Isaac Bishop Junior (aka Virus-X)

[The Dude]

Methinks that there are five branches of service in the U.S Armed Forces. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard. Yep, five it is. It would appear that he is not very knowledgable on the U.S. Armed Forces, the same goes for his "sources".

He and his sources are apparently incapable of such simple research as viewing the Joint Chiefs of Staff website. The Marine Corps is technically part of the Department of the Navy, and the Coast Guard part of the Department of Transportation, but they are distinct branches of the military nonetheless.

[Master of Ossus]

I've used my sources in the armed forces (besides myself) for military data (all 3 branches; yes, the US only has THREE branches)...

Methinks that there are five branches of service in the U.S Armed Forces. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard. Yep, five it is. It would appear that he is not very knowledgable on the U.S. Armed Forces, the same goes for his "sources".

Seriously. Even if you consider the Marines to be technically a part of the US Navy, then the Coast Guard is still a fourth branch, and considering the Marines to be a part of the Navy is SERIOUSLY stretching things.

Regardless, the guy is an even bigger doofus than I had at first imagined. I particularly like the "spaceship so big you can see it" bit, seeing as how the space station MIR is visible from the ground. What a dumbass.

[Ted C]

Dude, in case you didn't quite read the entirty of the last e-mail, there are other things to do, besides answer whining e-mails bemoaning the fact that you're prejudiced. Shut up and get over yourself, I'm busy. If you've got a question to ask, ask it. Otherwise, find something else to do; I know I have.

So Junior has time to bad-mouth Mike on assorted bulletin boards, but he doesn't have time to defend his actions when Mike actually confronts him about it. Typical schoolyard behavior.

[The Dude]

Seriously. Even if you consider the Marines to be technically a part of the US Navy, then the Coast Guard is still a fourth branch, and considering the Marines to be a part of the Navy is SERIOUSLY stretching things.

The fact that the MC has separate representation on the JCS smashes the notion that they are not a separate branch from the Navy proper to bits.

[Sir Sirius]

The United States Coast Guard is a military, multimission, maritime service and one of the nation’s five Armed Services.

Well the Coast Guard sure seems to think that it is one of the five Armed Services.

I'm having the strongest Déjà Vu feeling right now...

[2000AD]

<snip>

Did he just use the ROPG stats in his calcs? .....

[Publius]

According to Federal law (10 U.S.C. 101):

The term "armed forces" means the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard.

This is information readily available to those who have never served in or with the Armed Forces in any capacity whatever, let alone to those who have. His opinion that there are three armed forces is rather less authoritative than the United States Congress's opinion that there are five.

PUBLIUS

[Uraniun235]

Good lord, what a dunderhead this Virus-X is.

[Dillon]

Haha, I remember debating him a few years ago on Yahoo. Although, those were my early days of SW vs ST debating (and debating in general), so my arguments and logic weren't exactly stellar.

Anyways, you can see them here, in the "messages" section if you're interested.

[Solauren]

Hey Mike, DARE him to send you his resume, then shred it like you did Graham Kennedy's education claims.

Once his resume is sent and shreds, hate mail page.

And if he does have any military contacts, they should know what he's saying. I mean, doesn't the Patriot act cover this? I mean, he's making the military look bad

[Ender]

Actually, just his name is suficient; there is a site somewhere where you can look up who is in the military (he says he is looking into re-enlisting, therefore he should be on it). I know some guys who used it to proove a shitbag was lying about having a captain father commanding a sub (like that wasn't enough of a give away). I'd need to ask them what the name of the site was though.

[Darth Servo]

Douwd. A little-known civilization of sentient energy beings capable of assuming he appearance of other life-forms. Possessing awesome powers of creation and destruction, the Douwd considered themselves to be immortal beings of disguises and false surroundings. One member of the Douwd assumed a Human identity around 2312, named himself Kevin Uxbridge, and settled on planet Delta Rana IV in 2361. ("The Survivors [TNG]).

So his OWN source admits that the Douwd are KNOWN LIARS and yet he trusts the creature's explanation of things.

[Darth Wong]

The pussy returns!

Ok, while I've got a few minutes, let's hear your take on the display of firepower in "The Die is Cast", and "The Empire Strikes Back".

I responded:

No problem. Read this:

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/

If you disagree with its conclusions (and don't lie to me; you have publicly
claimed that my conclusions are easily refuted and in fact have been
successfully refuted many times), then surely you should be able to point out what's wrong with them rather than asking me to repeat myself.

Why do you keep ducking this debate? Do you really think anyone's going to buy your bullshit claim that I haven't made an argument yet despite throwing up an entire PUBLIC WEBSITE full of arguments which has been up for YEARS?

His continued evasive bullshit:

So, in other words, you're not going to answer the question. Well, then I guess I'm just wasting my time. I've told you once that I'm on a limited temporal budget, due to personal and work demands, and, in light of that, you continue to dance in circles, and talk about everything else that has absolutely nothing to do with the Star Wars v. Star Trek debate, and to further waste my time with more garbage like your reply to my simple question to start the debate. If anyone's ducking, it's you, and I'm beginning to tire, fast. I work for a living, and there are people that depend on me, so I don't have time for bullcrap, and I'm not going to make time for it, either. This is your only warning. Get in it gear, or get out of my face. I'll check my e-mail, again, in a couple of days. If there is no answer to my question, then I'll just have to assume that you're attempting to dodge the debate, and instead, indulge yourself in a mudslinging festival. Save that crap for someone that has both the time & patience for it.

My response:

Isaac Bishop Junior wrote:

So, in other words, you're not going to answer the question. Well, then I guess I'm just wasting my time. I've told you once that I'm on a limited temporal budget, due to personal and work demands, and, in light of that, you continue to dance in circles, and talk about everything else that has absolutely nothing to do with the Star Wars v. Star Trek debate, and to further waste my time with more garbage like your reply to my simple question to start the debate.

You're pathetic, you know that? I provided MEGABYTES worth of arguments on the SW vs ST debate, and you say I have not made an argument?

If anyone's ducking, it's you, and I'm beginning to tire, fast.

It's obvious that you're just going to weasel out of this by claiming that you don't have time to read my website even though you publicly claim to have REFUTED it, which is impossible if you haven't already read it! So either you're a fucking liar or a coward; take your pick.

But I grow weary of your flimsy excuses, so I will take this one away from you. You want my argument on SW vs ST firepower with respect to TDIC and TESB and you refuse to simply read it off my website? Fine, I'll paraphrase myself for you right here:

1. TDiC demonstrates sufficient Trek firepower to cause less destruction at surface level than a large asteroid strike, with non-persistent fireballs, no visible ejecta whatsoever, and in fact, less surface luminosity than is generated from a large forest fire. In fact, the ONLY evidence that the ships in orbit were capable of anything more than surface-level destruction was one of several possible interpretations of a piece of dialogue, which is to say no conclusive evidence at all. Contrast this to their various attempts to destroy asteroids in "Rise" and "Pegasus" and "Cost of Living", which are consistent with their observed firepower in TDiC but not with the unreasonable extrapolations derived from optimistic interpretations of dialogue that are common to wild-eyed Trekkie fanatics.
2. The common use of TESB as a maximum benchmark (rather than a ridiculously conservative lower limit) for Imperial firepower is actually a joke in light of the fact that Slave-1 was effortlessly pulverizing multi-kilometre wide asteroids in AOTC. It's precisely analogous to saying that you saw an M1 Abrams' 120mm smoothbore punch through drywall, so you're going to take that as a firepower limit for a 120mm smoothbore even though a comparatively miniscule handgun can do the same thing, and the published specs for a 120mm smoothbore are much higher. Having said that, the calculations show that it takes around a third of a megaton to vape one of those asteroids as shown, although ISD guns are actually much more powerful than that.

I work for a living, and there are people that depend on me, so I don't have time for bullcrap, and I'm not going to make time for it, either. This is your only warning. Get in it gear, or get out of my face.

Same to you, asshole. I'm only repeating the arguments made on my website, and your pathetic dodge that "you have not made an argument until you make it personally to me via E-mail even if you've already published it on the Internet'" is not going to fool anyone, or look like anything but the pathetic delaying action that it is. Now that I have taken it away from you, what will your next excuse be? Your dog ate your homework?

I'll check my e-mail, again, in a couple of days. If there is no answer to my question, then I'll just have to assume that you're attempting to dodge the debate, and instead, indulge yourself in a mudslinging festival. Save that crap for someone that has both the time & patience for it.

This sounds really funny coming from someone whose entire communication consists of whining and excuses and who responded to a challenge to back up his claims about having ALREADY refuted my website by claiming that he doesn't have time to read it. You may think you are very clever at playing games, but no one is fooled. Grow a backbone and respond, coward.

What do you think he'll do next? Grow a backbone or continue weaseling?

[Connor MacLeod]

I don't think you could get him unless he loses his temper and comes out due to your goading (possible - he strikes me as an arrogant and temperamental sort.) - so probably weasaling. I in fact predict he will probably continue to claim his "real life" prevents him from debating you, work on his nonexistant website (which appears to have been a "work in progress" for over a year or two now,) or some other evasion.

I find it interesting that he implies that his time is somehow more precious than yours (much like Lord Edam did in his debates before "dropping out".) - as if you don't work for a living and have people to support (your family.) yet you have no trouble. And this person has been abel to find time for years to post on various SW vs ST boards - alot of which in fact involved long-range sniping at you yourself Mike.

Also, I find it interesting that he thinks you are "dancing in circles" and that your site has "nothing" to do with the ST vs SW debate - clearly yet another dodge.

[Grand Moff Yenchin]

What do you think he'll do next? Grow a backbone or continue weaseling?

Likely continue weaseling or recycle old tactics. The way he responds to the link amuses me very much. Standard fucking coward response to links.

[Joe Momma]

A "limited temporal budget"? Jesus, he even talks in asshat treknobabble.

I'm guessing he'll say Mike copped out by sending his calcs in his email, "demonstrating" that his work can't withstand scrutiny.

If Mike subsequently sends the calcs via email, he'll scream that he doesn't have time to read a bunch of bullshit that doesn't have anything to do with the issue at hand anyway and maybe accuse Mike of spamming or harassment.

-- Joe Momma

I can afford to respond because I've reversed my polarity and thus created a quantum temporal budget.

[Master of Ossus]

My guess is that he'll attempt to weasel by using a "Style over Substance" approach, and by claiming that Mike's summarized arguments aren't detailed enough to refute.

[Stuart Mackey]

Virus X. been there, fought him, got his scalp to prove it.

[Darth Wong]

Heh heh ... I wonder what compels this "Virus-X" clown to lie so transparently about himself? Especially when his own Yahoo online profile says he's an electronics technician rather than an electrical engineer, and a 32-year old single guy rather than a busy family man? Fuck, I've never seen somebody who was so ridiculously easy to catch in a lie.

Basics

Yahoo! ID: frombfecanton
Real Name: Isaac Bishop Jr.
Location: Plymouth Township, MI
Age: 32
Marital Status: Single And Looking
Gender: Male
Occupation: Electronics Technician

More About Me

Hobbies: Kung fu, writing, etc; whatever's fun at the time. Interests? I'm all over the road. I mightn't look it, but I'm hardcore StraightEdge/Christian/Goth, all the way, baby!

Latest News: Just graduated from 2 simply marvelous years in college, & with all the other stupid crap I'm planning, I'll be in school FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE! Let's hear it for paying back STUDENT LOANS! YAAAA!

Links

* Home Page:  No home page specified
* Cool Link 1:  http://www.startrek.com
* Cool Link 2:  http://www.starwars.com
* Cool Link 3:  http://www.adcritic.com

I wonder what he would say if I mentioned this to him. Maybe he'd just say that there's another Isaac Bishop Jr. who happens to live in Michigan and be a SW/ST fan and use the same username as he does

[Darth Wong]

He ran to Darkstar for help! He forwarded my last message to him with the following comment:

So is Wong always this intelligent, or is he just being especially stupid, today? I wish I had the time to immediately respond. I also wish I knew his address, so I could go and kick his ass in front of his wife and kids. People who talk crap that they'd never say in person across a distance of hundreds of km/miles piss me off.

It didn't take too long for him to resort to the vague threats of physical violence, eh?

[Ghost Rider]

Wow...and I didn't think he would go to his patron saint .

Though gotta love the profile and his comment just now....well building up a nice resume for the Hate Mail page.

[Darth Wong]

I just fired off this quick response:

ROTFLMAO!! Running to Darkstar for help, eh? Even he doesn't stoop to your pathetically infantile tactics of answering points with vague threats of physical violence, dipshit. Grow a backbone and either answer my E-mail or concede. Grown men do not bluster about physical violence when they're losing an argument.

[Publius]

Maybe he'd just say that there's another Isaac Bishop Jr. who happens to live in Michigan and be a SW/ST fan and use the same username as he does

It worked for Annie Lee Moss, didn't it?

PUBLIUS

[The Dude]

He ran to Darkstar for help! He forwarded my last message to him with the following comment:

So is Wong always this intelligent, or is he just being especially stupid, today? I wish I had the time to immediately respond. I also wish I knew his address, so I could go and kick his ass in front of his wife and kids. People who talk crap that they'd never say in person across a distance of hundreds of km/miles piss me off.

It didn't take too long for him to resort to the vague threats of physical violence, eh?

How did you find out what he sent to Scooter?

[2000AD]

How did you find out what he sent to Scooter?

Given the level of inteligence he's shown so far he probably sent the same email to Mike as well