Star Wars vs Star Trek

Okay, so here it is. Memery-Alpha is not, repeat not canon.

Second except for specific Legendary ships the Federation sems to use a complex numbering system that included vessel class, date of completion, and shipyard. If you notice all non legendary ships of TNG and beyond has a 5 digit NCC number and not a single one starts with four zeroes. Hell you can't even find a set of five or six with consecutive numbers.

Through trade. The dang ship had to make deals for what it needed to keep going. Now imagine supporting 10,000 voyager class vessels with an economy of only at best 2 trillion people.

Actually you are misunderstanding his statement. The EU is not a seperate universe from his story, but rather a part of the universe he does not bother with. He laid the base stories and has done the movies and given permission to select people to write the backdrop. Like the reason why Anakin has that wicked scar in ROTS. How Luke built his lightsaber. How Han saved Chewie. All that stuff and myriad more of things. What he said is what he does in the movies is the core, he doesn't care if he walks on a writers toes. The movies are absolutely right and everything else is right as long as it does not directly disagree with the movies.

Mos Eisley is a seven kilometer wide community. Now try to figure out how one blast could vaporize all that, and remember though primitive looking the structures were made of special reinforced concretes made to resist and contain theraml nuclear detonations. Hutt's hate having to rebuild after a good thermal detonatoring.

I did and after I luaghed my ass off at you inconsistancies throughly wrong assumptions I had to catch my breath. BTW don't quote me but i doubt it would take more than a ton of C4 to pulverize even a 700 meter Type C asteroid, and that is obviously Type C.

Well, not as impressive. The Beam is travelling primary in one direction and must DET to create the effect. Meanwhile a Nuclear fission weapon or Torpedo loaded with enough explosives in herently releases energy in every direction at once. In another analogy it's like using a single bullet to kill a dozen people in and open space and using a grenade to do the same thing. The first is damned impressive, the second is still impressive but not as much.

Correct analogy, just you didn't understand it. Hmmmmm. I guess educating you is going to be tougher than I thought.

Man are you really this stupid? I mean really. What do you do for a living, scrape gum off the botoms of tables. The analogy is sound. If in a scientific study I "magically" made water heat to 100 degree celsius and this is measurable then by definition there was real thermal energy. The fact that you cannot understand this actually quite sad.

The same page where you assume the focal length of a 35mm lens is always 35mm despite focus and zoom. God, just go ask a photographer about this.

Obvisily missed "The Last Outpost" when the crew was astonished by the fact of a planetary shield even being possible. That and you never, ever, ever hear of another planet raising it shields. No matter what is in orbit and attacking.

Meanwhle Hoth is proof that even a Guerilla force can procure and use Planetary shielding. Not to mention Alderaan.

12.5 gigatons per Heavy Turbolaser assuming that 16 turbolasers on the Aclamator class firing togeter produce a 200 gigaton broadside. It's canon, read it and weep.

1 to 10 gigawat range you mean and I do admit it is higly acurate, if your target is 100 meters plus and stationary. As for Torpedo, even 100% efficent the 1.5kg AM and 1.5kg M warhead can only be 64 megatons.

Hmm, seems I am using what Lucas considers canon, so suck it up

Yes, Hundred, actually thousands, but with Hyperdrive it's just a quick zip. Not like Star Trek where Vulcan is much much closer, but it takes most Star Feleet vessels ten days from earth to Vulcan as of ST:TMP

I did pick one. The canon of the Star Wars universe. So take your strawman else where

What like I trust you when the creative people of two universe despise and revile you for being an argumentative troll. This is just you being an ignorant putz yet again. Go ahead cite your own work which of course disagrees with canon.

Want me to name a few
Well for the first over 200 there is every element on the table.
Proton-Electron theorhetically
Possibly many sub atomic particles

But you are wrong ANH did not say fusion per se anywhere in the novelization. There was a reference to ...miniature suns. Read in the context of the surrounding that is more descriptive of the AMOUNT of power the gnerators produce.

Abserved range versus a stationary ground based target versus you "calculation" where you can't seem to figure out that the focus is not always 35mm

No, no invasion just showing people your real side. You sound so reasonable, until one realizes that your slippers must be marked TGIF.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'm forced to agree with the others that you represent a hopeless case.

Impossible, as no such proof exists. I have had the fortune to discuss canon issues with Leland Chee, Sue Rostoni, and others, though only people with a penchant for the absurd would dare refer to those as arguments. I was also once flamed by a couple of rabid Pocket Books authors who get upset about the whole canon thing. I've also gotten the opinion of the liaison to the Trek licensees, though she and I were polite so far as I know.

STCanonquotes-trekbbs1.html at canonwars.com is where to go to read some of the above.

Chee and Rostoni are the deciders of canon only for the EU continuity . . . Lucas is the primary decider of both the movie continuity and the EU continuity.

The liaison, Block, is decider of nothing except for what goes into the licensed Trek materials, universally regarded as non-canon. Pocket Books authors decide nothing.

The above isn't technically accurate anymore, as you'd know if you read CanonWars.com.

You can't "ergo" canon. You can ergo it for yourself and your own beliefs, but you can't claim your opinion as a universal truth.

Not only is that false, but it's also irrelevant. We can use our brains to figure these things out when we know other data.

Why would I fabricate evidence? You already ignore the real stuff.

What sane pilot would use weapons blasts that don't even scratch asteroidal rock if it takes ubergazillatons of energy to knock out shields or penetrate armor?

Also false, though I'll compromise with you and we can agree to forget "These Are the Voyages".

Well, that's kinda bass-ackwards, but workable. In SI, a watt is defined as one joule per second. A watt-second is largely synonymous, but is used in other contexts.

On the other hand, I figure you probably just mistyped in a lucky way.

Image:BorgScoutCrashed.jpg at memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/ . . .

Oh yeah. That ship with the corpses sitting nearby is frickin' huge.

(sigh) . . .

I'll give you a couple of more replies to shape up and hold my interest even a bit, but otherwise I'm not gonna waste my time with you.

You're hypocritical on canon ("decider" vs. "ergo"), you knowingly mix and match data from two parallel universes to try to get the biggest figures, and you keep trying to change subjects. I'd love, for instance, if you'd actually talk about weapons ranges, instead of simply restating your opinion.

Here's something easy . . . show me a long-range shot from the movies, other than the Death Stars.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The death stars "long range" is pointless... it could never bring that to bear against a ship.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Stop evading the Ron D. Moore quote. You wanted something from Paramount suggesting 10,000 ships, and I gave you 30,000 from one of the main producers.

The least you could do is take your beating gracefully instead of trying to squirm out from under it with a pitiful evasion.

Total fabrication.

Why the hell would we expect them to?

Should be easy, judging by the show.

Even the folks who make the EU don't buy this garbage.

"<<"Once I heard that George Lucas was asked to comment on the many interpretations of Star Wars in book, comic, record, radio and TV spin-offs that grew from his original creation. 'The films are gospel,' he said, 'all the rest are gossip.' I like that.">>

Sounds like a typical George quote."

- Andy Mangels, EU Author, Dec. 1995 - rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc reprint of AOL SW forum posts

"Bookpg SD: How much is Lucas involved in the novels?

Timothy Zahn: As far as I know, George Lucas himself is not involved. He has a liaison group that deals with the book people, the game people, etc. They do the day-to-day work. Occasionally, he will be asked a question and will give an answer."

"I did meet Lucas once for a few minutes."

" 'Question: I heard that George Lucas doesn't read the STAR WARS novels, or only reads a few. Has he read the Thrawn trilogy, and what did he think of it?'

Timothy Zahn: As far as I know, he has not read any of the novels. From what I've heard, Lucas is a visual man. He likes comic books for the visual aspect. Frankly, I don't think he has time to read, so I'm not offended."

- Timothy Zahn, EU Author, Nov. 1997 - Interview in "The Book Report"

"Lots of people have been working on lots of SW extrapolations for the last twenty years, in good faith. There were never any promises from George Lucas or Lucasfilm regarding the acceptance of their work into some wider canon."

- Peet Janes, Dark Horse Comics Editor, Dec. 1998 - "Horsing Around" interview at EchoStation.com

"Yes, the books follow the continuity of the films as best we can taking into account that George follows his own continuity, and rightly so. He's the filmmaker."

- Sue Rostoni, Lucas Licensing (LLP Managing Editor), Jan 2005 - StarWars.com forum posts

" 'Within the issue of Starlog magazine with the War of the Worlds cover is an interview article with George Lucas. He stated something which he had said before, which is that he doesn't follow the SW EU, he doesn't read the books or comics. He also said that when they started doing all this (which is allowing other storytellers to tell their own SW tales), he had decreed that the Star Wars Universe would be split into two just like Star Trek (I don't know nuts about Star Trek, so don't ask me about that), one would be his own universe (the six episode movie saga), the other would be a whole other universe (the Expanded Universe). He continued to say that the EU tries as much as possible to tie in to his own universe, but sometimes they move into a whole other line of their own. '

Yeah, this is pretty much what I've heard, except that people have said he reads the comics."

- Sue Rostoni, Lucas Licensing (LLP Managing Editor), Sept. 2005 - StarWars.com forum post

"The only relevant official continuities are the current versions of the films alone, and the combined current version of the films along with whatever else we've got in the Holocron. [...] Anything not in the current version of the films is irrelevant to Film only continuity."

- Leland Chee, LLP continuity database admin, Dec. 2006 - posts from the "Holocron database continuity questions" thread at the StarWars.com forums

And, of course, we have Lucas:

" 'One of the characters that will eventually show up in the prequels is Boba Fett. The notorious bounty hunter has become a cult anti-hero ever since his introduction in The Empire Strikes Back.'

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

"I don't even read the offshoot books that come out based on Star Wars."

- George Lucas, Flannelled One, July 1999 - Film Night interview

" '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

“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

"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 (alt link)

"The question selected from The Furry Conflict poll was: How much does the Expanded Universe influence the movies?

As I asked him, Lucas leaned back a moment and said to me “Very little.” When he first had agreed to let people write Expanded Universe books, he had said “I’m not gonna read ‘em” and it was a “different universe” that he wanted to keep away from the time period of his saga. He jokingly complained, however, that now when he writes a script he has to look through an encyclopedia to make sure that a name he comes up with doesn’t come too close to something in the EU.

He later commented that the future of Star Wars may lie in other venues outside of feature film."

- "Marc Xavier", furryconflict.com, November 2003 - "The Furry Conflict and the Great ‘Beard‘ of the Galaxy"

"STARLOG: The Star Wars Universe is so large and diverse. Do you ever find yourself confused by the subsidiary material that's in the novels, comics, and other offshoots?

LUCAS: I don't read that stuff. I haven't read any of the novels. I don't know anything about that world. That's a different world than my world. But I do try to keep it consistent. The way I do it now is they have a Star Wars Encyclopedia. So if I come up with a name or something else, I look it up and see if it has already been used. When I said [other people] could make their own Star Wars stories, we decided that, like Star Trek, we would have two universes: My universe and then this other one. They try to make their universe as consistent with mine as possible, but obviously they get enthusiastic and want to go off in other directions."

- George Lucas, Flannelled One, Aug. 2005 - "New Hopes" interview in Starlog #337

Not in the movie, it's not.

More fabrications.

Um, no. A bomb has the material of the bomb casing to vaporize and hence 'expand with', but the principle of a point source of energy overload in the environment is the same in both cases.

You're scandalously unqualified.

If I'm a magic man and I want to make water into water vapor, why would I need heat? Are you so dense you don't see the problem assuming it would be needed? I'm the frickin' magic man!

No, I eat poo in German scheissevideos and torture fluffy, cute mammals for fun.

What the hell does it matter what I do? Focus on what I say.

Or I've toyed with your instruments. Or I've magically transported hot water where cool water was before. Or I've simply made the water appear to be boiling by moving the molecules just so, whereas the temperature is unchanged. Or some combination thereof. I am, after all, the magic man in this case.

Your analogy fails because of your own lack of imagination, which of course is why you didn't understand the argument in the first place. But once you bring in magic, you have to throw most logic out the window.

1. You're lying.
2. You're ignoring the confirmation of the example.
3. You're ignoring all the other examples on the page.

I'm not surprised by this, but you really ought to at least pretend to be aboard the clue train.

Hardly. I guess you missed "Year of Hell" when even crappy local planets were noted as having the ability to adjust their planetary shields against a temporal weapon, TOS eps featuring shielded Federation worlds, et cetera.

Because planetary shields are a known quantity . . . how many times do we hear of shields being raised or not-raised in the aftermath of a starship attack?

Besides which, don't you think Coruscant has shields, even though it doesnt? So where was the mention of them? Answer: nowhere.

False on both counts. Hoth had no planetary shields, and there is no evidence for shielding at Alderaan.

Wrong universe.

One meter target. One photon torpedo. 90,000 kilometers.

200,000 kilometers. One moving target. Dead-ass ship.

Et cetera. I have a whole page on this, you know.

Quit the non-canon crap.

Don't lie.

Are you knowingly lying here or is it just that you don't know Trek for sh*t?

You want to mix universes to get the highest and best examples for STar Wars, but use the lowest examples of Trek in and out of its canon.

At least you're consistently a waste of my time.

Uh, that's all fusion, nitwit. And there aren't 200 elements, either.

Oh good, then you agree that the superlaser is not a DET weapon. How nice. Thanks for that one.

You combine two lies about two pages in one sentence with the above. I'm impressed with how thoroughly you embrace your own suck.

 

Last chance to improve, TWScott, though I suspect you'll just dig your heels further into the thin ice.

Everyone, myself included, has been so polite in gracing you with their presence. Why are you so insistent on squandering the educational opportunities everyone else in the thread is granting you?

Facts are the only arbiter . . . not how much mud you can sling and not how long you can keep typing mindless posts against the onslaught. If everyone ditches you, are you going to think you won as a result?

If your first thought was yes, and you know it was, then you concede in your heart. That's not logical or reasonable . . . that's just being stubborn.

So yes, my compliments to your obstinacy, however misplaced. I haven't the time to waste on the likes of you, though, so again . . . you have one more chance. Think hard about what you say next.

 

Of course you do, becuase to actually face the truth would be admitting that you lie, constantly.

She was polite in the same way people are polite to the mentally retarded. You of course responded in your usual way and managed to piss off almost every author in Star trek, including the writers of several episodes.

There is no decision when it comes to canon, Lucas set out the rules and bascially unless the EU directly disagrees with the movies it is valid unless it disagrees with higher canon, novelizations, radio dramas, tech manuals, novels....

Don't you get the pint Startrek.com has only the information from the shows and movies, nothing else, except maybe convention updates. So going there to get the information is the same as getting it from the show. God, were you born this dense or did you take lessons

It's true and it drives you nuts becuase no matter how much you rail against it , it was in an episode it has never been refuted or chalallenged in any episode and there for it is unalterable canon. Suck it up.

Why ask the question if you are just going to write my answer as well. Point is all you have done is fabricate or supress evidence.

The one that is just trying to herd the Freighter along. Besides you will notice that they do cuase the Type M asteroids to glow for a short time where they struck.

No, completely true. According to TOS, TNG, DS9, and VOY, the NX-01 could not have existed. It does not fit the history of the time period it was placed, at all. In fact many events that happen on Enterprise are completely against the canon of all the other series. Ferengi were not met until TNG, well Picard blew a few up, but other than that before "The Last Outpost" Ferengi were COMPLETELY unknown to the Federation

Joule
One joule is the work done, or energy expended, by a force of one newton moving an object one meter along the direction of the force. Thus, the same quantity may be referred to as a newton metre or newton-metre with the symbol N·m. However, since the newton metre usually refers to torque, which is a quite different measure, the joule is a less ambiguous unit. In elementary units:

As a rough guide, 1 joule is the amount of energy required to lift a one kilogram object up by a height of about 10 centimetres on the surface of the Earth.

One joule is also:

The work required to move an electric charge of one coulomb through an electrical potential difference of one volt; or one coulomb volt, with the symbol C·V.
The work done to produce power of one watt continuously for one second; or one watt second (compare kilowatt-hour), with the symbol W·s.


Now obviously you can have a Joule and not be talking electricty, but Electricity can't exist with out Joules. Got the point.

No, you just figured that you could attempt to make me look stupid, but instead you reveal your lack of understanding.

Oh, nice pick, so given it is a crash site, part of one anyway, and a modern 747 can spread itself across acres, why wouldn't a starship. See you're just using a guess and saying that is the only peice, your guess is no more or less valid than mine.

Of course you take that position. I mean after all you are already lost , you just want to be able to cut and run at a moments notice so you don't have to face it.

Not in the least bit hypocritical. I have used both univereses definition of canon and I am very, very firm on it. Paramount has a very very strict definition and Lucas has a much more relaxed. Sorry if that spoils your day...Oh wait, no I am not.

Why do I have to do anything of the sort? I'm not the one making the claim. You are, and even by your theorhetical your math is off. Since you mistakenly believe the focal length of a 35mm camera is always 35mm.

 

Scott, please tell me they have public transportation where you are... I would imagine you need a job to fund the internet connection and I don't want one as mentally deluded and retarded as you driving himself around... after all, there ARE other people on the road that just might piss you off and, judging by your actions and re-actions here, you will simply run their ass over rather than abide by the law of the road.

Then again, you could still live with your mother, which would solve the problem AND explain why you fail at life at the same time... either way, you lost. Get over yourself. Stop pulling false information and lies out of your ass and go to bed.

 

What beating? The man said he wouldn't be surprised if there were 30,000 starships. Given they could only get 40 to Wolf 359, I highly doubt that. So he is a main producer, unless it was said in confines of the show or by Roddenberry himself it doesn't mean anything, at all.

No different than the idea that just becuase the numbers are multidigit that their must be that number of ships. I mean look at your social secuirity number. You don't imagine that there are 1,000,000,000 people in the US becuase we have a 9 digit Social Secuirity number do you?

Well only follows if they have 30,000+ ships.

Really, you must be tarded. Imagine 10,000 starships of the Intrepid class. Now imagine them running around not conserving every bit of power they can, wasting power on frivolous things. Now the Federation is not composed of two may fully established worlds. Most of them are still struggling colonies. Even if they have 2500 worlds that is each planet having 4 Intrepid class Star ships that they support, payfor, and put people through starfleet to crew. No where do you see that kind of magnitude of ships.

So now you allow hearsay?

Well then Star Wars wins, I one asked Gene Roddenberry (he was at a convention and I was lucky enough to get an autograph) is Star Trek could beat Star Wars. His response. "Not even if I wanted them to."

See the problem with hearsay?

Whole lotta rambling through here for not much point. The bassis of this argument is the universe Star Wars is set in. Or do you think the only things that happen are in the movies. Mean disregarding all the other materail that fits and does not contradict the movies is, well stupid. Which explains the apeal to you. Yes the movie is the core of the canon, where EU disagrees with the movies the movie wins hands down no contest, but where there is no comflict the EU is canon. Argue against it all you want, just makes you look the coward.


Not in the movie, it's not.

Actually from the scene in question you do not see all of Mos Eisly. Also remeber that it was the same town from TPM. Anakin was quite convinced that there was no way they could get to their ship in time from downtown to the outskirts and that sandstorm was at least half an hour away.

No, Huttese mindset garnered from EU.

Are you really this stupid? I mean really? You can't tell the different between an omnidirection and unidirectional weapon.

True I am not licensed to deal with the metally handicapped who are also mentally ill.

Did you not hear what I said thundering moron? I said I heated it to 10o celsius, not turned it to water vapor. Thus heat must have been applied. Same to get the sensors to show a 400 gigawatt energy beam there would actually have to be a 400gigawatt energy beam.

Just trying to figure out what kind of work someone with no grasp of reality does.

Occam's razor. We know he can create matter and energy. Simplest way to fool somneone is to just create the matter and energy. I mean who would got trough the hassle of:

Altering sensor readings.
Altering computer logs
Figuring out how to overload the shields without actually overloading them
Alter the hull so it looks burnt
Alter the hull again to cuase significant damage
Injure people
And do it all in a timely manner so that the effect looks like it was bolts of energy.


Now here is a hard one for you: Which is simpler, create the bolts of energy or perform that list?

No, Logic does not always go out the window. The Logic of the being in question perform the act is also brought in. Now yes he is super intelligent, but also super efficent. He would have picked the most efficent way to deal with the situation, like he did with Troi.

1. Prove it, oh that right you can't becuase you think a 35mm camera always has a focal length of 35mm
2. There is no confirmation if your math is flawed.
3. If you math and understanding are flawed in the first place why should I bother paying attention to your example, especially since they are completely wrong.

Of course you aren't surprised. You have been called on every lie you have ever made. Should be old hat by now.

Year of Hell....That's right one of those episodes than cancelled itself out. Odd that Voyager did not meet any planets with shields before or after that episode. Also TOS might have been near some planets inside the Federation borders that had rudimentary shields, but no Federation world seems to have them. In fact you never har of any one in the Federation, ever raising planetary shields.

I mean if every crappy plent has them, why didn't Farpoint raise it's shields when the other creature attacked? Why didn't Bajor repell the Cardasian fleet before it could land any troops? Why didn't Earth rase it shields when V'ger attacked? Why was the crystaline entity considered a menace to all inhabited worlds?

Every time there is ship to ship conflict you hear the "Shields Up!"

Interesting way to pphrase your question. Sorry to spoil you fun but several novels detail planetary shielding in Star Wars. Hell the field on Hoth was enough proof that it was possible.

Again you ignore canon.

Hoth:
"CommsScan has detected an energy field protecting an area of the planet. The field is strong enough to deflect any bombardment."

Does that ring a bell for you? Obviously they had a massive shielding system, it just didn't cover the whole planet.

Alderaan:
A point of evidence you happily ignore, and even your Star Trek buddies think you're nuts about this, is that in the destruction of Alderaan scene the super laser strikes the shield at the edge of atmosphere and spreads over it for a slpit second before overcoming it and destroying the planet.

Same universe, and the more you argue the more foolish you look. Not to mention cowardly.

Really which target and where and was it trying to be hit? See, your good at rattling off numbers but you are a little scant on the details.

What moving target? A Planet? Or something on the surface of a planet?

Deosn't really matter. Here is the point, what is every Starfleet commanders first instict. Close the distance and stay at point blank range. Range don't mean shit if you don't use it.

Hey, want me to go canon. Fine. Most powerful Photon torpedo explosion seen is the on in Skin of Evil which mimics the effects of the first atomic bomb test. Even then the torpedo had struck a shut with it's included warp core. So do you want you 20 kilotons or 64 megatons?

I am not lying, you are simply reading more into it than he actually said.

I am a Trekkie from way back, asshole. I'm just very realistic about their chances.

Actually if you rember the End of ST:TMP. Scotty claims that it is a ten day trip to Vulcan, but he can get spock there in four. Now TOS had Vulcan only a hundred light years from earth. Now since Enterprise was at the time fastest vessel in the fleet, it is not unreasonable to think that the best other vessels could do to Vulcan is the ten days Scotty claims.

Well, when determining the protective capability of something, you do not go with what it stopped one time, but rather what chewed it way through consistantly. Thus the ~400 gigawat shield strenght. It may have had a few good days where it did more, but that is like trusting a light Kevlar vest to stop .44 magnum at point blank range becuase it protected you 200 yards out.

And I am not mixing universes, I am using the EU as Lucas intends it to be used, as supplemental. Movies first and EU to fill the gaps.

Of course i waste your time. I don't fall for your bullshit.

Yopu asked me how many types there were, dipshit. And I told you. As for 200 element well of course you have to put in all the different isotopes as seperate types. And of course it produces different amounts of energy.

Did I say that at all? Nope, not even once. Now I know your problem. It's called selective reading. The Superlaser is a DET weapon. However that is seperate from my point.

My point is that the power cores and generators in Star Wars are emphatically not fusion, the term miniature sun refers to power out put not generation method.

What are you talking about, Robert. I was merely mentioning your inability to understand how zoom works with a 35mm lens and that this mistunderstanding leads to some very fualty conclusions on your part.

 

Improve? No, what you want is for me to turn into you and be a lying little weasle toad. I'm on the firm footing and you are the one who fell through the ice, years ago.

Granting me? Granting me? Oh, so the fact that I have to educate these people and deprogram them form the lies they have been fed is somehow and honor you bestow on me. Alright, go ahead and leave, admit defeat, not that you need to it is painfully obvious to all you are defeate, and leave so I can save these poor deluded monkeys.

Well, I look at it this way, you're running becuase your scared I will anger you into telling the truth and given the position you're in the truth is the last thing you want. Besides Star Wars already won, many many times over.

No, my first thought was Star Wars already won, all i am doing is trying to give people a proper education of sci fi analysis. Besides I don't really want you to leave, you do more damage to Star Trek than just about anything else.

Hmmm. I want you to leagally change your name. Something that fits you. I'm thinking McCarthy would be great for you.

 

Actually I am quite a skilled driver. Your allusion to my mental health and impaired faculties are completely off base. You are correct that they have public transportation where I live, but I much prefer driving. On the road I am actually quite understanding and tolerant. Se my true problem is people like yourself. Thundering morons who contribute nothing useful to a debate and then summarily claim victory. I am almost convinced you are a sock put of Robert, but then that would mean your head would implode under the pressure of no brain matter.

 

No I think he's target on the LZ. You've had a supernova of evidence against you...

And I think Robert Anderson will speak for himself...

I'd have to agree Scott...and he doesn't know the half of what you've said on the thread. You avoid every lie you're caught in. And you restate you bazillion gigawatt claims as though you're in some kind of tantrum. This Despite Star Trek easily showing far more firepower, easily 10x as much firepower as your one rock vaporizing scene. You reak of desperation now and any semblence you draw between us and Robert Anderson is strictly honorable.

 

So you cry foul over the concept of 10000 ships and challenge me to provide something from "Paramount or Roddenberry" supporting it. I do, and so then it is irrelevant to you.

Weasel.

Unlike registries, those do include digits representing places. So again, false analogy.

No, it does not follow. There is no logic in assuming that registries must start with opening zeroes just because of ship count.

Oh, the blessed irony. Retard.

1. Bye bye, Empire.
2. Readily supportable. Your only contrary "evidence" is your say-so, and that counts for squat.

Who's allowing hearsay? I'm quoting Andy Mangels there, not suggesting it is a direct Lucas quote.

No, it makes you look desperate for clinging to data from an alternate universe, much of which has been inserted by other anti-Trek fanboys like yourself by their own admission ("Origins of the New Non-Canon", ST-v-SW.Net). You know as well as I do that the Star Wars universe of George Lucas does not feature nor even suggest most of the datapoints you claim are valid. Hell, early EU info was very much superior to modern EU in regards to keeping consistent with the technology of the films.

Unless it has a suburbia hiding behind another hill, you do.

A laser will bore through steel, but the initial impact will be a point source of energy overload in the environment. A laser will continue to bore, however, because it is a constant beam. A bolt is not a laser beam.

Then you assumed in your analogy what you seek to prove.

Why?

You're hardly one to judge others' grasp of reality.

Do we? Picard noted that Rishon was without substance, and she poofed to nothing soon enough thereafter. Uxbridge is a being of "disguises and false surroundings". While we know he had the power to kill all of the Husnock, we do not know how that was done. All we know is that he is good at making illusions.

Conservation rules say that's not accurate.

Anyone who was used to making illusions and not manufacturing energy out of thin air.

Yeah, he messed with her mind. Just like he messed with everyone else's.

You obviously simply refuse to understand the method I actually employed, hence your foolish non-rebuttal.

Then show the flawed math.

Because you're too scared to acknowledge the truth.

That's a ridiculous counterclaim, plus a ridiculous lie. Chakotay's statement is valid. Further, "Workforce" and "Favorite Son" spring to mind.

1. Those were Federation worlds.
2. When would we?

Did you not see the Bandi technology state? Did you not hear everyone being surprised that they could even build Farpoint?

That's not how the Cardies invaded. They came as friends, over time, insidiously.

"All planetary defense systems just went inoperative".

Gee, because it sneaks up and kills people from within the atmosphere, maybe?

Idiot. That's not what I asked.

Just like yours.

Irrelevant.

It proves only theater shields on a small area. Or do you think AT-ATs lumbered across half the planet, or even a quarter of it? Would've taken weeks.

I said Hoth had no planetary shields, so you accuse me of ignoring canon while also saying they had no planetary shields.

Ridiculous!

Your 'edge of atmosphere' on the right side is within the circle of the planet's surface.

If you'd read the page I directed you toward you'd recognize the Nomad example.

Two Cardassian ships and a Federation ship from "The Wounded".

Says who?

Check my "Rise" page, O Ye of Little Canon.

No, you're refusing to accept his direct and repeated statements about parallel universes.

No, you hate Star Trek, which is why you take every opportunity to misrepresent it. Of course you also misrepresent Star Wars, but in the opposite direction.

No, he says he can get Spock back in four days. There is no suggestion of ten.

Fabrication . . . there is no such statement or implication.

See? You even try to rationalize discarding every other shielding example for Trek. Except you don't do the same for Wars.

That's all nuclear fusion, not different types.

How can the superlaser be a DET weapon when the reactor is incapable of producing that energy level, by your own statement?

My problem is not selective reading . . . it's trying to comprehend your self-contradictions.

See, look! You did it again!

You claimed "The Wounded" was a ground-based target, then lied about the 35mm thing you're making up.

 

Decidely less than squat....more like crap...

 

Yes, granting you. Your 'method of analysis' is nothing more than choosing a side in advance, then picking and choosing among the evidence when possible, reaching into non-evidence when available, or fabricating facts altogether when necessary.

This intellectual dishonesty extends to your arguments, in which you try to find any excuse to reject the obvious.

And as you're forced to do this more and more, you begin to hate those who state the obvious, because they're beating you. This is why you're so angry, while everyone else is just tired of you.

See? I told you that you thought if you just outlasted everyone you would win.

That's not intellectual honesty.

The intellectually honest person knows that the facts are the final arbiter, with reason as the judge. But in your mind, facts are optional, and "reason" is simply whether you can spin the facts you choose to accept into your camp or not.

And yet, you have the audacity to claim that others have no grasp of reality.

I feel sorry for you, TW Scott.

McCarthy assumed what he sought to prove, and spun everything to fit that assumption. That is what you do, and why McCarthy was wrong.

It's a shame you don't understand that.

You will make an excellent drone.

 

Dear All,

I hope all is well.

I have read parts of this thread with great ineterst, abnd have tried to follow the more technical bits to the best of my ability

being a fan of sci-fi films, and not getting to much into the detail, is it not obvious that StaRWars has superior technology.

if i compare the firepower in Starwars episodes 4,5 and 6 against starTrek 12and3 then starwars wins.. Surely you all can see that.

Its a no brainer really. I have not seen an event in any star-Trek film or serial episode (i admit i have not seen all of the Star Trek episodes etc) so i coudl be off the makr a bit here, where an entire planet is destroyed in seconds.

case closed surely, and how on earth would the enterprise stand up against the invisible hand let alone a fully armed SD from episode 4, or dare i say it a SSD or the death star.

And dont give me any nonsense about the imperials cant shoot etc.. and that a SSD was destrioyed in Return of the jedi by a few Rebel freighters, as the goodies always have to win in the films.

~~~~~~~~~
take it ez
zak

 

weLL Zak, the problem is the Death Star is not a representation of typical firepower for the Emprie. Just like a 5,000,000,000 ISOTON Warhead is not a typical representation of Star Fleet or Borg Firepower.

Yes, that ability has been displayed but it doesn't not give us a propper relation.

Comparing the most basic targets...Star Trek Phasers show a vast amount of Fire power over the Turbolaser.

Take an unarmored target from both series.

The typical object in Star Wars is in the Empire Strikes Back, AN asteroid vaporized in a second.

Now take Star Trek's best example of an unshielded un armored target, The Borg Cube in the first Borg encounter. Enterprise uses three shots each time vaporizing 244 meter spheres of alloyed metal taking 3 seconds.

The star wars asteroid was made of nickel and Iron and rock, unrefined and untempered. Star Wars fans say that the asteroid was 40 meters wide or long.

In contrast. The Enterpise took out 20% of the Borg ships structure. Each chunk massing more than the USS RELIANT from ST:II. This is metal that had some heat resisting propperties but it wasn't and can not be considered armor.

Enterprise vaporized more than 6 times as more as the Turbolaser in the same amount of time and...It was alloyed metals which brings Enterprise phasers 7 to 8 times more powerful than a single Star Destroyer turbo laser.

Sovereign has at least twice to thrice the fire power of a Galaxy class starship.

Defiant destroys it's targets more than ten times as fast as a Galaxy class vessel like the Enterprise from the Next Generation.

Galaxy is quickly replacing the cruiser variants like Excelsior to become the typical Federation Heavy cruiser or the propper designation...Deffender class vessel.

 

If that is true then I hope you are on some power anti-depressants, because you must seriously hate yourself.

 

You provided a comment from an associate producer, not Roddeberry himself. Paramount (after Roddenberry's death) has said time and time again the shows and movies are canon nothing else is. That would include comments from Producers which obviously are not on the show or in the movies.

I was already quite aware of your species, but thank you for clearing it up.

You do understand that an anology does not have to fit perfectly to demonstrate the idea, right. Try a rebuttal like that in debate class and your professor would mark you down.

Actually for ease of bookkeeping it very well might. Hell for programming purposes alone it might have to. Would make forms les subject to errors when filling them out.

No I spelled it the way I wanted and anyone with a working forebrain underst what I meant. Then again that calls for a little skill called reading comprehension.

1. Not even if you sent them all to Coruscant while the Imperial Navy was away.
2. No, my evidence is the show. How many episodes were about bartering for this or that need, the fact that they were on tight rationing and that every battle held the chance for the vessel to irreperably damaged. There is no such thing as an easy to support ship. Go ask NASA how much it costs just to keep the Space Shuttle in working order.

You did suggest it was an actual Lucas quote. If we were in court your comment would be striken from the record and if you continued to defend it possibly held for contempt.

Hmmm, odd that you try this route, wasn't it Lucas himself that comissioned the very manuals you revile so much? Yes it was. And didn't he chose form the list of candidates after seeing some of their work? Yes he did. Wasn't there already enough evidence from ANH and ESB, not to mention AOTC to show cuase for the power levels claimed? Yes there was. All your hand waving and yelling non-canon will not save you, in the slightest..

When we first see it most of Mos Eisley is hidden behind the cliff Luke and Obi-wan were standing on. Now if you watch TPM you can see that the twon is fairly spread out. Yes the Starport and the Arena help with that, but still the town is 7 klicks long at least.

Okay, I know you were going to try this. yes there will be some small splash of energy, but almost all (99.9%+) of it is going to keep going straight ahead, boring into the target dead on. The surrounding area is only going to be warmed by conduction and convection.

No, I told you that in my anology that as the magician I was going to boil the water. Now even I am magic man definition of boiling water is heated to the point of vaporization, which at sea level is 100 celsius

Didn't I explain that fact. Oh yes, but you're looking for the story with the story. Alright, I'll oblige.

To fool sensors into thinking there was a 400 gigawat blast of Jacketed antiprotons you would have to know and do a myriad of things
!: Know how such a stream looks from visible light
2. create a light based illusion of the stream.
3. know how such stream looks magnetically
4. create the magnetic signature of the stream
5. know how such a stream looks in infrared, ultraviolet, radio waves, tachyons scans, beta particles, and basically every spectrum of energy/matter.
6. you have to create a stream that mimics perfectly all thos properties.
7. you have to know how the shields would react to such an affect.
9 you have to make drain the shields the proper ammount.
10. you have to know the effects of another shot on the ship and then fake all that again perfectly
11. You have to know what the effects of the third shot would be an create the damage.

Now to actually create a 400 gigawatt jacket anti-proton stream all you have to do is know what one is and create it.

can you tell which one is more likely?

I don't have to judge you thrust most of your insanity out for all to see.

Wouldn't any being who had such control over Matter and Energy be a being of disguises and false surroundings. Nothing in the show offered any hint that it was all illusion. In fact Picard is quite adamanet that Kevin Uxbridge could destroy the Enterprise with ease. How would an illusionist do such? After all the damage to the Enterprise was real. All the Husnock are dead. Even the greatest of illusions could not do either.

Well create may be wrong, perhaps he can easily convert matter to energy and back again. Then again it may be right as well, it may be a being outside our understanding of the universe as well.

Thin air is hardly nothing. That is matter you know. But even it is an illusion how did the ship get damaged and people injured? Illusion can't do that.

If he was able to mess with her mind then he could have just blocked her empathy or made her feel something that was not there. I would guess that he simply started vibrating the bones in her ear to simulate the music. Simple, effective, and completely untracable. Oh and as added effect does not contradict why he couldn't hide from Troi.

Hello, if you think a 35mm lens focal length is always 35mm and then use that to create the maximum range for the Millenium Falcon's weapons then that is the beginning of your insanity. That's the rebuttal.

Okay, flawed math. You believe 35mm is always the focal length of a lens. Since it is not your math is by definition flawed.

Oh no, I have been telling the truth. If your math wasn't so obviously incorrect i would adress the issue.

I see no mention of Planetary shields in the descriptions of said shows.

1. Really? Name them.
2. When they are attacked of course.

But it was your claim that even crappy planets had Planetary shields in Star Trek, so i proved you wrong, didn't I.

Really? Hmmm, the impression given was that they invaded like the germans, both times. So give your proof.

Funny that line. V'ger couldn't do that the the Enterprise. Why would a planet be any different. In fact a planet should be much harder to crack. Besides they said defense systems, not shields or screens, which are always how the refer to shields.

Hmmm, seems to be quite visible to sensors of all kinds at some distance. A threat to all worlds would mean that it could get to Earth, Vulcan, or Beta Zed and inflict sizable damage.

Just an example to point out why you would hear about shields being raised. Plus you always hear science or tactical piping in. "They've raised shields." So it would damned obvious to hear about a planet doing it.

You say irrelevant and Lucas says hey it doesn't contradict the movies so canon.

Why? I mean you could fly your landing shuttle down under where the shiled protect then swoop inwards and drop off your troops much closer. See a simple and believable answer that fits the capabilities we have seen. Besides if it was like a Gungan's theater shield the At-At's would never have broght it down.

Novelization said they had a planetary shield generator there. It takes quite a few to protect an entire planet. But Hoth proves thy have the capability. Hell, Hoth proves a splinter faction has the capability.

I know you are.

Why do you lie Robbie? I mean everyone knows you are lying about this. You are the only debator period who believes that little piece of fiction you write. Even Pro-Trek agrees that Alderaan had shields. Novelization agrees. Novels agree. Please get your eyesight checked and a quality version of A New Hope and watch it again. If you still diagree I suggest having your ocipital lobe removed.

Ah Nomad, that was the case of a target wanting to get hit.

And watch in Generations when the Duras sisters miss a slow straight moving Enterprise at less than 20km

Syas countless space battles we see time and time again. Every ship in Star Trek has a penchant for knife range and letting loose.

I did, and laughed. That is obviously a type C asteroid then gets shattered. Not the type M you claim is vaporized. How can something be vaporized and leave mna sized and larger chucks of solid material.

No you are reading more into his statement than he said. He said that as long as it does not intrude and contradict his movies

The over all consensus of the different interviews is that George only worries about his Saga and what he decides to show in his Saga is core canon, meaning that if the movies dispute any books that come before or after then the movie is of course correct. However all of it is the Star Wars universe and therefore canon as long as it does not directly dispute Lucas' vision.

So, becuase I love a set of series and movies enough to see them as they truly arem you say I hate them. Hmm, interesting. I suppose you deny that the Federation is communist, too. Look, you know less about Star Trek than you do about Star Wars and less about Star Wars than you do about simple physics. Give it up before you hurt yourself.

Not according to my signed directors edition

When determining the protective qualities of something do you measure it against what succeeded or what penetrated. 400 gigawats penetrated ST shields with ease. You can try to rationalize that away, but you can't.

Actually each of the different fusion provided differing amounts of power, it may fall under the broad term of Nuclear Fusion, but fusing tow Helium atoms is Helium fusion, got the point?

Actually, you fail to understand a lot. Since Fusion is never mentioned as a power source and the reactors are described as miniature suns it is more reasonable to believe that the reactor puts out as much energy as a sun but (of course) is much smaller.

Yes, I corrected your wrong assumption about the description including the term miniature sun. Are you really that dense, or are you dyslexic?

Actually the only time I ever saw a target struck at anywhere near 200,000 km was in TOS and the target was a ground boud ship. As for the 35mm lens, go ask a photgrapher what the focal length of 35mm camera during a zoomed in close up.

 

Angry, I'm having fun luaghing at your expense. Almost sad, but too much fun to stop. I see you're resorting ad hominem and your infamous "Question the motive" attacks. I don't hate you, I feel sorry for you. i think you need some quality mental help.

As for your accusation. I reasearched both side, I actually was leaning toward Star trek until I read your site. Your arguments and proof were full of so many holes that to outline them would take the better part of a year.I dare not think how long it would take me to edit your pages to fit Star Trek canon.

No, winning would be educating you inot a honest, and fair debator. I don't mind that you argue Star Trek, but at least argue the show for how Gene created it, not Darkstar Trek as you have remodeled it.

You probably do know about that, but you don't practice it by any means.

Are you speaking to yourself?

Oh you are a moron. I suggested it becuase McCarthy openly lied about his evidence and he knew he was lying. He wasn't trying to do anything morre than boost his political career. You and him have a lot in common, which is why I suggested the name change.

 

You know, TW Scott, I have to say that you're quite possibly one of the most disturbing individuals I've seen online in a long while.

It's possible, I suppose, that you don't employ any of the mental maneuvers you use here in real life, in which case you might be okay. But I doubt this topic is so compartmentalized in your mind that you keep the patterns of illogic just in a neat little "online debates regarding ST and SW" box.

Let's ponder your tactics, in rough order of your last post:

1. Moving the goalposts:
You asked for something from Paramount or Roddenberry himself suggesting 10,000 ships. So I gave you a quote from one of the executive producers. Now you claim this is invalid, because only the shows or movies are canon.

1a. ... Into self-contradiction:
You claim with the above that only the shows or movies are canon, yet at the same time you claim that unsourced info supposedly from Paramount websites is canon.

2. Ignorance of analogies:
You repeatedly employ ridiculously false analogies on the one hand, and analogies which assume what you seek to prove. The first have nothing to do with the topic . . . the second involve you just trying to skip over the topic.

3. Fabricated requirements:
When no counterargument exists, you make up bogus counterclaims just to continue the argument. Examples include the notion that 10,000 starships cannot be supported by Federation planets because you don't think they can (no evidence . . . just your own incredulity and ignorance of Voyager), and the argument that there can't be 10,000 starships because registries don't include leading zeroes. When pressed, you go even further into fantasy, suggesting that they would have to have leading zeroes for when people are filling out forms. The hell?

4. Poor reading comprehension:
When two lists of quotes were presented, one of Licensing folks and one of Lucas, you took one of the ones in the Licensing list which mentioned Lucas and accused me of trying to quote Lucas via hearsay on that basis. Even when you were corrected, you maintained the claim.

Of course, the irony is that when you tried to quote Lucas later, you employed a hearsay quote.

5. Other Types of Idiocy/Dishonesty:

a. You insist that the lowest possible examples for Trek be used, and the highest examples for Star Wars. The best example is the 400 GW bull, wherein you attempt to apply Occam's Razor by spreading out the list of requirements for one thing (including what you seek to prove) into each of its constituent parts (even separated by EM spectrum), then for the alternative saying basically 'just do it'.

b. You make up Trek info repeatedly, such as claiming that Nomad wanted to be hit, making up quotes, claiming false information, et cetera.

c. You dismiss arguments that do not support your position on the basis of ridiculous claims. For instance, in regards to the pitifully short weapons ranges of Star Wars vessels, your only rebuttal is your 35mm nonsense, in which you claim that I use a focal length of 35mm exclusively in order to determine ranges in Star Wars. This ignores my page utterly, in which I employ a range of focal length values and back up those calculations with a second, independent set of trigonometric calculations from the same screenshots.

-------

. . . and so on. I could spend a week typing out how damn near everything you've said is wrong, and the precise reasons why it was both factually wrong and completely ill-considered on your part, but that's not my job. The rational people in this thread had already identified you as a hopeless case by the time I arrived, and they were completely correct.

You picked your side, and now all your mental energies are expended on supporting that choice. You have no interest in the facts if they do not support you. Perhaps you started small, with little mental twists here and there that you thought to be clever, but now you're to the point where you're simply lying instead of suffering what you consider the indignity of being wrong and confessing that.

And, of course, you project your habits onto others, and project the self-loathing in your conscience (if applicable) onto others as hatred of their so-called stupidity.

Hopefully you're young enough that you can undo these bad habits in the future. However, I rather doubt you will. In any case, it's not my job to convince you, because no one could . . . not because the facts aren't there (they are), but simply because there is no information that you can allow in your mind to convince you of how wrong you are.

There will always be lunatics who believe in a stupid idea for stupid reasons. And when their ego gets attached to that argument, no amount of education will convince them. They will warp and twist every fact to maintain their argument, and with it their ego, instead of acknowledging error.

Me, I'm not like that. I'll acknowledge my error right now: I thought TW Scott might be a rational person open to correct information. I was wrong.

Let TW Scott be a lesson to the readers on how not to behave. That may be his only redeeming value unless he changes his ways. But besides that, he's not worth the time.

He's certainly not worth mine.

Bye.