The SSD and 12 ISD's mix it up in Romulan space

[Praeothmin]

What is this stupidity? You do not need to look at his calcs to know that it is wrong? Do you possess telepathy?

it's called judging based off consistent history of a person there are DOW's warsies and SB'ers so biased that there s simply no need to look at a calc you know for an absolute fact it's going to be bullshit as it always is

A good debater will still try to prove the calculations wrong, because sometimes, even DOWs can post valid arguments, and to ignore everything that comes from them on the basis of them supposedly being DOWs is bad debating, since you have not disproven anything...

[Admiral Breetai]

A good debater will still try to prove the calculations wrong, because sometimes, even DOWs can post valid arguments, and to ignore everything that comes from them on the basis of them supposedly being DOWs is bad debating, since you have not disproven anything...

how many good DOW's do you know? outside of about four I can think of off hand (and then only when not debating star wars) that I have had genuinely pleasant experiences with who I could trust implicitly and if I felt something was wrong with their conclusions I'd bother to actually take a good look at.

besides I wasn't saying issue a blanket dismissal that is poor debating especially if Picard was doing that though I don't think he was. I was saying if you know the guy and know him well there's no reason not to just toss yer hands in the air and go "yeah no"

[Praeothmin]

Well, that's something I don't really agree with, I feel it's best to show why you believe things are bad or false...

Of course, say you've already debunked the conclusions in another thread, simply saying so with a link to the thread is acceptable, as you are again debunking the argument (by referrencing the counter-argument)...

I guess it's just a question of different POVs...

[StarWarsStarTrek]

How do you know it was a DOW. From what I recall, it was a random SB member that did a three line calculation and was flabbergasted by the result.

But no, every calc that turns out to hurt ST is from a Dow, based on your view

[Mith]

That's not to scoff at the achivement that is the Death Star, but it doesn't really present anything in terms of uber gravity technology.

Well, in AotC, we see Acclamators and Trade Federation spheres land on and take off planets.
If they did this using thrusters, and not Anti-grav, then every time one such ship took off the blast from its rockets or ion engines would devastate the surronding areas, like the space shuttle's does...

Since these ships taking off never do such damage, then they are not using simply rocket thrust to achieve this, they are most likely using anti-grav tehcnology of some sort, which is very impressive, and again points to SW knowing about gravity control...

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

According to the Technical Manual, from what I recall (and while it is not full canon, the writer's have attributed it as "pretty accurate" and "rough predictions"), the Enterprise needs tension fields just to enter the atmosphere without tearing itself apart.

Star destroyers are much larger than most ST ships.

[Picard]

Technical Manuals are not, and never were canon in the slightest. Meaning that if manual states something which is not stated in show directly, then it doesn't exist.

[Praeothmin]

That's not to scoff at the achivement that is the Death Star, but it doesn't really present anything in terms of uber gravity technology.

Well, in AotC, we see Acclamators and Trade Federation spheres land on and take off planets.
If they did this using thrusters, and not Anti-grav, then every time one such ship took off the blast from its rockets or ion engines would devastate the surronding areas, like the space shuttle's does...

Since these ships taking off never do such damage, then they are not using simply rocket thrust to achieve this, they are most likely using anti-grav tehcnology of some sort, which is very impressive, and again points to SW knowing about gravity control...

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

Never said it did, I just said SW also has anti-grav...

[Mith]

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

According to the Technical Manual, from what I recall (and while it is not full canon, the writer's have attributed it as "pretty accurate" and "rough predictions"), the Enterprise needs tension fields just to enter the atmosphere without tearing itself apart.

Star destroyers are much larger than most ST ships.

Well, given as no such problem was ever suggested in Voyager's numerous landing sequences--one of which was it literally spiraling out of control before entering the atmosphere, I find that a rather hard pill to swallow.

[Mike DiCenso]

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

According to the Technical Manual, from what I recall (and while it is not full canon, the writer's have attributed it as "pretty accurate" and "rough predictions"), the Enterprise needs tension fields just to enter the atmosphere without tearing itself apart.

Star destroyers are much larger than most ST ships.

Do you have a page number for that? Not that it matters since most of the TNG TM is not canon anyway.
-Mike

[Mith]

That's still a far cry from ST Tech. Hell, they have the same thing in Voyager where we see that ship lifting off without any major blasts--and it stood on a bunch of slim legs while there the whole time (which was stupid). I still don't see how this surpasses Trek technology.

According to the Technical Manual, from what I recall (and while it is not full canon, the writer's have attributed it as "pretty accurate" and "rough predictions"), the Enterprise needs tension fields just to enter the atmosphere without tearing itself apart.

Star destroyers are much larger than most ST ships.

Do you have a page number for that? Not that it matters since most of the TNG TM is not canon anyway.
-Mike

Probably the same page that mentions the dolphin tanks...