“Proof That Girls Are Evil”
May 16, 2007 
Sun
No, this is not my proof, but I thought it’s quite funny how it’s presented (if you haven’t seen it before).
When I hit the Stumble button on my broswer, I was shown the following image from this site:
Not that I agree with the conclusion, but I didn’t find any flaw in the procedure 
. Did you?
Hehe…that’s funny. Technically, the Bible states “For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil…” (1 Timothy 6:10)…so would that make us men the evil ones?
Hah — Don beat me to what I was going to say.
Cute though!
Lol! That’s pretty good.
However, yes, there are flaws in the logic, especially in the first step. Girls require time and money, sure, but that doesn’t necessarily lead to girls = time x money … it could easily lead to girls = time + money, or girls = 4time x money/2, or more likely, girls = time + money + love + honesty etc.
Also, it could also be said that boys require time and money, so the same procedure would be followed.
Another thing: the equation take a common English phrase and turns it into an identity statement, but it’s not necessarily so. For example, in English, time is money does not necessarily mean time = money. It could also mean that time is a subset of money. When I say that Fred is German, that does not mean that Fred = German (and thus German = Fred), because Fred is only one German. There are many other Germans.
OK, that was a bit too detailed for a joke equation (and there are other problems as well), but you asked!
Leo: Well, as you said, I feel what makes the proof funny is that it takes a common English phrases and interpolate it for its own use and also makes it fit very well in the equation. Otherwise, it won’t be so funny
)
the first step is wrong.
if girls equal time and money and you multiply your just getting the total money you spent on her, your not including the time. BAM !
The problem is that if you state “girls are time and money,” it should come out time + money because in math terms, ‘and’ refers to addition, not multiplication.
At which point the entire proof falls apart.