First of all, by your logic you can't fault me for hating such bombers, because I believe them to be guilty. So if that's really your stance, you can just stop now.
NOt at all. I agree with you that what they're doing is wrong.:)
But let us continue. For one, regardless of whether you believe the victims to be innocent or guilty, I think you might agree that summary execution is not in order. What's more, the Right Decision is NOT only based on individual world view. If that were so, then if I think you deserve to be murdered because I disagree with you, that would be A-OK. One general measure of civilization is that it values human life to at least some degree. If you at all value human life, then you would see that regardless of justification, such suicide bombing is wrong.
My only point is that from their point of view, the bombers are doing what is right. I don't consider summary execution to be acceptable, and philosophically oppose the death penalty. However, I also think that murderers and the like are frequently not capable of living in society as we have it today, and that they should be removed from society. I'm open to alternatives that don't involve execution.
As far as the suicide bombers themselves go, as I said, from their point of view what they're doing is right. I don't fault them for that. Quite the opposite, I think that someone giving their life doing what they think is right is a gift that should be respected, even if you don't agree with them. I also think that as far as the actual issue goes, the issue of Israeli and American Imperialism in the area, the bombers are on the right side of the issue and we are, in fact, on the wrong side. Finally, I think that their methods are totally uncalled for. Islam is a peaceful religion. Judaism, however, is not. Christianity is supposed to be. But Islam, as it is practiced widespread anyway, is a peaceful religion. From where I'm standing, suicide bombing for religious reasons from Moslems is hypocrisy. I think that the means with which these particular people are acting on their, uh, for lack of a better word, righteousness is totally wrong, but that it doesn't invalidate their point of view. Condemn the action, not the child.:)
The issue, as far as the US is concerned, is even more complicated, however. We can't pull our support of Israel in a fashion that even remotely indicates that the terrorists "won". We can't do anything that would make anyone think that they will get their way by throwing such tantrums, or else they'll just keep deciding they want shit from us and keep up the terrorism. Quite the contrary, we have to respond in a fashion that will motivate them to think more seriously before engaging in a terrorist attack against us. The Israelis are in a similar position. They can't just pack up and leave in response to the terrorist attacks. They can leave for any other reason but that. If they leave for that reason, then Jews the world over will likely become a target of hate once again, since they'll be viewed as pushovers. While both Israel and the US have a sordid history in that region of the world, and neither one of us has been exactly nice to that part of the world, we're in this hole now and it's not easy to get out of it without laying down a foundation for further actions against us. It's a complicated reason. As much as I'd like for our country to just quit screwing around over there like we have been, it's not nearly so cut and dried as all that.
In Voyager's One episode, the phaser beam was shown to be a conduit or artificial pipe i.e. it enables the Borg Sphere to use this pipe to damage Voyager without hitting Voyager's shields.
Your response seems to assume that there is no such thing as objective truth, at least with regard to human behavior.
I would take that as an axiom.:)
How is our sense of morality so superior that it overrides his judgement? Obviously, there must be something in our morality that does override the judgement of Adolf Hitler.
I don't think there's anything that says it's right for our sense of morality to override his, and the fundamentalists you discuss later in your post. I do think that you are mostly correct, with the exception that there isn't anything inherently right about us opposing them. We have to, it's in our morality system to oppose oppression and those who would bring about suffering. When that oppression grows to a point where it directly or indirectly endangers our own culture, then we must oppose it with any means necessary. It's part of our own morality system. It is also part of theirs, they just define the basic words differently.:) From the point of view of the Islamic fundamentalists, the US is an oppressive empire. From our own point of view, it's a bit different.
You'll find, Luke, that many of the truths we cling to depend entirely on your point of view.
Looking at the situation logically, one can see that overall western liberal democracy is the superior cultural system (in terms of how it benefits humanity), but it will not necessarily be the one that survives this current conflict.
Indeed, Western liberal democracy has brought about a lot of good, positive changes to the world. Longer lifespans as a result of happier lives, better medical research, etc. We can list all the benefits we want, but it's been proven time and again throughout history that when you let the people of a nation make the rules, the nation prospers. The problem is that it's very easy, when there's problems (such as the current fear of terrorism, the war on drugs, etc) to point at the free way of life as the culprit. If there were more police, we'd have less drugs. Right? But if there were more police, we'd also have less freedom. I think that what is needed now is a group of people, super-cops, that adhere to their own system of morality and wisdom, and justice. Jedi. Yeah, that's what we need.:) Seriously!
This simply isn't true. There are other search engines and people do use them. You think Google is the king because you use it and love it. Me too but I know lots of people who don't use Google or who have never heard of it. My Dad uses the MSN search and thinks it's the greatest thing in the world. I've shown him Google but he's the type that wants to do everything his own way (that's why he has WebTV instead of a computer).
MSN and Google are the only players right now worth mentioning. ALltheweb, which is the FAST engine, powers a lot of front-ends (such as Ask Jeeves), but has a very low percentage of the market. MSN is powered by Inktomi, sorta. They pull results from Overture as well as Looksmart, and then do their own magic on it. Inktomi-powered engines fall down in market share after that. Yahoo is powered by Google, of course, and Overture, but all is not well in the bed of Yahoo and Google. Anyway, at this time, the score is something like this:
Google: 80%
MSN: 19%
Everybody else: 1%
Personally, I want MSN to take on Google in a more serious fashion. Microsoft already demonstrated to us what happens in the tech market when one player dominates, and now Google is showing us the same. Yes, I know, Google has all these "innovations" these days. They had image search after Altavista had it. They had news search after, um, altavista? Someone tell me, I know Google didn't do it first. I just forgot who did. What else? The real question is, "What has Google done lately to justify their continuing presence as the market leader?" I say, "nothing." If we really want search to get better, Google needs to get beaten back down to 40% of the market, with no player over 45%.
But killing of innocents isn't perfectly understandable.
Exactly how are the victims innocent? Not once has a terrorist group struck another group of people without believing them to be guilty. How is your sense or morality so superior that it overrides their judgement? In the case of Israel, well, the Israelies are living on land that was previously controlled by the dominant culture in the area. The land was forced clear by Western nations having some sort of guilt complex over Hitler's extermination program. Great. So we take all these Jews that were going to be murdered by Nazis and place them in their traditional home (Israel), simultaneously suurounding them by a culture that would like nothing more than to annihilate them. Can you say, out of the frying pan, into the fire?
Of course, the population that lives at the expense of this particular situation, and the republic officials elected by this population are guilty as well. Just like the man who pays the assassin is guilty of the murder.
Whether these people (suicide bombers) are making the right decision is dependent on their own individual world view and morality, usually instilled on them by the culture around them. Whether the dominant world view wants them to live in this world is entirely a different matter. The nice thing about suicide bombers, though, is that they will sooner or later remove themselves from this world and cease to be a threat.
But I'm confused a bit by the universal translator part of your comment. It would seem that these things were implanted (at least later on). Remember the DS9 episode when Quark gets a new ship, but it's defective, they go back in time, and crash land at Area 51? Their translators are knocked out till Quark gets a bobby pin from the human woman and fixes things up. To that point, the humans spoke gibberish when shot from the Ferengi's perspective, and the Ferengis spoke gibberish when shot from the Hu-mon's perspective.
Never got into DS9, really. But I will say this::)
In Star Trek 6 we saw the absolute worst use of the universal translator. I don't recall exactly how the scene went, but the Enterprise is going into klingon space and getting calls from a patrol boat. So they look up the words and put together the language and say it, because the universal translator wouldn't be good enough, they would be recognized as not-klingon (like Uhura's human accent to the klingon language wasn't recognizable). In the same movie, though, we saw that universal translators, at least in Kirk's time, were not implanted, because Kirk and McCoy carried universal translators during their trial before the Klingon High Council.
All of that is besides my other main point.:) There is a particular episode of TOS that I don't recall the name for right off-hand, but it's the one with the Coms and the Yangs, with the Captain that was Kirk's old buddy violating the prime directive and using phasers to kill all the Yangs, and some crazy disease from the planet (due to biological warfare in the planet's history) and some perceived immortality. Anyway, it turned out that this society had the Declaration of Independence, and was a parallel earth that had nearly destroyed itself instead of achieving Roddenberry Enlightenment. On this planet, they all spoke English, but nobody could read it.
if this is the one i'm thinking of (where they only spoke in metaphors) they did speak english. shaka, when the walls fell.
Damn that preview button! Yep, that's the one, and I remembered while posting that the theme of the show was about language, but I'd forgotten that they used English. Sorry. It only proves my point even more, though.:)
For thousands more years the mighty ships tore across the empty wastes of space and finally dived screaming on to the first planet they came across---which happened to be Earth---where due to a terrible miscalculation of scale the entire battle fleet was accidentally swallowed by a small dog. --Douglas Adams
Dude, you were supposed to give the dog a sandwich.
You seem to have mixed up two lines of that song. IIRC, the one is "it's worse than that - he's dead, Jim!", the other is "you cannot bend the laws o'physics, cap'n!".
Besides the fact that the line does show up near the end (during the fade out, and is probably the only funny part of the song), Scotty's line is "You cannot change the laws of physics"
however in TOS warp scales uniformly, but TNG it scales exponentially where warp 10 is instantaneous travel between any 2 points. This was semi covered by your parent post, but hey, this is slashdot! Who bothers to read the posts?
Ok, in TOS, if they accelerated to Warp 10 and held it long enough, the traveled through time, right? The reason they slingshot around the sun to do it is because they need the extra gravitational pull of the sun to give them the extra acceleration to do it, yaddayadda.
So, what you guys are saying altogether is that in TNG, the warp scale is different, so what *was* warp 10 in TOS might actually be warp 3 or warp 4 in TNG. How does that jive with the time warp stuff that they built entire movies around? (screw starships, if they built a movie around it it's really important)
If I were a girl, I'd be a lesbian. Your post is pretty funny, I'd mod you up if I had points.
That should win some sort of troll award. It was funny as hell.:) Pure troll, but still pretty funny. (Ok, not pure troll, because pure troll would require a registered username so you can post at +1 by default)
Phasers and Photon torpedoes were used at Warp Speeds in "Best of Both Worlds", when the Enterprise was running from the Borg cube, right before they latched on with their tractor beam, knocked them out of warp, beamed over and stole Picard.
Also, in Star Trek: THe Motion Picture, when they fucked up the warp engines and an asteroid got in front of them, Kirk ordered phasers to destroy it because it was standard procedure. Phasers can be recharged, but photon torpedoes are limited stock. Decker belayed the order, of course, because the phasers had been routed through the warp engines in order to boost power to both the warp engines and the phasers (a stupid idea, obviously the physics of star trek might be "well thought out", but the engineering wasn't) and firing the phasers at that point would've killed EVERYONE!
Not required, though. I picked up a non-geek hot chick without tempering my geeky side. Sometimes its better to just break the rules than try to live within them.:) (Still with her, I should point out, with a litter of kids and stuff, and she's still not geeky, but she does like Star Trek now. I'll show her this article and she'll say "What a waste of time!")
If you run the numbers you'll find that, at warp 10, the windows of Ten Forward will rise from a space normal temperature of 4K to the melting point of 933.52 K in 2.73 hours.
You did an excellent job, so good a job that I hesitate to point out what you missed. But I will anyway.
The deflector dish pushes those particles to the side, creating an aerodynamic pocket and preventing those atoms from impacting in the first place.
But how about on impulse? A ship is supposed to be able to travel at impulse speeds without a working deflector dish, and still do some distance.
Yes, but neither Galactica nor Star Wars claimed to be hard sci fi - they were space fantasy shows and knew it. Star Trek tries to be all "scientific" often.
I call bullshit. Just because Star Trek tries to make shit sound good ("We can use the deflector dish to create a charge of neutrinos that would effectively disable their shields without damaging their hull!") doesn't mean they're trying to be "hard sci fi". Gene Roddenberry himself said many times "It's just a TV show!".
Keep in mind that this is the show where every single species spoke English, even if they'd never encountered humans before (Balance of Terror being a notable one where the ROmulan captain played by Sarek spoke to Kirk in English before getting wiped out). Kirk *never* had to carry a universal translator (a device invented for the sake of the trekkie fans writing books, iirc).
Except for the episode called "Darmok", TNG is just as guilty of this as TOS. Hell, the Darmok guys must have been the only species in history that didn't have English as a first language in Star Trek.
The main difference between Star Trek and Galactica and Star Wars is that the Star Trek universe has been created collaboratively over the years, and Gene Roddenberry accepted the books and stuff as part of the universe. This allowed many freaks to come in and try to make "scientific, rational" explanations for all the myriad inconsistencies so that Star Trek could be serious, hard science fiction, and therefore be taken seriously by science fiction fans.
Star Wars, on the other hand, has been tightly controlled, and the vast amount of material that is *now* available (but wasn't for years) isn't accepted as part of the universe (ref: Boba Fett in Attack of the Clones). Lucas has always said that he's trying to tell a story, and that it's "Space Opera" and not "Science Fiction" and that's what it always will be.
Galactica washed up, and is likely going to wash up again.
I thought they used inertial dampeners and artificial gravity to counteract all that crap.
How about facing? These ships have windows in the front, right? So the pilot needs constant visual points of reference, and if the ship just changed directions arbitrarily he wouldn't have those constant points of reference.
Aha! But this is the movie version of the TOS Enterprise, which actually *did* travel in the atmosphere--sorta (Tomorrow Is Yesterday). Now THAT is an historic fact. The Air Force recovered the gun camera film from the plane the Enterprise destroyed with its tractor beam and--and--oh crap, I need to date more...
And they also had to get out of the atmosphere in a hurry before they burned up because they didn't have heat shielding appropriate for reentry, or the necessary technical stuff to land. The ship was built in space and was never intended to leave space. This also happened in another episode, I forget what it's called, but it's the one with the machine that controls the humans on the planet and prevents them from breeding. They just provide it with food. Then Kirk comes along, and all hell breaks loose, of course, and among the problems is that the machine starts sucking the enterprise down into the atmosphere to ddestroy it.
That's not a starship, it's just an orbiter. Hardly worthy of being credited with being able to travel from one solar system to another. Even if it could go to, say, Mars, or Jupiter, it's still not a starship. IN that case it would be an interplanetary vessel, but not an interstellar one.
When will peoples facination with Bill Clinton's cock ever end? Judging from your moderation not anytime soon.
A clear case of penis-envy.
Besides, it strikes me as thoroughly entertaining that a president who did shit that many presidents before him likely did got dragged through the press over it, and with it we got a thorough education on how to use a cigar as a dildo. Useful stuff! When has a president done more to contribute to the sexual vitality of a nation?
From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/te xt/20030501-15.html (emphasis mine)
Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans:
Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.
From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/ir aq/20030501-15.html (emphasis mine)
Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans:
Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.
I think there is something fishy here. If all this is a mistake, then why is only Iraq of all things being left out. There must be a ton of other topics but why this?
Obviously there's some Democrat or otherwise bush-hater in the whitehouse website staff that built this robots.txt file just to create bad press for the president. The president is too stupid to even think "IS there some way to prevent search engines from indexing this stuff that might hurt my chances at re-election?". He's more likely to say "How do I determine if my car runs on search or just has a regular engine in it?". So it's obviously an insider job done to discredit the president.
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, by your logic you can't fault me for hating such bombers, because I believe them to be guilty. So if that's really your stance, you can just stop now.
NOt at all. I agree with you that what they're doing is wrong. :)
But let us continue. For one, regardless of whether you believe the victims to be innocent or guilty, I think you might agree that summary execution is not in order. What's more, the Right Decision is NOT only based on individual world view. If that were so, then if I think you deserve to be murdered because I disagree with you, that would be A-OK. One general measure of civilization is that it values human life to at least some degree. If you at all value human life, then you would see that regardless of justification, such suicide bombing is wrong.
My only point is that from their point of view, the bombers are doing what is right. I don't consider summary execution to be acceptable, and philosophically oppose the death penalty. However, I also think that murderers and the like are frequently not capable of living in society as we have it today, and that they should be removed from society. I'm open to alternatives that don't involve execution.
As far as the suicide bombers themselves go, as I said, from their point of view what they're doing is right. I don't fault them for that. Quite the opposite, I think that someone giving their life doing what they think is right is a gift that should be respected, even if you don't agree with them. I also think that as far as the actual issue goes, the issue of Israeli and American Imperialism in the area, the bombers are on the right side of the issue and we are, in fact, on the wrong side. Finally, I think that their methods are totally uncalled for. Islam is a peaceful religion. Judaism, however, is not. Christianity is supposed to be. But Islam, as it is practiced widespread anyway, is a peaceful religion. From where I'm standing, suicide bombing for religious reasons from Moslems is hypocrisy. I think that the means with which these particular people are acting on their, uh, for lack of a better word, righteousness is totally wrong, but that it doesn't invalidate their point of view. Condemn the action, not the child. :)
The issue, as far as the US is concerned, is even more complicated, however. We can't pull our support of Israel in a fashion that even remotely indicates that the terrorists "won". We can't do anything that would make anyone think that they will get their way by throwing such tantrums, or else they'll just keep deciding they want shit from us and keep up the terrorism. Quite the contrary, we have to respond in a fashion that will motivate them to think more seriously before engaging in a terrorist attack against us. The Israelis are in a similar position. They can't just pack up and leave in response to the terrorist attacks. They can leave for any other reason but that. If they leave for that reason, then Jews the world over will likely become a target of hate once again, since they'll be viewed as pushovers. While both Israel and the US have a sordid history in that region of the world, and neither one of us has been exactly nice to that part of the world, we're in this hole now and it's not easy to get out of it without laying down a foundation for further actions against us. It's a complicated reason. As much as I'd like for our country to just quit screwing around over there like we have been, it's not nearly so cut and dried as all that.
In Voyager's One episode, the phaser beam was shown to be a conduit or artificial pipe i.e. it enables the Borg Sphere to use this pipe to damage Voyager without hitting Voyager's shields.
Borg Phasers != Starfleet Phasers
Your response seems to assume that there is no such thing as objective truth, at least with regard to human behavior.
I would take that as an axiom. :)
How is our sense of morality so superior that it overrides his judgement? Obviously, there must be something in our morality that does override the judgement of Adolf Hitler.
I don't think there's anything that says it's right for our sense of morality to override his, and the fundamentalists you discuss later in your post. I do think that you are mostly correct, with the exception that there isn't anything inherently right about us opposing them. We have to, it's in our morality system to oppose oppression and those who would bring about suffering. When that oppression grows to a point where it directly or indirectly endangers our own culture, then we must oppose it with any means necessary. It's part of our own morality system. It is also part of theirs, they just define the basic words differently. :) From the point of view of the Islamic fundamentalists, the US is an oppressive empire. From our own point of view, it's a bit different.
You'll find, Luke, that many of the truths we cling to depend entirely on your point of view.
Looking at the situation logically, one can see that overall western liberal democracy is the superior cultural system (in terms of how it benefits humanity), but it will not necessarily be the one that survives this current conflict.
Indeed, Western liberal democracy has brought about a lot of good, positive changes to the world. Longer lifespans as a result of happier lives, better medical research, etc. We can list all the benefits we want, but it's been proven time and again throughout history that when you let the people of a nation make the rules, the nation prospers. The problem is that it's very easy, when there's problems (such as the current fear of terrorism, the war on drugs, etc) to point at the free way of life as the culprit. If there were more police, we'd have less drugs. Right? But if there were more police, we'd also have less freedom. I think that what is needed now is a group of people, super-cops, that adhere to their own system of morality and wisdom, and justice. Jedi. Yeah, that's what we need. :) Seriously!
This simply isn't true. There are other search engines and people do use them. You think Google is the king because you use it and love it. Me too but I know lots of people who don't use Google or who have never heard of it. My Dad uses the MSN search and thinks it's the greatest thing in the world. I've shown him Google but he's the type that wants to do everything his own way (that's why he has WebTV instead of a computer).
MSN and Google are the only players right now worth mentioning. ALltheweb, which is the FAST engine, powers a lot of front-ends (such as Ask Jeeves), but has a very low percentage of the market. MSN is powered by Inktomi, sorta. They pull results from Overture as well as Looksmart, and then do their own magic on it. Inktomi-powered engines fall down in market share after that. Yahoo is powered by Google, of course, and Overture, but all is not well in the bed of Yahoo and Google. Anyway, at this time, the score is something like this:
Google: 80%
MSN: 19%
Everybody else: 1%
Personally, I want MSN to take on Google in a more serious fashion. Microsoft already demonstrated to us what happens in the tech market when one player dominates, and now Google is showing us the same. Yes, I know, Google has all these "innovations" these days. They had image search after Altavista had it. They had news search after, um, altavista? Someone tell me, I know Google didn't do it first. I just forgot who did. What else? The real question is, "What has Google done lately to justify their continuing presence as the market leader?" I say, "nothing." If we really want search to get better, Google needs to get beaten back down to 40% of the market, with no player over 45%.
But killing of innocents isn't perfectly understandable.
Exactly how are the victims innocent? Not once has a terrorist group struck another group of people without believing them to be guilty. How is your sense or morality so superior that it overrides their judgement? In the case of Israel, well, the Israelies are living on land that was previously controlled by the dominant culture in the area. The land was forced clear by Western nations having some sort of guilt complex over Hitler's extermination program. Great. So we take all these Jews that were going to be murdered by Nazis and place them in their traditional home (Israel), simultaneously suurounding them by a culture that would like nothing more than to annihilate them. Can you say, out of the frying pan, into the fire?
Of course, the population that lives at the expense of this particular situation, and the republic officials elected by this population are guilty as well. Just like the man who pays the assassin is guilty of the murder.
Whether these people (suicide bombers) are making the right decision is dependent on their own individual world view and morality, usually instilled on them by the culture around them. Whether the dominant world view wants them to live in this world is entirely a different matter. The nice thing about suicide bombers, though, is that they will sooner or later remove themselves from this world and cease to be a threat.
But I'm confused a bit by the universal translator part of your comment. It would seem that these things were implanted (at least later on). Remember the DS9 episode when Quark gets a new ship, but it's defective, they go back in time, and crash land at Area 51? Their translators are knocked out till Quark gets a bobby pin from the human woman and fixes things up. To that point, the humans spoke gibberish when shot from the Ferengi's perspective, and the Ferengis spoke gibberish when shot from the Hu-mon's perspective.
Never got into DS9, really. But I will say this: :)
In Star Trek 6 we saw the absolute worst use of the universal translator. I don't recall exactly how the scene went, but the Enterprise is going into klingon space and getting calls from a patrol boat. So they look up the words and put together the language and say it, because the universal translator wouldn't be good enough, they would be recognized as not-klingon (like Uhura's human accent to the klingon language wasn't recognizable). In the same movie, though, we saw that universal translators, at least in Kirk's time, were not implanted, because Kirk and McCoy carried universal translators during their trial before the Klingon High Council.
All of that is besides my other main point. :) There is a particular episode of TOS that I don't recall the name for right off-hand, but it's the one with the Coms and the Yangs, with the Captain that was Kirk's old buddy violating the prime directive and using phasers to kill all the Yangs, and some crazy disease from the planet (due to biological warfare in the planet's history) and some perceived immortality. Anyway, it turned out that this society had the Declaration of Independence, and was a parallel earth that had nearly destroyed itself instead of achieving Roddenberry Enlightenment. On this planet, they all spoke English, but nobody could read it.
Oh hell. Nevermind. Later.
all that being said, I still have a much larger penis than any other slashdot member.
This, on the other hand, definitely classifies as hard science fiction.
if this is the one i'm thinking of (where they only spoke in metaphors) they did speak english. shaka, when the walls fell.
Damn that preview button! Yep, that's the one, and I remembered while posting that the theme of the show was about language, but I'd forgotten that they used English. Sorry. It only proves my point even more, though. :)
What did Spock find in Jim's mouth?
The Captain's Log?
For thousands more years the mighty ships tore across the empty wastes of space and finally dived screaming on to the first planet they came across---which happened to be Earth---where due to a terrible miscalculation of scale the entire battle fleet was accidentally swallowed by a small dog. --Douglas Adams
Dude, you were supposed to give the dog a sandwich.
You seem to have mixed up two lines of that song. IIRC, the one is "it's worse than that - he's dead, Jim!", the other is "you cannot bend the laws o'physics, cap'n!".
Besides the fact that the line does show up near the end (during the fade out, and is probably the only funny part of the song), Scotty's line is "You cannot change the laws of physics"
mmmmmm.....44 of DD
You like your women fat? I find that the numerical part of a bra size (the band size) is usually the same as the size of the ass....
Would it be any better if they were testing the performance at Mach 5 of a model of the Batmobile?
Actually, the should have checked my penis.
however in TOS warp scales uniformly, but TNG it scales exponentially where warp 10 is instantaneous travel between any 2 points. This was semi covered by your parent post, but hey, this is slashdot! Who bothers to read the posts?
Ok, in TOS, if they accelerated to Warp 10 and held it long enough, the traveled through time, right? The reason they slingshot around the sun to do it is because they need the extra gravitational pull of the sun to give them the extra acceleration to do it, yaddayadda.
So, what you guys are saying altogether is that in TNG, the warp scale is different, so what *was* warp 10 in TOS might actually be warp 3 or warp 4 in TNG. How does that jive with the time warp stuff that they built entire movies around? (screw starships, if they built a movie around it it's really important)
If I were a girl, I'd be a lesbian. Your post is pretty funny, I'd mod you up if I had points.
That should win some sort of troll award. It was funny as hell. :) Pure troll, but still pretty funny. (Ok, not pure troll, because pure troll would require a registered username so you can post at +1 by default)
Phasers and Photon torpedoes were used at Warp Speeds in "Best of Both Worlds", when the Enterprise was running from the Borg cube, right before they latched on with their tractor beam, knocked them out of warp, beamed over and stole Picard.
Also, in Star Trek: THe Motion Picture, when they fucked up the warp engines and an asteroid got in front of them, Kirk ordered phasers to destroy it because it was standard procedure. Phasers can be recharged, but photon torpedoes are limited stock. Decker belayed the order, of course, because the phasers had been routed through the warp engines in order to boost power to both the warp engines and the phasers (a stupid idea, obviously the physics of star trek might be "well thought out", but the engineering wasn't) and firing the phasers at that point would've killed EVERYONE!
It also helps to marry a female Geek. Nirvana!
Not required, though. I picked up a non-geek hot chick without tempering my geeky side. Sometimes its better to just break the rules than try to live within them. :) (Still with her, I should point out, with a litter of kids and stuff, and she's still not geeky, but she does like Star Trek now. I'll show her this article and she'll say "What a waste of time!")
If you run the numbers you'll find that, at warp 10, the windows of Ten Forward will rise from a space normal temperature of 4K to the melting point of 933.52 K in 2.73 hours.
You did an excellent job, so good a job that I hesitate to point out what you missed. But I will anyway.
The deflector dish pushes those particles to the side, creating an aerodynamic pocket and preventing those atoms from impacting in the first place.
But how about on impulse? A ship is supposed to be able to travel at impulse speeds without a working deflector dish, and still do some distance.
Yes, but neither Galactica nor Star Wars claimed to be hard sci fi - they were space fantasy shows and knew it. Star Trek tries to be all "scientific" often.
I call bullshit. Just because Star Trek tries to make shit sound good ("We can use the deflector dish to create a charge of neutrinos that would effectively disable their shields without damaging their hull!") doesn't mean they're trying to be "hard sci fi". Gene Roddenberry himself said many times "It's just a TV show!".
Keep in mind that this is the show where every single species spoke English, even if they'd never encountered humans before (Balance of Terror being a notable one where the ROmulan captain played by Sarek spoke to Kirk in English before getting wiped out). Kirk *never* had to carry a universal translator (a device invented for the sake of the trekkie fans writing books, iirc).
Except for the episode called "Darmok", TNG is just as guilty of this as TOS. Hell, the Darmok guys must have been the only species in history that didn't have English as a first language in Star Trek.
The main difference between Star Trek and Galactica and Star Wars is that the Star Trek universe has been created collaboratively over the years, and Gene Roddenberry accepted the books and stuff as part of the universe. This allowed many freaks to come in and try to make "scientific, rational" explanations for all the myriad inconsistencies so that Star Trek could be serious, hard science fiction, and therefore be taken seriously by science fiction fans.
Star Wars, on the other hand, has been tightly controlled, and the vast amount of material that is *now* available (but wasn't for years) isn't accepted as part of the universe (ref: Boba Fett in Attack of the Clones). Lucas has always said that he's trying to tell a story, and that it's "Space Opera" and not "Science Fiction" and that's what it always will be.
Galactica washed up, and is likely going to wash up again.
I thought they used inertial dampeners and artificial gravity to counteract all that crap.
How about facing? These ships have windows in the front, right? So the pilot needs constant visual points of reference, and if the ship just changed directions arbitrarily he wouldn't have those constant points of reference.
Aha! But this is the movie version of the TOS Enterprise, which actually *did* travel in the atmosphere--sorta (Tomorrow Is Yesterday). Now THAT is an historic fact. The Air Force recovered the gun camera film from the plane the Enterprise destroyed with its tractor beam and--and--oh crap, I need to date more...
And they also had to get out of the atmosphere in a hurry before they burned up because they didn't have heat shielding appropriate for reentry, or the necessary technical stuff to land. The ship was built in space and was never intended to leave space. This also happened in another episode, I forget what it's called, but it's the one with the machine that controls the humans on the planet and prevents them from breeding. They just provide it with food. Then Kirk comes along, and all hell breaks loose, of course, and among the problems is that the machine starts sucking the enterprise down into the atmosphere to ddestroy it.
And I've got a hot wife that loves star trek.
PROOF!!! http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/resources/orbi ters/enterprise.html
That's not a starship, it's just an orbiter. Hardly worthy of being credited with being able to travel from one solar system to another. Even if it could go to, say, Mars, or Jupiter, it's still not a starship. IN that case it would be an interplanetary vessel, but not an interstellar one.
When will peoples facination with Bill Clinton's cock ever end? Judging from your moderation not anytime soon.
A clear case of penis-envy.
Besides, it strikes me as thoroughly entertaining that a president who did shit that many presidents before him likely did got dragged through the press over it, and with it we got a thorough education on how to use a cigar as a dildo. Useful stuff! When has a president done more to contribute to the sexual vitality of a nation?
From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/te xt/20030501-15.html (emphasis mine)
From http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/05/ir aq/20030501-15.html (emphasis mine)
Conspiracy? I think not...
I can be just as paranoid as you. :)
I think there is something fishy here. If all this is a mistake, then why is only Iraq of all things being left out. There must be a ton of other topics but why this?
Obviously there's some Democrat or otherwise bush-hater in the whitehouse website staff that built this robots.txt file just to create bad press for the president. The president is too stupid to even think "IS there some way to prevent search engines from indexing this stuff that might hurt my chances at re-election?". He's more likely to say "How do I determine if my car runs on search or just has a regular engine in it?". So it's obviously an insider job done to discredit the president.