Scotty in NuTrek is a comedic character. Scotty in TOS was funny and had a great sense of humor but he was not comedic relief. Did you really grab at lines of dialogue without considering the persona and accomplishments of Master Engineer Montgomery Scott? In NuTrek, Checkov has shown more technological ingenuity than Scotty has. Transwarp beaming does not count because Spock Prime gave him the formula.Seems I must as you keep digging a deeper hole.Ugh...must you?
I am pointing out that Scotty was used as a comedic foil sometimes, nothing else.
He's a fracking CHARACTER, jeezus man
Ahh, I see we are at stage 1 again
Seems I must as you keep digging a deeper hole.
I am pointing out that Scotty was used as a comedic foil sometimes, nothing else.
I am pointing out that your -opinion- means as much as anyone elses. I don't give a TOSS if you watched TOS a few years before me, there are X amount of TV/movie hours of Trek, and just like you, I have watched nearly all of them (the cartoon never got here, sorry boss). You do not have some mystical understanding beyond mine that makes your understanding "more true", neither do I.
What you are stating is -opinion-, and so am I.
He's a fracking CHARACTER, jeezus man
Ahh, I see we are at stage 1 again
View attachment 32381
I could watch a Japanese poet reciting a poem in Japanese 100 times and still be clueless about the poem because I don't speak Japanese. All I hear would be basically babble. Does that mean that the poem in meaningless? Of course not. And without a basic understanding of Japanese and what the poem is about, I cannot even think about commenting on it's artistry or message. You are there with Star Trek.Dude, you could watch anything and be clueless..............No, YOU are at stage one. Not again, you never left it.
No, YOU are at stage one. Not again, you never left it.
I used that example because the reciting of some Japanese poetry I experienced lacked any clue, even the Haiku. East Asian poetry and music is not as expressive like when poets recite English poetry (I mean in the facial expression/emotional way). Japanese traditional music borders on atonal. In either case, even understanding a basic "gist" of it through observing would not allow me to comment on the topic of Japanese poetry or music.
You are married to someone from that culture.
My point to Gatefan is that the term "technobabble" is a term non-tech people made up to describe something technical they do not understand. I cannot think of a single valid situation where the term "technobabble" would be acceptable to use. If somebody started asking me where the Gandalf Module is on the motherboard, or what network component is regulated by the Central Plexus, I would call that nonsense and not technobabble, because I know there is no such thing as a Gandalf Module or a Central Plexus in a real computer or network.
) then surely you would then understand my meaning and use of the term "gandalf module", wouldn't you?
No f'ing way!!!Well, no, not really. No one is arguing *for* or *against* or *which is better*, just you trying to equate them as both being pure magical fantasy. Not much of a back 'n forth happening there.
No f'ing way!!!
I am the one who was saying JUST WATCH THE DAMN SHOWS/MOVIES!!!
Don't go flipping it around on me
I said that I appreciate both for what they are-entertainment
I think you may be conflating some of the things the GF and I are saying
---and as far as fantasy--it is fantasy damn it
I don't care how "theoretical" something is, until it is in existence it is just in the imagination. Imagination = fantasy. and yes,sometimes imagination does equal invention, but until the dreams come into physical reality they are just that--dreams=imagination=fantasy. Even if it is informed fantasy based on hard science
again--no point in going on, there will be no solution
you guys are hard wired for everything must have a solution, nothing left to the imagination, everything must be explained
if you have X+Y+Z=? You'd have no solution; I'd have "shyzz-y"
Shall we take a walk down memory lane? Oh, heck, just go down this thread.
http://www.gatefans.net/gforums/threads/star-wars-vii-the-force-awakens.27860/page-25
don't see your point--the link here only takes me to a page where the only posts I made was showing what actual NASA experts say about real world possibilities for what they call a "Warp drive" vs the warp drive of ST
they are two different things-the guy is quoted in the article as saying that much, not me.
according to NASA and their associates, the only thing real world possibilities (for which a energy source-they say-does not and probably will not ever, exist) for warp drive and ST has is similar names
---------------------------------------------------------
And--here is a real post of mine--since you keep pushing for an argument--showing why much of what is in ST is fantasy in the way that it does not exist now (of course) and why it can net EVER exist
transporters and the Heisenberg Compensator is one thing. Another (not in this video) is the amount of energy required just to scan,upload and dissemble one person far exceeds the amount of energy released from all of the nuclear weapons we have today.
Just more scientific fantasy- why don't you invite this guy to the forum and argue with him?--I'll get the popcorn
So just stop trying to bait me for this silly argument
Both movies/shows are imaginary, works of fiction. Most importantly, they are forms of entertainment and diversion-nothing more
So, you and OM and whomever else should just start a "Squee" thread for ST where you all can argue over who loves ST more
http://www.swinburne.edu.au/news/la...g-needed-for-secure-quantum-teleportation.php
that was just from Friday, long after you and OM started this flame war
I besides-I made no equations of there being "equal science" between ST and SW's in it, I just said, once again, it is all made up entertainment--'made up' from the realm of the writers imaginations. And, to "just watch the stuff". It is all entertainment
The best scientists are in the public sector, not at NASA wasting public resources on manmade global warming models or watching the private companies perform their paid experiments on the International Space Station which they only partially administer (and own). NASA does noit get to say what is possible or not. Only science does, and the best of science is not working at NASA.). Transporting a being with a living brain would kill it IMO.Just more scientific fantasy- why don't you invite this guy to the forum and argue with him?--I'll get the popcorn
So just stop trying to bait me for this silly argument
Both movies/shows are imaginary, works of fiction. Most importantly, they are forms of entertainment and diversion-nothing more
So, you and OM and whomever else should just start a "Squee" thread for ST where you all can argue over who loves ST more
Star Trek fans are way more picky, and about the same picky things we pick out in Star Trek. I don't always just want to be entertained. Sometimes I want to be challenged. Sometimes I want to be inspired. You can get all of that in Star Trek, but only entertainment from Star Wars. Is that a bad thing? Not necessarily.