The Death Star's power output confirmed!

[Admiral Breetai]

damn bro my points are still ignored

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Mr O, I was rather busy tonight. I will respond hopefully tomorrow.

Breentai, I still do not notice any quotes, sources or overall evidence for your arguments, filled with runon sentences and random ramblings whining about my behavior instead of the substantive topic at hand. PROVE all of your claims, try and put in better grammar; I am using an iPod touch at the moment and have better grammar, and cut out the random insults whether or not you think them to be true, because we're here to debate SW vs ST, not your opinion about me.

[Admiral Breetai]

Breentai, I still do not notice any quotes, sources or overall evidence for your arguments, filled with runon sentences and random ramblings whining about my behavior instead of the substantive topic at hand. PROVE all of your claims, try and put in better grammar; I am using an iPod touch at the moment and have better grammar, and cut out the random insults whether or not you think them to be true, because we're here to debate SW vs ST, not your opinion about me.

oh okay so basically "hey breetai all those valid points you raised citing the films as evidence and explaining in detail the scenes in questions on many different threads?!! you know doing exaxtly what I cry you never do while never doing it myself? yet you took the time to do it? SCREW YOU IMA INSULT YOUR GRAMMAR AND IGNORE YOUR POSTS!!!"

1, I made an argument I listed proof was very clear about it

2, stop demanding evidence from me and every one else we gave it to you already you ignored it..none of us are under any obligation to do it again

3, you have problems with me calling you out on your bullshit? stop doing the things you do wrong

this is definitive proof of your absolute and complete inability to honestly debate and it's in clear violation of the very reason you where infracted

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Oh...my...god...

I went back to the last argument post you made in this thread directed at me...and it was...

You attempt to use DBZ's anime as a benchmark for what a DET blast "should" look like? DBZ, a show with not even the slightest hint of scientific plausibility (SW and ST at least understand that a planet busting attack detonating in a planet would...uh...blow it up) is supposed to be an accurate example of a DET planet buster? That the animators of some anime are authorities on what a DET should look like? I suppose that we should use DBZ instead of real science, which states that the Earth being DEat'd is not going to mysteriously and dramatically disappear, leaving behind an asteroid field that for some reason DOES NOT MOVE. If anything, buu was using a chain reaction; and if you use Goku's words as fact as if Goku knows about science...

Excuse me...my faith in the human race just lowered a few marks.

[Picard]

with not even the slightest hint of scientific plausibility

As most of SW EU.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Pointless red herring, and your comment:

1. Implies that you think ST to be more scientifically plausible than SW EU
2. Implies that you think the SW movies to be more scientifically plausible than the EU
3. Most disturbing of all, you think that the SW EU's scientific implausibility can in any way, shape or form be compared with that of DBZ.

What's next?

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

What's next?

How about you addressing the fact all of your arguments are in tatters?.

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1952

[Picard]

Pointless red herring, and your comment:

1. Implies that you think ST to be more scientifically plausible than SW EU
2. Implies that you think the SW movies to be more scientifically plausible than the EU
3. Most disturbing of all, you think that the SW EU's scientific implausibility can in any way, shape or form be compared with that of DBZ.

What's next?

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) What is DBZ?

[Trinoya]

Dragon Ball Z.

An Anime.

It's about men who scream a lot and occasionally destroy the odd moon or planet.

[Admiral Breetai]

Pointless red herring, and your comment:

1. Implies that you think ST to be more scientifically plausible than SW EU
2. Implies that you think the SW movies to be more scientifically plausible than the EU
3. Most disturbing of all, you think that the SW EU's scientific implausibility can in any way, shape or form be compared with that of DBZ.

What's next?

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) What is DBZ?

I think 3 was directed at me..he was just projecting

[User1632]

Pointless red herring, and your comment:

1. Implies that you think ST to be more scientifically plausible than SW EU
2. Implies that you think the SW movies to be more scientifically plausible than the EU
3. Most disturbing of all, you think that the SW EU's scientific implausibility can in any way, shape or form be compared with that of DBZ.

What's next?

Some facts, maybe?

1. Star Trek ships are based on space warps and anti-matter, which are scientifically proven.
2. Star Wars ships are based on hypermatter and hyperdrive, which are scientifically impossible hogwash.

So technically, 1 is more scientifically plausible than 2, since 2 isn't scientfically possible while 1 is.

[Praeothmin]

Some facts, maybe?

1. Star Trek ships are based on space warps and anti-matter, which are scientifically proven.
2. Star Wars ships are based on hypermatter and hyperdrive, which are scientifically impossible hogwash.

So technically, 1 is more scientifically plausible than 2, since 2 isn't scientfically possible while 1 is.

1. Really? In world where there are Transporters, Replicators, Phasers able to explode rocks with tiny power packs? More scientifically plausible?
2. We don't know what Hypermatter is, so until we have a specific explanation (someone even posited it is Tachyonic matter, which is plausible), we can't say for certain it is hogwash.

If you want to prove your statements above, how about:

Some facts, maybe?

[StarWarsStarTrek]

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) What is DBZ?

1. You do realize that Star Trek has floating energy beings and a sublight missile reaching the sun within seconds, causing a detonation that is immediately visible, despite the fact that light would take many minutes to reach Picard's eyes, right?

2. I suppose that you can explain why Star Wars ships bank like atmospheric aircraft? Some EU is more scientifically believable than the movies; most are about the same.

3. Dragonball Z. Ever heard of it? Apparently, some people think that it's depiction of a DET is a benchmark for a technically orientated debate to use as what a DET planetary explosion should look like...uh huh.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

...uh huh.

Deal with these first:

1. DEATH STAR POWER OUTPUT YOUR CLAIM:

http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... &start=180

The Death Star circumnavigating Yavin 4 in a matter of minutes, calculating out to 67 km/s, requiring about e29 joules of energy assuming a density similar to a GSC.

Not only does this assume the DS came out of hyperspace stationary, it ignores the fact that without mass lightening and inertial dapening the DS would tear itself apart under such thrust.

2. SHIELDING:

Horray!

Star Trek shields


"RELICS" is courtesy of Mike Wong, here:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... ield1.html

So let me get this straight:

The Enterprise was FINE as it was entering orbit of the star. However, a solar flare hit it, and its shields went down to 23%.

At 150,000 km.

1. The ship was at 150,000km for a significant amount of time prior to the flare that caused them to raise the shields.

2.The ship and its main systems were already damaged so when the shields were raised they were at 23%.

3. It is clearly stated that the solar flares are going to get worse and yet the shields could last 3 hours of pounding from them (so if the flare knocked them down to 23% then how could they last 3 hours of even worse pounding).

[Picard]

1) Yes.
2) Yes.
3) What is DBZ?

1. You do realize that Star Trek has floating energy beings and a sublight missile reaching the sun within seconds, causing a detonation that is immediately visible, despite the fact that light would take many minutes to reach Picard's eyes, right?

2. I suppose that you can explain why Star Wars ships bank like atmospheric aircraft? Some EU is more scientifically believable than the movies; most are about the same.

3. Dragonball Z. Ever heard of it? Apparently, some people think that it's depiction of a DET is a benchmark for a technically orientated debate to use as what a DET planetary explosion should look like...uh huh.

1) Yes I know. But at least they try to explain their technology, which is mostly based on known scientific theories and principles
2) Most of SW EU is less scientifically believable than movies, since movies give no scientific explanation alltogether. Meanwhile, for movies we can at least theoretize
3) When I think about it, I might have heard about it around 10 years ago so you have to excuse me for my memory not being exactly fresh on the subject