Target practice (2008-07-22)

[Wyrm]

Guess who!

Only an idiot would construe this as any sort of death threat. I was clearly mocking the very idea I would be threatened by you.

Tom put your dick back in your pants.

No answer huh? No surprise there.

I can't make it any plainer.

Again, no answer. What a shock.

... However, a _full_ shield built by asufficiently advanced society could save a planet from such an impact.

Not that I'd expect you to understand.

I understand better then you think. Yourdelusional if you think a planetary shield would stop that.

What part of "sufficiently advanced society" do you not understand? It's Sci-Fi, ferchrissakes! The audiance walks into the theater _knowing_ that they are going to see fantastic technology beyond their ken, and possibly beyond that which science even allows. But we suspend our disbelief and accept the technology, and allow ourselves to be swept away in the story. Here, we suspend our disbelief in the clear impossibility of the event — and I know the event is impossible according to our current understanding of science, make no mistake — accept that the SW powers made the feat possible _somehow_, and go from there. That's fun.

A 500 km asteroid is about 10,000 X greater then the Dino Killer. That impact was about 100 teratons, andreleased an estimated energy of 5x10*23 joules. So you think it couldstop 5x10*28 joules? Such an impact would crack the earth's mantel.You stated that 1x10*32 joules would break up a planet. A planetaryshield can't be orders of magnitude greater then the local shields wehave seen. They have to spread their energy out over the whole planet.Use you head.

Yadda yadda yadda. No matter how many times you repeat it, the argument from incredulity is still a fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

Instead of trying to wow me with big numbers, show some calculations of the theoretical upper limit of a fantastic society's shielding technology.

Oh yeah... You can't even do basic math; I'm still waiting for the calculation that shows you can calculate the heat of fusion for a 6 meter cube of iron. Well, cupcake, it's up to me to paint a picture for you. The superlaser beam was stopped by something for about 1/8 second — three frames of six-frame blast — approximately half the 1e38 J blast. That would be billions of times more energy than the earth-killer, let alone the dinokiller (100 _million_ times less energy than the earth-killer).

Sadly, it's you who cannot use their head. You never learned to.

<mega snip>

It's good to meet some one who's a biggerwind bag then me. After all that verbiage Lucas still said the EU has no effect on his movie universe. Are you comparing ST to the EU? It seems so. You say some truly goofy things in your missive. You talk about Lucas spending money to set up the book publishing company.

You think LucasFilm Licencing is a _publisher_? You're a riot! Name one book published by LucasFilm Licencing. And remember, checking the publisher is as easy as looking up on Amazon.com.

Silly, he spent the money to make more money, not to add to his continuity. Do you think he was handing over the continuity to any one who wanted to write a book? No it just adds more to the fan base, like the toys, and action figures.

Why can't he do both? Don't you realize that part of "licencing" is "paying some dough"? Of course he wants to expand his fanbase, but he wants to do it in a way such that he can make his movies without worrying about the overall continuity.

Some storytellers actually _care_ about that, you know.

He said he never read any of it. It's like the ST novels, only a few are in continuity. Your logic is so tortured, "Lucas Film canon""""""""''''to allow George Lucas to override the fact in the EU without even caring what those facts are." That means he doesn't care what the EU says, it has no effect on the films. Thor Comics has nothing to do with Norse Mythology. The "Darknight" movie has no effect on the "Batman" comics.

See the Trektard.
See the Trektard whine.
Whine whine whine.

Again, you have no _theory_ that explains all the evidence. You brush off LucasFilm Licencing as a mere publishing company, never mind that it says on the LucasFilm Licencing website "LucasFilm Licencing is responsible for licencing and merchandising activities relating to Star Wars, Indianna Jones, and other LucasFilm enterntainment properties." Never mind that you have no answer at all for the multiple levels of Star Wars canon between G and N. Nevermind that Lucas has said in the very quotes you appeal to that the books intrude into Star Wars between the films. Answer these points.

Sorry, cupcake. Until you stop analysing SENTENCE FRAGMENTS out of context (even more fallicious than analysing sentences out of context), your arguments are as imaginary as your friends: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contextomy

The Canon novelazation suggested it was lost. I have seen the frames of the bridge structure smashed off.

Prove it, cupcake.

This is one of the dumbest things you have ever quoted from the EU. So they lowered the shields and killed them selves to send a hologram? Wouldn't a voice message have been good enough? Couldn't I just drop you a card? Is this another example of Imperials obeying suicidal orders, under fear of death?

You do realize there was a scary Sith Lord that could end their life very quickly. Remember, this was not long after he killed Admiral Ozzel for disobeying his orders. Darth Vader is some special kind of crazy, but he's a crazy with wicked mental powers.

Vader "I order you to kill yourself, with your whole crew. If you refuse I will kill you." Stupid.

Okay, let's pit your strategy against mine:

CMDR. JEFFERYS: "Captain, we have an incoming transmission from Lord Vader. He requests we pull alongside the Executor and communicate via holocom."

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "Wouldn't that require us to drop shields? In the middle of an asteroid field?"

CMDR. JEFFERYS: "Yessir."

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "No. I will not do this. I will not kill myself to make a report to Vader. Put it on the viewscreen instead."

CMDR. JEFFERYS: "But sir, Vader's orders were explicit. And besides, there's a good chance we'll survive anyway--"

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "No. I will not drop the shields. Vader can kiss my ass if he doesn't like it."

CMDR. JEFFERYS: "But, sir... Admiral Ozzel--"

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "I do not care. Patch me through to Lord Vader."

CMDR. JEFFERYS: "Yes sir. Goodbye."

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: //I wonder what he meant by that.// "Lord Vader, you requested my... *urk* *urrk*"

LORD VADER: "Captain Hartenstine, I _specifically_ requested your report be made via holocom. I'm quite testy after the bungling of the late Admiral Ozzel, doncha know..."

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrk* *urrrrk*"

LORD VADER: "When I say 'Jump off a cliff,' you ask, 'At what velocity do I lift off?' I expect my orders to be followed to the letter." (turns to CMDR. JEFFERYS) "Commander Jefferys."

CMDR. JEFFERYS: (clicks heels) "Sir!"

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrrrk* *urrrrrrk*"

LORD VADER: "You already have my orders. I expect them to be followed. You are in command now, _Captain Jefferys_."

CAPT. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrrrrrrrrrrrrrk*"(expires)

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "Yes, sir." (nods for the shields to come down) "Patch me through. This time through the holocom."

GENERIC FLUNKIE: "Yessir!"

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "And get someone to clean up this mess."

GENERIC FLUNKIE: "Yessir!"

Rob's survival odds: 0. Tom's survival odds: Considerably greater.

Besides it wrong. When Vader is told there's a (holographic) transmission from the Emperor, he tells them to move the ship out of the asteroid field, to assure the transmission is clear.

The SD sending holocoms to the Executor were a stone's throw away. The Emperor was at the center of the galaxy. Big difference.

He doesn't say Drop the shields. How dumb.

Dropping shields would be implied.

The Idiot who wrote that for the EU may have been trying to make the same point you are, about shield power. The effect of this is to increase shield power, at the cost of lowering brain power. You think these fools would beat Star Fleet? Remember the EU is making them even dumber then in the movies.

Whine whine whine. The EU is canon. The choice is not yours (or mine) to make.

Apples to oranges, kid. The SD that was hit with a .5 megatons was unshielded at the time, and the only _definite_ damage done was that its communications were disrupted. With a shield up, it will obviously be tougher.

The whole bridge structure was knockedoff.

Prove it.

And you still have not addressed the 200 gigaton blast. By the way the energy released from such a nuclear explosion would 8.4x10*22 joules. Do you think the shields could hold that? You do have a drug problem.

Again, argument from incredulity is a fallacy. Show me some calculations.

What, you can't do it? Too bad.

<snip>

So you refuse to explain the nature of a turbo laser. Laser, particle beam, projectile, an exploding burst like a shell, a beam weapon that hits a point target, all of the above, some time one some time another. What is it. If the canon is wrong about turbines of some kind powering them, what does?

I don't KNOW the nature of the turbolaser, so I can't answer that question honestly. I _do_ know that the ICC puts the heaviest turbolasers on the Imperial class "from 1 TT to reactor load." That is, the power of the turbolasers installed on these ships has an upper power rating at least as high as can be pumped in by the ship's main reactor.

As to their effects... we know what happens when turbolasers hit things: it blows shit up.

Yes, I'm sure the very basic concept of controling the enemy's movements is beyond you, armchair general. It's essentially the same purpose as suppressive fire, except that instead of keeping the enemy under cover so they can't shoot at you (hence, suppressive), we instead control its movements so that we can set up the precise disabling shot that will take the fight out of it without destroying it. Because in some cases, _destroying_ your target does not fit your mission.

We don't expect suppressive fire to hit anything, because that's not its purpose. Similarly, we don't expect the slightly misnamed bracketing fire to hit anything either, because that's not its purpose.

Tom your such a tool. You have no idea what your talking about. Suppressive fire keeps down the heads of individual troops, you can't make a ship keep it's head down.

God, go read the passage again. What do you think "except that instead of keeping the enemy under cover so they can't shoot at you" means? It means keeping the enemy's heads from sticking up (lest they be shot off), and the purpose of doing that is that it makes it _really hard_ to shoot you! Because if it _didn't_, it would be a waste of ammo!

The very basic, bottom-level principle is the same: make the enemy do what _you_ want him to do. For troops on the ground, suppressive fire keeps their heads down and unable to shoot at you, something you would _want_ your enemy to do; for ships in space, the misnamed bracketing fire keeps the ship on a specific course, making him afraid of making any unexpected movements, and therefore move in away you want him to do.

See? BOTH CONTROL YOUR ENEMY!

If you can shoot with enough accuracy fordisabling shots like in ST you would just do it, if not you just hopefor the best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBDbVPimLB0

Your ideas on tactics are comical.

Whatever you say, General Armchair.

To "Control" enemy movementlike your suggesting would require a constant cone of fire.

Bullshit. All you need to do is constantly remind him that straying out of the little box you've penned around him will get him spanked. That does NOT require a continuous cone of fire. Just unpredictable fire concentrated about a box.

A space ship can change it's speed, and vector in almost any direction. You don't have the accuracy, and rate of fire to do what your talking about. The idea is just laughable.

Oh? What if the vector you happen to choose puts you in the way of a bolt that you couldn't predict coming from that quarter? *POW!* Oops, you shouldnt've moved. So long as you stay in the box, you're in better shape than when you try to leave. And if you're being fired from above, that ship can control where the box goes. Therefore, he controls you totally.

<snip>

Prove it. And don't bring in the Death Star's defense systems. If the damn thing was designed around a large-scale assault, then it shouldn't be surprising the automatic systems are boggled by a few snub fighters. I wouldn't be surprised if the automatic systems simply ignore them as insignificant.

The novel was describing their standard mode. If you claim it's some thing else, you find a canon source to back you up.

Post the relevant text, word for word, cupcake. I don't see why _I_ have to go out and verify your claims if you don't hold up your end of the bargain.

What you said about automatic defense systems is so stupid it boggles the mind. An AEGIS system can track200 targets, and engage up to 100 at a time. Are you saying if 1 missile was coming in the system would be confused? Dope.

I'm saying that because it's designed around a large-scale assault, the automatic system won't know what to do with a group of snub fighters. If you don't program for a certain case, you have NO GUARANTEE that it will work.

I can easily see how this happened for the Death Star I: The auto-aiming systems for anti-capitol ship turbolasers would look for capitol ships, but not snub fighters (which they couldn't hit anyway), and leave them for the defense systems that are specifically anti-fighter. That's just good programming: a targeting system should not try to fire at things the gun can't be expected to hit. The problem is that the DS was designed around a capitol ship assault, so it had no anti-fighter turbolasers, and has to rely on fighter-to-fighter combat. Only Tarkin was an overconfident twat and didn't consider the fighters to be worth a bother at all; only Vader's squad launched, and they decimated the Rebels.

Thus, you get turbolaser crews scrambling, trying to get huge, lumbering guns to hit targets they weren't designed to track and shoot down.

They say in the movie the fighters aretoo small and fast for the Turbo Lasers to hit. Their shooting is justnot that good.

Again, these are the guns designed to hit CAPITOL SHIPS. It's the same reason you don't use screwdrivers as chisels, even though theylook similar.

Unless you DO use screwdrivers as chisels. You would be a fun guy to have around the workshop.

You think they have thousands of men handloading, and aiming weapons, as a back up?

Yes. Machines ain't perfect, you know. If the automatic systems start targeting your own ships, or not responding to legitimate targets, because of enemy countermeasures (they exist in SW you know), or breaks down, then a flesh-and-blood crewmember has to take control and show the auto system how it's done.

They just turn off the automated systems in combat, so the crews won't get fat and lazy?

For the first Death Star, there were problems with the fighters: the turbolasers not meant for snub fighters. For the Imperial SD that captured the Tantive, the turbolasers were being used to shoot down escape pods... and if you think about it, you really _shouldn't_ program your automatic systems to shoot down escape pods. They may be your own.

<snip>

So dishonest. The term artificial sun has been used for decades to describe fusion power. We have produced fusion reactions for fractions of a second, and we didn't need 10,000 kms to do it.

Precisely! The term "artificial sun" is a figurative phrase, and it has to be analyzed in context. For earthly articles on science, or power, "artificial sun" is a fusion power plant. In a SCI-FI world (like SW), an "artificial sun" may _literally_ be a full G0 V main sequence star that some advanced civilization constructed!

Remember, contextomies are bad, mkay?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contextomy

Or do you conceed that the quote can only be taken seriously by widening the definition of "sun"?

The term Sun has been applied to yellow, white, red, orange, and blue stars,

_And_ to stars 10,000 km across and greater. To apply it to any other kind of object is to expand its meaning.

Hydrogen is very common in the universe, free oxygen is very rare. There is water in Jupiter for example, but it's so deep it may be impossible to get at. It lies below the layer of liquid metallic hydrogen.

What you say is true for free oxygen, but there are other ways to get oxygen. The moon has plenty, if you're willing to bake rocks. As an element (in compounds), there's plenty of it to be found. Free hydrogen, however, is the most common substance in the universe, so why not mine it directly.

There's also the fact that, even with awesome power reactors, you still need propellant. That is, reaction mass. You still need to throw mass one way to go another.

Finally, just because you don't use nuclear fusion for power specifically, doesn't mean you can't use it for nucleosynthesis.

<snip>

Lie. I _also_ later said that the fighters were fighting fighters and the MF.

False, watch the movie, you see themattack the cruisers. The Rebel fighters only get into it till afterthat.

Lie. Although Lando does say, "Draw their fire away from the cruisers," he cannot _possibly_ know that only the TIE fighters are attacking, and thinks that the Imperial SDs will soon join in, in which case the cruisers will have enough troubles with the SDs. (Lando later makes a confused observation of why only the fighters are attacking.) In this case, the Rebel fighters are doing their goddamn job of keeping the TIE fighters off the cruisers' cases; remember that fighters can make nuicences of themselves. The Rebels would ASSUME that the TIEs are here to make trouble for otherwise occupied cruisers.

Furthermore, we don't even know if the TIE fighters even fire so much as a single shot at a cruiser specifically. First target is the _Falcon_, a small ship that isn't that much bigger than a fighter. All of the subsequent TIE fighter shots are at Rebel fighters. After that, all the TIE fighter shots are following other fighters and theFalcon.

It is very likely that this was the plan all along; the TIE fighters confuse the rebels into believing, just for a moment, that the battle is about to become a free-for-all at all levels. Remember that this is a play for Luke's benefit, the Emperor piling injury upon injury to force him to the dark side.

Your theory, on the other hand, depends on Lando having knowledge of enemy intensions, knowledge he cannot possibly have. I win.

"Kill your self, or I will kill you." The Soviets in WWII had punishment battalions. Units madeup of condemned men, given few weapons, forced forward into minefields, and German lines to reveal their firing positions. They needed other units to push them forward at gun point. No wonder they lost 14 million solders. Did the Empire have "Punishment Fighter Squadrons", with other squadrons to shoot them down if they faltered? Or do you think Vader, or the Emperor could kill the pilots in their cockpits with the force? If they can do that why didn't Vader kill Rebel pilots that way? Or does he only use the force to kill his own men? May be they should put self destruct devices under their seats, with the emperor holding the detonator? May be each pilot should take slow poison before a battle, so if you survive with out disobeying your orders you get the antidote? Can you think of anyother ways to improve moral Tom?

Strawman. The only one talking about morale issues is you. I'm talking about survival in the face of a scary, scary man. I'll show you what I mean:

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "We're in position, sir. As ordered."

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "Good. Commence the attack and support our fighters!"

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "Um, the Emperor said not to attack unless the Rebels try to escape."

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "The Emperor is a fool. Fighters can't expect to hold out against the Rebel cruisers. Commence theattack."

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "Please, sir. The Emperor is Lord Vader's master, and you know what happened to Ozzel--"

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "The Emperor can kiss my ass. We're helping our fighters."

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "Yessir."

--

EMPEROR PALPATINE: "Now witness the power of this fully armed and--" (sees something out the viewport) "What the hell is that fool doing?!" (pushes a button) "Commander, patch me through to the _Executor_!"

(ADML. HARTENSTINE appears on the screen with CAPT.JEFFERYS)

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "My Lord, we have started our attack and-- *urk* *urrk*"

EMPEROR PALPATINE: "I thought I told you to only make sure the Rebels do not escape, Admiral. Yes... yes, in fact I _did_ tell you that."

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrk* ...but your instructions... *urrrrk* ...make no sense... *urrrrrk*"

EMPEROR PALPATINE: "You don't know what I have planned for them, Admiral, and it is not your _place_ to contradict me! Captain Jefferys!"

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "My Lord!"

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrrrrk* *urrrrrrrk*"

EMPEROR PALPATINE: "You are to take the fleet back to its entrapment formation, while the fighters continue their attack. You are in command now, _Admiral Jefferys_!"

ADML. HARTENSTINE: "*urrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrk*" (expires)

CAPT. JEFFERYS: "At once, my Lord!" (viewscreen flicks off)

LUKE: "Problems?"

EMPEROR PALPATINE: "Shut up, farmboy!"

Rob's survival time: 2 minutes. Tom's survival time: Considerably longer.

Besides which, now that I think about it, Admiral Viett was probably in on the secret. In this case, he would be only too happy to follow the Emperor's orders; he'd want to stay the hell as far away from Rebel cruisers as orders permitted, knowing that they were going to get blasted to smithereens (and he might catch some of the Rebel boom).

<snip>

Still better than ST.

So ST canon is wrong? May be you got that4km range from the pages of "Star Trek The Expanded Universe."

Like I said, "Stated figures and demonstrated figures are different." No matter what the Tech Manual says, ST ships don't engage each other at anything over 50 km.

<snip>

In STTMP the refitted Enterprise flew from earth to Saturn in about 2 hours. That's about 1.26 billion km,so they had to be making better then .6 C. In the reference to ST Impulse, they say they normally stay at .25 C to avoid time dilation, but they can go faster.

Any sustained thrust will eventually get to .5 c, provided you can hold it for the required length of time. To do .6 c in 2 hrs is impressive, though, as it requires a thrust of 31,000 N for every kg of ship mass, or an acceleration of ~3,200 g.

However, that is a quite different animal from being able to _maneuver_ at .5 c. Plotting a course to Saturn is a very easy problem in celstial mechanics, even with a torchship. The amount of acceleration you're able to put out for a straight line powered thrust is a function of your main engine. The rate at which you're able to change direction, however, is a function of your _thruster_ strength. You can have a strong main engine and still manuever like a beached whale if you have weak thrusters.

You need to get some figures for _thrusters_, bucko.

Oh, by the way, that you're actually presenting calcs at last is an encouraging sign. Now calculate the heat of fusion for 6 m cube ofiron.

It took over a minute for the Enterprise C to get through the rift and set things right. Yet the rift wasobviously no more than ten km away at the time. Since you obviously fail math, 10 km/60 sec is much, much, MUCH less than 1/2 c.

What a dope. So if they don't operate at.5 C all the time, they never can?

So the "Yesterday's Enterprise" example was a redherring. Thank you. (That's a fallacy, by the way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi)

By the way, NEVER being seen going at .5 c is a stronger indicator of _not_ being able to achieve .5 c than being able toachieve .5 c, because the former strongly predicts that evidence, while the latter doesn't. Just giving you a lesson in evaluating evidence.

Lie. I said that it _should_ be understood, not that it will be understood. But then, you don't have any reading skills, so I can see how you made that mistake, you no-context bastard.

wrong, your misquoting your self, liar. you said "This is a given in ANY order."

You know, I keep assuming that you're a normal English speaker. I really should stop that.

It only seems like that way because you INSIST on reading my quote out of its proper context, you no-context bastard:

Every one could under stand what he was supposed to do.

This is a given in ANY order.

Ask any _normal_ English speaker if I meant that the order _will_ be understood, or that it _should_ be understood. They will answer the latter. Your use of the subjunctive "could" demands an implied subjunctive "should" by pragmatics. That's part of linguistics, by the way.

So chaulk up another count of contextomy.

You sure are not an expert on any of these matters. Misunderstanding bracketing fire, suppression fire, combined arms tactics, what a heads up display does. The list just goes on and on. You almost never make any historical, or tactical reverences to reinforce your points, and when you do you get it wrong.

Wrong. Space is a totally different battleground from anything fought here on Earth, so any historical and tactical references I may cite will be largely irrelevant.

Yeah, I did get bracketing fire wrong, but only because others on SDN (real soldiers) refer to the tactic I described as "bracketing fire". I know what they mean when they use it. If you have argument, take it up with them. "Bracketing fire" as originally defined is _worthless_ in space, even to get ranging data (due to the nonbalistic nature of trajectories in orbit).

As to "covering fire", dispite your whining I did not confuse it with what I call "braketing fire". (If you insist on bitching about this abuse of language, we can change our termenology. Is "fencing fire" better?) I described the salient differences between the two concepts, _as well as_ the concept that unifies them and how that applies to each tactic. No _normal_ English speaker would've thought differently. But then, you're not normal.

I know what a HUD does in general on Earth, but since when have we seen a HUD in a trooper helmet? I even admitted my ignorance about it. I do know, however, that a normal HUD takes traning to use... something that Farmboy Luke wouldn't have.

Combined arms is obvious, when you think about it, especially when reading Stuart's _Armageddon???_ Combined arms, however, is limited by the ability to get arms to their places to be _used_. On Endor, everyone was expecting one lone, small Rebel band — they weren't expecting Teddy Bears From Hell. On Hoth, the Imperials routed the Rebels, with Armor (AT-ATs), scouts (AT-STs), and infantry (snowtroopers), even when they were being careful not to shoot Luke Skywalker.

See, I can apply my knowledge to new areas where the rules are not as they were, and need to be critically thought out. How will the new environment or equipment configuration change the usefulness of the weapons or vehicles or tactics? You, on the other hand, apply the same damn rules of thumb you learned out of a book, and assume they apply everywhere in a fallacy of accident (look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_accident). You did it with nukes in space, you did it comparing Bradleys with AT-STs and you did it with bracketting fire. _That's_ what makes me superior to you.

<snip>

What a dolt. Transporter/Replicator tech opens up a whole new world. The uses are almostunlimited.

And seem to suffer bizarre and lethal accidents embarassingly often, as well as being fragile (disrupted by a freaking transformer, anyone?). Why use a transporter when shuttlecraft are fast, easy and SAFE? Why use a replicator when fabricators make things so abundant, one of what you need is nearby at any given time... and SAFE?

You seem to think transporters and replicators would usher in a post-scarcity world. Look to the Person's Puppetteers of Known Space to see what a _real_ post-scarcity world looks like.

A plasma torch extending from a compact hilt many times shorter than itself, with the ability to cut throughmost materials in SW (who can build very impressive spacecraft: again, size matters), all without cooking an untrained user (Luke), is _extremely_ impressive.

What a dope. The length of the plasma touch depends on how much power is used. You must be losing the argument, you have fallen back on "the ships are so big."

You seem to have missed the part where the plasma torch can cut through nearly anything _and_ be safe to hold only a few centimeters from living flesh. That's HARD!!!

And size DOES matter. Materials strength needs to scale approximately linearly with size in order to maintain the same _absolute_ performance. It must scale quadratically in order to maintain the same _relative_ performance. (If a ship travels some X times its own length each second and you scale it by Y, it's material strength has to scale by Y^2 in order to travel the same X times its own (dialated) length.)

<snip>

This is what I mean, you just don't know what your talking about. Nobody can move like that in space no matter how much power they have.

AND YET THEY DO!!!

Aircraft can bank in the air because they have control surfaces. In space you can only change vector. Babylon 5 is about the only show that ever showed space craft moving the way they would in space. No banks, or loops, just vector, and speed changes. Accepting the banking moves of ST ships, and SW fighters is just part of the suspension of disbelief in Sci-Fi. Oh I guess you didn't know that?

Yes, I did know that, thank you. [/sarcasm] The problem is that the point of this excecise is to figure out, on a fair basis, which universe is superior millitarily. We cannot do this without assuming that what we see and read about represent the _real capabilities_ of these craft. So ignoring the actual impossibity of the event, and pretend that what we see is real, what are the _real capabilities_ of these craft?

See, you're answering a different question than what was asked. You say, "DUH! It's SF!" Yeah, we know that, but what if it were real. Then what conclusions could be drawn? Answering again, "DUH! It's SF!" is not moving the debate along in the slightest.

And if "DUH! It's SF!" is your only answer... well, we don't have much to talk about.

So, are you going to advance the debate, or are you going to just say, "DUH! It's SF!" Your choice.

<snip>

that's why it takes Padme about 12 hours to go about 3 LYs Tatooine to Geonosis, She said the trip is less thena parsec.

You know that that probably included liftoff time, landing time, and STL in-system travel time as well as hyperspace travel time, did you not? It's like saying that, because it took me 3 hrs to get to the airport, 1 hr to board, 10 minutes to fly 90 miles and 3 hrs to get my luggage from baggage claim, that a car must be faster than an airplane.

So, prove it. Prove that those 12 hours were all hyperspace travel time.

And the Rebel fleet takes 5-6 days to go a few hundred LYs, from Sullust to Endor. ROTJ Novelazation.

Prove it.

<snip>

Childish you think it's a few hours, because it all happens in a movie of a little more then 2 hours.

ANH novelization p.118: "You can stop worrying about your Imperial friends," he told Luke and Ben. "They'll never be able to track us now. Told you I'd lose them" ... "Don't everybody thank me at once," Solo grunted, slightly miffed. "Anyway, navigation computer calculates our arrival in Alderaan orbit at oh two hundred."

The use of "0200" assumes the use of a millitary-style 24-hour day cycle. The lack of date of arrival (ie, "Tuesday at 0200", "December 3 at 0200", "April 1, 7000 at 0200") indicates that transit time will be less than one of these cycles. No, please don't propose silly things like a literal 200 hour cycle.

Even if such a trip takes weeks or even a few years of travel, it still kicks Voyager's ass. And I suppose you think Aniken Skywalker really did survive days, months, or years on Mufastar with burnt lungs. He'd be _awfully_ hungry.

Shielding, and firepower: The Enterprise would need most of its ~200 torpedo loadout to destroy an asteroid - Slave 1 shatters asteroids the same size with ease, using a single seismic charge.

Voyager could destroy an asteroid 390 by 220 meters with 1 photon torpedo. 2 tricolbolt devices completely destroyed the Care Takers Array, which was between 10-20 km across.

What, you mean the "Rise" asteroid? I thought I already answered that one: the fact that the asteroid was clearly SHATTERED, not VAPORIZED, means that photon torpedo yield was 300 kT max, and the fragile material it turned out to be reduces yield further to 15 kT. And this was a direct hit on one single asteroid. Slave-1's charge destroyed _many_ larger asteroids separated by a fair distance. Inverse square law yet again.

As to the Caretaker's Array, the tricobalt device didn't destroy it itself. It set off whatever volitile core was powering it.

Voyagers phasers were able to bore 60 km into the crust of a planet to mine dylithium, "Think Tank".

Again, using the magical disappearing act. Quantify it, bitch.

Your infantile tripe has been snipped. Please take your head out of your ass and debate with substance, back up your claims with evidence and calcs, or my next response will turn the mockery up to 11, and sprinkle within my two favorite words, "prove" and "it".

--Cut Here--

I'm serious about the last part, too. My goal is to make my response shorter than his if he continues with his bullshit. I'll take more than a day if I have to, so I can make it really caustic. (Though being able to dismiss much of his text with "Prove it!" will go a long way.)

I hope you enjoyed Hartenstine and Jefferys' Imperial Theatre, though!

[Aratech]

they decimated the Rebels.

Note entirely accurate. You see, Wyrm, Vader and his squad would have decimated the rebels if they'd blasted one ship in ten. They didn't decimate them, they utterly slaughtered them (we saw what, Luke, Wedge, and a single Y-wing survive that suicide run?).

[Peptuck]

Boredom. Snipped what was irrelavent.

I understand better then you think. Yourdelusional if you think a planetary shield would stop that.

Isn't this the same dickball who was wanking to the Federation's ability to create entirely new ecosystems? Doesn't he realize that in sci-fi, anything is possible with sufficiently advanced technology?

A 500 km asteroid is about 10,000 X greater then the Dino Killer. That impact was about 100 teratons, andreleased an estimated energy of 5x10*23 joules. So you think it couldstop 5x10*28 joules? Such an impact would crack the earth's mantel.You stated that 1x10*32 joules would break up a planet. A planetaryshield can't be orders of magnitude greater then the local shields wehave seen. They have to spread their energy out over the whole planet.Use you head.

He doesn't seem to realize that A) a shield operating like that wouldn't expend any more energy covering a wider area than a smaller one, because a shield won't be expending any energy except to deflect impacts against it, and B) Larger. Fucking. Generators.

Tom your such a tool. You have no idea what your talking about. Suppressive fire keeps down the heads of individual troops, you can't make a ship keep it's head down.

Proof that for all his talk about warships and fighters, Bob here doesn't understand the concept of "bracketing fire."

What you said about automatic defense systems is so stupid it boggles the mind. An AEGIS system can track200 targets, and engage up to 100 at a time. Are you saying if 1 missile was coming in the system would be confused? Dope.

Jamming and using anti-capital-ship weapons against ships they aren't designed to target in the first place, dickball.

They say in the movie the fighters aretoo small and fast for the Turbo Lasers to hit. Their shooting is justnot that good.

Liar.

How did you get "Our crews are not good enough to hit the fighters!" from "Their ships are so small they are evading our turbolasers!"? The Imperial officer kind of spells out that they are trying to hit things too small for their weapons to effectively track, not that the crews don't have the skills to hit the targets.

"Kill your self, or I will kill you." The Soviets in WWII had punishment battalions. Units madeup of condemned men, given few weapons, forced forward into minefields, and German lines to reveal their firing positions. They needed other units to push them forward at gun point. No wonder they lost 14 million solders. Did the Empire have "Punishment Fighter Squadrons", with other squadrons to shoot them down if they faltered? Or do you think Vader, or the Emperor could kill the pilots in their cockpits with the force? If they can do that why didn't Vader kill Rebel pilots that way? Or does he only use the force to kill his own men? May be they should put self destruct devices under their seats, with the emperor holding the detonator? May be each pilot should take slow poison before a battle, so if you survive with out disobeying your orders you get the antidote? Can you think of anyother ways to improve moral Tom?

I have no idea what he's getting at here. Is he saying that sending your troops into dangerous situations like deploying TIE fighters to attack capital ships indicates bad morale? Maybe he should have a chat with the United States Marine Corps, which sent a single light recon battalion ahead of all of its main advances in OIF to probe enemy positions and set off ambushes?

Either way, this argument is irrelevent; whether or not the Empire is willing to sacrifice a few dozen pilots won't change the absolute curbstomping the Federation would receive.

What a dolt. Transporter/Replicator tech opens up a whole new world. The uses are almostunlimited.

Is this the same transporter tech that can't pass through electrical fields or light radiation? Is this the same replicator that can't replicate a certain special kind of rainwater or a particular piece of the warp core?

Certainly seems to have lots of limits to me.

This is what I mean, you just don't know what your talking about. Nobody can move like that in space no matter how much power they have.

Argument from incredulity. The fact that the can move like that in space indicates they have the capability and the technology to do so.

And the Rebel fleet takes 5-6 days to go a few hundred LYs, from Sullust to Endor. ROTJ Novelazation.

Oh, fuck. Not this nonsense again.

The Rebel fighters launch before they jump into hyperspace. Leia herself says the Rebel fleet will be there any moment. They didn't spend six days wandering around the bunker and Luke didn't spend six days standing around in front of the Emperor.

Voyager could destroy an asteroid 390 by 220 meters with 1 photon torpedo. 2 tricolbolt devices completely destroyed the Care Takers Array, which was between 10-20 km across.

And a single pair of concussion torpedoes destroyed a 900km space station.

Do I need to whip out the Giant Enemy Crab macro to explain this to you?

[CaptJodan]

I'm serious about the last part, too. My goal is to make my response shorter than his if he continues with his bullshit. I'll take more than a day if I have to, so I can make it really caustic. (Though being able to dismiss much of his text with "Prove it!" will go a long way.)

I hope you enjoyed Hartenstine and Jefferys' Imperial Theatre, though!

Ugh, I hope so. He's ignored half of your points, and continues to back up nothing he says, as if his word alone proves it. It pains me to see you go through the trouble of calculating something for him, or going in some depth scientifically when all he's done is sprout a single statement with no proof to back it up.

[TC Pilot]

Minor nitpick, but the Star Destroyer's bridge tower that gets smashed by the asteroid was destroyed completely. The explosion fades just enough before the scene changes that it's evident there is literally no bridge tower.

[Vympel]

Where is this retard being debated anyway?

[Peptuck]

Where is this retard being debated anyway?

Email, apparently.

[Ender]

Minor nitpick, but the Star Destroyer's bridge tower that gets smashed by the asteroid was destroyed completely. The explosion fades just enough before the scene changes that it's evident there is literally no bridge tower.

So where is the debris then?

[Darth Wong]

Minor nitpick, but the Star Destroyer's bridge tower that gets smashed by the asteroid was destroyed completely. The explosion fades just enough before the scene changes that it's evident there is literally no bridge tower.

So where is the debris then?

Apparently, Star Destroyer bridge towers have the magical ability to disappear into nothingness when damaged, without leaving any flying debris whatsoever.

Clearly, using RSA's "anything I can interpret from a single visual must be true regardless of complicating factors or incompatibility with other data" method, this proves that Star Destroyers have phase cloaking devices

Seriously though, I haven't watched that scene for a while. Wouldn't it be easier to think that a helmsman might have seen the asteroid coming at the last moment and gunned the engines in an attempt to maneuver out of the way, either by accelerating forward or turning downward, or is that not possible?

[Dooey Jo]

Minor nitpick, but the Star Destroyer's bridge tower that gets smashed by the asteroid was destroyed completely. The explosion fades just enough before the scene changes that it's evident there is literally no bridge tower.

No, if you look closely, you can see that at least the aft parts of it are still there, as they block the engine light from the Executor.

[Darth Wong]

Minor nitpick, but the Star Destroyer's bridge tower that gets smashed by the asteroid was destroyed completely. The explosion fades just enough before the scene changes that it's evident there is literally no bridge tower.

No, if you look closely, you can see that at least the aft parts of it are still there, as they block the engine light from the Executor.

I really need to watch that scene again. It's been years, so my memory is foggy on the details.

[TC Pilot]

So where is the debris then?

From an out-of-universe perspective, they simply never bothered to add debris.

Seriously though, I haven't watched that scene for a while. Wouldn't it be easier to think that a helmsman might have seen the asteroid coming at the last moment and gunned the engines in an attempt to maneuver out of the way, either by accelerating forward or turning downward, or is that not possible?

Not at all. The rest of the Star Destroyer is still clearly visible.

Thus, it is clear that Star Destroyers have retractable bridges!

No, if you look closely, you can see that at least the aft parts of it are still there, as they block the engine light from the Executor.

You can see the left-hand portion of the tower disappear, because the explosion doesn't cover the whole thing. The back pylon might still be there, but the rectangular front is definately gone.

Methinks they just yanked that part of the model off when they were filming.

[Darth Wong]

In that case, the best explanation would be that a large part of the tower sheared off. That would explain the lack of debris, as well as the fact that its front face is not where it's supposed to be. That wouldn't be an outlandish thing to happen; the tower may not have been designed to withstand large physical impacts in the first place, so if it is made of very strong materials but was not designed to withstand that kind of impact, then it might actually shear off rather than shattering into a cloud of debris. If it was made of weak materials, then it should shatter into a cloud of debris for sure. There's also the possibility that it had suffered an impact with another ship before (given the two SDs which hit each other earlier in the film) and there was structural damage at some point in the tower which made it prone to that kind of failure.

[Connor MacLeod]

Internal damage contrtibuting to the outcome cannot neccesarily be overruled either. The most basic observation one could make (and I believe is mentioned on Mike's shield page) is that the shield generator got ripped off its mountings. The momentum transfer to a shield generator no longer anchored inside the taget is bound to be unpleasant. And starships are hardly volatile tarrgets to begin with. This probably isnt so surprising if you consider they spent hours (Days?) inside the asteroid field. Those shields can probably deflect the "weak" KE of an asteroid all day, but that doesn't mean the momentum is a negligible problem.

Edit: Hell, what about maintenance? ITs quite likely Vader decided to disregard maintenance and saftey issues in his obsession with the Falcon and Skywalker. If they were forced to keep the shields active for countless hours on end without any "down time" for them, I bet you could could end up getting a catastrophic failure of one kind or another, regardless of what the shield may or may not be otherwise capable of handling.


I know people complaina bout the whole "particle shields being down while communicating" idea is stupid, but people forget that particle shields have a structural reinforcing element as well as deflecting asteroids (again, due to conversation of momentum, you would want to enhance the bracving of the generator so it doesn't fail, wouldn't ya?) Its quite likely that such fields may interfere with some kinds of communications, so they do (selectively) lower shields in order to carry out conversations. Same possibly with Tensor fields. And don't forget deflector shields have a volumetric effect, which can include to intracting physically with the hull also.

[Darth Wong]

I know people complain about the whole "particle shields being down while communicating" idea is stupid ...

Ha! If it was in Trek, people would say it was another example of how realistic Star Trek is. The knee-jerk rejection of the idea is just fanboyism at work.

[Connor MacLeod]

Ha! If it was in Trek, people would say it was another example of how realistic Star Trek is. The knee-jerk rejection of the idea is just fanboyism at work.

Its also lazy and simplistic thinking. Every time I see the "TESB asteroid" argument crop up as an objection to SW capabilitie,s the first thing I always notice is that the issue is never completely thought through. Some of them can't even stretch their brains to grasp "force and momentum" nevermind anything more complex like engineering or maintance issues or why the comms were down.

Of course, there are people out there who apparently believe Spock's rocket boots from the ST movies are a fabulous piece of military hardware, or so I hear.

[Wyrm]

Oh, this is rich. Moron Bob sent me Darkstar's "The Alderaan Shield Fallacy" page: (http://www.st-v-sw.net/STSWalderaan.html) He didn't send me the link, no no. He copypasta-ed the entire page in an e-mail to me. What a tool.

Anyway, I summoned up some vitriol and spewed it at Moron Bob:

Robert, you foolish, foolish man. Darkstar's delusions were debunked a long time ago.

First off, I _know_ you copypasta-ed this from Darkstar's website. Simply sending me the URL would've saved me space on my HD. I _do_ have web access and a browser, you know.

Secondly, you're appealing to a man who has absolutely no grounding in science or math. If he had _any_ smarts, he would give up. But he's a stubborn twat with the scientific aptitude of my cat.

Correction: even Leela performs experiments (in gravity), which makes her superior.

Now onto the... *snort* 'evidence' itself:

[image here — I will not pollute SDN with more Darkstar crap]

An earthlike planet is 12000 km in diameter, corresponding to the 136px wide disk. More than 99% of an earthlike atmosphere is concentrated within 100 km of the surface, 1px on this diagram. So this 5px altitude feature (the reddish ring around the planet) is about ~500 km high. Oops!

Also, notice the sharp transition between the whatever and space. Atmosphere does not do this, Robert. It thins out more or less exponentially with altitude (increasing altitude by 5.6 km drops the pressure by 50%). There is no sharp transition like this. But then, you don't know math, or science, or this would've been painfully obvious. Ask your mommy what it means.

So you have both a feature that is NOT confined mostly below 100 km (as a human-breathable atmosphere should), but also vanishes abruptly at ~500 km. This is _completely_ unatmosphere-like. This is a fundamental observation, and so any effect within this region is by definition exo-atmospheric.

Get it yet, fool? Darkstar has discovered something absolutely unatmospheric hovering above Alderaan that surrounds it completely. Of course, he has less scientific aptitude than my cat, Leela, so he easily confuses it with the Alderaanian atmosphere, but that's his problem, due to the fact that he's an unschooled idiot. And you're an even greater idiot for following him, so it's now your problem.

[image here]

In this image the blast is already 1/6th over. That is, Alderaan as a whole has absorbed ~1.2e37 J of energy. The surface should not be intact and should already been shedding stuff into space, if nothing was there to stop it. Something has blocked the energy from reaching the surface, at least for the moment.

This is completely consistent with a planetary shield.

Lap it up, cupcake.

Now onto Darkstar's "Objections"

1. The Vader/Tarkin conversation: Fundamentally, Darkstar has made the same mistake you did, which makes me think he told you while you were fellating him. Like your objection, Darkstar's objection doesn't address the second part of the quote. I won't repeat it because I'm tired of your shit. Go look up and answer my objections to this very point, that is, why Vader would think the standing army would make the Death Star demonstration "as impressive as it was thorough"?

One down.

2. The 'Halo': Darkstar has tried to paint the halo as the simple brightening of clouds, "just as we would expect from the diffraction of a very bright light source (brighter, even, than the refraction of sunlight)", but here again he betrays his scientific ineptitude. The kind of diffraction he is asking we accept would also diffract sunlight the same way. Alderaan would not have a night, which it clearly does have because it has a terminator less than 200 km thick. In other words, Darkstar is retarded.

As to Darkstar's Gungan evidence, the Gungan shield was clearly not overloaded with these shots, as evidenced by the TF droid army changing its tactics. The Alderaan shield would have been, as it could no longer perform the function of protecting the planet.

Two down.

2a. Darkstar's 'Thick Atmosphere': Darkstar has to answer why the flash generated by the superlaser would travel thousands of miles, while the light of the sun would not travel a few hundred miles past the terminator.

Also, his talk of an atmosphere "sufficiently dense" means that he believes that the atmosphere may be arbitrarily thick to fit his evidence (as indicated by his foolish notion that it was ~500 km thick!). But Alderaan cannot have an atmosphere of _any_ thickness necessary; there are normal humans living on Alderaan — too thick an atmosphere, and the humans would need reducing rebreathers, and armored suits in the extreme superdense case. Even if Leia was some sort of superpressure alien, she would suffocate in the normal (ie, low) pressure of the Death Star battlestation.

Of course, Darkstar has no knowledge of physics, and never calculated the required atmospheric density. Why should he have knowledge of biology either?

Three down.

2b. Darkstar's 'Flashlight': More hillarity from Darkstar. Again, the atmosphere is too thin for this kind of wide area dispersal, but even if we grant this sheer piece of fantasy, Darkstar's example still doesn't wash. The diffraction would be confined mostly to the troposphere, and near to the ground (50% by mass is within 5.6 km), but the clouds begin at about 6 km, which means that if it really is the atmosphere that is diffusing the light, the clear areas must brighten more than the clouds, because clouds we can see from space are _opaque_ (as anyone who's seen the dark, foreboding clouds of a thunderstorm knows). Also, if the light is spreading about in the atmosphere from the beam impact spot, the parts of the cloud closer to ground zero would be brighter than parts further, for the same reason. Because the clouds brighten faster than the surrounding clear spots, the illumination must be coming from above.

This is consistent with a shield; there would undoubtably be leakage of energy from above, as no shield is _perfect_ and it was being overstressed.

Four down.

2c. Planetary shields are created by essentially stitching a bunch of individual theatre shields together. It's perfectly consistent for one part of the shield to have collapsed when other parts are still operational.

Then again, all shields are without exception monolithic pieces... wait. That's just in Star Trek. Darkstar is projecting his Trektardness onto SW. Stop that, Darkstar!

Five down.

2d. This part I agree with Darkstar. (SHOCK! HORROR!) The image of the superlaser could easily be altered by washout effects. However, the planetary shield theory is not a house of cards where one missing piece brings the whole ediface down. It is a convergence of evidence that points to a planetary shield.

2e. Darkstar's 'transparent cloud' objection: Darkstar accuses us of not being observant? Oh, the irony! Didn't he notice the fundamental difference between clouds that are bright and whispy and clouds that are dark and heavy? The light clouds are low mass and tenuous, while the dark clouds are high mass and robust. The light, whispy clouds would be invisible in space. So much for his observation!

Six down.

3. Absent Endor shields: I said this before, all diagrams are distortions of reality. You'll notice that the United States does not have big-ass letters across it saying "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". That the Rebel diagram in the film does not show the planetary shields does not mean that the shields were not there, it just mean that the novelization was wrong that the Endor's shields were part of the diagram.

Source: ROTJ novelization p.168: "Sir, the shield around the Death Star has lost its power."

Ackbar looked at the view screen; the electronically generated web was gone. The moon, and the Death Star, now floated in black, empty, unprotected space.

The quote clearly states that the shield that had encompassed the Death Star had encompassed the Forest Moon of Endor, too.

Of course, you have reading comprehension issues.

Seven down.

4. Darkstar is technically right here. But again, the planetary shield comes from a convergence of evidence.

5. Darkstar here is simply cargo-cult debating again after being spanked with his nonexistent magical chain reaction 'theory'. There's plenty of _positive_ evidence for shields, if one would simply _look_. Now it's up to your camp to knock it down. We're waiting... but not holding our breath...

6. All Darkstar demonstrates here is that the glowy effect takes time to reach the other side of the planet. Whoop de fuckin' doo. This surprised exactly... NO ONE! Well, except you Trektards, but then you don't know any real physics.

Eight down.

7. 'Non-burning clouds': Here, Darkstar again displays his slippery grasp of physics. The rate of cloud burn-off is proportional to the radient intensity of the event, as the clouds need time to absorb enough energy from the event to cook off. Of course, radient intensity follows the inverse square law. The difference of scale between a modern nuke and 1e38 J should be clear.

Well, except for Trektards like you, who wouldn't know scale if it bit you on the dick.

Nine down.

Now the Illustration section.

Although he cops to crappy artwork, Darkstar is nonetheless enraptured by his own misrepresentation of the atmosphere being this more-or-less uniform mass sticking to a planet and ending suddenly, like the goopy slime on a rotten cucumber. Which, of course, it isn't. Instead, he should've drawn an exponential graph and saw how tenuous the atmosphere is even ~500 km up. But then he'd have to admit that his diffraction theory and thick atmosphere was a complete and utter pile of crapola sherbert, and he can't have that! (He'd also have to know what an exponential is.)

Furthermore, he'd have to calculate how much atmosphere there would be for there to be substantial atmosphere ~500 km up, and we know you guys are allergic to math.

Darkstar then proceeds to commit a fallacy all his own, argumentum ad illustratum! He pretends his crappy little drawing is even a vague representation of reality and proceeds to draw lines that have nothing to do with how we think the planetary shield might have collapsed. (Strawman right there.) Yeah, that's convincing. (roll eyes) Can't have any actual calculations right there to distract us, nosiree!

In conclusion, your copypasta was utter crap. Darkstar is not a scientific genius, he has not disproven the established planetary shields, and you are not smart for swallowing his intellectual turds. Furthermore, you're boring; if I wanted to read Darkstar's drivel, I would visit ST-vs-SW.

Why don't you join Starfleet Jedi? You'll like it there, enjoying long 'Round the Worlds with your fellow trektards, talk trash about us, and wallow in the intellectual filth. You'll be the biggest spike in membership in a year. And tell 'em Wyrm sent ya!

[Aratech]

Ahhh, the smell of Imperial Smackdown.

I admire you, Wyrm. This kid's remarks verily reek of those of Spocktard. I'd have long ago written him off as a hopeless moron, yet you continue. I must learn to have your patience.

[Vympel]

I've said it many times before, but we know from the TESB novel explicitly - and by implication in the film - that the Avenger's shields were down when it was chasing the MF out of the asteroid field. A "gigantic" asteroid slams into the Avenger's hull and causes no damage (obviously, it was the main hull and not the bridge) - and Needa only orders shields raised when the MF "attacks" and flies at the bridge - the reason for that being solely the risk of the MF crashing through the window - an impact on the hull would've caused completely insignificant damage.

In other words, since we know Avenger's shields were down then, why should we assume the other Star Destroyer's shields were up in the asteroid impact scene, even absent all the information about communications and shields.

[Wyrm]

I think Moron Bob is in the meltdown stage. He fired off three messages last night, and I responded. I was tired, and these messages take some time to process for the BBS, so I waited until today to post them. Enjoy.

--CUT HERE--

So genius if there are no limits to anything thing why not start building up shields to resist a DS attack?

Strawman, you twat. Planetary shields were meant to defend against the then exant BDZ, not the not-yet-known DS. Even a hamster knows better.

Instead of trying to wow me with big numbers, show some calculations of the theoretical upper limit of a fantastic society's shielding technology.

Why worry about any numbers, your saying they don't matter. There is no sence of scale in your universe. Any level of energy short of a DS attack you say a shield can stop. A ship's shield can with stand a 200 gigaton blast. 5.4x10*28j is 15,000 X the EU stated out put of an early SD. Hypermatter is not used on planets so planetary shields use a lesser power souce, so how could they produce that much power? Your 200 gigaton blast puts out 21.6x10*29 watts, so how can your SD that puts out may be 5x10*24 watts generate one, let alone power a shield to survive one?

Your stupidity offends me, cupcake. Simply screaming "ITS REDICULUS" [sic] is a fallacy. We can guage their weapons by watching their effects on _natural objects_, such as asteroids and habitable planets. It doesn't reveal EVERYTHING, but screaming that because it can't reveal everything, therefore it reveals nothing is stupid. And a fallacy.

Why can't he do both? Don't you realize that part of "licencing" is "paying some dough"? Of course he wants to expand his fanbase, but he wants to do it in a way such that he can make his movies without worrying about the overall continuity.

He said he didn't care.

And using the structure of the canon, he can make some dough, work in a consistent universe, _and_ not care about the EU. Best of all worlds, cupcake.

See the warsee be an idiot. See the warsee live in his own fantasy world. See the warsee make up his own continuity. See the warsee ignore George Lucas because he thinks he decides what's part of the SW universe. See the warsee do math. See the warsee talk pseudoscience.

See the trektard ignore official policy of LucasFilm Licencing, George Lucas's own company, in favor of a statement in a verbal interview of George Lucas. See the trektard not understand the methods of science, and their application to an imaginary world. See the trektard whine when he can't understand his mental superiors.

See the Trektard.
See the Trektard whine.
Whine whine whine.

You have no idea how childish you sound. All the material is separate, it has no effect on each other. Superman canon is what happens in the comic books. Smallville has no effect on it. The superman movies have no effect on it. Even though more people see the TV show, and the movies, the comic is the canon, and the movies have no effect on it. Lucas said it's not connected what more do you want? How could they all be part of the same universe? The writers didn't coordinate with each other, or with Lucas, each story just stands on it's own. Are there aliens outside of the force getting ready to invade the New Republic? Did that effect the Emperors strategy? By definition if nothing they do binds Lucas universe it's not Lucas universe, and Lucas said it's not.

Your theory STILL doesn't explain why there's an _official canon policy_ by George Lucas's own company having more than G and N levels of canon. Do that and you'll be head and shoulders above Darkstar. But, of course, you can't, because you base your theory on SENTENCE FRAGMENTS taken out of context; its a FALLICIOUS ARGUMENT.

Nevermind that no NORMAL person would interpret George Lucas's quotes to mean that the EU is a separate universe. Yes, that means you're not normal, you fucking imbecile!

Prove it, cupcake.

See Darkstars website, it's very clear. I guess you won't because that would be attacking your delusions. I found it during the course of research on this debate.

Darkstar's arguments are fallicious, Darkstar himself has the scientific literacy of a newt (and he's not getting better), and you are a fucking tool to think that he has anything worthwhile to say. No, his complex diction is not sign of intelligence.

Then the moronic Captain JEFFERYS lowers the shield so his hansom image can be projectected. A moment later an asteroid destroys the ship killing all aboard. Vader stands there like a fool and looks into the camera, and says, "Me stupid." Besides Vader can't kill people with the force on other ships. The Captain he killed came over to his ship, and the admiral was of course on the flagship.

_Again_, you failed to present the requisite proof that said scenario would happen as you say, twat. And I still had greater chance of lasting longer than you did, asshat. Only one out of maybe ten ships got the frag, and even _that's_ in doubt. In any debate requiring LOGIC, you lose.

The SD sending holocoms to the Executor were a stone's throw away. The Emperor was at the center of the galaxy. Big difference.

What does this statement mean?

It means that while the SDs were only a few kilometers away, the nearest holonet repeater would be on the order of AUs to light years. Hyperwave may be fast, but it would still obey the inverse square law.

He doesn't say Drop the shields. How dumb.

Dropping shields would be implied.

Like ANY order being understood?

Yeah, because Imperial officers know their operating procedures. Like obeying your fucking superiors.

Whine whine whine. The EU is canon. The choice is not yours (or mine) to make.

Lucas said it's not canon, so stop whining.

Lie. YOU SAY Lucas said it's not canon. No _normal_ person would say that. No normal person would read the quotes, and look at the canon policy LucasFilm came up with and conclude that the EU doesn't count.

<mega snip>

God, go read the passage again. What do you think "except that instead of keeping the enemy under cover so they can't shoot at you" means? It means keeping the enemy's heads from sticking up (lest they be shot off), and the purpose of doing that is that it makes it _really hard_ to shoot you! Because if it _didn't_, it would be a waste of ammo!

That's funny, how does shooting at a ship make it harder for them to shoot back at you?

God, can't you read? Do you have books? Do you speak English? DO. YOU. SPEAK. ENGLISH!?!? I was specifically talking about covering fire in the quoted passage, you goddamn retard. It wasn't meant to apply to spaceships — I make that link in the very next quoted passage:

The very basic, bottom-level principle is the same: make the enemy do what _you_ want him to do. For troops on the ground, suppressive fire keeps their heads down and unable to shoot at you, something you would _want_ your enemy to do; for ships in space, the misnamed bracketing fire keeps the ship on a specific course, making him afraid of making any unexpected movements, and therefore move in a way you want him to do.

But, of course, you can't fucking read!

Oh? What if the vector you happen to choose puts you in the way of a bolt that you couldn't predict coming from that quarter? *POW!* Oops, you shouldnt've moved. So long as you stay in the box, you're in better shape than when you try to leave. And if you're being fired from above, that ship can control where the box goes. Therefore, he controls you totally.

Part of your problem is 2 dimensional thinking.

More proof you can't read, imbecile! My mention of firing above proves that I am well aware of all three dimensions. Firing from one spot on your ship confines you to a cone. Firing from a different spot on your ship confines you to another, different cone. Firing from both confines you within a solid that is the intersection of the cones. I am not at all surprised you don't understand basic geometry. That says far more about your credibility than it does mine.

Part is arrogance, and wishful thinking. The biggest problem is your basing it on convoluted logic.

You're a riot! You're the one committing fallacies left and right, and _I'm_ the one using convoluted logic?

Your trying to explain bad shooting, by saying it's not what you see. They miss on purpose, Their setting up trick shots. Your not watching an event and evaluating it, they missed.

Never mind that actually DESTROYING the Tantive with all hands would not suit their goal. They were tracking down the Death Star's plans, remember? That means capturing everyone along the spy chain and interrogating them to get the next link. Had they destroyed the Tantive, they would've lost the last link they had and FAILED THEIR MISSION because they couldn't verify that the Death Star plans were not transmitted elsewhere.

God, why am I explaining this to you? You obviously have the tactical acumen of a gerbil.

<snip>

This is the kind of thing I mean, you have know idea what your talking about. When the USN brought the Iowa Class Battleships back in the 80 they installed 4 automated phalanx point defense gun systems. So in case they failed they should have kept all the 40mm and 20mm guns from WWII, manned by 1,000 men, just to be safe? Is you reliability so poor you have no confidence in it? The cost and inefficiency of manned systems shows if you have them you don't have automated systems. No one would have both.

Fucking strawman, moron. The same weapons that would be driven by the automatic system would be the exact same weapons that could be driven manually. The weapons would have an 'auto' mode and a 'manual' mode, and men on the ship would be trained to operate the exact same weapons manually.

Get it, asshat? The same turbolasers that would be fired automatically also have crews on it in case their automatic systems go kaput.

God, why am I explaining this to you? You obviously have the tactical acumen of a hamster.

<snip>

Silly fanboy the novel was written for readers on 20th century earth, not aliens, or Sci-Fi characters inside a Sci-Fi story. Your using convoluted logic again.

More contextomy bullshit. You took the context of magazines and TV spots and artificially grafted it onto a Sci-Fi story.

The term Sun has been applied to yellow, white, red, orange, and blue stars,

Again you edited out that your "widening definintion" includes Dead Stars, which have never been, and never will be called suns.

And it doesn't even matter, you fuck, because you still didn't answer this point:

_And_ to stars 10,000 km across and greater. To apply it to any other kind of object is to expand its meaning.

<snip>

Again convoluted logic. Your reading your own meaning into things the statement stands on it's own. Yet you must have checked and found I was right, and still your calling me a liar. That just shows your a bit unstable, since your post concedes the TIE fighters did attack the cruisers on their own, and the Rebel fighters only joined in after.

I called you a liar because that's what you _are_. You take "Draw their fire away from the cruisers," to mean that the TIE fighters were _actually_ shooting at the cruisers, rather than the fighter wings reacting to the TIEs showing up with standard fighter wing tactics. Your theory assumes Lando has knowledge he could not possibly know, that the fighers were there to fire at cruisers _without Imperial SD support_. That's an extraordinary claim, cupcake, and it requires extraordinary proof. You have failed to provide it. I win.

<snip>

Cupcake we see them shooting at the cruisers, you conceded that in your above post. Your getting confused.

Prove it. Provide the time offset index of a TIE shooting at a cruiser for the sake of shooting at the cruiser. No, shooting at a juking fighter and hitting a cruiser doesn't count, so please don't waste my time.

<snip>

Your off to the races cupcake. You have a whole bunch of ideas whirling around your head. It's funny reading you, They knew that he knew, but he knew that they knew, but what none of them knew was what I know, ha,ha,ha,ha,ha. What do you think my theory is? What did you win?

I won the argument, you tard. You're too stupid to know that I had all the cards. That's because I have all the brains here, too.

And don't think I haven't noticed you calling me "cupcake", cupcake. Stop cargo-culting me and come up with your own insults.

<snip>

Tom your such a twit. It's fine for the SDs to stay out of the action. The orders make sense if the fighters can hurt the cruisers like I contend. You keep getting confused about my position. You have so many ideas whirling around in your head you can't keep them straight, let alone what I'm saying. That's why you argue with me when you agree with me, claim I'm arguing the opposite of what I'm saying, and just getting more and more convoluted in your thinking.

Oh, so it wouldn't be the DEATH STAR that would be taking out the Rebel cruisers, and the Emperor wanted them out of the fire zone. I know why you don't come to that conclusion: because that would make _sense_, considering that it takes out the only two Revel cruisers they see destroyed.

And don't think I haven't noticed you haven't answered my point about disobeying the Emperor would win you a quick death, if not by Force choke then by summary execution by your own crew for treason. So far, you've proven yourself superior in only one respect.

(removes human disguise to reveal Dalek Sec)

YOU.ARE.BET.TER.AT.DY.ING.

Like I said, "Stated figures and demonstrated figures are different." No matter what the Tech Manual says, ST ships don't engage each other at anything over 50 km.

In TOS every battle happened beyond visual range. They needed view screen magnification to see any combatant. The Enterprise orbits at 600 some odd miles, "Savage Curtin", and they can hit surface targets. There no reason to doubt the stated ranges, other then a rant trying to prove a subjective point.

"Beyond visual range" is a very vague description of range, and a far cry from concluding that the weapons have the stated range against a moving target. Prove that it is at the ranges you say, cupcake.

A target on a planet has very predictable movements; ICBMs were designed to hit ground stationary targets (they never put to real use, thank goodness, but I wouldn't put any money on them always failing), but SDI (a program to shoot down said ICBMs) has yet to turn out an interceptor that is anything close to successful.

<snip>

Again your confusing your self cupcake. You conceded the Enterprise refit flew to Saturn in 2 hours. The USS Jonolean In "Relics" opened the hatch of the Dysonsphere from 500,000 km, waited till the tractor beam stopped, then closed the distance and used it's shields to hold the hatch open. From a standing start she accelerated, then decelerated to a position 500,000 km away in less then 30 seconds.

I know what I'm talking about, cupcake. (And don't use my insults; find your own, goddamnit!) That's not a maneuvering thruster performance — that's still _straight line_ acceleration. Demonstrate a sudden change in _direction_.

<snip>

At 9:25 PM -0400 8/9/08, Thomas R Jefferys wrote:

No idiot that's what I wrote. get it right before you call some one a liar.

I messed up the quoting (sometimes I hate Eudora and its goddamn insane quoting paradigm), although it should've been clear. You are not innocent of this. I guess we can add "overreactionary fucktard" to your long list of offenses to sense and reason.

And, yes, you _are_ a liar. Whine all you want, but that's the truth. All who will see this is Darkstar and his chums, whom I don't care about, and the normal folks at SDN, who will laugh at you.

This is a given in ANY order.

This was your stand alone reply.

See? You ignore the fact that in the original message, this section went this way (careful getting the quoting _right_ this time. Goddamn Eudora. Maybe I really should switch to Thunderbird):

Every one could under stand what he was supposed to do.

This is a given in ANY order.

The context of my statement was YOURS. And you have yet to answer the point I raise, even when you _should_ know what the actual quote was all about. Now answer my point.

<snip>

Wrong fanboy. Air battles are in 3 dimensions. Try to imagine B17s using your inane "control enemy movement tactics" on German fighters. A fighter pilot missing on purpose so he can set up a bomber for a critical hit. A flight of fighters shooting guns around a fighter so their leader can get a shot at a straight flying target. Just ridicules.

And air battles have a fundamental component that makes it all work: air. Its lack a big effect on space battles, you know.

<snip>

Thank you for the concession. May be you might start thinking that some of the other things on SDN are rants posted by BS artists.

Then the "BS artists" on SDN are hiding their deception well. Your rants are just baldfaced nonsense, cupcake.

If the argument doesn't stand up to logic it's not valid.

Sometimes, the comedy just writes itself.

<snip>

You still don't understand what covering fire means. Covering fire suppresses enemy counter fire, by keeping their heads down, in a ground action. That's why the terms covering, and suppression fire are often used interchangeable. You can't keep the head down of a ship, tank, fighter, or any other covered position, only exposed men. SEAD suppress enemy air defense is a different matter. That's when your taking out air defenses, (like Luke taking out the Flak Tower in ANH) not keeping their heads down.

More confirmations that you are not a normal English speaker. Are you seeing "covering fire" and shout, "DURRRR!!!! TOM'S YUSIN' 'COVERIN' FIRE'! BETTR SKUUL HIM!!" then type out this tired old information yet again, like a fucking automatic routine? How does this answer the point that covering fire controls your opponent's actions?

<snip>

The reason I jumped on you was you were suggesting that a HUD would some how mean STs could see just as well as with out the helmet. A HUD might use many different sensors, or just a data link. fighters in SW have no HUDs for the simple reason that when the movies came out HUDs were not commonly known to be in use in real fighters.

You're projecting Author Intent again, you tool. It doesn't fucking matter when they entered the continuity. HUDs are in. And you are the one pretending what they actually show you.

<snip>

When a battle starts training should take over. Instead the imperials just go off helter-skelter, with no plan. No one seemed to take command.

<snip>

Once again your showing how ignornorant you are of military matters, and what a commander is supposed to do. If caught by surprise, or in an unexpected situation, you don't throw away the book and run in all directions. You try to ascertain the situation, and regain control. You may have to retreat, call for reinforcements, or even attack to throw the enemy off, but do it in an organized manor. The imperials panicked and lost all control of their forces. You seem to think that disgraceful performance was a good showing. An American officer who had his company overrun like that, and lost a vital position to such an inferior force, though incompetence would be court martialed.

Stormtroopers are human beings, too. Even they can have a bad day when the (then thought) non-combattive natives turned out to have serious teeth.

Meanwhile, you have shown to be ignorant in basic LOGIC. You take rules of thumb from muclear air and ground bursts and apply them in space, a completely different environment that greatly changes their behavior. That is a FALLACY! You have used so many fallacies, at each turn, that it disqualifies you from arguing about ANYTHING, _including millitary matters_!

<snip>

Shuttlecraft like aircraft crash, and are shot down.

Rate?

Transporters are stated to have a 99.99999% safety record, and are much faster.

Again, ignoring the basic difference between a "stated" safety record and an actual safety record. Prove your shit.

It's a TV show Transporter tech is a plot device.

So are shuttlecraft.

Though I don't like the socialist aspects of Rodenberry's vision, it seems to have eliminated scarcity in the 24th century.

Bullshit. They still have to mine stuff. The replicators are even stated to not be able to replicate basic compounds. Really, ribosomes? We can synthesize them NOW.

<snip>

They seem very good at controling plasma in ST, passing it though conduits, using it to transfur power. Storing it in hand held units.

But in open air? Extending out a good meter from a hilt maybe a decimeter long? And be of sufficient density to cut thorugh most materials, and yet not fry you by radiation? That is a very hard combination, and I've seen nothing like it in ST.

Fanboy ships are made of pieces,

How does this answer my question? Oh right... it DOESN'T!

and hear ST ships have an advantage having structural integrity fields.

And yet the ships still blow up with love taps.

<snip>

Well smart guy if you knew that why did you try to claim if a ship had a powerful enough engine it could move that way? Ether you didn't know that which I suspect, or you were lying, which was it?

Neither. Your assumption was wrong. The text under contension:

To even do the things we see them capable of, the SW ships have to have phenomenal power output. WWII maneuvers were only possible in WWII because we do things in AIR, which makes things much, much easier; you have reaction mass all around you to move in great masses without expending much energy. In space, you cannot fly like an airplane unless you had _very strong_ and _very efficient_ engines. This is testiment to their power generation technologies, and if you have that much power to throw about, you can do a lot of damage.

I know exactly what I meant by this. I was calling out a ship capable of what the X-wings were capable of, flying like an airplane. I was imagining a generalized spacecraft that abstracted the engine to a controlable force vector on the craft's center of mass; the real actualization of this would be a rocket on a gimbal mounted at the craft's CoM.

Why is this the sensible conclusion? Because I was talking about where the momentum was coming from to change the directions of these craft. Scientists OFTEN do this, a habit I picked up. And before you accuse me of not having exposure with scientists, YES I HAVE! I've been to college and my father is a scientist, so I know how they think.

My appologies. A mistake on my part. I should be speaking to you on your level: sub-moron.

<snip>

You tried to claim it was real, your being dishonest.

The METHOD is real. Assuming the scientific method, the "data" of the canon, and certain real scientific principles generates the conclusions. Because saying, "DUH! It's SF!" is NOT an answer.

<snip>

Childish. Read the book. From the time they go into Hyperspace near Sullust till they come out at Endor days, most likely 5-6 have gone by. ST-VSW.NET makes a good case for 5-6. The movie clearly shows a undetermined number of days. A fanboy like you would say "O man they were so cool they could way do it in 5 minutes. Not like those ST Winnies, they would need like years to go half that far, if they didn't brake down before they got there."

You're an idiot. Do you really think those X-wings are designed for long occupancy? Do you really think that X-wing pilots sat in their own shit and pee for 5-6 days? Did you know that in Darkstar's revised timeline, he puts the transit time at 2 days, because... you know... 5-6 days is _stupid_? Do you think you can get any worthwhile SLEEP in such a cramped cockpit? Why would X-wings enter hyperspace when they know it would take 5-6 days to get there instead of, say, stopping about an hour away and _then_ launching the X-wings?

From NO angle does this "theory" make any sense. You LOSE! Good day, sir!

<snip>

Hard to say we don't know how long they have been underway way, and we don't know the distance. It seemed to take only a few days.

You're insane. You _really_ think Solo watched out for Imperial ships for a few days to make sure he wasn't followed, even though he had the fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy? If he was that paranoid, why didn't he search for tracking devices when Leia pointed out they got away easily? One day max.

And a few days STILL kicks Voyager's ass.

3 days seems a resonable amount of time.

And you doubt that Vader could crush the life out of you with a Force choke over a visual communication? You're funny! Having cooked lungs would be a death sentence for anyone else, yet you think that Aniken could survive without medical attention for three days.

<snip>

Dishonest as usual. The reason it wasn't vaporized was because it was lased with tritaniam.

Another lie. Only Chakotay said "vaporized", but Tuvok, the Tactical officer, who knew what the fuck he set the torpedoes to, said he expected centimeter sized shrapnel. People who knew what the fuck they're talking about (Tuvok) knew it would never be vaporized.

They couldn't understand why it wasn't vaporized until they found out about the tritainium.

Which they _chipped easily_ with a pickaxe, with one swing... by a HUMAN! It may be harder than diamond, it may be practically unmeltable, but it's fucking _fragile_... as a building material, it's worthless, and as a fragile material, 15 kT yield max.

As to the Caretaker's Array, the tricobalt device didn't destroy it itself. It set off whatever volitile core was powering it.

Off to the races again cupcake. That idea came from your own head, not the show. A Kazon ship bigger then a SD crashed into the Array taking out the self destruct system.

You are an imbecile. The power core is not the self-destruct system. The self-destruct may work by disengaging the safeties, but grave damage routinely does that on ST. Use your loaf.

<snip>

After saying you have no way of explaining what turbo laser are, how they work, what powers them, how their used; if their beam weapons, explosive weapons, projectiles or what ever. you want detailed real world physics on how phasers work. If you don't accept the explanation of a shock wave that breaks down the strong nuclear force, that's fine. You accept a lot more far fetched things. Your enemy the Dreaded Darkstar doesn't accept my theory. He makes straight heat calculations for energy out put. 2.7 mega Js to vaporize a human body. I have a lot more respect for his calculations then Mike's because he tries to error on the side of being conservative, not the most fantastic figure he can think of. 200 gigatons to take out a 70 meter asteroid, ridicules.

Where do you think I got the 200 GT figure from? 200 GT is what's needed to vaporize a 40 m asteroid as fast as it does. The turbolaser did it. It's as simple as conservation of energy, bitch. Your turn. Quantify phasers.

Then again, you can't even calculate the melting energy of a 6 m cube of iron. Too bad. It's not my job to do your work for you.

you mock your self fool with every post. Your so called calcs prove the truth garbage in garbage out. You think saying prove it prove it is some type of counter argument? You sound like a child, "I know you are but what am I." In fact if you just say "prove it" your conceding you have no counter argument, your not refuting the argument you just challenging the other side to reinforce his argument, your no longer even fighting back.. Prove it is only a counter argument to trying to prove a negative. I know debate tactics are over your head, because there based on logic. All you know how to do is argue. And you can't tell the difference.

Whine and whine some more, bitch. You're copying my "cupcake" remark. You're hoping your ancestors will visit you with the same success in debate you believe mine have graced me with. You'll be waving sticks with a gourd on your genitals for a while, but that plane will never come with cargo.

--CUT HERE--

I fear I may be close to the posting limit. Continued.

[Wyrm]

Here are the other two messages. They're much shorter and sweeter.

--CUT HERE--

Hi Tom The SD taking out the 40 meter asteroid needed a 45 kt blast, not 200 gigatons. If you think the explosion you saw would have ended human civilization you are a silly fanboy. And you think your better then Darkstar. Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha.

Show your work, bitch.

--CUT HERE--

<snip>

Secondly, you're appealing to a man who has absolutely no grounding in science or math. If he had _any_ smarts, he would give up. But he's a stubborn twat with the scientific aptitude of my cat.

The man makes a lot more sence then the ravings of mike wong.

Empty keens of irrelevance, cupcake.

<mega snip — all points unanswered. How shocking!>

1. The Vader/Tarkin conversation: Fundamentally, Darkstar has made the same mistake you did, which makes me think he told you while you were fellating him. Like your objection, Darkstar's objection doesn't address the second part of the quote. I won't repeat it because I'm tired of your shit. Go look up and answer my objections to this very point, that is, why Vader would think the standing army would make the Death Star demonstration "as impressive as it was thorough"?

I suspected you had gay tendencies.

Do I [hear] a Trektard whining? Even if I did have gay tendencies, that's no concern of yours, cupcake.

<another mega-snip — rest of the points unanswered. HORRORS!>

And yet the DVD shows the shield effect you guys keep raving about are gone.

You never answered my main topic or ANY of my points, cupcake, which were made in reference to the VERY DVD IMAGES YOU CLAIMED DISPROVE THE SHIELD (although the images may have disappeared, the links to same did not). Simply repeating a claim does NOT address my points, and does not dismiss my rebuttal.

More importantly they are never discussed in a canon source. When the Clone Wars movie comes out do you want to bet there are no planetary shields, torpedo spheres, or any other EU shit?

Again, simply repeating the claim that the EU is out does not make it so.

But I'll answer the question anyway. The Clone Wars was the abrupt end of a centuries-long peace. Nobody had time to repair old planetary shields and build new ones; nobody thought they needed them anymore under the Pax Republica.

[CaptJodan]

I love the endless "It's impossible, ridiculous, and not fair!" bullshit he keeps screaming about when he comes to hypermatter, 200GT turbolasers, and everything else he just can't disprove away but doesn't want to accept. He calls you a child while displaying such childish tendencies. I was also amused with him adopting your insults, as if he has nothing comparable to use on you. The best he can do is repeat what you or other people have said, which was actually evident when he went running to Darkstar for help. He's definitely joined the the Darkstar Cockgobblin Club.

[Peptuck]

Hi Tom The SD taking out the 40 meter asteroid needed a 45 kt blast, not 200 gigatons. If you think the explosion you saw would have ended human civilization you are a silly fanboy. And you think your better then Darkstar. Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha.

Is he seriously trying to say that the light turbolasers we can clearly see emerging from the bow end of an Imperial Stardestroyer are the same as the heavy turbolasers on an Acclamator?

[PeZook]

He used an example of Soviet penal batallions, but according to him those didn't exist. Because, you see, walking into a minefield was a suicidal order, so no sane officer should've obeyed it, therefore they were pointless and stupid and didn't happen.

The NKVD machinegunners who kept them in line were what Vader was, just without the wicked Force powers.

[Connor MacLeod]

Hi Tom The SD taking out the 40 meter asteroid needed a 45 kt blast, not 200 gigatons. If you think the explosion you saw would have ended human civilization you are a silly fanboy. And you think your better then Darkstar. Ha,ha,ha,ha,ha,ha.

Is he seriously trying to say that the light turbolasers we can clearly see emerging from the bow end of an Imperial Stardestroyer are the same as the heavy turbolasers on an Acclamator?

He's assuming 100% effiiciency as well, and ignoring that it takes a fraction of a second (How many shots a second do those guns involve.) We know they aren't the heavy turbolasers due to placement as well.

Hell, we've seen the trench guns on ISDs in various comics, they're small.