SDB's vs. Warships
- Thread starter phavoc
- Start date
F33D said:
I like how you don't put any backing into your statements to even try to prove your point. The "known" physical laws have been changing since they were created. But oh no, it's "impossible" to hide in space. And you've proved it....
You ain't proved dick. Till you've gone out in space and proven your statements, they remain only theory. Lemme help you with that definition - In science, the term "theory" refers to "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. That's what the National Academy of Sciences says.
So I'm waiting for you to provide the background information upon which you are basing your statement. Please tell me when these experiments were carried out in space that support your statement. Otherwise it remains theory. While that's not a law, it is what us other people call a definition.
phavoc said:
What are you doing?! It's F33D! Take a look at his post history and you will realise that reason, or logic does not factor into his arguments. Whether it is game rules, concepts, reality... just browse his post history and give up now!
Your other option is to keep this up until he stops responding because half a dozen or so people have jumped on the thread just out of sheer frustration from reading his attempted arguments.
As long as Traveller's technology is only able to turn one form
of energy into another form of energy true stealth in space is
difficult to achieve, if at all, because any kind of energy is com-
paratively easy to detect. However, a technology able to turn
energy into matter would make stealth in space possible - but
this is beyond Traveller's technology assumptions.
of energy into another form of energy true stealth in space is
difficult to achieve, if at all, because any kind of energy is com-
paratively easy to detect. However, a technology able to turn
energy into matter would make stealth in space possible - but
this is beyond Traveller's technology assumptions.
F33D said:
Kinda, How much money are you going to throw at it? Because that is what controls how much and how far you see. All I was pointing out that your little aphorism has a very strong economic control.
Now I could take the tack and ask you to Prove your assumption, but if you noticed I accepted it as true in a general sense. I could point out the specific flaws of the statement in the certain cases, but the economic factor is the primary controlling factor by far.
Always, always, always, it comes down to dirty Lucre.
As for your kind offer to come out and tutor me, if you publicly post your incidentals and any significant peer-reviewed papers that you have written that are salient to the subject, I will asked around and see if there is any interest in funding such a trip.
Gentlemen, please turn the debate down a notch...
crazy_cat said:
-1 for the ban. I'm against banning in general. While I have my own private opinions about some of the posts and such, nothing he's done that I'm aware of is ban-worthy.
People have a right to their opinion. I don't always agree with him, and obviously was frustrated by his responses here, but he has the right to be that way. Besides, he's not constantly attacking people. His "questionable" responses at times are his to own, his to defend, his rights. We can agree to disagree and move on.
phavoc said:
He's a troll - anywhere else that would be bannable in and of itself. He always refuses to present evidence to support himself, and when challenged he always resorts to insults, sneers, and put-downs. That's his modus operandi on pretty much every thread he's been on here and elsewhere, and it's typical behavior of someone who knows that there will be no consequences for their actions (which is true here, because actual moderation and punishment is non-existent). He has a consistent pattern of bad behavior (and not just on this forum), and despite being warned repeatedly he continues in that manner.
This isn't about him having a right to an opinion. This is about him not behaving in a civilised manner and refusing to change his counter-productive behavior. People do not have a right to behave like dicks in online forums.
This forum has an Ignore function which makes posts by certain postersWil Mireu said:
invisible to those who put these posters on their list of Foes, and this gi-
ves you the means for your personal ban of disliked posters - no need for
a general ban unless a poster moves from being impolite to true personal
attacks, I think.
Reynard
Emperor Mongoose
Sometimes we make mistakes and should have a chance to rectify it. Ignoring just covers up a problem. Banning should be last resort if a person has a pattern of abuse and that should be left up to the moderator who watches the board. More so don't answer someone with more abuse.
Back to SDBs vs Warships.
Back to SDBs vs Warships.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
While it may be easier to follow standard designs, outside of those directly order by the Imperium Navy and second hand donations, most planetary systems would be very interested in promoting and protecting their local shipyards and architects, besides supposedly having a better feel for local conditions and needs, so each type and class may be essentially unique to each system.
Jump capable warships probably have to follow standards laid out by the subsector naval staff.
Jump capable warships probably have to follow standards laid out by the subsector naval staff.
Condottiere said:
That's probably an accurate future truism. Today we have a few nations that dominate the commercial ship building industry, but other nations still maintain smaller yards for local or specific ships. Militarily I think you see a division somewhere in the G20 set of nations that make their own warships, and lots of smaller, less fiscally-capable nations buy advanced frigates from others and construct smaller patrol craft locally. Iran is one of the few nations that appears to be actively developing internal military production capabilities across the entire spectrum - but we also understand why. Other nations seem to pick an area and more or less ignore the rest. Again, fiscal limitations prevents most nations from excelling at everything. The US, China and Russia are really the only nations that have the resources AND wherewithal to develop and produce the entire range of weapons. Everyone else seems to band together for R&D and in some areas production too.
