Moderator: Vympel
Oh, come on. You've put forward some fairly silly ideas in this thread, but that's just lazy.darthy2 wrote: The most important and largest determining factor on whether a stun setting can affect a stormtrooper is money.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8t7WCEeBRU <-- this looks about rightBatman wrote:I think you were the moment he brought up the 'immune to lasers' idiocy.
no clip = no proof. Your wiki is hearsay.DarthPooky wrote:Stormtrooper armor completely resisted Ezra's energy slingshot in the season 1 episode fight or flight. Unfortunately I couldn't find a clip but hears what Wookieepedia says.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Energy_slingshot
I think this defiantly shows that Kannan's comment is inaccurate.
And I accept your donation of $1,000,000 to me.Esquire wrote:I can only assume by your continued refusal to address my (and others') arguments or provide any substantive ones of your own that you realize you're wrong but don't want to admit it. Therefore, formally:
Concession accepted.
The fact that nobody but you and WATCH-MAN, whose ignorance of logic, science, and reasonable doubt is well known, seem to think so ought to have suggested otherwise.darthy2 wrote: I didn't think I needed to address any further points after it became pretty clear a stun should knock out a storm trooper.
In reverse order: That clip does not show a phaser, or at least no type or setting of phaser that's usually seen; phasers don't generally cause blood loss from open wounds. It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even still, it would be on you to demonstrate that the purely-kinetic effectiveness of the whatever-it-was blast is equivalent to being hit in the head with a fifteen-pound rock.But since we're on the subject of unaddress arguments:
stormtrooper's knocked out with sticks - I provided the clip and it was not acknowledged
proof that phasers cause motion - I provided the star trek 6 clip as additional proof and this was not acknowledged either
We know for a fact that the Rebels quote is wrong, since stormtrooper armor protects against all those things Batman listed as a logical necessity as well as from film evidence. I'm not buying a Rebels DVD just to demonstrate that to you. Moreover, even without anything but the clip you provided it's obviously false, because instead of being knocked out the two in armor were dazed for a few seconds and were fine immediately after.That clip from star wars rebels about armor not being able to block anything and seeing a Jedi and a former clone trooper wearing stormtrooper armor and stunned is about as convincing as convincing gets. On top of that there are the pragmatic reasons why the stun setting of a phaser should knock out a stormtrooper -- entertainment and money. Here's a scene of a stormtrooper getting knocked out from a single punch by a girl if you need further convincing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9zzV3-Ltk4
Correct, I rubber stamped it earlier.Just when I thought we were done here...
you must not have been reading, others have said they have no problem with a stun setting taking out a stormtrooper.The fact that nobody but you and WATCH-MAN, whose ignorance of logic, science, and reasonable doubt is well known, seem to think so ought to have suggested otherwise.
Definitely wrong there. The durability of the one wearing the armor is a factor. Like if superman were wearing stormtrooper armor, we would know that a stun setting would not affect him. Stormtroopers drop like flies. This makes it more likely that a stun setting can affect a stormtrooper.In reverse order: That clip does not show a phaser, or at least no type or setting of phaser that's usually seen; phasers don't generally cause blood loss from open wounds. It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even still, it would be on you to demonstrate that the purely-kinetic effectiveness of the whatever-it-was blast is equivalent to being hit in the head with a fifteen-pound rock.
The zero gravity scene in Star Trek 6 with the first law of motion proves that phasers transfer kinetic energy. They were motionless in zero gravity then they moved when hit with the phaser. The movement proves that a kinetic force from the phaser acted on them. Not to mention the star trek 3 scene that everyone is trying to forget and dismissing as an outlier.Say it with me: kinetic energy and energy weapons fire are not the same thing. They have nothing to do with each other, except in the higher-abstraction physics sense.Just because it's possible to knock somebody out through their armor via momentum transfer has no relevance to knocking them out with a stun blast, unless you can prove it does using actual facts and figures. Kinetic weapons - rocks, clubs, etc - can knock stormtroopers down by direct momentum transfer unbalancing them or out by directing that momentum transfer against the head, sloshing the brain around inside the skull. Demonstrate that phaser fire can provide sufficient purely-kinetic energy to accomplish either.
We don't know that it was wrong. Maybe you're just interpreting it wrong. When he said that the armor does not block anything, he was probably just talking about the things you would expect the armor to be able to block, not insects to the face or sunburn or whatever other desperate counter-examples people threw out there. The stormtroopers went down with a stun setting, in a similar manner to how Quark went down when being hit with the lowest stun setting of a phaser.We know for a fact that the Rebels quote is wrong, since stormtrooper armor protects against all those things Batman listed as a logical necessity as well as from film evidence. I'm not buying a Rebels DVD just to demonstrate that to you. Moreover, even without anything but the clip you provided it's obviously false, because instead of being knocked out the two in armor were dazed for a few seconds and were fine immediately after.
Not unrelated. Durability of a stormtrooper and blocking ability of the armor are factors in determining whether a stormtrooper can be knocked out from a stun setting. She hit a stormtrooper in the helmet and the stormtrooper went down. In one hit. That scene is an embarassment to stormtroopers.Being knocked out by Sabine Wren, a highly-trained bounty hunter, commando, and former soldier wearing armor of uncertain capabilities has nothing to do with resistance to phaser fire because, once again, resistance to kinetic energy and to energy weapons fire are unrelated
Forgot to address this, I am dealing with facts. The fact is that these are movies and tv shows. If a gold shirt shot a Stormtrooper it would be on a movie or tv series. This implies a mutual agreement was reached between two franchises that legally determine what is considered canon. I'm certain that the writers would allow the stun setting to work on a stormtrooper just like they would have to allow the lasers to pass through federation shields.Finally, if the best you can do is "because in a film that will never be made, such-and-such a decision would be taken by the producers," you're even more out of touch with logic than I thought you were. We deal in facts here. Your refusal to provide any will be and is being taken as a tacit admission of defeat.
Your reply has nothing to do with my statement. You have repeatedly failed to provide calculations supporting your claim, a violation of Debating Rule Five: Back Up Your Claims. Demonstrate that the weapon in your clip is a phaser even though it causes bleeding wounds instead of burns or vaporization, calculate the KE imparted by the blast, and show the equivalence to large rocks and SW stun blasts.darthy2 wrote:Definitely wrong there. The durability of the one wearing the armor is a factor. Like if superman were wearing stormtrooper armor, we would know that a stun setting would not affect him. Stormtroopers drop like flies. This makes it more likely that a stun setting can affect a stormtrooper.In reverse order: That clip does not show a phaser, or at least no type or setting of phaser that's usually seen; phasers don't generally cause blood loss from open wounds. It's irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Even still, it would be on you to demonstrate that the purely-kinetic effectiveness of the whatever-it-was blast is equivalent to being hit in the head with a fifteen-pound rock.
You've provided three scenes allegedly showing this, one of which (Quark) did not show anything of the sort, the second of which (STVI) may not have involved a phaser at all and certainly didn't impart enough KE to matter (I invite you to demonstrate otherwise), and the third (STIII) takes place on an artificial planet with uncertain physical characteristics, uses an uncertain power setting, and is as far as I know unlike any other single phaser firefight in the entire series. One of your claims is a lie, the second has yet to be proved, and the third is the very definition of an outlier. You're at best one for three. Do better. How much KE do phasers impart under normal combat (i.e., within normal gravity) conditions? I await your calculations.The zero gravity scene in Star Trek 6 with the first law of motion proves that phasers transfer kinetic energy. They were motionless in zero gravity then they moved when hit with the phaser. The movement proves that a kinetic force from the phaser acted on them. Not to mention the star trek 3 scene that everyone is trying to forget and dismissing as an outlier.Say it with me: kinetic energy and energy weapons fire are not the same thing. They have nothing to do with each other, except in the higher-abstraction physics sense.Just because it's possible to knock somebody out through their armor via momentum transfer has no relevance to knocking them out with a stun blast, unless you can prove it does using actual facts and figures. Kinetic weapons - rocks, clubs, etc - can knock stormtroopers down by direct momentum transfer unbalancing them or out by directing that momentum transfer against the head, sloshing the brain around inside the skull. Demonstrate that phaser fire can provide sufficient purely-kinetic energy to accomplish either.
Do you think armor works like video-game hit points? Medieval plate armor was effectively impervious to (non-specialized) stabbing attacks, which is why a primary weapon for late-era knights was the mace. Modern NBC suits offer excellent defenses against fallout, biological, and chemical weapons, and none whatsoever against bullets. 'Blocking ability' depends on threat profile; it's not some universal factor that applies equally to everything.We know for a fact that the Rebels quote is wrong, since stormtrooper armor protects against all those things Batman listed as a logical necessity as well as from film evidence. I'm not buying a Rebels DVD just to demonstrate that to you. Moreover, even without anything but the clip you provided it's obviously false, because instead of being knocked out the two in armor were dazed for a few seconds and were fine immediately after.We don't know that it was wrong. Maybe you're just interpreting it wrong. When he said that the armor does not block anything, he was probably just talking about the things you would expect the armor to be able to block, not insects to the face or sunburn or whatever other desperate counter-examples people threw out there. The stormtroopers went down with a stun setting, in a similar manner to how Quark went down when being hit with the lowest stun setting of a phaser.
Such as what, smoke, gas, shrapnel, the actual stunning effects of stun bolts instead of a few moments' dizziness? Dialogue is imprecise. Prove that stormtrooper serves no useful purpose, which is what you're effectively claiming. Your continued insistence on this is a violation of Debating Rule 3: No Broken Record Tactics.
Not unrelated. Durability of a stormtrooper and blocking ability of the armor are factors in determining whether a stormtrooper can be knocked out from a stun setting. She hit a stormtrooper in the helmet and the stormtrooper went down. In one hit. That scene is an embarassment to stormtroopers.Being knocked out by Sabine Wren, a highly-trained bounty hunter, commando, and former soldier wearing armor of uncertain capabilities has nothing to do with resistance to phaser fire because, once again, resistance to kinetic energy and to energy weapons fire are unrelated
They looked like phasers, they were starfleet officers, and the plot of the movie involved making it look like the federation assassinated the leader of the Klingon empire so of course it's a phaser. Disproving your claim that it's not a phaser is not my job. That would be like asking me to prove Q is not secretly watching and making the phasers cause bleeding. Sillyness. You need to provide proof that your claim is worth disproving.Your reply has nothing to do with my statement. You have repeatedly failed to provide calculations supporting your claim, a violation of Debating Rule Five: Back Up Your Claims. Demonstrate that the weapon in your clip is a phaser even though it causes bleeding wounds instead of burns or vaporization, calculate the KE imparted by the blast, and show the equivalence to large rocks and SW stun blasts.
1) Both weapons disable the target without injuring them usually. This requires a delicate power setting. Talking about "more powerful" stun blasts would defeat the purpose of it being called "stun".To summarize, you have repeatedly claimed that a lowest-power stun blast from a phaser will reliably knock out a stormtrooper. Your reasoning for this is that stormtroopers are knocked down (not out, unless you can prove it) by kinetic weapons thrown by abnormally strong aliens, that they are knocked down (not out, unless you can prove it) by Star Wars-technology stun blasts, and that stormtrooper armor serves no useful purpose despite the Empire buying billions of suits of it for decades. If you can provide hard evidence showing that:
1) Star Trek phaser stun blasts are more powerful than Star Wars blaster stun bolts,
2) Phasers impart significant kinetic energy, at least equal to a fifteen-pound rock to the head,
3) Phasers will work through the armor material, when their effectiveness is clearly highly dependent on target material, and
4) Stormtrooper armor is equally-vulnerable (/resistant) against all threats, even those with massively different mechanisms of action (i.e., phaser stun blasts and rocks to the head), then I'll cheerfully admit you were right all along. I await your evidence, with attendant calculations and citations.
of course but you said you deal with facts and I don't. The writers and the companies make the final call on how these canon's interact technically. If we assume this encounter would never really happen as officially canon fine. But if we wanted to treat it as a realistic possibility in a future file or tv episode, then these things would be taken into account.The question of what would make for an enjoyable show/movie/story is completely irrelevant to the current debate and I'm not going to dignify it with further discussion. We operate under suspension of disbelief here; appeals to fictionality carry no weight.
Here's the clipDarthPooky wrote:Stormtrooper armor completely resisted Ezra's energy slingshot in the season 1 episode fight or flight. Unfortunately I couldn't find a clip but hears what Wookieepedia says.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Energy_slingshot
I think this defiantly shows that Kannan's comment is inaccurate.
Um-no. It's very likely a phaserdarthy2 wrote:They looked like phasers, they were starfleet officers, and the plot of the movie involved making it look like the federation assassinated the leader of the Klingon empire so of course it's a phaser.Your reply has nothing to do with my statement. You have repeatedly failed to provide calculations supporting your claim, a violation of Debating Rule Five: Back Up Your Claims. Demonstrate that the weapon in your clip is a phaser even though it causes bleeding wounds instead of burns or vaporization, calculate the KE imparted by the blast, and show the equivalence to large rocks and SW stun blasts.
Since it does something no other phaser is ever seen to do yes it is.Disproving your claim that it's not a phaser is not my job.
1. There's no y in silliness. 2. He did when he pointed out that weapon did something no other phaser before (or since) has done.That would be like asking me to prove Q is not secretly watching and making the phasers cause bleeding. Sillyness. You need to provide proof that your claim is worth disproving.
Complete garbage. Not only are we thanks to the OP working with TM power settings which DOES mean several different stun settings, but even in the real world 'stun' (as in tranqulizers) the proper dosage varies considerably depending on target mass and state of excitement. There IS no such thing as a 'guaranteed' stun setting for any and all targets. And that's without having to go past body armour.1) Both weapons disable the target without injuring them usually. This requires a delicate power setting. Talking about "more powerful" stun blasts would defeat the purpose of it being called "stun".To summarize, you have repeatedly claimed that a lowest-power stun blast from a phaser will reliably knock out a stormtrooper. Your reasoning for this is that stormtroopers are knocked down (not out, unless you can prove it) by kinetic weapons thrown by abnormally strong aliens, that they are knocked down (not out, unless you can prove it) by Star Wars-technology stun blasts, and that stormtrooper armor serves no useful purpose despite the Empire buying billions of suits of it for decades. If you can provide hard evidence showing that:
1) Star Trek phaser stun blasts are more powerful than Star Wars blaster stun bolts,
2) Phasers impart significant kinetic energy, at least equal to a fifteen-pound rock to the head,
3) Phasers will work through the armor material, when their effectiveness is clearly highly dependent on target material, and
4) Stormtrooper armor is equally-vulnerable (/resistant) against all threats, even those with massively different mechanisms of action (i.e., phaser stun blasts and rocks to the head), then I'll cheerfully admit you were right all along. I await your evidence, with attendant calculations and citations.
Wait, you're saying stormtroopers get knocked out by hitting OTHER people? This I gotta see.2) Actually it's "at most equal" to a fifteen-pound rock. You forgot that a stormtrooper got knocked out with a single punch to a girl. Now it's "at most equal" to a girl hitting a stormtrooper. I'll await for you to concede this point before I consider proving anything.
What kind of armour, at what setting? Not all armour is created equal.3) Absolutely we've seen phasers work through armor before, I've seen nothing to make me think otherwise.
Because they were abysmally stupid and supported by nothing whatsoever. There's no evidence whatsoever that Wars humans are more massive than Trek humans, leave alone because of Midichlorians.Back in the day you could have used the durasteal argument but durasteal is no longer canon. Put simply, my claims about midichlorians were not addressed earlier with regards to comparing humans.
No we do not, since packing crates handily stop standard fight setting phaser blasts with little to no ill effects.At least we know midichlorians exists. You'll need to prove that stormtrooper armor is made of an exotic material.
You're wecome to show any of those attacks was weaker than phaser stun. Oh wait-you can't because that would require you to understand physics.4) Stormtroopers drop like flies no matter how they are attacked. They seem equally vulnerable to just about any attack shown.
In other worlds, you finally realized you never had a case (which should have been obvious to anyone with an IQ-which obviously excludes you-from the word go) and are now hiding behind 'none of this is real anyway. NAH!'of course but you said you deal with facts and I don't. The writers and the companies make the final call on how these canon's interact technically. If we assume this encounter would never really happen as officially canon fine. But if we wanted to treat it as a realistic possibility in a future file or tv episode, then these things would be taken into account.The question of what would make for an enjoyable show/movie/story is completely irrelevant to the current debate and I'm not going to dignify it with further discussion. We operate under suspension of disbelief here; appeals to fictionality carry no weight.
This is not an argument. You are begging the question, a formal logical fallacy; you assume that no extra power is required to bypass stormtrooper armor.darthy2 wrote: 1) Both weapons disable the target without injuring them usually. This requires a delicate power setting. Talking about "more powerful" stun blasts would defeat the purpose of it being called "stun".
Calculations, please. You're the one claiming that being hit in the head by a trained soldier wearing armor of uncertain capabilities is not a serious threat.2) Actually it's "at most equal" to a fifteen-pound rock. You forgot that a stormtrooper got knocked out with a single punch to a girl. Now it's "at most equal" to a girl hitting a stormtrooper. I'll await for you to concede this point before I consider proving anything.
This is not an argument. We have seen phasers work through some, but not all armors in Star Trek. They do not affect silicon-based lifeforms or people hiding behind packing crates. Demonstrate that stormtrooper armor is weaker than a packing crate. You are welcome to calculate the mass of a midichlorian, the average number of them in a non-Force-sensitive Star Wars human, and the effect of that difference on resistance to kinetic attacks. Absent said calculations there's no reason to believe you've got even the barest hint of a valid argument.3) Absolutely we've seen phasers work through armor before, I've seen nothing to make me think otherwise. Back in the day you could have used the durasteal argument but durasteal is no longer canon. Put simply, my claims about midichlorians were not addressed earlier with regards to comparing humans. At least we know midichlorians exists. You'll need to prove that stormtrooper armor is made of an exotic material. Durasteal days are over. We're in the Disney era now. I'm not doing your work for you.
This would be a fair point... if they were ever attacked by Federation technology. Demonstrate that phasers are more, or even equal in power to blasters. Demonstrate that phasers provide equivalent kinetic energy to a large rock or the average martial-arts punching force of ~325 psi. If you think that's an inappropriate measure, demonstrate why.4) Stormtroopers drop like flies no matter how they are attacked. They seem equally vulnerable to just about any attack shown.
A projectile doesn't stop having considerable mass just because it's a fruit.darthy2 wrote:Here's the clipDarthPooky wrote:Stormtrooper armor completely resisted Ezra's energy slingshot in the season 1 episode fight or flight. Unfortunately I couldn't find a clip but hears what Wookieepedia says.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Energy_slingshot
I think this defiantly shows that Kannan's comment is inaccurate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2s0a7guIX4
They were affected by the slingshot device but not enough to be injured. Though getting a few pieces of fruit thrown at them by that kid did affect them which is kind of sad.
And, moreover, they're on what appears to be a moving vehicle. They're going to have balance issues, not to mention that visibility is pretty shit in those helmets, which will affect their equilibrium to some degree. You try standing on a slowly moving car and having someone throw a cantaloupe at your head while you're wearing a welding mask, see how well you stay upright...Batman wrote:A projectile doesn't stop having considerable mass just because it's a fruit.darthy2 wrote:Here's the clipDarthPooky wrote:Stormtrooper armor completely resisted Ezra's energy slingshot in the season 1 episode fight or flight. Unfortunately I couldn't find a clip but hears what Wookieepedia says.
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Energy_slingshot
I think this defiantly shows that Kannan's comment is inaccurate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2s0a7guIX4
They were affected by the slingshot device but not enough to be injured. Though getting a few pieces of fruit thrown at them by that kid did affect them which is kind of sad.
Here. Hole's in the body caused bleeding. The phaser was set to kill on Star Trek 6 plus they were in zero gravity which does not normally happen either.Esquire wrote:You claim that a weapon which produces effects never replicated by a phaser is a phaser. Demonstrate it. If it looks like a duck but neither walks nor quacks like a duck, the logical conclusion is that it's a clever forgery and not a duck at all.
Just so we're clear... you're skeptical that this is a phaser:Batman wrote:A phaser on an unknown setting causes the head of an unarmoured human to explode. This is relevant to the stun settings working past stormtrooper armour why exactly?
The "phaser" set on kill which was not immediately fatal, which is another difference from every other depiction of phasers set to kill.darthy2 wrote: Here. Hole's in the body caused bleeding. The phaser was set to kill on Star Trek 6 plus they were in zero gravity which does not normally happen either.
No your question is flawed. More power makes it less of a stun setting. How much power do you want to pump into someone and call it stun? Asking me to prove which stun weapon is more powerful is idiotic. Stun settings are adjustable and then it's no longer considered stun in someone's judgement.This is not an argument. You are begging the question, a formal logical fallacy; you assume that no extra power is required to bypass stormtrooper armor.
