Do you have to be "dumb" to like Star Trek?
- Thread starter Cepstrum
- Start date
- Status
Well, they're posing as Jedi, so why aren't they embracing all the Jedi ideals?
Jedi in the movies always removed their hoods. Hell, Obi-Wan removed his hood when he entered the cantina, for fuck sakes. So why do these Jedi wannabes refuse to take their hoods off on the grounds of "we're Jedi"?
Opinions are like belly buttons, some are in, some are out, but everybody has one. -Sector 7
My opinion is that I enjoy both and think very poorly of those who would fight over a television show or movie.
IMO, those who are writing such "long diatribes" or supposed theses are doing so-- not to present logical arguments-- rather because their feelings are hurt ("butthurt" was a good description
).
My opinion is that I enjoy both and think very poorly of those who would fight over a television show or movie.
IMO, those who are writing such "long diatribes" or supposed theses are doing so-- not to present logical arguments-- rather because their feelings are hurt ("butthurt" was a good description
).
Exactly. They tend to behave in even more one-dimensional/monochromatic ways than the one-dimensional/monochromatic characters they're emulating.
I'm being a smart-ass so please don't go on a lengthy diatribe about these characters are at least two-dimensional.
Thanks.
Going back to putting ointment on my hurt butt now.
Maybe because they're Orthodox Jedi?
^^^
I know, and it's my fault for starting this. I never meant the thread to be anything about Star Wars; rather, as I've stated, I wanted to query fellow scientists and engineers about whether Trek's technobabble and occasion misuse of scientific terms/concenpts (eg, "gigawatts per hour" when I think they meant just gigawatts or gigajoules per hour) was bothersome. It isn't to me, and I actually like to pretend it's all real.
The only reason Star Wars came up was because a devoted SW fan and other members of his cohort write long diatribes decrying Trek, ridiculing its fans, and applying science to " prove" that SW is more plausible. But that was only supposed to be the catalyst for what I really wanted to talk about (and that wasn't Star Wars but Trek's scientific realism/pseudoscience).
Obviously I messed up in the OP, but I've tried to since clarify and apologize. My principle question has still largely been unaddressed, and the only thing I've accomplished is to stir up bad feelings.
Maybe I should ask a moderator to put a lock on this thread. While it has been interesting to hear a variety of opinions, I feel awful for starting this exchange of attacks.
Let me once again apologize and solicit answers to my intended question:
Does Trek's use (and misuse) of science bother my fellow scientists and engineers, or even those not formally trained in science?
For me, the answer is absolutely not! I love escaping to the fictional 24th century in three series that attempt to maintain a veneer of plausibility, rationality, and that take place in "our" universe (as opposed to an entirely fictional place, like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings) and promotes a somewhat idealized and optimistic (if unrealistic) view of future humanity where war, poverty, greed, and racism don't exist (on Earth, at least, and so we're told).
So, does anyone care to weigh in on this issue? Do you find it ridiculous that in 300 years we'll possess such seemingly "magical" technology as replicators, transporters, FTL travel, a widespread interstellar Federation with Earth in the forefront, and a completely changed dynamic of society on Earth? Or do you cringe when bad science is uttered, Voyager keeps replicating shuttles, people get healed (and younger) via the transporter, the artificial gravity (almost) never goes offline ( though many other things do), consoles explode, and the UT starts working before communication with an unknown species begins?
I chalk it up to someone from the 1600s looking at my iPod Touch, spacecraft, airplanes, satellites that can read license plates, nuclear power, and even freezers. Who was it that said some to the effect that the distinction between technology and magic becomes blurred for most people of the technology we use today? That's why I can accept Trek's tech. It appears like magic sometimes, but at least it tries to remain internal consistency despite over 700 shows, dozens of (non technical) writers, producers, directors, and actors.
So, once again, please forgive me for the poor way in which I introduced this (I was still in shock from reading the belittling hatred of some SW fans such as the notorious Mr. Wong). I hope we can go forward to discuss what I intended to. If not, perhaps I'll have to start over with a new thread (I probably will; I doubt many people to revisit this one anymore
).Sorry to all. Maybe we should create two new threads: one for my questions above and another about how some SW fans despise Trek and Trekkies.
That is an interesting question, which crossed my mind as well... I'm thinking it's just something they made up for their religion... why, I dunno.... maybe just to have something to toss in people's faces in order to get more attention to themselves, like asking them to remove it and thus opening them up for saying no and then explaining why, ie: their "Religion"
I'm not making fun of it.... that's just what makes sense to me.
lol... true, but I doubt many would go to a job interview dressed like a klingon and acting like a klingon.... the only time I can think of acting like a klingon during a job interview which would be tolerated would be applying for security position during a ST convention position.
Last edited:
Can I take a nap while it goes on and just assume it ended in bloodshed?
Depends on the size of their respective corpora cavernosa.
"Are we learning yet?" -John Connor, Terminator 2: Judgement Day
In other words, have you learned that Trek fans can also write ridiculously long diatribes about 'my fictional universe can beat up your fictional universe'? They not only CAN, they DO.
How is debate manifesting in insecurity?
Eh? People dress up as Klingons (and still, only a minority of Trek fans) for fun. Who seriously thinks that Trek is a real religion?
lol... I am no medical doctor/expert in human physiology, but I think most doctors probably would laugh out loud at the suggestion of a Vulcan neck pinch. It's pure fantasy made up by the 60s TOS producers, and no healthy thinking/reasoning person would really believe in it.
I think personally that Star Wars fans lend more to the negative stereotype of sci-fi fans in general. Some sound frankly mentally ill, and that's not meant as a facetious comment.
.
Whatever. Wake me up when my whiskey gets here.
The SD.Net forum it self is (overall) not that drastically different to this forum, with some genuinely cool people mixing in with a few pompous assclowns, but Wong's reasoning is fatally flawed because BOTH UNIVERSES ARE COMPLETELY MADE UP AND WHY SHOULD SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING APPLY TO THEM WHEN THEY'VE BEEN PRODUCED BY PRODUCTION CREWS THAT MAINLY DON'T UNDERSTAND SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, WITH THE ACT OF PLOT AND ARTISTIC SFX TRUMPING ALL?!
Sure the UFP seems partially socialist, Starfleet is not purely dedicated to war, and given Star Trek's vast output with nearly a dozen movies and scores of TV sesons, the writing/story quality is bound to be inconsistant, however something's amiss about somebody's state of mind when you seriously hate a set of shows and movies that are mostly intended as light entertainment and attempt to seriously dismantle them with mathematics when none of it is really real.
Sure the UFP seems partially socialist, Starfleet is not purely dedicated to war, and given Star Trek's vast output with nearly a dozen movies and scores of TV sesons, the writing/story quality is bound to be inconsistant, however something's amiss about somebody's state of mind when you seriously hate a set of shows and movies that are mostly intended as light entertainment and attempt to seriously dismantle them with mathematics when none of it is really real.
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
