Bad Astronomy review of RotS is up

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2005-05-24 09:24am

Some people like to use the infamous "movies sometimes contain mistakes" argument to somehow conclude that "the look of the scene can be 100% opposite to what the director intended", which is simply absurd. Do these people really believe that if you went up to George Lucas and said "George, you didn't really mean Alderaan to be blown up right? You just meant that it would be really badly damaged but would eventually re-form?" that he would say they were right?

Seriously, nobody in his right mind would seriously argue that unless he's working from an agenda and has thrown simple honesty out the window.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2005-05-24 03:09pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:And also with the concept of insults...it seems backhand and indirect insults are fine but saying someone is thick for making stupid statements without evidence is not....what fun...

Chill, Keevan. Most places don't accept SD.net's insulting debate style. It's not a failing on their part, it's a differing standard.

Keevan_Colton · Post by **Keevan_Colton** » 2005-05-24 04:23pm

McC wrote:Chill, Keevan. Most places don't accept SD.net's insulting debate style. It's not a failing on their part, it's a differing standard.

No, but they let little cunts like hewhocaves away with it. It is a failing from my perspective, I believe in having facts on side and damn the rest...if the other side cannot accord with reality then any name concieved to fit their idiocy is not only acceptable, but thoroughly justified.

McC · Post by **McC** » 2005-05-24 04:38pm

Keevan_Colton wrote:No, but they let little cunts like hewhocaves away with it. It is a failing from my perspective, I believe in having facts on side and damn the rest...if the other side cannot accord with reality then any name concieved to fit their idiocy is not only acceptable, but thoroughly justified.

So PM Phil and detail your grievances. Confronting a troll directly does nothing if you don't have moderation power behind you.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2005-05-24 04:58pm

Crown wrote:Who is the poster Fearghul over there? Anyway, somebody make sure you pick up on this point by our beloved John;

John M. Dollan wrote:Yes, but I was talking about the previously quoted "millions of gigatons" for one of the *ships*. Oh, sure, the Death Star will have an ungodly amount of energy in order to destroy a presumably roughly Earth-massed planet (we don't know if the debris was scattered, but I would assume that it remained gravitationally bound and will reassemble over the next few centuries... though, really, I tend to think that the debris should have been vaporized). But a ship with that amount of fire power... it just doesn't ring true to me.

...John...
It was seen moving at a fraction of c, I think you can kiss the reformation good bye, point him to the DS planetary destruction page on the main site (here). Also the vaporise part is interesting; he obviously doesn't have an agenda if he's trying to increase the DS firepower.

Also suggest that he reads the following; Mike's site (along with Brian's Turbolaser pages), Curtis' site and come back after that and tell us that the numbers are made up out of thin air.

It's not even necessary to calculate the debris' velocity. It clearly exceeded Alderaan's surface escape velocity, which means that it was no longer gravitationally bound. (If it was traveling at less than 11.2 km/s, then we simply would not have been able to see the expansion.) This guy is obviously unfamiliar with the concept of potential and kinetic energy balances.