![]() |
Quote:
But instead... If you were to place the ISV on a treadmill, would it still reach near relativistic speeds? :D:xD: |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, go watch the actual film, and stop watching that crappy flash on Newgrounds. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I do not understand why you are mentally incapable of understanding this, but they can not have or use advanced military hardware. They are not a military, it is not an invasion. the marines are using standard off the shelf equipment because all they are meant to be doing is providing basic security, not fighting a war. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It says that EMP based weapons are common enough to be available to terrorists, eliminating the dependence on UAVs. It says that projectile weapons are used on Earth, but the type include gauss gun -type weapons as well as standard bullets. There is no mention of your precious lasers. Quote:
The same goes for lasers. They will not be available to everyone as some kind of ridiculous spess mehren weapon just because they have been around for a certain period of time. Quote:
The rights to mine unobtainium are dependent on conditions, including not using excessive weapons - they can only use what they actually need for basic security. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You know, what they were designed for on Earth. Quote:
Oh, and yes. Humans are biological organisms, who they can communicate with and learn from. Quote:
Again, watch the actual film. Quaritch works for Selfridge, Selfridge is just a spineless idiot. Also, he does mention others that are not on Pandora, but I understand that that wasn't in wikipedia's plot summary so you probably never heard of that. Quote:
Quote:
Considering the fact that it's far underground and not evident form orbit, that makes zero sense. Actually, Pandora was discovered conventionally and seen to support plantlife, before an unmanned expedition discovered the magnetic properties, while it determined the existence of unobtainium, there is zero evidence of any sample-return or even detailed analysis, as opposed to simply detecting its presence from the surface. Source: Survival guide. Quote:
I was pointing out that you believe that knowing something's characteristics will magically make it synthesisable - I asked that, in that case, why has not an ideal nuclear fuel, an ideal structural metal, or an ideal plastic been synthesised? People know what their physical characteristics are, yet that in itself is not enough to determine if one could exist or is producible. Quote:
You've flip flopped between 'not enough energy' and 'energy is infinite'. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Nothing in Avatar contradicts itself, if we take all data about the state of things from the film itself and not from 2011. You've been continually complaining about how it is 'not consistent' without even understanding the definition. Consistent: (logic) Of a set of statements, such that no contradiction logically follows from them. Plausible: Seemingly or apparently valid, likely, or acceptable; credible: a plausible excuse. Things that are not plausible beforehand have happened throughout human history as understanding has improved, but hat does not make the reality inconsistent. |
Quote:
Quote:
Trust me, you can't argue canon with me :P Quote:
A fusion reactor explicitly allows a higher capacity without the danger of producing a critical mass when not operating. The only known upper limit would be the largest known star - clearly, that is impractical on Earth, but it does not suffer the same limitation as fission. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
2. If you actually watched the film, you'd know that that is entirely the point, because being seen not to be harming the Na'vi does help their image, even if many people do realise what's really going on. Using robots everywhere would totally destroy that perception and then some. Quote:
Lasers do not exist in a useful form (weapons on Earth are gauss-type). The RDA can not use those because they do not require advanced military hardware. This is not an invasion, and they are not supposed to be causing any damage. They're being limited by governments and organisations like the UN here, in that a species of sentient beings deserve equal rights, even if unobtainium is useful. That means the RDA are not going to have advanced military hardware for some kind of invasion like you wanted to see (in which case, there is plenty of fiction for you, don't try and use false logic to rationalise Avatar into something you wanted with spess mehrens killing everything). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
However, neither would protect against a powerful EMP discharge, as the windows are far larger than the wavelength of the resulting radiation. The windows could be shielded of course, but I'm unsure whether or not this is standard practice in aircraft (today, not to mention 150 years into the future). |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
1) EMPs are easy to defend agianst if you know they're coming. Not only are Faraday cages cheap, the actual circuits can be shielded against the blast. 2) Non-nuclear EMP generators would require the very supercapacitors laser weaponry would also require. Building the latter would almost be a case of plug-and-play. :P [/slight exaggeation] 3) Handheld gauss weapons are impractical. Recoil much? :P Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
...Seriously how on earth coudl you know that? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Unless you want to call someone like, say, Debbie Reese, a Native American woman who is tribally enrolled, a hipster for her review and dislike of Avatar. And again - people can ultimately like the movie, but have deep problems with it. This doesn't make them 'hipster' (again, whatever the hell THAT is). There is a wonderful essay on livejournal that describes this: what's love got to do with it: my thoughts on *fail (the author is Indian). |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Spoiler: If you insist...
Quite simply, it doesn't matter who someone is, it doesn't give them an exemption from logical thinking. The fact she even tried to work in a reference to Inglorious Basterds practically makes this entire discussion of her post redundant. She's not a hipster, just another individual with too much self-importance and a persecution complex (in addition to no understanding of tropes, and some kind of belief that anything with a vague resemblance to something must be that very thing). A hipster is someone who dislikes it because it did well. I by no means said that everyone who dislikes it is a hipster. Indeed, some people can even say "I didn't like it because I like space marines shooting things, not films where they get defeated" and while I may thoroughly dislike that person's taste, that's a reason not to like it. They might say "I don't like scifi" and I'd think them a pretentious idiot, but clearly, that rules out them liking it, and that's their taste. Not liking a film simply because it did well (not to be confused with finding it overrated) is not a comparable reason. Making a thread claiming that its premise is impossible but going on to only say that it isn't likely with current Earth is blatant trolling. Disliking a film for not explaining every single aspect in perfect detail while providing necessary explanation where needed, but loving a TV series that doesn't explain anything at all is being hugely logically inconsistent. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
THE NA'VI ARE NOT STUPID. They understand far more than people like you would like to believe. Humans are a sentient, biological species. At first they don't understand where humans are from, but that easily changes, and humans are VERY like the Na'vi. One of your fantasy robots would not be. Quote:
Also... you're trying to justify why unobtainium should not be found... by inventing a different fictional material? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
you're right, the list is general problems - ones that are true with either approach and significant enough to prevent their use. Do you honestly believe the way seen is the most efficient possible way? It isn't. It's the best way they are allowed to do without causing massive damage to sentient beings, not to mention treaties about the militarisation of space. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
AGAIN: Some kind of energy weapon MAY exist on Earth, likely similar to Firefly in that they would be effective but unreliable, rare and expensive. None are mentioned anywhere in the background, and even IF they existed, advanced military hardware is not going to be required here. again, Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
2. Yet again: Lasers are not impossible per se, only never mentioned, presumed impractical, and, at any rate, advanced military hardware. 3. WRONG. One of the points of one is that recoil is comparable to or slightly smaller than a firearm of comparable size. You're thinking of a railgun. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You'd know this, if you'd watched the film at all. Quote:
That really is not that many. Quote:
Quote:
Selfridge's being a spineless idiot doesn't change the actual position. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
The presence of a field (hundreds of km for Earth) is enough otherwise. Quote:
Quote:
Even if the physics doesn't work, it's consistent in that. Indeed, it doesn't show its age as much as its contemporaries (remember the TNG episode where Fermat's Last Theorem was still unsolved?). Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Compare to an average modern single reactor of ~1.3GW. Remember the above was the first commercial one, not the first success. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Anyway, as in the post you directly quoted, lasers are not shown anywhere. Quote:
Quote:
Overkill is not a good option. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
(Inicndentally, this is in a seperate post because it's not actually related to the mechanics of the Avatar 'verse. Regularly scheduled arguments will resume shortly) |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:22 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All images and clips of Avatar are the exclusive property of 20th Century Fox.