---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 23:23:23 -0700 Subject: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- BaldStar claims that the Romulan plasma weapon in "Balance of Terror" 'maneuvered' to follow the Enterprise after it was fired I claim Rogaine jockey is purposely misrepresenting the scene, and that the pulsating plasma ball is on a straight course. When we first see the plasma weapon fired, we can clearly see it pulsating; growing bigger and then smaller as it travels: http://h4h.com/louis/baldy1.mpv Now, when the plasma weapon is fired at the Enterprise, Kirk orders emergency warp. We see the ship firing, then come back to a scene asking if they have achieved emergency warp. Sulu answers, and then we see another shot of the plasma ball: http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv Now, BaldStar claims this ball MANEUVERED. Even though, the ship that fired it allegedly can't even achieve warp. Not only that, but I don't believe we've ever seen an energy weapon home in on a target. Now, wouldn't it make MORE sense that, when Kirk orders emergency warp, the Enterprise clearly didn't have time to spin around yet, (warp pivot, which is done in "Elaan of Troyus") but as the stars show, the ship IS traveling "backward" from the Romulan ship? Then when we switch back to Kirk, then back to the viewscreen, wouldn't it make MORE sense that, by that time, Sulu has had time for the warp pivot, and the ship is pointed AWAY from the plasma ball, and in fact, we are seeing the ball on ANOTHER external camera? Note that the ball is SMALLER in the second scene, lending weight to the above theory. Unless BaldStar wants us to believe that the plasma ball was courteous enough to slow down for few seconds... -- "I'm sick of this canon bitching. The Trekkies have six hundred fucking hours of canon to work with. We have about TEN, not counting the novelizations, Radio scripts, etc. Stop crying because of 200GT turbolasers." --- Dalton http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2002 07:57:46 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <_h709.291385$Bt1.15110392@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:uk1qmv76ot0126@corp.supernews.com... > BaldStar claims that the Romulan plasma weapon in "Balance of Terror" > 'maneuvered' to follow the Enterprise after it was fired > > I claim Rogaine jockey is purposely misrepresenting the scene, and that the > pulsating plasma ball is on a straight course. Man, that "Darth Mullet" thing really got to you. > > When we first see the plasma weapon fired, we can clearly see it pulsating; > growing bigger and then smaller as it travels: > > http://h4h.com/louis/baldy1.mpv Duh. Nice waste of your server space. > > Now, when the plasma weapon is fired at the Enterprise, Kirk orders > emergency warp. We see the ship firing, then come back to a scene asking if > they have achieved emergency warp. Sulu answers, and then we see another > shot of the plasma ball: > > http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv There we go. I knew you could digitize the right scene. > > Now, BaldStar claims this ball MANEUVERED. It was fired from above the plane of the ship. When the ship started zipping backward at a speed faster than light, the object continued to follow them. Had it been a straight-shooting weapon, it would have continued on a downward trajectory. This is really simple. I don't understand how the concept eludes you. > Even though, the ship that fired > it allegedly can't even achieve warp. Man, there's a bullshit story I never get tired of hearing. No, wait, I did get tired of it long ago. > Not only that, but I don't believe > we've ever seen an energy weapon home in on a target. V'ger fired some, and the Defiant's phaser pulses were once seen to turn along with the ship. (I personally consider it an FX gaffe, but that argument isn't allowed in most ST/SW quarters.) > Now, wouldn't it make > MORE sense that, when Kirk orders emergency warp, the Enterprise clearly > didn't have time to spin around yet, (warp pivot, which is done in "Elaan of > Troyus") It's about damn time you admit that they pivoted. > but as the stars show, the ship IS traveling "backward" from the > Romulan ship? Then when we switch back to Kirk, then back to the viewscreen, > wouldn't it make MORE sense that, by that time, Sulu has had time for the > warp pivot, and the ship is pointed AWAY from the plasma ball, and in fact, > we are seeing the ball on ANOTHER external camera? No, it wouldn't. We see the stars moving toward the ship, then Kirk learns the Romulans are decloaking. Kirk guesses their move, orders "full astern, emergency warp speed" (your second video begins there), and we see the Romulan ship fire. When the Romulans fire, the stars are already moving in reverse, and there are no further turning orders. Those reversing stars are heading toward a point below the plasma weapon. By the next viewscreen shot, they are headed toward a point behind the plasma weapon. > > Note that the ball is SMALLER in the second scene, lending weight to the > above theory. Unless BaldStar wants us to believe that the plasma ball was > courteous enough to slow down for few seconds... > Geez... whatever crackwhore format you put that movie in sucks. I can't get anything but Windows junk to open it, so I can't go counting pixels. But, yes, it does appear to be about ten percent smaller... and in the center, instead of the upper left of the screen where it started out. Oh, right, I forgot that makes your theory look stupid. Sorry. The idea that you're missing isn't that the plasma weapon slowed... the Enterprise was speeding up. The most you can claim out of the smaller plasma weapon was that the magnification on the screen changed. But, changing magnification, or even entire cameras, isn't going to change the direction of the ship's travel, or the direction of travel of the plasma weapon. There is no evidence that the ship changed direction of travel (well, except for reversing), so the plasma ball must have. Are you still going to argue your stupid point, or face the facts? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 02:19:34 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote > "Wayne Poe" wrote >> I claim Rogaine jockey is purposely misrepresenting the scene, and that the pulsating plasma ball is on a straight course. > Man, that "Darth Mullet" thing really got to you. Once again, nope. Like every other argument of yours that has been shot down in flames here and elsewhere, the hair in the "Lord Poe" picture isn't a "mullet". The haircut I CURRENTLY have would definitely be considered a mullet, but that other one is just long hair. I simply notice your obsession with my hair for what it is- envy to the "follicly challenged". > It was fired from above the plane of the ship. It was fired from direct center. > When the ship started zipping backward at a speed faster than light, the object continued to follow them. Had it been a > straight-shooting weapon, it would have continued on a downward trajectory. This is really simple. I don't understand how > the concept eludes you. Probably because its idiocy is immediately canceled. Not only do you assume incorrectly that it was "pointing down", but that the weapon is "fixed" and can't fire off-center. Rather, you stick to the more ludicrous assumption that the plasma ball adjusted its course for no reason against a target that wasn't maneuvering. >> Even though, the ship that fired it allegedly can't even achieve warp. > Man, there's a bullshit story I never get tired of hearing. No, wait, I did get tired of it long ago. Ah yes, another Trekkie that insists that Scotty MUST be wrong when he said the ship's power was "simple impulse". That's right up there with "DS9 wasn't missing all those Klingon ships; they were firing at ships off camera!"There was this incredible idiot that used to be here posting the same crap, calling himself Guardian 2000. You woudn't want to be associated with such a 'tard, would you? >> Not only that, but I don't believe we've ever seen an energy weapon home in on a target. > V'ger fired some, V'ger's weapons never adjusted course after being fired. Didn't need to since not one of its targets even tried to evade. > and the Defiant's phaser pulses were once seen to turn along with the ship. Can you be any more vague? > It's about damn time you admit that they pivoted. Wrong once again. I've never disputed it. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=warp+pivot+wayne+poe+elaan&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT F-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=Pine.LNX.3.95.990327021707.23277D-100000%40h4h.com&rnum=2 http://groups.google.com/groups?q=warp+pivot+wayne+poe+elaan&hl=en&lr=&ie=UT F-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=u1scua9dnmn970%40corp.supernews.com&rnum=3 >> but as the stars show, the ship IS traveling "backward" from the Romulan ship? Then when we switch back to Kirk, then back to the viewscreen,wouldn't it make MORE sense that, by that time, Sulu has had time for thewarp pivot, and the ship is pointed AWAY from the plasma ball, and in fact,we are seeing the ball on ANOTHER external camera? > No, it wouldn't. We see the stars moving toward the ship, then Kirk learns the Romulans are decloaking. Kirk guesses their > move, orders "full astern, emergency warp speed" (your second video begins there), and we see the Romulan ship fire. > When the Romulans fire, the stars are already moving in reverse, and there are no further turning orders. This doesn't mean they were already turned around. We've seen the speed of a "warp pivot", and its far from immediate. > Those reversing stars are heading toward a point below the plasma weapon. By the next viewscreen shot, they are headed > toward a point behind the plasma weapon. Yup, when the Enterprise has already completed its turn. > Geez... whatever crackwhore format you put that movie in sucks. I can't get anything but Windows junk to open it, so I > can't go counting pixels. Yes, well, Quicktime .mpv IS one of the more underground formats... > But, yes, it does appear to be about ten percent smaller... and in the center, instead of the upper left of the screen where it > started out. Oh, right, I forgot that makes your theory look stupid. Sorry. You're projecting again, since it fully supports my theory-- new camera angle. > The idea that you're missing isn't that the plasma weapon slowed... the Enterprise was speeding up. No shit. Really? Your theory is the one that allows us idiotic assumptions like the plasma ball can course correct (for no reason) and therefore slow down (for no reason). My theory fits all the facts, without making up a theory so idiotic that even a spacebattles.com resident would laugh at it. > The most you can claim out of the smaller plasma weapon was that the magnification on the screen changed. Incorrect. Anytime there is a screen magnification change, Kirk orders it. He didn't. > But, changing magnification, or even entire cameras, isn't going to change the direction of the ship's travel, or the direction of > travel of the plasma weapon. It will if the object is being shot from a different perspective. > There is no evidence that the ship changed direction of travel (well, except for reversing), so the plasma ball must have. Yes, that the most "logical" explanation... > Are you still going to argue your stupid point, or face the facts? Ok, I admit it. The fact is, you ARE an idiot. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 23:18:34 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:uk4pdbbov66h04@corp.supernews.com... > "DarkStar" wrote Let's make life easier, shall we? http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=657 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 20:47:48 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote > 1. You ignore canon representations of warp speed without warp stars. Nope, you ignore clear canon visual evidence which shows that the stardrive is NOT AT WARP when it made its turn. Concession Accepted. > 2. You ignore canon fact about how long it takes the ships to drop out of warp. Nope, you ignore clear canon visual evidence which shows that the E-D DID in fact, drop out of warp almost immediately. > 3. You ignore the necessary plot elements of the episode. You ignore the fact that "plot elements" means about as much as your mom wondering if she should get an abortion now or later. > All this, because you see warp-speed ships sometimes shown with warp star effects, and assume it is a universal idea. All this, because you refuse to accept clear canon visual evidence which shows that the stardrive is NOT AT WARP when it made its turn. Concession Accepted. > It is not whining... I am telling you and showing you the canon facts of Star Trek. Canon facts do not contain "Tng-era effects were different! Waaaa!" > Oooh, now there's a dishonest debating tactic. I never said Q was using warp drive. Yes you did. To prove there was no "warp effect" during warp, you offered up Q's ball. You've yet to prove Q needs to HAVE a "warp effect". Concession Accepted. > Any starship which loses warp propulsion Kirk's Enterprise has nothing to do with this thread. Please stay on topic. > The fact that it is mobile matters, whether you choose to ignore the fact or not. Doesn't matter. Warp effect is present. THAT matters. >> I know enough about it to kick your ass in every discussion. > What, like this one? Yup. And by using canon visual evidence you want to ignore. Imagine that. http://h4h.com/louis/baldyi.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyj.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyk.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyl.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldym.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyn.jpg > If the canon speaks for itself, why are you putting your hand over its mouth by ignoring the fact that warp drive, when shown > from a stationary observation point, would not be shown with warp stars? Q's ball isn't the E-D. Concession Accepted. > Why are you holding it down and tying it up so you don't have to watch it gesture or draw pictures in the sand to you about > the fact that it took six seconds to drop out of warp with reverse power? This canonically happened in the episode. Concession Accepted. > Why are you stripping and butt-raping the Trek canon so you don't have to acknowledge the fact that the stardrive section > made that turn at warp speeds? The canon speaks for itself: The stardrive section was NOT AT WARP when it made the turn. http://h4h.com/louis/baldyi.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyj.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyk.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyl.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldym.jpg http://h4h.com/louis/baldyn.jpg -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 06:02:21 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:uk9en8o2rnqr5c@corp.supernews.com... Let's make life easier, shall we? http://www.stardestroyer.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=657 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 00:11:57 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote > Let's make life easier, shall we? Sure; Concession Accepted. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 14:26:19 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:uk9qm27hg1ph65@corp.supernews.com... > > > "DarkStar" wrote > > > Let's make life easier, shall we? > > Sure; Concession Accepted. On what grounds? Just because you've demonstrated the ability to ignore canon is hardly justification for a claim of victory on your part. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 18:13:25 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote > "Wayne Poe" > > Sure; Concession Accepted. > On what grounds? On the grounds that you refuse to accept canon even with visual evidence. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 15:45:51 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:ukbqe4o378m838@corp.supernews.com... > > "DarkStar" wrote > > > "Wayne Poe" > > > > Sure; Concession Accepted. > > > On what grounds? > > On the grounds that you refuse to accept canon even with visual evidence. You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. It's really, really simple, but you refuse to acknowledge it, and will go to any length (claiming warp pivot, lying about Elaan of Troyius (again), and disputing the fact that the Romulans were above the plane of the Enterprise) to avoid having to acknowledge the simple fact. Concession accepted, unless and until you can come up with an argument which does not require you to ignore or lie about the canon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 22:08:57 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "DarkStar" wrote > You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. Concession Accepted. > It's really, really simple, Yes it is. You want everyone to subscribe to your fantasyland version of events on everything, while ignoring canon. But no one except you wants to frolic in that playground of ignorance. Concession Accepted. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "C.S.Strowbridge" Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 08:00:41 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <3D4798FE.4020103@shaw.ca> -------- Wayne Poe wrote: > "DarkStar" wrote: >>You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the >>Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > Concession Accepted. Is that really his entire argument? Doesn't he realize you can draw a line between any two points. It doesn't matter what the co-ordinates of those two points are. C.S.Strowbridge ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 06:08:11 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D4798FE.4020103@shaw.ca... > Wayne Poe wrote: > > "DarkStar" wrote: > > >>You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > >>Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > > Concession Accepted. > > Is that really his entire argument? Doesn't he realize you can draw a > line between any two points. It doesn't matter what the co-ordinates of > those two points are. If one endpoint moves, the direction of the line must change, unless the endpoint moves closer or further. The Romulans fired from above the plane of the Enterprise, and the Enterprise moved backwards along her prior orientation. The plasma weapon followed. CURVED LINE = MANEUVERING WEAPON Unless, of course, Poe would now like to argue that a microscopic black hole was between the ships and affected the weapon's trajectory (not that such an argument would be any less ridiculous than the one he is now using). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Matthew Van Wie Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 13:15:04 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <3D493541.191E7B1A@yahoo.com> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message > news:3D4798FE.4020103@shaw.ca... > > Wayne Poe wrote: > > > "DarkStar" wrote: > > > > >>You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > > >>Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > > > > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > > > Concession Accepted. > > > > Is that really his entire argument? Doesn't he realize you can draw a > > line between any two points. It doesn't matter what the co-ordinates of > > those two points are. > > If one endpoint moves, the direction of the line must change, unless the > endpoint moves closer or further. The Romulans fired from above the plane > of the Enterprise, and the Enterprise moved backwards along her prior > orientation. The plasma weapon followed. > > CURVED LINE = MANEUVERING WEAPON > > Unless, of course, Poe would now like to argue that a microscopic black hole > was between the ships and affected the weapon's trajectory (not that such an > argument would be any less ridiculous than the one he is now using). Or the Romulans displayed intelligence, and used a basic tactic called "leading the target." MattV ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 14:34:22 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Matthew Van Wie" wrote in message news:3D493541.191E7B1A@yahoo.com... > > > > If one endpoint moves, the direction of the line must change, unless the > > endpoint moves closer or further. The Romulans fired from above the plane > > of the Enterprise, and the Enterprise moved backwards along her prior > > orientation. The plasma weapon followed. > > > > CURVED LINE = MANEUVERING WEAPON > > > > Unless, of course, Poe would now like to argue that a microscopic black hole > > was between the ships and affected the weapon's trajectory (not that such an > > argument would be any less ridiculous than the one he is now using). > > Or the Romulans displayed intelligence, and used a basic tactic called > "leading the target." > The idea that the Romulan weapon was fired toward way behind the ship is not supported by what we see in the canon. The weapon, when fired from above the plane of the ship, appears to be heading directly for the ship, and always appears that way. Curved line = manuevering weapon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 01 Aug 2002 18:56:20 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020801145620.02559.00000981@mb-cl.aol.com> -------- Darkstar subspaced: >The idea that the Romulan weapon was fired toward way behind the ship is not >supported by what we see in the canon. The weapon, when fired from above >the plane of the ship, appears to be heading directly for the ship, and >always appears that way. Curved line = manuevering weapon. > Screenshot proving your point? Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2002 15:58:56 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <4%x29.30157$vg.1048603@bin2.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com> -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020801145620.02559.00000981@mb-cl.aol.com... > Darkstar subspaced: > >The idea that the Romulan weapon was fired toward way behind the ship is not > >supported by what we see in the canon. The weapon, when fired from above > >the plane of the ship, appears to be heading directly for the ship, and > >always appears that way. Curved line = manuevering weapon. > > > Screenshot proving your point? http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 03 Aug 2002 04:05:27 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020803000527.19461.00001342@mb-mc.aol.com> -------- >http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv > > Great, a .mpv file, something that would take me an hour to download and AOL would error out me before that. I suppose that 'screenshot' meaning a still image went right over your head. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Sat, 03 Aug 2002 06:04:29 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020803000527.19461.00001342@mb-mc.aol.com... > >http://h4h.com/louis/baldy2.mpv > > > > > > Great, a .mpv file, something that would take me an hour to download and AOL > would error out me before that. I suppose that 'screenshot' meaning a still > image went right over your head. (sigh) Okay, try this if you can't download anything: http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/index_3.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 03 Aug 2002 18:34:19 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020803143419.12271.00001179@mb-fj.aol.com> -------- >Okay, try this if you can't download anything: >http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/index_3.htm > Thanks you just proved your self wrong. Your entire claim of the romulan ship being above the enterprise when it fired, if so how come we can see the top of the romulan vessel in the veiwscreen? Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2002 05:38:31 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020803143419.12271.00001179@mb-fj.aol.com... > >Okay, try this if you can't download anything: > >http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/index_3.htm > > > > Thanks you just proved your self wrong. Your entire claim of the romulan ship > being above the enterprise when it fired, if so how come we can see the top of > the romulan vessel in the veiwscreen? Wow... is this really the dumbest thing I've heard you say, or am I misunderstanding? It looks like you just asked why we should be able to see the top of something which is above the plane of the ship. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 05 Aug 2002 22:34:34 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020805183434.19479.00001786@mb-mc.aol.com> -------- >Wow... is this really the dumbest thing I've heard you say, or am I >misunderstanding? It looks like you just asked why we should be able to >see the top of something which is above the plane of the ship. > LOL, above the plane means above the ship, we should be looking at the bottom of the Romulan ship, unless your revising your argument that you mixed up the position of the Ent and Rom ships Your example says we should see this ROM ENT The visual shows the Rom ship where we would see this. Ent Rom Or are you now claiming this Ent Rom Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Tue, 06 Aug 2002 11:11:31 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020805183434.19479.00001786@mb-mc.aol.com... > >Wow... is this really the dumbest thing I've heard you say, or am I > >misunderstanding? It looks like you just asked why we should be able to > >see the top of something which is above the plane of the ship. > > > > LOL, above the plane means above the ship, we should be looking at the bottom > of the Romulan ship, unless your revising your argument that you mixed up the > position of the Ent and Rom ships > > Your example says we should see this > > ROM > > ENT > > > The visual shows the Rom ship where we would see this. > > Ent Rom > > > Or are you now claiming this > > Ent > Rom > Nope, I was right... you are extremely fucking stupid. Did it not occur to you that the Romulan ship didn't have to be on the same plane as the Enterprise? Or, to borrow your style: M O R ENT (The angle is exaggerated, but you get the idea... or, actually, no, you probably don't, but that's just because you're stupid.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 06 Aug 2002 16:46:28 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020806124628.02118.00002371@mb-fe.aol.com> -------- Darkstar subspaced: >"Setesh" wrote in message >news:20020805183434.19479.00001786@mb-mc.aol.com... >> >Wow... is this really the dumbest thing I've heard you say, or am I >> >misunderstanding? It looks like you just asked why we should be able to >> >see the top of something which is above the plane of the ship. >> > >> >> LOL, above the plane means above the ship, we should be looking at the >bottom >> of the Romulan ship, unless your revising your argument that you mixed up >the >> position of the Ent and Rom ships >> >> Your example says we should see this >> >> ROM >> >> ENT >> >> >> The visual shows the Rom ship where we would see this. >> >> Ent Rom >> >> >> Or are you now claiming this >> >> Ent >> Rom >> > >Nope, I was right... you are extremely fucking stupid. > >Did it not occur to you that the Romulan ship didn't have to be on the same >plane as the Enterprise? > >Or, to borrow your style: > > M > O > R > >ENT > >(The angle is exaggerated, but you get the idea... or, actually, no, you >probably don't, but that's just because you're stupid.) > The stills you pointed out to me show the Romulan ship exactly the way we would see it if it was coming dead on. I have yet to see any proof of this angle except your contention that that's how it happened. The only time we see a 'under shot' of the BOP is a flyby that isn't from the enterprises POV. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2002 16:00:51 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Setesh" wrote in message news:20020806124628.02118.00002371@mb-fe.aol.com... > Darkstar subspaced: > >"Setesh" wrote in message > >news:20020805183434.19479.00001786@mb-mc.aol.com... > >> >Wow... is this really the dumbest thing I've heard you say, or am I > >> >misunderstanding? It looks like you just asked why we should be able to > >> >see the top of something which is above the plane of the ship. > >> > > >> > >> LOL, above the plane means above the ship, we should be looking at the > >bottom > >> of the Romulan ship, unless your revising your argument that you mixed up > >the > >> position of the Ent and Rom ships > >> > >> Your example says we should see this > >> > >> ROM > >> > >> ENT > >> > >> > >> The visual shows the Rom ship where we would see this. > >> > >> Ent Rom > >> > >> > >> Or are you now claiming this > >> > >> Ent > >> Rom > >> > > > >Nope, I was right... you are extremely fucking stupid. > > > >Did it not occur to you that the Romulan ship didn't have to be on the same > >plane as the Enterprise? > > > >Or, to borrow your style: > > > > M > > O > > R > > > >ENT > > > >(The angle is exaggerated, but you get the idea... or, actually, no, you > >probably don't, but that's just because you're stupid.) > > > > The stills you pointed out to me show the Romulan ship exactly the way we would > see it if it was coming dead on. I have yet to see any proof of this angle > except your contention that that's how it happened. The only time we see a > 'under shot' of the BOP is a flyby that isn't from the enterprises POV. > I'm sorry, but you're a fucking idiot, and there's nothing more I can do for you. If only you had a few operable neurons... but, oh well. http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/pages/09BOT_157.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh) Date: 08 Aug 2002 17:59:22 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <20020808135922.16242.00002680@mb-fq.aol.com> -------- >I'm sorry, but you're a fucking idiot, and there's nothing more I can do for >you. If only you had a few operable neurons... but, oh well. > >http://www.trek5.com/caps/tos/09_BOT/pages/09BOT_157.htm Will everyone in the group click on his link, it shows the Romulan Bird of Prey in a directly forward position in the veiw screen firing what I assume is the plasma weapon. The warbird could be at any position facing a camera, but it still looks dead on to me. I'm still unsure why he thinks it was above the plane of the ship. Because its not dead center of the veiw screen? Boy I'm such a fuckin idiot that a screen shot that doesn't prove your point won't convince me. Skywarp:"Starscream, What's Megatron's plan this time? Starscream:"Who cares? You just Know it's going to be evil. And evil is always fun." ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Wayne Poe" Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2002 16:14:24 -0700 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote in message news:3D4798FE.4020103@shaw.ca... > Wayne Poe wrote: > Is that really his entire argument? Doesn't he realize you can draw a > line between any two points. It doesn't matter what the co-ordinates of > those two points are. You've hit it right on the head. This idiot can't seem to think in 3-d space. No, everything is on a perfectly horizontal path, so let's go WAY out on a limb and say the plasma weapon was maneuvering. No, NOT because the Enterprise was, but because DarkStar can't conceive of another, more logical scenario. -- "Morons like Darkstar make up imaginary observations, mutilate science, nitpick unrelentingly, commit all manner of ad hominem fallacies, etc. They are only "successful" to the extent that people who are just as stupid as they are might be amenable to their arguments." Darth Wong http://h4h.com/louis/vsfaq.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 06:05:44 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Wayne Poe" wrote in message news:ukes7dqdj4me5f@corp.supernews.com... > "DarkStar" wrote > > > You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > > Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > Concession Accepted. Oh good grief. Have you been lobotomized or something? Let me say this very slowly so you can understand: If... you... shoot... down... toward... something... and... the... target... moves... backward... quickly... it... won't... be... there... when... the... weapon... would... have... hit. > > It's really, really simple, > > Yes it is. You want everyone to subscribe to your fantasyland version of > events on everything, while ignoring canon. But no one except you wants to > frolic in that playground of ignorance. Me and my damned insistence on simple geometry... I know, I'm a bastard like that. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Graeme Dice Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 07:13:46 -0600 Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: <3D49340A.BEB3798A@sk.sympatico.ca> -------- DarkStar wrote: > > "Wayne Poe" wrote in message > news:ukes7dqdj4me5f@corp.supernews.com... > > "DarkStar" wrote > > > > > You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > > > Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > > Concession Accepted. > > Oh good grief. Have you been lobotomized or something? Let me say this > very slowly so you can understand: > > If... you... shoot... down... toward... something... and... the... > target... moves... backward... quickly... it... won't... be... there... > when... the... weapon... would... have... hit. It's called leading your target Darkstar. -- "Everything that can be invented has been invented." -- Charles Duell, head of the U.S. Patent Office, 1899 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "DarkStar" Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2002 14:36:59 GMT Subject: Re: Another Correction for BaldStar - ATTN: BOYD Message-ID: -------- "Graeme Dice" wrote in message news:3D49340A.BEB3798A@sk.sympatico.ca... > DarkStar wrote: > > > > "Wayne Poe" wrote in message > > news:ukes7dqdj4me5f@corp.supernews.com... > > > "DarkStar" wrote > > > > > > > You ignore the fact that the weapon was shot from above the plane of the > > > > Enterprise. This requires that it must have tracked the ship. > > > > > > No, this requires that it must have been pointed at the Enterprise. > > > Concession Accepted. > > > > Oh good grief. Have you been lobotomized or something? Let me say this > > very slowly so you can understand: > > > > If... you... shoot... down... toward... something... and... the... > > target... moves... backward... quickly... it... won't... be... there... > > when... the... weapon... would... have... hit. > > It's called leading your target Darkstar. And this is not shown. When the weapon is fired, it is headed downward, apparently on a direct course for the Enterprise. During the warp run from the weapon, it is headed directly toward the ship, coming at it from dead ahead. Curved line of trajectory = maneuvering weapon.