The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

[loCAtek]

Then let debate continue, (whether you click the link or not) Huzzah! Its purpose is greater than ourselves...

[Sean]

Oh I'm more than happy to debate Lo, just so long as you debate honestly. TBH I'm not seeing too much of it right now.

[loCAtek]

A long read from Dictionary.com that explains the usages of 'if' to indicate uncertainly;

Usage Note: In informal writing both if and whether are standard in their use to introduce a clause indicating uncertainty after a verb such as ask, doubt, know, learn, or see: We shall soon learn whether (or if) it is true. In such contexts, however, the use of if can sometimes create ambiguities. Depending on the intended meaning, the sentence Let her know if she is invited might be better paraphrased as Let her know whether she is invited or If she is invited, let her know. •

In conditional sentences the clause introduced by if may contain either a past subjunctive verb (if I were going) or an indicative verb (if I am going; if I was going), depending on the intended meaning. According to the traditional rule, the subjunctive should be used to describe an occurrence that is presupposed to be contrary to fact, as in if I were ten years younger or if Napoleon had won at Waterloo. The main verb of such a sentence must then contain the modal verb would or (less frequently) should: If America were still a British colony, we would have an anthem that human voices could sing. If I were the President, I should (or would) declare November 1 a national holiday. When the situation described by the if clause is not presupposed to be false, however, that clause must contain an indicative verb, and the choice of verb in the main clause will depend on the intended meaning: If Hamlet was really written by Marlowe, as many have argued, then we have underestimated Marlowe's genius. If Kevin was out all day, then it makes sense that he couldn't answer the phone. Note also that the presence of the modal verb would in the main clause should not be taken as a sign that the verb in the if clause must be in the subjunctive, if the content of that clause is not presupposed to be false: If there is anything I can do to help, I should be happy to do so. He would always call her from the office if he was (not were) going to be late for dinner.

• Again according to the traditional rule, the subjunctive is not correctly used following verbs such as ask or wonder in if clauses that express indirect questions, even if the content of the question is presumed to be contrary to fact: We wondered if dinner was (not were) included in the room price. Some of the people we met even asked us if California was (not were) an island. • With all deference to the traditional rules governing the use of the subjunctive, it should be noted that a survey of the prose of reputable writers over the past 200 years would reveal a persistent tendency to use the indicative was where the traditional rule would require the subjunctive were. A sentence beginning If I was the only boy in the world, while not strictly correct, is wholly unremarkable. But the corresponding practice of using the subjunctive in place of the indicative may be labeled a hypercorrection. • In spoken English there is a growing tendency to use would have in place of the subjunctive in contrary-to-fact clauses, as in if I would have been the President, but this usage is still widely considered incorrect. See Usage Notes at doubt, should, wish.

More

Learning English by Uncle Teng
Direct and Indirect Speech (Positive and negative questions)

1. In an indirect question, we place the subject of the reported clause before the verb as in a statement. We usually change the tense of the verb as well as the pronouns, possessive adjectives and time expressions in the reported clause.
Example:
a) We said to Janet, “Are you leaving the company next month?”
b) We asked Janet if she was leaving the company
(Reporting clause) (Subject + verb) (reporting clause)
the following month. (right)

[loCAtek]

Regardless, my point still stands, the answer I received, revealed I was correct;

Gob wrote:Obviously Lo still believes in the tooth fairy/santa/the bogeyman under the bed and all the things she was taught as a child, as it is impossible to stop believing in anything once you've been informed of it.

All of the above is a stereotype of a religious person, said by the intolerant who wishes to remain close-minded. None of the above is factual, but is designed to pigeonhole a spiritual character into something he can control; like a racist needs to control perceptions of ethnic people to maintain his prejudice.

[Sean]

I think you'll find that Strop's post was a general comment rather than an answer to a question you didn't ask...

All that remains now is to ascertain whether you are being deliberately obtuse, completely tonto or just completely ignorant of basic English.

I'll wager that your next post or two will answer that one...

One more thing:

If Lo really believes that she is making any kind of sense here then she is sadly delusional.

See, that sentence started with the word 'if' but wasn't a question... it's what we call a 'statement with a proviso'.
Let me know if you need any more help with this. I'm particularly good with the alphabet if you get stuck...

[The Hen]

LOL. Gob said that after you made your silly statement about the flatearthers learning "more about the earth," with "nothing was taken" but "something was added" once they found out it wasn't, in fact, flat.


LOL you are the silly one aren't you.

[loCAtek]

~Heh, why do you always chirp in for Gob while he goes AWOL?

[loCAtek]

If that's what Gob wants to say, why doesn't he say it? I'm so scary, 'eh?

[Sean]

Didn't you know Lo? Strop has you on ignore...

And he DID fucking say it! You just twisted it to fit in with your "everyone is picking on me" agenda...

[loCAtek]

Well, he appears to have Hen on interference, but you're right it's not about them.

[Sean]

So now it's a conspiracy eh?

[loCAtek]

Didn't you know Lo? Strop has you on ignore...

And he DID fucking say it! You just twisted it to fit in with your "everyone is picking on me" agenda...

LOL. Gob said that after you made your silly statement about the flatearthers learning "more about the earth," with "nothing was taken" but "something was added" once they found out it wasn't, in fact, flat.


LOL you are the silly one aren't you.

Well, you did say he has me on ignore, but then Hen says he was responding to me.

Regardless the obfuscation, my point was confirmed;

All of the above is a stereotype of a religious person, said by the intolerant who wishes to remain close-minded. None of the above is factual, but is designed to pigeonhole a spiritual character into something he can control; like a racist needs to control perceptions of ethnic people to maintain his prejudice.

If he doesn't want to address it that's fine. If other posters don't wish to address it that's fine too. Further pigeonholing by anyone, just continues to demonstrate my point. So, carry on then.

[The Hen]

Gob was responding to a quote Sean made of your inane twitterings.

I am SO SORRY that is so difficult for you to follow dear.

Your point has not been made unless it was to show me you were a fool. In which case you have done that superbly.

Well done that fool.

[loCAtek]

ThX for demonstrating my point, well done.

[Sean]

Oh dear...

Strop, you should really read some of this guff. If nothing else I'd be interested in your professional opinion...

[loCAtek]

Very good, ThX for your demo. Do go on.

[Gob]

Ha! You were stupid enough to take her off ignore, don't try and get me to fall into the trap just to make you feel better..

[loCAtek]

Nicely done, pls continue.

I'm so glad you're willing to prove my point.

[Sean]

There's enough material for a whole conference!

[loCAtek]

LOL thX U muX


Don't stop flattering yourselves, at all as it shows me correct.