EU's officiality

Doomriser · Post by **Doomriser** » 2002-08-12 12:19am

What Dickstar doesn't seem to understand is that Dr. Saxton's ICS HTL calcs were derived from estimates based on the most consistent elements from BDZ in official literature as well as canon weapons knowledge. Any investigation into SWTC easily demonstrates how concerned Saxton is with Star Wars technical accuracy, consistency, and realism. The ICS did not make the super-SW calcs, it only confirmed and solidified already-existing knowledge.

LMSx · Post by **LMSx** » 2002-08-12 12:22am

Fine. I agree.

Out of morbid curiosity, what was the official statement for or aginst ICS canon status? I havn't been on the debate scene long enough to end up in a debate where TPM/OT ICS was under question.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2002-08-12 12:24am

Doomriser wrote:What Dickstar doesn't seem to understand is that Dr. Saxton's ICS HTL calcs were derived from estimates based on the most consistent elements from BDZ in official literature as well as canon weapons knowledge. Any investigation into SWTC easily demonstrates how concerned Saxton is with Star Wars technical accuracy, consistency, and realism. The ICS did not make the super-SW calcs, it only confirmed and solidified already-existing knowledge.

Exactly. He is falling (once again) for the fallacy that if he can remove the source he can also remove the capability.

Incidentally, if there is anyone who thinks that the Flying Wing designed in the '40's was anywhere near what the B2 Spirit is, slap "idiot" on your forehead and walk around the block numerous times while asking people to take pictures of you. The thing barely flew, and it flew inefficiently. It had a relatively large cross-section, it used propellers instead of jet engines, and it was not even fly-by wire. It doesn't even look the same! Parity of technology is the only explanation for the kind of parity of design we see between ICS and AotC (or, for that matter, ICS and all of the other films).