[BoredShirtless]

[BoredShirtless]

Anyway, the fact that these powers can be removed from Q blows the "it's an innate trait" argument completely out of the water, thus necessitating some kind of external apparatus.

So if I handcuffed your wrists, would that mean you ability to move your arms isn't innate? If it is in a Q's powers to remove the powers from another Q, why should that mean their powers aren't innate?

Editor's Note: Split from here.

[Ghost Rider]

Anyway, the fact that these powers can be removed from Q blows the "it's an innate trait" argument completely out of the water, thus necessitating some kind of external apparatus.

So if I handcuffed your wrists, would that mean you ability to move your arms isn't innate? If it is in a Q's powers to remove the powers from another Q, why should that mean their powers aren't innate?

It's amazing that they shown they also used mechanical appartus to suppliment powers and have shown human level endurance as well.

So which fits better...somehow magical unprovable innate powers, or external power source?

[BoredShirtless]

It's amazing that they shown they also used mechanical appartus to suppliment powers and have shown human level endurance as well.

Humans use weapons to make more effective killing machines, so why can't Q's? Using your logic, one could say a human doesn't have the innate ability to destroy a laptop, because you saw a human smashing one with a sledgehammer.

Sisko hurting Q doesn't fit as is, but like Spiderman going toe to toe with Fire Lord, it's an anomaly, and can be safely ignored.

So which fits better...somehow magical unprovable innate powers, or external power source?

Magical powers. Are you guys serious, or playing devils advocate?

[Ghost Rider]

It's amazing that they shown they also used mechanical appartus to suppliment powers and have shown human level endurance as well.

Humans use weapons to make more effective killing machines, so why can't Q's? Using your logic, one could say a human doesn't have the innate ability to destroy a laptop, because you saw a human smashing one with a sledgehammer.

Sisko hurting Q doesn't fit as is, but like Spiderman going toe to toe with Fire Lord, it's an anomaly, and can be safely ignored.

Ah, so you don't want to actually approach the fact that Q has been shown to be taken off guard. And that he's the one making the claims. I don't remember Firelord ever claiming omnipotence. But hey you want to use a red-herring, fine by me.

Also...You haven't provided evidence that Q wazsn't exagerrating his abilities but instead going "Well, it's just doesn't make sense to me."

So please...show your side of it, and show how it's somehow innate and not technology.

So which fits better...somehow magical unprovable innate powers, or external power source?

Magical powers. Are you guys serious, or playing devils advocate?

No, we're playing around.

And thank you for your usual "I'm butting in because I'm a bored dumbfuck."

[BoredShirtless]

It's amazing that they shown they also used mechanical appartus to suppliment powers and have shown human level endurance as well.

Humans use weapons to make more effective killing machines, so why can't Q's? Using your logic, one could say a human doesn't have the innate ability to destroy a laptop, because you saw a human smashing one with a sledgehammer.

Sisko hurting Q doesn't fit as is, but like Spiderman going toe to toe with Fire Lord, it's an anomaly, and can be safely ignored.

Ah, so you don't want to actually approach the fact that Q has been shown to be taken off guard.

And because his powers are great, means he must have faster then human reaction time....why?

And that he's the one making the claims. I don't remember Firelord ever claiming omnipotence. But hey you want to use a red-herring, fine by me.

It was an example, not a red herring. Didn't another Q once tell the crew that they aren't omnipotent?

Also...You haven't provided evidence that Q wazsn't exagerrating his abilities but instead going "Well, it's just doesn't make sense to me."

I'm not going to provide evidence that Q wasn't exagerrating because I never made the claim. I'm sure he was, he's a bit of a bullshit artist.

So please...show your side of it, and show how it's somehow innate and not technology.

Have we seen any tech? Q transporters? A Q holodeck? It's a theory without any subjective observation to support it. No objective evidence from the characters in the show. Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate.

[Ghost Rider]

And because his powers are great, means he must have faster then human reaction time....why?

When claiming omnipotence....how are you caught off guard, if you know everything.

It was an example, not a red herring. Didn't another Q once tell the crew that they aren't omnipotent?

But the focus is still upon the primary and saying that while another has refuted this shows that most of what Q says can be brought into question.

Have we seen any tech? Q transporters? A Q holodeck? It's a theory without any subjective observation to support it. No objective evidence from the characters in the show. Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate.

Why?

What does he do, that isn't replicated on a smaller scale of what the Federation does.

And Star Trek has shown other being who have Q's powers using machinery.

Q himself has shown machinery being used and allowing others to kill Q's. Rather strange no Q couldn't defend themselves against humans regardless of what stick they held.

[BoredShirtless]

And because his powers are great, means he must have faster then human reaction time....why?

When claiming omnipotence....how are you caught off guard, if you know everything.

Notice how I typed "great", and earlier typed I don't believe his claim of omnipotence? Once again, he was contradicted by that other Q. And observation clearly proves there are limits to what they can do. Limits == not omnipotent.

It was an example, not a red herring. Didn't another Q once tell the crew that they aren't omnipotent?

But the focus is still upon the primary and saying that while another has refuted this shows that most of what Q says can be brought into question.

Fine, question whatever he claimed. While you're questioning, don't forget the subjective evidence all over the place which supports the innate power theory...and the lack of evidence supporting your own.

Have we seen any tech? Q transporters? A Q holodeck? It's a theory without any subjective observation to support it. No objective evidence from the characters in the show. Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate.

Why?

What does he do, that isn't replicated on a smaller scale of what the Federation does.

Don't know. Why do you ask?

And Star Trek has shown other being who have Q's powers using machinery.

That's nice.

Q himself has shown machinery being used and allowing others to kill Q's.

So? Refer to my laptop with sledgehammer analogy.

Rather strange no Q couldn't defend themselves against humans regardless of what stick they held.

Not really, when you accept that they aren't omnipotent. A humans inability to defend against shotgun pellets to the head doesn't prove it has a whole bag of innate abilities.

[Ghost Rider]

Notice how I typed "great", and earlier typed I don't believe his claim of omnipotence? Once again, he was contradicted by that other Q. And observation clearly proves there are limits to what they can do. Limits == not omnipotent.

This also suggest very much of how much exgerration he purports to do as well.

Fine, question whatever he claimed. While you're questioning, don't forget the subjective evidence all over the place which supports the innate power theory...and the lack of evidence supporting your own.

Right, because Voyager using Guns made by Q in their hands and entering the Q Space.

Don't know. Why do you ask?

Dodge.

That's nice.

Once again...you're dodging because it does show that the theory isn't hairbrained, but has shown precedence...do I have to spell it out for you. Oh wait...I do because you've done nothing to rebute it.

So? Refer to my laptop with sledgehammer analogy.

And amazingly they never REMOVED these weapons from humans. Strange if they had these abilites of mass teleportaion, they couldn't apply it to humans.

Not really, when you accept that they aren't omnipotent. A humans inability to defend against shotgun pellets to the head doesn't prove it has a whole bag of innate abilities.

Amazing you make a red herring when they have shown supposed mass teleportation and yet when it comes down to humans able to kill them they use none of this on regular humans.

Omnipotent or not, you're just making tiny nits without making a clear point other then a style of nitpicking yet not refuting the whole.

[Stravo]

Fine, question whatever he claimed. While you're questioning, don't forget the subjective evidence all over the place which supports the innate power theory...and the lack of evidence supporting your own.

Really? Would you say from watchng the Squire of Gothos that it was obvious Trelayne was using machinery to augment his powers? No. That was revealed by SPock's obsrevations. There were no obvious side effects that could be detected by the audience so if we did not have the mirror smashing scene people here would be claiming Trelayne was inantely omnipotent or godlike.

Apollo in Who Mourns for Adonis is revealed to use machinery to augment his powers but that isn't noticable either until Spock the God killer notices the connection as well and the temple is destroyed. Once again but for the discovery by Spock the audience would easily assume Apollo was inherently omnipotent and godlike.

Return of the Archons has Landru ruling over his planet. He appears as a god like shade that controls his world but in the end is revealed as a super computer that Kirk the super computer killer destroys with Kirk-Fu logic. If the reveal of the super computer origin was never made people would assume Landru was a powerful being.

Bhaal from The Apple was a supercomuter ruling over a primitive society. Kirk convicnes people to stop feeding it and it dies. Godlike being revealed to be technologically advanced artifact.

God in ST IV is revealed to be a powerful alien trapped on a world and hardly a god when a ship mounted disruptor kills it.

This theme runs throughout TOS and is even picked up in TNG with the woman posing as the devil of a world convincing them through clever use of transporter and holodeck technology that she is a god.

Roddenberry was a humanist and a firm believer that in the future mankind would leave religion behind as the superstitious trappings that it was, hell Kirk in Who mourns for Adonis clearly states Roddenberry's position when he tells Apollo "There was a time when we needed people like you but not anymore. We've outgrown you."

Gods are revelaed to be sufficiently advanced beings that their technology = Magic. So in the face of this overwhelming evidence we're now going to say that the Q are the exception to this rule because....Q said so.

Q, the trickster's word is going to be taken at face value...because...?

Hell, the Q Civil War clearly shows high technology being used. The Continuum cloaks the use of this technology with holodecks that make the war representative of US Civil War era and cloaks the Q weapons as muskets but how the hell can you then ignore the Q weapons? If the Q have innate abilties they should be snapping their fingers at each other not using tools.

Have we seen any tech? Q transporters? A Q holodeck? It's a theory without any subjective observation to support it. No objective evidence from the characters in the show. Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate.

Why?

What does he do, that isn't replicated on a smaller scale of what the Federation does.

Don't know. Why do you ask?

Because you said this jackass: Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate

Claiming that this creature has god like powers because he says so even though all his abilties can be replicated by a very logical extrapolation od 23rd century technology and a running theme throughout the fucking series is less desperate how?

And seriously where is this mountain of evidence pointing to innate. Show me some abilties that cannot be explained away as technological. Show me this obviously innate evidence. We've gone out of our way to bring up past episodes and examples and all we keep hearing from the other side is:

Q said so.

C'mon its obvious.

Starfleet would never make a mistake so they say he's omnipotent.

Q said so.

And Star Trek has shown other being who have Q's powers using machinery.

That's nice.

Lalalala I can't make logical deductions. Jesus Christ are you even TRYING to entertain a serious debate at this point?

[BoredShirtless]

Fine, question whatever he claimed. While you're questioning, don't forget the subjective evidence all over the place which supports the innate power theory...and the lack of evidence supporting your own.

Really? Would you say from watchng the Squire of Gothos that it was obvious Trelayne was using machinery to augment his powers? No. That was revealed by SPock's obsrevations. There were no obvious side effects that could be detected by the audience so if we did not have the mirror smashing scene people here would be claiming Trelayne was inantely omnipotent or godlike.

Apollo in Who Mourns for Adonis is revealed to use machinery to augment his powers but that isn't noticable either until Spock the God killer notices the connection as well and the temple is destroyed. Once again but for the discovery by Spock the audience would easily assume Apollo was inherently omnipotent and godlike.

Return of the Archons has Landru ruling over his planet. He appears as a god like shade that controls his world but in the end is revealed as a super computer that Kirk the super computer killer destroys with Kirk-Fu logic. If the reveal of the super computer origin was never made people would assume Landru was a powerful being.

Bhaal from The Apple was a supercomuter ruling over a primitive society. Kirk convicnes people to stop feeding it and it dies. Godlike being revealed to be technologically advanced artifact.

God in ST IV is revealed to be a powerful alien trapped on a world and hardly a god when a ship mounted disruptor kills it.

This theme runs throughout TOS and is even picked up in TNG with the woman posing as the devil of a world convincing them through clever use of transporter and holodeck technology that she is a god.

You've plotted a trend. Congratulations. Pity the trend doesn't have Q in it. The Q species is not related to any of the species and/or examples above. You can't just chuck him in because he shows God like powers. Using your logic, I could extrapolate characteritics of a horse based on how an engine works because hey, they both produce power!

Roddenberry was a humanist and a firm believer that in the future mankind would leave religion behind as the superstitious trappings that it was, hell Kirk in Who mourns for Adonis clearly states Roddenberry's position when he tells Apollo "There was a time when we needed people like you but not anymore. We've outgrown you."

It's worth noting I guess, but the above doesn't mean much; in this context it assumes Roddenberry's intentions of the Q character based on past characters and RL.

Gods are revelaed to be sufficiently advanced beings that their technology = Magic. So in the face of this overwhelming evidence we're now going to say that the Q are the exception to this rule because....Q said so.

And what does the above evidence have to do with Q? You didn't come up with a rule; you plotted a trend. It's for you to prove that the Q species belongs in that trend. You are misleadingly stating he bucks it because "Q said so", which is crap. You gotta try fitting him in there, and from what I read below, you didn't.

Q, the trickster's word is going to be taken at face value...because...?

Right, he's a trickster, therefore he uses a lot of hyperbole. His mock trial for example; what a drama queen. Anyway, you can argue he flat out lied about being omnipotent, fine. But how does that support your tech theory? Has he ever talked about the origins of his powers, so that we can question what he said based on his lying/exaggerating nature?

Hell, the Q Civil War clearly shows high technology being used. The Continuum cloaks the use of this technology with holodecks that make the war representative of US Civil War era and cloaks the Q weapons as muskets but how the hell can you then ignore the Q weapons? If the Q have innate abilties they should be snapping their fingers at each other not using tools.

I love the wording of your question; talk about putting the horse before the cart! You ASSUME they used holodecks. Anyway, your answer:

Why should a guy murder someone with his fists, when he could use a gun? Would you claim the ability to murder isn't innate, just because he used the gun? We know that their powers have limits, therefore using tools to breach their own innate limits makes perfect sense.

Having said all that, it makes much more sense to assume Q bestowed powers to them; the muskets where not really muskets, and where more likely manifistations of a fight their minds just couldn't comprehend. Didn't Q say he is depicting the battle into a form they could understand?

Because you said this jackass: Most of the evidence points to innate, and I'm sorry, but your tech theory is very funny. Almost....desperate

Claiming that this creature has god like powers because he says so even though all his abilties can be replicated by a very logical extrapolation od 23rd century technology and a running theme throughout the fucking series is less desperate how?

Do you have ANY objective evidence? Any examples of tech? Subjective from people on the show? ALL subjective evidence supports innate powers. ALL objective supports innate powers. Your theory is utterly without evidence; it is based purely on examples from TOS, different species and logical extrapolation. Sorry, but that just isn't good enough. Your theory requires evidence to support it IMO.

And seriously where is this mountain of evidence pointing to innate.

Clicking fingers? I don't see any tech.
Transporting around the joint? Don't see signs of tech.
Changing coustume?
Giving powers to others with a simple snap of the fingers?

I could go on and on. The evidence is overwhelming.

Show me some abilties that cannot be explained away as technological.

why?

Show me this obviously innate evidence. We've gone out of our way to bring up past episodes and examples and all we keep hearing from the other side is:

Q said so.

C'mon its obvious.

Starfleet would never make a mistake so they say he's omnipotent.

Q said so.

See above.

And Star Trek has shown other being who have Q's powers using machinery.

That's nice.

Lalalala I can't make logical deductions. Jesus Christ are you even TRYING to entertain a serious debate at this point?

I am. Once again who gives a shit if some other species used tech; Q isn't them, is he.

[Stofsk]

BS, the contrarian, speaks again.

Let me get this straight: we don't see technology, therefore none exists? So the Q is the unknown, correct?

[Stravo]

Picard taps his chest, he disappears. No visible tech right jackass?

And after wading through your non response it comes to the same circular logic every fucking pro-Q innate person uses in this fucking thread. Q is different from the other god like beings because...he's Q.

[BoredShirtless]

Picard taps his chest, he disappears. No visisble tech right jackass?

He taps his comm badge, you idiot.

[BoredShirtless]

BS, the contrarian, speaks again.

Let me get this straight: we don't see technology, therefore none exists? So the Q is the unknown, correct?

Where are you going with this? Even with the tech theory the tech is unknown.

[Stravo]

Picard taps his chest, he disappears. No visisble tech right jackass?

He taps his comm badge, you idiot.

And Q snaps his fingers activating his transporter moron. What are you? Retarded? I gave you a fucking example and you use the same circular logic once again. How is Q snapping his finger ANY different from Picard touching his chest?

Wait....let me look in my crystal ball.....he's Q.

[Stofsk]

Where are you going with this? Even with the tech theory the tech is unknown.

I already went with this before pages back. Tech theory is not the unknown, because as Lord Poe will tell you what we see Q do can be performed by advanced holograms, replicators, transporters, and transwarp conduits.

Which is better than saying "Oh yeah, Q clicked his fingers and bang! chicken's done."

[Stofsk]

For what appears to be the hundredth time, he isn't fucking omnipotent. He just says he is. Well he also said he was god.

[BoredShirtless]

Picard taps his chest, he disappears. No visisble tech right jackass?

He taps his comm badge, you idiot.

And Q snaps his fingers activating his transporter moron.

You don't have any evidence, dumbass. This is all addressed in my long post; are you going to rebutt it?

What are you? Retarded?

What are you? A coward?

I gave you a fucking example and you use the same circular logic once again.

Do you even know what "circular logic" means?

How is Q snapping his finger ANY different from Picard touching his chest?

You have a serious reading problem; Picard touches a comm badge. That is evidence of TECH. Q snaps his fingers; NO evidence of tech.

[BoredShirtless]

For what appears to be the hundredth time, he isn't fucking omnipotent. He just says he is. Well he also said he was god.

Thanks for reading my posts. Stofsk, one of the first things I wrote is I know he isn't omnipotent.

[Stravo]

You have a serious reading problem; Picard touches a comm badge. That is evidence of TECH. Q snaps his fingers; NO evidence of tech.

Was there any evidence of Tech in Squire of Gothis, Who Mourns Adonis, Return of the Archons, etc? The whole POINT of magical tech is that it looks magical NOT technological.

[Stofsk]

Thanks for reading my posts.

Thanks for reading and ignoring my posts. I threw down the gauntlet on page 6: if you support the theory that 'his powers are unknown' explain how it's logical. If you support the theory that Q's powers are innate then explain how they can be taken away and conferred onto humans.

[BoredShirtless]

Where are you going with this? Even with the tech theory the tech is unknown.

I already went with this before pages back. Tech theory is not the unknown, because as Lord Poe will tell you what we see Q do can be performed by advanced holograms, replicators, transporters, and transwarp conduits.

So because the results we see from Q can be reproduced on a smaller scale by Starfleet tech, means Q's tech is known? Right. So then, tell me how he empowered Riker? Created the baby? Etc.

Not only is the tech unknown, but there is no evidence of it. Sorry, but just because Starfleet can perform a certain action with tech, doesn't mean the res.

Which is better than saying "Oh yeah, Q clicked his fingers and bang! chicken's done."

No it isn't. The Q species is portrayed as a species having innate powers, aquired through natural evolution. THAT trumps your tech theory...until you can bring some evidence to the table. I'll be one of the first to support the tech theory if you can bring it.

[BoredShirtless]

You have a serious reading problem; Picard touches a comm badge. That is evidence of TECH. Q snaps his fingers; NO evidence of tech.

Was there any evidence of Tech in Squire of Gothis, Who Mourns Adonis, Return of the Archons, etc? The whole POINT of magical tech is that it looks magical NOT technological.

Refer to long post.

[Stofsk]

So because the results we see from Q can be reproduced on a smaller scale by Starfleet tech, means Q's tech is known? Right. So then, tell me how he empowered Riker? Created the baby? Etc.

How he empowered Riker? Jesus, he told his machine to accept his input.

Created the baby? Well golly gee, he porked the bitch and she 'ad 'im. I'm not an expert on Q sexual practices.

No it isn't.

Yes it is, as per Occam's Razor.

The Q species is portrayed as a species having innate powers, aquired through natural evolution.

No, they're not. No discussion on evolution at all.

THAT trumps your tech theory...until you can bring some evidence to the table. I'll be one of the first to support the tech theory if you can bring it.

P=U

vs

P=R+Q+H

Parsimony says equation two is the correct one, since what it relies on is rationalisations, Q technology and hyperbole on the part of Q. If P=U, and U is unknown, then we're going around in circles.

[Robert Walper]

You have a serious reading problem; Picard touches a comm badge. That is evidence of TECH. Q snaps his fingers; NO evidence of tech.

Was there any evidence of Tech in Squire of Gothis, Who Mourns Adonis, Return of the Archons, etc? The whole POINT of magical tech is that it looks magical NOT technological.

Were not all those incidents determined technological though?