Airlocke_Jedi_Knight wrote:These same people who so staunchly support the ICS, also, of course, make us honorable debaters look bad with their rude, and often childish, behavior.
Precisely reconfirmed in one of Wong's so enlightening interventions in the ICS poll at SDN.
It would appear that he's considerably proud of hosting a group of thinkers... who appear to be qualified in various domains of science, probably such as physics, (bio)chemistry, astronomy, etc., using his traditional pedantic appeal to authority in the most laughable attempt to shift the attention of other debaters off the fact that the premises they espouse, the very basic tenets behind their logic and arguments, are simply and purely wrong and terribly selective.
An example, the X-wing firepower falsehood (borrowing RSA's title), a crucial argument they keep hammering on and on, which I had to deal with at SBC in the looong
ICS thread, when arguing against "the band."
A thread which itself mirrored a former
short discussion which Skyzeta jumped in to demonstrate his pro Wars bias and literally threaten l33telboi, clearly intervening as a mod and not a debater, taking a position in defense of Balrog. The same Skyzeta going on to ban all no-ICS threads, for the reminder.
So this stuff I talk about is proved wrong several times, and debunked with, notably, the use of
this image, showing that even bolts hitting armour and possibly shields can lead to the creation of sparkles, yet leave no damage to the ship's hull. Same can apply to the Death Star, and actually does, as we can observe when the camera flies above the surface, all those shots which Wong was quick to described as many bolts flash-vapourizing one cubic meter of metal, left absolutely no hole at all, not even a molten edge, nothing at all.
His method actually reminds me a lot of the methods used for much more serious topics concerning the analysis of explosions. They concentrate on the immediate impression and cultural concepts ingrained within average Joe's mind, but when you look at the details, it just fits fuck all.
The guys who'll repeatedly ignore all the points presented in the same three parter ICS thread, including the demonstration of the fallacious firepower figure for the Slave-I missile (and his attempt to reboot the subtopic
here), or the conclusive proof that the Trade Federation coreships were clearly hit multiple times by the SPHA-Ts, despite the claims of the ITW that they were
"self shielded" (same ITW which had Saxton as a consultant, of course! so much for the objectivity).
While I'm at it, I'll point out a few other posts, and the major argument to find in them.
Thread Part I
78: First big bite at the novel Death Star, and above all, tackling the hyperjump fallacy. Which has creeped up lately in a power generation thread (started by RJLCyberpunk, or Punk Maister as we know him here). l33telboi forwarded similar conclusions and other figures (and also had, in the same thread, to repeat the point about BattleFront II and the crystal core Palpatine eyed).
131: a demonstration of what happens when you over analyze VFX. Members here will probably remember that I already posted this picture here, and that Poe attempted to tackle this with the grace of a beached whale and... just failed badly (see his fantastic demonstration based on some katana job, Good Lord).
162: ITW's attempt at showing that the superlaser on the Death Star is just a very similar design to the one on the Geonosian ultimate weapon, which itself is derived from a superlaser used in Geonosis' foundries. Yet it runs on fusion and its abilities are far from formidable.
262: Addressing CommanderRazor's (mod) claim that the myth that the ICS is higher canon. Just a long lived myth.
267: The 190 MT fallacy, first post (more to come, much more documented and conclusive).
321: Quick estimation of the KOTOR era capital missiles fired at Serroco.
360: A note about Saxton enforcing the 19 km long Executor figure, just to be sure to add
another one to the pool of already many figures existing for the Executor. Of course, not only did he need to make it longer, but he had to come with an unnecessary new nomenclature, despite the Executor being just your SD, simply made bigger. It's not like the nomenclature in SW was always that strict or had to fit with the Navy's.
You can follow the discussion from post 363 to 365 with JCI if you wish.
374: Starts the topic about the A-wing crash and the shields of the Executor, to defend a bit of the Complete Locations (a variant name for one of the ITWs) which I wasn't sure to agree with, since apparently the book doesn't like the idea that the domes host shield generators, and notably because the book argues that shields drop at the moment the A-wings attack. Super duper coincidence don't you think? Leo1 was arguing that the guy standing in front of the console giving a feedback on the shield status, didn't notice shields were down until the bridge shook. Or delayed his report. Just for the kicks you know. He argues the Executor was under considerable bombardment (as per a generour interpretation of the novelization), but fails to understand that if that was the case, why then send two damn fighters which happen to just hit the dome as the shields fail, and not just fire an extra bolt at the bridge?
Duh duh duh.
You may appreciate his tip-toe dancing about shields were down but not down, etc. He argued that shields flickered at the two A-wigns approached and fired missiles. With absolutely zero evidence behind it (no bolt seen landing anywhere on or around the tower) and certainly no logic behind this, based on the way the ICS describes the mechanism of shields. Continues
here,
here,
here (with a picture), etc.
Actually, the last post also features the beginning of Leo1 arguing that AT-ATs have mini flak cannons above the temples' guns, which contradicts... the OT ICS. He has, of course, constantly been taking a bite at any possible debut of proof of flak.
447: Possibly a conclusion to the bridge's shield argument. Oh no, wait. Leo1 was going on with it again. So I had to put up
this reply (which also includes a part about Leo1's debut with his AT-AA argument to debunk the flak from AT-AT guns, which he failed at as well). You can notice the stupidity of pretending that a guy staring at a screen... was not staring at this very screen.
Wait, he was still insisting on with this absurd notion, so...
there. Features pictures of the Executor' asymetric repartition of other extra domes, plus the AT-AT & Flak argument at full throttle.
All of this continues
here.
Notice: The arguments about the AT-TE's main cannon, SPHA-T start a few posts later and, above all, a large section dedicated to flak guns, starts there. Notice
some warsies attempting to pretend that blaster/laser cannon bolts = missiles.
472: Comparing the bridge blasting impactor from TESN to the note about asteroid impacts against the hull of an ISD.
We notice that angle is important.
546: A word about the blaster-centric culture in Star Wars, dismissing missiles (which is apples and oranges with what the EU often claims).
Thread Part II
48: Random ruminations about the yields displayed by an AT-TE and the SPHA-Ts at Geonosis.
206: This is where I debunk the 190 MT missile claim once and for all. Plus some stuff about snowspeeder and Nantex fighter cannons.
211: Some note about the seismic mine.
324: First resumé post. Tackles:
- Slave-I's missiles (ICS: 190 megatons); I had to push Leo1 into a corner[/url] and have him stand up to his claims, and provide evidence for them, which he never did.
- Slave-I's cannons vs tiny asteroids and armour
- Slave-I's energy cannons and Delta-7s' defenses
- Dooku's ship and people shooting at it; about flak, blasters and invisible beams, quite interesting and new, actually.
325: Second résumé post, with the following bits inside:
- Defending the Nerfgun yields at Kashyyyk, Hoth, Teth, Geonosis, etc.
- Snowspeeder's cannons
- Millennium Falcon vs. TIEs' cannons: yields and flak
- The X-Wing Firepower Falsehood; which I spoke of earlier on.
- LAATs and Nantex energy cannons (Geonosian fighter weaponry); just a one sentence reply. Leo1 never really found a way to deal with that display of fire...power?
- Impactor vs ISD
326: Third post in this series.
- Identification of light, medium and heavy turbolasers on Venators and ISDs + Downfall's asteroids
- Seismic mines, effects and uses
- SPHA-Ts, LAATs, etc.: Comparing missiles and beams against various targets; SPHA-T nonsense finally dealt with.
- Venator vs. Invisible Hand, and (not) shooting at (supposedly) obvious weak spots
- RotJ's ISD going down in the background: why?
- Red herrings about other universes; just Leo1 being silly.
327: Last one.
- Some more talk about the mechanics and effects of bolts, in general
- Shields' power requirements vs. attacks vs. reactors' outputs (started with Hoth's shield)
- More about exploding reactors: 1st Death Star
- More FLAK: Unproven presence of AA shells nearby snowspeeders, sparkles and Nantex fighters
- Spaceships' accelerations
End.
Part II is largely noticeble for Point45 wasting people's time with a large bunch of inane arguments and pissing off mods, notably by spamming their mailboxes with reports on old posts.
It took time for the mods to deal with him, and largely because of his abuse of report spam and "concession accepted" finishing move, hardly for the fact that he was presenting no good argument and no evidence to back them up.
