Star trek Versus Star Wars...which is better & why?

[TIC TAC]

There are some aspects of this conversation that remind me of people in the 13th century arguing about just how flat the world is or exactly just how impossible it is for humans to build a "flying machine". Sure there are some universal laws of physics that are very hard to discount when trying to explain the advance technology of either Star Trek or Star Wars however to assume contemporary science “has it all figured out” is a little ignorant. Revisions to our understanding of what is possible and was isn’t, changes on a daily basis. Sometimes hourly. This is a long way of saying I’m willing to accept that there is a possibility our current science knowledge could be radically altered by discoveries in the near future. Discoveries that might make the concepts of warp drive / hyper drive, transporters, phasers & light sabers much easier to believe.

[Avatar]

Not to mention that the mere fact of their presence within sci-fi encourages people to look for ways of making it a reality.

--A

[TIC TAC]

Not to mention that the mere fact of their presence within sci-fi encourages people to look for ways of making it a reality.

--A

I completely agree.

[A Gunslinger]

You all realize the star trek geeks have won the battel for worl domination. What is a cell phone other than a OS "communicator", flip top included! Also, the black berry looks alot like a tricorder, does it not?

Show me a light sabre...anyone?

[I'm Murrin]

You sure about that? I coulda sworn it was forcefield type things...

Picard showed one of the people from the past in First Contact that the windows were forcefields. That might be where you're getting it from.

But it's stated in numerous episodes and in Trek fact books that the windows are transparent aluminum. Sure, First Contact shows us a forefield, but that doesn't make all windows fields.

I was not saying that made it so; I was simply pointing to an instance that might have been the source of (apparently) Avatar's misconception. He was not wrong to think so, because it was presented as fact in that case; he was simply unaware that it contradicted other information.

[Loredoctor]

There are some aspects of this conversation that remind me of people in the 13th century arguing about just how flat the world is or exactly just how impossible it is for humans to build a "flying machine". Sure there are some universal laws of physics that are very hard to discount when trying to explain the advance technology of either Star Trek or Star Wars however to assume contemporary science “has it all figured out” is a little ignorant.

You're moving the goalpost. The debate is about ST being regarded as some bastion of scientific accuracy. You can't argue that ST is scientifically accurate just because in 100 years someone 'might' invent a warp drive.

What is a cell phone other than a OS "communicator", flip top included! Also, the black berry looks alot like a tricorder, does it not?

As far as I know, the communicator was always meant to represent a futuristic walkie-talkie. It's more believable to accept that mobile phones were the natural evolution of Bell's invention than just because Kirk spoke to his ship using some prop.

[TIC TAC]

(Loremaster) You're moving the goalpost. The debate is about ST being regarded as some bastion of scientific accuracy. You can't argue that ST is scientifically accurate just because in 100 years someone 'might' invent a warp drive.

I understand your point LM. I'm guessing that the perception people have about ST science is largely based on what most people would compare it to. I'm guessing quite a few people either missed or slept through 2001. Heck I'm betting when held up to close scrutiny Alien may end up being more technologically accurate than Star Trek, or at least more believable given the current state of affairs in space travel but I think we all have to admit that there is a very large pile of steaming, stinking science fiction out there that hardly bothers to keep themselves in check technologically. As long as muscle dude can spray the ugly Martians with a midi gun someone is going to watch and enjoy. I guess it’s just the natural way of things.

[Loredoctor]

(Loremaster) You're moving the goalpost. The debate is about ST being regarded as some bastion of scientific accuracy. You can't argue that ST is scientifically accurate just because in 100 years someone 'might' invent a warp drive.

I understand your point LM. I'm guessing that the perception people have about ST science is largely based on what most people would compare it to. I'm guessing quite a few people either missed or slept through 2001. Heck I'm betting when held up to close scrutiny Alien may end up being more technologically accurate than Star Trek, or at least more believable given the current state of affairs in space travel but I think we all have to admit that there is a very large pile of steaming, stinking science fiction out there that hardly bothers to keep themselves in check technologically. As long as muscle dude can spray the ugly Martians with a midi gun someone is going to watch and enjoy. I guess it’s just the natural way of things.

Good post. I might comment on what I highlighted. DOn't get me wrong, ST is far from bad sci-fi. It's very good - or can be. The story where the Borg are introduced for the first time remains one of the greatest episodes in sci-fi history. And the show I love - Doctor Who - is filled with terrible scientific flaws. But yes, you are right; there is far worse out there (Space Rangers . . . )

[Avatar]

Picard showed one of the people from the past in First Contact that the windows were forcefields. That might be where you're getting it from.

But it's stated in numerous episodes and in Trek fact books that the windows are transparent aluminum. Sure, First Contact shows us a forefield, but that doesn't make all windows fields.

I was not saying that made it so; I was simply pointing to an instance that might have been the source of (apparently) Avatar's misconception. He was not wrong to think so, because it was presented as fact in that case; he was simply unaware that it contradicted other information.

Exactly.

--A

[Loredoctor]

*Sigh* That may be, but it doesn't dispute my first point.

[Avatar]

Which one?

--A

[I'm Murrin]

*Sigh* That may be, but it doesn't dispute my first point.

Good to know you agree with me on that, then. (seriously, I posted the previous because you seemed to think there was still some kind of argument there... there wasn't. You were right, we got your point, you just seemed to think that by explaining a mistake we were still disagreeing... and appear to have made the same assumption in the above.)
Clarity in all matters etc etc; let's never speak of this etc etc.

[Loredoctor]

seriously, I posted the previous because you seemed to think there was still some kind of argument there... there wasn't. You were right, we got your point, you just seemed to think that by explaining a mistake we were still disagreeing... and appear to have made the same assumption in the above.)

It would have helped to admit that I was right.

[I'm Murrin]

It went without saying.

[Loredoctor]

It went without saying.

But it means more if Avatar writes it.

[Avatar]

I'm flattered.

But I was right too.

Their internal consistency is quite a different topic.

--A

[Loredoctor]

Their internal consistency is quite a different topic.

--A

As consistent as every other sci-fi show/movie.

[Avatar]

Probably true enough.

Although I must say that on the whole, SW is fairly consistent. In fact, I can't think of a direct self-contradiction, although a potentially implied one has been pointed out to me before.

--A

[Loredoctor]

Probably true enough.

Although I must say that on the whole, SW is fairly consistent. In fact, I can't think of a direct self-contradiction, although a potentially implied one has been pointed out to me before.

--A

Enterprise is a massive contradiction!

[Avatar]

I said SW, not ST. And don't talk to me about Enterprise...first I thought it was going to be great to see the development of the things we already new.

Little did I know...

--A