Galactica Vs. Enterprise

Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog

[Suche] [Administrator] [Hinweise zum Reader] [Startseite]

Science Fiction » alt.startrek » Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E

Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267829]

Do, 18 Mai 2006 17:45

Numan

Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
to the Enterprise - E?

I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
acting WAY outshine Trek.

Why am I saying this? Because it proves there IS an audience
for GOOD science fiction that is done well. I just hope and
pray that TPTB are paying attention to this show and taking
notes. NO, please not a rip off. But the next show is really
going to have to be something special. All is not lost! Trek
will live again.

Tim McBride
aka "Numan"

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267830 ]

Do, 18 Mai 2006 18:23

Benjamin Pavsner

This is why I like stuff like BG and B5 over Trek: no preaching, no
messages, none of this stuff about what a bunch of wankers humans are and
how much of a utopia we could be if we "shaped up "(as least as far as the
"left" is concerned).
"Numan" <tbrdmann [at] sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:NE0bg.18537$Lm5.10035 [at] newssvr12.news.prodigy.com...
> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
> to the Enterprise - E?
>
> I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
> the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
> weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
> season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
> acting WAY outshine Trek.
>
> Why am I saying this? Because it proves there IS an audience
> for GOOD science fiction that is done well. I just hope and
> pray that TPTB are paying attention to this show and taking
> notes. NO, please not a rip off. But the next show is really
> going to have to be something special. All is not lost! Trek
> will live again.
>
> Tim McBride
> aka "Numan"
>
>

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267833 ]

Do, 18 Mai 2006 20:02

Numan

"Benjamin Pavsner" <pavsnerp [at] bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:Eb1bg.39483$QU3.29182 [at] bignews8.bellsouth.net...

>> "Numan" <tbrdmann [at] sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
>> to the Enterprise - E?
>>
>> I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
>> the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
>> weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
>> season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
>> acting WAY outshine Trek.
>>
>> Why am I saying this? Because it proves there IS an audience
>> for GOOD science fiction that is done well. I just hope and
>> pray that TPTB are paying attention to this show and taking
>> notes. NO, please not a rip off. But the next show is really
>> going to have to be something special. All is not lost! Trek
>> will live again.
>>
>> Tim McBride
>> aka "Numan"
>>
>>
>
> This is why I like stuff like BG and B5 over Trek: no preaching, no
> messages, none of this stuff about what a bunch of wankers humans are and
> how much of a utopia we could be if we "shaped up "(as least as far as the
> "left" is concerned).

Well, one thing is for sure. You would never see Picard putting a
Klingon out the air lock. There has actually been several things on
BSG that I actually made a mental note of, "you'd never see that on
Trek." I realize they are two different types of shows that try to show
the good side of humans and I appreciate that. To me, one doesn't
take the place of the other.

I miss Trek!

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267835 ]

Do, 18 Mai 2006 23:02

Wouter Valentijn

Numan wrote:
> "Benjamin Pavsner" <pavsnerp [at] bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> news:Eb1bg.39483$QU3.29182 [at] bignews8.bellsouth.net...
>
>>> "Numan" <tbrdmann [at] sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
>>> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
>>> to the Enterprise - E?
>>>
>>> I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
>>> the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
>>> weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
>>> season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
>>> acting WAY outshine Trek.
>>>
>>> Why am I saying this? Because it proves there IS an audience
>>> for GOOD science fiction that is done well. I just hope and
>>> pray that TPTB are paying attention to this show and taking
>>> notes. NO, please not a rip off. But the next show is really
>>> going to have to be something special. All is not lost! Trek
>>> will live again.
>>>
>>> Tim McBride
>>> aka "Numan"
>>>
>>>
>>
>> This is why I like stuff like BG and B5 over Trek: no preaching, no
>> messages, none of this stuff about what a bunch of wankers humans
>> are and how much of a utopia we could be if we "shaped up "(as least
>> as far as the "left" is concerned).

BG and B5 do get preachy.
Early in S1 of BG you had an episode that took a stab at McCarthyism and in
B5 Sheridan made several speeches, including that 'get the hell out of our
galaxy' one.
I don't think these shows are less preachy than Trek. The tone is only
slightly different. Like Cockney vs. the Queens English. So to speak.

>
> Well, one thing is for sure. You would never see Picard putting a
> Klingon out the air lock. There has actually been several things on
> BSG that I actually made a mental note of, "you'd never see that on
> Trek."

That depends on circumstance I think...
Sisko, Janeway and Archer all did some controversial stuff.

>I realize they are two different types of shows that try to
> show the good side of humans and I appreciate that. To me, one doesn't
> take the place of the other.

Agreed.

>
> I miss Trek!

As do I.

--
Wouter Valentijn

www.wouter.cc
www.nksf.nl
www.zeppodunsel.nl
liam=mail

"The world that denies thee, thou inhabit.
The peace that ignores thee, thou corrupt.
Chaos. I remain, as ever, thy faithful, degenerate son."

Ethan Rayne, 'Halloween' (Buffy The Vampire Slayer)

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267872 ]

Sa, 20 Mai 2006 11:44

Graham Kennedy

Numan wrote:
> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
> to the Enterprise - E?

Compares in what way? Size, technology level, crew
complement, number of bathrooms?

> I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
> the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
> weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
> season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
> acting WAY outshine Trek.

I love BSG too, but comparing it to Trek is to compare
apples and oranges. They are two very different types
of show.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267915 ]

Mo, 22 Mai 2006 19:19

Numan

"Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
news:fxBbg.467$TF.3329 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
> Numan wrote:
>> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
>> to the Enterprise - E?
>
> Compares in what way? Size, technology level, crew
> complement, number of bathrooms?

All of it! :-) I realize the technology isn't even close but that
is part of the show. They are only still around because
their technology wasn't up to the rest. The Cylons weren't
able to take them out because they weren't hooked in with
the rest.

>
>> I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
>> the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
>> weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
>> season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
>> acting WAY outshine Trek.
>
> I love BSG too, but comparing it to Trek is to compare
> apples and oranges. They are two very different types
> of shows.

Yes, they are. But they are both space based sci-fi. But
BSG gets a "Yes" on two important questions in my mind.

1. Would I like to be there, on that ship with those people?
2. Is there a WOW facter and am I looking forward to seeing the episode?

BSG - Yes, Yes
TOS - Yes, Yes
TNG - Yes, Yes
DS9 - Yes, Yes
Voy - No, Sometimes
Ent - No, Very slight

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267920 ]

Mo, 22 Mai 2006 21:10

Graham Kennedy

Numan wrote:
> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
> news:fxBbg.467$TF.3329 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
>> Numan wrote:
>>> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
>>> to the Enterprise - E?
>> Compares in what way? Size, technology level, crew
>> complement, number of bathrooms?
>
> All of it! :-) I realize the technology isn't even close but that
> is part of the show. They are only still around because
> their technology wasn't up to the rest. The Cylons weren't
> able to take them out because they weren't hooked in with
> the rest.

Size-wise, the Galactica is 4,640 feet long, twice the length
of the Enterprise-E, and so obviously much larger in volume
terms. The Pegasus's crew is around 2,500, again bigger - and
if anything Galactica's crew is likely significantly larger
than the Pegasus since it's an older, much more "hands on"
ship. However the accommodation standards on a Federation
Starship are vastly superior to those on Galactica.

There's (deliberately) lots we don't know about Galactica's
tech. It's pretty obvious to me that their weapons tech lags
way behind Treks. They don't seem to do much in the way of
aiming, it's more like WWII style "saturate the sky" tactics.
They might put up a good showing with liberal use of nukes,
but nukes are rarely used for some reason and even then are
unlikely to do that much against shields.

Interestingly, since Galactica can't fly around at FTL speeds
then it couldn't possibly catch the Enterprise-E if it wanted
to run away. And since the Enterprise-E can't jump around
in an instant like Galactica can then it very probably couldn't
catch the Galactica if it wanted to run away. So ultimately,
any battle between the two would probably be a draw!

>> I love BSG too, but comparing it to Trek is to compare
>> apples and oranges. They are two very different types
>> of shows.
>
> Yes, they are. But they are both space based sci-fi.

And Ally McBeal, Boston Legal and The Practice are all legal
shows based in Boston, but you can hardly compare them!

> But
> BSG gets a "Yes" on two important questions in my mind.
>
> 1. Would I like to be there, on that ship with those people?
> 2. Is there a WOW facter and am I looking forward to seeing the episode?
>
> BSG - Yes, Yes
> TOS - Yes, Yes
> TNG - Yes, Yes
> DS9 - Yes, Yes
> Voy - No, Sometimes
> Ent - No, Very slight

Hey, I'd take an interstellar trip with pretty much ANY crew!
But yeah, I rarely looked forward to seeing the next Voyager
ep all that much and very rarely with Enterprise.

For me, the best thing about Galactica is that the people are
actual Human beings, who act like actual people do. They goof
off, get drunk, make mistakes, all the stuff that we all do in
our own lives.

But one of the things I like about Trek is that they are NOT
all that much like real people - they're BETTER! Trek says
people can and will become more than they are, and I like that
idea.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267921 ]

Mo, 22 Mai 2006 23:18

Wouter Valentijn

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Numan wrote:
>> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
>> news:fxBbg.467$TF.3329 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
>>> Numan wrote:
>>>> Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
>>>> to the Enterprise - E?
>>> Compares in what way? Size, technology level, crew
>>> complement, number of bathrooms?
>>
>> All of it! :-) I realize the technology isn't even close but that
>> is part of the show. They are only still around because
>> their technology wasn't up to the rest. The Cylons weren't
>> able to take them out because they weren't hooked in with
>> the rest.
>
> Size-wise, the Galactica is 4,640 feet long, twice the length
> of the Enterprise-E, and so obviously much larger in volume
> terms. The Pegasus's crew is around 2,500, again bigger - and
> if anything Galactica's crew is likely significantly larger
> than the Pegasus since it's an older, much more "hands on"
> ship. However the accommodation standards on a Federation
> Starship are vastly superior to those on Galactica.
>

I thought the standard compliment of a battlestar of Galactica's class was
about 2,000?
It was mentioned in the pilot miniseries.
As for accommodations... Federation Starships aren't really battleships.
Except for the Defiant class.

> There's (deliberately) lots we don't know about Galactica's
> tech. It's pretty obvious to me that their weapons tech lags
> way behind Treks. They don't seem to do much in the way of
> aiming, it's more like WWII style "saturate the sky" tactics.
> They might put up a good showing with liberal use of nukes,
> but nukes are rarely used for some reason and even then are
> unlikely to do that much against shields.
>
> Interestingly, since Galactica can't fly around at FTL speeds
> then it couldn't possibly catch the Enterprise-E if it wanted
> to run away. And since the Enterprise-E can't jump around
> in an instant like Galactica can then it very probably couldn't
> catch the Galactica if it wanted to run away. So ultimately,
> any battle between the two would probably be a draw!

Doesn't the Galactica need some preparation time before it can jump? I've
seen the first season and I recall a countdown. Otherwise they would jump
blind.
And at sublight speeds and maneuverability I think the Enterprise-E can
outfly a battlestar.

>
>>> I love BSG too, but comparing it to Trek is to compare
>>> apples and oranges. They are two very different types
>>> of shows.
>>
>> Yes, they are. But they are both space based sci-fi.
>
> And Ally McBeal, Boston Legal and The Practice are all legal
> shows based in Boston, but you can hardly compare them!
>
>> But
>> BSG gets a "Yes" on two important questions in my mind.
>>
>> 1. Would I like to be there, on that ship with those people?
>> 2. Is there a WOW facter and am I looking forward to seeing the
>> episode? BSG - Yes, Yes
>> TOS - Yes, Yes
>> TNG - Yes, Yes
>> DS9 - Yes, Yes
>> Voy - No, Sometimes
>> Ent - No, Very slight
>
> Hey, I'd take an interstellar trip with pretty much ANY crew!
> But yeah, I rarely looked forward to seeing the next Voyager
> ep all that much and very rarely with Enterprise.
>

Agreed.

> For me, the best thing about Galactica is that the people are
> actual Human beings, who act like actual people do. They goof
> off, get drunk, make mistakes, all the stuff that we all do in
> our own lives.
>
> But one of the things I like about Trek is that they are NOT
> all that much like real people - they're BETTER! Trek says
> people can and will become more than they are, and I like that
> idea.

We can certainly hope so.

--
Wouter Valentijn

www.wouter.cc
www.nksf.nl
www.zeppodunsel.nl
liam=mail

"The best diplomat I know is a fully activated phaser bank."

Mister Scott, 'A Taste of Armageddon', Star Trek.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267948 ]

Di, 23 Mai 2006 20:10

Graham Kennedy

Wouter Valentijn wrote:
> I thought the standard compliment of a battlestar of Galactica's class was
> about 2,000?
> It was mentioned in the pilot miniseries.

I don't recall them mentioning it then, but maybe
I'm just forgetting.

When Pegasus arrived the survivors total in the
credits went up by about 2,500, IIRC.

> As for accommodations... Federation Starships aren't really battleships.
> Except for the Defiant class.

Even Defiant's accommodation seems to be better than
Galacticas - standard rooms are for two people so
no mass barracks as Galactica has.

>> There's (deliberately) lots we don't know about Galactica's
>> tech. It's pretty obvious to me that their weapons tech lags
>> way behind Treks. They don't seem to do much in the way of
>> aiming, it's more like WWII style "saturate the sky" tactics.
>> They might put up a good showing with liberal use of nukes,
>> but nukes are rarely used for some reason and even then are
>> unlikely to do that much against shields.
>>
>> Interestingly, since Galactica can't fly around at FTL speeds
>> then it couldn't possibly catch the Enterprise-E if it wanted
>> to run away. And since the Enterprise-E can't jump around
>> in an instant like Galactica can then it very probably couldn't
>> catch the Galactica if it wanted to run away. So ultimately,
>> any battle between the two would probably be a draw!
>
> Doesn't the Galactica need some preparation time before it can jump? I've
> seen the first season and I recall a countdown. Otherwise they would jump
> blind.

They need some time, yeah, but not very much. I don't think
we've ever seen a situation where they jumped and then jumped
again as fast as possible, so it's hard to judge the minimum.
We do know they can calculate and execute a new jump in less
than 33 minutes.

> And at sublight speeds and maneuverability I think the Enterprise-E can
> outfly a battlestar.

Yes, I'd say so too. Even the fighters only pull a few
gees - ten or twelve at the most, say. That's nothing
to an impulse engine.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267955 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 11:15

Wouter Valentijn

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> I thought the standard compliment of a battlestar of Galactica's
>> class was about 2,000?
>> It was mentioned in the pilot miniseries.
>
> I don't recall them mentioning it then, but maybe
> I'm just forgetting.

Just watched the mini again (it was still on my HD recorder).
Remember when the Galactica docks at Ragnar station? Chief Tyrol confronts
Leoben Conoy and says that there are 'over 2,000' on the ship.
So, somewhat higher than 2,000 I guess. They lost 85 in the fire plus
several dozen viper pilots who flew the mark VII.
BTW, just recently it struck me the name Ragnar might be derived from the
Norse-Germanic myth of Ragnarok, the twilight of their gods.

>
> When Pegasus arrived the survivors total in the
> credits went up by about 2,500, IIRC.
>

I look forward to that!

>> As for accommodations... Federation Starships aren't really
>> battleships. Except for the Defiant class.
>
> Even Defiant's accommodation seems to be better than
> Galacticas - standard rooms are for two people so
> no mass barracks as Galactica has.
>

Yeah, given a choice I'd probably prefer to hitch a ride on a Defiant class
ship. ;-)

>>> There's (deliberately) lots we don't know about Galactica's
>>> tech. It's pretty obvious to me that their weapons tech lags
>>> way behind Treks. They don't seem to do much in the way of
>>> aiming, it's more like WWII style "saturate the sky" tactics.
>>> They might put up a good showing with liberal use of nukes,
>>> but nukes are rarely used for some reason and even then are
>>> unlikely to do that much against shields.
>>>
>>> Interestingly, since Galactica can't fly around at FTL speeds
>>> then it couldn't possibly catch the Enterprise-E if it wanted
>>> to run away. And since the Enterprise-E can't jump around
>>> in an instant like Galactica can then it very probably couldn't
>>> catch the Galactica if it wanted to run away. So ultimately,
>>> any battle between the two would probably be a draw!
>>
>> Doesn't the Galactica need some preparation time before it can jump?
>> I've seen the first season and I recall a countdown. Otherwise they
>> would jump blind.
>
> They need some time, yeah, but not very much. I don't think
> we've ever seen a situation where they jumped and then jumped
> again as fast as possible, so it's hard to judge the minimum.
> We do know they can calculate and execute a new jump in less
> than 33 minutes.

And when the coordinates are very clear they can jump in less time. Like
that first jump they did to Ragnar station.

<snip>

--
Wouter Valentijn

www.wouter.cc
www.nksf.nl
www.zeppodunsel.nl
liam=mail

"The best diplomat I know is a fully activated phaser bank."

Mister Scott, 'A Taste of Armageddon', Star Trek.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267958 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 14:23

3D Master

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Numan wrote:
>> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
>> news:fxBbg.467$TF.3329 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
> Hey, I'd take an interstellar trip with pretty much ANY crew!
> But yeah, I rarely looked forward to seeing the next Voyager
> ep all that much and very rarely with Enterprise.
>
> For me, the best thing about Galactica is that the people are
> actual Human beings, who act like actual people do. They goof
> off, get drunk, make mistakes, all the stuff that we all do in
> our own lives.
>
> But one of the things I like about Trek is that they are NOT
> all that much like real people - they're BETTER! Trek says
> people can and will become more than they are, and I like that
> idea.

Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
ultimately going doing pretty quickly.

I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be there;
with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the whole lot
of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were just all but
wiped out, but every single last one of them is still stuck in their own
petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their humanity deserved to
live, well I've got his answer for him right here: no.

There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires to
grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and gloom and
look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in existence, and
the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more in common with
the average Trek character than the tripe that's masquerading as humans
in that GINO show.

3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander

"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~

Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267959 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 18:43

Graham Kennedy

3D Master wrote:

> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>
> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be there;
> with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the whole lot
> of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were just all but
> wiped out, but every single last one of them is still stuck in their own
> petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their humanity deserved to
> live, well I've got his answer for him right here: no.
>
> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires to
> grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and gloom and
> look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in existence, and
> the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more in common with
> the average Trek character than the tripe that's masquerading as humans
> in that GINO show.

That's exactly what makes it realistic.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267960 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 18:45

Graham Kennedy

Wouter Valentijn wrote:
> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>> I thought the standard compliment of a battlestar of Galactica's
>>> class was about 2,000?
>>> It was mentioned in the pilot miniseries.
>> I don't recall them mentioning it then, but maybe
>> I'm just forgetting.
>
> Just watched the mini again (it was still on my HD recorder).
> Remember when the Galactica docks at Ragnar station? Chief Tyrol confronts
> Leoben Conoy and says that there are 'over 2,000' on the ship.
> So, somewhat higher than 2,000 I guess. They lost 85 in the fire plus
> several dozen viper pilots who flew the mark VII.

And you gotta wonder just how much of a full complement
Galactica had in the first place. It was on it's way to
retirement to become a museum when the miniseries opened.

> BTW, just recently it struck me the name Ragnar might be derived from the
> Norse-Germanic myth of Ragnarok, the twilight of their gods.

Wouldn't be at all surprised.

>> They need some time, yeah, but not very much. I don't think
>> we've ever seen a situation where they jumped and then jumped
>> again as fast as possible, so it's hard to judge the minimum.
>> We do know they can calculate and execute a new jump in less
>> than 33 minutes.
>
> And when the coordinates are very clear they can jump in less time. Like
> that first jump they did to Ragnar station.

They had quite a long time to calculate that one, though.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267961 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 20:01

Wouter Valentijn

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>> Wouter Valentijn wrote:
>>>> I thought the standard compliment of a battlestar of Galactica's
>>>> class was about 2,000?
>>>> It was mentioned in the pilot miniseries.
>>> I don't recall them mentioning it then, but maybe
>>> I'm just forgetting.
>>
>> Just watched the mini again (it was still on my HD recorder).
>> Remember when the Galactica docks at Ragnar station? Chief Tyrol
>> confronts Leoben Conoy and says that there are 'over 2,000' on the
>> ship. So, somewhat higher than 2,000 I guess. They lost 85 in the fire
>> plus
>> several dozen viper pilots who flew the mark VII.
>
> And you gotta wonder just how much of a full complement
> Galactica had in the first place. It was on it's way to
> retirement to become a museum when the miniseries opened.
>

I do.

--
Wouter Valentijn

www.wouter.cc
www.nksf.nl
www.zeppodunsel.nl
liam=mail

"The best diplomat I know is a fully activated phaser bank."

Mister Scott, 'A Taste of Armageddon', Star Trek.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267962 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 21:03

3D Master

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> 3D Master wrote:
>
>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>
>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
>> here: no.
>>
>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires to
>> grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and gloom
>> and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in existence,
>> and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more in common
>> with the average Trek character than the tripe that's masquerading as
>> humans in that GINO show.
>
> That's exactly what makes it realistic.

Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.

3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander

"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~

Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267964 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 21:55

Graham Kennedy

3D Master wrote:
> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>> 3D Master wrote:
>>
>>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>>
>>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
>>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
>>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
>>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
>>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
>>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
>>> here: no.
>>>
>>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires
>>> to grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and
>>> gloom and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in
>>> existence, and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more
>>> in common with the average Trek character than the tripe that's
>>> masquerading as humans in that GINO show.
>>
>> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
>
> Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
> planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.

There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
evil. It was just Human.

People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
heroism.

Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
statues of once they're dead.

That's what I like about Galactica.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267966 ]

Mi, 24 Mai 2006 23:14

Kweeg

"Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
news:8S2dg.515$TF.4462 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
> 3D Master wrote:
> > Graham Kennedy wrote:
> >> 3D Master wrote:
> >>
> >>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
> >>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
> >>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
> >>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
> >>>
> >>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
> >>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
> >>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
> >>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
> >>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
> >>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
> >>> here: no.
> >>>
> >>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires
> >>> to grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and
> >>> gloom and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in
> >>> existence, and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more
> >>> in common with the average Trek character than the tripe that's
> >>> masquerading as humans in that GINO show.
> >>
> >> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
> >
> > Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
> > planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.
>
> There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
> evil. It was just Human.
>
> People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
> their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
> people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
> heroism.
>
> Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
> unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
> Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
> for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
> stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
> absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
> will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
> She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
> sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
> statues of once they're dead.
>
> That's what I like about Galactica.

Indeed.
I think too many people expect too much of real life persons as well. A
politician, police constable, member of the armed forces or teacher can't be
seen acting like a human being. The masses expect them to be perfect *all*
the time when they don't even expect it from the people they actually know
or even from themselves. People need to remove their rose coloured glasses
once and a while.

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267967 ]

Do, 25 Mai 2006 22:18

3D Master

Kweeg wrote:
> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
> news:8S2dg.515$TF.4462 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
>> 3D Master wrote:
>>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>>>>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>>>>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>>>>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
>>>>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
>>>>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
>>>>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
>>>>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
>>>>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
>>>>> here: no.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires
>>>>> to grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and
>>>>> gloom and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in
>>>>> existence, and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more
>>>>> in common with the average Trek character than the tripe that's
>>>>> masquerading as humans in that GINO show.
>>>> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
>>> Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
>>> planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.
>> There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
>> evil. It was just Human.
>>
>> People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
>> their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
>> people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
>> heroism.
>>
>> Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
>> unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
>> Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
>> for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
>> stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
>> absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
>> will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
>> She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
>> sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
>> statues of once they're dead.
>>
>> That's what I like about Galactica.
>
> Indeed.
> I think too many people expect too much of real life persons as well. A
> politician, police constable, member of the armed forces or teacher can't be
> seen acting like a human being. The masses expect them to be perfect *all*
> the time when they don't even expect it from the people they actually know
> or even from themselves. People need to remove their rose coloured glasses
> once and a while.

:rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for money.
And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on. I don't care if someone likes
to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks and gets drunk, I
don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on his wife. But the
people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that, they hit people,
they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even as much as half, no
it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM. And that just isn't realistic.
There's always at least one person who isn't a cynical bastard, always
at least one who is not a drunk, at least one person who'll make fun of
even the most dire situations to lighten the mood, there's at least one
person who doesn't give up hope, and there's at least one person who
cares about more people than just him/herself.

In Battlestar Galactica; no one does. And worse; it isn't at a time of
standard operating procedure, no, their civilization was just all but
wiped out, and the ones who did are bent on destroying them too. And
still, even then, they can't put aside their petty, selfish desires,
their little ridiculous hangups, and their self-destructive impulses.
Not one, has the damn ability to lift up their heads and go: "My god.
It's time we shape up. It's to stop with unimportant stuff and focus on
the important stuff: survival."

Go to Africa, to the people who had their village burned down, to the
people in refugee camps, to the people who need to move because a
hurricane swept passed, because a dust storm destroyed their crops,
because humans murdered their neighbors and most of their families. You
know what you'll find? None of them will be beating up the family over
for no reason. None of them will try and look for alcohol to consume.
None of them will care about a little picture, none of them will
continue little unimportant feuds. All of them, except a few sniffling
few bastards who shouldn't be living anyway, will be focusing on the
important stuff, and leave the unimportant stuff behind; they'll be
focusing on survival, and making a new life somewhere else.

But in BSG; not one. And this shows just how unrealistic it is; and how
completely skewed the writers views are, as well as those who think that
that is "realistic". The problem of luxury. So much luxury they can't
even figure out how humans would react if all that luxury is gone and
they're struggling for survival the next day.

And if you think; that a person who genuinely doesn't give a shit about
people in his day to day affairs, is suddenly going to risk his life for
someone else, you're deluding yourself. The only way they might think
about doing that, if they it looks good, and reflects goof of them;
they'd be doing it for their own gain, not because it's the good, and
right thing to do.

3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander

"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~

Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267968 ]

Do, 25 Mai 2006 22:41

Snake

"Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
news:8S2dg.515$TF.4462 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
> 3D Master wrote:
>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>
>>>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>>>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>>>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>>>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>>>
>>>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be there;
>>>> with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the whole
>>>> lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were just
>>>> all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still stuck in
>>>> their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their humanity
>>>> deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right here: no.
>>>>
>>>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires to
>>>> grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and gloom and
>>>> look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in existence, and
>>>> the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more in common with
>>>> the average Trek character than the tripe that's masquerading as humans
>>>> in that GINO show.
>>>
>>> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
>>
>> Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this planet,
>> but not every single last human being is pure evil.
>
> There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
> evil. It was just Human.
>
> People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
> their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
> people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
> heroism.
>
> Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
> unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
> Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
> for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
> stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
> absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
> will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
> She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
> sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
> statues of once they're dead.
>
> That's what I like about Galactica.

But will we - and therefore "them", that is humans as shown in BSG - /still/
be that way by the time we/they reach the technological level that [even]
BSG shows?

Will we be - and can we continue to be - as petty as we are (and as shown in
BSG's fantasy) while still bringing an entire civilization into starflight?

I would humbly answer "No".

In the same manner that we have advanced (level debatable) from the 1700's
(where "social consciousness" was completely unheard of, now an ingrained
part of our everyday reality - from Europe's socialized medicine to
America's Social Security Administration)...

and we are quite tremendously changed from Roman Empire times (where human
sacrifice inside entertainment was considered acceptable)...

I do not think we will be the same by the time we can leap between star
systems by 'pushing a button'.

It is the pettiness that keeps us back as a race. To "advance" requires
more than simply developments in technology...it requires the /wisdom/ to
use that intelligence (as we (barely) proved with the thermonuclear device).

When technological advancement causes humans to leap between the stars will
such pettiness be /tolerated/ between one another? Won't we expect more of
ourselves, and those around us?

If this is not true then how do we rationalize the advancement we have made
over the past 10,000 years of civilization?

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267969 ]

Do, 25 Mai 2006 23:53

Graham Kennedy

3D Master wrote:

> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for money.
> And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on. I don't care if someone likes
> to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks and gets drunk, I
> don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on his wife. But the
> people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that, they hit people,
> they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even as much as half, no
> it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM. And that just isn't realistic.
> There's always at least one person who isn't a cynical bastard, always
> at least one who is not a drunk, at least one person who'll make fun of
> even the most dire situations to lighten the mood, there's at least one
> person who doesn't give up hope, and there's at least one person who
> cares about more people than just him/herself.

And Galactica is full of such people. The show is FULL
of people who have not given up hope, who care about
others - remember, not one single member of Galactica's
crew has ever resigned, despite their situation. They
put their lives on the line for others on a day to day
basis.

The whole point of the show is that these fine brave
selfless people are simultaneously just as screwed up
as anybody else, if not more so.

> In Battlestar Galactica; no one does. And worse; it isn't at a time of
> standard operating procedure, no, their civilization was just all but
> wiped out, and the ones who did are bent on destroying them too.

Dude, did it not occur to you that if they behave worse
than average it's precisely *because* of that? They're
up shit creek, they're under constant pressure with no
end in sight - and people don't behave nice when they
are desperate.

> still, even then, they can't put aside their petty, selfish desires,
> their little ridiculous hangups, and their self-destructive impulses.
> Not one, has the damn ability to lift up their heads and go: "My god.
> It's time we shape up. It's to stop with unimportant stuff and focus on
> the important stuff: survival."

They DO do that. Starbuck, Apollo and the rest do that
every time they climb into a cockpit.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267970 ]

Do, 25 Mai 2006 23:59

Graham Kennedy

Snake wrote:

> But will we - and therefore "them", that is humans as shown in BSG - /still/
> be that way by the time we/they reach the technological level that [even]
> BSG shows?
>
> Will we be - and can we continue to be - as petty as we are (and as shown in
> BSG's fantasy) while still bringing an entire civilization into starflight?
>
> I would humbly answer "No".
>
> In the same manner that we have advanced (level debatable) from the 1700's
> (where "social consciousness" was completely unheard of, now an ingrained
> part of our everyday reality - from Europe's socialized medicine to
> America's Social Security Administration)...
>
> and we are quite tremendously changed from Roman Empire times (where human
> sacrifice inside entertainment was considered acceptable)...
>
> I do not think we will be the same by the time we can leap between star
> systems by 'pushing a button'.
>
> It is the pettiness that keeps us back as a race. To "advance" requires
> more than simply developments in technology...it requires the /wisdom/ to
> use that intelligence (as we (barely) proved with the thermonuclear device).
>
> When technological advancement causes humans to leap between the stars will
> such pettiness be /tolerated/ between one another? Won't we expect more of
> ourselves, and those around us?
>
> If this is not true then how do we rationalize the advancement we have made
> over the past 10,000 years of civilization?

I think the fundamental nature of people has not changed,
and probably will never change. Not on an individual level.
We are no different from the crowds at the Colesseum - you
only have to watch the crowd at a boxing match to see that
exact same sentiment in the here and now.

What has changed is the way we deal with such drives; we
don't let those boxers kill one another for instance. But
I see that not as an inevitable march of progress, but
merely random circumstance. We just happen to be in a time
when we're more fussy about killing than the Romans were.

The Romans probably saw themselves as morally superior to
previous civilisations precisely because they did have the
kind of culture that had death as entertainment. And I have
no doubt at all that a hundred or a thousand years from now
there could be a civilisation with exactly that same attitude,
regardless of their technological advancement.

Of course, I like to *hope* that the above is not really
true, and a major reason I like Trek is that it posits
such. But realistically, it ain't gonna happen.

--
Graham Kennedy

Creator and Author,
Daystrom Institute Technical Library
http://www.ditl.org

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267971 ]

Fr, 26 Mai 2006 01:45

3D Master

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> 3D Master wrote:
>
>> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for
>> money. And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on. I don't care if
>> someone likes to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks
>> and gets drunk, I don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on
>> his wife. But the people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that,
>> they hit people, they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even
>> as much as half, no it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM. And that just
>> isn't realistic. There's always at least one person who isn't a
>> cynical bastard, always at least one who is not a drunk, at least one
>> person who'll make fun of even the most dire situations to lighten the
>> mood, there's at least one person who doesn't give up hope, and
>> there's at least one person who cares about more people than just
>> him/herself.
>
> And Galactica is full of such people. The show is FULL
> of people who have not given up hope, who care about
> others - remember, not one single member of Galactica's
> crew has ever resigned, despite their situation. They
> put their lives on the line for others on a day to day
> basis.

As opposed to what? Killing themselves? Do nothing and wait for the
Cylons to come and kill them? They don't have another choice, that's not
bravery, that's not going forward, and saying, "Okay, that's done. No
sense crying over it, we gotta move on." They're just moving because
there's nothing else to do, and they couldn't even manage to do that,
they settled down on a planet. None of them manage to set aside their
petty hangups, none, not a one.

> The whole point of the show is that these fine brave
> selfless people are simultaneously just as screwed up
> as anybody else, if not more so.

No, not "if not more so", more so period. To the ridiculous extreme.
There isn't a single one person who doesn't have some fatal, ridiculous,
petty luxury problem, they can't seem to put aside.

>> In Battlestar Galactica; no one does. And worse; it isn't at a time of
>> standard operating procedure, no, their civilization was just all but
>> wiped out, and the ones who did are bent on destroying them too.
>
> Dude, did it not occur to you that if they behave worse
> than average it's precisely *because* of that? They're
> up shit creek, they're under constant pressure with no
> end in sight - and people don't behave nice when they
> are desperate.

No, and that's not true. They were already acting like that BEFORE
they're destruction. It isn't something that was "Oh, my god we're
fucked, let's start drinking." It's "Oh, we're fucked, well who cares,
let's drink some more."

And again, I direct you to the Africa example. In real life, the
opposite happens. When we get to the point of "we're fucked", you look
at all your petty, useless, little hangups and problems, and realize,
"What the hell does that matter? Time to get going! Time to start
working! I've been shitting myself. Let's roll!"

Drinking. Father/son quarrels. Knocking people out for the hell of it.
Those aren't the problems of someone in trouble, those are luxury
problems. And dipshits who can't see the unimportance of luxury
problems, are nuts, bastards, evil, whatever. When I watch Battlestar
Galactica and I quit a long time ago, the only urge I get is to kill the
bastards. If find myself cheering on the Cylons. Go little doggies!
Kill! Kill!

>> still, even then, they can't put aside their petty, selfish desires,
>> their little ridiculous hangups, and their self-destructive impulses.
>> Not one, has the damn ability to lift up their heads and go: "My god.
>> It's time we shape up. It's to stop with unimportant stuff and focus
>> on the important stuff: survival."
>
> They DO do that. Starbuck, Apollo and the rest do that
> every time they climb into a cockpit.

No, they, don't. If they did, they wouldn't go back to their petty,
selfish little bullshit after they get back out of the cockpit. They
just sit in that cockpit because there's nothing else to do short of
killing themselves.

3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander

"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~

Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267972 ]

Fr, 26 Mai 2006 02:41

Kweeg

"3D Master" <3d.master [at] chello.nl> wrote in message
news:7d345$44764182$3ec2ee50$17293 [at] news.chello.nl...
> Graham Kennedy wrote:
> > 3D Master wrote:
> >
> >> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for
> >> money. And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on.

Then you must be just naive.

>>> I don't care if
> >> someone likes to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks
> >> and gets drunk, I don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on
> >> his wife. But the people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that,
> >> they hit people, they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even
> >> as much as half, no it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM.

err no.... Gaeta? Cally? Roslin? Billy? Priestess Elosha?

<snip>
> > Dude, did it not occur to you that if they behave worse
> > than average it's precisely *because* of that? They're
> > up shit creek, they're under constant pressure with no
> > end in sight - and people don't behave nice when they
> > are desperate.
>
> No, and that's not true. They were already acting like that BEFORE
> they're destruction. It isn't something that was "Oh, my god we're
> fucked, let's start drinking." It's "Oh, we're fucked, well who cares,
> let's drink some more."

So Starbuck and Tigh huh playing cards and having drinks is everyone huh?

> And again, I direct you to the Africa example. In real life, the
> opposite happens. When we get to the point of "we're fucked", you look
> at all your petty, useless, little hangups and problems, and realize,
> "What the hell does that matter? Time to get going! Time to start
> working! I've been shitting myself. Let's roll!"

So you've been there? Talked with people that have? I have. And they tell me
*really* bad shit goes down when people are desperate, to say otherwise is
ludicrous. Remember the genocide in Rwanda? Somalia? The goings on right now
in the Darfur region, yep they're all getting along there, no bad things
happening..... do you know anything about post traumatic stress syndrome?
Know anyone that has gone though it? BSG has a pretty accurate portrayal of
it with some of the characters.
<snip>

Here's a thought, if the show annoys you so much don't watch it and
especially don't post to a Battlestar Galactica NG!

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267973 ]

Fr, 26 Mai 2006 13:01

3D Master

Kweeg wrote:
> "3D Master" <3d.master [at] chello.nl> wrote in message
> news:7d345$44764182$3ec2ee50$17293 [at] news.chello.nl...
>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>
>>>> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for
>>>> money. And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on.
>
> Then you must be just naive.
>
>
>>>> I don't care if
>>>> someone likes to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks
>>>> and gets drunk, I don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on
>>>> his wife. But the people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that,
>>>> they hit people, they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even
>>>> as much as half, no it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM.
>
> err no.... Gaeta? Cally? Roslin? Billy? Priestess Elosha?

Yep, they too.

>>> Dude, did it not occur to you that if they behave worse
>>> than average it's precisely *because* of that? They're
>>> up shit creek, they're under constant pressure with no
>>> end in sight - and people don't behave nice when they
>>> are desperate.
>> No, and that's not true. They were already acting like that BEFORE
>> they're destruction. It isn't something that was "Oh, my god we're
>> fucked, let's start drinking." It's "Oh, we're fucked, well who cares,
>> let's drink some more."
>
> So Starbuck and Tigh huh playing cards and having drinks is everyone huh?

Nope, but the others have something else.

>> And again, I direct you to the Africa example. In real life, the
>> opposite happens. When we get to the point of "we're fucked", you look
>> at all your petty, useless, little hangups and problems, and realize,
>> "What the hell does that matter? Time to get going! Time to start
>> working! I've been shitting myself. Let's roll!"
>
> So you've been there? Talked with people that have? I have. And they tell me
> *really* bad shit goes down when people are desperate, to say otherwise is
> ludicrous. Remember the genocide in Rwanda? Somalia? The goings on right now
> in the Darfur region, yep they're all getting along there, no bad things
> happening..... do you know anything about post traumatic stress syndrome?
> Know anyone that has gone though it? BSG has a pretty accurate portrayal of
> it with some of the characters.
> <snip>

Yeah, well, the bad stuff going in Rwanda and stuff, are not Colonials,
they're the Cylons. The Colonials are the one's defending and fleeing
from the bad stuff going on down there. And they're drinking to get
drunk, and beating up people just of the sake of beating up people; they
(realize they) don't have time for bullshit like that, for one thing.

> Here's a thought, if the show annoys you so much don't watch it and
> especially don't post to a Battlestar Galactica NG!

It's not a Battlestar Galactica NG! It's a Star Trek NG! Real smart
aren't ya?

3D Master
--
~~~~~
"I've got something to say; it's better to burn out than to fade away!"
- The Kurgan, Highlander

"Give me some sugar, baby!"
- Ashley J. 'Ash' Williams, Army of Darkness
~~~~~

Author of several stories, which can be found here:
http://members.chello.nl/~jg.temolder1/

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267975 ]

Fr, 26 Mai 2006 21:52

Kweeg

"3D Master" <3d.master [at] chello.nl> wrote in message
news:1cae4$4476dfd8$3ec2ee50$20524 [at] news.chello.nl...
> Kweeg wrote:
> > "3D Master" <3d.master [at] chello.nl> wrote in message
> > news:7d345$44764182$3ec2ee50$17293 [at] news.chello.nl...
> >> Graham Kennedy wrote:
> >>> 3D Master wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for
> >>>> money. And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on.
> >
> > Then you must be just naive.
> >
> >
> >>>> I don't care if
> >>>> someone likes to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks
> >>>> and gets drunk, I don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on
> >>>> his wife. But the people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do
that,
> >>>> they hit people, they abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even
> >>>> as much as half, no it's EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM.
> >
> > err no.... Gaeta? Cally? Roslin? Billy? Priestess Elosha?
>
> Yep, they too.

Got some examples of them being so bad?

> >>> Dude, did it not occur to you that if they behave worse
> >>> than average it's precisely *because* of that? They're
> >>> up shit creek, they're under constant pressure with no
> >>> end in sight - and people don't behave nice when they
> >>> are desperate.
> >> No, and that's not true. They were already acting like that BEFORE
> >> they're destruction. It isn't something that was "Oh, my god we're
> >> fucked, let's start drinking." It's "Oh, we're fucked, well who cares,
> >> let's drink some more."
> >
> > So Starbuck and Tigh huh playing cards and having drinks is everyone
huh?
>
> Nope, but the others have something else.

What's that?

> >> And again, I direct you to the Africa example. In real life, the
> >> opposite happens. When we get to the point of "we're fucked", you look
> >> at all your petty, useless, little hangups and problems, and realize,
> >> "What the hell does that matter? Time to get going! Time to start
> >> working! I've been shitting myself. Let's roll!"
> >
> > So you've been there? Talked with people that have? I have. And they
tell me
> > *really* bad shit goes down when people are desperate, to say otherwise
is
> > ludicrous. Remember the genocide in Rwanda? Somalia? The goings on right
now
> > in the Darfur region, yep they're all getting along there, no bad things
> > happening..... do you know anything about post traumatic stress
syndrome?
> > Know anyone that has gone though it? BSG has a pretty accurate portrayal
of
> > it with some of the characters.
> > <snip>
>
> Yeah, well, the bad stuff going in Rwanda and stuff, are not Colonials,
> they're the Cylons. The Colonials are the one's defending and fleeing
> from the bad stuff going on down there. And they're drinking to get
> drunk, and beating up people just of the sake of beating up people; they
> (realize they) don't have time for bullshit like that, for one thing.

You really don't know what is going on there do you? Maybe you should find
out before spouting off about it. Your examples consistantly prove the exact
opposite of what you are trying to illustrate.

> > Here's a thought, if the show annoys you so much don't watch it and
> > especially don't post to a Battlestar Galactica NG!
>
> It's not a Battlestar Galactica NG! It's a Star Trek NG! Real smart
> aren't ya?

Is that all you have? If it is, give it up and stick your head back in the
sand obviously that's where you get your world view from. That or
Telitubbies.
--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #267997 ]

Mo, 29 Mai 2006 20:10

Josh Rambo

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Yes, I'd say so too. Even the fighters only pull a few
> gees - ten or twelve at the most, say. That's nothing
> to an impulse engine.
>

Err... the fighters flip end for end in .35 seconds (season 1, ep 4).
That's more maneuverable than the Enterprise-E, methinks.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #268011 ]

Di, 30 Mai 2006 23:28

Numan

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #268012 ]

Di, 30 Mai 2006 23:31

Numan

"3D Master" <3d.master [at] chello.nl> wrote in message
news:c654b$447610fe$3ec2ee50$20279 [at] news.chello.nl...
> Kweeg wrote:
>> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
>> news:8S2dg.515$TF.4462 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>>>>>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>>>>>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>>>>>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
>>>>>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
>>>>>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
>>>>>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
>>>>>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
>>>>>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
>>>>>> here: no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires
>>>>>> to grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and
>>>>>> gloom and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in
>>>>>> existence, and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more
>>>>>> in common with the average Trek character than the tripe that's
>>>>>> masquerading as humans in that GINO show.
>>>>> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
>>>> Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
>>>> planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.
>>> There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
>>> evil. It was just Human.
>>>
>>> People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
>>> their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
>>> people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
>>> heroism.
>>>
>>> Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
>>> unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
>>> Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
>>> for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
>>> stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
>>> absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
>>> will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
>>> She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
>>> sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
>>> statues of once they're dead.
>>>
>>> That's what I like about Galactica.
>>
>> Indeed.
>> I think too many people expect too much of real life persons as well. A
>> politician, police constable, member of the armed forces or teacher can't
>> be
>> seen acting like a human being. The masses expect them to be perfect
>> *all*
>> the time when they don't even expect it from the people they actually
>> know
>> or even from themselves. People need to remove their rose coloured
>> glasses
>> once and a while.
>
> :rolleyes: I don't get drunk, I don't do drugs, I don't care for money.
> And I don't have rose-coloured glasses on. I don't care if someone likes
> to party, I don't care if someone enjoys a few drinks and gets drunk, I
> don't care if someone enjoys sex and even cheats on his wife. But the
> people in Battlestar Galactica don't simply do that, they hit people, they
> abuse people. And it isn't just a few, or even as much as half, no it's
> EVERY SINGLE LAST ONE OF THEM. And that just isn't realistic. There's
> always at least one person who isn't a cynical bastard, always at least
> one who is not a drunk, at least one person who'll make fun of even the
> most dire situations to lighten the mood, there's at least one person who
> doesn't give up hope, and there's at least one person who cares about more
> people than just him/herself.
>
> In Battlestar Galactica; no one does. And worse; it isn't at a time of
> standard operating procedure, no, their civilization was just all but
> wiped out, and the ones who did are bent on destroying them too. And
> still, even then, they can't put aside their petty, selfish desires, their
> little ridiculous hangups, and their self-destructive impulses. Not one,
> has the damn ability to lift up their heads and go: "My god. It's time we
> shape up. It's to stop with unimportant stuff and focus on the important
> stuff: survival."
>
> Go to Africa, to the people who had their village burned down, to the
> people in refugee camps, to the people who need to move because a
> hurricane swept passed, because a dust storm destroyed their crops,
> because humans murdered their neighbors and most of their families. You
> know what you'll find? None of them will be beating up the family over for
> no reason. None of them will try and look for alcohol to consume. None of
> them will care about a little picture, none of them will continue little
> unimportant feuds. All of them, except a few sniffling few bastards who
> shouldn't be living anyway, will be focusing on the important stuff, and
> leave the unimportant stuff behind; they'll be focusing on survival, and
> making a new life somewhere else.
>
> But in BSG; not one. And this shows just how unrealistic it is; and how
> completely skewed the writers views are, as well as those who think that
> that is "realistic". The problem of luxury. So much luxury they can't even
> figure out how humans would react if all that luxury is gone and they're
> struggling for survival the next day.
>
> And if you think; that a person who genuinely doesn't give a shit about
> people in his day to day affairs, is suddenly going to risk his life for
> someone else, you're deluding yourself. The only way they might think
> about doing that, if they it looks good, and reflects goof of them; they'd
> be doing it for their own gain, not because it's the good, and right thing
> to do.
>
>
> 3D Master

I don't remember Mr. Gador hitting or abusing anyone. What about
the girl who is the communications specialist? (The girl Billy liked)

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #279176 ]

Do, 08 Juni 2006 16:11

Snake

"Numan" <tbrdmann [at] sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:nO2fg.29585$fb2.12944 [at] newssvr27.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "Graham Kennedy" <graham [at] ditl.org> wrote in message
> news:8S2dg.515$TF.4462 [at] news-1.opaltelecom.net...
>> 3D Master wrote:
>>> Graham Kennedy wrote:
>>>> 3D Master wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Quite frankly, the new Galactica doesn't stand a hope in hell against
>>>>> the E-E, it doesn't even stand a chance against the NX-01, and that's
>>>>> saying something. The Old Galactica I see giving a good fight, but
>>>>> ultimately going doing pretty quickly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't want to be on the new Galactica... okay, I do want to be
>>>>> there; with a machine gun and personal shields so I can slaughter the
>>>>> whole lot of them. Those people aren't human: they're evil. They were
>>>>> just all but wiped out, but every single last one of them is still
>>>>> stuck in their own petty little hangups. Adama asked whether their
>>>>> humanity deserved to live, well I've got his answer for him right
>>>>> here: no.
>>>>>
>>>>> There's not a single hero around them, not a single one who aspires to
>>>>> grow, to be a little better then next day. It's just doom and gloom
>>>>> and look how evil humanity is; not a single good person in existence,
>>>>> and the only urge I get is to mow them down. I've got more in common
>>>>> with the average Trek character than the tripe that's masquerading as
>>>>> humans in that GINO show.
>>>>
>>>> That's exactly what makes it realistic.
>>>
>>> Sorry, but no. There are quite a bunch of evil bastards upon this
>>> planet, but not every single last human being is pure evil.
>>
>> There's the thing, you see. What you described was not
>> evil. It was just Human.
>>
>> People are people. They get drunk, they screw up, they beat
>> their wives, cheat on their taxes. And then those self same
>> people go out and perform deeds of absolute selflessness and
>> heroism.
>>
>> Look at Starbuck. She's a drunk, she's immature, she'd deeply
>> unconcerned for other people's feelings much of the time.
>> Yet she climbs into a cockpit and puts her life on the line
>> for a bunch of complete strangers on a regular basis. She's
>> stated that whilst the fleet may reach Earth one day, she's
>> absolutely certain that she won't - one day some Cylon pilot
>> will get lucky or catch her on an off day, and she'll die.
>> She knows this. But she still does it anyway. She is by any
>> sensible definition a hero, the kind of person we build
>> statues of once they're dead.
>>
>> That's what I like about Galactica.
>>
>> --
>> Graham Kennedy
>
> Yes sir. Same for me. Even the doctor isn't pure evil. He
> really does want the humans to survive.

IMHO:

I have not watched a full collection of episodes of BSG, but overall I must
agree with the sentiments of typical "overblown TV drama".

"Let's drop: sex, drugs, alcohol, smoking, philandering, incompetence,
"comfortably identifiable decor" (see: Disney's "The Black Hole" for what I
mean) and selfish greed in the middle of critical situations"

Yes - as Graham and Kweeg note /some/ humans will act poorly no matter what
the situation. However, in regards to many of the main characters - Apollo,
Starbuck, President Baltar - while some humans can be predicted to act
poorly under duress most people, /when faced with a crisis/, will act
"properly".

Apollo and Starbuck, for instance, are *professionals*. They would be
members of what we would consider the equivalent of the "Air Force". They
are CAREER people. It is an insult to career military - especially people
who consider themselves members of an elite faction like the Air Force - to
think that these career military people would collapse into drunken,
outrageous stupors as soon as a difficult situation arises.

No. They would rise to the challenge, expect themselves to perform to the
highest caliber. Why? Because, as /career military/, if they did not show
this predilection during *previous* difficult situations they would have not
been allowed to stay within the force. They would have not been promoted,
possibly demoted, maybe even discharged.

These people are *supposedly* battle-experienced...yet they show no
"professionalism", or precious little.

And this is tolerated. It /might/ have to be tolerated NOW, when they have
no relief troops, no chance of change...but prior to being put into this
situation such behavior would NOT have been tolerated, and that questions
whether or not the behaviors would have been "trained out", or at least
identified and "drummed out", of these individuals. Military training,
especially for career individuals, is not simply to advance skills -
military career training is also meant to polish the personality in order to
deal with the stresses of continuing warfare.

Then, we have the new President. 1 year later...and I SERIOUSLY doubt that
such...incompetence...would be tolerated from the people at large within a
(supposedly) democratic society.

Let's see: "average" person living in squalor and questionable health -
while President does 'not much' to correct this situation and lives
(obviously) a much more comfortable philandering lifestyle?

And neither the general populace - or the military (supposedly) backing this
man - does nothing?

Sorry. History (generally) proves...Unbelievable.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #279178 ]

Do, 08 Juni 2006 20:35

Kweeg

"Snake" <fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote
in message news:geWhg.6106$LN1.3217 [at] trndny01...
<snip>
> "Let's drop: sex, drugs, alcohol, smoking, philandering, incompetence,
> "comfortably identifiable decor" (see: Disney's "The Black Hole" for what
I
> mean) and selfish greed in the middle of critical situations"

LOL!

> Yes - as Graham and Kweeg note /some/ humans will act poorly no matter
what
> the situation. However, in regards to many of the main characters -
Apollo,
> Starbuck, President Baltar - while some humans can be predicted to act
> poorly under duress most people, /when faced with a crisis/, will act
> "properly".
>
> Apollo and Starbuck, for instance, are *professionals*. They would be
> members of what we would consider the equivalent of the "Air Force". They
> are CAREER people. It is an insult to career military - especially people
> who consider themselves members of an elite faction like the Air Force -
to
> think that these career military people would collapse into drunken,
> outrageous stupors as soon as a difficult situation arises.

Actually they would be more apt to be members of what we would consider "the
equivalent of" the Navy, specifically the Fleet Air Arm or a Air Detachment,
they are Naval Aviators. PTSD is not an insult to "career military,"
Starbuck is defiantly suffering from it. The only slightly unbelievable part
is it seems no one is aware of it or has recognised the signs and got help.
When the Chief snapped it was in a very violent exposive manner, thus he got
the help he needed (or did he?) People break down under trying circumstances
even highly trained professionals, albeit usually not as fast as the
untrained. After all we're all only human...

<snip>

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #279179 ]

Do, 08 Juni 2006 21:40

Snake

"Kweeg" <kweeg [at] nospam.shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:p5_hg.89$6%2.68 [at] pd7tw1no...
> Actually they would be more apt to be members of what we would consider
> "the
> equivalent of" the Navy, specifically the Fleet Air Arm or a Air
> Detachment,
> they are Naval Aviators.

You are probably right - but that might make BSG all the worse. In America,
Navy aviators consider themselves "The Best of the Best" and the esprit
de'corps amongst them is very high.

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #279180 ]

Do, 08 Juni 2006 21:46

Numan

"Snake" <fluidstates_NO+SPAM [at] REMOVE-ME.verizon.IHATESPAM.SPAM_VAC.com> wrote
>

> Apollo and Starbuck, for instance, are *professionals*. They would be
> members of what we would consider the equivalent of the "Air Force". They
> are CAREER people. It is an insult to career military - especially people
> who consider themselves members of an elite faction like the Air Force -
> to think that these career military people would collapse into drunken,
> outrageous stupors as soon as a difficult situation arises.

But, having almost all humans killed and then facing an onslaught of Cylons
isn't just a difficult position. Believe me, I was in the military so I know
what it is to have Sargeants come in and kick your ass up around your
shoulder blades. And officers are expected to be near perfect AND
play the politics just right in real life "normalcy". But things are not
normal on this show. At any second they can be wiped out for good
so people are having some drunken sex, etc.. Sounds pretty reasonable to
me.

> No. They would rise to the challenge, expect themselves to perform to the
> highest caliber. Why? Because, as /career military/, if they did not
> show this predilection during *previous* difficult situations they would
> have not been allowed to stay within the force. They would have not been
> promoted, possibly demoted, maybe even discharged.

But they CAN'T be discharged because they don't have any replacements.
Again, normal has been tossed out the window. They have to stay and do
their job. So, for some, the career has become a burdon.

> These people are *supposedly* battle-experienced...yet they show no
> "professionalism", or precious little.

They bounce back and forth just like real people.

> Then, we have the new President. 1 year later...and I SERIOUSLY doubt
> that such...incompetence...would be tolerated from the people at large
> within a (supposedly) democratic society.

Ok, this I agree with 100%. The president at the end of season 2
had no business being there and real people would have been able
to see it.This person has no leadership time or training or any military
training. Isn't even a politician used to telling other to do their biding.
I'm going to have to go back re-watch but I can't remember why
they picked him to be the sub for her to begin with.

> Let's see: "average" person living in squalor and questionable health -
> while President does 'not much' to correct this situation and lives
> (obviously) a much more comfortable philandering lifestyle?

But, would the common people get to witness this presidents screwing
around? Or would only certain people be privy. Lets say George
W. Bush liked to suck cock on the side. Would you and I ever hear
of it? Well. . . now that I think about it. Probably!

Re: Galactica Vs. Enterprise - E [message #279221 ]

Mi, 14 Juni 2006 01:19

zonker

what is everyones obsesion with comparing trek to everyother sci-fi
show. I love trek and wish enterprise would have gotten another season,
but i also love BSG. it is awsome.

Peace
Zonker

http://www.2000ah.blogspot.com

Graham Kennedy wrote:
> Numan wrote:
> > Anyone know of a site that compares the Galactica (Old and/or New)
> > to the Enterprise - E?
>
> Compares in what way? Size, technology level, crew
> complement, number of bathrooms?
>
> > I have to say I am a die hard Trek fan but I absolutely LOVE
> > the new Battlestar Galactica. I just started watching it about 2
> > weeks ago on DVD and I am almost done with the second
> > season. The writing, story lines, character developement, and
> > acting WAY outshine Trek.
>
> I love BSG too, but comparing it to Trek is to compare
> apples and oranges. They are two very different types
> of show.
>
> --
> Graham Kennedy
>
> Creator and Author,
> Daystrom Institute Technical Library
> http://www.ditl.org

Vorheriges Thema:	J.J. Abram directing the next Startrek movie
Nächstes Thema:	Trek2.0

Gehe zu:

-=] Zurück zum Anfang [=-

aktuelle Zeit: Mi Mai 23 01:37:29 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,15911 Sekunden

.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.