I got the impression that the comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. The joke lies in the fact that saying "100% of real numbers" isn't *technically* the same thin

I got the impression that the comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek. The joke lies in the fact that saying "100% of real numbers" isn't *technically* the same thing as saying "all real numbers", because there's not really a good way to define a meaning for "100%" that lets you exclude rational numbers (or any other countable subset of the reals) and get something other than 100%.