"Husnock" ship vs ISD or SISD

[Darth Wong]

Why don't you explain how a planet can be subjected to a bombardment that would render it lifeless yet retain an atmosphere that was normal in all visual respects when viewed from the habitable zone? No ash, no fallout, no dust and no need whatsoever for life support by the Enterprise away team, who weren't illusions.

I thought it was assumed that the Dowd had somehow scrubbed the atmosphere.

[Shrykull]

The habitable area was solely the creation of the alien so it's not a fair indication of the surface of the rest of the planet.

The area still had a breathable atmosphere, which the Dowd wouldn't need.

No, but his wife, whom he resurrected as a human in all respects, would. The Dowd wouldn't need grass and a house, but they existed as well.

he didn't resurrect her, he was incapable of that, he just made a fake replica of her, like a hologram, he recreated her.

[MrAnderson]

All right then, present your evidence which clearly disproves that the warship projection was not based on the Husnock ship which attacked Rana IV. Or is Appeal to Ignorance the sole defence of your position?

My statements are baed on onscreen evidence or to be more exact the complete ABSENSE of evidence that says we are seeing a Husnock ship. You are making an assumption.

BTW, use your brain. You have been aruond this site long enough to know that only a moron demands that someone prove a negative.

[Ender]

All right then, present your evidence which clearly disproves that the warship projection was not based on the Husnock ship which attacked Rana IV. Or is Appeal to Ignorance the sole defence of your position?

My statements are baed on onscreen evidence or to be more exact the complete ABSENSE of evidence that says we are seeing a Husnock ship. You are making an assumption.

So it is an appeal to ignorance then. Ok, thanks.

BTW, use your brain. You have been aruond this site long enough to know that only a moron demands that someone prove a negative.

You are really one to talk about brains and fallacies

[Ted C]

My statements are baed on onscreen evidence or to be more exact the complete ABSENSE of evidence that says we are seeing a Husnock ship. You are making an assumption.

To my knowledge, statements regarding Husnock firepower are generally referenced with the assumption that the Husnock really did exist, really did attack Rana IV, and really did scour the surface of virtually all life. That's the only sensible way to assess their abilities, since no other evidence exists for such assessments.

[MrAnderson]

My statements are baed on onscreen evidence or to be more exact the complete ABSENSE of evidence that says we are seeing a Husnock ship. You are making an assumption.

To my knowledge, statements regarding Husnock firepower are generally referenced with the assumption that the Husnock really did exist, really did attack Rana IV, and really did scour the surface of virtually all life. That's the only sensible way to assess their abilities, since no other evidence exists for such assessments.

But the ship we saw was an image created by a Dowd and possessed just enough power to accomplish what the Dowd wanted it to do. It died when it was supposed to and nearly killed the Enterprise when it was supposed to.

It was a tool, how do you scale a tool that never has the same ability twice?

Also you do not know what the Dowd did to the planet. He said he tried to hide the planet from the Husnock but failed. So maybe some of the surface effect was from his effort and not the Husnock attack.

[Ted C]

But the ship we saw was an image created by a Dowd and possessed just enough power to accomplish what the Dowd wanted it to do. It died when it was supposed to and nearly killed the Enterprise when it was supposed to.

These are tools for evaluating the shielding abilities of the Enteprise-D, not for evaluating the power of a Husnock vessel. The Dowd's version fired bursts just strong enough to have the desired effect, but the real thing could have been much more powerful.

Estimates of genuine Husnock firepower are based on what the genuine attack did to the Rana IV colony. These estimates assume that such an attack actually did occur much as Kevin Uxbridge described it.

Also you do not know what the Dowd did to the planet. He said he tried to hide the planet from the Husnock but failed. So maybe some of the surface effect was from his effort and not the Husnock attack.

Uxbridge said he tried to "trick" the Husnock; he said nothing about how he tried to trick them. Even if there were evidence to support your claim that his effort to "hide the planet" actually harmed it, any surface damage that the Dowd created in that effort would only reduce the amount of work the Husnock need to do to finish the job, which would push estimates of their firepower down.

[MrAnderson]

But the ship we saw was an image created by a Dowd and possessed just enough power to accomplish what the Dowd wanted it to do. It died when it was supposed to and nearly killed the Enterprise when it was supposed to.

These are tools for evaluating the shielding abilities of the Enteprise-D, not for evaluating the power of a Husnock vessel. The Dowd's version fired bursts just strong enough to have the desired effect, but the real thing could have been much more powerful.

Estimates of genuine Husnock firepower are based on what the genuine attack did to the Rana IV colony. These estimates assume that such an attack actually did occur much as Kevin Uxbridge described it.

Also you do not know what the Dowd did to the planet. He said he tried to hide the planet from the Husnock but failed. So maybe some of the surface effect was from his effort and not the Husnock attack.

Uxbridge said he tried to "trick" the Husnock; he said nothing about how he tried to trick them. Even if there were evidence to support your claim that his effort to "hide the planet" actually harmed it, any surface damage that the Dowd created in that effort would only reduce the amount of work the Husnock need to do to finish the job, which would push estimates of their firepower down.

This thread though is supposed to br about comparing a Husnock ship to an ISD. Or at least that is what it was started to do. I am merely saying that there is not enough concrete information about the Husnock to make any sort of comparison. Even if we assume the Dowd accurately mimicked the Husnock ship we do not make any progress because the ship was created multiple times and each time is had different strengths.

[Ted C]

This thread though is supposed to br about comparing a Husnock ship to an ISD. Or at least that is what it was started to do. I am merely saying that there is not enough concrete information about the Husnock to make any sort of comparison. Even if we assume the Dowd accurately mimicked the Husnock ship we do not make any progress because the ship was created multiple times and each time is had different strengths.

You entirely missed my point. The Dowd's illusions are irrelevant to the debate; it's what the Husnock attack did to Rana IV that matters. The Dowd supposedly had nothing to do with that attack.

The Husnock apparently had the firepower to scour the surface of Rana IV in a matter of days. That's what people are using to estimate their capabilities against an ISD, not what the Dowd's illusion did to the Enterprise.

[Patrick Degan]

All right then, present your evidence which clearly disproves that the warship projection was not based on the Husnock ship which attacked Rana IV. Or is Appeal to Ignorance the sole defence of your position?

My statements are baed on onscreen evidence or to be more exact the complete ABSENSE of evidence that says we are seeing a Husnock ship. You are making an assumption.

It is you who is making assumptions and ignoring the evidence. There is no reason to assume that the warship projection was not based upon the Husnock battlewagon which attacked the planet. Unless you can point to contradictory information in the episode, your argument necessarily fails.

BTW, use your brain. You have been aruond this site long enough to know that only a moron demands that someone prove a negative.

Try taking your own advice. You are the person challenging the position that what we see is based on the Husnock vessel, and as you are presenting the challenge, it is upon you to prove the validity of your argument with evidence to the contrary. That is not a demand to prove a negative, it is a demand for you to back your case with something beyond mere assertion.

[MrAnderson]

Try taking your own advice. You are the person challenging the position that what we see is based on the Husnock vessel, and as you are presenting the challenge, it is upon you to prove the validity of your argument with evidence to the contrary. That is not a demand to prove a negative, it is a demand for you to back your case with something beyond mere assertion.

I merely am asking for you to prove your stance. Just because my statement is in the minority does not mean I am the one who has to prove it. Your statement is the one tht is making assumptions and requires some form of evidence.

You say its a Husnock ship, so prove it.

[Patrick Degan]

Try taking your own advice. You are the person challenging the position that what we see is based on the Husnock vessel, and as you are presenting the challenge, it is upon you to prove the validity of your argument with evidence to the contrary. That is not a demand to prove a negative, it is a demand for you to back your case with something beyond mere assertion.

I merely am asking for you to prove your stance. Just because my statement is in the minority does not mean I am the one who has to prove it. Your statement is the one tht is making assumptions and requires some form of evidence.

Dead wrong —the evidence is in the form of the visuals and the dialogue from the episode. Without anything which says definitevly that the projection is not in fact a Husnock vessel, statements to the contrary are speculative and useless, and we rely upon Parsimony and the "best evidence" standard..

You say its a Husnock ship, so prove it.

Burden of Proof fallacy. Again, you are making the attack on the position. Present your evidence that backs your contention that it is not.

[Darth Wong]

You say its a Husnock ship, so prove it.

The theory that it is a Husnock ship produces predictions which are consistent with observation, and employs only terms and elements which are known to exist.

You have failed to present any competing theory. Instead, you say only that the only workable theory is not yet proven to your satisfaction.

You cannot win, Mister Anderson.

[MrAnderson]

You say its a Husnock ship, so prove it.

The theory that it is a Husnock ship produces predictions which are consistent with observation, and employs only terms and elements which are known to exist.

You have failed to present any competing theory. Instead, you say only that the only workable theory is not yet proven to your satisfaction.

You cannot win, Mister Anderson.

There is no reason for me to even try to win. Even if one assumes that the ship was a Husnock ship it does you no good.

1. The ship had different capabilities every time it appeared before the Enterprise.

2. You don't know how long the assault on the planet took.

3. You don't know if only one Husnock ship or mroe than one was involved in the assault. The Dowd said they were attacked by the Husnock he spoke in a way suggesting he was talking of the entire race. The Husnock came and attacked. You cannot infer numbers of attackers from his statements.

4. You do not know what the Dowd did to hide the planet. This might have damaged it or altered it appearance.

5. You don't know what the Dowd did to destroy the entire Husnock race. As an example he may have just made them all cease to exist. Or he could have made them all violently explode with death. Either one is possible and one could argue that the second option might be more likely since the Dowd fully admitted he acted in a moment of rage after the death of his wife. Now if he blew all the Husnock up violently then what if large numbers of invading Husnock were on the planet? The Dowd killing them may have caused widespread additional damage to the planet.

Basically there is no concrete information that can be taken from the episode. The Dowd being there and the lack of direct visual evidence during the attack make it this way.

[Darth Wong]

There is no reason for me to even try to win. Even if one assumes that the ship was a Husnock ship it does you no good.

The ship was a copy of a Husnock ship. There's no reason to assume the Dowd actually went and did the work of designing an entire new ship in his head just for the purpose of this exercise.

1. The ship had different capabilities every time it appeared before the Enterprise.

Or it simply used low yield settings the first time. There is no reason to assume that it had different capabilities.

2. You don't know how long the assault on the planet took.

It took long enough that there was talk of fighting and an argument in the Dowd's household over whether they should join in the conflict.

3. You don't know if only one Husnock ship or mroe than one was involved in the assault. The Dowd said they were attacked by the Husnock he spoke in a way suggesting he was talking of the entire race. The Husnock came and attacked. You cannot infer numbers of attackers from his statements.

So you're saying that the Husnock ships might have been much weaker?

4. You do not know what the Dowd did to hide the planet. This might have damaged it or altered it appearance.

He never hid the planet. It's quite visible. What the fuck are you talking about?

5. You don't know what the Dowd did to destroy the entire Husnock race. As an example he may have just made them all cease to exist. Or he could have made them all violently explode with death. Either one is possible and one could argue that the second option might be more likely since the Dowd fully admitted he acted in a moment of rage after the death of his wife. Now if he blew all the Husnock up violently then what if large numbers of invading Husnock were on the planet? The Dowd killing them may have caused widespread additional damage to the planet.

May have, could have, etc. But you have no reason to claim that this is a more reasonable hypothesis than the one given. All you're doing is appealing to uncertainty.

Basically there is no concrete information that can be taken from the episode. The Dowd being there and the lack of direct visual evidence during the attack make it this way.

In other words, you're saying that in the absence of a very high degree of certainty, you should just completely ignore the episode and make up whatever hypothesis you want. Sorry, but that's not reasonable. In real-life, we must work with preliminary data all the time. It is possible that more data will require corrections, but that doesn't mean you throw up your hands and refuse to make conclusions of any kind until you have what you call "concrete" data.

[MrAnderson]

There is no reason for me to even try to win. Even if one assumes that the ship was a Husnock ship it does you no good.

The ship was a copy of a Husnock ship. There's no reason to assume the Dowd actually went and did the work of designing an entire new ship in his head just for the purpose of this exercise.

The ship may have had the external appearance of a Husnock but that doesnt mean it was one through and through. Dowd could have created the image and then created the energy weapons that it fired. Basically all an elaborate illusion instead of creating an actual ship. The Dowd did say he was a creature of illusion.

1. The ship had different capabilities every time it appeared before the Enterprise.

Or it simply used low yield settings the first time. There is no reason to assume that it had different capabilities.

But it did so both offensively and defensively based on what the Dowd needed it to do relative to the Enterprise.

2. You don't know how long the assault on the planet took.

It took long enough that there was talk of fighting and an argument in the Dowd's household over whether they should join in the conflict.

3. You don't know if only one Husnock ship or more than one was involved in the assault. The Dowd said they were attacked by the Husnock he spoke in a way suggesting he was talking of the entire race. The Husnock came and attacked. You cannot infer numbers of attackers from his statements.

So you're saying that the Husnock ships might have been much weaker?

Yes which makes it ahrd to decide how it would stand up to an ISD.

4. You do not know what the Dowd did to hide the planet. This might have damaged it or altered it appearance.

He never hid the planet. It's quite visible. What the fuck are you talking about?

I remember the episode obviously you do not. The Dowd quite clearly told Picard that he tried to hide the planet from the Husnock. He said he failed though and his attempts further enraged the attacking Husnocks.

5. You don't know what the Dowd did to destroy the entire Husnock race. As an example he may have just made them all cease to exist. Or he could have made them all violently explode with death. Either one is possible and one could argue that the second option might be more likely since the Dowd fully admitted he acted in a moment of rage after the death of his wife. Now if he blew all the Husnock up violently then what if large numbers of invading Husnock were on the planet? The Dowd killing them may have caused widespread additional damage to the planet.

May have, could have, etc. But you have no reason to claim that this is a more reasonable hypothesis than the one given. All you're doing is appealing to uncertainty.

Enough uncertainty to know that trying to compare the Husnock ship to an ISD ship and have any sort of conclusion will not be worth anything more than its weight in dog shit.

Basically there is no concrete information that can be taken from the episode. The Dowd being there and the lack of direct visual evidence during the attack make it this way.

In other words, you're saying that in the absence of a very high degree of certainty, you should just completely ignore the episode and make up whatever hypothesis you want. Sorry, but that's not reasonable. In real-life, we must work with preliminary data all the time. It is possible that more data will require corrections, but that doesn't mean you throw up your hands and refuse to make conclusions of any kind until you have what you call "concrete" data.

There is more uncertainty then there is measureable facts in this episode. Sure you can draw conclusions but they will be worthless because there will be more assumption than fact in the conclusion.

BTW, whats up with the quoting?

[Darth Wong]

There is more uncertainty then there is measureable facts in this episode. Sure you can draw conclusions but they will be worthless because there will be more assumption than fact in the conclusion.

Ah, I see. False dichotomy between "concrete" certainty and "worthless". I should have expected reasoning as flimsy as that.

BTW, whats up with the quoting?

You fucked up the quote tags.

[Patrick Degan]

The ship may have had the external appearance of a Husnock but that doesnt mean it was one through and through. Dowd could have created the image and then created the energy weapons that it fired. Basically all an elaborate illusion instead of creating an actual ship. The Dowd did say he was a creature of illusion.

Objection, assumes facts not in evidence.

1. The ship had different capabilities every time it appeared before the Enterprise.

Or it simply used low yield settings the first time. There is no reason to assume that it had different capabilities.

But it did so both offensively and defensively based on what the Dowd needed it to do relative to the Enterprise.

Which supports your increasingly rickety case how, exactly?

2. You don't know how long the assault on the planet took.

We know it took place within the stretch of a few days at most between the attack and the arrival of the Enterprise, considering that they were responding to the colony's distress call.

3. You don't know if only one Husnock ship or more than one was involved in the assault. The Dowd said they were attacked by the Husnock he spoke in a way suggesting he was talking of the entire race. The Husnock came and attacked. You cannot infer numbers of attackers from his statements.

The Dowd said no such damn thing. Did you even watch the episode?

4. You do not know what the Dowd did to hide the planet. This might have damaged it or altered it appearance.

He never hid the planet. It's quite visible. What the fuck are you talking about?

I remember the episode obviously you do not. The Dowd quite clearly told Picard that he tried to hide the planet from the Husnock. He said he failed though and his attempts further enraged the attacking Husnocks.

No, it's very clear that you do not remember the episode and Mike does. From the confession scene:

KEVIN UXBRIDGE: I tried to fool the Husnock, as I tried to fool you. But that only made them more angry, more determined.

Nowhere does the Dowd say he tried to hide the whole planet.

You don't know what the Dowd did to destroy the entire Husnock race. As an example he may have just made them all cease to exist. Or he could have made them all violently explode with death. Either one is possible and one could argue that the second option might be more likely since the Dowd fully admitted he acted in a moment of rage after the death of his wife. Now if he blew all the Husnock up violently then what if large numbers of invading Husnock were on the planet? The Dowd killing them may have caused widespread additional damage to the planet.

A whole lot of "what-ifs" and zero solid evidence. You'll have to do better than that.

Enough uncertainty to know that trying to compare the Husnock ship to an ISD ship and have any sort of conclusion will not be worth anything more than its weight in dog shit.

Considering that your entire argument is pinned on Appeals tyo Ignorance, I'd say that is the thing worth its weight in dogshit here.

There is more uncertainty then there is measureable facts in this episode. Sure you can draw conclusions but they will be worthless because there will be more assumption than fact in the conclusion.

The measurable facts are: the appearance of the Husnock warship projection, its high-power capabilities exhibited in the second attack on the Enterprise, and the appearance of Rana IV post-attack. You have not offered even so much as a single scrap of solid data to contradict any of these facts.