Star Wars>Star Trek

[SilverWingedSeraph]

me: hats not the Enterprise bit I was referring to, you misunderstood me; i was referring to a book, in which there is a line that says somthing like: "
The Enterprise-J slowed in the expase BETWEEN the galaxies, slowed to warp speed, a relativy crawl, then to impulse, then stopped." Thus indicating that trans-galactic travel has taken place. And I never intended for yall to start arguing about the E-J, that was just a example. I might try to obtain the exact quote. Now as for ST books being un-cannon, I don't give a rip. They are canon to me. If SW books are cannon, ST books should be too

It's "canon", not "cannon". A cannon is an oversized gun. Also, your damn opinion on whether Star Trek books are canon is utterly fucking meaningless. Star Wars novels are canon because LucasFilm says so. Star Trek books, likewise, are not canon, because Paramount says so. Deal with it. While Star Trek books may be entertaining to some people, they are not canon, and thus, don't have a place in these arguments.

Besides, even if you rendered the entirety of the Star Wars Expanded Universe obsolete too, to make things even, it wouldn't help your argument any.

[Darth Servo]

I could go to my creationist friends and even if I got solid proof for creationism, I doubt you would pay attention to it.

By all means, post it. We're having a great time laughing at your creationist idiocy over here.

[The Computer Wizard]

Now as for ST books being un-cannon, I don't give a rip. They are canon to me. If SW books are cannon, ST books should be too Smile

Do yourself a favor and read the fucking website before assuming that your brilliant arguments haven't been dealt with a thousand times before.

That is not a argument, that is a opinion as stated by one of your things, because they screw up so much in the episodes, I even have a book which points flaws of all kinds in 6 of the 7 seasons of ST:NG, and there is not one episode that is not flawed. Im my opinion, Gene Rodenberry was a jerk for not having people check continuity and stuff.

lastly, I WAS using the E-J as a example!!! Lets make a fed ship, and name it the Hyperactive, and give it big bad lasers and its 50 thousand years in the future. Such a ship is sure as heck not cannon, but it can be used to make a EXAMPLE.

[CaptHawkeye]

Like I said, I am not going to argue something that you are not going to listen to. I have seen what you do to creationists here.

You belitte them, mock them, and are extremely rude. Why on earth would I want to set myself up for that for no reason? [/quote]

Guess what, you can flame people for their opinions on this forum. Especially if they aren't backed up. Doesn't have to just be creationism either, it can be anything. Don't like it? Fuck off.

I could go to my creationist friends and even if I got solid proof for creationism, I doubt you would pay attention to it.

No such "solid proof" exists you idiot. Nothing other than the Bible's preachy, hypocritical crap.

You tell me why I should bother, and I might.

Please don't, we've been through this hundreds of times.

The reason why I quoted that was because the Bible verse that it comes from packs a heck of punch.

Preachy crap from the bible that basically says "In other words, if you can't prove anything about religon, just tell the non believers how stupid they are!"

Honestly though, i'm all for keeping you around. We've been needing a chew toy.[/quote]

[Darth Servo]

Now as for ST books being un-cannon, I don't give a rip. They are canon to me. If SW books are cannon, ST books should be too

So you think your opinion overrides the people who OWN THE SHOW? My, you are arrogant, even for a creationist idiot.

[Teleros]

That is not a argument, that is a opinion as stated by one of your things, because they screw up so much in the episodes, I even have a book which points flaws of all kinds in 6 of the 7 seasons of ST:NG, and there is not one episode that is not flawed.

That link does clearly show Paramount's canon policy. Yes they screw up with continuity all the time, but that's for us to deal with if we're going to analyse ST like we do around here.

Im my opinion, Gene Rodenberry was a jerk for not having people check continuity and stuff.

And Paramount in general. Sadly we've just got to deal with it.

[Darth Servo]

That is not a argument, that is a opinion as stated by one of your things, because they screw up so much in the episodes, I even have a book which points flaws of all kinds in 6 of the 7 seasons of ST:NG, and there is not one episode that is not flawed. Im my opinion, Gene Rodenberry was a jerk for not having people check continuity and stuff.

Yep, you're a creationist moron all right. You actually think you can prove A is legitimate by showing that B is less than perfect. The fact that they screw up episodes does NOT make the written material canon.

lastly, I WAS using the E-J as a example!!! Lets make a fed ship, and name it the Hyperactive, and give it big bad lasers and its 50 thousand years in the future. Such a ship is sure as heck not cannon, but it can be used to make a EXAMPLE.

No, it CAN'T because its NOT CANON. Its FAN WANK. Fan wank is NEVER a legitimate example.

[Batman]

lastly, I WAS using the E-J as a example!!! Lets make a fed ship, and name it the Hyperactive, and give it big bad lasers and its 50 thousand years in the future. Such a ship is sure as heck not cannon, but it can be used to make a EXAMPLE.

So can my universe-destroying handguns.

[Karmic Knight]

This thread is a joke, almost textbook from the website, my only regret is I didn't post all of the points that someone said before me.

The arguement is simple it doesn't matter what Trek advances are because all of it is said on the site.

The guy also seems to not stay on topic himself.

Im my opinion, Gene Rodenberry was a jerk for not having people check continuity and stuff.

Rodenberry is the canon. it's on the WEBSITE. Just klick the top of the screne, the Star Destroyer, and read you argument.

[Ted C]

Like I said, I am not going to argue something that you are not going to listen to. I have seen what you do to creationists here. You belitte them, mock them, and are extremely rude.

That depends on the quality of your argument, doesn't it? If you regurgitate exactly the same invalid arguments that creationists typically produce when attempting to argue for creationism, then you probably will be raked through the coals.

If you actually produce an intelligent argument backed with verifiable data, then you'll get a much better response. Of course, I have my doubts that such an argument even exists, so...

[CaptHawkeye]

That is not a argument, that is a opinion as stated by one of your things, because they screw up so much in the episodes,

It's called suspension of disbelief cunt stain. Obviously you can't argue over fictional subjects if you don't take what happens in the show at face value.

I even have a book which points flaws of all kinds in 6 of the 7 seasons of ST:NG, and there is not one episode that is not flawed.

Guess what, it's not canon. So it's completely irrelevant.

[quote Im my opinion, Gene Rodenberry was a jerk for not having people check continuity and stuff. [/quote]

That is something we can agree on. It's even more stupid when you realize how much Roddenberry tried to tout how "superior" his society was to ours.

lastly, I WAS using the E-J as a example!!! Lets make a fed ship, and name it the Hyperactive, and give it big bad lasers and its 50 thousand years in the future. Such a ship is sure as heck not cannon, but it can be used to make a EXAMPLE.

A totally irrelevant one that blatently breaks the debating rules. If we can make a ship like that, why don't we make a Star Destroyer with technology from the Xelee or Culture? This is why we need to apply guidelines to objective debate. Without them all sorts of wierd shit comes up that simply can't be worked with.

[Ritterin Sophia]

me: hats not the Enterprise bit I was referring to, you misunderstood me; i was referring to a book, in which there is a line that says somthing like: "
The Enterprise-J slowed in the expase BETWEEN the galaxies, slowed to warp speed, a relativy crawl, then to impulse, then stopped." Thus indicating that trans-galactic travel has taken place. And I never intended for yall to start arguing about the E-J, that was just a example. I might try to obtain the exact quote. Now as for ST books being un-cannon, I don't give a rip. They are canon to me. If SW books are cannon, ST books should be too

Fuck off dipshit, you are not licensed by Paramount Pictures to make statements on what IS and what IS NOT Canon, however, Paula Block (Spelling?) is, and she says, books aren't canon! And guess what, the Copyright for both Star Wars and Star Trek are held by two seperate groups, Wars is LucasFilm Licensing owned by George Lucas, and Trek is owned by Paramount Pictures, so what applies to one doesn't apply to the other.

[FedRebel]

[*]The series Enterprise was shown to be nothing more than one of Riker's holodeck fantasies and the E-J would be part of that fantasy.[/list][/quote]

The simulation was of a historical event, Riker was using it in order to help him make the decision to rat on Pressman.

The exchanges between Riker and Troi make it clear that the program is supposed to be a historical recreation.

The fact that pretty much the whole show took a massive dump on TOS continuity.

inconsistency is Star Trek's middle name, there were continuity issues before ENT

And I bet you'll just love ST XI

The fact that we never hear anything about the uber-wank Xindi anywhere else in Trek. Its like they just disappeared!!!

I don't recall seeing an Andorian or a Tellerite in the TNG era, Obviously they don't exist and were merely fabrications of TOS and ENT.

Anyway the Sheliak from TNG were supposedly powerful, yet we only wee them in one episode and never here from them again.

The point is races get "lost" all the time in Trek, the Xindi are just business as usual.

Could it be they never existed in the first place and were all just...

...a fantasy?

The same argument could be made for any of the other series

Voyager was just a Holonovel Barkley created, or a wet dream by Harry Kim

DS9 was obviously a dream by Sisco after being knocked unconscious during Wolf359

You can maintain whatever opinion you want about ENT, but until it is explicitly mentioned that ENT was a holonovel, the events in the live action program have to be treated as canon in debate.

[Batman]

The fact that pretty much the whole show took a massive dump on TOS continuity.

inconsistency is Star Trek's middle name, there were continuity issues before ENT

But few if any so blatant or massive. While I do NOT think ENT was supposed to be fiction-within-fiction you must admit it would solve a great many continuity problems if it were.

So, any bets on wether our esteemed silicon sorceror bothers to actually address points anytime soon? Besides maintaining that non-canon sources are a valid source for information in a vs debate because he says so?

[SilverWingedSeraph]

DS9 was obviously a dream by Sisco after being knocked unconscious during Wolf359

Nah, man. DS9 was the writing and delusions of Benny Russell, an African-American sci-fi writer in the 1950's, who looks exactly like Sisko!

[Surlethe]

It's interesting how you can suddenly read the minds of three thousand people spread across the world, to be able to declare that "nobody would want to listen".substance.

Like I said, I am not going to argue something that you are not going to listen to. I have seen what you do to creationists here. You belitte them, mock them, and are extremely rude.

This will help foster in you the skill of critical reading: sifting past insults and other fluff and getting to the heart of an argument, seeing what it's really saying.

Why on earth would I want to set myself up for that for no reason? I could go to my creationist friends and even if I got solid proof for creationism, I doubt you would pay attention to it. You tell me why I should bother, and I might.

We -- all of us -- would certainly pay attention to it. There's really no point in keeping your mind closed to any new information. In fact, as we would be constructing rebuttals, we would probably pay more attention to your arguments than you do yourself.

The reason why I quoted that was because the Bible verse that it comes from packs a heck of punch.

How so?

[The Computer Wizard]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt. Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad. I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more. You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments and your rudeness, I am outa here. I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time. Feel free to email me, but chances are I will block your email, and delete your email, feel free to respond here, but it will be just to other cronies.

[Karmic Knight]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt. Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad. I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more. You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments and your rudeness, I am outa here. I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time. Feel free to email me, but chances are I will block your email, and delete your email, feel free to respond here, but it will be just to other cronies.

Style way over substance to you right?

[Darth Servo]

And I bet you'll just love ST XI

Actually I already hate the whole idea. Paramount needs to let the franchise rest in peace.

The fact that we never hear anything about the uber-wank Xindi anywhere else in Trek. Its like they just disappeared!!!

I don't recall seeing an Andorian or a Tellerite in the TNG era, Obviously they don't exist and were merely fabrications of TOS and ENT.

Neither of them were uber-threats to the federation who could blow up planets the way the Xindi were.

Anyway the Sheliak from TNG were supposedly powerful, yet we only wee them in one episode and never here from them again.

Because they were xenophobes who could kick the Fed's ass and who made it clear they wanted the Fed's to stay the fuck away from them.

The same argument could be made for any of the other series

Voyager was just a Holonovel Barkley created, or a wet dream by Harry Kim

Voyager takes place in a part of space that no other series even touches. The same can't be said for Enterprise.

DS9 was obviously a dream by Sisco after being knocked unconscious during Wolf359

DS9 takes place after every other piece of canon material dealing with that sector of space.

You can maintain whatever opinion you want about ENT, but until it is explicitly mentioned that ENT was a holonovel, the events in the live action program have to be treated as canon in debate.

Your reasons don't wash. We have sufficient evidence to conclude it was made up. The fact that it supposedly was a "historical event" being created in the Holodeck doesn't make it an ACCURATE recreation anymore than 300, Alexander, Gladiator or any other Hollywood films about ancient times are accurate.

[Darth Servo]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt.

You tried to post your opinion as a legitimate debate point and tried to use said opinion to override official policy. What do you expect?

Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad.

The fact that several people can see the exact same flaws in your arguments should tell you that your arguments range between "pretty week" and "utter transparent bullshit"

I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more. You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments and your rudeness, I am outa here. I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time. Feel free to email me, but chances are I will block your email, and delete your email, feel free to respond here, but it will be just to other cronies.

In other words, you're going to do the exact same thing you criticized everone her of doing--ignoring the facts. The difference is you have no actual EXAMPLES of us ignoring things we don't like.

[Batman]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt.

You think THAT was treating you badly? Oh boy.
As for having a discussion, how about you, y'know, actually DISCUSS? Specifically, discuss the topic of the thread YOU created as opposed to whining about how creationists are treated badly around here?

Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them.

Really. No doubt you exhaustively read through the board archive to come to this conclusion as you are of course not stupid enough to base that conclusion on this here one thread.

Sad. I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more.

Why should we post more when you have yet to address a single point?

You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments

Not a single one of which you have countered so far,

and your rudeness, I am outa here. I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time.

Yeah, right.

[Ritterin Sophia]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt.

You didn't read the rules of the board, we can flame you as much as we like as long as we rebut your points and make our own, we're not going to be nicer just because you asked when we flame mods and they reciprocate to us and other mods.

Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad. I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more. You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments and your rudeness, I am outa here.

Style Over Substance Fallacy, you're not allowed to invalidate other peoples' points just because you were insulted.

I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time.

Can't say we'll miss them because like hundreds of millions of Theists before you, they'll be the same tired old arguments that have been rebutted by each of us a thousand times before.

Feel free to email me, but chances are I will block your email, and delete your email, feel free to respond here, but it will be just to other cronies.

I assumed you would provide evidence for your accusation, but it's pretty much like the evidence for your magical tyrant sky pixie, nonexistent.

[Karmic Knight]

[quote=''The Computer Wizard"]Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad.[/quote]

The fact that several people can see the exact same flaws in your arguments should tell you that your arguments range between "pretty week" and "utter transparent bullshit"

I'm a complete idiot and I saw through the transparent arguements.

[SilverWingedSeraph]

Goodbye, I was hoping to have a good discussion on topics, but I get treated like a bag of dirt. Oh I could not help but notice that fresh posts are far between, and that it seems that the same people are talking in each one of them. Sad. I used to be in a clan of about 100 people for a computer game, and those people not only were a heck of a lot nicer, they posted a lot more. You all can have your re-re-re-re-re-hashed arguments and your rudeness, I am outa here. I was going to take time and research thuroughly to counteract that guy that runs creation-theories, but I wont bother, its just not worth the effort and my time. Feel free to email me, but chances are I will block your email, and delete your email, feel free to respond here, but it will be just to other cronies.

You should have read the damn rules before signing up, shithead. Words fail to describe just how sad and pathetic this makes you look. I find myself wondering if this is some kind of record. You've only been here for a few hours before you chicken out and run back to where you feel safe, because your retarded beliefs aren't challenged by logic. We don't want you here anyway. In your very short time here, you have provided me with frustration at your stupidity, and amusement at your retardation.

And you couldn't "counteract" the arguments of a well educated twelve year old to save your life. The idea of you disproving anything on Wong's website is laughable.

Run along, little man. Next time, read the rules. We don't catter to those with easily hurt feelings here. We deal if facts, or at the very least, simple logic. You have an astonishing deficiency in both.

[Master_Baerne]

Star Wars tech dosen't increase because they've hit the pinnacle of possible technology. Reasonably, Star Trek will hit that too, but that won't stop the GE winning from numbers if not superior firepower.