[John Clark/Ai Phling Pu] Unbelievable.

[John Clark]

Well, GA Pawn, Darth Wong, I would dearly have loved to respond to your criticisms of my thread, but (in typical totalitarian fashion) you managed to silence my airing of your intellectual dirty laundry.

I think, Wong, that I was being more than generous when I attributed those statements of yours to "operator error". However, your refusal to address them and your attempt to silence me pretty clearly indicates that they weren't errors at all, but calculated attempts to put your vaunted conclusion before the evidence.

I challenge you, Wong, to simply correct your errors and adjust your conclusions accordingly. After all, you claim to be using the "scientific method"... so act like a scientist. Correct your errors and adjust your findings.

Or you can just keep whining about us evil "trolls" who point out your fallacies to those who might otherwise be taken in by your insidious little flimflam "theories".

Editor's Note: Ai Phling Pu doesn't appear in this thread, but he was caught in John Clark's IP ban and considered acceptable collateral damage (if not an outright John Clark sock puppet).

[Mr. B]

Shut up Clark.

He has better things to do than listen to your babble about minute unimportant flaws.

[Nova Andromeda]

--The tone of your statements in your nitpick thread clearly reveals your goal. It is not to point out flaws to Darth Wong so he can fix them or more importantly point out criticle errors in his analysis. It is to point out a bunch of insignificant errors and then make the gigantic leap of logic that Darth Wong intentionally distorted the facts and analysis to favor the Empire.
--From what I can tell you don't even know how a scientist acts. Let me assure you that you would be laughed out any scientific feild for using these methods. That is after having your main point anhilated (assumming anyone would listen to it).

[Master of Ossus]

You should not have come back... I still have no idea what the point of your last thread was, JC. My server crashed just as I was about to attack you, but since you've come back I can do it again. You said that you wanted Wong to publicly admit that he was wrong. That was why you ruled out a simple E-Mail. Had you, instead, E-Mailed Wong, he would have corrected the errors that you pointed out. He then would have told everyone that he had changed those in his What's New section. It isn't like he launches massive cover-up conspiracies whenever he changes the wording of a sentence. Instead, you decided that you would attempt to crucify him for absolutely no reason.

All of your points were more or less irrelevent. The fact that the HK probes were Son'a made VERY little difference, and if anything STRENGTHENS Wong's original points about SF technology. SF has never been shown to be able to create anything like the HK probes. They MIGHT not be able to do so.

In any case, JC, your problem is that you have no idea what you are up against when you claim that SF would be able to defeat Imperator class Star Destroyers. We are not simply taking whatever Wong says and making it gospel truth. We look at what Wong does, and we use what we agree with. In the case of SW vs. ST, SF has NO CHANCE! They have no weapons that can compare with the firepower of SW capital ships. I do not, and have never believed, that Wong is right about everything he says. I DO believe that his calculations of lower and upper limits are accurate because they make sense within both the films and the laws of physics and thermodynamics. Your attempt to discredit him has done nothing. Not only were you incapable of finding flaws in his mathematics (the point of the website), but you were also incapable of finding any truly relevent points on which to attack him. That NONE of you Trekkies has managed to successfully attack Wong's mathematical calculations on a site this large is testament to Wong's accuracy. If Wong does something that is TRULY bad in the future, I will be the first one to E-Mail him and complain about it. I do not think that he has done anything wrong here, and I find that it is your behavior, JC, that is questionable at best.

Further, your attempts to destroy an entire point of view by destroying its leader are also futile. Even if Wong is proven to be totally untrustworthy (highly dubious, at best), SW would still have ships that are vastly more powerful than SF. The official ICS, and ST episode upon episode, has proven that SF cannot hope to compete with the Empire in terms of firepower. It has also been shown that SF cannot compete with the Empire in logistics or speed. Your inability to recognize these facts has led you to incorrect conclusions. We do not blindly follow Mike Wong. We do not blindly accept what he says. Instead, we look at what he says and draw our own conclusions from the evidence that he presents.

[NecronLord]

RARELY DO I FEEL THE NEED TO SAY THIS SORT OF THING BUT;

CLARKE, SHUT IT!

[Darth Wong]

You act as though you've made intelligent points, when you have not. You portray your alternate interpretations (which are often ridiculous and poorly thought out) as "errors" that I must "correct". You find errors which are utterly meaningless (eg- the useless STI drones were So'na rather than Federation) and do not affect the point of my website at all, and you pretend that by not rushing to correct such nitpicks, I must be trying to cover up the truth. Frankly, you're an idiot and an asshole. Your threads contain nothing of technical value or interest, and they are mostly designed as a personal attack against me.

Moreover, I know precisely who you are, you little chickenshit. You're the ASU Coward, since your IP address and general demeanour matches that of the mindless little troll who sent the world's most ignorant creationist arguments to my website a few months ago. Moreover, your E-mail (ancient_gate@hotmail.com) is an anonymous web-mail account, which is completely consistent with your pattern of sniping and abject cowardice.

I dare you to grow a pair of testicles and reveal your true E-mail and name, coward.

[Mr. B]

EVERY ONE GRAB THEIR BLASTERS. WERE OFF TO THE ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY DORMS.

[Anarchist Bunny]

John Shithead, we know what your trying to do here. If you'd keep these threads the fuck off of SW vs ST board and on the Off topic, didn't talk about taking wong down a notch you wouldn't get bad rep. What your trying to do here is trying to destroy Wong credability. Even now talking about Wong being totalitarian for shuting down you thread. YOUR THREAD WAS FLAMES AT WONG! You were not pointing out mistakes, dumbass. You were simply attacking Wongs credability. What the fuck is wrong with you, crankmonkey. I've seen crack babies with more sense than you. It's dumbasses like you that give the trekkies out there a bad reputation.

[Mr Bean]

WE HAVE A WINNNER!

The first Blast from the past idiot from Wong's Hate Mail Pages has arrived on this Forum!
(The illustrious and exgerating Lord Edam would be number two to show up)


Lets give him a round of appolase fokes and wait to see how he responseds

[Wicked Pilot]

I think you scared the little bastard off.

[NecronLord]

Can be seen off in a corner polishing an E-11 and cackling insanely

[Anarchist Bunny]

I'm pretty sure he swore, ran off and will be back in a few days under a new account pulling the same bullshit.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Listen Clark, that's enough.

[Moderator Mode]Your thread was closed because you flamed members and myself. I don't care if there are a few insults thrown around, but when you ignore posts and simply flame, it goes bye bye. You also posted stupid, flamebait posts.[/Moderator Mode]



And you are wrong and hated because

1. You act as though your little nitpicks are huge argument shattering errors.
2. You lie by saying Warsies think Mike is perfect.
3. You demand Mike change every little error you find despite he has a job and a family

[John Clark]

Well, those are some pretty impassioned responses, seeing as I made "no point", and my displays of Wong's wishful interpretations of dialogue were "futile."

By the way, since you've all decided to first concoct and then attack my "alternative interpretation" of the evidence, might I point out that I never offered an alternative interpretation? Not that it matters, obviously.

The errors I pointed out, with the exception of the incorrect attributation of Son'a HKs to Starfleet, are not minor. Wong drew a conclusion about the Federation's knowledge of a nation's size (the Iconians) by re-wording a character's statement to better serve his conclusion. in the last example posted, he grossly oversimplified Imperial Hyperdrive in order to give the Empire an advantage in unfamiliar space that, according to every official source, it would not have.

His tendency to put his conclusions ahead of the evidence is not limited to the examples I have so far posted. It is endemic to his entire "campaign". Your refusals to recognize and accept this proven fact regarding Wong's approach to this debate render those facts no less valid.

[TheDarkling]

John Clark: What do you wish to achieve by pointing out these flaws?

If its to prove Wong can make errors then hes admitted that.
If its to get him to alter his conclusions your going to have to come up with more than these slight problems.

Out of the three things you pointed out only one had the slightest bearing on anything -The quote used to show the Federation was amazed by the T'kons size and that wasnt exactly Earth shattering.

[John Clark]

No, Darkling, that wasn't the most telling one. The most telling one was his statement that using Hyperdrive in territory for which the Empire has zero navigational data would be "trivially easy". But take that entirely unfounded assumption away, and the Empire's ability to perform a blitzkrieg like the one Wong is depending on is likewise reduced to zero.

No blitzkrieg, no element of surprise. I'm not saying the Empire wouldn't win... eventually. But it would be a damn sight tougher than Wong's assumption about the ease of initial hyperdrive use makes it out to be.

That's the best example Wong, Pawn and the others have allowed me to cite so far. There are others... but if no one is willing to listen, why bother pointing those out, too?

[John Clark]

John Shithead, we know what your trying to do here. If you'd keep these threads the fuck off of SW vs ST board and on the Off topic, didn't talk about taking wong down a notch you wouldn't get bad rep. What your trying to do here is trying to destroy Wong credability. Even now talking about Wong being totalitarian for shuting down you thread. YOUR THREAD WAS FLAMES AT WONG! You were not pointing out mistakes, dumbass. You were simply attacking Wongs credability. What the fuck is wrong with you, crankmonkey. I've seen crack babies with more sense than you. It's dumbasses like you that give the trekkies out there a bad reputation.
_________________


Did you even read my posts? I pointed out flaws in logic and hasty assumptions. As for my posts being "flames", get real. I've been "flamed" far worse than I've done to anyone here, including Wong. All I can say is, read the damned posts before jumping on any bandwagon.

[TheDarkling]

It is trivially easy to set course for a distant planet, jump into hyperspace, and arrive as close as one planetary diameter out from its surface (ref. ANH novelization).

That in itself isnt wrong - if the Nav computer has a map of the area, now if the context is implying that its easy to just use hyperspace without co-ords thats wrong.

What context was the quote used in?

[SirNitram]

It is trivially easy to set course for a distant planet, jump into hyperspace, and arrive as close as one planetary diameter out from its surface (ref. ANH novelization).

That in itself isnt wrong - if the Nav computer has a map of the area, now if the context is implying that its easy to just use hyperspace without co-ords thats wrong.

What context was the quote used in?

With a Navicomp, it's easy as hell to get around. That's the context.

[TheDarkling]

SirNitram: Well then like I said theres nothing wrong with that quote but John seems to imply Wong was using this evidence to show that the Imps could quickly take over the feds without a map - which is my point John is viewing that quote is a different light than which it was meant.

[John Clark]

As for you, Darth Wong, who exactly are you calling a coward? Obviously, you can't tolerate any lack of control over the content of your opponents' arguments. Hence the wrath with which you've responded to mine. Your inability to edit the exchange obviously has you frustrated, and leaves you with no other recourse but to shout down or shut down anyone who makes even the slightest dent in your Authority(tm). Fortunately, your drooling lapdogs are on the job as well.

You shout that I've made no intelligent points? Then why dost thou protest so much?

And if you know "precisely who I am", why come begging for information which you say you already have?

Here's your first clue, Mike. "I" is "We". And we will see you admit the errors we've pointed out. Whether you correct them now or not is no longer relevant. Concede the point, any of them, and we go away. If not, well...

[Wicked Pilot]

Here's your first clue, Mike. "I" is "We".

I guess more than one village lost their idiot.

[Darik Sdair]

"...in the main, we make our logic according to what we like."
--Miyamoto Musashi "

hmmm

[Spanky The Dolphin]

Is there any reason this bastard is still here?

Why don't we just ban his IP?

[Anarchist Bunny]

I don't know if tHEwONG said it but I've heard it spoken of that they could use cheap probe droids to slowly map out an area until they can capture a ship and try to find some maps off of it. You seemingly miss the point. Your ignoring me. I never said what you posted was wrong. The tone of them and you comments of pulling wong off his high horse made it VERY clear these were more than just pointing out errors. They were out right flames, trying to attack Wongs credibility by finding small errors. It's an Ad Hominem Attack. You're not the first to try attack tHEwONG like this and unfortunately you won't be the last.