In Mike's thread "Finally adding to my canon database", FuckStar said that Borg drones has selective KE shield, based on the premise that no projectiles have been fired at the Borg.

While the premise itself still debatable, I'd rather go for the logical validity of his claim as a whole instead.




"No projectiles have been fired at the drones" premise

Now, let's suppose, through some magical way, FuckStar's premise that no projectiles have been fired at the Borg is true. Question is: does it automatically translate that Borg drones has selective KE shield?

Does it mean that IF no projectiles have been fired at the drones, THEN it is because they are ineffective against them, due to selective KE shielding?

Of course not. Logic dictates that it is only one of many possibilities implied by the premise.

In order to justify his claim, FuckStar has to *prove* that they never shoot projectiles at drones BECAUSE projectiles are innefective due to selective KE shield, and not because anything else.




Absence of 20th century guns aboard E-E

Now, in order to justify his selection of possibility, that no projectiles have been fired at the Borg because they are ineffective, FuckStar pointed out the absence of replicated 20th century projectile weapons aboard the E-E in ST:FC. He said that such weapons ain't available because they are ineffective against the Borg, due to the selective KE shielding.


Does it mean that, IF no guns replicated aboard E-E during , THEN it is because they are ineffective against the drones, due to selective KE shielding?

Again, logic dictates it is only one of many possibilities implied.

In order to justify this particular possibility, that no guns are replicated BECAUSE they are ineffective against the drones because of selective KE shield, then FuckStar has to prove these following:

FuckStar has to *prove* that they are CAPABLE to replicate those guns at that time. It means that FuckStar has to *prove* that the all neccessary resources are available aboard, such as replicator pattern, required materials, required powers, required opportunity, as well as proving that the replicator is not DOWN at that time.

If FuckStar can prove the point above, does it simply means that projectiles are ineffective due to selective KE shield?

Of course not. It only means that The Feds decide not to replicate 20th century guns and distribute them to their crews.


Does it mean that, IF the Feds decide not to replicate 20th century guns, THEN it is because they are ineffective against the drones, due to selective KE shielding?

Again, logic dictates it is only one of many possibilities implied.

FuckStar has to *prove* that they decide not to replicate 20th century guns is because they are ineffective against the Borg, and not due to other reason.

Ergo, he has to justify the reason why he choose the possibility that "they decide not to replicate those guns because of they are ineffective against the Borg", over other possibilities.




Absence Federation Experimental Projectile Weapons/b]

Now, in order to justify his selection of possibility, no projectiles have been fired at the drones because they are ineffective against them, FuckStar pointed out the absence of Feds experimental weapon among Feds personnel. He said that such weapons ain't available because they are ineffective against the Borg, due to the selective KE shielding.


Does it mean that, IF the weapon ain't commonly used, THEN it is [b]because they are ineffective against the drones, due to selective KE shielding?

Again, logic dictates it is only one of many possibilities implied.

FuckStar has to *prove* that the experimental weapons are not commonly used, is because they are ineffective against the Borg, and not due to other reasons.

And in order to prove it, FuckStar still has to consider many other possibilities such as:
-. They are still in experimental stage, and not ready for mass-production (or replication, if FuckStar prefers it that way)
-. They are still in experimental stage, and has yet to pass operational testing
-. They are still in experimental stage, so Starfleet DECIDED not to make the replicator pattern commonly available
-. The weapons are actually based on good concept, but proved to be unreliable after field testing




"Why do I have to prove it? It is conjecture, you dipshit!"

Common FuckStar defense. It's conjecture, so he doesn't have to prove it. In fact, he ***admitted*** that his premises cannot prove that Borg drones have KE shielding.

The question is; why should he prove it? Why can't he use assumption and excuses instead?


Why? Well, if he claimed that IT IS POSSIBLE THAT BORG DRONES HAVE SELECTIVE KE SHIELDING, ASSUMMING THAT <blah-blah> AND <blah-blah> AND <blah-blah>, then his argument may be fair enough. And maybe no need to flame him.



But did he? No. He claimed that

No projectiles have been fired at the drones, so it means that they have selective KE shielding

is more reasonable than the common

We have seen onscreen that KE attacks like claws and Bathleth are effective against the drones, so they don't have KE shield

See, so FUCKSTAR HAS TO PROVE THAT HIS CONJECTURE IS THE ONE WHICH MORE REASONABLE.



Occam's Razor will cut FuckStar's cock

FuckStar claimed that his conjecture is more reasonable than the more common conjecture about borg drones KE shielding (or the lack of it).

But guess what? When we use Occam's Razor to compare both theories, wich one will fall???

with so many weak spots on FuckStar's conjecture, how can he ever said that his are more reasonable?????

Ooppsss.. the title should read FuckStar's "Borg drones selective KE shielding pet argument". Not enough space.

Some readers my question my boring, repetitive style of explanation. But since FuckStar may be among the readers, I think it is neccessary to make my explanation as clear and detailed as possible. My apologize to brighter readers.

BTW, when the Borg boarded the E-E, main power go poof.

Geeez, didn't you guys know?

Whenever someone shoots a "real" gun at a Borg, magical purple bunnies fly out of its ass to take the bullets, like Clint Eastwood in In the Line of Fire.

Since we've never seen someone shoot a "real' gun at a Borg, it must be true.

No, I said it was possible. The entire purpose was conjecture. This was explained to you in the thread, repeatedly. I consider your run from that thread so you can spread your BS in a new location to be further stupidity on your part.

Further, the rest of your post is little more than a straw man orgy. Sorry, not interested.

If anyone would care to actually see what was said in the thread, instead of listening to the rabid liar, just follow this link:

http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=36

I'm glad DumbShit didn't totally scare you off after the thread where you two went at it. That was a classic debate, and one which I will always attempt to pattern my own style on. May the Force be with you, DasBastard, you were one of the few people that actually went after that jackass when he first came to the board.

---

"Sometimes I think you WANT us to fail." "Shut up, just shut up!" -Two Guys from Kabul

Latinum Star Recipient; Hacker's Cross Award Winner

"one soler flar can vapririze the planit or malt the nickl in lass than millasacit" -Bagara1000

"Happiness is just a Flaming Moe away."

Ahhh... poor HypocriteStar. Resort to LYING after being put in hopeless situation. If you simply said that *it is possible* that Borg drone have KE shielding *if* we assume <blahblah> and <blahblah>, then you won't humiliate yourself that bad.

But did you? Nah, you suck your own cock further by saying that your conjecture is more reasonable than the conclusion that said "Borg drones doesn't have KE shielding." Sorry. Burden of proof false on you.

It was yourself who put yourself in deep shit. Don't blame us. Asshole.



If anyone would care to actually see what was said in the thread, instead of listening to the rabid liar so-called DarkStar (FuckStar is more appropriate, I guess), just follow THESE links:


http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... &start=120



http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... &start=120



http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... &start=225


http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... c&start=30





"does make more sense", "better synthesis", "far more likely", "it is more likely".....


Don't like it when the truth thrown infront of your face, don't you, HypocriteStar?

You are an ignorant little pest, aren't you? Praytell, at what point in your stupid schpiel do I say anything other than the fact that I am engaging in conjecture? Answer: at no point.

How does one conjecture making more sense, being a better synthesis, or being more likely than another give you the idea that I have declared my conjecture and the conclusions thereof as the Absolute Canon Truth For All Time? Answer: it could not have given you that idea, unless you're a complete idiot.

So, get over it.

Moron.

Ahh... there you go, lying again. I never said that you declared your conjecture and the conclusions thereof as the Absolute Canon Truth For All Time.

I said that you claimed your conjecture is more reasonable than the more common conjecture about borg drones KE shielding (or the lack of it), which is basically what you said at least FOUR TIMES in Mike's thread.

And you still haven't proved WHY it is more reasonable.

Well, probably it is more reasonable in your masturbating sessions. Poor baby.


PS: Can you say Occam's Razor? Afraid that it will cut through your genital? Well, asshole?

Yup, you said it *WAS* possible. Sadly, you didn't admit that you also say it is *MORE* possible than "common Warsie conjecture" until I throw the evidence right infront of your face.

You also said, that I said that you declared your conjecture and the conclusions thereof as the Absolute Canon Truth For All Time, while I simply showing the evidence of your claim that your conjecture is more possible.

Tell me, FuckStar, do you realize it when you lie, or you simply cannot tell the lie from the truth, maybe because you've been too much masturbating with your delusion?

Poor FuckStar.

Tell me, K.A.N.,

How do you expect me to "PROOF" a conjecture? You have wisely used the escape clause that I inadvertently provided you, wherein I made fun of your arguments by using the term "Absolute Canon Truth For All Time". However, the fact remains that you declared "concession accepted" because I did not provide canon proof that my conjectural Borg shielding actually existed.

So, how do you expect one to "PROOF" a conjecture?

I know that I have been guilty of making personal attacks in debate, but can't we please argue without insulting so much? Calling Darkstar "Fuckstar" is extremely rude. I would think that Darth Wong would take better care to moderate his discussion boards. If Darkstar has insulted people like that without provocation I withdraw my objection though.

You still have yet to prove that


"Borg drones have selective KE shielding" conjecture

is more reasonable

than what you called "common warsie" conjecture.








PS: Congratulation on your new tactic! After saying that I have the idea that you have declared your conjecture and the conclusions thereof as the Absolute Canon Truth For All Time, which is basically LYING, now you simply dodge it by saying that you only made fun. Did you say to your parents too that you only made fun when they caught you masturbating? Hmmmmm????

My apologize to you, Commander LeoRo, and to all users other than DarkStar (since I never insult people unless I think they deserve it) if you have been offended by my insults and choice of words on him. You got your point.

Ah, so you are modifying your argument? What a surprising leap of logic!

In response, then:

http://ocean.otr.usm.edu/~randers2/STSWBorgKE.html

However, even with that, I do not anticipate you saying anything of value. On the other hand, I shall simply hope you surprise me.



No, since your "concession accepted" stupidity was based on the idea that I was trying to "PROOF" my argument, which I was not, because it is conjecture.

http://kier.3dfrontier.com/forums/showt ... post842730

Fucking Coward.

---

Nuclear Navy Warwolf
*
in omnibus requiem quaesivi, et nusquam inveni nisi in angulo cum libro
*
ipsa scientia potestas est

Its not like this debates going anywhere since it consists of
"show me evidence",
"ok here it is"
"show me evidence"
"but I..."
"show me evidence"

With various slander attacks mixed in.

Just look at his evidence and complain about that not how many letters his last post contained or his exact wording

Darkling in case you missed that when he provides evidence it is always his own weird interpretation of a fact.
Seriously I don't know why you are defending this moron.

---

Supermod

Im not defending him what im doing is pointing out that this debate is going nowhere (like I said at the very start on the other thread).

However my main point is all thats happening on this thread is people attacking Darkstar and him defending himself it has nothing to do with the topic, for Petes sake 4 posts have been based around what the word conjecture means - its stupid and in this case I dont think its his fault.

I have yet to see any debate over the evidence whatsoever and thus the only point of this thread is another flame war, Im just dismayed at ever thread where darkstar voices an opinion becomes a huge flame war where the evidence is forgotten in favour of slander.

Just look at his debate on canon policy with Cromag - huge amounts of evidence and debate and very few (if any) flames because Cromag is actually debating the evidence and not Darkstar.

Darkling, there is a very good reason no debate with him stays on the facts. It's because he doesn't have facts to back him up, just interpretations which everyone else challenges, and he is forced to fall back to defend his nonsensical interpretations and predictions. This isn't some major flaw on our side: We merely want him to present a defendable theory. That his canon argument has degenerated to calling the Canon Purists a source is a sign of the weakness of his arguments(Can I call the Cult Of Connie a source when I want to throw out evidence for Trek? Of course not.). That it degenerates into him flaming people for pointing out he doesn't have a leg to stand on is not something I, or anyone else, give a damn about. You want his theories debated like you want? Find some evidence for them.

---

Logic Enforcer of Fantasy

Shadowy Overlord - BMs/Black Mage Monkey - BOTM/Jetfire - Cybertron's Finest/General Miscreant/ASVS/Supermoderator Emeritus

Debator Classification: Trollhunter

Remember: The Media will always promote and attempt to ensure governing liberally has a price. Otherwise, the elected might get crazy ass ideas like regulating banks and other stuff!

His most recent theory on KE shields does has evidence (just look at his site) yet it hasnt been discussed I would also have to say that most often he takes flames before he gives them out (this thread ha flames in its opening post).

I wouldnt mind if evidence was being examined bt 4 posts that havent even cited a shred of evidence (not to mention these last few aswell) is going beyond debating.

Ther fact that Pro wars people wont entertain the fact that Darkstar could be right abuot something is a mirror of his inability to entertain the thought he could be wrong about something.

I am not really interested in discussing him further so I withdrawing from anything involving discussion of him and not the evidence or theories he brings.