The 1.5 megaton myth

[sonofccn]

Besides, regarding Death Star, where is it said it was a "drop in the bucket"?

I said that in regards to the "scores of sector groups" quote in comparison to the millions of ISDs SWST kept speaking of.

[Praeothmin]

Oh shit, SWST's range bullshit all over again... :(

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Of course, you do understand that torpedo launcher takes some time to reload.

And that's my ENTIRE POINT.

God, who are you trying to help here?

Actually no since I never argued "The Empire went bankrupt from the Death Star" in any thread in our latest round of debate. I simply grew tired of the antics like the above.

Yes, you did. "bankrupt" is an exaggeration; but you argued that the Empire was putting an enormous portion of its resources into the Death Star, based on the hilarious argument that building a project in its industrial base holds no advantages over building one in an obscure area; you never did respond to the presence of a massive, Death Star sized torpedo spheres that some argue actually is a Death Star, within a year of the formation of the Empire, did you?

But when I turn around and use the Death Star as an example of the massive size of the imperial industry, you do a 180 degree turn and state that the Death Star is but a "drop in the bucket" for the Empire; the polar opposite of what you had just said, and that this magically results in the Death Star only being worth a "score" of sector groups.

Of course, you never explain how a Death Star could possibly equal only 100 frigates, when the difficulty in building a single, large, mobile station is exponentially more difficult as you increase size due to the fact that stresses scale cubically, while loading strength only squares. Instead, your argument is that it does not matter how illogical the argument is; it is supported by a secondary source, and it is canon.

But then you turn around and dismiss by Geonosis calculation as an "outlier" that is contrary to the "internal logic" of the franchise. So you can dismiss a primary canon source because it doesn't make sense to you, but I cannot use concrete mathematics to dismiss (or force reevaluation of) your secondary source?

Dare I say the H word?

You do realize those scenes were not continious but were from various episodes correct? I think they even repeat. So a scene of the Galaxy class not firing no more disproves the all out salvo than film of a man walking counters a previous clip of his running.

I am well aware of that. I am also well aware that, even in the, for example, thirty second time frames of a single battle, the Galaxy class isn't firing eight torpedos a second continuously, as your statistics imply.

You may believe what you want. I have no further urge to argue with the likes of you.

Yeah, humor yourself. I used simple math based on the statistics that you supplied, and they turned out in the ISD's favor. Too bad for you that you never did any yourself.

What of it? We weren't arguing range at that point nor was I assuming the E-D would just hold back and snipe. Considering Imperial accuracy the Enterprise holding constant at 10 thousand kilometers would have all the time in the world to bring down the ISD.

Wait, so suddenly you conclude from the video that the Enterprise can sit back and snipe at ten thousand kilometers, even though the galaxy class is approaching within a few hundred meters in some cases to fire?

Give me a break.

Roughly ten million would all that you could logically infer from "millions" in the absence of other evidence. Now I highly doubt whomever typed up that website actually had a number in mind, likely just a bit of fluff that sounds good but assuming it was actually based on a concrete figure if they had helped "tens of millions" or "hundreds of millions" they would say so.

Look at this, from the Enduring Vision textbook:

"Six days later Lincoln's funeral train departed on a mournful journey from Washington to Springfield, Illinois, with crowds of thousands gathering at stations to weep as it passed."

Authors: Paul S Boyer (PHD, Harvard), Clifford E Clark Jr. (PHD, Harvard), Joseph F Kett (PHD, Harvard), Neal Salisbury (PHD, California), Harvard Sitkoff (PHD, Columbia).

We know that hundreds of thousands of mourners, at the least, observed Lincoln's funeral train; should I call these people up and sue them for libel against Lincoln?

-------------

Your greatest hits:

• Insistence that the SW galaxy is only 100 light years in diameter.
  Insistence that the Death Star was both a great financial burden and a drop in a bucket for the Empire at the same time.
  Insistence that the latter of the above implies that constructing a moon sized battle station is only as difficult as constructing one hundred frigates, logic, science, mathematics and engineering be damned.
  Insistence that the term 'modern' connotes only the industrial, economic, political and military centers of the Alliance...and the claiming that this makes them "useless".
  Insistence that you can dismiss a G canon incident because it doesn't make sense to you, but I cannot dismiss a lesser canon incident because it doesn't make sense based on objective, mathematical analysis.

[sonofccn]

Yes, you did. "bankrupt" is an exaggeration; but you argued that the Empire was putting an enormous portion of its resources into the Death Star, based on the hilarious argument that building a project in its industrial base holds no advantages over building one in an obscure area;

You are welcome to obtain quotes of me from the thread in question where I say "bankrupt", "consume major portion" "most of industry" or the like in relation to the Death Star project.

As it is I argued it being secret on the outer rim was not proof it was a minor drain on Imperial resources and that the Death Stars were provided the full support of the Galactic Empire's industrial base which is not the same as saying everything the industry did went to the Death Star.

you never did respond to the presence of a massive, Death Star sized torpedo spheres that some argue actually is a Death Star, within a year of the formation of the Empire, did you?

You made a vague refrence to death star sized torped spheres. No picture that I could see, no quote. Nadda. So there was nothing to respond to.

But when I turn around and use the Death Star as an example of the massive size of the imperial industry,

Turn around? You been talking about massive industrial advantage since nearly the day you arrived here.

Of course, you never explain how a Death Star could possibly equal only 100 frigates, when the difficulty in building a single, large, mobile station is exponentially more difficult as you increase size due to the fact that stresses scale cubically, while loading strength only squares. Instead, your argument is that it does not matter how illogical the argument is; it is supported by a secondary source, and it is canon.

Directly stated by a secondary source, supported by both primary and secondary sources. Which must really sear you doesn't it?

But then you turn around and dismiss by Geonosis calculation as an "outlier" that is contrary to the "internal logic" of the franchise.

yes I dismiss something which occurs offscreen, involves Dooku being incredibly stupid and idiotic and is countered by both the whole X-wings on the Death Star scene and the MF scene you provided to me so you presumbly are aware of it.

Dare I say the H word?

You may dare say many words. That doesn't make them true.

I am well aware of that. I am also well aware that, even in the, for example, thirty second time frames of a single battle, the Galaxy class isn't firing eight torpedos a second continuously, as your statistics imply.

And if you had actually responded to my evidence perhaps we could have a discussion on the matter. However instead you wasted my time, ignored three examples I laid out with time stamps and prattled on how I proved myself wrong or some such. So that ship is passed and now that you conceded that your previous statement was in error, that I posted evidence proving myself wrong, we are concluded on this score.

Yeah, humor yourself. I used simple math based on the statistics that you supplied, and they turned out in the ISD's favor. Too bad for you that you never did any yourself.

Thats funny. I remember running out all the calculations, the time figures ect. All I remember you doing is grabbing my end results and shouting "See, I win!".

Wait, so suddenly you conclude from the video that the Enterprise can sit back and snipe at ten thousand kilometers, even though the galaxy class is approaching within a few hundred meters in some cases to fire?

Give me a break.

No. You see there are two basic statments in what you quoted. The First is me asking essentially what your point is since I did not make an argument on range during the time in question. The Second, starting with "considering", then points out that if a Galaxy class chooses to sit at ranges observed in a plethera of evidence, as has been given to you more times than can be counted, it doesn't matter what the rate of fire is because the ISD could never hope to hit it.

Look at this, from the Enduring Vision textbook:

"Six days later Lincoln's funeral train departed on a mournful journey from Washington to Springfield, Illinois, with crowds of thousands gathering at stations to weep as it passed."

Authors: Paul S Boyer (PHD, Harvard), Clifford E Clark Jr. (PHD, Harvard), Joseph F Kett (PHD, Harvard), Neal Salisbury (PHD, California), Harvard Sitkoff (PHD, Columbia).

We know that hundreds of thousands of mourners, at the least, observed Lincoln's funeral train; should I call these people up and sue them for libel against Lincoln?

A descrepency at all depends on if you are claiming hundreds of thousands of mourners were at each station or not which the quote appears to be saying. If not there is no descrepency or issue.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Torpedo spheres aren't Death Star sized. The largest model is under 8 km wide.

[Khas]

In other words, smaller than the Executor.

[Mr. Oragahn]

In other words, smaller than the Executor.

Not exactly smaller because they're flattened spheres, which will represent more volume that the relatively "paper thin" Executor, especially since it's not very large in comparison to its length, due to its dagger shape.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Now. Does anybody actually want to make a case in relation to the main topic, substantiating how the turbolasers mentioned in the quote could possibly have been heavy turbolasers, when they were described as tracking erratically moving starfighters?

Like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beehive_%2 ... ircraft.29

EDIT: Actually, bolt size in Oragahn's picture seems to me to be more in line with medium turbolasers. Of course, there is question as to why exactly would narrator describe them?

The Trade Federation Droid Control ship was firing at a relatively insect-sized ship. In ROTS, all the bolts fired by the HTLs are considerably short. Only the beam coming from the belly of a Venator is long, and is typical of a SPHA-T (which is the EU explanation anyway).

Thank you. I honestly wasn't expecting this from you. But I would point out to you that they probably were not even in the ionosphere; all evidence indicates that they were in space.

Well, you annoy me, and I let that cloud my judgement, which I shouldn't have...
And I agree, the Ionosphere doesn't cut it either, they were most likely in space...
(Which makes the barely visible bolts fired by HTLs no way visible to the naked eye on the planet below, which makes the novel entry at least on this subject, invalid)

So what are these black clouds?
I guess they aren't black clouds (I don't buy the "full of oxygen" explanation, I feel it doesn't make any sense)?
We know that flying in battles is done mostly by visual means, at least for starfighters (yes, they do use sensors, but most fights show us the pilots actually look at their targets, just as in modern fighter engagements)...
These Flak bursts seemed to be aimed at them, so the actuall black clouds could simply be dark particules conatined in the flak shells, in order to create black clouds which block vision...
They may even hamper sensors a bit, at least thermal ones, and so on...
So they would be used in order to make fighter runs against targets more diificult...

There is after all plenty of good reasons for shedding crap on the flight path of fighters and bombers, so who knows?

[StarWarsStarTrek]

You are welcome to obtain quotes of me from the thread in question where I say "bankrupt", "consume major portion" "most of industry" or the like in relation to the Death Star project.

One there is no evidence the Star Wars industry can grow exponentially, nor that the Federation industry couldn't grow proportionally to match. Second there are indications the Empire was pushing its industry as much as it could, with the DS project sucking down resources, and it wasn't building ginormouse battlefleets. Third the war is likely to be over long before any of this industrial ramp up could hope to go into effect.

What is so amazing, is that this statement came in the same statement you present the 'sector group' quote!

As it is I argued it being secret on the outer rim was not proof it was a minor drain on Imperial resources and that the Death Stars were provided the full support of the Galactic Empire's industrial base which is not the same as saying everything the industry did went to the Death Star.

I don't need to prove this for you any longer. By your own statement, it is a "drop in the bucket" for the Empire. That is correct; a moon sized battle station, incalculable trillions of tons of metal, is nothing compared to the imperial war machine. Amazingly convenient, when your opponent does all the work for you, eh?

You made a vague refrence to death star sized torped spheres. No picture that I could see, no quote. Nadda. So there was nothing to respond to.

No. Surely, you remember the fiasco resulting from the end of RotS; the giant, spherical object that your side eagerly proclaimed to be the Death Star. They, of course, did this with the attempt of both nerfing industry and discrediting the EU. It ironically does precisely the opposite.

Turn around? You been talking about massive industrial advantage since nearly the day you arrived here.

I'm not referring to the bigger picture, of course. My point is that you simultaneously argue that the Death Star was significant and insignificant.

Directly stated by a secondary source, supported by both primary and secondary sources. Which must really sear you doesn't it?

No, it really sears you. By your own accord, the imperial industry is so inconceivably vast, that constructing a mobile, metal moon is "a drop in the bucket" for them.

yes I dismiss something which occurs offscreen,

Who cares? The construction of the Death Star occurs offscreen. Does this mean it didn't happen?

involves Dooku being incredibly stupid and idiotic

1. Even if it did, who cares? We are talking technology here, not the intelligence of a single man. And it happened. To paraphrase you:

"Directly stated by a primary source, supported by both primary and secondary sources. Which must really sear you doesn't it?"

2. Your own secondary source involves the fundamental physics and economics of Star Wars being "stupid and idiotic", yet you never bat an eye at this. Why does my primary source suddenly get dismissed for an in-universe, fallible person [allegedly] making a bad tactical decision?

and is countered by both the whole X-wings on the Death Star scene and the MF scene you provided to me so you presumbly are aware of it.

ROFL what? The X wings cross Yavin Prime in six seconds, and you call it a contradiction?

And if you had actually responded to my evidence perhaps we could have a discussion on the matter. However instead you wasted my time, ignored three examples I laid out with time stamps and prattled on how I proved myself wrong or some such. So that ship is passed and now that you conceded that your previous statement was in error, that I posted evidence proving myself wrong, we are concluded on this score.

Vague response to a specific argument. Rewatch your own video. The galaxy class fires a few torpedos, does nothing, then fires eight torpedos in rapid succession, and then waits to recharge. Naturally, you take this as meaning that it can fire eight torpedos, per second, without pause. Really, how could you possibly miss this?

Thats funny. I remember running out all the calculations, the time figures ect. All I remember you doing is grabbing my end results and shouting "See, I win!".

You remember this, because you never read my final rebuttal in sufficient detail.

No. You see there are two basic statments in what you quoted. The First is me asking essentially what your point is since I did not make an argument on range during the time in question.

So what? You cannot force people to only analyze a specific segment of a video, when the others indicate highly relevant information as well.

The Second, starting with "considering", then points out that if a Galaxy class chooses to sit at ranges observed in a plethera of evidence, as has been given to you more times than can be counted, it doesn't matter what the rate of fire is because the ISD could never hope to hit it.

Except that effective combat range is at the least in the hundreds of kilometers; read the RotS novel. And the galaxy class always prefers to move into knife fighting range, whether it is against romulan warbirds or against a freaking borg cube.

A descrepency at all depends on if

Wait, so if I were to call up these authors and ask them if they intended to mean that there were less than 10,000 people mourning Lincoln at every stop, they would say yes, that the connotation of "thousands" here is "<=10,000"?

you are claiming hundreds of thousands of mourners were at each station or not which the quote appears to be saying. If not there is no descrepency or issue.

[/quote]

Read:

"Over 25,000 people went to the White House on 18th April to see the body, which was then taken by grand procession to the Capitol where another 25,000 paid their respects."

http://www.americancivilwar.asn.au/conf ... nation.pdf

[sonofccn]

One there is no evidence the Star Wars industry can grow exponentially, nor that the Federation industry couldn't grow proportionally to match. Second there are indications the Empire was pushing its industry as much as it could, with the DS project sucking down resources, and it wasn't building ginormouse battlefleets. Third the war is likely to be over long before any of this industrial ramp up could hope to go into effect.

What is so amazing, is that this statement came in the same statement you present the 'sector group' quote!

Again I ask where I said it would consume a major portion thereof. I stated by all indiciations the Imperial fleet was expanding minus the resources the Death Star project was taking which doesn't conflict with my position since I believe it consumed the worth of 20 sector groups. 20 groups the Empire couldn't build because it wasted it in its White Elephant program. So sorry try again.

I don't need to prove this for you any longer

Need to? No. Understanding what I was arguing? Yes which you have failed repeatedly at.

o. Surely, you remember the fiasco resulting from the end of RotS

That isn't a torpedo sphere. That is the death star and its a skeletal frame. A frame they then spent some years building to finish. Then after it exploded they then spent some more years building its replacment.

I'm not referring to the bigger picture, of course.

Or, I assemble a massive fleet and drown Starfleet in numbers. The second Death Star masses two billion times the entire Federation Starfleet based on a calculation by Picard here; I convert the industrial capabilities needed to construct a moon sized battle station into tens of billions of imperial star destroyers instead.

here

The Empire focusing to the max to fininsh that only got about halfway done in years. Or built the smaller DS1 in about 20 years, you know the one worth about a score sector groups only?

here

So again. You brought it up first.

My point is that you simultaneously argue that the Death Star was significant and insignificant.

And you have failed to prove this assertion.

No, it really sears you. By your own accord, the imperial industry is so inconceivably vast, that constructing a mobile, metal moon is "a drop in the bucket" for them.

It sears me to have evidence supporting my position? Face it the Death Stars do not match the convential fleet, there is a disconect wether we are talking about G,T, or C canon.

Who cares? The construction of the Death Star occurs offscreen. Does this mean it didn't happen?

This ties back into fast only when we aren't looking at them which is a copout. But of course I said this already and you'll won't remember it the next time you ask.

1. Even if it did, who cares? We are talking technology here, not the intelligence of a single man. And it happened. To paraphrase you:

For it to do what it did requires Dooku act idiotic.

2. Your own secondary source involves the fundamental physics and economics of Star Wars being "stupid and idiotic", yet you never bat an eye at this.

It involves them acting counter to how you wish them to be. I have provided rather lenghty amount of evidence to support why your assumption of industry doesn't hold water. Conversly you haven't done anything to support your "example" but cling to it.

ROFL what? The X wings cross Yavin Prime in six seconds, and you call it a contradiction?

Sigh. You never worked figures for that scene, or found someone who did, so there is nothing there for me to evaluate. I was refering to the X-wings on the Death Star scene, where they are going full throttle yet sluggishly travel through its trench line. And I refrenced your MF scene involving a MF speeding to catch a TIE fighter which, from memory, equaled an acceleration of only about 1800 meters per second or so.

Vague response to a specific argument. Rewatch your own video. The galaxy class fires a few torpedos, does nothing, then fires eight torpedos in rapid succession

My God. Did you forget inbetween a single post that this is not a consectative video? As more you can not disprove what it did anymore than a clip of man walking can disprove he can run.

You remember this, because you never read my final rebuttal in sufficient detail.

You some size work and argued since ISD was bigger it had to be more powerful by the same proportion of such. Hardly doing all of the calculations or claiming I didn't do any.

So what? You cannot force people to only analyze a specific segment of a video, when the others indicate highly relevant information as well.

Because in our debate at that time it wasn't relevant. We were not discussing range only rate of fire. Therefor your "but its all at closer range!" is a meaningless statement.

Except that effective combat range is at the least in the hundreds of kilometers; read the RotS novel

And I showed you a movie clip showing how they couldn't hit the Tantiv with anything regarding accuracy. But I'm out of time. So I'll cut off here. See you on the flip side SWST

[StarWarsStarTrek]

sonofccn, your entire argument rests on a very shaky needle of self-contradicting assertions and standards. It is incredibly unprofessional of you to dismiss any attempts of rationalizing a C canon source on the grounds of logic, but then to attempt to do the exact same thing to an undisputed calculation stemming from the films themselves!

Again I ask where I said it would consume a major portion thereof.

You said that the Empire was pushing its industry as far as it could, and that it was "focusing to the max." Then, you say that the Death Star project is only a "drop in the bucket" for the Empire; very blatant contradictions here.

That isn't a torpedo sphere. That is the death star and its a skeletal frame. A frame they then spent some years building to finish. Then after it exploded they then spent some more years building its replacment.

ROFL. What makes you think it took "years" to build the skeletal frame? The scene occurs before Obi Wan gives a baby Luke to the Lars family on Tatooine! No more than months could have passed. And this skeletal Death Star is still massively larger than anything the Federation has ever built.

So again. You brought it up first.

So what? You attempted to downplay the possibility of the Alliance rapidly constructing a Death Star on the grounds that the Empire strained its resources to make one; then, to downplay industry, you downplay the difficult in constructing the Death Star (not realizing that this actually does precisely the opposite).

And you have failed to prove this assertion.

Sure. "Focusing to the max" and "drop in the bucket" are quite blatant contradictions.

It sears me to have evidence supporting my position? Face it the Death Stars do not match the convential fleet, there is a disconect wether we are talking about G,T, or C canon.

And by your own assertions, a moon sized battle station is only a "drop in the bucket" for the imperial industry! Do you realize how this statement destroys your entire argument?

And I have already explained to you how it is much more difficult to construct the Death Star than it is to construct a smaller vessel pound for pound. The fact that it equaled a score of sector groups doesn't mean that the fundamental mathematics and physics of Star Wars should be thrown out; it simply means that a sector group is very large. It's funny, how you will jump to the far crazier explanation (Science is wrong!) whenever it suits your case.

And before you go off and argue that a "sector group" is clearly defined, it isn't. We know roughly the size of a mobile component of a sector group; the sector fleet. We know that it possesses 24 star destroyers, 2400 combat ships, and 1600 "other" vessels; we have no idea how large the latter are. Nor we do know how many resources are required in building planetary shields, a ground army, a ground police force, supply ships, combat and non-combat space stations, planetary defense forces, and an enormous list of other assets not mentioned explicitly in the ISB, but that are completely essential to defend and control a thousand star systems.

So, we have two routes here:

1. Dismiss science and engineering

2. Rationalize the quote, and expand the definition of a "sector group"

Should I be surprised that you went with one?

You don't understand that the fact that the Death Star exists is proof of my argument. If the team tasked with building it were given only the resources needed to construct one hundred frigates, they could not conceivably have succeeded! Any glance at it would make it clear that it requires more metal, more manpower and more resources to construct than a hundred frigates. This isn't rocket science here.

This ties back into fast only when we aren't looking at them which is a copout. But of course I said this already and you'll won't remember it the next time you ask.

Who cares? It happened, and it can be calc'd, and I don't care if we can't see it. You haven't ever attempted to dispute the calcs, and you have no evidence of your own to dispute it.

You know...exactly what you accuse me of, for your own, lower canon source.

For it to do what it did requires Dooku act idiotic.

Who cares? It is canon. Your own interpretation of a C canon source requires us to assume idiocy.

It involves them acting counter to how you wish them to be.

DO YOU REALIZE THAT THIS IS PRECISELY YOUR BASIS FOR DISMISSAL OF MY OWN EVIDENCE?

Your entire argument against Dooku-acceleration is:

"Well, it's idiotic, it doesn't make sense to me, it must not be true."

I used the exact same argument against a lower canon source, with far more detail, and your response is incredulity, and a threat to report me.

So why the FUCK do you feel that it is okay for you to dismiss a G canon source, yet I cannot dismiss a C canon source?

Sigh. You never worked figures for that scene, or found someone who did, so there is nothing there for me to evaluate.

No. You said that there was a contradiction. If you cannot evaluate it, don't bring it up.

My God. Did you forget inbetween a single post that this is not a consectative video? As more you can not disprove what it did anymore than a clip of man walking can disprove he can run.

I already addressed this. Yes, there are cuts to different scenes. My point is that, within a single scene, you still don't see rapid 8 torpedo per second successions.

And yet I used precisely that; and found that, by your own ridiculous calculations, an imperial star destroyer still defeats a galaxy one v one! And there are far more imperial vessels than Starfleet's; and they can build vessels more rapidly as well, and they have more manpower! The Empire has every conceivable advantage here, yet still you stick you continue to persist.

You some size work and argued since ISD was bigger it had to be more powerful by the same proportion of such. Hardly doing all of the calculations or claiming I didn't do any.

If ISDs fazed Victorys out, they would have to have a greater firepower at least per square area. I was generous in assuming parity, since the former are clearly more advanced and formidable.

Because in our debate at that time it wasn't relevant. We were not discussing range only rate of fire. Therefor your "but its all at closer range!" is a meaningless statement.

No, it isn't. You certainly loved to add in snippets of "well, my calculations are generous, because they assume that the venator can hit the broad side of a barn". Given that Galaxy classes love to approach within point blank range to hit giant targets such as a borg cube, we can conclude that their own accuracy is pitiful and/or they love to attack in close quarters for idiotic reasons; either way, SW's allegedly inferior accuracy is irrelevant.

And I showed you a movie clip showing how they couldn't hit the Tantiv with anything regarding accuracy.

And I provided you with a counter clip, to which you concluded that accuracy was roughly equal. So there is no discrepancy here.


----------------------


Really, your entire argument is marred with the unavoidable, ridiculous hypocrisy of dismissing a G canon incident because it "doesn't make sense", "assumes idiocy", blahblahblah, without any canon of your own to support your stance, but then turn around and deny that a C canon source can be dismissed on the same grounds.

[sonofccn]

Okay I'm back. Finishing your original post, try to look over your latest sometime tomorrow or monday.

Wait, so if I were to call up these authors and ask them if they intended to mean that there were less than 10,000 people mourning Lincoln at every stop, they would say yes, that the connotation of "thousands" here is "<=10,000"?

Actually I would expect them to be confused and fail to understand why any of this has any merit. However on the matter I would say they likely do not have an idea on how many exactly stood at each station and are speaking in rough generalization on an average of thousands were at each station. And yes I do expect that if they had meant tens of thousands were at each station they'd have said so nor could I logically infer tens or hundreds of thousands from the passage.

"Over 25,000 people went to the White House on 18th April to see the body, which was then taken by grand procession to the Capitol where another 25,000 paid their respects."

Okay? That appears to be talking about his body at the Capitol not during its long procession to the burial site which if I understand everything correctly was where your previous passage came from. There is no direct link between that number and the number at the station.

[sonofccn]

You said that the Empire was pushing its industry as far as it could

I remember saying by all accounts the Empire was pushing itself as hard as it could building its navy, minus the DS project and various other super weapon projects palpy had cooking, so if you have a quote...

and that it was "focusing to the max."

Yes the Empire was focusing on completing the Death Star project, this was not some low key back burner but the key to which he was to control his Empire. That is not to say that the DS consumed the entire industry but that it wanted for nothing. That they were doing everything in their power to see it to completion.

Then, you say that the Death Star project is only a "drop in the bucket" for the Empire; very blatant contradictions here.

No there is not. It simply means the DS project was an important project that as an individual program recieved lavish funding that few projects likely could hope for but in turn was dwarfed by the total Imperial budget.

ROFL. What makes you think it took "years" to build the skeletal frame?

I didn't say anything of the frame. I said it took years to finish it as refrenced by the DS1 coming on line circa ANH. So your claim of a "torpedo sphere" being built on the birth of the Empire is nonsense. It still takes years to build Death Stars per all available evidence and there is still fairly conclusive evidence their is a disconect between building death stars and regular naval ships.

So what?

So what? You claimed I brought up the 20 sector group quote and then, after you started talking about all those millions of ISDs that "were a drop in the bucket" I then started arguing that the DS consumed some major portion of the Imperial budget. I have proven that your timeline is completely fabricated. You started talking about millions of ISDs I then I brought up the 20 sector group quote.

And by your own assertions, a moon sized battle station is only a "drop in the bucket" for the imperial industry! Do you realize how this statement destroys your entire argument?

A moon sized battlestation worth only 20 sector groups in a navy that has thousands. Which doesn't destroy my argument.

And I have already explained to you how it is much more difficult to construct the Death Star than it is to construct a smaller vessel pound for pound.

You have stated your opinion on the matter. To this day no evidence has ever been brought to support this postion.

And before you go off and argue that a "sector group" is clearly defined, it isn't. We know roughly the size of a mobile component of a sector group; the sector fleet

No. It actually is fairly explained in the ISB. And once again I see you failed reading 101, its 2400 total ships with 24 star destroyers and 1600 combat vessels. For the army we have the following:

A surface marshal commands the sector army. Although more often than not this is merely an additional title bestowed onto the Moff or Grand Moff who commands the Sector Group. The Sector includes every single army troppper in an assault fleet. This is 774,576 tropps and 1,180,309 personnel in total. 66,640 repulsor craft are in service with the sector army, as well as 13,992 heavy tanks.

Nor we do know how many resources are required in building planetary shields, a ground army, a ground police force, supply ships, combat and non-combat space stations, planetary defense forces, and an enormous list of other assets not mentioned explicitly in the ISB, but that are completely essential to defend and control a thousand star systems.

Mostly because most of that isn't in a sector group and would fall to the local planet to provide.

So, we have two routes here:

1. Dismiss science and engineering

2. Rationalize the quote, and expand the definition of a "sector group"

Or three accept the quote and using science and observation notice it is in line with the rest of the universe. I choose three.

You don't understand that the fact that the Death Star exists is proof of my argument.

No your argument is that the Death Star can be broken down into millions of ISDs not that the Death Star existed. An assertion which flies in the face of nearly all evidence we have of the situation.

Who cares? It happened, and it can be calc'd, and I don't care if we can't see it. You haven't ever attempted to dispute the calcs, and you have no evidence of your own to dispute it.

Well because we don't see it its just as likely Dooku fell into a wormhole or the hand of Lucas reached down and plucked him into the heavens. :) Or any other ludricus options equally sound as assuming ships only speed when we don't watch. But yes it can be calced nor did I say the calculation was wrong merely an outlier.

Who cares? It is canon. Your own interpretation of a C canon source requires us to assume idiocy.

No. It assumes there may be factors we don't comprehend. At no point does it assume idiocy on anyone.

"Well, it's idiotic, it doesn't make sense to me, it must not be true."

I stated the idiocy of Dooku, trying to escape, to go slow-superfast-slow. I also brought up the whole it only happens when we don't see it and we have evidence that when we can see them they don't go as fast. nothing as simplistic as you state.

So why the FUCK do you feel that it is okay for you to dismiss a G canon source, yet I cannot dismiss a C canon source?

Because I have evidence on my side, you have only an empty assertion.

No. You said that there was a contradiction. If you cannot evaluate it, don't bring it up.

I didn't bring it up. I said the X-wings on the deathstar. You brought it up.

I already addressed this. Yes, there are cuts to different scenes. My point is that, within a single scene, you still don't see rapid 8 torpedo per second successions.

Differnt scenes from differnt episodes with vastly different scenarios. Or to be precise you could only argue I contradicted myself if you had a shot of the same episode during the "unloading scenes" which showed them pause to "recharge" or something. You have not provided it so your original statement is still in error.

If ISDs fazed Victorys out, they would have to have a greater firepower at least per square area. I was generous in assuming parity, since the former are clearly more advanced and formidable.

Which is absolutely meaningless to your statment I didn't do any calculations when in fact I did most of the calculations on that subject. So therefore your original comment that you did all the work and I didn't is in fact wrong.

No, it isn't. You certainly loved to add in snippets of "well, my calculations are generous, because they assume that the venator can hit the broad side of a barn".

And I provided evidence of Imperial accuracy which is not one and the same with range.

Given that Galaxy classes love to approach within point blank range to hit giant targets such as a borg cube, we can conclude that their own accuracy is pitiful and/or they love to attack in close quarters for idiotic reasons; either way, SW's allegedly inferior accuracy is irrelevant.

No because they suffer horrendous inaccuracy at the photogenic ranges Trek has a tendency towards. The only way you'd have a point if I showed clips of ISDs missing a target at thousands of miles and compared it to accuracy of a Galaxy class hitting at tens of kilometers or some such. Which I didn't do so you have no grounds to complain on this score.

And I provided you with a counter clip, to which you concluded that accuracy was roughly equal. So there is no discrepancy here.

The tactical fighters again? As I said they were facing smaller targets who actually who moving in relation to the capitol ship but yes the Cardie ship did achieve similar accuracy the ISD did against a larger, nonevasive target flying directly ahead of it or as I said in my reply the Imperials would have killed to able to achieve that kind of hit ratio against a similar situation. So again no point. But again I'm not here to argue accuracy with you merely your thinly veiled assertion that I was somehow being dishonest in not stating the distance shown in the images I provided for you to look at.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

I remember saying by all accounts the Empire was pushing itself as hard as it could building its navy, minus the DS project and various other super weapon projects palpy had cooking, so if you have a quote...

You said that the "DS project [was] sucking down resources", and this this prevented the imperial starfleet from being as massive as it could have been; but then you argue that the Death Star was no big deal for the Empire at all, and was only a "drop in the bucket".

If it were only a drop in the bucket of the imperial budget, then it couldn't possibly have drained said imperial budget by the enormous amounts you simultaneously argue that it did.

I didn't say anything of the frame. I said it took years to finish it as refrenced by the DS1 coming on line circa ANH. So your claim of a "torpedo sphere" being built on the birth of the Empire is nonsense. It still takes years to build Death Stars per all available evidence and there is still fairly conclusive evidence their is a disconect between building death stars and regular naval ships.

No, look at the giant object in space at the end of RotS, which you argue is the skeletal frame of the first Death Star. It is still massive, and that much had been built in less than the time it takes Obi Wan to bring a baby Luke to the Lars family; no more than a few months or a year.

So what? You claimed I brought up the 20 sector group quote and then, after you started talking about all those millions of ISDs that "were a drop in the bucket" I then started arguing that the DS consumed some major portion of the Imperial budget. I have proven that your timeline is completely fabricated. You started talking about millions of ISDs I then I brought up the 20 sector group quote.

No. There were two seperate arguments I made regarding the Death Star:

1. That the Galactic Alliance could mass produce Death Stars to swarm the Federation.

2. That the construction of the Death Star is an industrial feat far surpassing anything the Federation has ever done.

First, I make claim 1. You counter that the Death Star took years to build and heavily strained the imperial economy. Then, I make claim 2, and you selectively change your stance to "the Death Star wasn't a big strain", to argue that it is magically easy to build.

A moon sized battlestation worth only 20 sector groups in a navy that has thousands. Which doesn't destroy my argument.

Yes, it does. "worth" is completely relative; but the resources required are fixed, and do not inflate. The Federation could never hope to build a Death Star, because they lack the resources to build one; if they didn't, they could have built up a far more massive starfleet.

But the fact that the Empire can build a Death Star means that they have access to trillions of tons of durasteel, and can assemble it together on the fly, in space.

It is the rough equivalent in mass of a Lake Superior being created every half an hour.

So, if the Empire could build a Death Star, it would have to had "flown" in various chunks of metal; yes, this would include billions of ISD equivalents, or quadrillions of starfighter sized chunks. So, let's compare this to building a star destroyer:

Metal: The Death Star proves that the Empire has the raw resources needed to build a billion-ISD fleet.

Crew: The Death Star proves that the Empire has either the crew or the droids needed to build and/or maintain a billion-ISD fleet.

Power: The massive power reactor proves that the Empire can build the reactors of this billion-ISD fleet.

Crafting: The ability to assemble all of this into a perfectly spherical, complicated battle station with hosts of markings on its hull, anti-grav, etc, proves that the Empire can make the fine tunings necessary of a billion-ISD fleet.

Money: The ability to hire workers, and get all of the above has this covered.

Technology/engineer: The ability to build the Death Star, have it move, and not have it fall apart, more than covers this.

So, your assertions that there is a magical line between the Death Star and everything else is completely unsupported.

You have stated your opinion on the matter. To this day no evidence has ever been brought to support this postion.

Nope. I explained to you the science behind it; you never even bothered to address it specifically, so I will repeat:

As a starship increases in volume, the stresses it undergoes will increase by a factor of three. But its loading area and strength will only increase by a factor of two. Additionally, the Death Star are mobile, in both sublight and FTL. Federation starbases are immobile, and only have to deal with one G of acceleration.

This isn't "opinion", it is fact. Now you can either make the slightest semblance of addressing my argument, or you can just put your hands in your ears, throw up a wall of ignorance, and refuse to even acknowledge anything I say, as though the concepts are too complex for you to understand. I know that they are not, so stop it with this "Science only applies when it suits me!" nonsense.

No. It actually is fairly explained in the ISB. And once again I see you failed reading 101, its 2400 total ships with 24 star destroyers and 1600 combat vessels.

For the army we have the following:

A surface marshal commands the sector army. Although more often than not this is merely an additional title bestowed onto the Moff or Grand Moff who commands the Sector Group. The Sector includes every single army troppper in an assault fleet. This is 774,576 tropps and 1,180,309 personnel in total. 66,640 repulsor craft are in service with the sector army, as well as 13,992 heavy tanks.

Sector "army" does not preclude the existence of other ground forces.

Or three accept the quote and using science and observation notice it is in line with the rest of the universe. I choose three.

Ok then, bring subcommander tyler back in, and have him give an explanation as to how the moon sized battle station was constructed with the resources allotted to 100 frigates. After all, it "is in line with the rest of the universe"; it certainly must be remotely comprehensible to rationalize, right?

No your argument is that the Death Star can be broken down into millions of ISDs not that the Death Star existed. An assertion which flies in the face of nearly all evidence we have of the situation.

"Broken down"? No. The Death Star proves that the Empire can quickly gather the metal, fuel and manpower needed to build billions of ISDs; this is fact.

Well because we don't see it its just as likely Dooku fell into a wormhole or the hand of Lucas reached down and plucked him into the heavens. :)

...

Oh god...

Or any other ludricus options equally sound as assuming ships only speed when we don't watch. But yes it can be calced nor did I say the calculation was wrong merely an outlier.

I DON'T GIVE A FUCK WHAT YOUR OPINION IS! You haven't offered any counter-evidence to refute my statement; you simply make vague "it doesn't make sense to me!" arguments based on an imaginary camera.

It happened, it is evidence, just man up and admit it.

No. It assumes there may be factors we don't comprehend. At no point does it assume idiocy on anyone.

Well then, there are factors involved with Dooku's acceleration feat that we can't comprehend. But it's still canon that he could move that fast. Bingo.

I stated the idiocy of Dooku, trying to escape, to go slow-superfast-slow. I also brought up the whole it only happens when we don't see it and we have evidence that when we can see them they don't go as fast. nothing as simplistic as you state.

Who cares? It still happened, I don't care if we see it with our eyes or not.

Because I have evidence on my side

...

Well because we don't see it its just as likely Dooku fell into a wormhole or the hand of Lucas reached down and plucked him into the heavens. :)

Really, I don't see this "evidence" you claim exists, other than "well, it's probably an outlier..."

I didn't bring it up. I said the X-wings on the deathstar. You brought it up.

Oh, on the death star? Why, that is simple; they don't want to run into anything.

Differnt scenes from differnt episodes with vastly different scenarios. Or to be precise you could only argue I contradicted myself if you had a shot of the same episode during the "unloading scenes" which showed them pause to "recharge" or something. You have not provided it so your original statement is still in error.

Feel free to explain why, in each scene in which you cite as evidence of 8-torpedos-per-second rapid fire, the Galaxy only does this once, and then, in the same scene, pauses for several seconds, and why you come to the conclusion that they can or will do this constantly.

Which is absolutely meaningless to your statment I didn't do any calculations when in fact I did most of the calculations on that subject. So therefore your original comment that you did all the work and I didn't is in fact wrong.

No, I took your own calculations (that assume 8-torpedos-per-second when the video you posted depicted the exactly opposite) for both ships, scaled the Venator's up to an imperial star destroyer, and saw that the imp outputted more energy per second and could withstand more total firepower; translation, it would win.

Now, if you actually feel like pointing out flaws in my calcs, feel free.

And I provided evidence of Imperial accuracy which is not one and the same with range.

In space, it pretty much is. If your accuracy is lower, you can't shoot as far. Ergo, accuracy determines range in space, the only other factor for weapons like turbolasers and phasers being dissipation, but that doesn't factor in for anything short of rather astronomical distances anyhow.

No because they suffer horrendous inaccuracy at the photogenic ranges Trek has a tendency towards. The only way you'd have a point if I showed clips of ISDs missing a target at thousands of miles and compared it to accuracy of a Galaxy class hitting at tens of kilometers or some such. Which I didn't do so you have no grounds to complain on this score.

Sure; galaxy classes may be inaccurate at hitting targets from 300K kilometers away. Fine; but that doesn't explain why they must move within five kilometers, in many occasions, to fire. The implication here is that they are inaccurate, even against a borg cube, at even a hundred kilometers, or else they would be firing at those ranges instead.

Yet we know from the G canon RotS novelization that effective combat range between ships is at least "hundreds" of kilometers; and in ESB, an ion cannon hits a star destroyer from 6000 kilometers distant.

And you yourself brought up accuracy.

The tactical fighters again? As I said they were facing smaller targets who actually who moving in relation to the capitol ship but yes the Cardie ship did achieve similar accuracy the ISD did against a larger, nonevasive target flying directly ahead of it or as I said in my reply the Imperials would have killed to able to achieve that kind of hit ratio against a similar situation. So again no point. But again I'm not here to argue accuracy with you merely your thinly veiled assertion that I was somehow being dishonest in not stating the distance shown in the images I provided for you to look at.

All of this is countered by the fact that the Tantive IV was over one kilometer away from the ISD, and slightly below it. Whereas in comparison, these smaller fighters were almost literally within spitting distance of the ships firing on them; close enough so that Napoleon's artillery could have had a decent shot at hitting them!

[Praeothmin]

Sure; galaxy classes may be inaccurate at hitting targets from 300K kilometers away. Fine; but that doesn't explain why they must move within five kilometers, in many occasions, to fire. The implication here is that they are inaccurate, even against a borg cube, at even a hundred kilometers, or else they would be firing at those ranges instead.

Yet we know from the G canon RotS novelization that effective combat range between ships is at least "hundreds" of kilometers; and in ESB, an ion cannon hits a star destroyer from 6000 kilometers distant.

And you yourself brought up accuracy.

This has been done to death and you know it, SWST...
SW ships DO NOT ENGAGE AT MULTI-KM FIGHTS ANYMORE THAN ST DOES...
The Hoth Ion Cannon example is beaten to a pulp by ENT's Mars defense array which could hit the Enterprise near Earth...

We know from THE FUCKING MOVIES that your RotS novel ranges are bullshit...

And WE HAVE MULTIPLE ST CANON INSTANCES OF RANGES IN THE HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF KM, so stop your bullshit...