Just wanted to point over to the CanonWars blog (see here and especially here), where there are recent Lucas quotes. Lucas re-iterates and expands upon the assorted "parallel universe"/"two universes" sorts of quotes that he's been making since 2001, which (as we know) nullify the efforts of some to use Star Wars novels and reference guides (including children's books created by Vs. Debaters which were an attempt to 'adjust' the 'evidence').
While I'm saddened by the knowledge that some will continue to embarrass themselves by suggesting otherwise despite seven years of quotes on the matter, the simple fact is that by the standards that the Vs. Debate supposedly uses, the Expanded Universe is objectively invalid, and its continued use is a subjective choice to deviate from the standard.
Consider this a sort of epilogue to the State of the Debate 2008 post.
2008-04-08
TOR and Distance
I've been noticing something for awhile that I've been hesitant to deal with, but it has to happen.
I've been hesitant for a few reasons. First, I was a little unclear on how one should treat the remastered original series (usu. "TOS-R", but I prefer "TOR" because it fits the three-letter scheme). Second, and more importantly, I haven't really seen any of it. For the most part I'm just seeing the TrekMovie.com reports so far.
But there are now too many cases confirmable even from TrekMovie reports for me to continue hesitating.
At issue is this: the TOR guys have no conception of distance whatsoever.
The example that broke the camel's proverbial back is this one from TrekMovie:
That is the lead Romulan ship from "The Enterprise Incident" giving chase to the Enterprise near the end of the episode, as Scotty feverishly works to install the stolen cloaking device, and Spock ponders his recent installation regarding the also-stolen Romulan commander.
You'll note that the Enterprise nacelles are clearly visible in this aft view, as if to scream "this is an aft view!" . . . because otherwise we silly modern viewers might not get it.
Here's the problem, though, with thanks to Chakoteya's transcripts site:
In the FX reel available at TrekMovie.com, you can even hear "very rapidly" while the image above showing the nacelle ends is on the screen. In other words, the displayed image . . . showing a Klingon ship perhaps a handful of kilometers distant assuming a normal camera image . . . is in fact some 150,000 kilometers away.
One could try to explain the discrepancy via other, intra-universe means. For instance, one could assume a really wonky camera system in use for the viewscreen, or an image display system with a flair for the dramatic. But such in-universe explanations fall flat with other examples.
For instance, we have "Journey to Babel", in which the Enterprise has difficulty firing on a high-warp attacker. In the episode, we see this:
There's a dot which, in the video, looks like a fly buzzing about in space, with the Enteprise phasers trying and failing to track it.
Clearly the CBS Digital guys thought it would be cool to see the Orion ship zipping about. However, they failed to realize this is impossible, even ignoring the inherent peculiarity of seeing a superluminal vessel at all. (I can't fault them for that, though, since TNG, especially early TNG, often showed us the Enterprise flying by at high warp with a normal starfield behind it. It's a convention.)
To be able to see the Orion ship zipping about like that, it must either be helluva-huge or awfully close. By "huge" we're talking about thousands of kilometers. By "close" we're talking about hundreds or perhaps thousands of kilometers for it to show up as just a dot, but in that case it would be moving very slowly.
Even at a bit above lightspeed . . . say, 314,159 km/s . . . a vessel 1,000 kilometers from the Enterprise would be able to orbit the ship 100 times per second. (At best, then, the little dot in the episode would only be akin to how helicopter rotor blades or bicycle spokes can appear to stand still if the frame rate and motion match.)
Episodes like "Elaan of Troyius", which also features both warp strafing and range callouts in the tens of thousands of kilometers, also get this absurd sort of treatment. There are other examples as well, but frankly I'm sufficiently depressed. ;)
It seems pretty clear that, in the end, TOR will be considered canon . . . it will, apparently, be all that is available in the high-def world. Such obvious errors are unfortunate given how easily they could've been avoided with a little research. The fact that Dave Rossi and Mike Okuda are involved in this makes this failure to research and comprehend even more appalling.
While it is tempting to declare all of the remastered effects as mere eye candy illustrations (and indeed, in many cases "illustration" is precisely what it looks like), the simple fact is that we cannot completely ignore them. However, in the case of obvious error like this, we have no choice but to ignore the revisions where they err.
I've been hesitant for a few reasons. First, I was a little unclear on how one should treat the remastered original series (usu. "TOS-R", but I prefer "TOR" because it fits the three-letter scheme). Second, and more importantly, I haven't really seen any of it. For the most part I'm just seeing the TrekMovie.com reports so far.
But there are now too many cases confirmable even from TrekMovie reports for me to continue hesitating.
At issue is this: the TOR guys have no conception of distance whatsoever.
The example that broke the camel's proverbial back is this one from TrekMovie:
That is the lead Romulan ship from "The Enterprise Incident" giving chase to the Enterprise near the end of the episode, as Scotty feverishly works to install the stolen cloaking device, and Spock ponders his recent installation regarding the also-stolen Romulan commander.
You'll note that the Enterprise nacelles are clearly visible in this aft view, as if to scream "this is an aft view!" . . . because otherwise we silly modern viewers might not get it.
Here's the problem, though, with thanks to Chakoteya's transcripts site:
KIRK: Mister Spock, distance from the Romulan vessel?
SPOCK: One hundred and fifty thousand kilometres, Captain, and closing very rapidly.
KIRK: Stand by, phasers. Commander, you'll forgive me if I put up a fight.
COMMANDER: Of course. It's expected.
SPOCK: One hundred thousand kilometres. They should commence firing at us within the next twelve point seven seconds.
In the FX reel available at TrekMovie.com, you can even hear "very rapidly" while the image above showing the nacelle ends is on the screen. In other words, the displayed image . . . showing a Klingon ship perhaps a handful of kilometers distant assuming a normal camera image . . . is in fact some 150,000 kilometers away.
One could try to explain the discrepancy via other, intra-universe means. For instance, one could assume a really wonky camera system in use for the viewscreen, or an image display system with a flair for the dramatic. But such in-universe explanations fall flat with other examples.
For instance, we have "Journey to Babel", in which the Enterprise has difficulty firing on a high-warp attacker. In the episode, we see this:
There's a dot which, in the video, looks like a fly buzzing about in space, with the Enteprise phasers trying and failing to track it.
Clearly the CBS Digital guys thought it would be cool to see the Orion ship zipping about. However, they failed to realize this is impossible, even ignoring the inherent peculiarity of seeing a superluminal vessel at all. (I can't fault them for that, though, since TNG, especially early TNG, often showed us the Enterprise flying by at high warp with a normal starfield behind it. It's a convention.)
To be able to see the Orion ship zipping about like that, it must either be helluva-huge or awfully close. By "huge" we're talking about thousands of kilometers. By "close" we're talking about hundreds or perhaps thousands of kilometers for it to show up as just a dot, but in that case it would be moving very slowly.
Even at a bit above lightspeed . . . say, 314,159 km/s . . . a vessel 1,000 kilometers from the Enterprise would be able to orbit the ship 100 times per second. (At best, then, the little dot in the episode would only be akin to how helicopter rotor blades or bicycle spokes can appear to stand still if the frame rate and motion match.)
Episodes like "Elaan of Troyius", which also features both warp strafing and range callouts in the tens of thousands of kilometers, also get this absurd sort of treatment. There are other examples as well, but frankly I'm sufficiently depressed. ;)
It seems pretty clear that, in the end, TOR will be considered canon . . . it will, apparently, be all that is available in the high-def world. Such obvious errors are unfortunate given how easily they could've been avoided with a little research. The fact that Dave Rossi and Mike Okuda are involved in this makes this failure to research and comprehend even more appalling.
While it is tempting to declare all of the remastered effects as mere eye candy illustrations (and indeed, in many cases "illustration" is precisely what it looks like), the simple fact is that we cannot completely ignore them. However, in the case of obvious error like this, we have no choice but to ignore the revisions where they err.
2008-02-28
History - Regarding SpaceBattles
Commenter "International Man of Mystery" requested information about my departure from SpaceBattles in comments to the last post.
As that was a mere four and a half years ago, and as SpaceBattles cannot be googled going back that far, I wasn't thinking I'd find much.
But I did. So now, as usual, far too much information:
For starters, a little backstory.
Then, as now, SpaceBattles had a strong cross-pollenation with our old friends at StarDestroyer.Net's forums, meaning that the vitriolic anti-Trek contingent was well-represented. It was, though, a much different environment. First, the overall noise level of so many universes being pitted against one another left Trek vs. Wars discussions a mere drop in the rainstorm. And, there were pro-Trek folks there to a larger degree than one would find at SDN, though without the unity of SDN's spin campaigns.
The natural result of this was naturally that I, the Great Satan (tm), would be piled upon as usual, albeit with the occasional kudo to break up the monotony.
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C.", who was more than happy to use executive authority in support of his most favored franchise of Star Wars. I naturally found this quite annoying, and my resulting failure to kow-tow led to a tangle or two. Or three.
And there was much to discuss then. This was the era during which the dual canon idea was still relatively fresh, while at the same time the other side was subverting their minds to the ICS children's books as the end-all be-all of Star Wars fact, widening the gap between myself and the other side as they devolved into selective EU worship at the expense of the Star Wars of Lucas. And the other side felt they had the upper hand at the time, as previously pro-Trek poster Alyeska, in an obvious social play, chose to publicly concede to the aforementioned children's books. This was spun as an objective repudiation of any who failed to toe the opposition's party line.
As I had never been one to try to socialize with my ever so ill-mannered opponents, I'd never had need to try to get in their good graces.
Alyeska had already done so, cozying up to the opposition to the point that, as a classic "useful idiot", he was even granted a small moderation position at SDN. His final choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as he undoubtedly expected, lauded and further rewarded by the opposition, though after his usefulness ended there was a bitter falling out.
At one point, I'd asked another mod with pro-Trek leanings on how best to get HBMC off my back. The fellow noted that HBMC had gotten in trouble for that sort of thing more than once already. A portion of his response . . . quoted here under the presumption that any statute of limitations has run out . . . was as follows:
The fellow's basic advice was to socialize with HBMC -- make friendly with him and/or others.
There was logic to that. However, I'm not involved in this hobby to make friends. I'm in it to establish and support facts on the topic (such as one can have facts regarding fiction, but you know what I mean). Any interest I might've entertained in revealing myself further became extinct the first time such conversations became used by the opposition as ammunition for personal harassment and death threats. (This gives people the impression that I am extraordinarily single-minded on this one topic, with nothing else in life. I'm quite comfortable giving off that impression, given the unpleasant alternative.)
In short, as a rule of thumb, if I want to socialize with people I don't do it with faraway strangers from the internet. And so in regards to HBMC, the advice to socialize fell on deaf ears. My sole interest in SpaceBattles was for the sole purpose of Star Trek vs. Star Wars fact-finding. All else was irrelevant, meaning that, unlike Alyeska, I was completely unconcerned with the opinion others held about me on a personal level.
My only concern with HBMC was that he was interfering in fact-finding. He had what I considered a 'unique' concept of what topics to close and when . . . always seeming to correspond to that which most benefitted the pro-Wars mythology camp of which he was a part. His trolling of threads, support of trolling of me, and abuse of moderator authority were mucking with my goals.
Perhaps some of the most entertaining bits were his calls for invasion of the board he moderated, so as to try to wear me down and drown me out.
Of course the invasion requests included the "not outright attacking him" yarn, but merely for cover . . . a total flame-invasion would've drawn the attention of other mods, whereas the usual SDN tone of flaming with an admixture of non-flame words would at least give the appearance of heated debate instead of mere nonsensical personal attacks.
In any case, it was against this entire backdrop that Wayne Poe, using one of his multiple accounts at SpaceBattles, chose to repost his "Trekmiss" video (newer version here). In it, Poe had culled examples of misses by Trek vessels, put them to funny Benny Hill music, and thus crafted a small, fuzzy, low-logic video which purported to show that Star Trek starship weapon accuracy was crappy. As one thread participant put it, "Blind retarded monkeys would make better gunners than Trek targeting computers! That display of accuracy is absolutely PATHETIC! At least Star Wars turrets hit their targets more than 1 out of 10 shots."
To my mind, the most efficient response was to respond in kind with a parody video mocking Wayne's unintentional parody. Thus I culled examples of misses by Star Wars vessels, put them to the music of the Cantina band, and thus crafted a small, fuzzy, low-logic video that purported to remind Star Wars fanboys not to get too haughty in their anti-Trek glee.
I considered it tit for tat, a suitable negation of Wayne's silliness. I certainly see nothing wrong with the tactic. Why would I? Applying your opponent's own irrational attack pattern to your opponent's preference in order to make a point is hardly dishonorable. Turnabout, after all, is fair play.
Imagine my (lack of) surprise when H.B.M.C. came along and closed the thread and removed the video link, calling the whole thing "petty, childish and immature flamebait" compared to Wayne's "harmless fun".
But the idea that I had posted flamebait was silly. It's me we're talking about here, the GREAT SATAN(tm) . . . the fact that I posted at all was flamebait, including for HBMC. More specifically, though, I was annoyed at the obvious double-standards.
And that's the real crux of the matter. The situation was basically that a pro-Wars mod/troll and his fellow pro-Wars members, invasion-buddies, and trolls could not be expected to behave with civility when their opinions were challenged. I, meanwhile, was expected to be respectful of their failings in that regard while peacefully and happily accepting all their challenges and insults to my opinions and person. If I failed to do so, thereby producing flaming from them, I was considered the troublemaker.
If such a consequentialist view is how one wants one's board run, that's fine . . . just be honest about it. The annoying part is when that's done at the same time as the pretense of fairness and justice is maintained.
HBMC sent attacks via PM and I replied forcefully. Seeing that HBMC was rendering SpaceBattles useless to me, I decided to lodge a formal complaint. There was little chance of a good result, but if I was to be made to go I had no desire to go silently.
And indeed, I later learned I was banned. Since HBMC was already effectively interfering with and closing (i.e. banning) discussion, this hardly changed anything. (And according to reports, this still goes on.)
The end result was that, alongside the SDN ban, I had another badge of honor, and more proof that the pro-Wars side cannot take the real heat . . . they can only flame.
As that was a mere four and a half years ago, and as SpaceBattles cannot be googled going back that far, I wasn't thinking I'd find much.
But I did. So now, as usual, far too much information:
For starters, a little backstory.
Then, as now, SpaceBattles had a strong cross-pollenation with our old friends at StarDestroyer.Net's forums, meaning that the vitriolic anti-Trek contingent was well-represented. It was, though, a much different environment. First, the overall noise level of so many universes being pitted against one another left Trek vs. Wars discussions a mere drop in the rainstorm. And, there were pro-Trek folks there to a larger degree than one would find at SDN, though without the unity of SDN's spin campaigns.
The natural result of this was naturally that I, the Great Satan (tm), would be piled upon as usual, albeit with the occasional kudo to break up the monotony.
One SDN/SB border-hopper was SpaceBattles mod "H.B.M.C.", who was more than happy to use executive authority in support of his most favored franchise of Star Wars. I naturally found this quite annoying, and my resulting failure to kow-tow led to a tangle or two. Or three.
And there was much to discuss then. This was the era during which the dual canon idea was still relatively fresh, while at the same time the other side was subverting their minds to the ICS children's books as the end-all be-all of Star Wars fact, widening the gap between myself and the other side as they devolved into selective EU worship at the expense of the Star Wars of Lucas. And the other side felt they had the upper hand at the time, as previously pro-Trek poster Alyeska, in an obvious social play, chose to publicly concede to the aforementioned children's books. This was spun as an objective repudiation of any who failed to toe the opposition's party line.
As I had never been one to try to socialize with my ever so ill-mannered opponents, I'd never had need to try to get in their good graces.
Alyeska had already done so, cozying up to the opposition to the point that, as a classic "useful idiot", he was even granted a small moderation position at SDN. His final choice to abandon reason in favor of community was, as he undoubtedly expected, lauded and further rewarded by the opposition, though after his usefulness ended there was a bitter falling out.
At one point, I'd asked another mod with pro-Trek leanings on how best to get HBMC off my back. The fellow noted that HBMC had gotten in trouble for that sort of thing more than once already. A portion of his response . . . quoted here under the presumption that any statute of limitations has run out . . . was as follows:
"I wish I could give you some advice... but HBMC's a tough case. He's been around here much longer than I have, but after a few years, there's a few things I've come to understand about him...
He hates Star Trek, in all incarnations, and considers Star Wars to be practically a masterpiece, instead of the derivative pulp work it frankly is. He does, however, have interests outside of Trek, so it couldn't hurt to find some common ground.
I don't know how often you intend to hang around here, but it certainly could only get better if you visit some of the other forums. {...} Remember, every time you've posted here so far, that I can recall, it has been in a Trek/Wars debate of some kind or other, and you make some very strong arguments against his position, which psychs the hell out of him. So he gets a ten foot pole up his ass the minute he spots your name on the board.
{...} That'd be my best advice. Hang around a bit more, get to know some of the other people... get involved in different forums, and debates about *other* SF universes, and I practically garauntee he'll either shut up voluntarily, or the rest of the people on the board will tell him to."
The fellow's basic advice was to socialize with HBMC -- make friendly with him and/or others.
There was logic to that. However, I'm not involved in this hobby to make friends. I'm in it to establish and support facts on the topic (such as one can have facts regarding fiction, but you know what I mean). Any interest I might've entertained in revealing myself further became extinct the first time such conversations became used by the opposition as ammunition for personal harassment and death threats. (This gives people the impression that I am extraordinarily single-minded on this one topic, with nothing else in life. I'm quite comfortable giving off that impression, given the unpleasant alternative.)
In short, as a rule of thumb, if I want to socialize with people I don't do it with faraway strangers from the internet. And so in regards to HBMC, the advice to socialize fell on deaf ears. My sole interest in SpaceBattles was for the sole purpose of Star Trek vs. Star Wars fact-finding. All else was irrelevant, meaning that, unlike Alyeska, I was completely unconcerned with the opinion others held about me on a personal level.
My only concern with HBMC was that he was interfering in fact-finding. He had what I considered a 'unique' concept of what topics to close and when . . . always seeming to correspond to that which most benefitted the pro-Wars mythology camp of which he was a part. His trolling of threads, support of trolling of me, and abuse of moderator authority were mucking with my goals.
Perhaps some of the most entertaining bits were his calls for invasion of the board he moderated, so as to try to wear me down and drown me out.
"It brings me great pain to do this...
But I am at my wit's end with DarkStar. Thanks be to Alyeska for doing what he has done, but it has made DipShit even more unbearable than ever.
I come here only because no one else will, and because I'm a mod in the VS forum who has his hands tied.
Anyone who can help deal with DarkStar over there is welcome, and I implore someone to help."
-http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=514645
"Are we totally sure that no one wants to pop over and pitch in? A few descenting voices would be nice, and as long as they're not outright attacking him all help (not that we need any, but it's fun to watch him squirm when he has 6... 7... 8 ... 9 people against him at once) would be greatly appreciated."
-http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=524181
"We're getting no-where at Spacebattles and we're sick of his posts.
Worst of all, I can't actually ban him for any real reason as he's done nothing wrong either."
-http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic.php?p=258675
Of course the invasion requests included the "not outright attacking him" yarn, but merely for cover . . . a total flame-invasion would've drawn the attention of other mods, whereas the usual SDN tone of flaming with an admixture of non-flame words would at least give the appearance of heated debate instead of mere nonsensical personal attacks.
In any case, it was against this entire backdrop that Wayne Poe, using one of his multiple accounts at SpaceBattles, chose to repost his "Trekmiss" video (newer version here). In it, Poe had culled examples of misses by Trek vessels, put them to funny Benny Hill music, and thus crafted a small, fuzzy, low-logic video which purported to show that Star Trek starship weapon accuracy was crappy. As one thread participant put it, "Blind retarded monkeys would make better gunners than Trek targeting computers! That display of accuracy is absolutely PATHETIC! At least Star Wars turrets hit their targets more than 1 out of 10 shots."
To my mind, the most efficient response was to respond in kind with a parody video mocking Wayne's unintentional parody. Thus I culled examples of misses by Star Wars vessels, put them to the music of the Cantina band, and thus crafted a small, fuzzy, low-logic video that purported to remind Star Wars fanboys not to get too haughty in their anti-Trek glee.
I considered it tit for tat, a suitable negation of Wayne's silliness. I certainly see nothing wrong with the tactic. Why would I? Applying your opponent's own irrational attack pattern to your opponent's preference in order to make a point is hardly dishonorable. Turnabout, after all, is fair play.
Imagine my (lack of) surprise when H.B.M.C. came along and closed the thread and removed the video link, calling the whole thing "petty, childish and immature flamebait" compared to Wayne's "harmless fun".
But the idea that I had posted flamebait was silly. It's me we're talking about here, the GREAT SATAN(tm) . . . the fact that I posted at all was flamebait, including for HBMC. More specifically, though, I was annoyed at the obvious double-standards.
And that's the real crux of the matter. The situation was basically that a pro-Wars mod/troll and his fellow pro-Wars members, invasion-buddies, and trolls could not be expected to behave with civility when their opinions were challenged. I, meanwhile, was expected to be respectful of their failings in that regard while peacefully and happily accepting all their challenges and insults to my opinions and person. If I failed to do so, thereby producing flaming from them, I was considered the troublemaker.
If such a consequentialist view is how one wants one's board run, that's fine . . . just be honest about it. The annoying part is when that's done at the same time as the pretense of fairness and justice is maintained.
HBMC sent attacks via PM and I replied forcefully. Seeing that HBMC was rendering SpaceBattles useless to me, I decided to lodge a formal complaint. There was little chance of a good result, but if I was to be made to go I had no desire to go silently.
And indeed, I later learned I was banned. Since HBMC was already effectively interfering with and closing (i.e. banning) discussion, this hardly changed anything. (And according to reports, this still goes on.)
The end result was that, alongside the SDN ban, I had another badge of honor, and more proof that the pro-Wars side cannot take the real heat . . . they can only flame.
2008-02-16
2008-01-25
State of the Debate 2008
I'd been batting around ideas for a State of the Debate 2008 for awhile, even back when it would've been 2007, and thus wouldn't have rhymed quite so nicely. Of course, I've been ever so busy for the past several months, and thus many ideas for updates, blog posts, and so on have been left by the wayside, if not forgotten altogether. But this one keeps re-appearing in my brain.
A State of the Debate, by its nature, is not meant to cover every little detail. Here, we primarily wish to ponder some of the grander themes and overall tracks of the debate.
For the purpose of this post, we'll accept as accurate some statements of the opposition.
My opponents have long listed the the matters of canon policy and the technology of the Death Star as what they consider to be my two primary arguments. While I never considered it in that way, it is true that those two topics bring us to our major points of logical departure.
Their assumption of selected EU material's validity for the purpose of analyzing Star Wars tech (even allowing them to re-understand clear film evidence) carries them far, far away from views that a normal movie-goer would hold. Also, their assumption that the Death Star uses raw, focused reactor energy to annihilate worlds results in much of their beliefs on Imperial reactor power and firepower, as they initially derived estimates by simply scaling downward. That is to say, they simply assumed years ago that a turbolaser was a small superlaser, with a linear firepower relationship joining the two. Ignoring that this would result in ridiculous blaster firepower, this scaling view informed all other firepower estimates, even those that ought to have been taken independently.
Meanwhile, we have argued since at least 2002 that the EU is not valid for the purpose of understanding the Star Wars universe of Lucas. While there might've been room for almost-reasonable doubt at first, the matter became quite settled a couple of years ago, what with Lucas et al. repeatedly stating that there are two separate, parallel universes with the EU being the other. This means that analyzing the Expanded Universe for info on the Lucas universe would be like watching "Mirror, Mirror" to find out about Trek technology, or learning history from alternate history books like Fatherland.
The pro-Wars debaters still refuse to accept this point, instead choosing to ally with the similarly-stuck "EU Defense Force" types who are also emotionally invested in claiming that the EU is not to be discounted for any purpose. But despite such irrational resistance, their position has been thoroughly discredited.
As for the Death Star, we have maintained since at least 2002 -- based on analysis of the films and novelizations thereof -- that the Death Star is not a brute-force weapon directly transferring its reactor's energy . . . instead, the superlaser produces a highly destructive hyperspace-related matter-energy conversion. This was the only useful way to explain the rings added to the Special Editions, material disappearance, and so on, effects which the other side chose instead to ignore. It was also the only way to satisfactorily explain how a vehicle powered by simple fusion could have a planet-busting raygun.
In what must seem the ultimate betrayal for the EU-phile pro-Wars side, the Star Wars Expanded Universe now forces this position, as well. October 2007's Star Wars: Death Star novel also discusses the superlaser in terms of a hyperspace-related matter-energy conversion, with hyperspatial reflux rings and target matter that disappears into hyperspace. Even the reactor technology, despite use of the EU's "hypermatter" nonsense, is incapable of planet-busting energy levels except under catastrophic superlaser misfire conditions, similar in broad strokes to our explanation of the destruction of DS1.
This means, in short, that their cherished EU now officially agrees, in principle, with what their arch-rivals have maintained for years. They can continue to argue the point by trying to scour older EU sources for contrary-sounding minutiae, but only at the expense of their own logical consistency.
And so, with the canon debate also long-settled, the situation they are faced with is quite terrible for them . . . what they view as my two primary arguments are both now lost.
Even putting the best spin on things (emphasis on spin), they are faced with a Catch-22. Either they can try to argue the point of the superlaser at the expense of the EU, or they can argue the EU at the expense of the superlaser.
-------------------------------
There is, of course, a certain irony to all this. For all the work that's gone into ST-v-SW.Net . . . for all the debates and postings and so on . . . it was generally outsiders who decided the issues. Lucas and Lucas Licensing personnel clarified the existing facts, but the Death Star novel was an independent construct of the two authors (barring the outside chance that they somehow stumbled upon this internet backwater and paid attention to some of the same details I presented in the Death Star Research Project).
But given the vitriolic, irrational taking of sides that I have long railed against . . . the sort of us vs. them war mentality that is so often prevalent in this, the most unimportant of topics, just as it is in American politics (which often seems tamer by comparison) . . . that was really the only way it could've happened. Their 'Darkstar Derangement Syndrome', to coin a phrase, has been too prevalent, and thus nothing I or anyone espousing similar views could've said would've convinced them.
That having been said, there's no reason to presume that they will be convinced by anything.
- When faced with devastating facts in the canon debate, they withdrew into a virtually impenetrable groupthink, outright ignoring the facts and patting one another on the back for doing so.
- When faced with devastating facts from the EU regarding troop numbers far smaller than their pulled-from-the-air quadrillions, they attacked and made threats against the author, who now seems to rather enjoy slipping in additional jabs in her continuing EU writings. Nowadays, the author's numbers are ignored despite their repetition in the EU.
- When initially faced with the Death Star novel, their claim was that this increased the Death Star's firepower and reactor power to unknowable levels, instead of decreasing it from their already-expanded values.
With all those facts in mind . . . and oh so many others from similar stories . . . the future will likely not involve an acceptance of the facts.
The pro-Wars Vs. Debate subculture has seen its heyday, what with one of its members contributing to the EU a few years back, but with its assorted attacks on EU personnel they have served to isolate and marginalize themselves rather effectively, and as they continue to spout quadrillions in the face of everyday Star Wars EU readers who see millions, they will continue to be viewed as off their collective rocker . . . especially as their vitriol increases.
Thus I would wager that they will engage in continuing re-imagination or outright ignoring of the Death Star novel, with the same 2002-era myths of theirs told and retold.
Meanwhile, Star Trek will have a film in late 2008, with Star Wars possibly having a TV show in 2009. Thus the topic itself will probably not be dying out anytime soon, and . . . years behind as I already am . . . I'll continue to have work to do, thus enabling me to get even further behind without even trying.
There's much more that can be said on the State of the Debate 2008, but for now . . . with the rather serious exceptions of the author being AWOL and all the pages being in need of updates . . . ST-v-SW.Net's position is strong as ever.
And, with the continuing presence of StarfleetJedi.Net in the pro-Trek side, along with its forum that the SDN pro-Wars side have failed to destroy, the debate itself is proceeding apace.
A State of the Debate, by its nature, is not meant to cover every little detail. Here, we primarily wish to ponder some of the grander themes and overall tracks of the debate.
For the purpose of this post, we'll accept as accurate some statements of the opposition.
My opponents have long listed the the matters of canon policy and the technology of the Death Star as what they consider to be my two primary arguments. While I never considered it in that way, it is true that those two topics bring us to our major points of logical departure.
Their assumption of selected EU material's validity for the purpose of analyzing Star Wars tech (even allowing them to re-understand clear film evidence) carries them far, far away from views that a normal movie-goer would hold. Also, their assumption that the Death Star uses raw, focused reactor energy to annihilate worlds results in much of their beliefs on Imperial reactor power and firepower, as they initially derived estimates by simply scaling downward. That is to say, they simply assumed years ago that a turbolaser was a small superlaser, with a linear firepower relationship joining the two. Ignoring that this would result in ridiculous blaster firepower, this scaling view informed all other firepower estimates, even those that ought to have been taken independently.
Meanwhile, we have argued since at least 2002 that the EU is not valid for the purpose of understanding the Star Wars universe of Lucas. While there might've been room for almost-reasonable doubt at first, the matter became quite settled a couple of years ago, what with Lucas et al. repeatedly stating that there are two separate, parallel universes with the EU being the other. This means that analyzing the Expanded Universe for info on the Lucas universe would be like watching "Mirror, Mirror" to find out about Trek technology, or learning history from alternate history books like Fatherland.
The pro-Wars debaters still refuse to accept this point, instead choosing to ally with the similarly-stuck "EU Defense Force" types who are also emotionally invested in claiming that the EU is not to be discounted for any purpose. But despite such irrational resistance, their position has been thoroughly discredited.
As for the Death Star, we have maintained since at least 2002 -- based on analysis of the films and novelizations thereof -- that the Death Star is not a brute-force weapon directly transferring its reactor's energy . . . instead, the superlaser produces a highly destructive hyperspace-related matter-energy conversion. This was the only useful way to explain the rings added to the Special Editions, material disappearance, and so on, effects which the other side chose instead to ignore. It was also the only way to satisfactorily explain how a vehicle powered by simple fusion could have a planet-busting raygun.
In what must seem the ultimate betrayal for the EU-phile pro-Wars side, the Star Wars Expanded Universe now forces this position, as well. October 2007's Star Wars: Death Star novel also discusses the superlaser in terms of a hyperspace-related matter-energy conversion, with hyperspatial reflux rings and target matter that disappears into hyperspace. Even the reactor technology, despite use of the EU's "hypermatter" nonsense, is incapable of planet-busting energy levels except under catastrophic superlaser misfire conditions, similar in broad strokes to our explanation of the destruction of DS1.
This means, in short, that their cherished EU now officially agrees, in principle, with what their arch-rivals have maintained for years. They can continue to argue the point by trying to scour older EU sources for contrary-sounding minutiae, but only at the expense of their own logical consistency.
And so, with the canon debate also long-settled, the situation they are faced with is quite terrible for them . . . what they view as my two primary arguments are both now lost.
Even putting the best spin on things (emphasis on spin), they are faced with a Catch-22. Either they can try to argue the point of the superlaser at the expense of the EU, or they can argue the EU at the expense of the superlaser.
-------------------------------
There is, of course, a certain irony to all this. For all the work that's gone into ST-v-SW.Net . . . for all the debates and postings and so on . . . it was generally outsiders who decided the issues. Lucas and Lucas Licensing personnel clarified the existing facts, but the Death Star novel was an independent construct of the two authors (barring the outside chance that they somehow stumbled upon this internet backwater and paid attention to some of the same details I presented in the Death Star Research Project).
But given the vitriolic, irrational taking of sides that I have long railed against . . . the sort of us vs. them war mentality that is so often prevalent in this, the most unimportant of topics, just as it is in American politics (which often seems tamer by comparison) . . . that was really the only way it could've happened. Their 'Darkstar Derangement Syndrome', to coin a phrase, has been too prevalent, and thus nothing I or anyone espousing similar views could've said would've convinced them.
That having been said, there's no reason to presume that they will be convinced by anything.
- When faced with devastating facts in the canon debate, they withdrew into a virtually impenetrable groupthink, outright ignoring the facts and patting one another on the back for doing so.
- When faced with devastating facts from the EU regarding troop numbers far smaller than their pulled-from-the-air quadrillions, they attacked and made threats against the author, who now seems to rather enjoy slipping in additional jabs in her continuing EU writings. Nowadays, the author's numbers are ignored despite their repetition in the EU.
- When initially faced with the Death Star novel, their claim was that this increased the Death Star's firepower and reactor power to unknowable levels, instead of decreasing it from their already-expanded values.
With all those facts in mind . . . and oh so many others from similar stories . . . the future will likely not involve an acceptance of the facts.
The pro-Wars Vs. Debate subculture has seen its heyday, what with one of its members contributing to the EU a few years back, but with its assorted attacks on EU personnel they have served to isolate and marginalize themselves rather effectively, and as they continue to spout quadrillions in the face of everyday Star Wars EU readers who see millions, they will continue to be viewed as off their collective rocker . . . especially as their vitriol increases.
Thus I would wager that they will engage in continuing re-imagination or outright ignoring of the Death Star novel, with the same 2002-era myths of theirs told and retold.
Meanwhile, Star Trek will have a film in late 2008, with Star Wars possibly having a TV show in 2009. Thus the topic itself will probably not be dying out anytime soon, and . . . years behind as I already am . . . I'll continue to have work to do, thus enabling me to get even further behind without even trying.
There's much more that can be said on the State of the Debate 2008, but for now . . . with the rather serious exceptions of the author being AWOL and all the pages being in need of updates . . . ST-v-SW.Net's position is strong as ever.
And, with the continuing presence of StarfleetJedi.Net in the pro-Trek side, along with its forum that the SDN pro-Wars side have failed to destroy, the debate itself is proceeding apace.
2007-11-24
On the Brief Stagnation
Main page news update:
Obviously there have been a few blog posts since June, so the whole five month thing doesn't quite apply to the blog. But the point remains. Sue me.
So, in case you're wondering (and I know you are), I do have a perfectly good excuse for a total lack of updates for the past 5-and-a-half months. More than one, actually. First, I've been helluva-busy. Second, I've been working in my virtually non-existent spare time on what may end up being a massive overhaul of the site. I didn't want to mention it at first, but as the days have ticked by and I've kept noticing that the last update on here was from June, I figured I ought to say something. So here it is. :P
Obviously there have been a few blog posts since June, so the whole five month thing doesn't quite apply to the blog. But the point remains. Sue me.
2007-09-04
Dr. McCoy Would Be Pleased
This thing sounds hella-cool . . . a golf-ball-sized ultrasound device with a handle that would be used to scan for internal injuries and, with a few settings adjustments, to patch them via precise and localized ultrasonic heating of the blood into a seal.
Quite a bit different from what we're used to, as so wonderfully explained circa 2:47 in this gratuitous YouTube clip posting.
"Oh, I'd give a lot to see the hospital. Probably needles . . . sutures . . . oh the pain . . . they had to cut and sew people like garments!"
Quite a bit different from what we're used to, as so wonderfully explained circa 2:47 in this gratuitous YouTube clip posting.
"Oh, I'd give a lot to see the hospital. Probably needles . . . sutures . . . oh the pain . . . they had to cut and sew people like garments!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)