The day of reckoning has arrived.

[Angrboda]

I was going to reply, but then I realized you didn't say anything worth replying to.  Just the usual bullshit and lies.  You really are pathetic.

---

Oh, one thing worth replying to, you fucked up.


And you're not competent.  The words you quoted are from a letter to the Quote Investigator asking him to look into the quote.  They are the conclusions of the letter writer, not of the investigation by the Quote Investigator.  But then you'd know that if you had done more than simply skim the text looking for something to dispute.  Your analysis of the Quote Investigator webpage is shallow and incompetent.  Here is what the Quote Investigator concluded:

"In conclusion, this saying is not from Albert Einstein. It is probably from a channeler named Darryl Anka who has assigned the words to an entity named Bashar."

So, yes he did say in the affirmative, contrary to your claim that he did not.  When you actually learn to read, maybe you'll do more than just skim the page looking for something to refute.  As I said, you're pathetic.

 

By saying.......... It is probably from..........is the same as to say.......I think that.......NO DIFFERENCE Yog.

Bull balls.  You're full of shit.  Full stop.  

You made an error, and now, true to form, you're changing the substance of what you said.  "It is probably from" expresses a high degree of certainty, as much as is reasonable given the evidence, which he is only summarizing here.  Regardless, the question is not what level of certainty the Quote Investigator has, but what level of certainty one should have given the evidence that was presented.  So your bullshit argument about what he really means is just a diversion.  The question is does it make sense to attribute the quote to Einstein when the earliest attestation of the quote attributes it to someone else?  And the answer to that is an affirmative, "No, it does not."  As usual, you're full of red herrings and bullshit assertions.  You sidestepped the question only to step in your own excrement.

Nothing to do with any affirmative sentence.
As far as these sentences do not carry any evidence then they are guessing and guessing can not be put at the same level as to any positive and affirmative saying.
Nothing, zero, nil.

These sentences don't carry evidence because they are a summation of the evidence which came before them.  Duh.  You're so full of crap.  You're dismissing the whole of what was said based on only a part of what was said.  That's taking things out of context and is a form of lying.  As I said, you're just up to your usual bullshit and lies.  It's not a guessing, it's a conclusion based upon evidence which was presented, namely that the earliest attestation of the quote is not to Einstein, but to someone else.  If that evidence leads you to conclude that Einstein "probably" made that quote, then you're a fucking imbecile.  Again, your dancing is of no use because you haven't defused the central question.

That is bizarre Yog considering that your mother language is English while mine is not.
You should know better what is affirmative and what is not.

What's truly bizarre is the lengths you will go to in order to deny that you made an error.  Yet it's clear that you're just backpedaling here because you were WRONG about what the Quote investigator had said.  And this is just more bizarre contortions of logic and sense on your part.  "[T]his saying is not from Albert Einstein," is an affirmative statement, and if you don't understand that much, you should go back to butt fucking Italy where they do speak a language which you do understand. Again, it isn't a question of the Quote Investigator's use of language. That's just a red herring. What is at issue is the Quote Investigator's use of the evidence. A subject your inane bullshit has not even touched. Is it reasonable to conclude that the quote is from Einstein if the earliest attestation to it attributes it to someone else? If you answer that in the affirmative, then you're a fucking moron.