Star Wars vs Star Trek

Yes I'm sure from your position, yes, I'm sure you think so. But let's hope that George Lucas gives you a decent "reach around" from that same position,eh?

But you didn't have a vailid post. Liars don't give valid post. And You've lied just to get your way more times than I can count.

You lied about Defiant, The naboo fighter shot down, ISD firepower (proven inferrior) This is your common tactic. To lie. Because you're so overconfidence that you're right you can't bear to be wrong.

So when caught in a lie...a lie is what you give. You have no credibility here and you know it...

Shall we take a poll or shall we depend on your "good" word? How many here view you as a intelectualy stimulating conversationalist? How many people here think you've both brought up or addressed intresting points of discussion?

I do not believe you'd recieve many votes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Prove that it didn't.

Exactly.

You cannot

Why?

Because

1) you're an idiot

2) There are not enough facts to support it either way.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hey, when you are suggesting that something happens that flies in DIRECT opposition to known science then you better have proof it acted that way. Since my explanation fits known science it has superior position until YOU prove your hypothesis.

Burden is on you my friend.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Interesting. The second time I've seen this myth spouted on this web site today.

Wrong. The current is from sky to ground in a lightning strike. The myth, as far as I can tell, originates in the positive streamer that reaches up from the ground to touch the negative streamers reaching down from the sky. Once the connection is made, the current flow is into the ground.

 

I guess Saquist has his asshairs in a twist again. That is fine. it is not like he has acted any other way. Or even entered this conversation with the intention of debating fairly. I had admitted my mistake, but he continues to harp and add more.

One thing he has not done is prove that even one Federation Capital ship weapon is on par with or exceeds an equivalent SW weapon.

 

Ah yes, because we all know that using math and reason in a debate is hitting below the belt. And really, what evidence have you actually shown? Your only point is The Survivors, which is one of the few episodes that show low UFP firepower. Lets count all of the lower firepower I've seen in Star Trek, mind you, this is just off hand:


The Survivors: Here the Enterprise's shields drop at low level firepower for no apparent reason.

DS9 episode: Where the Defiant seems to be unable to deal with a large chunk of space ice for some unexplained reason. However, granted that the Defiant has been known to have power problems in early testing, this isn't too hard to explain.

Here's the debatble issues:

The Pegasus: Where it would take most of the torps on the Enterprise D to destroy a large astroid. However, it should be noted that the astroid was F*ing huge and was described as a planetary body.

Skin of Evil: Large fireball from the explosion, however, it has been debated that the anti-matter in the shuttle added to the explosion, but granted that we have never seen a photon setting off a large explosion to a starship as if it had just experienced a warpcore breach, this is debatable.

Here's examples of heavy firepower:

A Taste of Armageddon: Kirk orders Scotty to perform General Order 24, in which given that said level of requirements are not met in two hours, the Enterprise will launch an attack that will destroy all inhabitalbe areas of a M-Class planet. This was shown as to not be a bluff.

Operation: Annihilate!: Where Kirk struggles over if he should destroy an entire colony of millions of people so as to prevent the spread of a horrible virus thing.

Die is Cast: A Starship Armada of 20 ships was able to destroy 30% of the planet in its opening volly.

Broken Link: The Defiant is stated to be able to reduce the Founder's homeworld to a cinder.

Scorpion: Here a Borg Mine is stated to be able to create an explision that affects an entire Galaxy.

DS9 Episode: A bomb set to detonation destroys everything within 800km and takes out the warp matrix of a fully shielded Jem'Hadar fighter which caught the edge of the blast.

TOS Episode: A bomb is created in a short period of time on the Enterprise to Destroy a giant space Omoeba about 12,000 miles long. The blast easily sent the Enterprise clear of the amoeba.

And you? You've been wrong about almost everything. You have yet to show G-Level canon of ISDs having planet BDZing power, the highest example is of TL being able to vaporize a small town. You claimed that this is a "SW" small town, claiming that Lucas claimed this himself, though you have yet to show any qoutes from Lucas, and given that no self-respecting author would make a reference to an in-universe relation unless it was from a view of a character of said universe, then you have nothing to base this on. Other than you seeming to think that Lucas is a total dumb ass who would make such a horrible child mistake in his writing method (and as someone who is studying to become a writer, I can tell you that he was trying to make a refence that the reader can understand). Lucas was making making a relation to which anyone with even a low level intelligence could understand so he wouldn't have to write down something less artistic such as the mathmatical yield needed to do such a thing. And lets not forget the Doomsday Device, which you siad that the UFP was weak because they couldn't destroy the Doomsday machine without self-destructing their ships, thus proving weak photon yields. However, you seemed to fail to mention that the machine seemed to be able to neturalize anti-matter and the ship itself was crippled, having to used badly damaged sub-light drives working on back-up power to cause an explosion.

You have zero credit here.

 

Then technically both sides would be right, wouldn't they?

Actually After a touch of research there is Ground to Cloud as much as there is Cloud to Ground and Cloud to cloud and so on. So making any statement about lightning is aking to gambling. Thus I won't use that particular analogy anymore.

 

Saquist hasn't shown a single correct bit of complex math since he started posting. I have used canon evidence and actually presented a theory that bridges what we have seen together so that NONE of the canon is invalidated.

But you will note that none of the crew was surprised that it could happen, which denotes a mechanic at work here that is never explained. I will right out my full SBBP shield theory in another post.

Hey, water has one of the HIGHEST specific heats out there. An ice chunk would a surprising amount of power to melt.

It was not considered planetary by any stretch of the imagination. It was at best ten km in diameter and mostly hollow.

Not debatable at all WE HAVE NEVER SEEN A PHOTON EXPLOSION OF THAT SIZE. A shuttle warp core breach is more realist answer.

Yes, but it was NOT DONE. So we have no dea how long that would take.

Again same thing.

30% of the crust to a planet is nothing like the Death Star. Hell it ain't even the beginning of a BDZ. Plus since it was a mission with the deliberate undertaking to do this, we have no idea the actual munitions they used.

So could a TIE fighter. Your point?

No, rewatch it and listen. The Multikinetic Mine was supposedly able to spread the nanites over a solar system. If the weapon was able to destroy an entire solar system like some wild eyed trekkies claim then why didn't the borg use it to defeat the Species 8472 without the nanoprobe?

Yes I remember this and I remember the Jem'hadar fighter was moving at a speed away from the blast and reinforced it's shields. The bomb in question however set off a chain reaction of explosions.

Yeah take a few hundred of killos of anitmatter and it might would that way. Not something i would call an everyday weapon. Same as i would say ever squadron would have a Luke Skywalker like Jedi flying with them either.


As for the rest of you meandering message. Vaporizing a small town is not easy with a beam weapon, go ask a geologist what that would do to surrounding soil.

 

Scott... about water...

You just said water takes MORE ENERGY TO MELT than, say, Steel...

Are you crazy?

 

Okay, after the constant arguements abck and forth over the issues of ST shields I have come up with working hypothesis to explian their behaviour.

First: Survivros Illustrates that a small amount of energy can collapse a shield. 400 gigwatts. This agrees with the noncanon info of the tech manuals.

Second: We have seen the shields take some massive high energy attacks and survive. In all cases these high energy attacks covered large areas of the shield and drained over all protection by a great deal.

Now these facts do not easily reconcile but i think i have managed it.

I call it the Single Beam Break Point.

Basically it is described as the amount of energy per square cm needed to bring down the shields. This has two interesting parts to it.

A. If the attack area is small, less energy is needed to temporary knockdown the shields. Conversely a larger area attack would need substantially more.

B. It would explain the ability to reinforce shields beyond normal parameters. Put more energy in and the SBBP grows.

Now for energies falling below the break point, the shield would weaken in response to the strain in maintaining integrity. This damage, as it were, would naturally slowly refresh.

 

A) Really? How so?

B) Funny you have yet to give me any shred of this evidence...

And? We have other examples of where firepower is up the whazoo.

Not likely. Given that the Enterprise D was able to do the same with Phasers at 10% power, I think its more of a power issue.

It was described as a planetary body by Data, who scanned the planet other than the one side of it that we saw (it could be very long), its likely that he was right in it being exceptionally large. Likely the size of a small moon.

That's because most of them are detonated within space, and in space, the large lack of air makes it hard for a large fireball to show up.

Yeah, except the Constitution has only like 120 photon torps and six phaser banks. The time frame would have to be as long as it takes to fire those photons and empty their phaser banks at the most.

Again, same thing. Just because they didn't have to rush didn't mean they had an unlimited supply of weapons to chuck at them. It was just one warship with only a 120 photons and 6 phaser banks.

Who cares? The Death Star is a fucking battle station the size of a F*ing moon. These are ships that range from around half a mile long to at most a mile long who can easily destroy massive areas with just 20 small ships. They don't need a massive station. And by the way, the Death Star and the Death Star II where destroyed.

No it couldn't. An AT-AT couldn't vaporize snow, I hardly think that a Tie fighter can peform the same results as the Defiant. Largely impart because you have no proof.

I said affect an entire Star System you dipstick, not destroy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You load the nanites into the mine and it blows them all over the solar system.

No it didn't. Again you fail at this. O'Brian said that the weapon had a yield that could destroy everything within that area. There was no chain reaction, so stop pulling shit out of your ass and passing it off as evidence.

...This is evidence of high firepower. I did not state it to be a common weapon, but rather an example of heavy yields.

Go watch Star Wars you spaz. When their weapons hit something, it causes an explosion and a release of heat. its equal to a bomb in that sense. And no, I won't ask a geologist, why don't you explain it to me rather than try to sound smart and point me in another direction that has little or nothing to do with the debate at hand? Fact is, we saw a fleet of Starships destroy 30% of a planet's crust in its opening volly. This is a planet the size of earth. That means that each one of those ships, assuming each one of them gave a full volly in it (which is in your favor as we didn't see all of them firing on screen), are able to destroy 1.5% of a planet's crust in its opening volly, not to mention the firepower the entire ship itself has.

And you think that vaporizing a small town is a big deal? Its nothing. Because humans today can easily do that with an atom bomb. It doesn't matter how much power you need to put in a TL if it only gives off the equal to low megatons, it just means the Empire is full of a bunch of fucking morons.

 

Apparently I can turn my easy-bake-oven into a forge...

 

Or back in the world or reason and logic, it was just that the writing staff has no idea what gigawatt means...

 

BTW for reference

Little Boy the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 13 to 16 kilotons.

Fat Man the bomb dropped on Nagasaki was 21 kilotons.


I don't expect you to trust those, go ahead and check them. When you find they are, you can use this knowledge to judge certain other peoples posts.

 

No, not what I said. That is you misinterpreting what i said.

Water has a high specific heat almost everything is lower. What specific heat means is the energy to change one gram one degree celsius. (or in the case of my equations I mulitplied it out for kilograms for ease of use). Steel takes more energy over all, becuase it has a higher melting temperature.

 

Listen when we are suspending disbelief we have to ignore the fact that there is writers. Unfortunately for ST it is in the show and is thus canon, no matter how much people bitch.

If you look at my proposal it does reconcile everything we see.

 

Oh for the love of Yahweh. Are really this much of a fool? Doesn't this whole thing strike you as odd? The planet when found was devistated, the entire planet was dead and massivly damaged on the surface. No ship with only 400 gigawattts could possibly do that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

If this ship's power level was around that level, how could it have killed every living thing on the planet? So rather than assume something that makes no sense, not even in the logical area that we have seen in this episode in, how can you justify this weakness? And no it makes no sense. Trying to pass off one point as utter weak firepower for a show that has shown multiple high end yields over five series is nothing short of you passing off bulshit.

 

Remember that the Uxbridges said they came in ships, as in mulitiples.

Also since you are so big on variable setting, whyu couldn't the ship have it.

But most damning is that Worf was at tactical and said specificall 400 gigawatts and nobody went "Wait a minute that is to weak to take down our shields." so obviously it must be doable.


Why are you fighting his so bad when I am just using it and other data to formulate my hypothesis. A hypothesis that lets you bounce multi megaton weaponry, but keep the fragility the show demonstates.

 

Multiple of ships could have meant two, a nd I would like to see the quote if you will. And again, here we have a problem. You can't make this claim, its ignores every aspect of physics. You can't bounce warheads that are in the megaton ranges and then claim that an energy beam of 400 gigawatts is able to easily take down the entire shield grid due to a point blank strike. And by the way, the shields didn't fail, they where somehow dissipated, Worf said himself that he had a hard time re-assembling the shield, something he never said before and we never hear anyone say again. Something was apparently wrong with that weapon.

And again, you ignore all other Star Trek shows just to support this one example of weak shielding. So yeah, I think you have a problem here. Out of five series we have one example of low firepower that is pretty strange in and of itself in how the episode acts with a energy being who's a self-claimed trickster and you want to take everything as it is? You fail yet again at logic.

 

Hmmm, I couldn't find any quotes, but wiki has a brief discussion on it, it seems to claim that there was only one warship: