----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 25 Oct 2002 10:54:25 -0700
Subject: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210250954.2ead3d5b@posting.google.com>
--------
I read through Dorkstar's posts at google in the Wong-Anderson Debate
(god, my *head* hurts) and here's his 'definition' of the MCR.

Dorkstar's Mysterious Chain Reaction (MCR) Theory:

The superlaser strikes Alderaan but damage very little of the planet,
then it somehow creates an 'anti-Genesis effect' which moves across
the surface, but do not follow the curvature of the planet for some
reason. The 'anti-Genesis effect' somehow use an unknown form of
mass-energy conversion to create the required energy effect. The
chain-reaction is not material-dependent.

After the 'band' has moved across the entire surface and meets itself
at the far side it somehow creates a planar shockwave (the 'fire
rings'), and then, through unknown means, a secondary explosion -
after running out of reactant.


That's *six* unknowns. Principle of Parsimony, anyone?

Also, remember that he dares not even *pretend* that there is a
planetary shield and test his 'theory' against it.

No need to thank me, Dorkstar; the pleasure is *all* mine.

PS: Feel free to ad anything.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 25 Oct 2002 20:47:39 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021025164739.05367.00000384@mb-fw.aol.com>
--------
<Snip> You forgot:

The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no support.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 21:01:39 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DB9B0DC.9020907@shaw.ca>
--------
Sir Nitram wrote:

> <Snip> You forgot:
> 
> The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no support.

I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jesus Christ" <jutland@ihug.co.nz>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 11:22:29 +1300
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <apccj9$6u4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>
--------

"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3DB9B0DC.9020907@shaw.ca...
> Sir Nitram wrote:
>
> > <Snip> You forgot:
> >
> > The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
support.
>
> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.

Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:10:10 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DB9EB1D.7060402@shaw.ca>
--------
Jesus Christ wrote:
> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>>Sir Nitram wrote:

>>><Snip> You forgot:
>>>
>>>The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
>>>support.
> 
>>I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
> 
> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...

I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Spyder <mark.rusbridgeNOSPAMORBADTHINGSHAPPEN@paradise.net.nz>
Date: 26 Oct 2002 04:49:10 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <Xns92B3B543367E6Spyder@130.133.1.4>
--------
..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:

>>> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>> 
>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
> 
> I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.

He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a 
snail now.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Drewcifer <valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:56:45 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <B9DF8ABC.7FAE%valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com>
--------
::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:

> ..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:
> 
>>>> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>>> 
>>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
>> 
>> I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
> 
> He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a
> snail now.

Or like a Klein bottle...

http://www.kleinbottle.com/



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 26 Oct 2002 05:13:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021026011345.20177.00000369@mb-fu.aol.com>
--------
>::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:
>
>> ..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:
>> 
>>>>> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>>>> 
>>>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
>>> 
>>> I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
>> 
>> He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a
>> snail now.
>
>Or like a Klein bottle...
>
>http://www.kleinbottle.com/
>

We should send him a Klein Bottle Hat. Perfect for the zero-volume head.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Drewcifer <valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 00:26:52 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <B9DF91CC.7FB1%valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com>
--------
::log::  XMT IDC: "Sir Nitram"  MSG TXT:

>> ::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:
>> 
>>> ..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:
>>> 
>>>>>> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
>>>> 
>>>> I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
>>> 
>>> He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a
>>> snail now.
>> 
>> Or like a Klein bottle...
>> 
>> http://www.kleinbottle.com/
>> 
> 
> We should send him a Klein Bottle Hat. Perfect for the zero-volume head.

" An important accessory to the one-sided mind."



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Colin'The Yosemite Bear'Witz" <ybear@inreach.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 23:13:53 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <xoqu9.724$J36.297673777@news.inreach.com>
--------

"Drewcifer" <valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:B9DF91CC.7FB1%valis1NOTFORSPAM@mindspring.com...
> ::log::  XMT IDC: "Sir Nitram"  MSG TXT:
>
> >> ::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:
> >>
> >>> ..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:
> >>>
> >>>>>> I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
> >>>>
> >>>> I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
> >>>
> >>> He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a
> >>> snail now.
> >>
> >> Or like a Klein bottle...
> >>
> >> http://www.kleinbottle.com/
> >>
> >
> > We should send him a Klein Bottle Hat. Perfect for the zero-volume head.
>
> " An important accessory to the one-sided mind."
>

I thought it was removing his neck with a Mobius Tie.....




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 06:48:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBA3A55.4080509@shaw.ca>
--------
Drewcifer wrote:
> ::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:
>>..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:

>>>>>I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>>>>
>>>>Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
>>>
>>>I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
>>
>>He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like a
>>snail now.
> 
> Or like a Klein bottle...
> 
> http://www.kleinbottle.com/

I want one of those. But since I'm planning on getting the James Bond 
DVD set instead of food this month, that will have to wait.

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ryan Spickard" <atomik_chicken@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 01:53:22 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <apiu41$1utac$1@ID-42467.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3DBA3A55.4080509@shaw.ca...
> Drewcifer wrote:
> > ::log::  XMT IDC: "Spyder"  MSG TXT:
> >>..and then "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> said:
>
> >>>>>I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
> >>>>
> >>>>Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
> >>>
> >>>I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
> >>
> >>He's wrapped up in himself several times over. He's basically looks like
a
> >>snail now.
> >
> > Or like a Klein bottle...
> >
> > http://www.kleinbottle.com/
>
> I want one of those. But since I'm planning on getting the James Bond
> DVD set instead of food this month, that will have to wait.

I'm sure that won't be a problem for someone with your mass. :)




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:26:41 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBD731D.9060001@shaw.ca>
--------
Ryan Spickard wrote:
> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>>Drewcifer wrote:

>>>Or like a Klein bottle...
>>>
>>>http://www.kleinbottle.com/
>>
>>I want one of those. But since I'm planning on getting the James Bond
>>DVD set instead of food this month, that will have to wait.
> 
> I'm sure that won't be a problem for someone with your mass. :)

I know, but try explaining that to my parents. 'You can't spend the 
grocery money on DVDs. Blah, blah, blah.'

They don't understand that it's James Bond. On DVD.

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage <Nospam@nowhere.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 08:50:40 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <ic7lrugldlm7bb7vkvnknhgm4sl6t4eled@4ax.com>
--------
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:10:10 GMT, "C.S.Strowbridge"
<csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote:

>Jesus Christ wrote:
>> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>>>Sir Nitram wrote:
>
>>>><Snip> You forgot:
>>>>
>>>>The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
>>>>support.
>> 
>>>I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>> 
>> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...
>
>I don't think it's possible to reach that far up your own ass.
>
>C.S.Strowbridge

You kidding?  He lapped himself the first time he was here, and he's
kept going ever since!

-- Iceberg, the Dancing Black Mage

With only a single word/The future is decided
Our beat is/A shining diamond
Into the true sky into the true sky/Our life shining into the sky
- "Try Again," Macross 7
maberger IX V IX 0 at webmail dot winona dot edu


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Ryan Spickard" <atomik_chicken@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 01:52:16 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <apiu1v$2027c$1@ID-42467.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"Jesus Christ" <jutland@ihug.co.nz> wrote in message
news:apccj9$6u4$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>
> "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:3DB9B0DC.9020907@shaw.ca...
> > Sir Nitram wrote:
> >
> > > <Snip> You forgot:
> > >
> > > The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
> support.
> >
> > I wonder if even Darkstar knows where he got that figure.
>
> Darkstar was playing with his anus that day...

Hey man, you still owe me $100 for weed. Don't make me get out the crowbar.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:36:11 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <FzednXLAp9BMqiegXTWcqA@comcast.com>
--------

"Sir Nitram" <nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam> wrote in message
news:20021025164739.05367.00000384@mb-fw.aol.com...
> <Snip> You forgot:
>
> The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
support.

Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage <Nospam@nowhere.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 08:41:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com>
--------
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:36:11 -0500, "DarkStar"
<afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Sir Nitram" <nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam> wrote in message
>news:20021025164739.05367.00000384@mb-fw.aol.com...
>> <Snip> You forgot:
>>
>> The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no
>support.
>
>Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
>very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
>travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.

There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).

At any rate, you have tired me, and so you die.

*PLONK*

-- Iceberg, the Dancing Black Mage

With only a single word/The future is decided
Our beat is/A shining diamond
Into the true sky into the true sky/Our life shining into the sky
- "Try Again," Macross 7
maberger IX V IX 0 at webmail dot winona dot edu


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>
--------

"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...

> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
>
> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).

Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.






----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Commander Raynor RayCav <geraycav@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 13:21:58 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com>
--------
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
<afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
>
>> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
>> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
>> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
>>
>> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
>> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
>> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
>
>Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.

Did you notice the green glow? Oh yeah, that's right, you can't
because your head is shoved that far up your ass.

Besides, IIRC, even the freakin canon novel states that they have
sheilds...oh no wait, are the novels really canon? I don't know, I
guess we have to ask DarkStar......



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 18:39:34 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <_RidncHTYYc0uiagXTWc3g@comcast.com>
--------

"Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
> <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> >news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> >
> >> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents
a
> >> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
> >> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> >>
> >> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> >> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> >> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> >
> >Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>
> Did you notice the green glow?

In the Special Edition?   Nope.

> Besides, IIRC, even the freakin canon novel states that they have
> sheilds

Oh really?  And where is this statement?





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Commander Raynor RayCav <geraycav@yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 20:54:37 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <palmru0nkbn61ob8h8ee2db9eccmb10a88@4ax.com>
--------
On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 18:39:34 -0500, "DarkStar"
<afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
>> <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> >news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
>> >
>> >> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents
>a
>> >> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
>> >> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
>> >>
>> >> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
>> >> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
>> >> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
>> >
>> >Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>>
>> Did you notice the green glow?
>
>In the Special Edition?   Nope.
>
>> Besides, IIRC, even the freakin canon novel states that they have
>> sheilds
>
>Oh really?  And where is this statement?
>

Note the "IIRC" unlike you I'm not afraid to admit that I am not sure
on a source



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:09:36 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <api683$1p8bj$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_RidncHTYYc0uiagXTWc3g@comcast.com...
>
> "Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com...
> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
> > <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > >news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> > >
> > >> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
represents
> a
> > >> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
beam's
> > >> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
clouds.
> > >>
> > >> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
refuse
> > >> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > >> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> > >
> > >Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> >
> > Did you notice the green glow?
>
> In the Special Edition?   Nope.

That's right because in the SE its white.

> > Besides, IIRC, even the freakin canon novel states that they have
> > sheilds
>
> Oh really?  And where is this statement?
>

ANH Novelisation which you continue to try and declare doesn't mean Alderaan
has shields, the reasoning for which I have never seen.



--
Lcpl Burnett, G.R.
USMCR
BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG

"Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure"
- IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net)

"I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me."
-Anakin Vader




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Commander Raynor RayCav <geraycav@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 09:54:52 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <cuqqruslj4qtd362cpq8ono7lln3lrruaa@4ax.com>
--------
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:09:36 -0500, "Greg Burnett"
<burnettr@comcast.net> wrote:

>"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:_RidncHTYYc0uiagXTWc3g@comcast.com...
>>
>> "Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com...
>> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
>> > <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>> > >news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
>> > >
>> > >> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
>represents
>> a
>> > >> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
>beam's
>> > >> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
>clouds.
>> > >>
>> > >> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
>refuse
>> > >> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
>> > >> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
>> > >
>> > >Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>> >
>> > Did you notice the green glow?
>>
>> In the Special Edition?   Nope.
>
>That's right because in the SE its white.

I could've sworn it was green from Wong's screen captures.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:01:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <apk52a$2ctpi$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cuqqruslj4qtd362cpq8ono7lln3lrruaa@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:09:36 -0500, "Greg Burnett"
> <burnettr@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:_RidncHTYYc0uiagXTWc3g@comcast.com...
> >>
> >> "Commander Raynor RayCav" <geraycav@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >> news:koqlrucgfq3dlf5di6740n8lted08cabsf@4ax.com...
> >> > On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:14:39 -0500, "DarkStar"
> >> > <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in
message
> >> > >news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> >> > >
> >> > >> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
> >represents
> >> a
> >> > >> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
> >beam's
> >> > >> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
> >clouds.
> >> > >>
> >> > >> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
> >refuse
> >> > >> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three
canon
> >> > >> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> >> > >
> >> > >Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> >> >
> >> > Did you notice the green glow?
> >>
> >> In the Special Edition?   Nope.
> >
> >That's right because in the SE its white.
>
> I could've sworn it was green from Wong's screen captures.

If you aren't loooking at it just right the superlaser's color will bleed
into the blur. Nonetheless the actual color is definately white (which would
actually make it a tint and not a color but neh).



--
Lcpl Burnett, G.R.
USMCR
BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG

"Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure"
- IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net)

"I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me."
-Anakin Vader




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 27 Oct 2002 03:00:40 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021026230040.10703.00000763@mb-mh.aol.com>
--------
>"Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
>news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
>
>> >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
>> >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
>> >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
>>
>> There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
>> to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
>> novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
>
>Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>

They are extensively mentioned in multiple references authorized by Lucas,
either directly(AOTC ICS) or indirectly(WEG Death Star Tech. Compend.). You
lose.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: big_red901@hotmail.com (CaptainSheridan)
Date: 27 Oct 2002 05:57:43 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2d3e5dbf.0210270557.681a23a1@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> 
> > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
> > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
> > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> >
> > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> 
> Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.



There's the novel reference of planetary defenses. You say it isn't
planetary shields. Do you see any weapons engaging the Death Star. And
if you can build one small shield generator that can protect a 900 km
DS, why can't you build a chain of them to protect a planet?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:07:08 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <xvKdnXa26_TB2iGgXTWcog@comcast.com>
--------

"CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d3e5dbf.0210270557.681a23a1@posting.google.com...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> >
> > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
represents a
> > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
beam's
> > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> > >
> > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> >
> > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>
>
>
> There's the novel reference of planetary defenses. You say it isn't
> planetary shields. Do you see any weapons engaging the Death Star.

Do you know of any that could have attacked the Death Star at 77,000
kilometers?

> And if you can build one small shield generator that can protect a
> 900 km DS, why can't you build a chain of them to protect a planet?

All we see is a dish beaming a shield which wraps around the Death Star,
possibly with aid from that device.  I suppose you could put a similar
projector on the moon and, provided it was possible, enshroud the Earth, but
I hardly see that as helpful.   Solution:  Blow up the moon, first.

To guess, however, that the shield projector could be used as a theatre
shield, linked with others, is not supported in the canon.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:14:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <api6gq$1kcdg$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xvKdnXa26_TB2iGgXTWcog@comcast.com...
>
> "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2d3e5dbf.0210270557.681a23a1@posting.google.com...
> > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> > >
> > > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
> represents a
> > > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
> beam's
> > > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
clouds.
> > > >
> > > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
refuse
> > > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> > >
> > > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> >
> >
> >
> > There's the novel reference of planetary defenses. You say it isn't
> > planetary shields. Do you see any weapons engaging the Death Star.
>
> Do you know of any that could have attacked the Death Star at 77,000
> kilometers?

Just because weaponry COUDL have existed doesn't mean it does exist.
Furthermore ESB shows us that a vesel can detect shielding but NOT weapons
emplacements (any halfway competent commander would not have stayed in range
of the Ion Cannon if he knew it existed). This means that detectable
defenses are, canonically, limited to the detection of shields...the DS1
detected defenses therefore it detected shields. Whether they were planetary
in nature does NOT matter, ANH in conjunciton with ESB logically proves
there are shields there. You would have to supply a counter argument.

Furthermore since there are defenses (which means guns or shields) the onus
would be on you to prove that there are guns and not shields...just try that
one.

> > And if you can build one small shield generator that can protect a
> > 900 km DS, why can't you build a chain of them to protect a planet?
>
> All we see is a dish beaming a shield which wraps around the Death Star,
> possibly with aid from that device.  I suppose you could put a similar
> projector on the moon and, provided it was possible, enshroud the Earth,
but
> I hardly see that as helpful.   Solution:  Blow up the moon, first.
>
> To guess, however, that the shield projector could be used as a theatre
> shield, linked with others, is not supported in the canon.

Yes it is, shields have been shown to link together from multiple
projectors.



--
Lcpl Burnett, G.R.
USMCR
BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG

"Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure"
- IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net)

"I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me."
-Anakin Vader




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 27 Oct 2002 11:06:31 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210271106.916d071@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> 
> > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc represents a
> > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the beam's
> > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> >
> > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> 
> Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.

Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.

Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
(allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring the
'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.

So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
shield generators. This would be simpler and cheaper than building
vast orbital defences or maintaining a space fleet capable enough to
stop a fleet of Star Destroyers.

I will eagerly await your insane ramblings.

Also, I'm still waiting for you to post (or provide a link to) the
definition of your MCR - which you of course won't.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:10:53 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <a4mcnZ2aZMqj1SGgXTWc3A@comcast.com>
--------

"Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
news:2a0b0e0d.0210271106.916d071@posting.google.com...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> >
> > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
represents a
> > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
beam's
> > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> > >
> > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> >
> > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
>
> Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
>
> Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.

True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.   Wong's
extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.

> Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
> shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring the
> 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).

And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be altered to
make a static planar shield?

> Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
>
> So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
> shield generators.

Can you?   Proof, please.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 07:57:05 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210280757.56abc62d@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<a4mcnZ2aZMqj1SGgXTWc3A@comcast.com>...
> "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> news:2a0b0e0d.0210271106.916d071@posting.google.com...
> > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>  news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> > > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> > >
> > > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
>  represents a
> > > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
>  beam's
> > > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the clouds.
> > > >
> > > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly refuse
> > > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three canon
> > > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> > >
> > > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> >
> > Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
> >
> > Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
> 
> True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.   Wong's
> extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.

So essentially you are saying that the primitive Gungans could link
their generators, while the Empire can't after *decades* of
technological development? That's an unreasonable assumption,
especially when we consider the advantages of being able to do so.

> > Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
> > shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> > (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring the
> > 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
> 
> And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be altered to
> make a static planar shield?

Wtf is this? Shield generators in warships can warp the projection
around the ship. What's different from warping it around a sphere?

> > Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> >
> > So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
> > shield generators.
> 
> Can you?   Proof, please.

We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.

Building and linking a couple hundred shield generators would *still*
be simpler and cheaper than building vast orbital defences or large
space fleets.

And I'm still waiting for you to post (or provide a link to) the
definition of your MCR - which you won't do since you don't have any.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 17:43:50 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBD7722.60402@shaw.ca>
--------
Crazy Ivan wrote:
> "DarkStar" wrote:

>>>Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
>>>
>>>So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
>>>shield generators.
>>
>>Can you?   Proof, please.
> 
> We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
> Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.

<SNIP!>

Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:

1.) WEG said so.

Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling we know 
he thinks it's greater than canon (at least it is when it's convenient.)

So either Darkstar agrees that Alderaan had planetary shields or he 
admits his canon policy is, 'We can only use what I say we can use.'

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:00:17 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <YfucnVIdfoet5iCgXTWcqQ@comcast.com>
--------

"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3DBD7722.60402@shaw.ca...
> Crazy Ivan wrote:
> > "DarkStar" wrote:
>
> >>>Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> >>>
> >>>So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
> >>>shield generators.
> >>
> >>Can you?   Proof, please.
> >
> > We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
> > Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> > never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
>
> <SNIP!>
>
> Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>
> 1.) WEG said so.
>
> Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling

What the hell do you think you're talking about?




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 18:28:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBD819D.3000408@shaw.ca>
--------
DarkStar wrote:
> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:

>>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>
>>1.) WEG said so.
>>
>>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
> 
> What the hell do you think you're talking about?

How big is the first Death Star?

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:42:18 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <suucnUxRGPj3JyOgXTWcoQ@comcast.com>
--------

"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3DBD819D.3000408@shaw.ca...
> DarkStar wrote:
> > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>
> >>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
> >>
> >>1.) WEG said so.
> >>
> >>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
> >
> > What the hell do you think you're talking about?
>
> How big is the first Death Star?

~120km, but this is from canon and not WEG.   Saxton's scaling, FYI, is not
canon, nor are the assumptions he uses.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 17:41:24 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021029124124.11035.00000071@mb-fh.aol.com>
--------
>"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:3DBD819D.3000408@shaw.ca...
>> DarkStar wrote:
>> > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>>
>> >>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>> >>
>> >>1.) WEG said so.
>> >>
>> >>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
>> >
>> > What the hell do you think you're talking about?
>>
>> How big is the first Death Star?
>
>~120km, but this is from canon and not WEG.   Saxton's scaling, FYI, is not
>canon, nor are the assumptions he uses.
>

Blatant Lie. 120Km -only- comes from WEG, and no other source.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Phong Nguyen <phong.nguyen@deadspam.com>
Date: 29 Oct 2002 18:28:30 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <Xns92B68912EC60Dphongnguyenusanet@130.133.1.4>
--------
nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) wrote in
news:20021029124124.11035.00000071@mb-fh.aol.com: 

>>"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>>news:3DBD819D.3000408@shaw.ca...
>>> DarkStar wrote:
>>> > "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:
>>>
>>> >>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>> >>
>>> >>1.) WEG said so.
>>> >>
>>> >>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
>>> >
>>> > What the hell do you think you're talking about?
>>>
>>> How big is the first Death Star?
>>
>>~120km, but this is from canon and not WEG.   Saxton's scaling, FYI,
>>is not canon, nor are the assumptions he uses.
>>
> 
> Blatant Lie. 120Km -only- comes from WEG, and no other source.
>
That, and Saxton didn't scale the DS1. Only the DS2. 

-- 
Phong Nguyen | pnguyen7_at+mail-usf=eduspam | AIM: JediPhong

"There's a story about a C-124 and an F-4 on intersecting taxiways at 
Rhein-Main long ago. The F-4 driver asked Ground what the Globe-master's 
intentions were. It is said that the C-124 pilot opened the clamshell 
doors in the nose and announced, 'I'm going to eat you.'"


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 19:18:56 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBEDEF9.4080801@shaw.ca>
--------
DarkStar wrote:
> "C.S.Strowbridge" wrote:

>>>>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>>>
>>>>1.) WEG said so.
>>>>
>>>>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
>>>
>>>What the hell do you think you're talking about?
>>
>>How big is the first Death Star?
> 
> ~120km, but this is from canon and not WEG.  

Where in canon is this figure from?

 > Saxton's scaling, FYI, is not canon, nor are the assumptions he uses.

Proof?

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 19:12:38 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021028141238.05443.00001076@mb-fw.aol.com>
--------
>"C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>news:3DBD7722.60402@shaw.ca...
>> Crazy Ivan wrote:
>> > "DarkStar" wrote:
>>
>> >>>Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
>> >>>
>> >>>So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
>> >>>shield generators.
>> >>
>> >>Can you?   Proof, please.
>> >
>> > We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
>> > Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
>> > never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
>>
>> <SNIP!>
>>
>> Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>
>> 1.) WEG said so.
>>
>> Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling
>
>What the hell do you think you're talking about?
>

Your demands that we use the WEG size of the DS-1 over canon scaling. Thank
you, drive through.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 19:12:02 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021028141202.05443.00001075@mb-fw.aol.com>
--------
>Crazy Ivan wrote:
>> "DarkStar" wrote:
>
>>>>Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
>>>>
>>>>So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
>>>>shield generators.
>>>
>>>Can you?   Proof, please.
>> 
>> We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
>> Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
>> never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
>
><SNIP!>
>
>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>
>1.) WEG said so.
>
>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling we know 
>he thinks it's greater than canon (at least it is when it's convenient.)
>
>So either Darkstar agrees that Alderaan had planetary shields or he 
>admits his canon policy is, 'We can only use what I say we can use.'
>

Actually, it states two things: Alderaan had a shield. And, should the DS beam
hit an -unshielded- planet, it's not just destroyed, it's vaporized. 1e42J,
IIRC.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "C.S.Strowbridge" <csstrowbridge@shaw.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 21:03:10 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBEF768.5090507@shaw.ca>
--------
Sir Nitram wrote:
>>Crazy Ivan wrote:
>>>"DarkStar" wrote:

>>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>
>>1.) WEG said so.
>>
>>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling we know 
>>he thinks it's greater than canon (at least it is when it's convenient.)
>>
>>So either Darkstar agrees that Alderaan had planetary shields or he 
>>admits his canon policy is, 'We can only use what I say we can use.'
> 
> Actually, it states two things: Alderaan had a shield. And, should the DS beam
> hit an -unshielded- planet, it's not just destroyed, it's vaporized. 1e42J,
> IIRC.

There you go, a Darkstar Approved Source(tm) agrees with us.

C.S.Strowbridge



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 21:06:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021029160617.28798.00000091@mb-cf.aol.com>
--------
>Sir Nitram wrote:
>>>Crazy Ivan wrote:
>>>>"DarkStar" wrote:
>
>>>Here's proof Darkstar will have to accept:
>>>
>>>1.) WEG said so.
>>>
>>>Since Darkstar has already taken WEG's word over canon scaling we know 
>>>he thinks it's greater than canon (at least it is when it's convenient.)
>>>
>>>So either Darkstar agrees that Alderaan had planetary shields or he 
>>>admits his canon policy is, 'We can only use what I say we can use.'
>> 
>> Actually, it states two things: Alderaan had a shield. And, should the DS
>beam
>> hit an -unshielded- planet, it's not just destroyed, it's vaporized. 1e42J,
>> IIRC.
>
>There you go, a Darkstar Approved Source(tm) agrees with us.
>

Well, not quite. A DAS(tm) requires that we raise our DS SL energy level by
four orders of magnitude.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:08:26 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <HhWdnRFrjZaE4CCgXTWc3Q@comcast.com>
--------

"Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
news:2a0b0e0d.0210280757.56abc62d@posting.google.com...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<a4mcnZ2aZMqj1SGgXTWc3A@comcast.com>...
> > "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> > news:2a0b0e0d.0210271106.916d071@posting.google.com...
> > > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >  news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > > > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in
message
> > > > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> > > >
> > > > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
> >  represents a
> > > > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
> >  beam's
> > > > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
clouds.
> > > > >
> > > > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
refuse
> > > > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three
canon
> > > > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> > > >
> > > > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> > >
> > > Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
> > >
> > > Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
> >
> > True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.   Wong's
> > extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.
>
> So essentially you are saying that the primitive Gungans could link
> their generators, while the Empire can't after *decades* of
> technological development?

And, as per Wong, helicopters should be able to fly to the moon.

> > > Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
> > > shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> > > (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring the
> > > 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
> >
> > And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be
altered to
> > make a static planar shield?
>
> Wtf is this? Shield generators in warships can warp the projection
> around the ship. What's different from warping it around a sphere?

You're assuming a great many things, such as shielding not being
line-of-sight, and that the shielding device employed could be modified in
the manner we were discussing.

> > > Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> > >
> > > So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
> > > shield generators.
> >
> > Can you?   Proof, please.
>
> We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.

Really?  Where do we learn of this ability in the Empire?

> Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.

My argument rests on nothing of the sort.    First, such shields are not
observable or inferrable in the canon . . . Wong couldn't even build an
argument that didn't contradict itself on that count.   Second, to suggest
that such shields exist is to employ a number of assumptions which are not
supported in the canon.

> And I'm still waiting

Still?  When did you start?  This is the first I've heard you say about it.

> for you to post (or provide a link to) the definition of your MCR

I cannot define what does not exist . . .  there is no such thing as the
MCR.   I'll be happy to provide the link to the Superlaser Effect page on my
site, but you'll have to wait for the update (a fact you ought to have read
in the "Civil Question" thread).  In the meantime, you should trouble
yourself to read the Wong debate.





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 15:07:18 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <apk5cu$2c1nc$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:HhWdnRFrjZaE4CCgXTWc3Q@comcast.com...
>
> > > > Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
> > > >
> > > > Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
> > >
> > > True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.
Wong's
> > > extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.
> >
> > So essentially you are saying that the primitive Gungans could link
> > their generators, while the Empire can't after *decades* of
> > technological development?
>
> And, as per Wong, helicopters should be able to fly to the moon.

Really where did you misinterpret him to get to that?

> > > > Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
> > > > shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> > > > (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring
the
> > > > 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
> > >
> > > And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be
> altered to
> > > make a static planar shield?
> >
> > Wtf is this? Shield generators in warships can warp the projection
> > around the ship. What's different from warping it around a sphere?
>
> You're assuming a great many things, such as shielding not being
> line-of-sight, and that the shielding device employed could be modified in
> the manner we were discussing.

Warping around the ship means either:
A) One projector can work without LOS (since it woudl have to cover a 360
degree area around the vessel) or
B) You can link multiple shield generators

> > > > Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> > > >
> > > > So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162
Endor-style
> > > > shield generators.
> > >
> > > Can you?   Proof, please.
> >
> > We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
>
> Really?  Where do we learn of this ability in the Empire?

Did you even watch Episode I?

> > Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> > never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
>
> My argument rests on nothing of the sort.    First, such shields are not
> observable or inferrable in the canon . . . Wong couldn't even build an
> argument that didn't contradict itself on that count.   Second, to suggest
> that such shields exist is to employ a number of assumptions which are not
> supported in the canon.

You state your premise (shields are not observable or inferable) as fact
then proceed to support it by stating that they are not observable or
inferable without providing any actual evidence or logical proof. In other
words circular logic, you lose.

> > And I'm still waiting
>
> Still?  When did you start?  This is the first I've heard you say about
it.

Once agian try NOT breaking people's sentences apart Mr "I must be given
entire sentences without ... for me to mistake context."

> > for you to post (or provide a link to) the definition of your MCR
>
> I cannot define what does not exist . . .  there is no such thing as the
> MCR.   I'll be happy to provide the link to the Superlaser Effect page on
my
> site, but you'll have to wait for the update (a fact you ought to have
read
> in the "Civil Question" thread).  In the meantime, you should trouble
> yourself to read the Wong debate.


So in other words you have never defined your theory nto even on your own
site. Thank you for admitting defeat finally.



--
Lcpl Burnett, G.R.
USMCR
BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG

"Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure"
- IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net)

"I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me."
-Anakin Vader




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:41:02 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <psKdnf2XKaKDJyOgXTWc2Q@comcast.com>
--------

"Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:apk5cu$2c1nc$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:HhWdnRFrjZaE4CCgXTWc3Q@comcast.com...
> >
> > > > > Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
> > > >
> > > > True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.
> Wong's
> > > > extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.
> > >
> > > So essentially you are saying that the primitive Gungans could link
> > > their generators, while the Empire can't after *decades* of
> > > technological development?
> >
> > And, as per Wong, helicopters should be able to fly to the moon.
>
> Really where did you misinterpret him to get to that?

Read the debate, retard.

>
> > > > > Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a
planetary
> > > > > shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> > > > > (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring
> the
> > > > > 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
> > > >
> > > > And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be
> > altered to
> > > > make a static planar shield?
> > >
> > > Wtf is this? Shield generators in warships can warp the projection
> > > around the ship. What's different from warping it around a sphere?
> >
> > You're assuming a great many things, such as shielding not being
> > line-of-sight, and that the shielding device employed could be modified
in
> > the manner we were discussing.
>
> Warping around the ship means

 . . . that we weren't talking about ship shields, you dipshit.

> > > > > Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> > > > >
> > > > > So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162
> Endor-style
> > > > > shield generators.
> > > >
> > > > Can you?   Proof, please.
> > >
> > > We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
> >
> > Really?  Where do we learn of this ability in the Empire?
>
> Did you even watch Episode I?

Gungan = Empire to you?

>
> > > Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> > > never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
> >
> > My argument rests on nothing of the sort.    First, such shields are not
> > observable or inferrable in the canon . . . Wong couldn't even build an
> > argument that didn't contradict itself on that count.   Second, to
suggest
> > that such shields exist is to employ a number of assumptions which are
not
> > supported in the canon.
>
> You state your premise (shields are not observable or inferable) as fact
> then proceed to support it by stating that they are not observable or
> inferable without providing any actual evidence or logical proof.

It takes an ignorant liar of your calibre to try to make such a claim.

> > > And I'm still waiting
> >
> > Still?  When did you start?  This is the first I've heard you say about
> it.
>
> Once agian try NOT breaking people's sentences apart

Works fine for me, thanks.

> > > for you to post (or provide a link to) the definition of your MCR
> >
> > I cannot define what does not exist . . .  there is no such thing as the
> > MCR.   I'll be happy to provide the link to the Superlaser Effect page
on
> my
> > site, but you'll have to wait for the update (a fact you ought to have
> read
> > in the "Civil Question" thread).  In the meantime, you should trouble
> > yourself to read the Wong debate.
>
>
> So in other words you have never defined your theory nto even on your own
> site.

No, in other words, you can't stop yourself from lying about anything and
everything.

> Thank you for admitting defeat finally.

Your concession was accepted long ago.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 07:59:32 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210290759.63584ddb@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<HhWdnRFrjZaE4CCgXTWc3Q@comcast.com>...
> "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> news:2a0b0e0d.0210280757.56abc62d@posting.google.com...
> > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>  news:<a4mcnZ2aZMqj1SGgXTWc3A@comcast.com>...
> > > "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> > > news:2a0b0e0d.0210271106.916d071@posting.google.com...
> > > > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>  news:<PeCcnVPd54EOdCegXTWcog@comcast.com>...
> > > > > "Iceberg the Dancing Black Mage" <Nospam@nowhere.com> wrote in
>  message
> > > > > news:ap6lru02lfj2rln3klumu09bfroqncick4@4ax.com...
> > > > >
> > > > > > >Once again, something I did not say.  The 23.5 gigaton calc
>  represents a
> > > > > > >very high upper energy limit for the superlaser, given that the
>  beam's
> > > > > > >travel through the atmosphere of Alderaan did not disrupt the
>  clouds.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There's a very obvious explanation for this, but you stubbornly
>  refuse
> > > > > > to embrace it (even though it's explicitly referenced in three
>  canon
> > > > > > novelizations and shown in all three canon movies).
> > > > >
> > > > > Planetary shields are not observed or mentioned, sorry.
> > > >
> > > > Don't be a dork, Dorkstar.
> > > >
> > > > Fact 1: The Gungans linked their shield generators.
> > >
> > > True, and their shield tech is unlike that observed elsewhere.   Wong's
> > > extrapolation comments are therefore even more relevant.
> >
> > So essentially you are saying that the primitive Gungans could link
> > their generators, while the Empire can't after *decades* of
> > technological development?
> 
> And, as per Wong, helicopters should be able to fly to the moon.

Using some kind of insane analogy to evade the point. Gee, I wonder
why? And stop talking about Wong. In case you haven't noticed it's not
him you are debating with. Dork.

> > > > Fact 2: Even if you refuse to accept the Endor shield as a planetary
> > > > shield, it still had a surface area of 3.140.000 square kilometres
> > > > (allowing 100 km between the surface and the shield, and ignoring the
> > > > 'neck' between Endor and the Deathstar).
> > >
> > > And how was it's wraparound projection achieved, hmm?   Can it be
>  altered to
> > > make a static planar shield?
> >
> > Wtf is this? Shield generators in warships can warp the projection
> > around the ship. What's different from warping it around a sphere?
> 
> You're assuming a great many things, such as shielding not being
> line-of-sight, and that the shielding device employed could be modified in
> the manner we were discussing.

Whether shielding is line-of-sight or not is irrelevant. It is clear
that Star Destroyers use more than one shield generator ("Sir! We've
lost bridge deflector shield!"). Each of these generators protect
different parts of the ship; one protects the bridge, another the port
side, etc. So what's wrong with a network of Endor-class shield
generators protecting a planet in the same manner? Even if an Endor
shield generator cannot be used for some reason, we still have the
option of linking Hoth-style generators.

> > > > Fact 3: Earth has a surface area of 506,450,600 square kilometres.
> > > >
> > > > So, to shield an Earth-like planet you'd need to link 162 Endor-style
> > > > shield generators.
> > >
> > > Can you?   Proof, please.
> >
> > We *know* that it is technically possible to link shield generators.
> 
> Really?  Where do we learn of this ability in the Empire?

Oh, I dunno... Several linked shield generators in one Star Destroyer?
Dork.

> > Your whole argument rests upon the assumption that the Empire have
> > never tried to do so, which is quite flimsy.
> 
> My argument rests on nothing of the sort.    First, such shields are not
> observable or inferrable in the canon . . . Wong couldn't even build an
> argument that didn't contradict itself on that count.   Second, to suggest
> that such shields exist is to employ a number of assumptions which are not
> supported in the canon.

For the last time *stop dragging Wong into this*! I employ exactly ONE
assumption: That the Empire after at least *thirty years* of
technological development know how to link shield generators. This is
supported by the FACT that it's *technically possible* to do so, and
the FACT that there are *several shield generators* in one Star
Destroyer.

> > And I'm still waiting
> 
> Still?  When did you start?  This is the first I've heard you say about it.
> 
> > for you to post (or provide a link to) the definition of your MCR
> 
> I cannot define what does not exist . . .  there is no such thing as the
> MCR.   I'll be happy to provide the link to the Superlaser Effect page on my
> site, but you'll have to wait for the update (a fact you ought to have read
> in the "Civil Question" thread).  In the meantime, you should trouble
> yourself to read the Wong debate.

Liar. You cannot possibly have forgotten the original tropic of this
thread. Until your chain reaction has been explained it will continue
to be a *Mysterious* Chain Reaction. I *have* read about the
'superlaster effect' on your page, and I *have* read the entire Wong
debate. There is absolutely nothing there that qualifies as a
scientific theory. Dork.

Oh, and be sure to notify me when (if ever) you update that page. I'll
be curious of what kind of insane ramblings you'll make up this time.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: big_red901@hotmail.com (CaptainSheridan)
Date: 26 Oct 2002 05:50:35 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com>
--------
nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram) wrote in message news:<20021025164739.05367.00000384@mb-fw.aol.com>...
> <Snip> You forgot:
> 
> The yield must be ~23GT of actual energy, a bullshit figure with no support.
> -- 
> SirNitram
> ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius
> 
> Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
> Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.
> 
> "And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
> -Hero



Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS? Heh.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 14:16:25 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>
--------

"CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...

>
>
> Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS? Heh.

I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: big_red901@hotmail.com (CaptainSheridan)
Date: 27 Oct 2002 05:55:48 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> 
> >
> >
> > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS? Heh.
> 
> I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.




So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
superlaser yield, means nothing to you?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:11:34 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <SoGdnWCigfH61SGgXTWcow@comcast.com>
--------

"CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS?
Heh.
> >
> > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
>
>
>
>
> So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> superlaser yield, means nothing to you?

Nothing in regards to the superlaser.   The upper limit established by
atmospheric effects is not altered.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Greg Burnett" <burnettr@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:16:29 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <api6l0$1nqad$1@ID-97732.news.dfncis.de>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:SoGdnWCigfH61SGgXTWcow@comcast.com...
>
> "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com...
> > "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> > > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS?
> Heh.
> > >
> > > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>
> Nothing in regards to the superlaser.   The upper limit established by
> atmospheric effects is not altered.
>

The atmospheric effect which cannot possibly have occurred in the
atmosphere. Mike tore this segment of your argument to shreds, you never
adequately explain how this light was suppossed to bend at wacky angles it
has no right doing anywhere other than near a balck hole.



--
Lcpl Burnett, G.R.
USMCR
BridgeCo B 6th EngSptBN 4th FSSG

"Weapons do not penetrate armour based on force and pressure"
- IXJac(taken from SB.com and SD.net)

"I'm a genocidal maniac, hold me."
-Anakin Vader




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 14:12:40 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <DxycnTp7G5E01SGgXTWc3w@comcast.com>
--------

"CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS?
Heh.
> >
> > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
>
>
>
>
> So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> superlaser yield, means nothing to you?

Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Graeme Dice <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 15:29:02 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca>
--------
DarkStar wrote:

<snip>

> > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> 
> Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
> sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.

Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy required.
It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.

Graeme Dice
-- 
If you're happy and you know it, clunk your chains.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 23:15:44 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <GsqdnUeamY1yWiGgXTWc3Q@comcast.com>
--------

"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
> DarkStar wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> >
> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>
> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy required.
> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.

In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek and Wars
are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
lightspeed.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 08:20:29 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com>
--------
Darkstar subspaced:

>"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
>> DarkStar wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
>> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
>> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>> >
>> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
>> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>>
>> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy required.
>> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
>
>In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek and Wars
>are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
>lightspeed.
>

Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:

Star Trek:

2 theories put forth by 2 differant sci advisors for star trek

The 'Warp' nacelles alter the space around the ship.  The ship itself is not
moving at lightspeed, instead they create a 'bubble' of space around the ship,
the distortion then accelerates past lightspeed, since the ship is not
technically moving it doesn't gain mass as it reaches the ftl barrier.

version 2:
Most of the the ship is submerged into 'subspace' decreasing the ships mass so
its reletive mass remains the same reguardless of speed

Star Wars:
Hyperdrive takes the ship into anouther dimension referred to as Hyperspace. 
The laws of physics work differantly there, in Hyperspace objects do not gain
mass as they approach c so acceleration is limited only by drive system and
your charts.

So Infinate Energy is not required as both 'cheat' by altering the laws.

 

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" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 07:43:00 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3tucncPPSuF-oyCgXTWcpA@comcast.com>
--------

"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
> Darkstar subspaced:
>
> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
> >> DarkStar wrote:
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
second
> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> >> >
> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
> >>
> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy required.
> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
> >
> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek and
Wars
> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
> >lightspeed.
> >
>
> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:

Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 17:45:01 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com>
--------
Darkstar subspaced:
>"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
>> Darkstar subspaced:
>>
>> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
>> >> DarkStar wrote:
>> >>
>> >> <snip>
>> >>
>> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
>second
>> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
>> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>> >> >
>> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
>> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>> >>
>> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy required.
>> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
>> >
>> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek and
>Wars
>> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
>> >lightspeed.
>> >
>>
>> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
>
>Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
>

the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point stands.
 The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.




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" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:09:45 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <9kCdnS_o_az14CCgXTWcow@comcast.com>
--------

"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com...
> Darkstar subspaced:
> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
> >> Darkstar subspaced:
> >>
> >> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
> >> >> DarkStar wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip>
> >> >>
> >> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
> >second
> >> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then
your
> >> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star
at
> >> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
> >> >>
> >> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy
required.
> >> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
> >> >
> >> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek
and
> >Wars
> >> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
> >> >lightspeed.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
> >
> >Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
> >
>
> the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
> travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point
stands.
>  The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.

Oh!  Crash and burn.  You get no points for follow-through, especially since
antigravs are a realspace affair.   Tsk, tsk.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 28 Oct 2002 19:15:08 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021028141508.05443.00001080@mb-fw.aol.com>
--------
>"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com...
>> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
>> >> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >>
>> >> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> >> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
>> >> >> DarkStar wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <snip>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
>> >second
>> >> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then
>your
>> >> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star
>at
>> >> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy
>required.
>> >> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
>> >> >
>> >> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek
>and
>> >Wars
>> >> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
>> >> >lightspeed.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
>> >
>> >Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
>> >
>>
>> the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
>> travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point
>stands.
>>  The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.
>
>Oh!  Crash and burn.  You get no points for follow-through, especially since
>antigravs are a realspace affair.   Tsk, tsk.
>

Your ignorance of CoE astounds me yet again.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:44:27 -0600
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <RPOcncy6-bl2JyOgXTWcqw@comcast.com>
--------

"Sir Nitram" <nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam> wrote in message
news:20021028141508.05443.00001080@mb-fw.aol.com...
> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com...
> >> Darkstar subspaced:
> >> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
> >> >> Darkstar subspaced:
> >> >>
> >> >> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >> >> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
> >> >> >> DarkStar wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> <snip>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
> >> >second
> >> >> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then
> >your
> >> >> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death
Star
> >at
> >> >> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy
> >required.
> >> >> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek
> >and
> >> >Wars
> >> >> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
> >> >> >lightspeed.
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
> >> >
> >> >Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
> >> >
> >>
> >> the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
> >> travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point
> >stands.
> >>  The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.
> >
> >Oh!  Crash and burn.  You get no points for follow-through, especially
since
> >antigravs are a realspace affair.   Tsk, tsk.
> >
>
> Your ignorance of CoE astounds me yet again.

Just as your leaping to false conclusions does the same to me.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam (Sir Nitram)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 17:42:14 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021029124214.11035.00000072@mb-fh.aol.com>
--------
>"Sir Nitram" <nitramtahalshia@aol.comAntiSpam> wrote in message
>news:20021028141508.05443.00001080@mb-fw.aol.com...
>> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >news:20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com...
>> >> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
>> >> >> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> >> >> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
>> >> >> >> DarkStar wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> <snip>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
>> >> >second
>> >> >> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then
>> >your
>> >> >> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death
>Star
>> >at
>> >> >> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy
>> >required.
>> >> >> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek
>> >and
>> >> >Wars
>> >> >> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
>> >> >> >lightspeed.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
>> >> >
>> >> >Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
>> >> travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point
>> >stands.
>> >>  The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.
>> >
>> >Oh!  Crash and burn.  You get no points for follow-through, especially
>since
>> >antigravs are a realspace affair.   Tsk, tsk.
>> >
>>
>> Your ignorance of CoE astounds me yet again.
>
>Just as your leaping to false conclusions does the same to me.
>

Sorry, Robert, I know how bad your knowledge of physics is. But CoE is a
definate. If the DS accelerates, it must provide the energy for it.
-- 
SirNitram
ASVS Small Gods Keeper and Amateur Genius

Uptight Christians pray for God to save themselves.
Upright Christians pray for God to save others in need.

"And they say that a hero can save us, I'm not gonna stand here to wait..."
-Hero


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: setesh@aol.com (Setesh)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 05:19:21 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <20021029001921.05879.00000976@mb-ms.aol.com>
--------
Darkstar subspaced:

>"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20021028124501.24941.00001028@mb-mp.aol.com...
>> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >"Setesh" <setesh@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >news:20021028032029.14610.00001279@mb-cl.aol.com...
>> >> Darkstar subspaced:
>> >>
>> >> >"Graeme Dice" <grdice@sk.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>> >> >news:3DBC5A9E.EA198751@sk.sympatico.ca...
>> >> >> DarkStar wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <snip>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > > So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every
>> >second
>> >> >> > > to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then
>your
>> >> >> > > superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star
>at
>> >> >> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Which makes absolutely no difference to the amount of energy
>required.
>> >> >> It's called conservation of energy, and there's no way around it.
>> >> >
>> >> >In which case all this talk of power is silly, since obviously Trek
>and
>> >Wars
>> >> >are capable of infinite energy generation.   After all, they reach
>> >> >lightspeed.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Quick sci-fi ftl propulsion explaination:
>> >
>> >Thank you, Captain Obvious . . . now, how about the follow-through?
>> >
>>
>> the follow through you snipped off or the fact that the Death Star was
>> travaling in realspace and used no 'cheat' method so the original point
>stands.
>>  The Deathstar takes more energy to move then your phantom theory.
>
>Oh!  Crash and burn.  You get no points for follow-through, especially since
>antigravs are a realspace affair.   Tsk, tsk.
>
Of course the fact that the a-gravs (aka repulsorlifts) need something to push
against hense the name repulsor(to repulse)lifts.  So exaclly what is the
Deathstar pushing off of in mostly empty space?  In fact IIRC they take more
energy than the ion drives and are used due to their lack of radiation output. 




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: Beowulf <mkhQWEui@ucdavis.edu>
Date: 27 Oct 2002 21:29:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <Xns92B48929BD06ETIEbeowulf@130.133.1.4>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:DxycnTp7G5E01SGgXTWc3w@comcast.com: 

> 
> "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com...
>> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
>> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the
>> > > DS? 
> Heh.
>> >
>> > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
>> to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
>> superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> 
> Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
> sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
> 
> 

So you're going to argue that anti-gravity will magically reduce the
power requirements, even though that violates Conservation of Energy? 

-- 
Is EVERYONE on this board some sort of twisted sexual freak?
-Stormbringer You say that as if it's a bad thing. - Mike Wong


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Colin'The Yosemite Bear'Witz" <ybear@inreach.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2002 17:29:52 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <mq0v9.782$MT5.326679569@news.inreach.com>
--------

"Beowulf" <mkhQWEui@ucdavis.edu> wrote in message
news:Xns92B48929BD06ETIEbeowulf@130.133.1.4...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in
> news:DxycnTp7G5E01SGgXTWc3w@comcast.com:
>
> >
> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com...
> >> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> >> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the
> >> > > DS?
> > Heh.
> >> >
> >> > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> >> to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> >> superlaser yield, means nothing to you?
> >
> > Also, it should be noted that we have not observed the Death Star at
> > sublight velocities when antigravs were not being employed.
> >
> >
>
> So you're going to argue that anti-gravity will magically reduce the
> power requirements, even though that violates Conservation of Energy?
>
> --
> Is EVERYONE on this board some sort of twisted sexual freak?
> -Stormbringer You say that as if it's a bad thing. - Mike Wong

Well I told you his basic understanding of the Laws of Physics has to come from
Berman and Braga plus some of the Anime Physics rules.




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 29 Oct 2002 08:10:01 -0800
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210290810.2818149d@posting.google.com>
--------
big_red901@hotmail.com (CaptainSheridan) wrote in message news:<2d3e5dbf.0210270555.7fadd871@posting.google.com>...
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<qwGdnZY6kc1gdCegXTWcqA@comcast.com>...
> > "CaptainSheridan" <big_red901@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:2d3e5dbf.0210260450.3b30db7a@posting.google.com...
> > 
> > >
> > >
> > > Did you know 23 gigatons is a lot less then it takes to MOVE the DS? Heh.
> > 
> > I would imagine so.   However, that has no relevance I'm aware of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So the fact that the DS produces 100 000 gigatons of KE every second
> to accelerate 100 gs, several orders of magnitude higher then your
> superlaser yield, means nothing to you?

Of course it means nothing to him. He only sees what he wants to see.
If he wants evidence that supports his pet theory, he sees a band
moving over the surface of Alderaan. At the same time he goes blind
when the Endor planetary shield comes into play.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 01:33:56 -0500
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <WJedneFHdpfUqiegXTWcpw@comcast.com>
--------

"Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
news:2a0b0e0d.0210250954.2ead3d5b@posting.google.com...
> I read through Dorkstar's posts at google in the Wong-Anderson Debate
> (god, my *head* hurts) and here's his 'definition' of the MCR.

The hell you say.  If you read the debate, you saw the definition . . . and
evidently, promptly reworked it into something not resembling the original.





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: crazy.ivan@webmail.no (Crazy Ivan)
Date: 26 Oct 2002 12:59:00 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <2a0b0e0d.0210261159.20fe9f40@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<WJedneFHdpfUqiegXTWcpw@comcast.com>...
> "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> news:2a0b0e0d.0210250954.2ead3d5b@posting.google.com...
> > I read through Dorkstar's posts at google in the Wong-Anderson Debate
> > (god, my *head* hurts) and here's his 'definition' of the MCR.
> 
> The hell you say.  If you read the debate, you saw the definition . . . and
> evidently, promptly reworked it into something not resembling the original.

As I said; Feel free to ad anything (which you of course won't).

Also, I see you claim I 'reworked it', but still you do not post the
original. Gee, I wonder why?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: hraxmeim@yahoo.com (Henry Mundstock)
Date: 26 Oct 2002 14:51:25 -0700
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <f4904d50.0210261351.6c696c8@posting.google.com>
--------
"DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<WJedneFHdpfUqiegXTWcpw@comcast.com>...
> "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> news:2a0b0e0d.0210250954.2ead3d5b@posting.google.com...
> > I read through Dorkstar's posts at google in the Wong-Anderson Debate
> > (god, my *head* hurts) and here's his 'definition' of the MCR.
> 
> The hell you say.  If you read the debate, you saw the definition . . . and
> evidently, promptly reworked it into something not resembling the original.

Perhaps you would like to post the correct definition then? It would
certainly be helpful, seeing as how the only person who knows it seems
to be you.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Dalton <rob@daltonator.net>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 20:26:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Dorkstar's 'definition' of his MCR
Message-ID: <3DBB32D2.AFEBC303@daltonator.net>
--------
Henry Mundstock wrote:
> 
> "DarkStar" <afinalunity@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<WJedneFHdpfUqiegXTWcpw@comcast.com>...
> > "Crazy Ivan" <crazy.ivan@webmail.no> wrote in message
> > news:2a0b0e0d.0210250954.2ead3d5b@posting.google.com...
> > > I read through Dorkstar's posts at google in the Wong-Anderson Debate
> > > (god, my *head* hurts) and here's his 'definition' of the MCR.
> >
> > The hell you say.  If you read the debate, you saw the definition . . . and
> > evidently, promptly reworked it into something not resembling the original.
> 
> Perhaps you would like to post the correct definition then? It would
> certainly be helpful, seeing as how the only person who knows it seems
> to be you.

More surreal every day.

-- 
Rob "Roby" Dalton
http://daltonator.net

"Pretty," Donos said. "What do we blow up first?"
	--"Solo Command", Aaron Allston