You were crying over being called 'boy' in a Foghorn-Leghorn bit, and, while being upset at how you're insulted, are calling me an asshole virgin British child? You only got that first
I mocked you, in so much that I did, because you came in here to 'win' this discussion based on nothing more than your own fanboi interpretation of the TNG technical manual, and swang your ePenis around a bit when anyone had a disagreement with your assessment. You wanted to claim a level of 'Treknical authority' here, in a very definitive sense...
And, when confronted that your arguments either made no sense (they would armor the secondary hull, but not the nacelle) or simply didn't match what we know of and seen from Trek (armor will STOP attacks from enemy vessels), you took a huge share of personal offense.
I'm going to tell you something, compared to several people on this group, I'm a young'un, and I've been doing this stuff since the 1980s. I deal with guys who worked on the actual shows and movies
, and have every right to take me on their knee and tell me of Treknology on how it was 'back then', when the Enterprise ran on hamster-power and the hull was carved from the finest mesopotaniac stone.
And, like I said, there's people who beat me to the punch on this material, as fans, by more than a decade. When they tell me I've screwed something, they're probably right, and I gotta rethink what I'm doing and why.
But when someone's told you you screwed something up, you threw a little hissy and claimed I don't get laid. In fact, I'm going to have sex with my wife tonight just
to piss you off (angry sex is the best). In the meantime, maybe you should rethink your
approach on things, copiche?