Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
A challenge: Defend SD.net!
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by MinutiaeMan: [QB] Good god... what is the point of a frame-by-frame analysis with the intention of determining real-life physics of a specific situation? IT IS A FUCKING TELEVISION SHOW. (Or a movie.) In the vast majority of the scenes, the visuals are created with the intention of LOOKING COOL. They're supposed to ENTERTAIN. Now yes, Bernd and others (myself included) do try frame-by-frame analyses on occasion -- but these are all intended to discuss ideas that are relative to Trek, like comparing starship lengths or something. We're not trying to determine the speed of a phaser! I think that this, more than anything else, indicates the poor attitudes behind a site like SD.net. The fact that such anal analyses are performed simply to prove that Wars is kewler than Trek. And the fact that there are scientific errors (like the density issue above) does not improve the situation any. Is it simply that Wong and his gang must prove that Trek is inferior in order to enjoy Wars more? [QUOTE]From Wong's front page: Although the site has some facetious overtones, it is still nonetheless an academic discussion of Star Wars, Star Trek, and real science. It is intended to entertain but also to educate and to encourage scholarly debate.[/QUOTE]I would like to ask: What the heck does "real science" have to do with "science fiction"? And if that site is an example of scholarly debate, then I'd be terrified of seeing their idea of a full-blown uneducated rant. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3