| Main > Everything Else |
| This is the best scene in all of Star Trek, prove me wrong |
| << < (18/62) > >> |
| DrakeTungsten:
--- Quote from: pbj on August 16, 2018, 08:40:31 pm ---Now we're arguing about the definition of true science fiction. Classic. :applaud: --- End quote --- I'll just wait silently* for a usual suspect to admonish pbj to "just let people enjoy things." *startinnnng now! |
| shponglefan:
--- Quote from: Vigo on August 16, 2018, 09:01:03 pm ---Really? What is so entrenched in you that you have to unlearn that was so hard? To watch the show in general you have to unlearn our current understanding of space travel, time, matter, intelligence, medicine, etc...our understanding of how DNA works doesn't seem to be any different, especially given it is still a very untapped science that we are still struggling to learn more about. --- End quote --- Are you trying to argue that we should just suspend our disbelief and enjoy it? Or are you trying to argue that it could be scientifically plausible what they are depicting? The former I'm fine with. Because a lot of stuff in Star Trek makes no sense and just seems to exist for the convenience of the plot. The latter though is just silly. The show is not pushing plausible science; they're simply invoking a technobabble solution for an in-universe explanation for their budgetary constraints. Now do I really need to start getting into genetics, evolution, and the diversity of life to explain why it's a silly idea? |
| Howard_Casto:
Star Trek is science fiction, period, end of story, it isn't up for debate. They had nasa consultants working with the tng showrunners for quite a while to make sure that the science of the day at least seemed accurate or plausible even if the explanation given isn't exactly scientific fact. Of course they did stuff that most likely isn't possible and explained a lot of stuff wrong.... that's where the "fiction" in science fiction comes from. Many of the underlying principals in the show are factually accurate though, or at least were factually plausible at the time. Much of the tech in the show, for example, is now actual stuff that you have in your living room and use everyday. Transporters.... yup some scientists have managed to "teleport" a few atoms across a room. Scifi isn't about what is, it's about what potentially could be. Science fantasy are shows like Doctor Who, where they have flying sharks because flying sharks are cool, or Star Wars, where they don't even bother to attempt to explain how most stuff works, ect... I've said my piece and now I'm leaving this thread as a warp core breach between you two seems imminent. |
| Vigo:
--- Quote from: shponglefan on August 16, 2018, 10:40:21 pm ---Are you trying to argue that we should just suspend our disbelief and enjoy it? Or are you trying to argue that it could be scientifically plausible what they are depicting? --- End quote --- Neither. I'm asking what had to be "unlearned" to watch that episode. You should neither need to suspend disbelief nor call it scientifically plausible as written. Star trek invented things like the cloaking device, where its scientific explanation would not work according to "real science" as drake calls it in a manner that would fool ship sensors, yet here we are in 2018 with some cloaking technologies surfacing based on completely different technology. --- Quote from: shponglefan on August 16, 2018, 10:40:21 pm ---Now do I really need to start getting into genetics, evolution, and the diversity of life to explain why it's a silly idea? --- End quote --- What I find silly is you picking that apart when there are dozens of creatures, races and entities that defy those genetic theories far more than that episode. The puddle thing that killed Tasha, Rock people, fire entities, cloud creatures. Every effin planet is a desolate wasteland with no flora or fauna but a single race living there? I guess that's fine, but writing an episode about a DNA being spread between planets systems ruins the show? That just doesn't add up. |
| DrakeTungsten:
--- Quote from: Howard_Casto on August 16, 2018, 11:49:36 pm ---Scifi isn't about what is, it's about what potentially could be. --- End quote --- You completely ignored the question. This particular idea can't potentially be. NASA and teleportation have nothing to do with it. Get back to me when you can tell me which rigidly-tested theory your teleportation upended. Jumping into the fray without any relevant substance doesn't mean you're above the fray. It just means you jumped into the fray without any relevant substance. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |