Darth Wong wrote:I see it is worse than I feared. You are actually so goddamned stupid that you don't see the problem with the writing when spacecraft can fly so close to each other that it's actually akin to bumper-to-bumper traffic in automobiles. Once again, you seem to ignore the fact that the writing itself is being criticized here.
Yes ladies and gentleman, if it were up to Mike Wong, two spacecraft travelling at over twenty times the speed of sound, wouldn't, couldn't, possibly be able to 'fly' close together. Woe would have befallen the space programs of no less than
two superpowers, had this brain trust had a voice. Thankfully for you, me, and humanity in general. He remains a voice in obscurity.
Darth Wong wrote:Of course they're at risk, retard. You said yourself the Cylons have tried something like this before, and that means they've been scheming and planning. Of course, you assume they're retards and won't think of anything new, so any idea I come up with is just crazy-talk and shouldn't be taken seriously. Hell, you even OPENLY MOCKED any idea I came up with that might involve them doing a lot of planning or scheming, because of course, they wouldn't do that. Congratulations for demonstrating that you have the strategic thinking of a Trekkie.
So me being a Trekkie is because I refuse to acknowledge ad hoc tacked on 'if they did
this' scenarios for the sole purpose of you trying to shore up a losing fucking argument. Of course in your fantasy world only the Cylons would become more 'sneaky sneaky' the Colonials wouldn't evolve their own safety procedures, just like in real life ...
hang on I think I see a flaw in your devilish logic!
Darth Wong wrote:You know, I'm growing tired of your lies. I
never specified in my initial posts exactly which assets were at risk; I was talking about the risk to the entire mission to save humanity. Here is the post to which you initially responded:
I wrote:In the end, they took an unacceptably stupid risk that was as idiotic as anything you can point to in the original series. The original series may have had bad writing, but at least it seemed to recognize on some level that it was camp. My tolerance for stupid plot takes a nosedive when a show takes itself as seriously as neoBSG does.
You'd think that they'd be doing everything in their power to get as far away from their vastly superior enemy as possible, but I never get that impression from the show. Instead, there's political intrigue and bizarre hokey religious bullshit and things like this "rescue mission" which could only have been dreamt up by a retarded hamster on crack. As I said, if the show didn't take itself so seriously I might be more inclined to overlook that stuff, but it does.
Nope, nothing there about whether it was Galactica, fleet ships, their fighters etc. at risk. Why? Because I was talking about the risk
to the entire mission, you lying piece of shit. Your historical revisionism only tells me that you are incapable of arguing about this honestly.
That's rich asshole. If it was true that I was 'historical revising' this argument from the first post, then why didn't you correct me? Could it be because only now you're trying to back track the fucking issue because your more full of crap than a septic tank? I stated
FROM THE FIRST POST ONWARDS that I did not believe that 'THE ENTIRE HUMANITY' is at risk;
Darth Wong wrote:They were also assuming that their scheme for avoiding backtracking would be effective; if they were wrong ...
and in the very same post;
Darth Wong wrote:Then again, the survival of the entire human race didn't depend on not being found.
There it is you schizophrenic delusional asshole. Your fucking assumption loud and clear. Not 'the mission to save humanity
in general', but your assumption that the fleet was in
direct danger by this action.
That is what this replies are being directed to and you know it, I
will not even respond to any of your attempts to shift the goal posts.
And while we're at it, lets look at my reply to the quote you gave;
Crown wrote:Darth Wong wrote:In the end, they took an unacceptably stupid risk that was as idiotic as anything you can point to in the original series.
I disagree with this, although having not seen more than 5 mins of the original series I can't possibly disprove it. I will say though that the risk was far less than you seem to be implying, although the possible 'rewards' for them going there was no where near acceptable to take that risk. It was an act of plot, a purly contrived one at that.
Darth Wong wrote:The original series may have had bad writing, but at least it seemed to recognize on some level that it was camp. My tolerance for stupid plot takes a nosedive when a show takes itself as seriously as neoBSG does.
I'm trying hard not to get into the 'make Mike like nBSG' mind set, but didn't B5 suffer from even worse examples of such behavior?
Darth Wong wrote:You'd think that they'd be doing everything in their power to get as far away from their vastly superior enemy as possible, but I never get that impression from the show. Instead, there's political intrigue and bizarre hokey religious bullshit and things like this "rescue mission" which could only have been dreamt up by a retarded hamster on crack. As I said, if the show didn't take itself so seriously I might be more inclined to overlook that stuff, but it does.
I'm with you on this rescue mission (but for different reasons; it was a pure act of writer fiat, it came out of nowhere, and it went no where), I don't mind the hokey religious stuff, but come on, political intrigue has been a part of human nature since the first cave man picked up a rock and brained the alpha male to claim his spoils. It's not exactly something we'll ever do away with.
Wow, the unmitigated arrogance of me, agreeing with you that the rescue mission to Caprica didn't fit in with the 'general' goal of getting the fuck out of dodge. What ever will I agree with you on next?
And just what was
your reply to me on this issue ... hang on, it's gotta be around here somewhere, I'm sure if I use my super powers I can find it ... no. What do you know. There isn't one. You let it lie then, and are now claiming that it was
I who ignored it? Riiiiiight.
Darth Wong wrote:It was
you who started trying to argue about which
particular problems might arise, and when I started arguing with you about that, you pretended that this was my initial argument. And now you have resorted to lies and projections like this:
It is your concoction to attempt to place nBSG on oBSG 'Casino Planet' episode level. You're fucking grasping at straws and it is - frankly - pathetic.
The only one here who is grasping at straws is you, by LYING about what I initially said and resorting to strawman distortions and blatant dishonesty in order to defend your beloved dumbshit show and all of its idiotic writing conventions. Did I ever defend oBSG's writing? No; I admitted it was stupid right up-front. The only one here who is rabidly defending a TV show is you.
Liar;
Crown wrote:I disagree with this, although having not seen more than 5 mins of the original series I can't possibly disprove it. I will say though that the risk was far less than you seem to be implying, although the possible 'rewards' for them going there was no where near acceptable to take that risk. It was an act of plot, a purely contrived one at that.
Crown wrote:I'm with you on this rescue mission (but for different reasons; it was a pure act of writer fiat, it came out of nowhere, and it went no where), I don't mind the hokey religious stuff, but come on, political intrigue has been a part of human nature since the first cave man picked up a rock and brained the alpha male to claim his spoils. It's not exactly something we'll ever do away with.
That was from my first post, do I need to quote myself even more? Well I will, even though it has become apparent that you will either flat out ignore this evidence, or find some other way to shift gears;
Crown wrote:I say again; the risk is hardly as great as you imagine, the really stupid thing about this scenario was that the reward wasn't worth the risk of losing the Raptors and the pilots.
Crown wrote:Again, I'm not arguing that the entire mission was stupid from a risk/rewards stand point, but I am saying the risk to the fleet and to Galactica is NO WHERE NEAR as grave as you believe, and it would take MASSIVE, unprecedented levels of stupidity to actually lose the Galactica.
Crown wrote:Stop projecting. The crew were right to be concerned over the plot, the risk of the Raptors and their crew where waaaaaay beyond the possible gains of the mission. Not that anyone seriously thought that THE ENTIRE FLEET hung in the balance. It was a mis allocation of resources with no clear objectives or gains.
Crown wrote:Liar, liar pants of fire. I said in the very first post that this was a stupid idea, I mean just brain numbing obvious writer fiat going on. What I disagree with, and what we are discussing, is your assertion that the fleet was placed in jeopardy from this action, and no, not from well they stand to lose X Raptors which would really hurt them on Z, Y, W fronts, which would lead to, and so on, etc.
I'm not going to even
bother quoting everything from my
last reply to you, but if you consider any of the afore cited as examples of me 'defending the writing' than I don't know what kind of fucked up world you live in cunt. And here's something fun, the
next time you start making accusations you fucked up dwarf, have the decency to provide evidence.
Crown wrote:And how the fuck is "let's stop on this casino planet" so much dumber than "let's stop on this dirtball planet" or "let's go back to Caprica", exactly? They all suffer from the same basic flaw: failure to make the characters follow the logical course of action that is dictated by their situation, which is to flee at all possible speed and put as much distance as possible between them and their enemies.
That, is actually a very good point. Which is why I said in this exchange;
Crown wrote:Darth Wong wrote:In the end, they took an unacceptably stupid risk that was as idiotic as anything you can point to in the original series.
I disagree with this, although having not seen more than 5 mins of the original series I can't possibly disprove it. I will say though that the risk was far less than you seem to be implying, although the possible 'rewards' for them going there was no where near acceptable to take that risk. It was an act of plot, a purly contrived one at that.
Which is why I never broached the subject at all. To me, I
can't make judgement calls on shows I've never even watched, I can't possibly put it in any kind of meaningful context. I don't know whether or not the 'Casino Planet' episode would have rankled me or not (although as it stands it does, simply because I don't even watch 'camp' sci-fi shows, they don't hold my attention). I'm not comparing the two, I'm not even trying to defend one private Idaho over another.
All I'm doing is saying that your exaggerated claim of the entire fleet was at risk, is just that - an exaggeration. A bold, flat out, spectacular attempt to make a situation sound more reckless than it is.
I flat out
reject your assertion that you were speaking 'in general to the entire goal of keeping humanity alive' was what you were talking about in the post that I replied to - or any other posts that followed. You were talking about the fleet itself, period.
Darth Wong wrote:PS. About the religious bullshit, yes, I know their religion is actually supposed to be true. That does not defend the writing; it only plants Galactica in the annoying "all religions are basically true" category of bad writing. At least if a prophecy or ancient religious teaching is found to be based on something, it should be so distorted that attempts to follow it cause more harm than good.
Actually religion hasn't been given a green light at all, nor has it been defined as being true or righteous. You assume because the scroll of Pic-her-nose were true about the Tomb of Athena, then religion is being given a green light, but throughout the show the Cylons have implied that the Colonists religion is actually
false, and that they know more about it than the Colonists do.
The show has actually taken a very agnostic attitude towards religion, sometimes it's all good, and at others all bad. Even those who are playing religious are atheist through and through. Neither the Colonists nor the Cylons are 100% pure religious, and the argument between the religious and atheist (from both sides) is one that is modeled on Earth. Those that are shown to poses religious conviction, are more often than not displayed as zealots.
In short you're
assuming that just because certain passages in 'holy' scrolls have been proven right, then that is an affirmation on the whole issue of religion, which is a rather simple minded conclusion. There was no evidence of a
deity in Athena's Tomb, what was evidenced was very advanced technology. To quote Arthur C. Clark; "Significantly advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic to more primitive intellects."
Why this needs to be explained to you is a fucking mystery. One of the Cylon models claims that God talks to them all the time, the other calls them self deluded schizophrenics. The show hasn't ruled on any which way yet. And you can check my posting history, because this isn't the first time I've posted as such.
But you know what Mike? When all is said and done, you are right. I am in the end, a liar. Do you know why?
Crown wrote:I disagreed with what you characterised as what was at risk - not whether or not that there was any risk present - and no, a slippery slope falacy of losing X will hurt them in Y and Z areas does not apply. You mentioned the entire fleet, you are wrong. Grow up and deal with it. I was amused, I no longer am. If you chose to reply to this post and yet again
continue to ignore that;
- I have already agreed with you that this mission was fucking stupid.
- That in any situation there exists a risk/reward analysis process by which we determine what risks are worth taking, and that I have stated that in this case the reward wasn't worth risking the Raptors and their crews.
- That the only place of contention between us is exactly. WHAT. WAS. AT. RISK.
Then I will consider this discussion forfeit, for I have neither the time nor patience to constantly repeat myself, only to have it conveniently ignored.
It turns out, that I broke my own promise.