The 1.5 megaton myth

[Picard]

There are no upper and lower limits when it is only value avaliable. And if you read my page, you'd see that I TOOK upper limit - I took largest asteroid avaliable, assuming it was nickel/iron instead of rock. So, it IS upper limit.

Appeal to ignorance. By your logic, if we see a bullet easily penetrate plywood, and it's the only value we have on that caliber, that's an upper limit...because it's the only value.

So you would go and claim that bullet can penetrate M1 Abrams MBT beacouse "penetrating wood is not upper limit and we don't see any upper limit". Which we do see in case of MTL, since bolt passes right throught one asteroid, but is stopped by another.

[Praeothmin]

"penetrating wood is not upper limit and we don't see any upper limit".

Worst of all is saying "penetrating the wood is a lower limit" when we see the wood spontaneously explode for no reason... :)

Oh, and SWST?

This:

Do I need to remind you -AGAIN- about the self exploding asteroids which make your "lower limit" pure BS, and points to an actual lower limit?

Which is something you've always ignored, even though it was pointed out to you many, many times, is proof of you ignoring evidence when it doesn't fit your version of SW...

[StarWarsStarTrek]

So you would go and claim that bullet can penetrate M1 Abrams MBT beacouse "penetrating wood is not upper limit and we don't see any upper limit". Which we do see in case of MTL, since bolt passes right throught one asteroid, but is stopped by another.

Red herring and strawman. You were the one to claim that I had to support kiloton MTL's, and used a LOWER LIMIT as evidence. That is like using a gun penetrating plywood and using it as evidence that it can't penetrate wood because "that's the only value we have".

[Picard]

So you would go and claim that bullet can penetrate M1 Abrams MBT beacouse "penetrating wood is not upper limit and we don't see any upper limit". Which we do see in case of MTL, since bolt passes right throught one asteroid, but is stopped by another.

Red herring and strawman. You were the one to claim that I had to support kiloton MTL's, and used a LOWER LIMIT as evidence. That is like using a gun penetrating plywood and using it as evidence that it can't penetrate wood because "that's the only value we have".

We see that larger of two asteroids completely stopped the bolt.

[Praeothmin]

SWST, you are a Troll, and you ignore evidence when it is presented...

"When do I do that?", you will say...
"Show me one single piece of evidence of me doing that", you will add...

Easy:

StarWarsStarTrek wrote:Picard wrote:TESB asteroid chase scene, where we see ISD vaporizing asteroids. As I already explained like five times before.

Do I need to explain to you the difference between upper and lower limits?

Do I need to remind you -AGAIN- about the self exploding asteroids which make your "lower limit" pure BS, and points to an actual lower limit?

TESB asteroid chase scene, where we see ISD vaporizing asteroids. As I already explained like five times before.

Do I need to explain to you the difference between upper and lower limits?

Do I need to remind you -AGAIN- about the self exploding asteroids which make your "lower limit" pure BS, and points to an actual lower limit?

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 11:38 am

Which you ignored the first time in your replies to Picard...

Then:
Oh, and SWST?

This:

Oh, and SWST?

This:

Do I need to remind you -AGAIN- about the self exploding asteroids which make your "lower limit" pure BS, and points to an actual lower limit?

Which is something you've always ignored, even though it was pointed out to you many, many times, is proof of you ignoring evidence when it doesn't fit your version of SW...

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2011 2:18 pm

Which you still ignored...
So that is twice, in one thread, where you ignored evidence...
Plus the evidence wasn't in a long post, lost among long replies from Picard...
I think it is clear to everyone that you ignore evidence which doesn't agree with you, just like you ignore the complet description of the Dankayo incident because it doesn't fit with your interpretation of SW...

[StarWarsStarTrek]

And you have still ignored the evidence I presented about Breetai. If you want me to respect and to answer your arguments, you need to do the same thing for me.

[Praeothmin]

And you have still ignored the evidence I presented about Breetai. If you want me to respect and to answer your arguments, you need to do the same thing for me.

Ah, so now because you feel I "started it", you do not have to provide evidence?
Well then, neither Breetai or anybody else need to provide any evidence you may request in the future, since you were the first to fail at evidence providing...
You see, the Exploding asteroids bit was presented a long time ago:

Posted: Fri Nov 26, 2010 11:53 am

The belt WAS very dense, this is stated in the ESB novel and is obviously on screen, as you can see numerous asteroids of various sizes moving at rather fast speed.

No, it wasn't...
While there are clusters of high density, the sixe of the rocks should pose no danger whatsoever to ships capable of resisting 200GT of firepower...
Plus, these asteroids were pretty funky, since they tended to explode like fireworks when they hit each other, as seen at 2:31 of the linked video...

As you can see, you've been ignoring the "exploding Asteroid" evidence since November of last year, before Breetai even started debating with you...
So you are a Troll, and I've provided evidence to show it...

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Since when does time matter in this? My point is that although I have failed to respond to every random argument you post, you do not respond to all of my arguments, often times dropping out in the middle of debates. You then turn around and accuse me of ignoring evidence?

Your definition of "troll" is also wrong. Go look up "troll" before you fling accusations without knowing what they mean. Troll is not the right word.

As for your argument, have you calculated the kinetic energy and momentum of the asteroids and whether or not it would be enough to destroy both asteroids?

[Admiral Breetai]

I'm not especially sure in what twisted world posters not responding to your arguments mid debate due to your own absolute inability to reason or debate objectively counts as trolling or hypocrisy but not in this one.

oh and you have flat our ran from other posters arguments

[StarWarsStarTrek]

So you would go and claim that bullet can penetrate M1 Abrams MBT beacouse "penetrating wood is not upper limit and we don't see any upper limit". Which we do see in case of MTL, since bolt passes right throught one asteroid, but is stopped by another.

No, I use the asteroid scenes to establish lower limits, not to argue for upper limits. There's a very obvious difference between the two.

[Picard]

"Very obvious difference" in how? It is only thing in canon from which we can determine MTL yields, and larger asteroid stpped bolt... vaporizing iron-nickel asteroid is upper limit. Lower limit is setting made-from-gunpowder asteroids on fire...

[Praeothmin]

No, I use the asteroid scenes to establish lower limits, not to argue for upper limits. There's a very obvious difference between the two.

Which you still haven't established as lower limit, since you keep ignoring the facts these asteroids explode by themselves...
Nickel-Iron asteroids don't explode by themselves, not at speeds close to 3 m/s, as seen in the video link...

[Mike DiCenso]

Even if we assumed that the asteroids were nickel-iron, which the G-level canon of the TESB novelization says they're not, the lower limits Warsies claim is not, in fact, the lower possible limits with the so-called asteroid vaporization. Twenty meters is far larger than the asteroids as measured against the width of the turbolaser bolts, which set a definite limit of only 1-8 meters.
-Mike

[Picard]

I remember measuring larger of asteroids to 12 meters in diameter.

http://picard578.hostoi.com/startrek-vs ... asers.html

[Mike DiCenso]

That's good work, but you missed a few critical things about the bolts leaving the trench areas of the ISD. First off if you look closely at the bolt that leaves the trench notch section, and you zoom in on it and watch the bolt closely, it starts off much smaller than it does in the frame you have chosen, and gets bigger only because it leaves the ISD rather quickly and at a bit of an odd angle. But when it first appears, it is a tiny dot, barely something like 1/10th of the 20 meter high trench.
-Mike