Virus-X Debate (updated Dec 15!)

[Connor MacLeod]

You're not gonna believe this ... he's back! And he's posted perhaps the most bizarre "rebuttal" I've ever seen. Wanna see it?

Ok, now that I've got some time, I'll jump back in.

First of all, your arguments agains the display of firepower in The Die is Cast fall into being completely irrelevant.

Why?

That's simple.

Both Star Wars and Star Trek are nothing more than items meant to entertain.  They are not science entertainment, they are science fiction.  In the case of The Die is Cast from Star Trek Deep Space Nine, you consistently forget the fact that this is Star Trek, not Nova.  The script clearly stated that 30% of the planetary crust was destroyed.  This is not in dispute; this is now history.  It happened, and there's nothing you or I can say to change that, period.  The special effects reinforced this by showing explosions that were some 30-35 percent planetary diameter.  Your cries for seeing ejecta or whatever are also irrelevant, because you consistently forget the fact that the explosions were there to entertain, not enlighten about impact and explosion physics.  They were meant to show that they (the explosions) were big and powerful.  That's it.  Extropolations about power could be made based on how big they were, but not much else.

Disputing that is about as useless as my trying to debate the stupid ring special effects shown in the explosions of Alderaan and the Death Star. They're just irrelevant light shows, meant to further entertain (and, coincidentally, a bad idea). For the same token, we know the explosive power of the mines dropped by Slave-1, but we've no idea on how they work. Our knowledge of how big their explosions are came from the Incredible Cross-Sections book for Episode 2, a canon/official source of Star Wars data. Nowhere else. Trying to judge their mechanism by looking at the special effects of Episode 2 would be both pointless and stupid, just like the idiot that said quantum torpedoes contained quantum strings, and other such dumb nonsense.

Virus-X (ver 7.5)
sXe STAY TRUE sXe

Is it even worth replying to this with anything more complex than "concession accepted"?

Well, lets see. He wants to ignore strict adherence to the visuals because they are... inconsistent with what he thinks they represent? Does that earn a rebuttal?

Yes, I think so. If nothing than to educate and entertain in the hate mail page (and this makes useful material for you to explain just why TDIC is bullshit), which I believe is your intention.)

The fact he is now attempting to "change the rules" by tossing Suspension of disbleief out the window (even though he dresses it so it doesn't *seem* like he is) would be worth comment. He'll no doubt he expecting a reply, and do you really want to put up with him blustering and bluffing again if you brush him off without hammering the logic into his head?

[Connor MacLeod]

Moreover, I could have figured this is how he would respond - it seems that this guy is pulling out all the typical "counterarguments" he usually employs in such debates (its not the first time he tried saying "the VFX artists are idiots so should not be taken literally.

he also seems to be combining it with his blind, rabid adherence to "what the books say" policy. He appears totally unwilling to take something at face value unless it is written down in the canon or EU explicitly somewhere (IE his refusal to acknowledge the true size of the Second Death Star.)

[Connor MacLeod]

So he fell back to the old 'its just about Entertainment' line? Alright, who guessed it?

I did

[Ender]

You're not gonna believe this ... he's back! And he's posted perhaps the most bizarre "rebuttal" I've ever seen. Wanna see it?

Ok, now that I've got some time, I'll jump back in.

First of all, your arguments agains the display of firepower in The Die is Cast fall into being completely irrelevant.

Why?

That's simple.

Both Star Wars and Star Trek are nothing more than items meant to entertain.  They are not science entertainment, they are science fiction.  In the case of The Die is Cast from Star Trek Deep Space Nine, you consistently forget the fact that this is Star Trek, not Nova.  The script clearly stated that 30% of the planetary crust was destroyed.  This is not in dispute; this is now history.  It happened, and there's nothing you or I can say to change that, period.  The special effects reinforced this by showing explosions that were some 30-35 percent planetary diameter.  Your cries for seeing ejecta or whatever are also irrelevant, because you consistently forget the fact that the explosions were there to entertain, not enlighten about impact and explosion physics.  They were meant to show that they (the explosions) were big and powerful.  That's it.  Extropolations about power could be made based on how big they were, but not much else.

Disputing that is about as useless as my trying to debate the stupid ring special effects shown in the explosions of Alderaan and the Death Star. They're just irrelevant light shows, meant to further entertain (and, coincidentally, a bad idea). For the same token, we know the explosive power of the mines dropped by Slave-1, but we've no idea on how they work. Our knowledge of how big their explosions are came from the Incredible Cross-Sections book for Episode 2, a canon/official source of Star Wars data. Nowhere else. Trying to judge their mechanism by looking at the special effects of Episode 2 would be both pointless and stupid, just like the idiot that said quantum torpedoes contained quantum strings, and other such dumb nonsense.

Virus-X (ver 7.5)
sXe STAY TRUE sXe

Is it even worth replying to this with anything more complex than "concession accepted"?

Yes, reply with "if 30% of the crust had been destroyed, Kira would not be able to survive in the atmosphere in the finale".

[Crown]

So he fell back to the old 'its just about Entertainment' line? Alright, who guessed it?

I did

*hands Connor a cookie and clips him behind the ear*

Go on with ya!

I would of thought he was going to emulate his idol and just throw up a wall of ignorance. I guess he realised that he was out of his depth.

[Lord of the Farce]

The script clearly stated that 30% of the planetary crust was destroyed.  This is not in dispute; this is now history.  It happened, and there's nothing you or I can say to change that, period.

An interesting thing to note is that unlike his method as he describes above would suggest, he has at least once in the past claimed that this "30% of the planetary crust was destroyed" was done in seconds, clearly contradicting the "1 hour" projection from the episode.

The special effects reinforced this by showing explosions that were some 30-35 percent planetary diameter.

Frankly, when a dozen dull brown clouds that when combined doesn't cover 1/3 (closer to 1/4 is probably more accurate) of a planet's apparent circumference, the claim that they "were some 30-35 percent planetary diameter" seems kind of ridiculous...

Your cries for seeing ejecta or whatever are also irrelevant, because you consistently forget the fact that the explosions were there to entertain, not enlighten about impact and explosion physics.

Isn't it strange then, how the FX people behind Star Trek never seemed to have much of a problem in the past when they want to portray explosions, which are visually nothing like dull brown clouds.

They were meant to show that they (the explosions) were big and powerful.  That's it.  Extropolations about power could be made based on how big they were, but not much else.

Yup, dull brown clouds are exactly what we usually associate with big and powerful explosions, uh-huh.

[Master of Ossus]

LMAO! That's hilarious! That's one of the funniest, most pointless rebuttals I've ever seen.

BTW, Connor, I'm not sure how you think he dressed up his dismissal of suspension of disbelief. It seems like the most straight-forward rejection of that principle I've ever read in a debate.

[Rightous Fist Of Heaven]

As i respond to these "VFX artists are idiots" arguments every time, you dont need to be a goddamn rocket scientist to understand that a few shots that supposedly remove (just for the sake of argument) 30% of planetary crust, would cause pretty goddamn big explosions. I dont understand why people like Virus try to make the creation of even remotely consistant visuals as an overwhelming task.

[Ghost Rider]

So because he cannot dispute he goes for the tried and true..."They aren't real...etc!!!"

Nope, nothing more then concession accepted is needed here.

[Ted C]

Hmmm... what might I say to this nonsense...

Ok, now that I've got some time, I'll jump back in.

First of all, your arguments agains the display of firepower in The Die is Cast fall into being completely irrelevant.

Why?

That's simple.

Both Star Wars and Star Trek are nothing more than items meant to entertain.  They are not science entertainment, they are science fiction. In the case of The Die is Cast from Star Trek Deep Space Nine, you consistently forget the fact that this is Star Trek, not Nova.  The script clearly stated that 30% of the planetary crust was destroyed.  This is not in dispute; this is now history.  It happened, and there's nothing you or I can say to change that, period.  The special effects reinforced this by showing explosions that were some 30-35 percent planetary diameter.  Your cries for seeing ejecta or whatever are also irrelevant, because you consistently forget the fact that the explosions were there to entertain, not enlighten about impact and explosion physics.  They were meant to show that they (the explosions) were big and powerful.  That's it.  Extropolations about power could be made based on how big they were, but not much else.

The problem here, Isaac, is that the arguments you are using to dismiss the visual effects from TDiC work just as well against the dialogue from TDiC. The claim of 30% crust destruction is "science entertainment", so we can dismiss its implications just as easily as you can dismiss the decidedly unimpressive visual display. If we look at TDiC as you suggest, it's is completely worthless as debate evidence. Indeed, if you're going to look at Star Trek and Star Wars the way you're suggesting, you should get out of versus debating altogether, since you have just dismissed all of the evidence as unreliable.

Disputing that is about as useless as my trying to debate the stupid ring special effects shown in the explosions of Alderaan and the Death Star. They're just irrelevant light shows, meant to further entertain (and, coincidentally, a bad idea). For the same token, we know the explosive power of the mines dropped by Slave-1, but we've no idea on how they work. Our knowledge of how big their explosions are came from the Incredible Cross-Sections book for Episode 2, a canon/official source of Star Wars data. Nowhere else. Trying to judge their mechanism by looking at the special effects of Episode 2 would be both pointless and stupid, just like the idiot that said quantum torpedoes contained quantum strings, and other such dumb nonsense.

Virus-X (ver 7.5)
sXe STAY TRUE sXe

So you think that only information from official "technical" sources should be used in versus debates? If that's the case, then again you should just get out of the debate arena while you can, since Star Wars technical sources show that the Empire's military capabilities completely dwarf those of the Federation in every field.

[Psycho Smiley]

This isn't even funny anymore. Just "Concession Accepted" his ass and Hate Mail the whole mess.

[The Kernel]

It's so nice that he simply dismissed your response as "irrelevant" without noting that it totally destroyed his previous argument. This guy is like the anti-Darkstar, if his argument doesn't work he simply tries a new approach. Of course, he wouldn't dream of actually admitting that his last argument was laughable, he just decided to declare the entire discussion pointless and stick his fingers in his ears.

This is the way first graders debate; I'd suggest you simply write this dickwad off as another wannabe. It's funny that he has this new anti-science perspective while his MSN page was full of "scienctific" reasoning. I guess he just admitted that all of the stuff he's been arguing about for months is bogus so that he can "win" a single point from a single episode. Brilliant.

[Darth Servo]

Refute this last bit of crap (which should take all of about 10 seconds) and then put him in the 'cowards' section of the hate mail page.

[Connor MacLeod]

BTW, Connor, I'm not sure how you think he dressed up his dismissal of suspension of disbelief. It seems like the most straight-forward rejection of that principle I've ever read in a debate.

By couching it in a seemingly "reasonable" reference to technical sources (like the ICS) as reason for dismissing visuals. Its an attempt to portray adherence to SoD as a distorted form of "ignoring factual evidence in favor of contrary personal interpretation" bullshit. Its a facade to appear "reasonable" (either unknowingly or knowingly) while quietly sidestepping the fact its based on pure bullshit (especially how he tries to slip the ST script in as being "technical", and neglecting the fact he has based analysis on visuals in the past!)

Yes, it is obvious to us he is changing things around because he's getting his ass kicked, yes we notice he is attempting to ignore rational analysis in favor of his own twisted views, yes we know he is being a fucktard, but as I am reading it, he is attempting to present it as something else. Might work on relatively obscure webboards without access to many people who could see through his crap, but it doesn't work here.

[Connor MacLeod]

BTW, do we know the TDIC script says in fact what it does?

[Darth Fanboy]

This begs the question, why do Trek fans like to use TDIC as a way to show the power of Trek weaponry when the operation in question was a drastic failure?

[Stofsk]

This begs the question, why do Trek fans like to use TDIC as a way to show the power of Trek weaponry when the operation in question was a drastic failure?

Insecurity? Also, there's some sort of allure to TDIC. When I first saw it I was blown away, even though the battle was relatively short (and was a failure to the Rommies and Cardies). I think that was the first time we had seen a mass-fleet engagement who's purpose was to make a strategic strike; I mean, we never really saw the Battle of Wolf 352 did we? The little we did see made us want to see more. TDIC was cool simply because it had huge explosions and ships going *boom!* Everyone likes big explosions...

What "impresses" me to no end is how Trekkies ignore the line about sensor readings being deliberately falsified during the attack, making the onscreen dialogue obsolete; not to mention the changeling who was probably pulling figures out of his arse, just to make the battle look good. You would think rational people would accept this as a given, but apparently not.

[The Kernel]

What "impresses" me to no end is how Trekkies ignore the line about sensor readings being deliberately falsified during the attack, making the onscreen dialogue obsolete; not to mention the changeling who was probably pulling figures out of his arse, just to make the battle look good. You would think rational people would accept this as a given, but apparently not.

Neither of these arguments holds anything against the TDiC bombardment figures. The truth of the matter is that everyone else assumed that the bombardment would do what it was projected to do, thus validating it as within the relm of probablity.

HOWEVER, I still think that TDiC is bogus for the following reasons:

1) If they really did destroy 30% of the planet's crust with their first salvo, that would have been more than enough to kill everyone on the planet. The whole idea of blasting them until they wiped out the mantle would have been pointless if it was taken at face value.

2) The Star Trek writers are not known for producing reliable, consistent dialogue. I think we all know what I am talking about here (Riker's TW power source claim, the "Survivors" 600 GW thing, etc). Because of this, we really can't take the dialogue seriously when we have visuals to work with. Warsies have been more then fair in throwing out dialogue that hurts the Trekkie side before in favor of onscreen capabilities, so why should Trekkies suddenly get favorable treatment in this situation?

3) The visuals simply do not lie. There is no way to rationalize TDiC without discarding the dialogue in favor of the visuals. And the visuals do not show 30% crust destruction.

These three points simply cannot be ignored. All the sidestepping about jamming and misinformation really miss the point. There is no way that the mission or the visuals support such levels of firepower so we therefore must eject the dialogue like we have done in other situations which did not favor Trek.

[Tribun]

Did IBJ become more and more irrational?

[SPOOFE]

Given the pathetic nature of Star Trek scripts and dialogue in general, I wonder why the rabid nutcase Trekkies want to rely on them so much. It's like Ted C said... how does Mr. X know that it's not the WRITER that exaggerated, and not the FX artist that got an accurate view, consistent with the rest of the show?

Either way, he still needs to deal with one big conundrum, common with semantic arguments... what, exactly, does "30% of the crust destroyed" entail? The totality of the crust? Just the surface of the crust? The part of the crust specifically targeted in the opening volley? 30% of a piece of bread crust that was lying on the ground?

Criminy... TDIC, with that latter interpretation, shows that ST weapons pack a few millijoules of energy, at best... barely enough to singe a piece of bread as a low-end...

[Kamakazie Sith]

Yes, reply with "if 30% of the crust had been destroyed, Kira would not be able to survive in the atmosphere in the finale".

Just want to jump in here. IIRC didn't the Founders move to a different planet before the attack, and I believed they stayed on that planet because they still wanted their home to be in a secret location.

[Darth Wong]

It's the logical inconsistency in his arguments that's most annoying, and why I'm debating whether I should bother answering it, or just let its overt hypocrisy speak for itself.

"Star Wars vs Star Trek is so important to me that I'm willing to threaten others with violence over it!" ... er ... "it's a silly debate and not worth my time" ... er ... yeah.

"If you look at these screenshots and these scientific principles I looked up on Google, you will see that the visual effects support my case!" ... er ... "visual effects are meaningless" ... er ... "but scaling still works" ... er ... yeah.

"Look at the dialogue, which indicates the writers' true scientific intentions" ... er ... "the writers don't know what they're talking about, dumb-ass" ... er ... yeah.

[Crown]

And that ... Mike ... should be your reply, with a nice big 'roll eyes' emoticon too boot!

Also a nice big red shinny 'concession accepted' wouldn't be too far out of the question.

[Utsanomiko]

And that ... Mike ... should be your reply, with a nice big 'roll eyes' emoticon too boot!

Also a nice big red shinny 'concession accepted' wouldn't be too far out of the question.

Is that big enough of a 'roll eyes'?

[Crown]

And that ... Mike ... should be your reply, with a nice big 'roll eyes' emoticon too boot!

Also a nice big red shinny 'concession accepted' wouldn't be too far out of the question.

<snip a HUGE FUCKING ROLLY EYE pic>

Is that big enough of a 'roll eyes'?

Surely you could do better?