Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

For polite and reasoned discussion of Star Wars and/or Star Trek.
Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Thu Jun 09, 2011 10:14 am

......

EDIT: Good. Now I'll work on my reply.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:13 pm

StarWarsStarTrek wrote: If Continuity Canon does not exist, why is it still up on the official Star Wars website? Stop dismissing evidence that you find inconvenient.
It is merchandizing trick. Nothing more, nothing less. And if Continuity canon does exist, why Lucas directly stated that Luke, Leia and Han settled in calm life after Return of the Jedi, or that Boba Fett died in that movie? Yet EU has trio participate in literally impossible number of adventures, be it together or separated; and EU brought Boba back to life, again contrary to what Lucas has said.

Like these:
canon1 wrote: I don't know why. [Laughs] I'm mystified by it. He is, he's a, I mean I think he's a, he's a mysterious character, he's a provocative character. He seems like an all powerful character, except he gets killed. Although he's gotten killed, the people who write the books, and everybody else, the comics, are all 'We cant kill him, we gotta bring him back!', you know, 'He can't die! We refuse to let him die!'"
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, 1997 - MTV interview as reposted in Boba Fett Fan Club site FAQ
canon2 wrote: "Do you have a map of this universe, every single creature, where they come from, what they eat, what their society back home is like? Or are you just making it up as you go?“
„Well, I think somewhere in some of the dark recesses of my company's files there is something like that, but I've never seen it. And I don't really know. Even though I live this, and I know the worlds very well, and I know what everything in them is, half the time I'm in the fortunate position to just make it up. So, when somebody asks me a question, I just...I know what the consistencies are. I know what is consistent with a particular environment and what isn't. And really that's the job of the director, to keep everything in line. I can do that on the movie. But I can't do that in the Star Wars universe."
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, Summer 1999
canon3 wrote: "I don't even read the offshoot books that come out based on Star Wars."
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, July 1999 - Film Night interview
canon4 wrote: "What would it take for you to do a third trilogy, with episodes VII, VIII and IX?”
“Each time I do a trilogy it's 10 years out of my life. I'll finish ”Episode III” and I'll be 60. And the next 20 years after that I want to spend doing something other than ”Star Wars.” If at 80 I'm still lively and having a good time and think I can work hard for another 10 years between 80 and 90, I might consider it. But don't count on it. There's nothing written, and it's not like I'm completing something. I'd have to start from scratch. [The idea of episodes VII, VIII, and IX] was more of a media thing than it was me.”
“Do you know how many fans would be willing to feed you Cream of Wheat and wheel you around in your chair if you did?”
“I don't think that's going to happen. Time catches up with you.”
“Yet novelists have written "Star Wars" sequels using the same characters and extending their stories.”

“Oh, sure. They're done outside of my little universe. ”Star Wars” has had a lot of different lives that have been worked on by a lot of other people. It works without me."
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, Nov. 2001 - "Matters of Life and Darth" interview in the Nov. 24-30 2001 TV Guide, pp. 24-25
canon5 wrote: “There are two worlds here,” explained Lucas. “There’s my world, which is the movies, and there’s this other world that has been created, which I say is the parallel universe – the licensing world of the books, games and comic books. They don’t intrude on my world, which is a select period of time, [but] they do intrude in between the movies. I don’t get too involved in the parallel universe.”"
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, July 2002 - as reported on the Cinescape site, from Cinescape Magazine
canon6 wrote: "Q: Do you supervise the development of all the off-movie stories? After all, Star Wars exists in books, comics.
A: You know, I try not to think about that. I have my own world in movies and I follow it. Of course that the people who expand this universe work for me, but I can't follow up all that they produce.
Q: Can you quote any good story other than the movies?
A: No, I don't think so. (laughs)."
- George Lucas, Flannelled One, July 2002 - From a TheForce.Net translation of a Brazilian site's interview
So, yeah. „EU is canon.“ Suuuure..
StarWarsStarTrek wrote: Based on your highly conservative calculations - where, by the way, did you find the footage of asteroid collisions? Did you use a dvd?

You also neglect the difference physical impacts and energy based weapons.
I have all 6 Star Wars movies on my computer. And besides, I used more favourable option – energy weapons give ISD only 200 megaton shields, high end.
The asteroids were crossing the hull of the Falcon in a fraction of a second; they were moving at supersonic speeds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gzf0kR5 ... re=related

1:47 and later. Especially 2:05 and later. If 5 meters per second is „supersonic“, you would be correct. But since it is not... and even fastest asteroids move at ~30 meters per second max. By the way, if you don't know it, speed of sound in air (which we normally think about when defining „supersonic“) is 343.2 meters per second. So, since when 5 > 343 ? Enlighten me.
Would you care to search up the definition of official?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_(fiction)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Official
When there are multiple "official" works or original media, the question of what is and what is not canon can be unclear.
I think that above quote would be quite meaningless if canon = official.
No, you are making the false claim that the asteroids in the field were slow moving, when they were moving with at least supersonic speeds.
Supersonic speeds my Palpatine. Watch YouTube link above. And WATCH it, not just see that I have put some link, maybe gloss over it to ease conciousness, and then continue to spew bullshit, as you regularly do when I give you links.
So then, in that case, if there were no asteroid field, why did the fleet not simply send tie fighters to chase after the Falcon?
Worst part is that they sent them DESPITE asteroid field.
How much fuel would be needed for, say, ten borg cubes to jump to Earth? What would the vast fuel storages on each cube be used for otherwise? Are they just sitting around doing nothing?
None, since they use transwarp conduits generated from transwarp hubs.
Borg drones require minimal maintenance.
They do require one. And they require „regeneration“ in alcoves.
Because after "divine intervention" happens two times in a row, the third time you should bring in more to stop another convenient plot device from occurring. This is basic logic.
Voyager : Endgame. Not quite divine intervention, but clearly something that had ability to eradicate Borg (read: computer virus).
Stupid analogy. A better analogy is that if you sent a single abrams tank to quell a rebellion, and the rebels trick the tank crew into driving into a deep ditch and capture it, is your solution to dismiss it as a fluke and to send the very same force a second time.
Nope. Better analogy is that rebels destroy your first tank with one-shot weapon, and you send another tank since they do not longer can use that one-shot weapon; but this time rebels discover mechanical weakness on your tank from first one and manage to exploit it.
US troops can and have countered insurgent forces, and if X number of troops prove insufficient for the job, they send in more. What is so hard about this to understand?
Except that in both cases one cube was proving to be quite enough for the job until Deus ex Machina happened.
After their second incursion attempt failed, the borg logically would have simply diverted a fleet of one hundred cubes to storm Earth.
If they still exist. Forgot Endgame?
Because surely a space age society lacks the capability of repopening the entrance, or having multiple entrances.
And who defined that society is „space age“? Melting entrance and few hundred meters of tunnel is enough.
Your link to your blog site? Not to mention that megaton airbursts cannot destroy military structures or even durable civilian structures. Do you honestly think that an airburst will destroy all "natural resources", a term of which is explicitly mentioned separately from the industry needed to run it such as mines (meaning that both the mines AND the deposits are destroyed)? A megaton airburst would not be guaranteed to kill somebody in a basement!
A link you, as usuall, will ignore along with everything there, as you ignore anything you don't like (including canon). And why is melting of surface destroyed? Destroying infrastructure required for mining is more than enough to make mine unusable for quite some time.
If you did not wish to discuss BDZ, you should not have included discussions from it in your opening post. You are conveniently attempting to drop out of the debate halfway through the thread.
I included it beacouse that was opening post and I was optimistic that we will solve it. Or that you will stop being dishonest and actually accept that canon>EU.
Are you honestly reading what you type, Picard? Do you think that a "deep planetary shelter" is only a few hundred meters underground, which is less than 0.0001% of the depth of the upper mantle? You also fail to realize that megaton airbursts would fail to affect a shelter a few hundred meters underground, and the e24 joule calculation is estimating 1 meter of the surface being melted!
And what about earthquakes? Would they fail to affect shelter too? Or fact that shot can explode on surface and still create air blast?
Which surely explains why you felt so inclined to include it in your blog, in your opening post and in the base delta zero thread.
Beacouse it is main bullshit being used by Warsies in debate.
The survivor was an Alliance agent. He is by no means and ordinary civilian.
And since canon>EU, he obviously got it wrong. Or knew more than you.
Again, goalpost shifting. You stated that base delta zero's do not destroy natural resources in direct violation to your quote. If you really meant my definition of natural resources, you should have specified so. Otherwise, you look like you're backtracking to cover your tracks.
It destroys SOURCES of natural resources, not resources themselves.
natural resources AND industry. If the author included mines and harvesting agents for such natural resources as natural resources, why include industry in the statement too?
Beacouse farms are not industry? Or beacouse factory does not produce resources but is still part of industry?
Nowhere did I try and refute canon with non canon. Once again, you are making BS up out of your mind.
You are using Expanded Universe as counter to actual canon. So yes, you DO try to refute canon with non-canon.
The canon films support Saxtonite calculations within one or two orders of magnitude! The Death Star DET theory just happens to support Saxtonite calculations within a small margin of error, as does the Death Star's circumnavigation of Yavin.
Yeah, right. One-and-half megaton heavy turbolasers and two-character kiloton light turbolasers on Star Destroyer really support 200 gigaton turbolasers on transport ship and 1 teraton heavy turbolasers on that same star destroyer.
See? I provide canon evidence supporting my claims, and your only rebuttal is to say that "maybe" it's some made up technobabble that is never mentioned in Star Wars, but that you pull out of your butt because you cannot just admit that my calculations for the circumnavigation of Yavin are based on solid interpretation of the scene.
You provide EU evidence, and you warp canon evidence. Imperial display – BASED ON DEATH STAR ITSELF – contradicts Rebel display of Death Star circumnavigation.
An unshielded ISD was hit, yes. What's your point?
ISD which has lost shields due to asteroid bombardment in triple-digit megaton to single-digit gigaton range.
Do we know what grade durasteel it was? Or what temperature the lava was?
And why that matters? If nothing is written, one can assume standard values.
Stop it with the stupid ad hominems. You make a texbook example of the burden of proof fallacy. You literally ask me to prove that something is "not" true.
I HAVE CREATED THIS THREAD SO AS NOT TO DERAIL ICS THREAD. THEN YOU LIED THAT „SINCE I SPLIT THIS THREAD, IT IS STILL SAME THREAD“ (I mean, really good logic, there) AND THEREFORE WE HAVE TO USE EU IN DEBATE REGARDLESS OF CANON. You are liar and cherrypicker. Simple as that.
No, this is stupid circular reasoning. You continue to use your own conclusion as evidence for your premise, which you in turn use as evidence for your conclusion.

You think that an ISD cannot remove an atmosphere by DET, when the Death Star can scatter a planet and overcome GBE (you know, the defined, scientifically accurate DET "theory", which is really the laws of thermodynamics?) and circumnavigate gas giants in minutes?

And where do we ever see evidence in your precious canon where an ISD cannot remove an atmopshere by DET? Do we ever see an upper limit to the firepower of turbolasers? No, so then what's your point?
WE HAVE upper limit of ISD firepower. „Vaporize a small town“, remember? Along with fusion reactors and fact that 200 megatons to 1 gigaton of asteroid bombardmentor 200 megatons delivered doing battle are enough to drop its shields? And that it uses two-digit kiloton MEDIUM turbolasers?
"ignore canon"? Whenever I ask you to support your bullshit claim that base delta zero is in contradiction of canon, you bring up the same arguments:
You ignore canon. Plain and simple. Whenever I confront you with canon evidence, you cry that „we are in EU thread“ (which we are not; at least, not anymore) and that EU is valid source of information. Which it is not. When I let you to use EU evidence, you warp it.
1. The asteroid collision scene, because you think that the durability of the bridge tower of an unshielded ISD is relevant to the firepower of heavy turbolasers.
No, but it shows that Star Wars hulls are NOT wanktastically strong. Besides, if it had teraton-range shields, it would not lost them due to asteroid collisions in first place.
2. That TCW episode involving asteroids, yet you still fail to quantify the size and density of the asteroid field, or at least to give reasonable estimates, footage, screenshots, etc.
I never watched TCW, and asteroid scene was from TESB. And yes, I gave links to video showing that scene, as well as screenshots I TOOK AND INCLUDED IN MY SITE. And you still refuse to even look at my site or my blog. Hypocrite.
3. Vaporizing a small town, yet your calculations are totally minimalist; you assume everything that would lower the energy needed (US size town, random calculation darkstar pulled, figurative vaporization, heavy turbolasers, wooden structures)
US size town, which is larger than small town seen in Star Wars canon.
Random darkstar calculation pulled – nope. I do not use his calculations.
Figurative vaporization – yes, beacouse it is mostly used in EXACTLY that way
Heavy turbolasers – beacouse it makes most sense – heavy TL bolts would be only thing visible from planet anyway
Wooden structures – no, I don't assume wooden structures
And this is supposed to qualify as proof instead of a restatement of the obvious how?
Beacouse you use EU to counter CANON evidence, that how.
The base did, but the atmosphere, a completely quantifiable target, did not.
And it could be technobabble as well.
You mean planetary shields that are rarely, if ever, shown?
And shields that have to exist, since we know from Chase that single Bird of Prey can destroy entire life on a planet with few technobabble shots.
And even if Earth does have a planetary shield, it does not explain away the issue. The breens did damage Earth, but slightly, meaning that; and I have already explained this:

1. There was bleed through damage

or

2. The shield eventually fell

Both are faulty:

1. In this case, why would only San Fransico be affected? Why would 99.99% of the blast be conveniently diverted, and why would the breen forces not take advantage of this bleed through to saturate the entire planet surface?
Saturate throught shield? Really? You must be kidding.
And star destroyers can destroy all life using raw energy:
They can't. That's entire point.
"Cloaked Star Destroyer!" Han snapped back, twisting the helm yoke viciously, the whole plan suddenly coming clear. "That battle back there over Bothawui- all those ships beating each other into rubble- with a Star Destroyer waiting hidden here, ready to finish them all off and maybe burn Bothawui in the bargain. No survivors, no witnesses, only a battle everyone in the New Republic would blame everyone else for." VOTF p.617

"The preliminary [target] list has been filed," Oissan said, sounding a bit flustered. "We were expecting to have more time to complete it."
"Well, you didn't, did you?" Nalgol bit out, thoroughly disgusted. First the strike team, now Oissan. "Get back to work. We still have an hour or two before the battle out there winds down to where we'll be entering it." VOTF p.651
Non-canon, again.
You make the foolish strawman that I do not accept canon (when among my main arguments remains the circumnavigation of Yavin, which is G canon, and your response to CANON is to use a NON CANON, not even mentioned in any C canon, made up mass lightning which is literally N canon).
And when did I use non-canon? Besides, your „Yavin circumnavigation“ argument is wrong, SINCE IMPERIAL DISPLAY SHOWED THAT THERE WAS NO CIRCUMNAVIGATION. And according to Rebel display, Death Star could have fired on moon as soon as it exited hyperspace (that is, unless it does not have its own thrusters and superlaser can't reach that far). But Imperial display showed different picture.

http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWdsaccel.html
Red herring. Your megaton airbust theory would be completely ineffective against military structures, mines, heavy civilian structures, deep basements, fisheries or deep planetary shelters.
Proof? Or just some EU wank you picked up along the way? Star Wars buildings are built by concrete.
Sometimes, under fortified shelters, yes. But by your airburst idea, a significant number of people on the surface would survive if they were inside a concrete building!
Not if it is small town that is targeted. Any why in Hiroshima half of population died from explosion of single-digit kiloton weapon? And it was CITY (since 1889), not TOWN, let alone small one.
That's not what a contradiction means. Go search up the definition.
You actually don't know definition of contradiction and ask me to find it for you? That explains a lot.
No, you stated that megaton level nukes are city killers.
AND THEY ARE. KILOTON-range nuke destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yet I never claimed KILOTON range heavy turbolasers, EXACTLY due to that VAPORIZE part.
There were still structure left standing after the detonation.
Which is exactly why I do not claim kiloton-range HTL, but rather megaton-range HTL for settlement FAR smaller than Hiroshima.
So if TM refers to the Enterprise as, for example, the finest ship in the fleet, are you going to assume that it is in reference to the US navy?

Or when Luke is described as perhaps the most skilled swordsman ever, the author is referring to real life?

Show me ONE example where the author EVER mentions real life.
No, BEACOUSE it is statement of FACT in THAT universe. But HERE author is attempting to explain US, not some random homeless bothans, how powerful turbolasers are.
So because it's the only one we see, all other small towns must be like that? Even though a freaking desert town is obviously going to try and minimize size for reasons that hopefully you can understand?
Such as protection from bandits? Or you think that village with 1000 inhabitants is considered megapolis just beacouse it is in desert?
Irrelevant, as a gigaton per day is a low end lower limit, and is far in excess of anything that the Enterprise can handle. Or was it being harmed by a large chemical explosion a fluke?
It is UPPER limit. My optimum calculations give 250 megatons per day.

As for "chemical explosion", I think that you refer to Insurrection, where that "normal gas" had subspace-f****** effects and several other things.
Why don't you stop your foolish goalpost shifting?
YOU constantly try to get EU in debate. STFU. Or I will start ignoring any EU info you bring up (as I should have done) until you learn to use canon evidence.
Durasteel on capital ships is very strong; how is this relevant to the titanium alloy hull used on tie fighters?
And then we have durasteel melting in not-too-hot lava...
PROVE IT.
Every single post you made on this forum. Especially in these threads:
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1952
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1763
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1954
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1730
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1961
http://www.starfleetjedi.net/forum/view ... f=8&t=1771

The basic laws of physics do.
Which are quite happily ignored in almost all of Star Wars EU.
You, of course, can provide evidence for this other than your desperation to dismiss all solid evidence as a unknown technobabble you do not quantify or explain?
Death Star superlaser.
http://picard578.blogspot.com/2010/09/d ... laser.html
Nowhere is it stated that the ground is not melted.
„EVENLY CRATERED SURFACE“ CAN AT SAME TIME BE MELTED?
Why do you bold the part about reducing a tiny base to slag, but neglect the part about the atmosphere drifting away?
Beacouse it could be technobabble for all we know. Atmosphere-removing DET would do far more than only crater the surface and partially melt the base.
The quote is self contradicting; how could blasts that merely create firestorms create immense clouds of soot and smoke that significantly affect the atmosphere and poison it?
And forest fires somehow do not create smoke? And besides, there are survivors all over the planet. If it was Saxtonian BDZ, there would be no survivors at all, let alone walking outside with gas masks.
And your point is what?
BASE DELTA ZERO: Destruction of all sources of natural resources. Or you think that infantry can melt surface of planet? Why we never see those gigaton-range hand blasters then, hmm?
Once again, what's your point?
Point is that Saxtonian definition of Base Delta Zero is UTTER BULLSHIT. Or you are so brainwashed that you can't see it?
1. Show me a single canon example that contradicts base delta zero

2. Show me a single example of me ignoring it.
I already did. „Small town“ that you try to turn into CITY, and then ignore context and real-life terms used. But you are so full of bullshit that you can't see it.
Because it is significantly more difficult to melt durasteel structures than it is to melt rock? Is this difficult to comprehend?
Except that durasteel is in line with normal steel when it comes to heat resistence. PLUS, ONLY settlements in Star Wars that we see using steel in construction are Coruscant and Kamino. „Normal“ small towns use concrete.
Show me where darkstar got his imaginary equation that he pulls out of nowhere from.
Go and use any of Nuclear effect calculators you have on internet. You will see that it is CORRECT, regardless of where he got it from. Maybe he has some book home? OR MAYBE HE KNOWS IT?
Prove that ANY isd's other than ssd's have superlasers, or you're just making up stupid shit to counteract the mounting evidence conveniently supporting Saxtonite calculations within a few orders of magnitude.
I NEVER CLAIMED SUCH THING, YOU BULLSHITTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is no contradiction. Just because darkstar says so, does not make it true.
So you admit that you do not watch ANY of links I give you? Or that you are so dishonest that you just handwave away anything that contradicts fairy little tales Warsies pumped in you?
Is this the best excuse you've got? That you can use telescopes to locate things underground? Or send in spies to locate every single underground structure, hoping that not one happens to get caught?
You are making up excuses; we are not in BDZ thread, and I don't think Imperial sensor technology is SO idiotically archaic that they can't locate mines. Besides, we know they DO have probe droids. Or you think they still use sextant and compass for navigation?
Because they are spread out across the entire ocean, and many are underwater?
We know from EU (Rise of Dark Force) that TL bolts can travel underwater; since BDZ is also EU, you can't ignore it. Yet you do.
What's this supposed to mean?
Exactly what it means. Stop evading.
This is a stupid strawman; I did not mention neutronium hulls, you did. You also got cause and effect wrong; nowhere do Saxton, Wong me or other pro Wars debaters use neutronium alloy hulls as proof of hull durability; Saxton and other Eu writers included it as an explanation for the super strong hulls, not the other way around.
They DO use it; it looks like this:
1) ISD's have teraton-range guns, therefore they must have neutronium hulls
2) ISD's have neutronium hulls, therefore they must have teraton-range guns
Yet all those 100,000 km ranges obviously do not factor in your rationalization of jamming, so what's your point?
Beacouse there was no jamming in those instances.
And such ranges are only relevant, by your own admission, when jamming is off.
And what proof you have that Star Wars can jam Star Trek subspace sensors?
Ah, the classic tactic of making a rhetorical "do you know how these work?" in response to an assertion. Sure, why don't you explain to me how they work, and how this is relevant?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_jamm ... _deception

If you can't understand how is it relevant...
And all those reasons also apply to Star Wars, so your 200,000 Km ranges are useless and irrelevant!
Except that Star Wars don't use subspace sensors, and probably don't have any means to jam them. And have inferior firepower even if they can neutralize range advantage (which they can't but still...).
Too bad that the script says so, and you adhere to the script over visuals for some reason. Nute Gunray spoke in absolutes, and was not aware of what weapons the Naboo could have.
So shields ARE penetrated by 1-kiloton protons. Nice.
That's not what the script says.
YOU ACCUSE ME OF TAKING SCRIPT OVER MOVIE AND THEN.... huh. You really don't know how to be honest? IT WAS IN CONTEXT OF ATTACK. HE WAS SPEAKING ABOUT FIGHTER WEAPONS.
That's my point! If we see a borg cube pass right next to the Enterprise and Picard, for example, says that the cube is about 10,000 KM away, the literary description makes no sense.
And when it happened? You insist on using ideas that make NO sense, only if these ideas help „prove“ Star Wars is superior.
None of these come close to matching Star Wars ship numbers.
Star Wars ship numbers? You mean those 30 Star Destroyers in RotJ? Or 1 000 to 25 000 ISD's maximum?
I already responded to this several times, liar.
YOU IGNORED IT. YOU KEEP CLAIMING THAT ONE GIGATON BEAM WILL DESTROY SAN FRANCISCO DESPITE EARTH HAVING PLANETARY SHIELDS. AND WE KNOW IN CANON THAT PLANETARY SHIELDS DO EXIST. Frakkin' bullshitter.
Psychological warfare only gets you so far. Just like how running into battle naked with stripes and spiked bats is not a good idea.
It is used. AND is very effective. (Not spikes and stripes, but look at MOAB and how it freaked out Iraquis).
Nowhere did I state that. In fact, this idea point is a nitpick of yours.
HUH?
SWST wrote: The context of the quote, mentioning and describing the stone?
It only describes stone of temple. And it might be in reference to way temple is built.
1. Explain what the technobabble is, what it does, and roughly how
Shifting part of matter to hyperspace.
2. Explain how this technobabble explains all of the VFX effects used to discount the DET theory any better than the DET theory does
http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWsuperlasereffect.html
3. Make sure that this technobabble theory take less than e32 joules and is not in violation with the fundamental laws of physics.
As above.
Plus...
mass of Earth = 5.9742 × 1024 kilograms
7.6MJ/kg to vaporize iron

If Earth was literally made of iron, energy required to vaporize it would be 4.54 x 10e31 J. That is LESS THAN ONE HALF of what you are claiming for superlaser.
As I have already explained, the ROTS opening scene is a surprise, act fast invasion fleet; of course they're going to have to move in close to land troops.
Problem is that battle shows that ships are DESIGNED to fight age-of-sail style battle.
Oh, Star Trek may be capable of long range combat, but by your own admission it's only when jamming is not an issue. Star Wars ships do have jamming, so your examples of BVR ST combat are irrelevant.
And can Star Wars jam Star Trek subspace sensors?
Lucky as in a decent few ships hit per ten seconds? Sure.
Really. YOU WERE SAYING THAT WW2 TARGETING SYSTEMS CAN HIT IT. You attack me for not reading every single post we made until now, yet you don't do it either.
Citation needed.
You don't know how to THINK?
So then how are they relevant?
In that Star Wars probably won't be able to jam Star Trek sensors effectively.
And for all we know, phaser NDF effects might be totally ineffective against SW shields. Stop making these unreasonable claims.
And NDF effects are only PART of phaser's effect. And none of torpedo effect.
Prove it.
Ignorance, your name is StarWarsStarTrek.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MJZbCNexctc
What pattern of penetration? Federation combat tactics seem to preclude firepower concentration, given that age of sail like formations are still used.
Parts of cube were heavily damaged while other parts were completely undamaged. Nice. You didn't watch the scene. Or you are intentionally lying.
Prove it.
Fact that they were shooting at some systems more than other. Fact that Picard was not a Borg drone for years by then. Fact that Borg DO have subsystems, like weapons etc. beacouse ship can't function without them.
Weapons systems were relevant, of course, but were not successfully destroyed.
Not COMPLETELY destroyed, but do you have any proof that not single system was destroyed as you claim?
Gosh, maybe the debate is getting too complex for you.
Your warping of evidence and lies certainly are.
Do you even understand what jamming is?
Unlike you, yes.
Are you under the impression that jamming has some sort of density, and that 5 ships a kilometer away from each other produce more jamming than 5 ships spread out?
Then why, for example, radio signals weaken with distance?
Space is 3-d.
And?
So why would one need to park one's ship within a few kilometers of another to exchange energy that propogates at C?
To conserve it? Photon torpedoes do not move at c and are far more powerful than phasers.
If all ST sensors are subspace, then are they blocked by things as simple as a ion storm?
Not ALL are subspace, frakker.
You do realize that a laser designator cannot be jammed, right? That marking a target with a laser or similar equivalent marker is not something you jam?
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Laser_designator

Not quite.
Do you ever see more than one Federation ship being hit at a time?
Do we ever see ALL of them?
See above.
And what about different types of sensors?
You still don't understand what a stationary target is, do you?
You don't know what canon is, do you? Besides, ISD in TESB was stationary, and stationary ion cannon hit it at 6 000 km. Which is about longest range we see in canon.
Yet you have no problem with allowing them when you have the impression that they help your cause.
No, its beacouse you insist on using non-canon.
See above.
You too.
...why?
Beacouse... you know... you have to propagate particles and torpedoes at faster speed to reach target in required time.
Not if the target is moving in a predictable path, as I have pointed out.
And you think Borg wouldn't simply stop or change course if ships fired from long range?
Which shows that you have been watching too much Star Trek. Some "antimatter based trick"? What?
IT HAS BEEN DONE. Best of Both Worlds, again.
Oh, the cube could do that...no, it doesn't bother to try in the battles, not to mention that although a modern missile could hit it, it would do no harm and the borg would not bother to avoid it.
You were talking about some wanktastic faster-than-c missiles with modern guidance systems.
Better analogy; we never see Han Solo cry, iirc, so does that mean that he has never cried?
NO; but you are again bullshitting. By your logic, we never saw battleship fly to moon, but does that mean it can't do it?
Again, you forget context.
I did not. You were saying that ISD's can take more turbolaser bolts than Federation ships can take photon torpedoes. I got the context pretty well.
None of which have been shown to justify charging straight through an enemy formation.
Except the fact that they could not circumnavigate it without being intercepted and destroyed.
Last edited by Picard on Thu Jun 16, 2011 9:52 am, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:58 pm

Picard, next time I see this:
STFU. You are last person on board who should be teaching anyone on „dishonest fallacies“, seeing as you are full of them – first lying so as to get EU into debate, then...
You get a warning...

SWST, this:
Go search up burden of proof, and come back and apologize for your dishonest fallacy, or prove to me that you are not Osama Bin Laden.
Is called fuelling the flames...
Besides, let me suggest YOU should first read the definition of "Burden of Proof", as you need it the most...

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Thu Jun 09, 2011 2:40 pm

Praethomin wrote:You get a warning...
For STFU or rest of post?

User avatar
Praeothmin
Jedi Master
Posts: 3920
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 10:24 pm
Location: Quebec City

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Praeothmin » Thu Jun 09, 2011 4:57 pm

STFU...

The rest is simply an observation you are making based on his pattern of posting...

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Fri Jun 10, 2011 2:32 pm

Ah, thanks.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:03 pm

Sorry if the update of this gave you a false flag. I promise that I will respond to this by next week.

However, Picard, you are still getting context wrong. Moreso, you're, intentionally or unintentionally, making the argument go in circles.

I need this confirmation:

Do you still want to debate BDZ? You were fine with debating it halfway through the thread, but then mysteriously dropped it right after you dismissed your own Dankayo quote.. You claim that your quote contradicted canon; if so, then why did you bring it up at all, when you stated that the point of that quote was to bring up a BDZ quote consistent with canon??? It seems suspiciously like a copout to me.

So please, if you want to drop BDZ, please either concede the point or explain why you suddenly want to drop it.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:14 pm

NO. I do NOT want to discuss BDZ any more, beacouse you use it as excuse to basically claim that non-canon overrides canon - plus, if you forgot, we moved here exactly beacouse our discussion had more to do with anything BUT BDZ. And EU is wide enough that, with it, you can basically cherry-pick anything you like, regardless of actual canon evidence. As for Base Delta Zero, there is a thread devoted entirely to it.

EDIT: If you want, you can answer part of my post that is about BDZ in that thread.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:42 pm

Picard wrote:NO. I do NOT want to discuss BDZ any more, beacouse you use it as excuse to basically claim that non-canon overrides canon - plus, if you forgot, we moved here exactly beacouse our discussion had more to do with anything BUT BDZ. And EU is wide enough that, with it, you can basically cherry-pick anything you like, regardless of actual canon evidence. As for Base Delta Zero, there is a thread devoted entirely to it.

EDIT: If you want, you can answer part of my post that is about BDZ in that thread.
On the contrary, the main quote I am using was the quote that you brought forward. If this quote were in contradiction with canon, why did you bring it forward to support your side, even when you stated that you wanted to bring up quotes only that would agree with canon?

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Wed Jun 15, 2011 8:58 pm

EU is INTERNALLY INCOSISTENT, which is basically only thing you have "proved", along with well-known fact that you are unfamilliar with Star Wars canon, and most of EU.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Thu Jun 16, 2011 5:56 pm

Picard wrote:EU is INTERNALLY INCOSISTENT, which is basically only thing you have "proved", along with well-known fact that you are unfamilliar with Star Wars canon, and most of EU.
This has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm saying.

You: I don't think this is canon, but I want to bring up a quote that fits in with canon (translation: that supports a low end showing)...Dankayo!

Me: ...that blows off the atmosphere?

You: It was an airless moon!

Me: No, it was explicitly stated to be a planet.

You: Ah, so we have contradiction with canon.

Me: But you are the one to bring up the quote under the pretext that it was not in contradiction with canon. Funny that you change your tune as soon as your quote is shown to be high end.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Thu Jun 16, 2011 7:43 pm

It is not point. Unlike some, I ignore both high AND low ends when they are contradicted by (higher) canon (that "higher" is referring on TCW being contradicted by movies and novelizations). You cherry-pick from non-canon, ignore rest of same non-canon (I think we have proved it quite well) and ignore canon in process. As I said, only thing you have proved with that quotes is that EU is internally incosistent. We have kiloton (or sub kiloton) showings and we have teraton showings; with both being implied to be upper limit in different works. You can ask any member of board familliar in SW EU; I have read only one single SW EU novel so far, and I don't plan on reading any other (maybe rest of Thrawn trilogy, maybe).

As for Dankayo, only way it could have appened as described is some wierd chain-reacton weapon with atmosphere-eating properties. Otherwise base would have been completely vaporized if hit by single wanktastic teraton-range shot.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Thu Jun 16, 2011 7:49 pm

Picard wrote:It is not point. Unlike some, I ignore both high AND low ends when they are contradicted by (higher) canon (that "higher" is referring on TCW being contradicted by movies and novelizations). You cherry-pick from non-canon, ignore rest of same non-canon (I think we have proved it quite well) and ignore canon in process. As I said, only thing you have proved with that quotes is that EU is internally incosistent. We have kiloton (or sub kiloton) showings and we have teraton showings; with both being implied to be upper limit in different works. You can ask any member of board familliar in SW EU; I have read only one single SW EU novel so far, and I don't plan on reading any other (maybe rest of Thrawn trilogy, maybe).

As for Dankayo, only way it could have appened as described is some wierd chain-reacton weapon with atmosphere-eating properties. Otherwise base would have been completely vaporized if hit by single wanktastic teraton-range shot.


So if Dankayo was a chain reaction and unquantifiable event that violates the laws of physics, why did you bring it up as evidence for your side?

The answer is clear, but you still can't bring yourself to admit it.

Picard
Starship Captain
Posts: 1433
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by Picard » Fri Jun 17, 2011 11:27 am

Beacouse it does. Small base at least partially survives supposed teraton-range bombardment. I think it calls for technobabble.

And one answer YOU can't bring yourself to admit is that EU is not canon. THE END.

StarWarsStarTrek
Starship Captain
Posts: 881
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm

Re: Me vs StarWarsStarTrek

Post by StarWarsStarTrek » Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:49 pm

Picard wrote:Beacouse it does. Small base at least partially survives supposed teraton-range bombardment. I think it calls for technobabble.

And one answer YOU can't bring yourself to admit is that EU is not canon. THE END.
If it's technobabble, why did YOU bring it up as evidence to support YOUR side?

Post Reply