How does the new Star Wars Canon affect the debate?

[Eternal_Freedom]

You misrepresent me once again. I was explaining what I meant by the term. I said that when I referred to elements, I meant chemical elements on the periodic table, not as components of a reaction. I did not say that elements are not components of a reaction. I meant elements in the physical, chemical sense rather than the linguistic sense synonymous with component.

Stop misrepresenting what I say. That is also not the only one of your "corrections" I take issue with, it's merely the onyl one that was right there, I didn't want to waste time going back over every post of yours to point out the flaws when I and others have already done that once at least.

ugggghhhh they are the same thing....
2 Fe + 3 Cl2 = 2 FeCl3

Fe Guess what that is? Its Iron! Atomic number 26

no because you were wrong about the other corrections otherwise you would have already said something when i corrected you.

No, a molecule and an element are not the same thing. By your logic, a girder and a building are the same because one is a component of another. Or an up-quark is the same as a proton, because one is a component of another. Or a never cell is the same as a synapse, because one is a component of another.

Also, guess what, In the very first correction I gave you regarding that chemical reaction, I said Iron was an element. It was you calling molecular chlorine and Iron Chloride elements I had issue with.

For all your criticism of my astronomy degree, you are demonstrating you didn't pay much attention in yours.

EDIT: And I did say something about your "corrections" at the time, as did Borgholio, Scottish_Ninja, Xess, Batman and so on.

[Thanas]

But am I the only one that has seen the Clone Wars? because it sure seems that way.

If you are, why did you miss the clone wars episode showing alderaans planetary shields?

[malguslover]

I want you to address the flaw in your logic. Your argument proves nothing as I have outlined the flaw in logic above.

but what you said isn't my logic. My logic is if there is no evidence of something ever existing and no one in any of the shows or movies mentions it then it can't exist.

By the description in the clone wars they are a pacifist planet. In any case, they also do not have huge ships, not any dedicated warships larger than a fighter etc. They are pathetic.

and Alderaan didn't have any weapons at all and were considered a peacful people. So why would they have a planetary shield?

They are shown though. Remember the Ghosts of Mortis? Definitely showed a planetary shield being overwhelmed by the Death Star.

The episodes with "The Ones" who show visions of Anakins future. Yeah there is no planetary shield either. The planet blows up

[Thanas]

I want you to address the flaw in your logic. Your argument proves nothing as I have outlined the flaw in logic above.

but what you said isn't my logic. My logic is if there is no evidence of something ever existing and no one in any of the shows or movies mentions it then it can't exist.

Are you really that obtuse that you don't get why your "argument" is one giant argument out of stubbornness and ignorance?

And if you continue to be that stupid I am going to have to see proof of your degree.

The episodes with "The Ones" who show visions of Anakins future. Yeah there is no planetary shield either. The planet blows up

Then you are a moron with no eyes to boot

[Eternal_Freedom]

I want you to address the flaw in your logic. Your argument proves nothing as I have outlined the flaw in logic above.

but what you said isn't my logic. My logic is if there is no evidence of something ever existing and no one in any of the shows or movies mentions it then it can't exist.

Nope, you're logic was "Mandalore is an advanced planet home to a warrior culture. They should have a planetary shield but they don't, so planetary shields don't exist."

Your own words:

"I mean really Mandalore doesn't have a planetary sheild? That right there is proof they don't exist. "

[malguslover]

No, a molecule and an element are not the same thing. By your logic, a girder and a building are the same because one is a component of another. Or an up-quark is the same as a proton, because one is a component of another. Or a never cell is the same as a synapse, because one is a component of another.

Also, guess what, In the very first correction I gave you regarding that chemical reaction, I said Iron was an element. It was you calling molecular chlorine and Iron Chloride elements I had issue with.

For all your criticism of my astronomy degree, you are demonstrating you didn't pay much attention in yours.

EDIT: And I did say something about your "corrections" at the time, as did Borgholio, Scottish_Ninja, Xess, Batman and so on.

0

Is this common on these boards? Using logic falicies to try and fight your way out of being wrong?

Lets take a look back how this started

Because like Borgholio you are trying to goal post shift.

You said and i quote

From the person who said "oxidents" could be elements

So quite clearly you are saying that Elements can not be Oxidents

So I posted this definition

An oxidizing agent (also oxidant, oxidizer or oxidiser) is the element or compound in an oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction that accepts an electron from another species.

Where it says very clearly that an element can be an oxident.

You then go on to try and say that isn't an element as in the periodic table

[Xess]

and Alderaan didn't have any weapons at all and were considered a peacful people. So why would they have a planetary shield?

I have an issue with this. A shield is not a weapon, it is a defensive device. Possession of a shield is not in anyway incompatible with being a peaceful people.

My main issue with shields is that since Star Wars clearly has the capability to build them, saying they don't implies that everyone in the universe is a massive idiot. It's like watching a WW2 movie where we see cargo being dropped from planes, and bombs blowing things up on the ground but we never see a plane dropping bombs and concluding that bombers didn't exist in WW2. It's a rational conclusion but it makes everyone in the universe a fucking moron.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Is this common on these boards? Using logic falicies to try and fight your way out of being wrong?

Lets take a look back how this started

Because like Borgholio you are trying to goal post shift.

You said and i quote

From the person who said "oxidents" could be elements

So quite clearly you are saying that Elements can not be Oxidents

No, I am saying that "oxidents" can't be elements, not the other way around.

So I posted this definition

An oxidizing agent (also oxidant, oxidizer or oxidiser) is the element or compound in an oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction that accepts an electron from another species.

Where it says very clearly that an element can be an oxident.

You then go on to try and say that isn't an element as in the periodic table

An element can be an oxidant, but not all oxidants are elements. How do you not get this. Also, from your own definition, it's oxidant, not oxident. At least spell your bullshit correctly.

[malguslover]

Then you are a moron with no eyes to boot

seriuosly... that's your proof of a planetary shield? a giant beam of light hitting a planet causing it to heat up and explode and because you see in 3d rendering that uses light sources the planet get lighter as the light source gets closer to the planet its a planetary shield.

Ok i'll tell you what. I will put that into the video of the Alderaan explosion video comparing the HD Special Edition, Standerd Edition and now the Clone Wars. I beleive once you see them in motion and in slow motion you will understand.

[Thanas]

OK, idiot, direct from the movie:





WTF is that keeping the laser away from the planet if not a planetary shield? I especially direct you to the bottom right of the first frame.

[Xess]

That's the original Thanas, the SE looks different.

[malguslover]

Nope, you're logic was "Mandalore is an advanced planet home to a warrior culture. They should have a planetary shield but they don't, so planetary shields don't exist."

Your own words:

"I mean really Mandalore doesn't have a planetary sheild? That right there is proof they don't exist. "

holy shit you do do it.


you are trying to create a logic falacie in an attempt to get a "win"

No my logic was its fucking Mandalore an incredibly advance race known for having some of the fierst warriors in the galaxy (which they still have during TCW). Now in The Clone Wars we first see Mandalore they are trying to remove all traces of their warrior past and become a peaceful part of the galaxy.

They were still a race with a warrior culture and they still had the Deathwatch. Now Thanas is correct that they were pacifists for the most part during TCW which pissed a lot of people off. I just didn't feel like getting into a arguement about the finer points of Mandalorian culture as it doesn't matter to the disscusion. Because the point is that Mandalore in the past had a warrior culutre and they made a lot of enemies. Enemeis that would attack their home world. Which would mean they should have a planetary shield.

Mandalore is a planet with tech and wealth equal to Alderaan and Corruscaont both planets you said have planetary shields.

[malguslover]

OK, idiot, direct from the movie:





WTF is that keeping the laser away from the planet if not a planetary shield? I especially direct you to the bottom right of the first frame.

yeah thats from the non Special Edition its no longer canon

http://imgur.com/qv0CHPh,i4W7wIn,C1fZvo ... 85,QMVdq7A
http://i.imgur.com/QMVdq7A.png
http://i.imgur.com/qv0CHPh.png
http://i.imgur.com/i4W7wIn.png
http://i.imgur.com/C1fZvok.png
http://i.imgur.com/zcROq85.png

There are some frames I took yesterday. Its the planet heating up not the shield. Its actually more obvious in motion.

Like I said just wait a few days and I will make a video comparing them in slow motion and at regular speed. Still frames only give you so much info

[malguslover]

Is this common on these boards? Using logic falicies to try and fight your way out of being wrong?

Lets take a look back how this started

Because like Borgholio you are trying to goal post shift.

You said and i quote

From the person who said "oxidents" could be elements

So quite clearly you are saying that Elements can not be Oxidents

No, I am saying that "oxidents" can't be elements, not the other way around.

So I posted this definition

An oxidizing agent (also oxidant, oxidizer or oxidiser) is the element or compound in an oxidation-reduction (redox) reaction that accepts an electron from another species.

Where it says very clearly that an element can be an oxident.

You then go on to try and say that isn't an element as in the periodic table

An element can be an oxidant, but not all oxidants are elements. How do you not get this. Also, from your own definition, it's oxidant, not oxident. At least spell your bullshit correctly.

WHAT??? Oxidants COULD be Elements. In no way at all does that mean anyone here is saying that all Oxidants ARE Elements.

Seriously this is basic english here.

I'm sorry this is all on you.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume you just missread what I wrote and weren't trying to say oxidants can't be elements and were just goal post shifting.

[Thanas]

That's the original Thanas, the SE looks different.

Special edition:
http://s12.photobucket.com/user/CptK/me ... 6.jpg.html
The SE also has a planetary shield.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Nope, you're logic was "Mandalore is an advanced planet home to a warrior culture. They should have a planetary shield but they don't, so planetary shields don't exist."

Your own words:

"I mean really Mandalore doesn't have a planetary sheild? That right there is proof they don't exist. "

holy shit you do do it.


you are trying to create a logic falacie in an attempt to get a "win"

No my logic was its fucking Mandalore an incredibly advance race known for having some of the fierst warriors in the galaxy (which they still have during TCW). Now in The Clone Wars we first see Mandalore they are trying to remove all traces of their warrior past and become a peaceful part of the galaxy.

They were still a race with a warrior culture and they still had the Deathwatch. Now Thanas is correct that they were pacifists for the most part during TCW which pissed a lot of people off. I just didn't feel like getting into a arguement about the finer points of Mandalorian culture as it doesn't matter to the disscusion. Because the point is that Mandalore in the past had a warrior culutre and they made a lot of enemies. Enemeis that would attack their home world. Which would mean they should have a planetary shield.

Mandalore is a planet with tech and wealth equal to Alderaan and Corruscaont both planets you said have planetary shields.

So...Mandalore is an advanced planet that should have a planetary shield, and because they don't those shields don't exist.

That's the summary of your position, I even quoted your original post "Mandalore doesn't have a shield, that's proof they don't exist."

Now answer Thanas' point about the flawed logic.

[Xess]

That's the original Thanas, the SE looks different.

Special edition:
http://s12.photobucket.com/user/CptK/me ... 6.jpg.html
The SE also has a planetary shield.

I don't disagree, I was just pointing out that they are in fact different. The 4th and 5th pictures down in your first link show it the best in my opinion. They have that weird white-glow thing that doesn't quite match up with the curvature of the planet or where the atmosphere should be.

[malguslover]

Nope, you're logic was "Mandalore is an advanced planet home to a warrior culture. They should have a planetary shield but they don't, so planetary shields don't exist."

Your own words:

"I mean really Mandalore doesn't have a planetary sheild? That right there is proof they don't exist. "

holy shit you do do it.


you are trying to create a logic falacie in an attempt to get a "win"

No my logic was its fucking Mandalore an incredibly advance race known for having some of the fierst warriors in the galaxy (which they still have during TCW). Now in The Clone Wars we first see Mandalore they are trying to remove all traces of their warrior past and become a peaceful part of the galaxy.

They were still a race with a warrior culture and they still had the Deathwatch. Now Thanas is correct that they were pacifists for the most part during TCW which pissed a lot of people off. I just didn't feel like getting into a arguement about the finer points of Mandalorian culture as it doesn't matter to the disscusion. Because the point is that Mandalore in the past had a warrior culutre and they made a lot of enemies. Enemeis that would attack their home world. Which would mean they should have a planetary shield.

Mandalore is a planet with tech and wealth equal to Alderaan and Corruscaont both planets you said have planetary shields.

So...Mandalore is an advanced planet that should have a planetary shield, and because they don't those shields don't exist.

That's the summary of your position, I even quoted your original post "Mandalore doesn't have a shield, that's proof they don't exist."

Now answer Thanas' point about the flawed logic.

no my position has always been because we don't see a planetary shield or have anyone talk about a planetary shield they don't exist.
Mandalore and the other planets I listed are all cases that if planetary shields did exist they would have used them.

[Eternal_Freedom]

You claim to have done a BSc in applied science, specifically nuclear technology. How do you not realise when people say "element" in a chemical/physical context they mean chemical element. That should have been something you learned well before a degree.

As for the oxidants thing, see the second part of my post you quoted "An element can be an oxidant, but not all oxidants are elements." Many oxidising agents are in fact compounds/molecules, not elements. You're the one playing with semantics in your definition to make "elements" mean "components" rather than "chemical elements."

[malguslover]

That's the original Thanas, the SE looks different.

Special edition:
http://s12.photobucket.com/user/CptK/me ... 6.jpg.html
The SE also has a planetary shield.

that's intersting but its not the same effect. If you look at the High Res pics i took you'll notice the lighting effects. If it was hitting a shield then the effect would be a perfect circle around it. But its not. Its only illuminating one side of the planet because the rest of the planet is

Show me the pics before and after that one.

Context is important. If it was a planetary shield how come the effect doesn't go away when it breaks the planetary shield?

[malguslover]

You claim to have done a BSc in applied science, specifically nuclear technology. How do you not realise when people say "element" in a chemical/physical context they mean chemical element. That should have been something you learned well before a degree.

As for the oxidants thing, see the second part of my post you quoted "An element can be an oxidant, but not all oxidants are elements." Many oxidising agents are in fact compounds/molecules, not elements. You're the one playing with semantics in your definition to make "elements" mean "components" rather than "chemical elements."

What definition of element do you think im using?

Again no one said that all oxidants are elements just that an oxidant COULD Be an Element.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Mandalore and the other planets I listed are all cases that if planetary shields did exist they would have used them.

I quoted your own exact words, spelling mistakes and all, saying that Mandalore not having a shield was proof they didn't exist. You then went on to explain that Mandalore is an advanced planet with a (former) warrior culture, so they should be able to build one, but because they don't they don't exist.

You are being really dishonest here.

[Eternal_Freedom]

You claim to have done a BSc in applied science, specifically nuclear technology. How do you not realise when people say "element" in a chemical/physical context they mean chemical element. That should have been something you learned well before a degree.

As for the oxidants thing, see the second part of my post you quoted "An element can be an oxidant, but not all oxidants are elements." Many oxidising agents are in fact compounds/molecules, not elements. You're the one playing with semantics in your definition to make "elements" mean "components" rather than "chemical elements."

What definition of element do you think im using?

Again no one said that all oxidants are elements just that an oxidant COULD Be an Element.

Going from the definition you posted to support yourself, you're using "a component of a reaction" as opposed to "chemical elemnt on the periodic table." The fact that I have to explain this to someone who apparently did a BSc in nuclear technology is not a good sign for you.

[Batman]

Okay I've had it. Who's in charge of the DCU these days? I want a timeout on the 'no killing' rule.

[malguslover]

That's the original Thanas, the SE looks different.

Special edition:
http://s12.photobucket.com/user/CptK/me ... 6.jpg.html
The SE also has a planetary shield.

I don't disagree, I was just pointing out that they are in fact different. The 4th and 5th pictures down in your first link show it the best in my opinion. They have that weird white-glow thing that doesn't quite match up with the curvature of the planet or where the atmosphere should be.

if you look at the 4th 5th and 6th pic the effect that is being called the planetary shield is still there. In fact its there all the way until the destrcution

Why would that be? If the Death star already has punched through the shield why is the shield glowin as if its being hit and holding?

To me its clear that the planet is beng super heated from all the thermal energy being pumped into it