A challenge to Trekkies

[Picard]

No it was not and that was never even implied or supported with othetr coments or comparisons, it was a general comment and considerably more likely refering to a contemporary small town. However Anchorhead, Mos Eisley and Mos Espa are all towns as per G canon.

Did you even read the quote? The quote was near the beginning of ROTS during the Battle of Coruscant. Obviously it's in the context of Coruscant.

No, it is not. It is in context of Star Wars and is guideline to reader. So you can use Bastrop, you can use Mos Eisley, but you CAN'T use Coruscant. Coruscant is ecumenopolis, not a small town.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Did you even read the quote? The quote was near the beginning of ROTS during the Battle of Coruscant. Obviously it's in the context of Coruscant.

It is not obvious at all the comment was a general one towards small towns and in no way shape or form was it in regards to a small town on Coruscant, and even if Coruscant had such a thing as small towns on it what makes you think that they would be any larger than the rest of the SW galaxys small towns?.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Don't make only a claim - explain it. How is it relevant?

Somebody questioned my scaling by claiming that Tarsus might not be a standard sized town. My rebuttal was that New York City was not a small town either, so therefore the scaling is correct, or even low end.

That's what I said earlier:

• • • • I think the question of the town is a non sequitur for both sides.
        
        Neither the one nor the other side can show, how large an average town in the Star Wars galaxy is.
        
        Correct is, that there are large cities.
        
        But ecumenopolises are the exception. Otherwise Ric Olie wouldn't have described the fact, that the entire planet (Coruscant) is one big city as if it were something special. It would be StarWarsStarTreks responsibility to prove that this is not the case because he would be the one to claim that such ecumenopolises are normal although only a few are mentioned in Star Wars. And it is still a fact that a few ecumenopolises are statistically irrelevant in a galaxy with millions of inhabited planets.
        
        Furthermore an ecumenopolises ≠ the average city and the average city ≠ the average town and the average town ≠ a small town.
        
        On the other side, as we don't know, how big the average town is in the Star Wars galaxy, we do not know, what is considered small. A few samples are statistically irrelevant in a galaxy with millions of inhabited planets. But they are showing that a small town does not have to be bigger than what we on Earth would consider a small town. Otherwise such towns wouldn't be called towns but villages.
        
        Insofar one shouldn't use the quote, that a turbo laser can destroy a small town, to calculate its strength. The quote is too vague and it's going nowhere.

We have not enough examples to determine, how big a small town is in the Star Wars galaxy. All we have are a few examples. That's not enough. It's quite possible, that in the Star Wars galaxy, small towns are usually bigger than Mos Eisley, Mos Espa or Anchorhead. But it is also possible that they are smaller.

The thing is, that I am saying that we do not know, how big a small town is.

You on the other hand are arguing, that a small town has to have a diameter of a few hundred miles.

But you are not providing any evidence for that assumption and are ignoring the fact, that Mos Eisley, Mos Espa and Anchorhead are towns in the Star Wars galaxy but do not have a diameter of a few hundred miles.

Insofar, we do not know, what was meant in the RotS novelization when a small town was mentioned. And this does mean, that you can not claim, that a fire power that is enough to vaporize a small town, has to be enough to vaporize a town with a diameter of a few hundred miles.

It is a non sequitur.

And this applies a fortiori for your argument, that this quote was used in the context of Coruscant. There are no small towns on Coruscant because Coruscant is an ecumenopolis. To say that the small town from said quote has to be a big small town because it was said during the battle above Coruscant is not plausible. It would be only plausible if there were small towns on Coruscant.

I got the small town size based on scaling from our world. That is, I took the ratio of a large town:small town in real life and scaled it up to Star Wars based on Tarsus.

Further evidence is in that Boba Fett said that Mandalore has a few million people, and that they are outnumbered by many towns. This implies that Star Wars towns have the population of millions of people. This is further impressive, since Traviss, the author of the novel in which Boba said that, is notorious for reduces Star Wars's scale.

No, I didn't use both images.
But it wouldn't be wrong if I had used them.
Because the one image shows buildings from what was canonical referred to as town while the other image does not even show a town. It shows buildings of an ecumenopolis. On this planet, the term town or small town is as meaningless as village. They do not exist on this planet.

Explain to me why you think that my scaling is incorrect. Also justify why it turns out to be pretty much exactly 200 gigatons; which, BTW, I did not pre plan beforehand.

[Who is like God arbour]

I already explained it.

You have taken a city and a town from Earth and got a ratio between both.

Your city had the size of New York (305 square miles), the small town the size Darkstar has chosen (7.3 square miles). You have gotten the ratio 41.78:1.

But you did not show, that this is a universal ratio on Earth. Statistically, that method is nonsense. You have to determine the average size of a small town on Earth and the average size of a city on Earth. Only then can you determine a ratio between both although even than most comparisons between small towns and cities will be far off. That's the problem with statistic. If you have a one meter tall man and a two meter tall man, they are statistically 1,5 meter tall. But that does not reflect reality.

But even if we assume that your Earth ratio would be correct, you do not provide any evidence, that you can apply your Earth ratio on the Star Wars galaxy. There the ratio between cities and small towns could be totally different.

Then you decide that Tarsus is an average city and calculate from there the dimension for a small town. But you do not show that Tarsus is an average city in the Star Wars galaxy. As I have said, it could be already one of the bigger cities in Star Wars, maybe already one of the biggest cities beside the few ecumenopolises like Coruscant.

From the beginning to the end, your method is flawed.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

I already explained it.

You have taken a city and a town from Earth and got a ratio between both.

Your city had the size of New York (305 square miles), the small town the size Darkstar has chosen (7.3 square miles). You have gotten the ratio 41.78:1.

But you did not show, that this is a universal ratio on Earth. Statistically, that method is nonsense. You have to determine the average size of a small town on Earth and the average size of a city on Earth. Only then can you determine a ratio between both although even than most comparisons between small towns and cities will be far off. That's the problem with statistic. If you have a one meter tall man and a two meter tall man, they are statistically 1,5 meter tall. But that does not reflect reality.

I'd assume that darkstar was honest and chose an average small town. If he was not honest, he would have chosen an even smaller town (since that would help the pro Trek side)...note that this would actually make my claim low end, not high end, so your reasoning does not work out.

As for New York City, it is by no means a standard large city, but that actually makes it low end, because then the small towns would seem to be even smaller in comparison to cities, which would lower my calculations by lowering the energy needed to vaporize the smaller towns, not increase them.

Therefore, all of your complaints would merely make my calculations low end, suggesting an even higher figure.

But even if we assume that your Earth ratio would be correct, you do not provide any evidence, that you can apply your Earth ratio on the Star Wars galaxy. There the ratio between cities and small towns could be totally different.

It could be, but there is no evidence that it is, especially since social dynamics in Star Wars are clearly very similar to our own.

Then you decide that Tarsus is an average city and calculate from there the dimension for a small town. But you do not show that Tarsus is an average city in the Star Wars galaxy. As I have said, it could be already one of the bigger cities in Star Wars, maybe already one of the biggest cities beside the few ecumenopolises like Coruscant.

New York City is also one of the bigger cities on Earth, so the ratio is evened out if Tarsus is a large city (which there is no evidence to suggest that it is, especially since it's from KOTOR). If Tarsus is not a large city, then my figure becomes even more low end, because I compared Tarsus to New York City, a very large city by modern standards.

Therefore, your criticism is ignoring the fact that I compared Tarsus to New York City, one of the biggest cities today, in order to keep the calculations reasonable.

From the beginning to the end, your method is flawed.

No, it clearly isn't, especially it turns out to be almost exactly 200 gigatons. Is that a coincidence?

[mojo]

mindblowing that you guys would bother to go on after the first page of this thread. i managed to read three pages before i had to stop in disgust. this jackass just ignores every valid point and keeps repeating the same drivel over and over. god almighty. you're a bunch of saints. if it were my forum i would have banned him outright after the first few DOZEN times you fulfilled his original requirements for conceding the point. and i love how eventually he just gets more and more 'busy' and can't be bothered to even try anymore.

That's what makes this place different, Mojo. This is not SDN, nor SBC where you can ban someone on the pretext of them simply disagreeing with the majority opinion, or the opinion of the admin/mod staff. SWST has not directly insulted anyone, though I do note a couple occasion recently where's he/she's borderline close to doing so. If that means we get piles of "drivel", then so be it. At least it keeps everyone here on their toes and their debate skills sharpened.
-Mike

i think i was misunderstood. these are facts we're talking about rather than opinions. this guy said 'give me this evidence and i'll concede the point'. this evidence is immediately given, over and over again. on almost EVERY SINGLE VALID POINT, he doesn't even bother to TRY to debunk the point, he simply ignores it or reasserts a point he made earlier which was itself instantly debunked. when this is instantly debunked again, sometimes USING SEPARATE LOGIC from the FIRST TIME it was debunked, he simply ignores it and moves on. he has no intention of living up to the bargain he himself made, and the terms he himself outlined have been fulfilled a dozen times or more.
now, i wasn't saying 'hey JMS ban this guy because he doesn't agree with my opinions'. it bothers me that apparently that is how i sounded. i was frustrated and should have taken a little longer to gather my thoughts. but even if i were to agree with the idea that every single piece of evidence thrown on the wall in this thread were simple opinions, then i personally think it's his responsibility to at least TRY to show why the evidence is faulty. he made a deal and he should man up. you could argue that he is one and you are many, so hey, maybe he's just taking his time and he hasn't gotten around to all the points that have been made. here's the thing, tho - many of these points have been made multiple times over TWELVE PAGES, and the guy has written huge walls of text. if there were logical, valid responses to the points made, he would have made them by now. i'm going to go ahead and predict the future here - he will not do this. he will simply continue to ignore them or go back to old arguments and force you to debunk them again and again.
anyway, the banning thing was just me letting off steam. but seriously, man, JUST ADMIT DEFEAT or show us why you're right on the salient points.

[mojo]

my great dream is for the dude to come along now and say 'jesus christ, buddy, relax'.

please?

[Airlocke_Jedi_Knight]

Yeah.....It IS irritating when people are stubborn........

But, MEH. MoJo, Khas is right, if you think this guy is bad, you should see Jason. MUUUUUCH worse. I'm kinda desensitized to it, at this point. This kinda stubbornness is actually what caused me to lose interest in the debate.

Yes, you read that right. Jason ruined the debate for me.

[mojo]

no thank you, one forum about star trek is enough.

although i do lurk SDN intermittently, the drama is fantastic.

[Airlocke_Jedi_Knight]

no thank you, one forum about star trek is enough.

although i do lurk SDN intermittently, the drama is fantastic.

Asvs isn't about ST. It is barely about the debate at all. I have something like 1350 posts over there, and MAYBE 200 are debate related. There is moer trolling than anything else.

[mojo]

a whole forum where it's mostly trolling is boring. trolling is only interesting in forums which try hard not to limit the speech of members while simultaneously trying hard to give members the benefit of the doubt if it's at all possible the troll was trying to make a point..

..like starfleetjedi?

[Picard]

No, it clearly isn't, especially it turns out to be almost exactly 200 gigatons. Is that a coincidence?

It means that EU has been shaped to fit ICS. Non-canon intentionally shaped to support non-canon.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

mindblowing that you guys would bother to go on after the first page of this thread. i managed to read three pages before i had to stop in disgust. this jackass just ignores every valid point and keeps repeating the same drivel over and over. god almighty. you're a bunch of saints. if it were my forum i would have banned him outright after the first few DOZEN times you fulfilled his original requirements for conceding the point. and i love how eventually he just gets more and more 'busy' and can't be bothered to even try anymore.

That's what makes this place different, Mojo. This is not SDN, nor SBC where you can ban someone on the pretext of them simply disagreeing with the majority opinion, or the opinion of the admin/mod staff. SWST has not directly insulted anyone, though I do note a couple occasion recently where's he/she's borderline close to doing so. If that means we get piles of "drivel", then so be it. At least it keeps everyone here on their toes and their debate skills sharpened.
-Mike

i think i was misunderstood. these are facts we're talking about rather than opinions. this guy said 'give me this evidence and i'll concede the point'. this evidence is immediately given, over and over again. on almost EVERY SINGLE VALID POINT, he doesn't even bother to TRY to debunk the point, he simply ignores it or reasserts a point he made earlier which was itself instantly debunked. when this is instantly debunked again, sometimes USING SEPARATE LOGIC from the FIRST TIME it was debunked, he simply ignores it and moves on. he has no intention of living up to the bargain he himself made, and the terms he himself outlined have been fulfilled a dozen times or more.
now, i wasn't saying 'hey JMS ban this guy because he doesn't agree with my opinions'. it bothers me that apparently that is how i sounded. i was frustrated and should have taken a little longer to gather my thoughts. but even if i were to agree with the idea that every single piece of evidence thrown on the wall in this thread were simple opinions, then i personally think it's his responsibility to at least TRY to show why the evidence is faulty. he made a deal and he should man up. you could argue that he is one and you are many, so hey, maybe he's just taking his time and he hasn't gotten around to all the points that have been made. here's the thing, tho - many of these points have been made multiple times over TWELVE PAGES, and the guy has written huge walls of text. if there were logical, valid responses to the points made, he would have made them by now. i'm going to go ahead and predict the future here - he will not do this. he will simply continue to ignore them or go back to old arguments and force you to debunk them again and again.
anyway, the banning thing was just me letting off steam. but seriously, man, JUST ADMIT DEFEAT or show us why you're right on the salient points.

Why don't you back up your claims? Show me these oh-so-brilliant points that I supposedly can't counter.

The absolute lower limit for turbolaser firepower is in the low kilotons based on the asteroid vaporization scene. Therefore, all instances if sub kiloton turbolaser firepower is overriden by G canon, with the rationalization being that the firepower was dialed down. The presence of BDZs implies at least megaton level firepower. Although some BDZs are less impressive than others, the higher end BDZs are numerous enough that they can be considered to be possible and not some sort of fluke. Therefore, we have a turbolaser firepower in the gigatons, thus validating the ICS and other higher end claims. Quite frankly, any claims of sub kiloton firepower is ridiculous. Any claim of kiloton level firepower does not explain BDZs, even low end ones. Any claim of megaton level firepower is more valid, more does not explain higher end BDZs and quotes blatantly stating gigaton or more level firepower.

[Trinoya]

The presence of BDZs implies at least megaton level firepower. Although some BDZs are less impressive than others, the higher end BDZs are numerous enough that they can be considered to be possible and not some sort of fluke. Therefore, we have a turbolaser firepower in the gigatons, thus validating the ICS and other higher end claims.

At no point do megaton level weapons justify the gigaton level quote.

BDZ has no time frame given, you could achieve such effects with SUB KILOTON weapons given enough time (mind you, I'm not claiming that they are sub kiloton). Simply put, megaton level weapons are more than enough to accomplish ANY of the observable BDZ effects.

Also: Since the guns on the acclamator do not exist they therefore contradict G-Cannon.

[Lucky]

The presence of BDZs implies at least megaton level firepower. Although some BDZs are less impressive than others, the higher end BDZs are numerous enough that they can be considered to be possible and not some sort of fluke. Therefore, we have a turbolaser firepower in the gigatons, thus validating the ICS and other higher end claims.

At no point do megaton level weapons justify the gigaton level quote.

BDZ has no time frame given, you could achieve such effects with SUB KILOTON weapons given enough time (mind you, I'm not claiming that they are sub kiloton). Simply put, megaton level weapons are more than enough to accomplish ANY of the observable BDZ effects.

Also: Since the guns on the acclamator do not exist they therefore contradict G-Cannon.

A BDZ is to be carried out with no less then three Star Destroyers as I recall, and can have hundreds of smaller ships helping.