[Russian] Generic anti-Saxton bullshit

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2006-09-12 01:55am

Damn it, I missed all the fun again.

Its amazing this idiot things that because a 50 MT nuke can cause massive earth quakes, that this event is even remotely comparable to destroying an entire continent.

Did anyone point out to him the famous dino-killer asteroid makes 200 GT look like nothing yet said asteroid did NOT vaporize entire continents?

Russian · Post by **Russian** » 2006-09-12 06:47am

Its amazing this idiot things that because a 50 MT nuke can cause massive earth quakes, that this event is even remotely comparable to destroying an entire continent.

1) I DIDN'T said that 50MT nuke could destroy a continent... But the 200 GT is another buisness. Dino-killer asteroid impact resulted in 1000 GT explosion... and an ecological disaster of that magnitude, that it changed biological life forever. If the turbolaser was 200 GT powerful and we do 50 shots, it will be 10 000 GT in total... so just imagine the magnitude of results...
2) I assume that these 200 GT figures are the sme absurd, as the range of turbolasers as long as 10 light minutes when used against spaceships stated in some sourcebooks.( Range of 10 lightminutes is absurd because of fact that turbolaser will require 10 minutes minimum to get to target, providing the bolt is flying at c ( films prove that speed of turbolaser bolt is usually less than c), while the starship could easily move away from danger ) The power of turbolasers in 200 GT contradicts the movies ( in both Original Trilogy and the New Episodes turbolasers were significantly less powerful), so these figures cuold be ignored.

Post by **Surlethe** » 2006-09-12 07:41am

Russian wrote:1) I DIDN'T said that 50MT nuke could destroy a continent... But the 200 GT is another buisness. Dino-killer asteroid impact resulted in 1000 GT explosion... and an ecological disaster of that magnitude, that it changed biological life forever. If the turbolaser was 200 GT powerful and we do 50 shots, it will be 10 000 GT in total... so just imagine the magnitude of results...

Did you take a junior high prealgebra class, retard? These strawmen and appeals to "common sense" will get you nowhere. Hell, you've not made an argument; you've simply insinuated the converse of the argument you seem to be trying to prove. By your logic, because my penis is bigger than yours, I can knock an elephant down when I ejaculate.

The K-T impact, by the way, didn't "destroy a continent". The crater it created wasn't continent-shattering; its radius is only 61 miles.

2) I assume that these 200 GT figures are the sme absurd, as the range of turbolasers as long as 10 light minutes when used against spaceships stated in some sourcebooks.( Range of 10 lightminutes is absurd because of fact that turbolaser will require 10 minutes minimum to get to target, providing the bolt is flying at c ( films prove that speed of turbolaser bolt is usually less than c), while the starship could easily move away from danger ) The power of turbolasers in 200 GT contradicts the movies ( in both Original Trilogy and the New Episodes turbolasers were significantly less powerful), so these figures cuold be ignored.

Range has nothing to do with power, and turbolasers' power in the OT and PT is quite consistent with 200 GT heavy shots.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-12 09:53am

Russian wrote:1) I DIDN'T said that 50MT nuke could destroy a continent... But the 200 GT is another buisness. Dino-killer asteroid impact resulted in 1000 GT explosion...

You're an idiot and, like so many Trekkie morons out there, you obviously can't do math. The dino-killer asteroid was 1E8 megatons, which works out to 100,000 GT, not 1000 GT.

If the turbolaser was 200 GT powerful and we do 50 shots, it will be 10 000 GT in total... so just imagine the magnitude of results...

It would take 500 shots to equal the dino-killer asteroid hit, you idiot. And that caused an ecological disaster but did not kill off all life on the planet. So you would need even more than that; my reference sources indicate that you would need at least ten times more, or 5000 shots at 200 GT per shot. And that still wouldn't "slag" the surface of the planet; it would only kill all of the complex life forms.

If you're going to base an argument upon math, here's a hint: learn how to do math. While you're at it, learn to read. You're only reinforcing the pattern, already quite consistent, that only rabid bluffers and scientific ignoramuses come to your conclusions rather than mine.

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-12 10:01am

Russian wrote:
Its amazing this idiot things that because a 50 MT nuke can cause massive earth quakes, that this event is even remotely comparable to destroying an entire continent.
1) I DIDN'T said that 50MT nuke could destroy a continent... But the 200 GT is another buisness.

The fact that the damage done by a 200GT explosion comes nowhere close to it nonwithstanding apparently,

Dino-killer asteroid impact resulted in 1000 GT explosion... and an ecological disaster of that magnitude, that it changed biological life forever.

Patently false, as the ecosystem today works pretty much as it did then minus a few species,

If the turbolaser was 200 GT powerful and we do 50 shots, it will be 10 000 GT in total... so just imagine the magnitude of results...

major ecological desaster. No appreciable damage to the continent where a BDZ requires the slagging of it in its entirety (leave alone the rest of the planet's surface.

2) I assume that these 200 GT figures are the sme absurd,

And I assume you're a mouldy piece of bread. And Unlike you I've got at least circumstantial evidence: You exhibit the level of intelligence we'd expect from that, whereas you just keep whining and completely ignore any rebuttal. 200GT is canon. Not contradicted by the novels. Learn to live with it.

as the range of turbolasers as long as 10 light minutes when used against spaceships stated in some sourcebooks.( Range of 10 lightminutes is absurd because of fact that turbolaser will require 10 minutes minimum to get to target,

And that means it won't work against stationary targets or ones on highly predictable flighpaths how?

providing the bolt is flying at c ( films prove that speed of turbolaser bolt is usually less than c)

Films prove that the visible part does. Films also prove there is an invisible part. You unsurprisingly lose again.

, while the starship could easily move away from danger )

Assuming it knows there is anyand where it's coming from.

The power of turbolasers in 200 GT contradicts the movies

Outright lie.

( in both Original Trilogy and the New Episodes turbolasers were significantly less powerful), so these figures cuold be ignored.

Quantify the ROTJ TL shots, asshat.

So, are you going to adress any of the rebuttals any time soon?

Batman · Post by **Batman** » 2006-09-12 10:03am

Err-replace 'novels' with 'movies', please. I'm not really sure how that happened.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2006-09-12 03:20pm

Hurray, the idiot DIDN'T run away and I can join in the fun of thrashing him

Russian wrote:
Its amazing this idiot things that because a 50 MT nuke can cause massive earth quakes, that this event is even remotely comparable to destroying an entire continent.
1) I DIDN'T said that 50MT nuke could destroy a continent... But the 200 GT is another buisness.

I didn't say you said that. I merely pointed out your stupidity in thinking that large earth quakes even comes CLOSE to destroying a continent.

Dino-killer asteroid impact resulted in 1000 GT explosion... and an ecological disaster of that magnitude, that it changed biological life forever.

Yet it did NOT destroy entire continents, contrary to your stupid claims, inspite of being far MORE powerful than 200 GT.

Darth Wong already covered your idiocy with the actual yield of said asteroid.

If the turbolaser was 200 GT powerful and we do 50 shots, it will be 10 000 GT in total... so just imagine the magnitude of results...

Unlike you, I can imagine the results just fine and its nowhere near "destroying entire continents".

2) I assume that these 200 GT figures are the sme absurd, as the range of turbolasers as long as 10 light minutes when used against spaceships stated in some sourcebooks.

200 GT yield comes straight from the AOTC Incredible Cross Sections book written by a man with a PhD in astrophysics making him far more qualified to discuss these matters than you obviously are.

( Range of 10 lightminutes is absurd because of fact that turbolaser will require 10 minutes minimum to get to target, providing the bolt is flying at c ( films prove that speed of turbolaser bolt is usually less than c),[/quote]
The VISIBLE PORTION of the bolt. Its pretty common knowledge that there is also an INvisible portion.

The power of turbolasers in 200 GT contradicts the movies ( in both Original Trilogy and the New Episodes turbolasers were significantly less powerful), so these figures cuold be ignored.

Not showing the full power of TLs in the films does NOT contradict the higher figures in the literature. Learn what the word 'contradict' means. A contradiction would be the films saying such yields are IMPOSSIBLE in SW and since the Death Star makes 200 GT look like a B-B gun, you'll have a hard time proving a contradiction.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » 2006-09-12 03:49pm

Russian, has it occured to you that Star Wars armor is designed to take or at least reduce damage from the firepower they are said to throw out.

The best example is the Alderaan shield which shrugged off the Superlaser for a split second before being battered down.

As a matter of fact you can see it for yourself on the main site [url=http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/]here.[url] {Hope I linked it right}

Einhander Sn0m4n · Post by **Einhander Sn0m4n** » 2006-09-12 03:51pm

Wanderer wrote:here. {Hope I linked it right}

You forgot the / on the second tag, sillybuns!

Noble Ire · Post by **Noble Ire** » 2006-09-12 03:59pm

Range of 10 lightminutes is absurd because of fact that turbolaser will require 10 minutes minimum to get to target, providing the bolt is flying at c ( films prove that speed of turbolaser bolt is usually less than c), while the starship could easily move away from danger )

Multi light-minute blasts are designed for usage against (relatively) immobile targets, like planets, asteroids, and unalerted space stations. I fail to see how your inability to understand the basic application of what amounts to artillery invalidates the technology.

The power of turbolasers in 200 GT contradicts the movies ( in both Original Trilogy and the New Episodes turbolasers were significantly less powerful), so these figures cuold be ignored.

You still have not established why exactly you think that this is the case. As many have pointed out, the "impact" of a DET energy weapon in space, especially against a shielded target, would not look at all like a conventional nuclear explosion, no matter the yield. What about capital turbolaser bolts, shown in any of the films, has lead you to believe that the accepted figures are false?

Post by **K. A. Pital** » 2006-09-13 01:11am

Speaking of stormtroopers, it's pretty clear that stormies were killed with spears through their armor in "To The Last Man", on multiple occasions. I remember, because I'm the one who did the translation he's referring to. Most of the instances where armor is clearly pierced:

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-13 03:03am

Sharpened wooden spears would bounce off cheap phone-booth plexiglass, never mind anything you could call "armour". The spears don't even seem to have stone or bronze heads. If their armour was that fragile, it should have crumpled like paper when struck by stones.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2006-09-13 03:59pm

Those spears are even sticking out of the ground (and rock, it seems), so they clearly cannot be "wooden" spears (or even spars with some sort of metal tip). They're clearly not a "normal" spear (or a primitive one) in any sense of the word.

NRS Guardian · Post by **NRS Guardian** » 2006-09-14 02:02am

Concerning ST armor first the Ewoks arrows in RotJ never penetrated ST armor and they had stone heads so wooden spears shouldn't be able to pierce ST armor either. Also, in the New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, in the section on projectile weapons, it's stated that Tusken weapons are projectile rifles. Also, in the original guide it says that special explosive tipped ammunition is required to get through ST armor.

Russian · Post by **Russian** » 2006-09-14 03:56am

. Also, in the New Essential Guide to Weapons and Technology, in the section on projectile weapons, it's stated that Tusken weapons are projectile rifles.

In Episode I it is clearly seen that tusken "rifles" are not firearms, because we see such weapons shoot the same plasma bolts as the blasters do. Perhaps, they are a primitive version of blasters.
About stormtrooper bodyarmour - it is non-resistant to blaster fire in lethal mode, even to weak-powered spoting models. But are blasters much more powerful than firearms? No, because as we can see in Episode 6 the blaster didn't cause massive damage ( I mention the scene, where Leia's been shot by blaster... IMHO, the ST armour is more like a modern class II armour according to ballistic resistance, it will hold the pistol bullet, but an AK would pierce through it on its effective range ( it is up to 350 m) like knife through butter...

A contradiction would be the films saying such yields are IMPOSSIBLE in SW and since the Death Star makes 200 GT look like a B-B gun, you'll have a hard time proving a contradiction.

We saw in films, what the standard turbolaser bolt could do, perhaps you could think, that films din't show the full power. But what the reason for nit using a full power shots for Rebels at Endor or in the battle for Coruscant (Episode 3). But neither in Episode 6, nor in Ep.3 we saw ships been vaporized, which is inevitable when ship lose it shields if the bolts were 200 GT powerful. The only ships vaporized were MC80 and other rebel shis in Episode 6 fallen under the Death Star-2 blasts ( which were far more powerful then 200 GT....)

The Nomad · Post by **The Nomad** » 2006-09-14 05:15am

The second Special Edition actually shows an ISD being rather violently blown up by the turbolaser shots from an Mon Calamari cruiser (read : turn into a giant fireball).

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » 2006-09-14 06:10am

Russian wrote:
A contradiction would be the films saying such yields are IMPOSSIBLE in SW and since the Death Star makes 200 GT look like a B-B gun, you'll have a hard time proving a contradiction.
We saw in films, what the standard turbolaser bolt could do, perhaps you could think, that films din't show the full power. But what the reason for nit using a full power shots for Rebels at Endor or in the battle for Coruscant (Episode 3). But neither in Episode 6, nor in Ep.3 we saw ships been vaporized, which is inevitable when ship lose it shields if the bolts were 200 GT powerful. The only ships vaporized were MC80 and other rebel shis in Episode 6 fallen under the Death Star-2 blasts ( which were far more powerful then 200 GT....)

Perhaps Russian, that is because Star Wars Armor is designed to withstand such weaponry.

LeftWingExtremist · Post by **LeftWingExtremist** » 2006-09-14 06:50am

here is another source saying that tusken rifles are projectile weapons.

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-09-14 08:47am

Russian wrote:In Episode I it is clearly seen that tusken "rifles" are not firearms, because we see such weapons shoot the same plasma bolts as the blasters do. Perhaps, they are a primitive version of blasters.

Don't be an idiot. Simply giving off a red glow does not make them blasters. They look like projectile weapons, they sound like projectile weapons, their ammo impacts like projectile weapons and official sources say they ARE projectile weapons.

About stormtrooper bodyarmour - it is non-resistant to blaster fire in lethal mode, even to weak-powered spoting models. But are blasters much more powerful than firearms? No, because as we can see in Episode 6 the blaster didn't cause massive damage ( I mention the scene, where Leia's been shot by blaster... IMHO, the ST armour is more like a modern class II armour according to ballistic resistance, it will hold the pistol bullet, but an AK would pierce through it on its effective range ( it is up to 350 m) like knife through butter...

Hey dumbass. You're comparing Stormtroopers who were hit square on the chest to Leia, who was hit on her shoulder.

We saw in films, what the standard turbolaser bolt could do, perhaps you could think, that films din't show the full power. But what the reason for nit using a full power shots for Rebels at Endor or in the battle for Coruscant (Episode 3). But neither in Episode 6, nor in Ep.3 we saw ships been vaporized, which is inevitable when ship lose it shields if the bolts were 200 GT powerful. The only ships vaporized were MC80 and other rebel shis in Episode 6 fallen under the Death Star-2 blasts ( which were far more powerful then 200 GT....)

Too bad that ISD that explodes in a huge fireball after it's shields fail torpedoes your theory.

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2006-09-14 09:04am

Is he seriously saying blasters are weak based on one shot to a wanted fugitive, ignoring all the 'giant smoking holes blown in chest' and 'wall-cratering' and 'sandcrawler disabling'?

I'm also loving how he says things like 'it is inevitable' that unknown armour must be massively vapourised by 200GT' with not only no numbers at all, but no analysis of the known superconducting, energy-field reinforced nature of Star Wars armour. It's just 'inevitable'

Russian · Post by **Russian** » 2006-09-14 09:12am

Perhaps Russian, that is because Star Wars Armor is designed to withstand such weaponry

It seem stange that ship armour, that withstands 200 GT yield shots could be easily destroyed by an asteroid impact ( Episode 5), so it seems if the turbolaser shots that powerful once the shields are down, the ship is doomed, just a couple of 200 GT directed energy shots will easily vaporise even an ISD..
But I must admit, that SW deflector shields are really tough thing - in Episode 5 an asteroid was vaporized by ISD's deflector...

The second Special Edition actually shows an ISD being rather violently blown up by the turbolaser shots from an Mon Calamari cruiser (read : turn into a giant fireball).

We actually don't know how much of that blast is turbolaser shot, we see an ISD been punctured by 2 bolts ( it didn't vaporise like the asteroids in Ep.5) than there is a powerful explosion ( looks like as the reactor went off)
To me correct are stated in SWTC numbers of turbolaser bolt be about 450 terawatt powerful at maimum, that is enough for asteroid destruction, and it is equvalent to power of approximatly 107 KT nuke, while it hits ground it could produce an explosion ( it was stated it is half a power of Hiroschima nuclear explosion) about enough to destroy a small city, as stated in canon materials...

like so many Trekkie morons out there

I'm not a "trekkie" ( fan of Star Trek ?), but rather a Star Wars fan....

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-14 09:20am

No, you're an idiot. And don't think we haven't noticed that you simply ignore rebuttals you can't answer. What is your explanation for the ability of an ISD to completely sterilize a planet in a short timeframe, if you think their weapons are so weak? Show us your math, retard. Oops, you can't do that, can you? You've already demonstrated that you have the math skills of a gerbil, after all.

Ted C · Post by **Ted C** » 2006-09-14 10:00am

Russian wrote:In Episode I it is clearly seen that tusken "rifles" are not firearms, because we see such weapons shoot the same plasma bolts as the blasters do. Perhaps, they are a primitive version of blasters.

Perhaps they fire tracer rounds or otherwise visibly resemble blaster bolts without being blaster bolts.

Russian wrote: bout stormtrooper bodyarmour - it is non-resistant to blaster fire in lethal mode, even to weak-powered spoting models.

Actually, it's hard to tell how much resistance it provides. It obviously doesn't provide complete protection against a direct hit from a blaster, but it's also hard to confirm whether a Stormtrooper was actually killed by a blaster shot or just incapacitated. Armor that changes a death into a serious injury is worth having.

Russian wrote: But are blasters much more powerful than firearms? No, because as we can see in Episode 6 the blaster didn't cause massive damage ( I mention the scene, where Leia's been shot by blaster...

Which isn't even necessarily a hit on her arm, unless you think human arms will explode in a shower of metallic sparks when hit. It seems more likely to me that the shot hit the wall just behind her, and hot fragments from the wall caused her injury.

Russian wrote: IMHO, the ST armour is more like a modern class II armour according to ballistic resistance, it will hold the pistol bullet, but an AK would pierce through it on its effective range ( it is up to 350 m) like knife through butter...

But you have no useful data to back up that estimate, of course.

Cao Cao · Post by **Cao Cao** » 2006-09-14 10:20am

Russian wrote:
Perhaps Russian, that is because Star Wars Armor is designed to withstand such weaponry
It seem stange that ship armour, that withstands 200 GT yield shots could be easily destroyed by an asteroid impact ( Episode 5), so it seems if the turbolaser shots that powerful once the shields are down, the ship is doomed, just a couple of 200 GT directed energy shots will easily vaporise even an ISD..

How the fuck do you define "easily destroyed"? They were in a super dense asteroid field which means they were being constantly pelted with rocks who's impact was enough to bring down their shields.
The asteroid in question then struck the bridge tower, one of the more vunerable parts of the ship. And from this you conclude that an entire ISD's armor is weak? Whatever.

We actually don't know how much of that blast is turbolaser shot, we see an ISD been punctured by 2 bolts ( it didn't vaporise like the asteroids in Ep.5) than there is a powerful explosion ( looks like as the reactor went off)

Hey that's good, move the goalposts when presented with evidence that goes against your stupid theories.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2006-09-14 10:37am

It would be nice if this imbecile would bother reading the various pages on the main site which address all of his arguments.