Those C phasers...
Wayne Poe
Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
of TNG and in DS9 and Voyager, phasers have travelled much, much faster than
this.
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Wayne Poe" <lo...@h4h.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.21.010608...@filmgate.h4h.com...
Strowbridge
> Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
>
> http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
weapons.
C.S.Strowbridge
Colin Brian Witz
On the other hand. It was suggested that Phasors fire radioactive 'Beta'
particles which can 'Quantum Jump' to FTL speeds, but possess hardly any mass.
--
Supporting the Right to Arm Bears
After all the Ranger's have guns
The Bears should have guns too.
.
"Strowbridge" <strow...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B21184F...@home.com...
Dalton
Lord Edam de Fromage
> Boyd, I think.
TNG TM, page 125. the claim is far to wide-spread for it to have
origniated with one person on a news group spurned by Sci-fi fans as the
hang out for nerds
--
Lord Edam de Fromage
aka Sorborus
www.trek-wars.org
A. Polinger
> > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
> >
> > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
>
> Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
Wrong again. This is one pretty isolated example, and it only proves that
phasers *can* be very slow - not that they always are. For example if all
phasers are alwyas so slow, then how do you explain that they always make
completely straight beams?
Blasters, on the other hand, always appear to ve very slow.
Transcend
> Ships Phasors have to be lightspeed or FTL for the 'Picard Manuver' to
> work.
That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. How in the hell does the
Picard manuver require lightspeed or FTL phasers?
>
> On the other hand. It was suggested that Phasors fire radioactive 'Beta'
> particles which can 'Quantum Jump' to FTL speeds, but possess hardly any
> mass.
Pfft.
--
A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
Stuart Mackey
Lord Edam de Fromage <$mike$@themightygibbon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.158b374be...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> In article <3B212578...@daltonator.net>, r...@daltonator.net says...
>
> > Boyd, I think.
>
> TNG TM, page 125. the claim is far to wide-spread for it to have
> origniated with one person on a news group spurned by Sci-fi fans as the
> hang out for nerds
>
Nerd!?!? I resent that, I prefer to be known as a Geek thank you.
Wayne Poe
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Transcend wrote:
> Colin Brian Witz wrote:
>
> > Ships Phasors have to be lightspeed or FTL for the 'Picard Manuver' to
> > work.
>
> That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. How in the hell does the
> Picard manuver require lightspeed or FTL phasers?
Goddamn, Transcend, what happened to that new leaf you were going to
turn over and "try to change?"
Strowbridge
> Ships Phasors have to be lightspeed or FTL for the 'Picard Manuver' to work.
I think the problems with the Picard Maneuver go well beyond LS phasers.
> On the other hand. It was suggested that Phasors fire radioactive 'Beta'
> particles which can 'Quantum Jump' to FTL speeds, but possess hardly any
> mass.
Where was it suggested?
C.S.Strowbridge
Colin Brian Witz
phasor fire. The blast hits BEFORE the ship can return fire to the new
position, At the moment of impact the ship sees Two ships. Since the images are
being transmitted at the speed of light, the ship board Phasors have to be
traveling at C.
Transcend
> since the sensors only work at lightspeed, the ship warps and engages with
> phasor fire. The blast hits BEFORE the ship can return fire to the new
> position, At the moment of impact the ship sees Two ships. Since the
> images are being transmitted at the speed of light, the ship board Phasors
> have to be traveling at C.
The Picard manuver involves dropping *out* of warp close to the target
before they open fire. No c phasers are needed. Further proof phasers don't
travel at c is that we can see them edge on.
--
George Washington observed, "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence;
it is force! Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
Transcend
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Transcend wrote:
>
> > Colin Brian Witz wrote:
> >
> > > Ships Phasors have to be lightspeed or FTL for the 'Picard Manuver' to
> > > work.
> >
> > That's the biggest bullshit I've ever heard. How in the hell does the
> > Picard manuver require lightspeed or FTL phasers?
>
> Goddamn, Transcend, what happened to that new leaf you were going to
> turn over and "try to change?"
I'm sorry but I don't see how the Picard Manuver would require c Phasers.
So shoot me. They jump to warp for a second, they drop out of warp very
close to the target, and fire. How would that require c Phasers? Sounds
like a bullshit concept to me.
Colin Brian Witz
Wouldn't that be necessary, to travel at FTL speeds.
The Origin of the weirdness, is this. In the Original Series, Kirk would
repeatable do things such as firing Phasors/Torps while moving at warp speed.
Since the movies, and TNG no one has done that. The Beta particle theory is
unsubstatiatable because I heard it at a cons. and because Beta's are the only
object that possess mass that can travel at C. The 'Quantum Jump' is
theoretical in RL at this time.
--
Supporting the Right to Arm Bears
After all the Ranger's have guns
The Bears should have guns too.
.
"Strowbridge" <strow...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B21C3D8...@home.com...
Transcend
> Like when did Fed or Ferngi vessels suddenly loose FTL sensor capability?
>
> Wouldn't that be necessary, to travel at FTL speeds.
>
> The Origin of the weirdness, is this. In the Original Series, Kirk would
> repeatable do things such as firing Phasors/Torps while moving at warp
> speed.
> Since the movies, and TNG no one has done that. The Beta particle theory
> is unsubstatiatable because I heard it at a cons. and because Beta's are
> the only
> object that possess mass that can travel at C. The 'Quantum Jump' is
> theoretical in RL at this time.
The times they've fired phasers while at warp the phasers were inside the
warp bubble of the Enterprise, or had crossed over into another ship's warp
bubble. In short the phaser could be fired at warp but is only FTL inside
the warp field of a ship. Phasers fired from a ship not at warp would be
sublight, and phasers fired from a ship at warp to one not at warp would
drop to sublight outside the warp field. The fact that phasers are visible,
and from all angles, tells us they cannot be truely FTL.
Wayne Poe
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
> > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
> Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
> BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> weapons.
The venerable ST:TM.
"Just because Boyd is a gigantic weiner doesn't mean unrealistic plot devices
should be concocted to spare his Dorkpire."
--------- Kynes
Wayne Poe
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Colin Brian Witz wrote:
> Ships Phasors have to be lightspeed or FTL for the 'Picard Manuver' to work.
No, they don't. The PM works by allegedly making a ship with no FTL
sensors believe they are seeing two targets. C or FTL phasers were
never a consideration.
> On the other hand. It was suggested that Phasors fire radioactive 'Beta'
> particles which can 'Quantum Jump' to FTL speeds, but possess hardly any mass.
Where was this from?
"Does it seem like Boyd is trying to compensate for the wish he got from
the Genie of the Small Genitals Lamp?"
-------- Kynes
Wayne Poe
On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Colin Brian Witz wrote:
> since the sensors only work at lightspeed, the ship warps and engages with
> phasor fire. The blast hits BEFORE the ship can return fire to the new
> position, At the moment of impact the ship sees Two ships. Since the images are
> being transmitted at the speed of light, the ship board Phasors have to be
> traveling at C.
That's completely wrong. The PM takes advantage of a ship with no FTL
sensors, by being able to jump from one part of space to directly
point blank of the enemy ship. The enemy ship would still see where
the attacking ship WAS, while the attacking ship is firing on it at
point blank range from where it actually IS.
This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
"Fuck the FCC! Fuck 'em! Fuck 'em!"
-------"Grandpa" Al Lewis, 1990 Howard Stern anti-censorship rally
Dalton
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
>
> > > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
>
> > > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
>
> > Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
>
> No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
*points at Elim*
> > BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> > remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> > weapons.
>
> The venerable ST:TM.
Whee
> "Just because Boyd is a gigantic weiner doesn't mean unrealistic plot devices
> should be concocted to spare his Dorkpire."
>
> --------- Kynes
I'm glad SOMEONE is using the FUQ :)
Wayne Poe
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Colin Brian Witz wrote:
> Like when did Fed or Ferngi vessels suddenly loose FTL sensor capability?
>
> Wouldn't that be necessary, to travel at FTL speeds.
Don't ask us, ask the writers of "The Battle" who had to come up with
some special "maneuver" to attempt to make Picard actually look like
he could do something in combat besides surrender his ship.
> The Origin of the weirdness, is this. In the Original Series, Kirk would
> repeatable do things such as firing Phasors/Torps while moving at warp speed.
> Since the movies, and TNG no one has done that.
Wrong. Torps can be fired at warp speeds. So can "ACB jacketed
phasers." And its been seen on DS9.
> The Beta particle theory is
> unsubstatiatable because I heard it at a cons. and because Beta's are the only
> object that possess mass that can travel at C. The 'Quantum Jump' is
> theoretical in RL at this time.
That might be from the DS9 TM, but I don't own it.
"...in truth, Roddenberry had about as much writing ability as the lowest
industry hack. A fact."
---Harlan Ellison
Strowbridge
>
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> > > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
>
> > > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
>
> > Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
>
> No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
True, as James Randi would say, 'No amount of evidence will dissuade the
true believer.'
> > BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> > remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> > weapons.
>
> The venerable ST:TM.
Ah, I see. Well, without that it's no longer up to the Pro-SW side to
disprove that claim, but the Pro-ST side to supply proof.
C.S.Strowbridge
Wayne Poe
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Dalton wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> > > > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > > > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
> > > > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
> > > Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
> > No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
> *points at Elim*
That was a no-brainer!
> > > BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> > > remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> > > weapons.
> > The venerable ST:TM.
> Whee
I think these days its better used to prop up your joystick as you
play "TIE Fighter".
> > "Just because Boyd is a gigantic weiner doesn't mean unrealistic plot devices
> > should be concocted to spare his Dorkpire."
> >
> > --------- Kynes
> I'm glad SOMEONE is using the FUQ :)
Hey, I've got these gems archived in my .sig files!
"It was only perpetuated by the Star wars side. the Star Trek
side kept having to correct them saying that only Kira was pergnant."
---------- Jonathan Boyd
Strowbridge
>
> Colin Brian Witz wrote:
> This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
They also failed to explain how the Ferengi could have FTL travel
without FTL sensors.
C.S.Strowbridge
Dalton
>
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Dalton wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
>
> > > > > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > > > > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
>
> > > > > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
>
> > > > Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
>
> > > No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
>
> > *points at Elim*
>
> That was a no-brainer!
:)
> > > > BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> > > > remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> > > > weapons.
>
> > > The venerable ST:TM.
>
> > Whee
>
> I think these days its better used to prop up your joystick as you
> play "TIE Fighter".
Hee hee hee
> > > "Just because Boyd is a gigantic weiner doesn't mean unrealistic plot devices
> > > should be concocted to spare his Dorkpire."
> > >
> > > --------- Kynes
>
> > I'm glad SOMEONE is using the FUQ :)
>
> Hey, I've got these gems archived in my .sig files!
Bastard.
Wayne Poe
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> Wayne Poe wrote:
> > > > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > > > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
> >
> > > > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
> >
> > > Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
> >
> > No it won't. They'll come up with some bullshit to try to dismiss it!
>
> True, as James Randi would say, 'No amount of evidence will dissuade the
> true believer.'
Yup...
> > > BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> > > remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> > > weapons.
> >
> > The venerable ST:TM.
>
> Ah, I see. Well, without that it's no longer up to the Pro-SW side to
> disprove that claim, but the Pro-ST side to supply proof.
I think the SW side has pretty much disproved such a notion in spades.
http://www.holonet.iwarp.com/Dodge.mov
Wayne Poe
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> Wayne Poe wrote:
> > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
> They also failed to explain how the Ferengi could have FTL travel
> without FTL sensors.
Curiouser and curiouser...
"Geezus, IXJac, you bring new and sadder meaning to the word
"frighteningly retarded.""
------- Kynes
Lord Edam de Fromage
lo...@h4h.com says...
> > since the sensors only work at lightspeed, the ship warps and engages with
> > phasor fire. The blast hits BEFORE the ship can return fire to the new
> > position, At the moment of impact the ship sees Two ships. Since the images are
> > being transmitted at the speed of light, the ship board Phasors have to be
> > traveling at C.
>
> That's completely wrong. The PM takes advantage of a ship with no FTL
> sensors, by being able to jump from one part of space to directly
> point blank of the enemy ship. The enemy ship would still see where
> the attacking ship WAS, while the attacking ship is firing on it at
> point blank range from where it actually IS.
>
> This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
this is never stated in the episodes. this is how fans assume the PM
works, but the mere fact it works against the E-d shows it is wrong.
A far better theory that does not have these problems is that the sudden
increase in the subspace field as you jump to high warp momentarily
blinds the FTL sensors of the victim so that they don't know where you
are until you stop again, and by then you are already pounding them with
phasers or torpedoes or whatever.
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Strowbridge" <strow...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3B21184F...@home.com...
> Wayne Poe wrote:
>
> > Here's yet more proof against phasers being faster than
> > blasters...(Thanks to Brian Young for the clip)
> >
> > http://h4h.com/louis/slowphasers.mov
>
> Wow, that pretty much kills any opposition.
>
> BTW, where did this Light Speed phaser theory come from? I don't
> remember hearing it in any episode and they are referred to as particle
> weapons.
>
> C.S.Strowbridge
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
great river
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Transcend" <tran...@cybertown.com> wrote in message
news:9fsklg$5v67n$1...@ID-75240.news.dfncis.de...
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Wayne Poe" <lo...@h4h.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.21.010609...@filmgate.h4h.com...
Wayne Poe
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> lo...@h4h.com says...
> > That's completely wrong. The PM takes advantage of a ship with no FTL
> > sensors, by being able to jump from one part of space to directly
> > point blank of the enemy ship. The enemy ship would still see where
> > the attacking ship WAS, while the attacking ship is firing on it at
> > point blank range from where it actually IS.
> >
> > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
> this is never stated in the episodes. this is how fans assume the PM
> works, but the mere fact it works against the E-d shows it is wrong.
Engaging the PDD...
"The Battle"
DATA: You performed what Starfleet textbooks now call "The Picard
Maneuver."
PICARD: What any good helmsman could have done. I dropped into high
warp, then stopped right off the target vessel's bow, and fired
everything I had.
RIKER: By blowing into warp speed, you appeared for an instant to be
in two places at once...
PICARD: And our attacker fired on the wrong one.
Gee Mike, canon dialogue from the episode agrees with exactly what I
said above.
> A far better theory that does not have these problems is that the
> sudden increase in the subspace field as you jump to high warp
> momentarily blinds the FTL sensors of the victim so that they
> don't know where you are until you stop again, and by then you are
> already pounding them with phasers or torpedoes or whatever.
Funny, but this theory of yours has absolutely zero canon evidence to
back it up. Nothing like this is stated in the episode, even when Data
comes up with a solution to the PM. Also, for your theory to work, the
tractor beam wouldn't have been able to pinpoint exactly where to
snare the Stargazer.
And here's what the June 2001 Star Trek:The Magazine says about it on
page 94-95:
"As the basis of this maneuver was dependant upon the speed of light,
the tactic offers no advantage against opponents with
faster-than-light detection technology. Exploiting the Ferengi
weaknesses required accurate timing for the ruse not to go awry. The
warp engines had to be engaged with precision timing so that the
U.S.S. Stargazer came out of warp before the Ferengi's sensors
realized that the ship had even jumped to warp; if they were not, the
Ferengi would have destroyed the ship with their plasma bursts."
"It was only perpetuated by the Star wars side. the Star Trek
side kept having to correct them saying that only Kira was pergnant."
---------- Jonathan Boyd
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
Strowbridge
>
> On Sat, 9 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
>
> > Wayne Poe wrote:
> > > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
>
> > They also failed to explain how the Ferengi could have FTL travel
> > without FTL sensors.
>
> Curiouser and curiouser...
Or maybe targeting sensors are vastly different that general navigation
sensors. This would seem to agree with most evidence.
C.S.Strowbridge
Transcend
> we saw phasers travelling at warp 5 (or over) in Treachary, faith and the
> great river
Outside of a ships warp field? If so how in the hell....
Transcend
<snip>
My theory is that at point blank range FTL sensors are useless. The ships
were simply too close to tell the difference with FTL sensors.
rob.wn5
Either a big white cane swinging across the path of the ship, or the
fastest guide dog in the universe.
:-)
Rob Wilson
>
> C.S.Strowbridge
Wayne Poe
On Sun, 10 Jun 2001, Strowbridge wrote:
> Wayne Poe wrote:
> > > > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
> > > They also failed to explain how the Ferengi could have FTL travel
> > > without FTL sensors.
> > Curiouser and curiouser...
> Or maybe targeting sensors are vastly different that general navigation
> sensors. This would seem to agree with most evidence.
A BIT of a correlation with Voyager's "The Voyager Conspiracy"
"I tend to mentall yprepare myself for the worst case scenario in
arguments,"
-----------Jonathan Boyd
Durandal
>
So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship is
incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
easily, then.
--
Damien Sorresso
TITANIA: Ewww! You said if I slept with you I wouldn't have to touch the drunk!
DUFFMAN: DUFFMAN SAYS A LOTTA THINGS!! OH YEAH!!
Lord Edam de Fromage
> > > That's completely wrong. The PM takes advantage of a ship with no FTL
> > > sensors, by being able to jump from one part of space to directly
> > > point blank of the enemy ship. The enemy ship would still see where
> > > the attacking ship WAS, while the attacking ship is firing on it at
> > > point blank range from where it actually IS.
> > >
> > > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
>
> > this is never stated in the episodes. this is how fans assume the PM
> > works, but the mere fact it works against the E-d shows it is wrong.
>
> Engaging the PDD...
>
> "The Battle"
>
> DATA: You performed what Starfleet textbooks now call "The Picard
> Maneuver."
>
> PICARD: What any good helmsman could have done. I dropped into high
> warp, then stopped right off the target vessel's bow, and fired
> everything I had.
>
> RIKER: By blowing into warp speed, you appeared for an instant to be
> in two places at once...
>
> PICARD: And our attacker fired on the wrong one.
>
> Gee Mike, canon dialogue from the episode agrees with exactly what I
> said above.
Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
it's in invisible ink?
> > A far better theory that does not have these problems is that the
> > sudden increase in the subspace field as you jump to high warp
> > momentarily blinds the FTL sensors of the victim so that they
> > don't know where you are until you stop again, and by then you are
> > already pounding them with phasers or torpedoes or whatever.
>
> Funny, but this theory of yours has absolutely zero canon evidence to
> back it up.
It has more canon evidence tan your "ships with no FTL sensors" does, Wayne.
And it actually fits with what we are shown.
Nothing like this is stated in the episode, even when Data
> comes up with a solution to the PM. Also, for your theory to work, the
> tractor beam wouldn't have been able to pinpoint exactly where to
> snare the Stargazer.
The tractor beam was detecting the shockwave of gasses in front of the ship,
not the ship itself. No subspaec flash to confuse it.
> And here's what the June 2001 Star Trek:The Magazine says about it on
> page 94-95:
Inadmissable evidence.
Wayne Poe
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> > > > That's completely wrong. The PM takes advantage of a ship with no FTL
> > > > sensors, by being able to jump from one part of space to directly
> > > > point blank of the enemy ship. The enemy ship would still see where
> > > > the attacking ship WAS, while the attacking ship is firing on it at
> > > > point blank range from where it actually IS.
> > > >
> > > > This, however, doesn't explain why it worked against the E-D...
> >
> > > this is never stated in the episodes. this is how fans assume the PM
> > > works, but the mere fact it works against the E-d shows it is wrong.
> >
> > Engaging the PDD...
> >
> > "The Battle"
> >
> > DATA: You performed what Starfleet textbooks now call "The Picard
> > Maneuver."
> >
> > PICARD: What any good helmsman could have done. I dropped into high
> > warp, then stopped right off the target vessel's bow, and fired
> > everything I had.
> >
> > RIKER: By blowing into warp speed, you appeared for an instant to be
> > in two places at once...
> >
> > PICARD: And our attacker fired on the wrong one.
> >
> > Gee Mike, canon dialogue from the episode agrees with exactly what I
> > said above.
>
> Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
>
> Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> it's in invisible ink?
There is no ink in this message, Mike.
Secondly, if the ship had FTL sensors, the Stargazer wouldn't be in
two places at once.
If you want to nitpick by every single word, we can play that game
too. But the above quotes still agree with what I posted, and there is
nothing there to support your theory.
> > > A far better theory that does not have these problems is that the
> > > sudden increase in the subspace field as you jump to high warp
> > > momentarily blinds the FTL sensors of the victim so that they
> > > don't know where you are until you stop again, and by then you are
> > > already pounding them with phasers or torpedoes or whatever.
> >
> > Funny, but this theory of yours has absolutely zero canon evidence to
> > back it up.
>
> It has more canon evidence tan your "ships with no FTL sensors" does, Wayne.
Exactly where? Quote?
> And it actually fits with what we are shown.
If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM. Again, you have no
proof. Just baseless speculation that you routinely flame Transcend
for.
> Nothing like this is stated in the episode, even when Data
> > comes up with a solution to the PM. Also, for your theory to work, the
> > tractor beam wouldn't have been able to pinpoint exactly where to
> > snare the Stargazer.
>
> The tractor beam was detecting the shockwave of gasses in front of the ship,
> not the ship itself. No subspaec flash to confuse it.
And thus, your theory is shot through with a few MORE holes.
> > And here's what the June 2001 Star Trek:The Magazine says about it on
> > page 94-95:
>
> Inadmissable evidence.
Just as your non-canon, baseless theory is. Except this comes from a
publication fully authorized by Paramount Pictures. Looks like you're
third in line.
"And since we assume things work the same..."
---------- Mike Griffiths
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
a runabout was a max warp (which is warp 5 for a runabout I believe)
it fired *phasers* (and we saw them being fired) at a jem hadar battle-bug.
Well outside of warp fields.
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Transcend" <tran...@cybertown.com> wrote in message
news:9g1467$6hjna$1...@ID-75240.news.dfncis.de...
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20 something)
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Durandal" <duran...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:3B244906...@mac.com...
Matthew Hyde
Is if you just download all the messages to the printer so you can read
them on the bus home
--
Me it was 100% (science fiction.)
--Paul Jacques Jr.
Matt Hyde
906-487-3406
mdo...@mtu.edu
Transcend
> dont ask me :)
>
> a runabout was a max warp (which is warp 5 for a runabout I believe)
>
> it fired *phasers* (and we saw them being fired) at a jem hadar
> battle-bug. Well outside of warp fields.
Was the Jem Hadar ship also at Warp? Anyway I don't think objects leaving a
warp field just suddenly drop to sublight do they? I mean they coast a bit
on some sort of decaying warp field right? Like when the E-D's saucer
seperated while at warp (don't say "warp sustainers" because nobody had
even thought of seperating at warp before this, it was stated in the show.).
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
> >
> > it fired *phasers* (and we saw them being fired) at a jem hadar
> > battle-bug. Well outside of warp fields.
>
> Was the Jem Hadar ship also at Warp?
yes, also at warp 5. more or less.
Anyway I don't think objects leaving a
> warp field just suddenly drop to sublight do they? I mean they coast a bit
> on some sort of decaying warp field right?
that's matter. Phasers are not matter. And like a runabout has enough power
to sustain something else moving at warp?
I think you are grasping at straws a little bit here.
Perhaps phasers have different speed settings, or ship phasers are faster or
osmething?
Like when the E-D's saucer
> seperated while at warp (don't say "warp sustainers" because nobody had
> even thought of seperating at warp before this, it was stated in the
show.)
that was a physics error. Without a warp field, no matter can go faster than
light. Period.
Strowbridge
>
> Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> > > > A far better theory that does not have these problems is that the
> > > > sudden increase in the subspace field as you jump to high warp
> > > > momentarily blinds the FTL sensors of the victim so that they
> > > > don't know where you are until you stop again, and by then you are
> > > > already pounding them with phasers or torpedoes or whatever.
> > >
> > > Funny, but this theory of yours has absolutely zero canon evidence to
> > > back it up.
> >
> > It has more canon evidence tan your "ships with no FTL sensors" does,
> > Wayne.
>
> Exactly where? Quote?
>
> > And it actually fits with what we are shown.
>
> If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM. Again, you have no
> proof. Just baseless speculation that you routinely flame Transcend
> for.
If his theory was correct the opponent wouldn't know where they were,
not see two images.
C.S.Strowbridge
Durandal
> that's matter. Phasers are not matter. And like a runabout has enough power
> to sustain something else moving at warp?
Bullshit. They travel at STL speeds, therefore they have mass.
> that was a physics error. Without a warp field, no matter can go faster than
> light. Period.
Theoretically, yes it can. No matter can be ACCELERATED to the speed of
light. The trick, however, is to actually create the particle in
question at a speed moving faster than c. Graphing Einstein's momentum
equation, you'll find that v can exist above c if m is imaginary. What
an imaginary mass is, we don't know, but we do know that tachyons exist
in Trek and have some interaction with matter, thus being picked up by sensors.
Durandal
>
> yes I admit he is not perfect. Guinan has better aiming abilities than he
> does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20 something)
That does not bode well for the rest of Starfleet security.
Matthew Hyde
>
> Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
>
> > that's matter. Phasers are not matter. And like a runabout has enough power
> > to sustain something else moving at warp?
>
> Bullshit. They travel at STL speeds, therefore they have mass.
>
> > that was a physics error. Without a warp field, no matter can go faster than
> > light. Period.
>
> Theoretically, yes it can. No matter can be ACCELERATED to the speed of
> light. The trick, however, is to actually create the particle in
> question at a speed moving faster than c. Graphing Einstein's momentum
> equation, you'll find that v can exist above c if m is imaginary. What
> an imaginary mass is, we don't know, but we do know that tachyons exist
> in Trek and have some interaction with matter, thus being picked up by sensors.
>
This makes me want to learn abt Borel sets. Please stop :)
Matthew Hyde
>
> Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> >
> > yes I admit he is not perfect. Guinan has better aiming abilities than he
> > does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20 something)
>
> That does not bode well for the rest of Starfleet security.
>
less--I mean, think abt it, how would you feel if you had forty or more
ranks to go through as an officer, or other kinds of steps? At 20 of
anything, and you're still not as good as a bartender (admittedly, a
very good one), you'd be like, BULLLLLLL, SHIT.
Shaun
Matthew Hyde <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote in message
news:3B2557A2...@mtu.edu...
> Durandal wrote:
> >
> > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > >
> > > yes I admit he is not perfect. Guinan has better aiming abilities than
he
> > > does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20
something)
> >
> > That does not bode well for the rest of Starfleet security.
> >
> Those must be worthless levels, able to be completed in a month or
> less--I mean, think abt it, how would you feel if you had forty or more
> ranks to go through as an officer, or other kinds of steps? At 20 of
> anything, and you're still not as good as a bartender (admittedly, a
> very good one), you'd be like, BULLLLLLL, SHIT.
>
You know, she is like a few hundred years older then him. Shes probably had
lots of practice.
Wayne Poe
On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Matthew Hyde wrote:
> > There is no ink in this message, Mike.
> Is if you just download all the messages to the printer so you can read
> them on the bus home
Pfft. Caveman. Get a Palm Pilot or one of those bumblebees.
"You don't need a set of rules to shot down stupidity."
------- Alves
Matthew Hyde
>
> Matthew Hyde <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote in message
> news:3B2557A2...@mtu.edu...
> > Durandal wrote:
> > >
> > > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > > >
> > > > yes I admit he is not perfect. Guinan has better aiming abilities than
> he
> > > > does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20
> something)
> > >
> > > That does not bode well for the rest of Starfleet security.
> > >
> > Those must be worthless levels, able to be completed in a month or
> > less--I mean, think abt it, how would you feel if you had forty or more
> > ranks to go through as an officer, or other kinds of steps? At 20 of
> > anything, and you're still not as good as a bartender (admittedly, a
> > very good one), you'd be like, BULLLLLLL, SHIT.
> >
>
> You know, she is like a few hundred years older then him. Shes probably had
> lots of practice.
>
OK *repeats self*
Weyoun the Dancing Borg
but she has this precognition thing and is strange.
--
Fighting Crime
Trying to Save the World
Here they come jsut in time
The Powerpuff Girls!
wey...@ntlworld.com.despam
remove ".despam" to reply.
"Matthew Hyde" <mdo...@mtu.edu> wrote in message
news:3B262186...@mtu.edu...
Lord Edam de Fromage
lo...@h4h.com says...
> > Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
> >
> > Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> > it's in invisible ink?
>
> There is no ink in this message, Mike.
So you were lying when you said you had a canon quote from the episode
explaining the Picard Maneuver?
> Secondly, if the ship had FTL sensors, the Stargazer wouldn't be in
> two places at once.
Unless the sensors were confused.
> If you want to nitpick by every single word, we can play that game
> too.
how could i possibly come anywhere near the prowess of a man who can base
a whole thread on the word "panick"?
But the above quotes still agree with what I posted, and there is
> nothing there to support your theory.
Canon has more to support my theory than yours. for example, the fact
that a ship doesn't even get FTL until three or four seconds after
kicking the warp drive in.
> > And it actually fits with what we are shown.
>
> If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM.
you clearly haven't read my theory then, Wayne. If you ahd it would be
clear no sensors would be able to tell where the stargazer was, so the E-
d (and any other ship, be it FTL-sensor enabled or not) would have very
reason to fear the PM.
> > The tractor beam was detecting the shockwave of gasses in front of the ship,
> > not the ship itself. No subspaec flash to confuse it.
>
> And thus, your theory is shot through with a few MORE holes.
How so? My theory relies on an intense subspace field confusing sensors.
The gas flows in front of the subspace field, so will be detectable. no
problems there.
> > > And here's what the June 2001 Star Trek:The Magazine says about it on
> > > page 94-95:
> >
> > Inadmissable evidence.
>
> Just as your non-canon, baseless theory is. Except this comes from a
> publication fully authorized by Paramount Pictures.
Hmm - I have a theory that fits all the facts, and works.
the ST Magazine has a theory that requires ferengi ships to have no FTL
sensors (despite being able to travel FTL, communicate FTL, and detect
FTL ships), and fails to explain why the E-d had problems with the Picard
Maneuver.
Neither of them is directly stated in canon, neither is more admissable
than the other. Which do we choose? the one that fits all the facts, or
the one from the magazine that has gaping holes in it?
--
Lord Edam de Fromage
aka Sorborus
www.trek-wars.org
Shaun
Weyoun the Dancing Borg <wey...@ntlworld.com.despam> wrote in message
news:49qV6.2312$0a6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> I cant ermember the exact numbers, but guanan is like twice as good as
him.
> but she has this precognition thing and is strange.
>
So she's like a jedi. hehe
rob.wn5
"Lord Edam de Fromage" <$mike$@themightygibbon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9g1tdv$6j61c$1...@ID-41346.news.dfncis.de...
>
Snip
> >
> > Gee Mike, canon dialogue from the episode agrees with exactly what I
> > said above.
>
> Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
>
> Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> it's in invisible ink?
Yes thats right, you need to rub your screen with a freshly cut raw potato.
If you do so you get this message which I transcribed below :
DATA: You performed what Starfleet textbooks now call "The Picard
Maneuver."
PICARD: What any good helmsman could have done. I dropped into high
warp, then stopped right off the target vessel's bow, and fired everything
I had.
RIKER: By blowing into warp speed, you appeared for an instant to be
in two places at once...
PICARD: And our attacker fired on the wrong one.
-------------
DATA: Correct sir due to them having no FTL sensors.
RIKER: Well thats that settled then, so any of you guys seen Star Wars? I
reckon the Empire would blast through us like a blowtorch through soft
butter!
WORF: Indeed I have. I think it would be Honourable to die at the hands of
the Empire!
PICARD: Well said Mr Worf. I thank god for the fact we would never have to
face real Warships with a dedicated Military guiding them.
DATA: Yes sir. I calculate a 99.99999999999999999999999% chance of an
Imperial Victory in a war against the Federation and it's allies.
-------------
See what happens when you don't read the Boy's book of Spies when your
younger? Always keep a sliced, raw potato handy to search for hidden
messages, you never know what you'll miss otherwise!
:-D
Rob Wilson
rob.wn5
"Wayne Poe" <lo...@h4h.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4.21.010612...@filmgate.h4h.com...
>
> On Mon, 11 Jun 2001, Matthew Hyde wrote:
>
> > > There is no ink in this message, Mike.
>
> > Is if you just download all the messages to the printer so you can read
> > them on the bus home
>
> Pfft. Caveman. Get a Palm Pilot or one of those bumblebees.
They can transcribe these on insects now? Wow!
:-)
Rob Wilson
rob.wn5
> >
> > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > >
> > > yes I admit he is not perfect. Guinan has better aiming abilities
than he
> > > does. (no, really, she is on level 40 or something, he's level 20
something)
> >
> > That does not bode well for the rest of Starfleet security.
> >
> Those must be worthless levels, able to be completed in a month or
> less--I mean, think abt it, how would you feel if you had forty or more
> ranks to go through as an officer, or other kinds of steps? At 20 of
> anything, and you're still not as good as a bartender (admittedly, a
> very good one), you'd be like, BULLLLLLL, SHIT.
Err, I think he's referencing a game on the holodeck. The higher the level
the harder the target is to hit... level forty looked about right for a
competent pistol marksman to hit with shotgun aiming.
Rob Wilson
Durandal
ROTFLMAO!!!!
Wayne Poe
On Tue, 12 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> > > Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
> > >
> > > Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> > > it's in invisible ink?
> >
> > There is no ink in this message, Mike.
> So you were lying when you said you had a canon quote from the episode
> explaining the Picard Maneuver?
No, I already proved that with the canon quotes I posted.
> > Secondly, if the ship had FTL sensors, the Stargazer wouldn't be in
> > two places at once.
>
> Unless the sensors were confused.
Funny, I don't remember anyone in the episode saying the sensors were
confused.
> > If you want to nitpick by every single word, we can play that game
> > too.
> how could i possibly come anywhere near the prowess of a man who can base
> a whole thread on the word "panick"?
Not base a whole thread on a word, but base a whole thread on an
incorrect assumtion made by somebody drastically looking for footholds
for a baseless theory.
> But the above quotes still agree with what I posted, and there is
> > nothing there to support your theory.
> Canon has more to support my theory than yours. for example, the fact
> that a ship doesn't even get FTL until three or four seconds after
> kicking the warp drive in.
Not unless Picard did something known as kicking the ship into "high
warp" not just "warp", which is what was stated in the episode. This
could mean they jumped to warp with no safety measures in place that
are normally there during a warp jump. Sort of live revving the engine
on your car as you hold down the brake peddle for a jackrabbit start.
> > > And it actually fits with what we are shown.
> >
> > If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM.
> you clearly haven't read my theory then, Wayne.
Yes, I read the whole thing. Yet it has no canon backing in quotes or
actions from "The Battle". Sort of like the exact same thing you
require from everyone here who comes up with a theory on just about
anything.
Now, if you can come up with a canon theory that explains why Riker
simply didn't use the prefix codes of the Stargazer to bring the
entire confrontation to a halt...
> If you ahd it would be clear no sensors would be able to tell
> where the stargazer was, so the E- d (and any other ship, be it
> FTL-sensor enabled or not) would have very reason to fear the PM.
Gee, then you've failed to explain why Data's counter to the PM would
work at all, since the sensors would have had to pick up the
compression of the trace gasses immediately.
> > > The tractor beam was detecting the shockwave of gasses in front of the ship,
> > > not the ship itself. No subspaec flash to confuse it.
> >
> > And thus, your theory is shot through with a few MORE holes.
> How so? My theory relies on an intense subspace field confusing sensors.
> The gas flows in front of the subspace field, so will be detectable. no
> problems there.
Those gasses would still be moving FTL, and your theory is silent with
regard as to how the "intense subspace field" would confuse sensors
detecting a FTL gas compression.
> > > > And here's what the June 2001 Star Trek:The Magazine says about it on
> > > > page 94-95:
> > > Inadmissable evidence.
> > Just as your non-canon, baseless theory is. Except this comes from a
> > publication fully authorized by Paramount Pictures.
> Hmm - I have a theory that fits all the facts, and works.
No, you don't, see above. Your theory is also not supported by canon
evidence.
> the ST Magazine has a theory that requires ferengi ships to have no FTL
> sensors (despite being able to travel FTL, communicate FTL, and detect
> FTL ships), and fails to explain why the E-d had problems with the Picard
> Maneuver.
ST Magazine and the writers of the episode both are officially
authorized by Paramount Pictures. That's two entities that have passed
the muster of the entity that owns and decrees canon for Star Trek.
> Neither of them is directly stated in canon,
Not in a "led by the nose" way. But the "theory" holds with the quotes
from the episode. Meanwhile, your theory does not.
> neither is more admissable
> than the other. Which do we choose? the one that fits all the facts, or
> the one from the magazine that has gaping holes in it?
I choose the canon theory outlined in the canon TNG episode, "The
Battle"
"Oh no! A bunch of pasty-faced geeks who sit inside all day masturbating
to their scale models of Klingon battleships don't agree with me?! Where
DID I leave that bottle of cyanide?"
------------Kynes
Transcend
>
> Weyoun the Dancing Borg <wey...@ntlworld.com.despam> wrote in message
> news:49qV6.2312$0a6.2...@news2-win.server.ntlworld.com...
> > I cant ermember the exact numbers, but guanan is like twice as good as
> him.
> > but she has this precognition thing and is strange.
> >
>
> So she's like a jedi. hehe
No she's something.....else. Very different. Q is scared of her and she
isn't afraid of him, understand the implications of *that!*
rob.wn5
Thank you, thank you. Please pay at the exit and remember, your money is
greatfully received ..... Crack and donkeys cost more than people think!
Rob Wilson
Lord Edam de Fromage
lo...@h4h.com says...
> > > > Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
> > > >
> > > > Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> > > > it's in invisible ink?
> > >
> > > There is no ink in this message, Mike.
>
> > So you were lying when you said you had a canon quote from the episode
> > explaining the Picard Maneuver?
>
> No, I already proved that with the canon quotes I posted.
the canon quotes that did not contain what you said they did.
do you want to borrow my glasses? i think you need them, you seem to be
struggling to read things.
> > Unless the sensors were confused.
>
> Funny, I don't remember anyone in the episode saying the sensors were
> confused.
well they certainly weren't working perfctly, were they?
> > But the above quotes still agree with what I posted, and there is
> > > nothing there to support your theory.
>
> > Canon has more to support my theory than yours. for example, the fact
> > that a ship doesn't even get FTL until three or four seconds after
> > kicking the warp drive in.
>
> Not unless Picard did something known as kicking the ship into "high
> warp" not just "warp", which is what was stated in the episode.
We've never seen "high warp" get the ship FTL faster than "warp", have
we? Or is that in another of your nonexistant canon quotes?
> > > > And it actually fits with what we are shown.
> > >
> > > If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM.
>
> > you clearly haven't read my theory then, Wayne.
>
> Yes, I read the whole thing. Yet it has no canon backing in quotes or
> actions from "The Battle".
It's the only theory presented which fits all the facts with no problems
whatsoever. Every other theory presented has serious holes in them, such
as requiring FTL ships with no FTL sensors, or the E-d choosing to turn
their FTL sensors off for no reason whatsoever.
When you have many competing theories you choose the one that fits all
the facts over the ones that have gaping holes in them.
> > If you ahd it would be clear no sensors would be able to tell
> > where the stargazer was, so the E- d (and any other ship, be it
> > FTL-sensor enabled or not) would have very reason to fear the PM.
>
> Gee, then you've failed to explain why Data's counter to the PM would
> work at all, since the sensors would have had to pick up the
> compression of the trace gasses immediately.
the magical thing of FTL sensors, you see. they can detect things almost
immediately. The E-d does have FTL sensors. as already explained, they
can't be use to track the stargazer, but the stuff out front of it, well,
that's just fair game.
> > How so? My theory relies on an intense subspace field confusing sensors.
> > The gas flows in front of the subspace field, so will be detectable. no
> > problems there.
>
> Those gasses would still be moving FTL,
Only if the stargazer was travelling FTL or near FTL. I've already
explained this doesn't happen for some seconds after they engage warp -
long after the entire picard maneuver finishes, infact.
> ST Magazine and the writers of the episode both are officially
> authorized by Paramount Pictures.
According to the council of this newsgroup Paramount Pictures have stated
the only thing that counts is what's shown on-screen. the ST magazine and
writers of the episodes are no more authoratative than you or I, or
weyoun, or Transcend, or even Kaz with his almost non existant
knowledge of Trek. If you cannot accept that then stop debating or
request a vote to change the rules of this newsgroup.
Wayne Poe
On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> > > > > Really? Where does it say "a ship with no FTL sensors"?
> > > > >
> > > > > Is that in the bit you forgot to quote? Or in the bit I can't see because
> > > > > it's in invisible ink?
> > > >
> > > > There is no ink in this message, Mike.
> >
> > > So you were lying when you said you had a canon quote from the episode
> > > explaining the Picard Maneuver?
> >
> > No, I already proved that with the canon quotes I posted.
>
> the canon quotes that did not contain what you said they did.
Yes they did. Just as you pulled your theory out of an episode which
in no way supports your theory, isn't addressed, or even shown. We
don't need Picard to turn to the screen and say,
"Ok, the rest of you understood what we said. Now to translate for
Mr. Griffiths so he doesn't go on a tangent with the weakest of
theories yet again to apologize for our piss-poor writers..."
> do you want to borrow my glasses? i think you need them, you seem to be
> struggling to read things.
If I do that, they may act as Dorothy's slippers and take me to the
"Land of Hyperinterpretation for the Sake of Saving Face."
> > > Unless the sensors were confused.
> >
> > Funny, I don't remember anyone in the episode saying the sensors were
> > confused.
>
> well they certainly weren't working perfctly, were they?
They weren't? Care to provide a quote?
> > > But the above quotes still agree with what I posted, and there is
> > > > nothing there to support your theory.
> >
> > > Canon has more to support my theory than yours. for example, the fact
> > > that a ship doesn't even get FTL until three or four seconds after
> > > kicking the warp drive in.
> >
> > Not unless Picard did something known as kicking the ship into "high
> > warp" not just "warp", which is what was stated in the episode.
>
> We've never seen "high warp" get the ship FTL faster than "warp", have
> we?
Sure we did. We saw it in "The Battle". Better wipe the those glasses
down. And buy a hearing aid, unless "high warp" WASN'T said by Picard.
> Or is that in another of your nonexistant canon quotes?
For a guy who demands unrestricted interpretation of canon, you sure
bitch a lot when your back is against the wall.
> > > > > And it actually fits with what we are shown.
> > > >
> > > > If it did, the E-D wouldn't have sweated the PM.
> >
> > > you clearly haven't read my theory then, Wayne.
> >
> > Yes, I read the whole thing. Yet it has no canon backing in quotes or
> > actions from "The Battle".
> It's the only theory presented which fits all the facts with no problems
> whatsoever.
Except that it isn't supported by canon dialogue whatsoever. Whoops.
> Every other theory presented has serious holes in them, such
> as requiring FTL ships with no FTL sensors, or the E-d choosing to turn
> their FTL sensors off for no reason whatsoever.
If the canon has serious holes in it, then so be it. Sorry.
> When you have many competing theories you choose the one that fits all
> the facts over the ones that have gaping holes in them.
You mean like the fact that a capital ship would use capital class
torpedoes, instead of one-man starfighter ones?
> > > If you ahd it would be clear no sensors would be able to tell
> > > where the stargazer was, so the E- d (and any other ship, be it
> > > FTL-sensor enabled or not) would have very reason to fear the PM.
> >
> > Gee, then you've failed to explain why Data's counter to the PM would
> > work at all, since the sensors would have had to pick up the
> > compression of the trace gasses immediately.
>
> the magical thing of FTL sensors, you see. they can detect things almost
> immediately.
Once again: if the sensors are "confused", they ain't working.
> The E-d does have FTL sensors. as already explained, they
> can't be use to track the stargazer, but the stuff out front of it, well,
> that's just fair game.
Once again: if the sensors are "confused", they ain't working.
> > > How so? My theory relies on an intense subspace field confusing sensors.
> > > The gas flows in front of the subspace field, so will be detectable. no
> > > problems there.
> >
> > Those gasses would still be moving FTL,
> Only if the stargazer was travelling FTL or near FTL. I've already
> explained this doesn't happen for some seconds after they engage warp -
> long after the entire picard maneuver finishes, infact.
Unless "high warp" is a different matter.
> > ST Magazine and the writers of the episode both are officially
> > authorized by Paramount Pictures.
> According to the council of this newsgroup Paramount Pictures have stated
> the only thing that counts is what's shown on-screen. the ST magazine and
> writers of the episodes are no more authoratative than you or I, or
> weyoun, or Transcend, or even Kaz with his almost non existant
> knowledge of Trek. If you cannot accept that then stop debating or
> request a vote to change the rules of this newsgroup.
Already did that, but again, this is no different that your open
admission that you consult the scripts when the episodes aren't clear
on a point.
"It was only perpetuated by the Star wars side. the Star Trek
side kept having to correct them saying that only Kira was pergnant."
---------- Jonathan Boyd
SirNitram
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
>
First and foremost, I'm gonna say Hi to everyone, as this is my first
post on ASVS. Please lower the flamethrowers please. Yes, you in the
back too. Thank you.
I'd also ask for the laughter at my Email address to be kept to a
minimum. I know I deserve it until I get a real one, but please, be
gentle. :)
Now that I've embarassed myself completely, I thought I'd inject
something into the debate. The argument seems to be whether the PM
requires FTL sensors to be absent on the target. This is pretty
barmy(How can anything go FTL without FTL sensors?), and begs the
question of how it worked on a Fedship.
I'm just gonna throw out my theory, and wait for the Canon quotes to
sear me like a overdone potato.
It was a surprise. It was the equivalent of exchanging fire with a
soldier on the other side of the town square, when suddenly he poofs
and another guy runs up to you and let's fly.
The Ferrengi fighting the Stargazer could have had all the FTL sensors
they want, but since the crew's reaction speed is decidedly STL, the
navigator would have just enough time to yell, "They've gone to hig.."
before the weapons barrage nails the vessel.
BTW, Phaser's are definately STL. Just watch the show. The occasions
where they've gone faster than C, would be when fired from an FTL ship
and probably while still in the warp bubble. Like me firing a flare
gun from a moving car.
The PM is the ultimate surprise tactic. For a fraction of a second, as
your image tries to catch up across the battlefield, you look like
you're in two places at once. Even if the sensor man is on his toes,
he can't react so fast as he would need to to get a good warning out.
So it works because it surprises and throws an enemy off balance, just
as you 'happen' to lob a full volley of phaser and torpedos at them.
There we go. No messy inconsistancies, fits within physical law, and
best of all, it fits within a newbie's post.
----------
Trapped in Google Groups, looking for a way out.
Mail Nit...@Despam.wpi.edu if you must, but despam the address,
there's a good lad.
Dalton
>
> Wayne Poe <lo...@h4h.com> wrote in message news:<Pine.LNX.4.21.01061...@filmgate.h4h.com>...
> > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> >
> <snip the size of a small state>
>
> First and foremost, I'm gonna say Hi to everyone, as this is my first
> post on ASVS. Please lower the flamethrowers please. Yes, you in the
> back too. Thank you.
[snip]
Welcome to ASVS! If you're interested in staying and rocking the debate,
go to these websites:
The ASVS FAQ: http://www.sfdebris.com/faq.html
The ASVS R&R: http://www.asvs.org
I hope you enjoy your stay! If you're having newsreading trouble, I
recommend http://news.cis.dfn.de.
--
Rob "Roby" Dalton
http://daltonator.net
rob.wn5
"SirNitram" <Mart...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1e5517e2.01061...@posting.google.com...
> Wayne Poe <lo...@h4h.com> wrote in message
news:<Pine.LNX.4.21.01061...@filmgate.h4h.com>...
> > On Wed, 13 Jun 2001, Lord Edam de Fromage wrote:
> >
> <snip the size of a small state>
>
> First and foremost, I'm gonna say Hi to everyone, as this is my first
> post on ASVS. Please lower the flamethrowers please. Yes, you in the
> back too. Thank you.
>
> I'd also ask for the laughter at my Email address to be kept to a
> minimum. I know I deserve it until I get a real one, but please, be
> gentle. :)
AOLer, kill maim destro... oh hang on he's making a good point - Bugger!
>
>
> Now that I've embarassed myself completely, I thought I'd inject
> something into the debate. The argument seems to be whether the PM
> requires FTL sensors to be absent on the target. This is pretty
> barmy(How can anything go FTL without FTL sensors?), and begs the
> question of how it worked on a Fedship.
>
> I'm just gonna throw out my theory, and wait for the Canon quotes to
> sear me like a overdone potato.
On this NG, think more along the lines of Paper in a Blast furnace.
:-)
>
> It was a surprise. It was the equivalent of exchanging fire with a
> soldier on the other side of the town square, when suddenly he poofs
> and another guy runs up to you and let's fly.
Thats one fast moving soldier! 1st Battalion Queens Skateboarding Regiment?
:-)
>
> The Ferrengi fighting the Stargazer could have had all the FTL sensors
> they want, but since the crew's reaction speed is decidedly STL, the
> navigator would have just enough time to yell, "They've gone to hig.."
> before the weapons barrage nails the vessel.
This is a good theory, but doesn't the veiwscreen *show* 2 images of the
ship (which is why this still causing a furor)? If not I really don't see
any problem with it.
>
> BTW, Phaser's are definately STL. Just watch the show. The occasions
> where they've gone faster than C, would be when fired from an FTL ship
> and probably while still in the warp bubble. Like me firing a flare
> gun from a moving car.
Actually you catch up to the flare pretty quickly as it runs out of
momentum after 50m. (you don't want to know, how I know this about cars
catching up to flares :-) ).
>
> The PM is the ultimate surprise tactic. For a fraction of a second, as
> your image tries to catch up across the battlefield, you look like
> you're in two places at once. Even if the sensor man is on his toes,
> he can't react so fast as he would need to to get a good warning out.
> So it works because it surprises and throws an enemy off balance, just
> as you 'happen' to lob a full volley of phaser and torpedos at them.
If the attacker sets up his weps ready for the exit position it should
work. It's really pending whether or not there is direct evidence for 2
ships being seen at once.
>
> There we go. No messy inconsistancies, fits within physical law, and
> best of all, it fits within a newbie's post.
But what are we supposed to debate and over-analyse if you keep on clearing
it all up?
<Slaps Newbie round the back of the head>
BTW Welcome to ASVS
<Drops primed WP grenade down SirNitrams trousers>
:-)
Rob Wilson
greeting newbies with a laugh and a WP grenade since <looks at watch> oh 1
minute ago.
:-)
Shaun
> Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> >
>
> So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship is
> incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
> easily, then.
Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
Dalton
>
> Durandal <duran...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:3B244906...@mac.com...
> > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > >
> > > that's not proof, it's worf's inabliity to aim.
> >
> > So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship is
> > incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
> > easily, then.
>
> Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
They took apart that Sandcrawler pretty handily.
"BEN: And these blast points, too accurate for Sandpeople. Only
Imperial stormtroopers are so precise."
Eleas
I didn't read this before...
...oh god that's funny! :D
--
Björn
rob.wn5
"Eleas" <fenix...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b789f8d6.01061...@posting.google.com...
Thank you.
Now someone recommend it for the FUQ, or I'll cry.
:-)
Rob Wilson
>
> --
> Björn
Wayne Poe
On Sun, 17 Jun 2001, Shaun wrote:
> Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
I don't remember any Stormtrooper ever trying to hit
shit. Proof? Quotes?
"Fuck the FCC! Fuck 'em! Fuck 'em!"
-------"Grandpa" Al Lewis, 1990 Howard Stern anti-censorship rally
Crayz9000
<rob...@ntlworld.com> found "Re: Those C phasers..." while drowning in
alt.startrek.vs.starwars:
ARCHIVE!
---
Crayz9000 -- mhm28x12 -- Cybernetic Crow
http://crayz9000.htmlplanet.com
(Crayz9000's Hideout)
http://crayz9000.htmlplanet.com/hack/new-main.html
(Newbie Hacking FAQ)
http://asvsaa.8m.net
(ASVS Auxiliary Archive)
Don't forget to validate my address.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
I second the motion :)
Dalton
Agreed.
Eleas
> Crayz9000 wrote:
> > > > >Thank you.
> > >Now someone recommend it for the FUQ, or I'll cry.
> > >:-)
> > >
> > >Rob Wilson
> >
> > ARCHIVE!
>
> I second the motion :)
I third it. *g*
--
Björn
Durandal
>
> Durandal <duran...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:3B244906...@mac.com...
> > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > >
> > > that's not proof, it's worf's inabliity to aim.
> >
> > So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship is
> > incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
> > easily, then.
>
> Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
ANH:
姫recision accuracy destroying Sandcrawler.
百tormtroopers easily defeat troopers on board the Tantive IV, with only
a small hatchway to serve as an entrance point, with acceptable losses.
TESB:
肘mperial troops easily overrun Rebel Base on Hoth and mop up resistance
with little trouble.
RotJ:
謬rooper hits Leia in the shoulder with a quick snapshot over 30m away,
and when Leia was partially covered.
謬roopers deliver heavy casualties to numerically larger, by a vast
margin, forces (Ewoks) consisting of targets that are half-human size.
Stormtroopers are quite capable soldiers and marksmen. Think before you
say something.
Shaun
> Shaun wrote:
> >
> > Durandal <duran...@mac.com> wrote in message
> > news:3B244906...@mac.com...
> > > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > > >
> > > > that's not proof, it's worf's inabliity to aim.
> > >
> > > So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship
is
> > > incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
> > > easily, then.
> >
> > Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
>
> ANH:
> .Stormtroopers easily defeat troopers on board the Tantive IV, with only
> a small hatchway to serve as an entrance point, with acceptable losses.
> TESB:
> with little trouble.
> RotJ:
> .Trooper hits Leia in the shoulder with a quick snapshot over 30m away,
> and when Leia was partially covered.
> margin, forces (Ewoks) consisting of targets that are half-human size.
>
> Stormtroopers are quite capable soldiers and marksmen. Think before you
> say something.
They sure had a tuff time hitting Han, even when there were like a dozen
bolts coming at him. There's lots of times when they miss, just as many,
if not more then all the times you quoted of them hitting. I'm not saying
they're awful shots, they just arent orders of magnitude greater then trek
people firing weapons like some of you make them out to be.
Kazuaki Shimazaki
<snip>
> > ANH:
> > .Precision accuracy destroying Sandcrawler.
> > .Stormtroopers easily defeat troopers on board the Tantive IV, with only
> > a small hatchway to serve as an entrance point, with acceptable losses.
> > TESB:
> > .Imperial troops easily overrun Rebel Base on Hoth and mop up resistance
> > with little trouble.
> > RotJ:
> > .Trooper hits Leia in the shoulder with a quick snapshot over 30m away,
> > and when Leia was partially covered.
> > .Troopers deliver heavy casualties to numerically larger, by a vast
> > margin, forces (Ewoks) consisting of targets that are half-human size.
> >
> > Stormtroopers are quite capable soldiers and marksmen. Think before you
> > say something.
>
> They sure had a tuff time hitting Han, even when there were like a dozen
> bolts coming at him. There's lots of times when they miss, just as many,
> if not more then all the times you quoted of them hitting. I'm not saying
> they're awful shots, they just arent orders of magnitude greater then trek
> people firing weapons like some of you make them out to be.
You might notice that in the times Durandal had mentioned, the idea was
to shoot to kill. In the times you mentioned, they're pushing them
towards the places they want them to go and want them alive. Han and
company can't have flown the Millenium Falcon back to Yavin so the Imps
can track them in, nor can they get into the way of Executor's tractor
beam had they been SHOT. So they put threatening rounds close, like a
shot across the bow, WITHOUT hitting them.
Durandal
> They sure had a tuff time hitting Han, even when there were like a dozen
> bolts coming at him. There's lots of times when they miss, just as many,
> if not more then all the times you quoted of them hitting. I'm not saying
> they're awful shots, they just arent orders of magnitude greater then trek
> people firing weapons like some of you make them out to be.
Yeah, I can imagine Vader's reaction in ANH:
OFFICER: Um...Lord Vader... our stormtroopers killed Captain Solo and
his Wookie co-pilot...so....ummmm...we can't really track the Falcon
back to the Rebel base like you wanted...cuz there's no one to fly the
Falcon, now...and umm....hey! Our stormies sure are good shots!
Dalton
[snip]
> > Stormtroopers are quite capable soldiers and marksmen. Think before you
> > say something.
>
> They sure had a tuff time hitting Han, even when there were like a dozen
> bolts coming at him. There's lots of times when they miss, just as many,
> if not more then all the times you quoted of them hitting. I'm not saying
> they're awful shots, they just arent orders of magnitude greater then trek
> people firing weapons like some of you make them out to be.
Wow, all those GREAT examples and you still insist they're horrid shots.
Shaun
> Shaun wrote:
> >
> > Durandal <duran...@mac.com> wrote in message
> > news:3B244906...@mac.com...
> > > Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:
> > > >
> > > > that's not proof, it's worf's inabliity to aim.
> > >
> > > So, you admit that the Chief Security Officer on Starfleet's flagship
is
> > > incompetent? Good. Stormtroopers should slaughter the Federation quite
> > > easily, then.
> >
> > Stormtroopers cant hit shit either.
>
> ANH:
> .Stormtroopers easily defeat troopers on board the Tantive IV, with only
> a small hatchway to serve as an entrance point, with acceptable losses.
> TESB:
> with little trouble.
> RotJ:
> .Trooper hits Leia in the shoulder with a quick snapshot over 30m away,
> and when Leia was partially covered.
> margin, forces (Ewoks) consisting of targets that are half-human size.
Thats how it should be. The troopers are outnumbered so they have more
targets to shoot out. The ewoks should have had heavier casualties.
rob.wn5
"Shaun" <skel...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:q9EX6.17637$aV1.1...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
DS9 : Nor the Battle to the Strong
A Fed Security officer from the kneeling supported position fires at 2
klingons as they walk slowly down the centre of a tunnel towards her (they
are not shooting at first, but have just killed her partner). She fires
three times and misses with each shot dispite the klingons not moving out
of the way until after the first shot. The range is 5-10m for first shot,
the klingons move the the sides of the tunnel then move back to the centre
and walk forwards firing intermitently. The next two shots miss High left
by at least 2 metres into the junction of cieling and wall, this is at less
than 10m and closer to 5m range. The Siege of AR155 gives even more
examples of Fed officers missing with aimed fire at near point blank range.
There are doubtless more but I use these because in each case the people
firing are Fed Security officers who are in a Battle posting and should be
an example of the *Combat* aiming skills of Fed forces.
Rob Wilson
SirNitram
Say WHAT? You're outnumbered, so you should do even better? Give one
instance of a Fed Trooper doing this. Fnark, give one instance of a RL
trooper doing this! A 'Target rich enviroment' may be a real term, but
it certainly doesn't mean being up to your wossname in midgets with
sticks and bows and rocks is good for your aim. Logic-deficient
rebuttal.
> >
> > Stormtroopers are quite capable soldiers and marksmen. Think before you
> > say something.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Damien Sorresso
> >
> > TITANIA: Ewww! You said if I slept with you I wouldn't have to touch the
> drunk!
> > DUFFMAN: DUFFMAN SAYS A LOTTA THINGS!! OH YEAH!!
--------
Help me! Help me! I have a sucky Email address!
So, then, Bob said "Let there be light", and the fridge light switched
on. It was wierd.
-The Book Of Bob.
Ryan Spickard
news:yxcY6.23481$aV1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Thats how it should be. The troopers are outnumbered so they have more
> targets to shoot out. The ewoks should have had heavier casualties.
More targets means more things trying to kill you, which would tend to lead
towards more stress. More stress would be bad on your aim don't ya think?
Shaun
was the original message anyway?
Shaun <skel...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:yxcY6.23481$aV1.2...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>