Questor

Cite please? Where else in the EU does it occur? Also, you know that steam is one of the better ways of converting anything to power right? It drives turbines.

As I recall, we see something that looks like the Death Star. And what does that have to do with anything? I'm pretty sure there's significant funding behind the sith in the prequels. Do you really think the Kaminoans took a PO for their clones? Do you really think that Drth Maul just stole that ship? And you still have not answered my question about everything else.

Please calculate the per capita additional tax burden on a million world poliical entity of a 10 million soldier army (5 million combat troops, plus 5 million support) Use current global GDP and population for averages, and use US military cost per soldier/sailer/airman/marine. Then tell me that that is going to bankrupt anyone.

Not when there wasn't a military at all before. Plans existed for a weapon similar to the Death Star. The need for the plans in ANH imply that it is not the same weapon - unless you are claiming that construction of that platform was kept secret for 20 years? Are you really that crazy? And I suppose the second one appeared as if by magic? The Executor and her sisters?

It's invalid because it's idiotic. If trekkies can demand that I ignore it when Data/Janeway/Geordi/Riker/Wesley/Torres/Kim/Picard/Dax/Troi/The Doctor/Crusher/Pulaski/Tuvok/Anyone Else butchers science, engineering, economics, general sanity and common sense - I get to ignore the stupid parts of the movies and that show (which I still have not watched - and don't plan to). Heck, Data doesn't even know what a decayed body looks like, and... well... Torres can't identify shit even with a tricorder.

Except we don't see any pockets or pouches, or web gear, or load bearing equipment. Also, we have seen Starfleet uniforms that have a lot of pockets and were warmer... Back when Starfleet wasn't space-hippies obsessed with being "non-violent." KIRK WORE THEM!!!!!!! They even had holsters!

A cite for 35 million combat casualties, please? (It's got to be combat casualties, it's too low to be general casualties)

What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? I'll bet the Republic had a very different taxation and revenue structure than the Empire did. Not to mention revolution is a decent way to change entitlement programs.

It's relative on the ground too. And I made that same point earlier in the thread and I was ignored. I think they've gone so far off the deep end that they aren't interacting with anyone but the other combatant. Two immortals, locked in eternal combat. <Cue Pirates of the Carribean Movie Theme>

While the general design philosophy probably carried through, Sovereigns (and any other ship we've seen) have individual quarters and large areas that the Defiants don't. Undoubtedly more teeth than a Galaxy, but I don't know how they compare to the previous generation.

It actually wasn't missiles (or torpedoes) that killed the battleship, if they had someone would have built one between 1945 and the late '70s when the first real ASM became available. In fact, if you only look at the context of conventional sea based weapons, the "balanced" battleship should have reached its most powerful sometime in '70s, with new classes becoming less and less "balanced" as time goes on. Eventually, the development of shaped charge warheads (and especaily the idea to put the fuel in front of the warhead) would have doomed the "balanced" battleship, but except for one thing, the concept of a massive 120,000+ ton (assuming size goes up in a similar rate with carriers and other classes - and remember the most modern western cruisers were designed as destroyers) weapons carrier would be extremely attractive. On the other hand, the long range bomber armed with nuclear devices does make any armor worthless in exactly the right time frame. BTW, what's your point? I simply took issue with the characterization of "tougher" since its such a worthless value for a warship (or anything), you need to look at how well they meet the requirements. I do think that TNG ships would be weaker ton-for-ton than a TOS ship, but that has more to do with the fact that they wast so much tonnage on "multi-role" and families. The Defiant on the other hand...

I'm not really arguing with you. You're sane.

Stationary is a relative concept. Literally. As much as I think this is a moronic topic, my gripes with it have nothing to do with using tractor beams in an atmosphere. Jason just wants the Galaxy-X to exist for some reason.

What does that prove? Are you seriously trying to use the texture of the fabric to prove something?

I have a jacket that's thicker than a suit jacket too, I wear it when it's cold out. You know, like it might be when you are in a cave.

You did, but when did we see body armor? It would be far better to reference the armor used in TWOK-era, as that is inarguable. Unless you are repeating Jason's claim that the uniform jacket they were wearing was body armor.

You said tougher, you didn't say more combat effective. Of course, it certainly could be argued that a modern ship's "armor" include her self defense systems, and I would make that argument. The problem with your reasoning is that you assume newer = better without looking at the inherent design decisions involved in that assumption. If you continue a philosophy, newer will almost certainly be better, but philosphies DO change. In Star Trek, at least until after Voyager launched, the Federation ALSO changed philosophies - leading to a change in ship design priorities, not to mention training priorities. Think about it, during TNG, in order to supply plot issues, a number of things that were done with button presses in TOS were said to take tremendous effort. I seem to recall that both reversing tractor beams and remodulating phasers were done in TOS, and I know that Crusher felt the need to remind her staff how to deal with burns and do triage in one episode. You made an absolute statement that was demonstrably false and that plays into the "tech level" fallacy. If you want to argue using better phrasing, I might even agree with you. WORDS MATTER.

This is Star Trek, they throw continuity, science and logic out the window without any provocation at all. Why blame the story?

*Eyes bleed* Paul, this is why I lock threads...

The Iowa would like a word with you.

This thread is pointless. Riker could have been commanding the Enterprise-B in that reality without it mattering to the plot of Generations.

What is this in relation to?

Interesting choice of words... "in practice"

That was a response to the assertion that he was a Mid-westerner.