Doctor Who Science Screw-Ups

[Khas 12,158]

I kinow I posted this on SFJ, but I'll post it here too. Because to say that Doctor Who abuses science is like saying Hitler killed a lot of people. It's a HUGE understatement.

 

 

 

First off, the Big-ass Wank Device, I mean, Reality Bomb. The Reality Bomb is nowhere near as thorough as Davros could have made it. By nullifying the electromagnetic force, baryonic matter turns to dust, but the following stuff would survive:

 

 

 

Dark Matter (Doesn't feel electromagnetism)

 

Dark Energy

 

Neutron Stars (Made of neutrons (no shit), which are electrically neutral)

 

Black Holes

 

And of course, Chuck Norris.

 

 

 

And now for the creatures that abuse science:

 

Slitheen from planet Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious. Creatures of Living Calcium. Calcium is an alkali earth metal that combusts when it hits water (much like what everyone wants to happen to Jason), so unless large amounts of Magicium, Technobabblium, and Plotdevicium are used, this is pretty much impossible.

 

 

 

Those Living Fat Creatures. Sure, creatures like that could exist in real life, but they'd need a Titan-like environment to do so. On Earth, they'd melt.

 

 

 

The Nestene Concioussness and Anti-Plastic. Anti-plastic? Are you fucking kidding me?

 

 

 

Weapons:

 

The Osterhagen key. 25 nukes placed under the Earth's crust, that when all activated, would blow Earth to bits. Nukes have to be a certain size to have a certain yield. And in order to get that yield, each nuke would have to be 300 miles across. How the fuck do you keep that a secret?

 

 

 

And a Jason-esque plan:

 

Detonate all of Earth's nukes at once to turn the crust into molten slag. Earth recieves more energy from the sun in an hour than what that explosion would do.

 

 

 

Doctor Who Fails Science Forever.

[Tyralak 12,068]

Of course it does. It doesn't even try. I love the Dr. Who franchise to death, but I don't expect it to even be remotely scientifically accurate.

[enigma 521]

Khas, it seems that you are new to science fiction because if you bothered to watch *ANY* science fiction movie or TV episodes you'd see that they all abuse science.

 

 

 

ST = space amoeba? Crack in the event horizon? Being shrunk to the size of a christmas ornament? Warp drive? transporters?

 

 

 

SW = hyperdrives, I know there's more but I am sure others will point it out.

 

 

 

V = stealing water? how stupid is that? There's water everywhere but instead waste time, effort and resources to steal water while being nicey - nice with the humans.

[Khas 12,158]

Khas, it seems that you are new to science fiction because if you bothered to watch *ANY* science fiction movie or TV episodes you'd see that they all abuse science.

 

 

 

ST = space amoeba? Crack in the event horizon? Being shrunk to the size of a christmas ornament? Warp drive? transporters?

 

 

 

SW = hyperdrives, I know there's more but I am sure others will point it out.

 

 

 

V = stealing water? how stupid is that? There's water everywhere but instead waste time, effort and resources to steal water while being nicey - nice with the humans.

 

 

 

Oh, I've been a Trekkie since I was 2, and I know all sci-fi has it's screw-ups, but Doctor Who seems to go out of it's way to abuse science.

 

 

 

And on ST science screw-ups, I never saw the VOY episode with the crack in the event horizon, but I've heard of it, and that had me gritting my teeth for about a quarter hour. As for warp drives and transporters, there are actually laws of physics allowing those. About transporters, I'd recommend the book "Teleportation: The Impossible Leap". It was written by a physicist, and he knows what he's talking about.

 

 

 

Never saw "V", but from what you said, that's just dumb what the aliens did. Why not just take it from the comets, or the moons of some gas giants, instead of taking it from here?

[Tyralak 12,068]

As for warp drives and transporters, there are actually laws of physics allowing those. About transporters, I'd recommend the book "Teleportation: The Impossible Leap". It was written by a physicist, and he knows what he's talking about.

 

 

 

That's the one written by David Darling, right?

[Khas 12,158]

That's the one written by David Darling, right?

 

 

 

Yup. Read it when I was 14.

[enigma 521]

Oh, I've been a Trekkie since I was 2, and I know all sci-fi has it's screw-ups, but Doctor Who seems to go out of it's way to abuse science.

 

 

 

And on ST science screw-ups, I never saw the VOY episode with the crack in the event horizon, but I've heard of it, and that had me gritting my teeth for about a quarter hour. As for warp drives and transporters, there are actually laws of physics allowing those. About transporters, I'd recommend the book "Teleportation: The Impossible Leap". It was written by a physicist, and he knows what he's talking about.

 

 

 

Never saw "V", but from what you said, that's just dumb what the aliens did. Why not just take it from the comets, or the moons of some gas giants, instead of taking it from here?

 

 

 

 

 

Dr.Who doesn't take itself serious whereas ST does and that what makes ST's abuse of science worse. Any sci-fi series that tries to take itself serious and messes up science is sad.

[Tyralak 12,068]

*COUGH* midichlorians *COUGH*

[enigma 521]

*COUGH* midichlorians *COUGH*

 

 

 

True. I knew I missed something.

[Questor 501]

Oh, I've been a Trekkie since I was 2, and I know all sci-fi has it's screw-ups, but Doctor Who seems to go out of it's way to abuse science.

 

 

 

Sometimes it does.

 

 

 

BTW, solving a physics problem (if it is solved, most of the solutions to those problems make A LOT of assumptions) has nothing on solving the engineering problems inherent in some of the things that take place in Sci-Fi.

 

 

 

Fusion is a wonderful example of this. People keep saying its scientists trying to make it work. Not so much.

[Mith 0]

Weapons:

 

The Osterhagen key. 25 nukes placed under the Earth's crust, that when all activated, would blow Earth to bits. Nukes have to be a certain size to have a certain yield. And in order to get that yield, each nuke would have to be 300 miles across. How the fuck do you keep that a secret?

 

 

 

It's not only amazingly stupid in what they claimed--but even more so when you see two seasons later, that there's apparently an entire race of dino people living down there. Naturally they find a massive fucking drill to be a gesture of war, but not massive fucking nuclear weapons that would destroy all life on Earth.

 

 

 

In other words, they were blowing more smoke out of their ass.

[Mith 0]

Sometimes it does.

 

 

 

BTW, solving a physics problem (if it is solved, most of the solutions to those problems make A LOT of assumptions) has nothing on solving the engineering problems inherent in some of the things that take place in Sci-Fi.

 

 

 

Fusion is a wonderful example of this. People keep saying its scientists trying to make it work. Not so much.

 

 

 

Oh please. Sci-fi gives scientists such a blow job that it's a wonder why nerds don't get laid. Star Trek and Doctor Who are both shameless in this regard. It's always the scientists, the gifted, the dreamers, and the like that are special. If you live an average, common life then you're living in a hole. If you don't do something EXCEPTIONAL, then it's apparently a waste. And it's always that scientists are looking up to the stars to be inspired and such bullshit. Or that it's always the scientists who're the best to go to because they can apparently handle strange things better than us simpletons. TNG's First Contact episode was full of that bullcrap. Oh? Go to the government leaders and present ourselves? No thank you! We're going to some scientist...because...because only a scientist could possibly believe in a world where aliens exist!

 

 

 

It's a load of bullcrap.

[Tyralak 12,068]

I couldn't agree more, Mith. If you weren't. In the Pansy group I'd posrep you for that one. That's one of those things that's always bugged the shit out of me too.

[Questor 501]

I'd actually like an apology from Mith for completely mischaracterizing what I said - AND taking the last part out of context.

 

 

 

Not to mention being a dumbass. Every single television show in history has ended up being about the people with extraordinary events in their lives. Do you know why? Because watching a TV show about my life - or just about anyone else's - would be boring 99.999999999999999% of the time. Look at cop shows. If everything that happens to a cop on Law & Order happened to a pair of cops in real life, they'd spend more time in counseling than on the job.

 

 

 

In the episode Dumbass Boy is whining about, they go to THE SCIENCE MINISTER IN THE GOVERNMENT!

 

 

 

If you want to complain about going to scientists your better bet is Stargate... Oh, wait. They only went to the crazy-ass historian after every other governmental group had tried.

 

 

 

Maybe Star Trek IV... nope, that doesn't work either.

 

 

 

First Contact? nope, trying to keep a low profile. Same with "Time's Arrow."

 

 

 

There's a lot to bitch about, but the fact that scientists are over-represented in SCIENCE FICTION is so low on the list as to be around the same level as the fact that there is dirt on the road.

 

 

 

Not to mention that I was essentially saying the same thing, but about the fact that knowing what to do is not even half the battle. Knowing HOW to do it is the important part.

 

 

 

Who was it that said: "Everything is simple, but the simple things can be extremely difficult?"

 

 

 

Apparently reading comprehension is one of those difficult "simple" things for Mith.

[Mith 0]

I'd actually like an apology from Mith for completely mischaracterizing what I said - AND taking the last part out of context.

 

 

 

Hey, that's what I understood it to say.

 

 

 

Not to mention being a dumbass. Every single television show in history has ended up being about the people with extraordinary events in their lives. Do you know why? Because watching a TV show about my life - or just about anyone else's - would be boring 99.999999999999999% of the time. Look at cop shows. If everything that happens to a cop on Law & Order happened to a pair of cops in real life, they'd spend more time in counseling than on the job.

 

 

 

Excuse me as I chop off half of that.

 

 

 

Now, you clearly misunderstand me. I don't mind watching something interesting. That's fine. I like that. I encourage that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. My problem is that small, one off characters in just about every sci-fi show are potrayed as taking to a field of science out of some sort of burning passion/influence/something. Or that only extrodinary people can lead happy and fulfilling lives. DW and ST are notorious, though the former tends to piss me off more. They repeatedly take ordinary, simple folks and then basically tell them that they need to be special or they're failed at life. And these characters are only there to preach to the audience about how amazing SCIENCE is. It's insulting. As if acting like only scientists are visonaries or those that are entirely apply themselves to the name of science.

[Mith 0]

I couldn't agree more, Mith. If you weren't. In the Pansy group I'd posrep you for that one. That's one of those things that's always bugged the shit out of me too.

 

 

 

Meh, I'm only in the 'Pansy Group' simply for the sake of not having my posts and avatars edited. I also found the reputation points somewhat annoying, since for several people here it seems to be their best attempt at a counter argument; gang up on one guy and he looks like an idiot. It's basically like voting in an argument. Never really liked it. But mostly it's so people don't mess with the profile. It's just not worth my effort to keep up a massive, group-friendly post count simply for the sake of my peace of mind.

[Questor 501]

Hey, that's what I understood it to say.

 

 

 

Then you are a dumbass. I was talking about the difference between Engineering and Science as disciplines, which should be obvious if you actually read the meat of my post, which was all of one sentence long - just in case you had a difficult experience with Tolstoy as a child and cannot read large blocks of text. The quote is below in case you cannot operate your browser.

 

 

 

BTW, solving a physics problem (if it is solved, most of the solutions to those problems make A LOT of assumptions) has nothing on solving the engineering problems inherent in some of the things that take place in Sci-Fi.

 

 

 

How on Earth can anyone with more intelligence then Jason come up with your interpretation.

 

 

 

Back to you being a dumbass.

 

 

 

 

Excuse me as I chop off half of that.

 

 

 

 

Nice, just your style. You ignore the points that specifically rebut your claim regarding an episode, as well as other episodes.

 

 

 

 

Now, you clearly misunderstand me. I don't mind watching something interesting. That's fine. I like that. I encourage that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with it. My problem is that small, one off characters in just about every sci-fi show are potrayed as taking to a field of science out of some sort of burning passion/influence/something.

 

 

 

It's SCIENCE FICTION. A lot of it takes place IN SPACE, a dangerous place that people aren't going to visit for the hell of it. Can you give me a list of occasions where a scientist was encountered, and it was inappropriate for either the plot or the situation? I've demolished a couple of the time travel ones above.

 

 

 

A lot of the one off characters in CSI are criminals, too. WHAT A REVELATION!!!!!!1!!!1!111!1!1!one!!one

 

 

 

Or that only extrodinary people can lead happy and fulfilling lives. DW and ST are notorious, though the former tends to piss me off more.

 

 

 

What are you smoking? In NuWho, we've had Rose, who was the definition of damsel in distress; we had Donna, who never achieved anything of note except getting a job from a bunch of Torchwood rejects; we've had Molly, who is very cute - and probably fun to look at naked - which is a damn good thing, as she's a fricking stripper. The only remotely science oriented companion is Martha. Or are you talking about the cardboard cutout minor characters, who are some of the most cliche ridden idiots ever seen?

 

 

 

They repeatedly take ordinary, simple folks and then basically tell them that they need to be special or they're failed at life.

 

 

 

You've done nothing significant with your life? NOTHING?

 

 

 

And these characters are only there to preach to the audience about how amazing SCIENCE is. It's insulting. As if acting like only scientists are visonaries or those that are entirely apply themselves to the name of science.

 

 

 

I think you're projecting. Are you a liberal arts student at a technical university? Maybe an English Major at MIT?

[Mith 0]

Then you are a dumbass. I was talking about the difference between Engineering and Science as disciplines, which should be obvious if you actually read the meat of my post, which was all of one sentence long - just in case you had a difficult experience with Tolstoy as a child and cannot read large blocks of text. The quote is below in case you cannot operate your browser.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

How on Earth can anyone with more intelligence then Jason come up with your interpretation.

 

 

 

Back to you being a dumbass.

 

 

 

Holy shit, did you sit on a fucking stick today?

 

 

 

How about you stop being a fucking, overbearing prick.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nice, just your style. You ignore the points that specifically rebut your claim regarding an episode, as well as other episodes.

 

 

 

Dude, take a fucking chill pill. The post was strung out and rather long, so I cut it for space reasons. This isn't a debate and since I never actually had an issue with your stance, addressing it would be pointless.

 

 

 

 

 

It's SCIENCE FICTION. A lot of it takes place IN SPACE, a dangerous place that people aren't going to visit for the hell of it. Can you give me a list of occasions where a scientist was encountered, and it was inappropriate for either the plot or the situation? I've demolished a couple of the time travel ones above.

 

 

 

A lot of the one off characters in CSI are criminals, too. WHAT A REVELATION!!!!!!1!!!1!111!1!1!one!!one

 

 

 

My point isn't the use of scientists or that scientists are bad. I'm simply annoyed at the idol-worship that some sci-fi shows stick in, as if scientists are walking gods.

 

 

 

What are you smoking? In NuWho, we've had Rose, who was the definition of damsel in distress; we had Donna, who never achieved anything of note except getting a job from a bunch of Torchwood rejects; we've had Molly, who is very cute - and probably fun to look at naked - which is a damn good thing, as she's a fricking stripper. The only remotely science oriented companion is Martha. Or are you talking about the cardboard cutout minor characters, who are some of the most cliche ridden idiots ever seen?

 

 

 

Yes, I'm talking about the fucking minor characters. You know, those ones? The one that the Doctor goes preachin go on to 'be exceptional', because God knows there was nothing amazing about them before. I haven't said anything regarding the fucking main characters. I don't care if they're ordinary--in fact they're required for the fucking show to work properly for any length of time. Ie, without a companion, kiss 70% of the information the audience is handed because there's no one there to have things explained to them.

 

 

 

Stop taking a narrow annoyance of a few shows and the way they occasionally preach as meaning that I'm attacking the show. I love Doctor Who--sure, I disliked Rose and hated Martha with a burning passion, not to mention the last two or three seasons of Doctor Who (not the fifth and the special season mind you). And I hated the show for then for its shitty writing, over the top killing of extras that you had JUST enough time to get attached to (so as to get an emotional rise out of the audience--specifically for that purpose), the Doctor cutting his wrists (generally, wasting the talent of David FUCKING Tennet!), the horse shit idea that you always have to commit genocide on your enemies to win (because you know, they couldn't just be crippled or weakened--no, no. We've had the Daleks come back from nothing like three times through the first four seasons?), and general other ass hatery on the part of the head writer.

 

 

 

You've done nothing significant with your life? NOTHING?

 

 

 

I never said that nor did I say it was bad. I don't mean being insignificant is good--what I'm refering to is Earth shattering important. God-like famous. They've had the Doctor preaching about people needing to be 'exceptional', ie, above the crowd. As if you can't live a happy and fulfilling life as a person.

 

 

 

 

 

I think you're projecting.

 

 

 

On what? I don't deny that scientists, famous/exceptional people, and so forth are bad, nor do I dislike these shows shows. My problem is that when people push certain groups above what they are in reality. Ie, that scientists are the dreamers that are always making advancements in technology and understanding. Yeah, that does happen. But that doesn't make it the default for a scientist.

 

 

 

Are you a liberal arts student at a technical university?

 

 

 

*sigh*

 

 

 

No.

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe an English Major at MIT?

 

 

 

English Major, but not at an MIT. Nor do I understand what you're getting on about. I'm not saying that anything these shows show as good is wrong. My problem is the near worshiping levels for scientists. Again, look at my examples like TNG's First Contact. Picard decides that instead of going the local government, he decided that a scientist would be better and to parphrase 'more open to possibilities, more intelligent, and capable of understanding', as if anyone else is too fucking apeshit backwards and stupid to be capable of understanding aliens and respond rationally--or that scientists are always going to respond rationally.

 

 

 

It doesn't mean that you can't go to a scientist, but the idea that someone in a government that is superior to the technology we have today is going to be incapable of responding rationally (after the shock) is simply insulting. That's my problem. That only scientists can solve issues...because they're scientists. That's not true in the real world. Engineers and many corperations help advanced companies in many waays that scientists don't. That's my gripe.

 

 

 

I have absolutely no idea why you just went apeshit about all this.

[Tyralak 12,068]

[Questor 501]

Holy shit, did you sit on a fucking stick today?

 

 

 

How about you stop being a fucking, overbearing prick.

 

 

 

Hi, I'm Questor, have we met?

 

 

 

Dude, take a fucking chill pill. The post was strung out and rather long, so I cut it for space reasons. This isn't a debate and since I never actually had an issue with your stance, addressing it would be pointless.

 

 

 

You're choices in snipping were... rather poor, given the way you did it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

My point isn't the use of scientists or that scientists are bad. I'm simply annoyed at the idol-worship that some sci-fi shows stick in, as if scientists are walking gods.

 

 

 

 

And I asked, in my own way, why the fuck you are watching a show where the very nature of the medium is going to irritate you? If you were making this point about, I don't know, a political drama or a legal drama, you'd have a point. But right now you sound like an idiot who is offended by churches watching a televangelist and then complaining that the program was offensive.

 

 

 

 

Yes, I'm talking about the fucking minor characters. You know, those ones? The one that the Doctor goes preachin go on to 'be exceptional', because God knows there was nothing amazing about them before.

 

 

 

Which ones? I assume that you have some examples that you can cite, rather than the annoying, idiotic mantra of Generation X.

 

 

 

I haven't said anything regarding the fucking main characters. I don't care if they're ordinary--in fact they're required for the fucking show to work properly for any length of time. Ie, without a companion, kiss 70% of the information the audience is handed because there's no one there to have things explained to them.

 

 

 

Exactly.

 

 

 

Stop taking a narrow annoyance of a few shows and the way they occasionally preach as meaning that I'm attacking the show.

 

 

 

I'm not, I'm taking issue with you whining about the obvious. "Doctor, my hand huts when I hit the wall."

 

 

 

 

 

I love Doctor Who--sure, I disliked Rose and hated Martha with a burning passion, not to mention the last two or three seasons of Doctor Who (not the fifth and the special season mind you). And I hated the show for then for its shitty writing, over the top killing of extras that you had JUST enough time to get attached to (so as to get an emotional rise out of the audience--specifically for that purpose), the Doctor cutting his wrists (generally, wasting the talent of David FUCKING Tennet!), the horse shit idea that you always have to commit genocide on your enemies to win (because you know, they couldn't just be crippled or weakened--no, no. We've had the Daleks come back from nothing like three times through the first four seasons?), and general other ass hatery on the part of the head writer.

 

 

It sounds like we pretty much agree on Who. Although my only problem with genociding the Daleks is the increasing level of brain twisting being used to bring them back. It's not like negotiation with them has ever been successful.

 

 

 

I never said that nor did I say it was bad. I don't mean being insignificant is good--what I'm refering to is Earth shattering important. God-like famous. They've had the Doctor preaching about people needing to be 'exceptional', ie, above the crowd. As if you can't live a happy and fulfilling life as a person.

 

 

 

I was actually trying to get at the fact that being unexceptional does not mean insignificant. A guy can labor for 50 years in obscurity, but still leave a hell of an impression on his children, who could go on to have any kind of impact you could predict. We don't even know what Justinian I's ethnicity was, but can you possibly argue that his parents were insignificant? Greatness can be measured by what you do, or by who you touch, and those are not mutually exclusive.

 

 

 

 

On what?

 

 

 

Projecting, i.e. the experience of projecting your own motives on others.

 

 

 

I don't deny that scientists, famous/exceptional people, and so forth are bad, nor do I dislike these shows shows. My problem is that when people push certain groups above what they are in reality. Ie, that scientists are the dreamers that are always making advancements in technology and understanding. Yeah, that does happen. But that doesn't make it the default for a scientist.

 

 

 

Who else is pushing the bounderies of scientific knowledge? If the show were about lawyers, you'd see lawyers being urged to be exceptional. I also disagree with you analysis of the messaging in Who, but that is a specific case.

 

 

 

 

English Major, but not at an MIT. Nor do I understand what you're getting on about.

 

 

 

Because the attitude you are describing is incredibly common at Sci/Eng universities and faculties (and especially students). Frankly the same attitudes (inversed) are present in the liberal arts, and they've managed to get far more done to the core curriculums at universities, or does/did your universities require English and History majors to take upper division Math and Science as part of the basic graduation requirements? Either way, the attitude is idiotic and counterproductive. The liberal arts are just as valid as fields of studies as the sciences, and vice versa. Having a grounding in both is important.

 

 

 

MIT was selected because of the percieved strength of their Sci/Eng program. I could have used CalTech or any other engineering dominant school.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that anything these shows show as good is wrong. My problem is the near worshiping levels for scientists. Again, look at my examples like TNG's First Contact. Picard decides that instead of going the local government, he decided that a scientist would be better and to parphrase 'more open to possibilities, more intelligent, and capable of understanding', as if anyone else is too fucking apeshit backwards and stupid to be capable of understanding aliens and respond rationally--or that scientists are always going to respond rationally.

 

 

 

YOU FUCKING DUMBASS! HE WENT TO THE GOVERNMEN'S SCIENCE MINISTER! Picard is a pompus, elitist asshole, if that doesn't float your boat - it sure doesn't mine - watch a better class of television show. Babylon 5 (some moralizing), Boston Legal, The West Wing (actually, that one has a couple pompus, elitist assholes in it too - but they work for me), are all wonderful options, and they are all available on DVD at a store near you.

 

 

 

As for Who, the new doctor has AMPLE evidence that local governments are going to be obstructionist and narrow minded. You remember how Torchwood was introduced, right?

 

 

 

It doesn't mean that you can't go to a scientist, but the idea that someone in a government that is superior to the technology we have today is going to be incapable of responding rationally (after the shock) is simply insulting. That's my problem.

 

 

 

THEN DON'T WATCH TNG!!! It had the double whammy of Rodenberry AND Picard? Shit, if you don't want to be preached to, get out of the church. Read a fucking book, literary Sci-Fi can be far less moralizing (or more, but that's rarer).

 

 

 

 

That only scientists can solve issues...because they're scientists. That's not true in the real world. Engineers and many corperations help advanced companies in many waays that scientists don't. That's my gripe.

 

 

Funny, that sounds exactly like the point I was making. To which you responded "Oh, please."

 

 

 

 

I have absolutely no idea why you just went apeshit about all this.

 

 

 

 

Because you built a gigantic strawman? Because I've had a bad day? Because I'm tired of people misrepresenting my positions here, on SDN, and in real life?

[Questor 501]

 

 

 

Are we entertaining you?

[Tyralak 12,068]

You certainly are. Carry on.

[Mith 0]

Hi, I'm Questor, have we met?

 

 

 

Have we?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're choices in snipping were... rather poor, given the way you did it.

 

 

 

My response didn't address any of the points, save for the misunderstanding. Why then, would it matter?

 

 

 

 

 

And I asked, in my own way, why the fuck you are watching a show where the very nature of the medium is going to irritate you? If you were making this point about, I don't know, a political drama or a legal drama, you'd have a point. But right now you sound like an idiot who is offended by churches watching a televangelist and then complaining that the program was offensive.

 

 

 

Um, I love both of those shows. I just get annoyed when they pay lip service and do so in an overbearing way. The good can outweigh the bad and thus I can still find enjoyment in something.

 

 

 

Which ones? I assume that you have some examples that you can cite, rather than the annoying, idiotic mantra of Generation X.

 

 

 

...What? Why does it matter? They're minor issues.

 

 

 

I'm not, I'm taking issue with you whining about the obvious. "Doctor, my hand huts when I hit the wall."

 

 

 

...what?

 

 

 

It sounds like we pretty much agree on Who. Although my only problem with genociding the Daleks is the increasing level of brain twisting being used to bring them back. It's not like negotiation with them has ever been successful.

 

 

 

See? No need to get angry.

 

 

 

And that's my problem too, but not just for the reasoning of bringing them back. Or rather, justification.

 

 

 

The fact is, the Daleks are pussies. The entire new series have transformed them into nothing more than soft-core pussies. Due to the poor choices of the head writer, he took all of the lasting fear power of the Daleks away. How are we supposed to take an enemy seriously when the Doctor eradicates their entire species at the end of a two parter? There's absolutely nothing there to help me take the Daleks as a serious threat. I mean really, the biggest f*ing twist of Victory of the Daleks was that they actually won. Which sounds strange given that the title gives it away, but really, we never expect the Daleks to get anywhere.

 

 

 

It's shitty writing. No one's going to be fucking suprised that the Daleks are back if you keep bringing them back. And it doesn't show us that they're super smart or that they're incredibly resourceful. It just shows us that they're fucking lucky as all hell. The writers need to learn that you can't keep bringing back overpowered races. Keep them realistic and keep them threatening. The Cult of Skaro was horribly, horribly abused here. They should have never of killed them off like that. They should have kept them around as a lasting threat; the Cult and the Doctor constantly in a struggle. One side trying to restore themselves and the other trying to prevent them.

 

 

 

 

 

I was actually trying to get at the fact that being unexceptional does not mean insignificant. A guy can labor for 50 years in obscurity, but still leave a hell of an impression on his children, who could go on to have any kind of impact you could predict. We don't even know what Justinian I's ethnicity was, but can you possibly argue that his parents were insignificant? Greatness can be measured by what you do, or by who you touch, and those are not mutually exclusive.

 

 

 

I couldn't agree more--and Season 1 of nDW suggested exactly just that with Rose's father. That even though he was considered a worthless nobody, his death still did significant damage to the world. But as the series progressed, this has almost seemed to reverse itself. Mind you, this was in the hack era of the series, so I'm not faulting the new writer, who seems to have a better handle on it.

 

 

 

Projecting, i.e. the experience of projecting your own motives on others.

 

 

 

I'm well aware of the definition. I just have no idea where you got that impression from.

 

 

 

Who else is pushing the bounderies of scientific knowledge? If the show were about lawyers, you'd see lawyers being urged to be exceptional. I also disagree with you analysis of the messaging in Who, but that is a specific case.

 

 

 

It's a thing I have. I hate it when people claim that Christians have better marriage rates because apparently God watches over them, even when such a thing is not true. Nor do I appreciate it that some consider themselves morally superior to non-Christians.

 

 

 

And yet, I'm a Christian and I place a great deal of importance on many of the core values, even if I don't agree with the entire dogma itself.

 

 

 

 

 

Because the attitude you are describing is incredibly common at Sci/Eng universities and faculties (and especially students). Frankly the same attitudes (inversed) are present in the liberal arts, and they've managed to get far more done to the core curriculums at universities, or does/did your universities require English and History majors to take upper division Math and Science as part of the basic graduation requirements? Either way, the attitude is idiotic and counterproductive. The liberal arts are just as valid as fields of studies as the sciences, and vice versa. Having a grounding in both is important.

 

 

 

MIT was selected because of the percieved strength of their Sci/Eng program. I could have used CalTech or any other engineering dominant school.

 

 

 

...My major has no bearing on my opinions, I assure you. I recognize the importance of all fields. I just don't like it when a show is obviously giving head to a specific one. Not that they're trying to show the importance for the sake of the story or the message, but delibertly just sucking someone's cock.

 

 

 

 

 

YOU FUCKING DUMBASS! HE WENT TO THE GOVERNMEN'S SCIENCE MINISTER!

 

 

 

I'm well aware who he appeared to. But it's a fucking slap in the face to the head of the government when you just basically said that they're too stupid to respond with any sort of reason--to which we see is absolutely incorrect in this instance. And it wasn't that they appeared to her because they thought that she was the most capable of understanding of all the people in the government. My problem is this:

 

 

 

TROI: We've come to you first because you're a leader in the scientific community. Scientists generally accept our arrival more easily than others.

 

 

 

That, is a load of fucking bullshit. This isn't a society that's in the middle ages. It's a society more advanced than our own today. And yet everyone is implied to having a hard time accepting their arrival? It's insulting to everyone who isn't a scientist.

 

 

 

Picard is a pompus, elitist asshole, if that doesn't float your boat - it sure doesn't mine - watch a better class of television show.

 

 

 

No he isn't. I mean sure, Season 1&2 the writers had him acting like a asshole, but when they actually got some competent writers, he quickly did a three sixty. Similar to how the Doctor's character was originally a selfish, arrogant asshole.

 

 

 

As for Who, the new doctor has AMPLE evidence that local governments are going to be obstructionist and narrow minded. You remember how Torchwood was introduced, right?

 

 

 

Eh? I had no problem with that.

 

 

 

THEN DON'T WATCH TNG!!! It had the double whammy of Rodenberry AND Picard? Shit, if you don't want to be preached to, get out of the church. Read a fucking book, literary Sci-Fi can be far less moralizing (or more, but that's rarer).

 

 

 

You misunderstand. I love TNG and Star Trek in general. But there are some tropes that bug me. You're taking them way, waaaay out of porpotion.

 

 

 

Funny, that sounds exactly like the point I was making. To which you responded "Oh, please."

 

 

 

...I was agreeing with you.

 

 

 

Because you built a gigantic strawman?

 

 

 

The fuck? This is a general conversation. If I misunderstood something you said, you should just calmly address that then go flying off the handle.

 

 

 

 

 

Because I've had a bad day?

 

 

 

...and that's my fault?

 

 

 

Because I'm tired of people misrepresenting my positions here, on SDN, and in real life?

 

 

 

Or maybe it's just a misunderstanding? Your immediate response to what you clearly percieved as a clash with what you wrote was to basically accuse me of being dishonest. Why would I do that? Why not ask what I mean or tell me that I got what you said wrong. Instead, even after I try to explain I misunderstood your position, you're still flying off the handle, accusing me of being a moron (because apparently if you misread something, you're automatically an idiot or dishonest).

 

 

 

You're overreacting.

[Questor 501]

Mith, you have my apologies. I'd been having a bad week, and took it out on you (and on somebody on SDN).