Hanshithispantz Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Please explain how 'the proof is in the pudding' works then There's no proof in the pudding, the proof is in the eating (ie does it taste good). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 It's not like a Christmas pudding where the coin inside is evidence to a murder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toondave Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Putting your proof in a pudding would be a very inefficient and messy way of being a mathematician Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toondave Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 quick someone check fermats pantry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Heard Descartes used to be an absolute fiend for hiding his workings inside a Flaugnarde, the cheeky bastard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Please explain how 'the proof is in the pudding' works then There's no proof in the pudding, the proof is in the eating (ie does it taste good). uhh uhhh how do you put proof "in" an "eating" durrr durrrr that phrase makes no sense Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 You're not playing a deck here mind, Thomas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 But anyway the proof is in the action of eating. The important point here is that the shortened phrase states something completely different, lighten the fuck up EDIT: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/proof-of-the-pudding.html A write up of the phrase for all the thrillseekers out there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaizero Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Wouldn't the pudding itself be the proof and the eating the process of checking the proof? The pudding - being good or bad - is proof in itself. But you check the proof of how good it is by eating it, hence the proof is the pudding. Not in the pudding. You're all wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Crooks Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 What have I done. Proof of something through doing actually doing it. In football for instance 'we can stop up, but the only thing that counts is doing it' cue John carver saying 'the proof is in the pudding' moral of the story - don't copy John carver. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peppe Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 "I could care less" is a funny one too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 "I could care less" is a funny one too That one drives me mental Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toondave Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Heard Descartes used to be an absolute fiend for hiding his workings inside a Flaugnarde, the cheeky bastard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Open_C Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Prove, is, in the proof-of-the-pudding expression, used in its original sense of 'test' (see also: proving grounds, proving bread dough). It makes perfect sense read in that context Has somebody already posted that? Couldn't bear to read back[emoji38] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bovineblue Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 'Someone's let a cat out' I believe the correct phrase is 'who let the dogs out?' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 For all intensive purposes he's already gone. Wouldn't be surprised to see these last 7 phoned in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superior Acuña Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 For all intensive purposes he's already gone. Wouldn't be surprised to see these last 7 phoned in. Not sure if joke after all the discussion on phrasing, or serious... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley17 Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 What a load of shit as well. Rafa might be the only one in that dressing room who thinks we can stay up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Would be worrying if he phoned in a massive percentage of the games he had when he arrived like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 For all intensive purposes he's already gone. Wouldn't be surprised to see these last 7 phoned in. Not sure if joke after all the discussion on phrasing, or serious... plz giv benefit of doubt couldn't help myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 For all intensive purposes he's already gone. Wouldn't be surprised to see these last 7 phoned in. Yep, we're a shoe in for relegation now. Not a surprise with all the pre-Madonnas in that fucking dressing room. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 Love 'for all intensive purposes' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LV Posted April 6, 2016 Share Posted April 6, 2016 For all intensive purposes he's already gone. Wouldn't be surprised to see these last 7 phoned in. Yep, we're a shoe in for relegation now. Not a surprise with all the pre-Madonnas in that f***ing dressing room. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marmoset Posted April 7, 2016 Share Posted April 7, 2016 Prove, is, in the proof-of-the-pudding expression, used in its original sense of 'test' (see also: proving grounds, proving bread dough). It makes perfect sense read in that context Has somebody already posted that? Couldn't bear to read back[emoji38] This. Hans is silly. Proof is in the pudding is a fine adaptation. Silly Hans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted April 7, 2016 Share Posted April 7, 2016 Open C's post disproves that man! It's "the test is in the pudding" vs "the test of the pudding." I had no idea proof meant test until I read that article like Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts