 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Think about what happens to the bad guy at the end.
Think about where he is when it happens.
Whoops.
I don't think it's a spoiler to say I'm still surprised they have deflector
shields that will ward off antimatter-based photon torpedoes and
particle-beam phasers, but they still rip chunks of the hull off when they
get hit by a passing piece of scrap. Why don't people equip their warships
with gattling guns and cannons?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I don't think it's a spoiler to say I'm still surprised they have
> deflector shields that will ward off antimatter-based photon torpedoes
> and particle-beam phasers, but they still rip chunks of the hull off
> when they get hit by a passing piece of scrap. Why don't people equip
> their warships with gattling guns and cannons?
Oh? I thought the whole point of the deflector shields was to prevent
the ship from getting hit by space dust and larger bits of rubble as it
ploughed through the universe at transluminal velocities.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook wrote:
> Oh? I thought the whole point of the deflector shields was to prevent
> the ship from getting hit by space dust and larger bits of rubble as it
> ploughed through the universe at transluminal velocities.
It's hard to say about warp speed, but they're certainly supposed to be a
wartime defense, given how often the captian yells "Shields up!" whenever an
enemy ship uncloaks or something. They don't seem to actually work against
physical attacks in any of the movies, tho.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > I don't think it's a spoiler to say I'm still surprised they have
> > deflector shields that will ward off antimatter-based photon torpedoes
> > and particle-beam phasers, but they still rip chunks of the hull off
> > when they get hit by a passing piece of scrap. Why don't people equip
> > their warships with gattling guns and cannons?
>
> Oh? I thought the whole point of the deflector shields was to prevent
> the ship from getting hit by space dust and larger bits of rubble as it
> ploughed through the universe at transluminal velocities.
They seem to also use the shields for this, at least when it suits the plot!
I always get bothered by the opening credits to Voyager, when the ship flies
through what appears to be a dense dust cloud (supposedly a nebula of some
kind, although what nebula would be that dense?), and the dust sweeps around it
prettily... I always think it must be playing hell with their hull!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Dude... I thought nerds being obsessed with Star Trek was just a
stereotype. I didn't realise people actually *watch* this stuff! o_O
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Dude... I thought nerds being obsessed with Star Trek was just a
> stereotype. I didn't realise people actually *watch* this stuff! o_O
To a *real* nerd, this is an absolute *must*. Even if it hurts.
If you can't bear the pain of watching it, and can't stand the pressure of
making a fool of yourself in public by dressing in red pyjamas and wearing
pointed ears, then you're not nerdish enough to be one of them... being a nerd
is a privilege, which only the toughest can obtain...
:P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> To a *real* nerd, this is an absolute *must*. Even if it hurts.
>
> If you can't bear the pain of watching it, and can't stand the pressure of
> making a fool of yourself in public by dressing in red pyjamas and wearing
> pointed ears, then you're not nerdish enough to be one of them... being a nerd
> is a privilege, which only the toughest can obtain...
>
> :P
WTF-O-Meter: 4.5
Somebody should *frame* this and put it on the wall or something. :-P
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Dude... I thought nerds being obsessed with Star Trek was just a
> stereotype. I didn't realise people actually *watch* this stuff! o_O
If nobody watched it, I seriously doubt it would have racked up 700 episodes and
11 movies... ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Bill Pragnell wrote:
> If nobody watched it, I seriously doubt it would have racked up 700 episodes and
> 11 movies... ;-)
In a similar way, there must be *somebody* somewhere who watches Oprah.
[Hard to comprehend as that might be...]
Of course, Star Trek isn't nearly as lame as Oprah. Star Trek is
actually mildly amusing at times. But I didn't think anybody was that
fussed about it...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/14/2009 6:09 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Bill Pragnell wrote:
>
>> If nobody watched it, I seriously doubt it would have racked up 700
>> episodes and
>> 11 movies... ;-)
>
> In a similar way, there must be *somebody* somewhere who watches Oprah.
> [Hard to comprehend as that might be...]
Middle-aged white housewives. My wife's not middle-aged yet, but she
loves Oprah.
(Actually, in all honesty, the show really isn't that bad).
> Of course, Star Trek isn't nearly as lame as Oprah. Star Trek is
> actually mildly amusing at times. But I didn't think anybody was that
> fussed about it...
You're talking about the people who violently opposed a video game
(Starfleet Command 2) because they got the stats on the spaceship
movement slightly wrong.
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
