is considered public domain.
That, my naive friend, is the kind of ignorance that can get you a registered letter from the law firm of
Gotcha Now.
I am familiar enough with Biblical Hebrew to read the original text and verify the info; which I did, and passed along the message as a courtesy. I never claimed to be the author of the text nor the discoverer of the Hebrew measurement of pi. I post to provide insight and help others if I can. Your remark and your hostility is contrary to the nature of the forum, which is to help and encourage one another.
That's very admirable, but it doesn't give you permission to plagiarize the works of others. In fact, I don't know of anything that does.
Your remark does neither, nor does it serve any constructive purpose.
Well, aside from not plagiarizing, which in a sense is doing a good you failed to do, I thought it would serve as a heads-up to you and anyone else who may be prone to pass of the works of others as their own. And, I think that's pretty constructive, at least IMO it's more useful than what you posted.
I suggest you go punch a wall if you want to vent, or go to a forum where trolls are welcome.
Read: "Leave me and my nefarious posting ways alone. People with scruples are not wanted here."
Your anger is a projection of your own self hatred.
Everyone: "Kettle, I'd like you to meet pot."
And for those who may be peeking in on this little exchange, believe me, posts on the web are not public domain unless they meet public domain criteria. Phoenix's source does not. BUT, even if it did, using the works of others without acknowledgment still amounts to plagiarism. Ask any 11th grade school kid who got caught passing off the work of some ancient author as his own. Smack on the hand with a wooden ruler for you, phoenixgw.
Oh yes,
HERE is your source, which you again "neglected" to provide.
(q+w+h). Now establish the numerical value of each word: q+w = 100+6 = 106; q+w+h = 100+6+5 = 111. Divide 111 by 106, multiply by 3 and you get: 3.1415094339622641509433962264151 This was about as accurate as one could expect in this time.
