Defiant For The Borg? Makes No Sense

[Crazy Eddie]

The anti-Borg tech might have protected the Defiant from phased polaron beams because the shields were of a different configuration ...

The Borg do not use polaron beams. "Different shield configuration" isn't an explanation for this; the shields would have to be designed specifically to counter that particular weapon to have that effect.

Also ... as another poster already wrote, ship systems (even crucial ones at times) suffer damage with the shields up (evidenced on screen on multiple occasions) ... so I fail to see the point of saying that the battle in 'The Search' was identical to the one the Odyssey faced when in fact it was not.

The damage to the "starboard power coupling" is, in fact, identical: both ships suffered damage to the same component, both with their shields up and operating.

The Defiant's shields would have been drained fast...

Speculation since 1) weapons do not "drain" shields and 2) we do not even know WHY Defiant's shields failed. We only know they were as ineffective in this battle as Odyssey's shields. You are free to speculate that they were ineffective for a completely different reason, but they remain ineffective overall.

So even if the shields were up and effective against the bugs weapons...

That's a big "if" that remains to be substantiated. They probably were NOT, which shouldn't be surprising since they were designed to counter the Borg, not the Dominion.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

This is irrelevant because Defiant's shields were definitely up.

I know. That's what I said.

But it's also irrelevant because Captain Keogh order shield power to weapons.

Only AFTER the Jem'hadar had already severely damaged the ship, and then after first rotating the shields through "the entire spectrum" and having no effect. Transferring shield power to weapons is therefore a last resort in the case of the Odyssey; not so in the case of Defiant, whose weapons are already freakishly powerful.

That the Jem'hadar intended to capture Defiant--and not destroy it--is plainly obvious, since they actually took the time to board the ship instead of either ramming it or blowing it in half.

 

[Deks]

It's besides the point if the Borg use polaron beams or not.
It's enough if their weapons had some properties similar to the polaron beams ... which might have allowed protection to begin with.
Also ... if the shields were 'specifically designed to protect against that one thing' then they would have been pretty useless against anything else would they?

It's a well known fact SF modifies their existing tech to incorporate new things.
so the shields on the Defiant might have been of a different configuration in terms that there was something done to them which might have helped in protecting from phased polaron beams.

The 'starboard power coupling' fails on virtually all SF ships at all times.
We saw this on TNG, DS9 and Voyager ... so again I fail to see the point in this particular component being neutralized since it's usually among the things to short out during combat.
You say I'm speculating that the shields were effective?
It's possible they were ineffective ... but the evidence from the episode itself shows otherwise.
Merely because there were some comparable instances to the Odyssey, doesn't imply the shields were useless to begin with ... otherwise there is a strong possibility that Sisko would have diverted power from shields into weapons or another system which might have aided them in another way.

Speculation?
When I mentioned that weapons drain shields, I meant it in a way that the shields lose integrity when hit which is measured in % by SF (and virtually every other race).
Also ... the Borg tractor beams drained the Enterprise shields fairly quickly in both of it's encounters ... and that can be considered a weapon as well (depends on your perspectiv on things ... so I would again counter with the premise that weapons CAN drain shields ... and were evidenced at least once to achieve this very purpose ... more specifically by the Borg).

You are saying I'm the one speculating?
Defiants shields were up (Sisko ordered them to be raised) and as evidenced by the Romulan officer later on were also in the process of failing (after suffering damage from Domininon weapons).
When shields are mentioned that they are failing it means they are effective in preventing from enemies weapons to get through but are losing integrity fast and are about to be breached.

 

[T'Girl]

When the TNG enterprise first encountered the borg, the borg fired a beam that, according to Q, was designed to "... drain your shields."

 

[Crazy Eddie]

It's besides the point if the Borg use polaron beams or not.
It's enough if their weapons had some properties similar to the polaron beams

And those properties are...?

if the shields were 'specifically designed to protect against that one thing'

No, just configured to protect against polaron beams. It's possible to reconfigure shields with a few keystrokes to defend better against different types of energies, once you know the nature of the weapon being used against you. This is exactly what was tried on the Odyssey by rotating shield harmonics, and is also exactly what is done to shields when trying to neutralize Borg weaponry (with varrying degrees of success).

That neither the Odyssey nor Defiant were able to overcome Dominion weapons suggests they have nothing in common with the Borg. Best evidence for this comes from the fact that even a Galaxy class starship is capable of partially deflecting Borg tractor beams and pulse weapons for a limited time, where Dominion weapons blast right through no matter what you do.

IOW: the only way Jem'hadar weapons are in ANY WAY similar to Borg weapons is if the Borg suddenly start using Jem'hadar weapons for some reason.

It's a well known fact SF modifies their existing tech to incorporate new things.

Which is exactly why Starfleet shields became effective LATER, after capturing and analyzing a Jem'hadar ship. They certainly weren't in The Search, before those modifications had occurred.

Of course, the major thing to consider is that the reason Jem'hadar weapons were so effective is probably because the Dominion went out of their way to infiltrate the Federation and steal their technological secrets so they could reconfigure their weapons to be more effective against them. This obviously would have included any experimental shield technology being bounced around the anti-Borg thinktanks (since those groups probably aren't classified given the Borg's disinclination for clandestine intelligence gathering).

The 'starboard power coupling' fails on virtually all SF ships at all times.

Sure. Just not spontaneously. On Odyssey it was put out of action by enemy fire, and it is clearly intended to be the same case on Defiant.

Merely because there were some comparable instances to the Odyssey, doesn't imply the shields were useless to begin with ...

That's exactly what it IMPLIES. The question is whether or not that implication is supportable or not: is there any reason to assume they weren't, other than speculation about Jem'hadar weapons possible similarity to Borg weapons (such similarity itself being speculation without any support of its own)?

I don't think so. In fact, we have Weyoun expressing surprise in "A Call To Arms" that DS9's shields were actually effective against Jem'hadar weapons, and he explicitly says that Starfleet shields HAD NEVER BEEN EFFECTIVE BEFORE THEN. This obviously includes their first encounter with the Defiant.

When I mentioned that weapons drain shields, I meant it in a way that the shields lose integrity when hit which is measured in % by SF (and virtually every other race).

Which is damage TO shields. Draining energy FROM them is something that is done only by the Borg. Furthermore, there is no reported power loss to the shields in either battle, and Defiant's shield failure was a result of damage to the ship itself, not the shields.

Also ... the Borg tractor beams drained the Enterprise shields fairly quickly in both of it's encounters ...

Except in the second encounter, where rotating shield modulation DID prevent the tractor beam from locking on for several seconds. Odyssey tried this exact same trick on the Jem'hadar, but to no avail. This directly implies two completely different systems at work here.

When shields are mentioned that they are failing...

It was not mentioned that they "are failing." T'rul simply says "Main power is offline! The shields have collapsed!" Seconds earlier, Odo mentioned as much to Kira: when main power goes down, shields go down; immediately after the failure of the shields, the Jem'hadar board the ship.

Prior to this, the shields seem to have no effect at all in blocking weapon fire, in fact Sisko gives the order to abandon ship almost immediately after the shields fail, when Defiant is already on fire from stem to stern.

 

[Saquist]

Disagree. It was the combined output of several ships, firing phasers, and both form of torpedos that dug a hole and eventual destroyed the FC cube. If anything StarTrek has shown time and again that torpedos really aren't that powerful, I've read estimates of explosive yields of hundreds of mega-tonnes, but what we're seeing seem more like a few tens of tonnes of chemical explosive. The Defiant isn't a torpedo boat, it's a gunship.

Defiant is definitely designed around it's Guns first.

This is irrelevant because Defiant's shields were definitely up.

I know. That's what I said.

I am, of course, aware of that.

Only AFTER the Jem'hadar had already severely damaged the ship, and then after first rotating the shields through "the entire spectrum" and having no effect. Transferring shield power to weapons is therefore a last resort in the case of the Odyssey; not so in the case of Defiant, whose weapons are already freakishly powerful.

What's your point?
I did not contradict any of these facts.
The shields weren't up.

That the Jem'hadar intended to capture Defiant--and not destroy it--is plainly obvious, since they actually took the time to board the ship instead of either ramming it or blowing it in half.

Yet this still describes no similarity of events between Defiant and Odyssey.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

That the Jem'hadar intended to capture Defiant--and not destroy it--is plainly obvious, since they actually took the time to board the ship instead of either ramming it or blowing it in half.

Yet this still describes no similarity of events between Defiant and Odyssey.

The majority of the battle was similar, only the endings were different. If the Jem'hadar wanted to they could have rammed the Defiant and destroyed it; they captured it instead. If the Jem'hadar wanted to they could have boarded the Odyssey and captured it; they rammed it instead.

The leadup to both outcomes is the same: they shot right through both ships deflectors and riddled them with holes, ultimately crippling them and leaving those vessels at their mercy.

 

[Saquist]

The majority of the battle was similar?

1. Okay. Both ships were struck with no defenses
2. Defiant actually got it's shields to work. Odyssey did not.
3. The attack ships maintained fire on the warp nacelle of both ships
4. Defiant destroyed one of the adversaries, Odyssey did not.
5. Defiant loss Main Power, Odyssey did not.
6. Defiant was boarded, the Odyssey was destroyed.

It seems more dissimilar to me.
Defiant had a fighting chance.

Note;
It was never said that the attack ships fired through Defiants deflectors.
If the transporters were blocked by Defiant's shields then so are the weapons.

 

[Herkimer Jitty]

If the transporters were blocked by Defiant's shields then so are the weapons.

Allow me to point out a potential logical error with a metaphor.

While a gas mask doesn't protect you from bullets, that doesn't mean it can't protect you from inhaling gasses which aren't alltogether good.

The point being of course, that just because it can defend against one thing, doesn't mean it can defend against the other.

 

[Saquist]

If the transporters were blocked by Defiant's shields then so are the weapons.

Allow me to point out a potential logical error with a metaphor.

While a gas mask doesn't protect you from bullets, that doesn't mean it can't protect you from inhaling gasses which aren't alltogether good.

The point being of course, that just because it can defend against one thing, doesn't mean it can defend against the other.

Perhaps you are actually pointing out your disagreement instead of logic.

Logic dictates one can be altered to penetrate the shields but not necessarily the same modification can do the same with a different device. But we do know frequency match will do just that.

Logic dictates if the shields weren't working then they should have been preparing for boarding instead of getting caught off Guard. The crew of 5 attack ships is definitely a match for a crew of 50 to 75.

No, Sisko was resolute on either facing the enemy weapons hot or getting the Port Nacelle back on line to escape the engage. You can't do either without shields. It's ludacris to assume the Jem' Hadar poleron beams were penetrating the shields. It's even contradictory to the next engagement in "The Die is Cast". How do you expect that they found a way to counter those weapons with no information when most believe it was the attack ship captured by Sisko that brought them that information...well into the Dominion War.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Defiant actually got it's shields to work. Odyssey did not.

Incorrect. Both of their shields were up. Both of their shields were ineffective.

Defiant destroyed one of the adversaries, Odyssey did not.

Irrelevant since reinforcements arrived to replace the destroyed attack ship.

Defiant loss Main Power, Odyssey did not.

Half right. Shortly before being rammed, Keogh was told "Our tactical control systems are down. We've lost all power to phasers." At the end, this puts Odyssey in the same boat as Defiant: shields are useless, no warp drive, no power to weapons. Odyssey seemed to have impulse power still operational, though, which is more than we could say for Defiant.

It seems more dissimilar to me.
Defiant had a fighting chance.

Only because the Jem'hadar CHOSE not to destroy it. Tactically it was soundly defeated just like Odyssey; if they wanted to, they could have either rammed it like before or simply blown it to bits.

It was never said that the attack ships fired through Defiants deflectors.

Yes it was. In "A call to Arms" Weyoun mentions that this is the first time Starfleet shields have EVER been effective against Jem'hadar weapons. Obviously, that includes The Search.

If the transporters were blocked by Defiant's shields then so are the weapons.

False presumption. Borg transporters are not blocked by shields, and the Jem'hadar weapons used against the odyssey were not blocked by her shields.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Logic dictates one can be altered to penetrate the shields but not necessarily the same modification can do the same with a different device. But we do know frequency match will do just that.

What we do NOT know is if the Jem'hadar used a frequency match to penetrate Starfleet shields. They don't seem to. Unless you can demonstrate that phased polaron beams can be coupled with a transporter device, there is no logical reason to assume shields can't defend against their transporter beams.

Logic dictates if the shields weren't working then they should have been preparing for boarding instead of getting caught off Guard.

Logic dictates nothing of the kind. They knew the Jem'hadar could penetrate their shields with their weapons; what they didn't know was whether or not the Jem'hadar could penetrate the cloak.

 

[SilentP]

Defiant actually got it's shields to work. Odyssey did not.

Incorrect. Both of their shields were up. Both of their shields were ineffective.

I'm pretty sure that the Defiant suffered a lot of hits while cloaked and then while charging it's shields. So even if it did get it's shields up, I doubt it would be at full effectiveness, regardless of the effect against Dominion weapons.

 

[Saquist]

Incorrect. Both of their shields were up. Both of their shields were ineffective.

No it's not incorrect. Defiant's shields were resisting the poleran beam. Odyssey never did.
You're thus wrong.

Irrelevant since reinforcements arrived to replace the destroyed attack ship.

We are judging the similarities by direct comparison. Of course it's relevant if Defiant destroyed and adversary. Manufacturing an argument on the spot will not persuade me to understand your position.

Half right.

It is a factually independent and true statement. If you wish to add to it that is your perogative.

Odyssey seemed to have impulse power still operational, though, which is more than we could say for Defiant.

I remember nothing of Defiant being without impulse power.

Only because the Jem'hadar CHOSE not to destroy it.

The fact that Defiant had a fighting chance had nothing to do with the wish to board the vessel because that has nothing to do with the initial circumstances that would allowe them to do that.

In order to board the ship they had to defeat its shields.
Odyssey didn't have a chance, no warp Drive, No shields, and weapons that appeared mostly ineffective.

Defiant's fighting chance was directly related to it's far superior fire power and it's shields.

Yes it was.

This is false.

In "A call to Arms" Weyoun mentions that this is the first time Starfleet shields have EVER been effective against Jem'hadar weapons. Obviously, that includes The Search.

Weyoun says Federation shields have have always proven ineffective against our weapons.

So...Weyoun is wrong. Your wish to ignore the evidence does not erase it. It's merely illogical bias to an argument.

If the transporters were blocked by Defiant's shields then so are the weapons.

False presumption. Borg transporters are not blocked by shields, and the Jem'hadar weapons used against the odyssey were not blocked by her shields.[/QUOTE]

You're right.
Borg weapons had to adapt the shield frequencies and as soon as that happened they could beam through. The attack ships weapons were blocked on multiple occuasions.

I'm pretty sure that the Defiant suffered a lot of hits while cloaked and then while charging it's shields. So even if it did get it's shields up, I doubt it would be at full effectiveness, regardless of the effect against Dominion weapons.

Newtypealpha has not used reasonable deduction for this posibilty but I believe it to be the most logical possibility.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Defiant's shields were resisting the poleran beam.

This is based on what?

Odyssey never did.

This is based on what?

Irrelevant since reinforcements arrived to replace the destroyed attack ship.

We are judging the similarities by direct comparison.[/quote]
YOU are, perhaps. I am judging similarities by causal relationships in the chain of events. Since the destroyed vessel was immediately replaced, its destruction has no causal power on the outcome of the battle; it is the same as if that ship was never destroyed. It might tell you something about Defiant's maximum phaser yield relative to the Odyssey, but it doesn't tell you anything about its defensive capability vis a vis the Jem'hadar.

For example: we have in WW-II confirmed evidence of German jet-powered fighter planes being successfully engaged and destroyed by piston-driven P-51 Mustangs. The Me-262 is significantly faster and better armed than the Bf-109, but this fact does not explain why the P51s were able to succesfully engage them. A crucial difference can only be determined by direct comparison: something the Mustang can do to the Me-262 that gives it a decisive advantage. In the WW-II example, it's the simple fact that the slower aircraft has a better range and a superior turn radius; in the DS9 example, it's the fact that Jem'hadar weapons can easily penetrate Starfleet shields.

It is a factually independent and true statement.

Well, it is a factually independent half-truth, sure. Defiant lost main power at about the same juncture in the battle that Odyssey was destroyed. One might as well compare a plane crash to an automobile accident and claim that the car crash was less lethal because it didn't burst into flames; this is a half truth at best if the driver and pilot are both dead.

I remember nothing of Defiant being without impulse power.

That's generally what a loss of main power implies, hence Sisko's order to abandon ship.

Weyoun says Federation shields have have always proven ineffective against our weapons.

So...Weyoun is wrong.

Heh.. because when Weyoun disagrees with Saquist, Weyoun must be wrong.

Borg weapons had to adapt the shield frequencies and as soon as that happened they could beam through. The attack ships weapons were blocked on multiple occuasions.

Of course they were. Just not until AFTER "A Call To Arms."

Or are you actually prepared to give some evidence that Defiant's shields were any more effective than a sheet of construction paper in The Search?

 

[Saquist]

This is based on what?

Based on the Episode Jem' Hadar in which weapons fire passes through Odyssey's untouched shield and blows out the port nacelle. Damage reports confirm the weapons didn't just appear to cause damage. The report includes attempted counter measures which were ineffective.

If you didn't know this then you should not be engaged in this discussion.
Rather you should be making inquiries not declaratives.

YOU are, perhaps.

Yes I am.

I am judging similarities by causal relationships in the chain of events.

Traditationlly, a discussion requires two people.
What ever casual relationships you seek to compare is purely your perogative but you then are offering rejoinder to yourself, rather than addressing a reply.

but it doesn't tell you anything about its defensive capability vis a vis the Jem'hadar.

I appreciate that you are attempting to place my post in the context of the shield defense but it was a direct reply to your imprecise comentary on the similarities of the battle, not shield defense.

in the DS9 example, it's the fact that Jem'hadar weapons can easily penetrate Starfleet shields.

While that is a fact.
Juxtaposed with other facts a contradiction remains

Well, it is a factually independent half-truth, sure.

It is an independent fully factual statement.
No modifier required.

That's generally what a loss of main power implies

Generally? How?
(State Canon Sources)
I find this exceedingly and glaringly false on more than just a few episodes and movies.

Heh.. because when Weyoun disagrees with Saquist, Weyoun must be wrong.

Weyoun is not disagreeing with Saquist. Weyoun is disagreeing with canon. If Weyoun protest that Federation shields have always...proven useless against their weapons and Defiant previously displays to the Dominion direct contradiction...then ....

...Weyoun-is-wrong....
It is peculiar how your senses miss the direct logic invovled. Do you require further explanation or is this merely a case of an inconvient truth?

Of course they were. Just not until AFTER "A Call To Arms."

That would be a false statement, proven by canon.

Or are you actually prepared to give some evidence

That word has been given.
I am not responsible for correcting your impaired perception.

 

[All Seeing Eye]

If anything StarTrek has shown time and again that torpedos really aren't that powerful, I've read estimates of explosive yields of hundreds of mega-tonnes, but what we're seeing seem more like a few tens of tonnes of chemical explosive.

You have to realise that when the torpedoes explode they are exploding in a vacuum therefore what appears to be only a small explosion is in fact quite a powerful one. We can also assume torpedoes are designed to focus the explosive force on the target.
Now another major factor you must consider is that Starships, at least Federation ones are made from Duranium and we really dont know how strong Duranium is and how strong in particular it would be against a matter/antimatter explosion in the vacuum of space.

Once a torpedo penetrates the hull and explodes we can assume the destruction is much greater. A torpedo beamed aboard a Borg ship in Voyager saw the ship destroyed in one blast. In Voyager they fired a torpedo at the nacelle of the Equinox and the nacelle was annihilated.

Torpedoes are extremely powerful weapons and can do immense damage, most of that damage is done if the torpedoes detonate within the ships hull, on the outside of the hull it's a vacuum and therefore there is no shockwave to cause greater damage but there's still power there to blow chunks of hull off.

In first contact Torpedoes probably had smaller effect because they were exploding in a vacuum and the Borg cube likely had a thick layer on the outside preventing torpedoes reaching the internal atmosphere. When they began firing on one location the thick layer eventually got blown away and torpedoes started detonating within the Borg ship itself causing greater and greater damage and likely hitting vital systems thus annihilating the Borg vessel.

 

[Saquist]

The torpedo is likely a shield buster weapon. If so that would make it's effectiveness in side or against the hull irrelevant.

G2K or Darkstar from the Star Wars/Star Trek Tech Assessment has noted that torpedoes leave the tube with one level of brightness and shortly after luanch increase in magnitude, usually before clearing the saucer. It's the most consistent special effect of the TNG onward era inluding ENT.

His canon reseach shows that this is likely the shield that all torpedos are equippd with. I suspect this shield is the key component to the weapon which we know to be a matter anti-matter explosion. This shield could serve two purposes, 1) decaying the neutrinos into charged particles that would allow the harnesting of the energy that would normallly escape. 2) The shield could also serve as a tactical device to either apply as much of the power detonated across as much of the shield's guarded energy spectrum or it could be used to match that spectrum to penetrate the shield.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

Based on the Episode Jem' Hadar in which weapons fire passes through Odyssey's untouched shield and blows out the port nacelle. Damage reports confirm the weapons didn't just appear to cause damage. The report includes attempted counter measures which were ineffective.

Good. Now answer the OTHER part of the question: on what do you base the statement that Defiant's shields were more effective than Odyssey's shields?

YOU are, perhaps.

Yes I am.

That's a shame.

I appreciate that you are attempting to place my post in the context of the shield defense but it was a direct reply to your imprecise comentary on the similarities of the battle, not shield defense.

They were similar as a matter of outcomes, in which case the effectiveness of the shields needs to be explained in that context. If the shields WERE more effective, the outcomes would have been different.

While that is a fact.
Juxtaposed with other facts a contradiction remains

There is no contradiction at all. Defiant's shields WERE NOT EFFECTIVE against the Jem'hadar. This is consistent with all other established facts, including Weyoun's line in "A Call to Arms."

Weyoun is not disagreeing with Saquist. Weyoun is disagreeing with canon. If Weyoun protest that Federation shields have always...proven useless against their weapons and Defiant previously displays to the Dominion direct contradiction...

I'll ask you again: what is your basis for stating that Defiant's shields ARE effective against the Jem'hadar? They don't seem to be, not in The Search, not in The Die is Cast. Not once prior to "A Call to Arms."

Again: are you going to back this statement up with any actual reference or are you going to keep changing the subject until I get bored and ignore you?

 

[Saquist]

Good. Now answer the OTHER part of the question: on what do you base the statement that Defiant's shields were more effective than Odyssey's shields?

On What Base was Defiant's shields effective:
a. Defiant's shields are effective untill proven otherwise by canon.

b.Odyssey's shield were ineffective: Proven by canon.

No logical syllogism can draw the conclusion Defiant's shields were ineffective. Defiant sustaining damage with shields up is not enough evidence to draw the absolute conclusion that Defiant suffered the same shield casualty as Odyssey as long as probable and possible options remain.

That's a shame.

No, that was the objective of the comparison you brought forth for argument. If you regret that action you need not voice guilt.

They were similar as a matter of outcomes, in which case the effectiveness of the shields needs to be explained in that context. If the shields WERE more effective, the outcomes would have been different.

You are using the most imprecise arguement you possibily could muster. The Out Comes...were not similar. Defiant was not destroyed and Odyssey was not boarded.

If the shields WERE more effective, the outcomes would have been different

That statement is a fallacy. The fallacy is a result of imprecision in your argument which simiply states "effective shields prevent boarding and ships' destruction," (an indefinite article of faith).

There is no contradiction at all. Defiant's shields WERE NOT EFFECTIVE against the Jem'hadar. This is consistent with all other established facts, including Weyoun's line in "A Call to Arms."

It is not consistent at all in any of the episodes.
The episode in question does not establish ineffectiveness.
I'm not prone to include your speculation as fact, newtypealpha.

I'll ask you again: what is your basis for stating that Defiant's shields ARE effective against the Jem'hadar? They don't seem to be, not in The Search, not in The Die is Cast. Not once prior to "A Call to Arms."

My Dear...newtypealpha,
I regret to inform you that I don't deal in apparent magnitudes on this level of discussion. You must provide an absolute value. Apparent is not good enough.

1)With that addressing The Search Part Two...
2)The Die is Cast makes litteral mention of the shields holding by Eddington.
3) In Starship Down Defiant's shield are visibly accounted for.
4)Call to Arms it's self proves that While Dax says the shields are at 35% the three Jem'Hadar appear to be striking bare hull.

Again: are you going to back this statement up with any actual reference or are you going to keep changing the subject until I get bored and ignore you?

Is either really of any serious consequence? You beg for reference but you yourself have access to the very same information I do. I am not incorrect. It is you that have not checked and rechecked your statements against the canon.

This is merely a debating excercise for myself.
I did not engage you, it was you that initiated the exchange. As such it is your option to withdraw. I am not inclined to accomadate nor enable what I can only identify as either undisciplined motivation (lazy) or single-minded contentiousness.