[QUOTE=ricrery;2596305]You said ST would beat it.[/QUOTE]
Wrong again. Want to go for round two?
Printable View
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596305]You said ST would beat it.[/QUOTE]
Wrong again. Want to go for round two?
[QUOTE=Omega133;2596310]Wrong again. Want to go for round two?[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2530068&postcount=19324]Liar.[/url] Modern Earth has old nukes that can destroy ships like Borg Cubes.
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596317][url=http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2530068&postcount=19324]Liar.[/url] Modern Earth has old nukes that can destroy ships like Borg Cubes.[/QUOTE]
Take things out of context much?
The original discussion was BSG vs Halo. I said BSG would win against them. And when I said the rest, I meant that if BSG could win, anyone could.
[QUOTE=Dywyddyr;2596281]So's Star Wars... :shrug:
Dune was a book (or series of books) DECADES before it was a movie.
And it was a TV mini-series after the movie.[/QUOTE]
i need some sleep. i didn't catch that. :p
i guess i just see Dune as separate as it's not usually part of the Star Something debates. first of all you can't diss Lynch. second he's in a galaxy far far away going boldly where nothing has ever been, so comparisons are out. also, Star Wars is a series of movies, whereas Dune is one movie and the miniseries is not worth mention. but you are right, the movie arguement sucked. but i still think Dune should be out. and Star Trek vs Stargate is another debate.
Farscape is practically Stargate's aussie cousin. they even absorbed the handsome twosome which caused them to eat a lot of the fans. and Stargate and Star Trek are friendly imo, many Star Trekkians have been on Stargate, such as Deanna, Q, Quark and Reg, which was a particularly hilarious episode and an homage to Barclay. so i see the 3 as one clump. where as people tend to hate Star Wars or Star Trek and love the other, and scream at each other. :p
oh and spaceballs i haven't even seen and it too shouldn't count as it's a totally unrelated movie, much like Dune.
Since he's content to ignore it:
[QUOTE=ricrery;2595920]Never did I say that.
[/quote]
Oh, really?
[QUOTE=ricrery;2595462][B]A kiloton would have created plasma in the atmosphere, did the photon and phaser hits do this? No. Thus, we can conclude they didn't do kilotons. [SIZE="7"][I][U][B]This is physics.[/B][/U][/I][/SIZE] A petaton would have created a far more destructive visual effect. I heavily doubt that this is an instance of kilotons.[/B][/QUOTE]
So, tell me Mr. Liar... what prey tell is that "this is physics" referring to? Perhaps you mean physics as in phys-ed? :rolleyes:
[QUOTE=ricrery;2595920]
Xeelee handguns have scale, and they work via gravity. They aren't doing kilotons at all because they are GRAVITY WEAPONS. Enjoy sub-kiloton Trek! Seriously, a kiloton of KE could shatter a ship's hull while its shields were at 70%.[/QUOTE]
They work via gravity... so they project gravity then?
Cool... how does projecting a gravity well cause an explosion... much less a supernova, hm? If anything, increasing gravity in a localized area would cause an IMPLOSION not an EXPLOSION.
:shrug:
Then again, it's just "phys-x" :m:
[QUOTE=Maika;2596348]oh and spaceballs i haven't even seen and it too shouldn't count as it's a totally [B]unrelated[/B] movie, much like Dune.[/QUOTE]
Would you mind clarifying "unrelated"?
[QUOTE=Kittamaru;2596350]Since he's content to ignore it:
[/QUOTE]
Don't worry, he will never notice it.
I am still curious as to why Photon torpedoes are called as such.
[QUOTE=Shogun;2596384]I am still curious as to why Photon torpedoes are called as such.[/QUOTE]
I read about it somewhere I think it's because a photon is smaller than a proton or such which it uses...I think. :D
[QUOTE=Omega133;2596351]Would you mind clarifying "unrelated"?[/QUOTE]
well, apples and oranges. just very different types of things. it just sticks out in my eye.
spaceballs is a spazz comedy where as the rest aren't. to me that's a different category. spoof and screwball comedies should be in a debate of their own.
Dune is art, and unique. it's Lynch's. that makes it Lynch Universe and that can only be compared to Lynch Universe creations.
Star Trek, Farscape and Stargate all follow similar rules and are very similar and share fans.
Star Wars follows similar enough rules that it can be compared to the previous clump without giving me a headache. :p
Like how a nuclear bomb uses the atom which has a nucleus in it.
[QUOTE=Kittamaru;2596350]Since he's content to ignore it:
[/quote]
Like you're content to ignore Rama's, Inquisitor Ryan's, and White Rabbit's statements. Really, when don't you make dishonest claims and ignore peoples posts because you can't create a response?
[quote]
So, tell me Mr. Liar... what prey tell is that "this is physics" referring to? Perhaps you mean physics as in phys-ed? :rolleyes:
[/quote]
No, I was referring to ignoring physics. Reading comprehension failure.
[quote]
They work via gravity... so they project gravity then?
Cool... how does projecting a gravity well cause an explosion... much less a supernova, hm? If anything, increasing gravity in a localized area would cause an IMPLOSION not an EXPLOSION.
:shrug:
Then again, it's just "phys-x" :m:[/QUOTE]
It was nice of you to ask for proof many other times while not giving any yourself.
[quote=Wikipedia]
At low power settings, the device emits synchrotron radiation, but the Qax have been too scared to try the higher settings. It is not until later in the story when Jim Bolder, piloting the nightfighter for the Qax, discovers the true nature of the device when he witnesses a small fleet of nightfighters destroying a star with cherry-red beams. After hatching a plot to change his entry point into the Qax system, this theory is proven when the starbreaker is accidentally fired into the system's sun at full power in an attempt to destroy the nightfighter. The star begins destroying itself within four days.
[b]The full capabilities of the starbreaker have never been clearly explained. For example, it is not known if the weapon makes use of direct energy transfer, or if the stellar disruption effect is due to some other mechanism. Furthermore, with the variable outputs of the device, it remains uncertain as to what magnitude of damage it can inflict upon "normal" targets.[/b] It would seem reasonable to assume that the device is formidable no matter what the mechanism, as the Xeelee have found it to be quite effective for their needs.[/quote]
So the Xeelee stomp pretty much... everything... with handguns.
[QUOTE=razordude;2596396]I read about it somewhere I think it's because a photon is smaller than a proton or such which it uses...I think. :D[/QUOTE]
Umm.....it uses matter/antimatter annihilation....
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596400]Like you're content to ignore Rama's, Inquisitor Ryan's, and White Rabbit's statements. Really, when don't you make dishonest claims and ignore peoples posts because you can't create a response?
[/quote]
I have yet to be dishonest, and their attacks on my person are nothing but that - personal attacks, to be handwaved away as the petty attempts of those who have no real rebuttal.
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596400]
No, I was referring to ignoring physics. Reading comprehension failure.
[/quote]
That is a lie, and you know it. You said, simply, THIS IS PHYSICS. Not "IGNORING PHYSICS"...
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596400]
It was nice of you to ask for proof many other times while not giving any yourself.
[/quote]
Oh, like when? You mean those times I gave you proof and you decided to skip over it?
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596400]
So the Xeelee stomp pretty much... everything... with handguns.[/QUOTE]
Yes, they do - this includes themselves. At least according to YOUR description.
[QUOTE=Shogun;2596435]Umm.....it uses matter/antimatter annihilation....[/QUOTE]
yeah I do think anti matter is part of it but I'm not sure
[QUOTE=Kittamaru;2596704]I have yet to be dishonest, and their attacks on my person are nothing but that - personal attacks, to be handwaved away as the petty attempts of those who have no real rebuttal. [/quote]
Really? How did they attack you?
[quote]
That is a lie, and you know it. You said, simply, THIS IS PHYSICS. Not "IGNORING PHYSICS"...
[/quote]
No, I said that I never said we should ignore physics.
[quote]
Oh, like when? You mean those times I gave you proof and you decided to skip over it?
[/quote]
Right, like Borg destroying planets :rolleyes:
[quote]
Yes, they do - this includes themselves. At least according to YOUR description.[/QUOTE]
No.
Btw, I love how you still go to SB.com and call it a site made up of idiots. You have been proven wrong there an unbelievable amount of times, thus they aren't the idiots, but you are.
[QUOTE=ricrery;2596766]Really? How did they attack you?
[COLOR="Red"]Same way you do later in this post[/COLOR]
No, I said that I never said we should ignore physics.
[COLOR="Red"]Can you quote this and interpret it for the rest of us?[/COLOR]
Right, like Borg destroying planets :rolleyes:
[COLOR="Red"]I claimed that? Cool. And they probably could destroy planets (after all, the Voyager was able to make a warhead capable of popping a small planet)[/COLOR]
No.
Btw, I love how you still go to SB.com and call it a site made up of idiots. You have been proven wrong there an unbelievable amount of times, thus they aren't the idiots, but you are.[/QUOTE]
I said that? Cool. Where? When? Quotes? Or are you just following your idols' footsteps and trying to put words in my mouth?
Rick Rollery, I still am awaiting some ounce of proof from you... *taps foot impatiently* c'mon child, I'm not going to wait forever.
[QUOTE=Kittamaru;2597288]Rick Rollery, I still am awaiting some ounce of proof from you... *taps foot impatiently* c'mon child, I'm not going to wait forever.[/QUOTE]
You use the quote function. Also, waiting for proof that the Borg can destroy planets.