Ok, what we are doing here is stupid, we are arguing, oppinions, you can't argue an oppinion, unless scientific facts back up the point that you are arguing. Yes, I know that it is one possibility that the stargate atracts the wormhole, I also know that once the wormhole is locked it won't be released unless there is an overwhelimng energy discharge to the gate.
We should have realised this before, I just realised it today, how stupid this argument is. We are arguing oppinions on how something works in a fictional tv show, with only limited facts. Your I idea is a possibility, and my idea is also a possibility, but untill they say something in the show that porves one theory and disproves another, or possibly disproves both, we will not know.
At the begining of this argument your argument was that the gate COULDN'T work the way I said it could, correct me if I am wrong, However both are possibilities, both are theoretically possible. Normally I would not rely on simply, what they said in the show, as evidence, but this situation is diffrent, we can ONLY rely on what they say on the show. Your argument does have scientific points backing it up but there are also many things you said that can only be proven by the show. Sorry if I am making this more complicated than it needs to be, but we were both wrong, not about our theories, our theories are both plausible, we were both wrong about arguing that the others' is not possible, because they are, both, possible. I belive that this argument is over now because of what we were arguing, oppinions, which can't be argued.
For anyone who didn't want to read the page of rambling back and forth between me and Seastallion, unless Seastalion believes otherwise, in which case we will continue the argument, both theories are plausible and only the show can say which one is used in the show, allthough this will still leave the other theory possible, just not in the show.
Is this allright with you Seastallion?
Owen Macri
We should have realised this before, I just realised it today, how stupid this argument is. We are arguing oppinions on how something works in a fictional tv show, with only limited facts. Your I idea is a possibility, and my idea is also a possibility, but untill they say something in the show that porves one theory and disproves another, or possibly disproves both, we will not know.
At the begining of this argument your argument was that the gate COULDN'T work the way I said it could, correct me if I am wrong, However both are possibilities, both are theoretically possible. Normally I would not rely on simply, what they said in the show, as evidence, but this situation is diffrent, we can ONLY rely on what they say on the show. Your argument does have scientific points backing it up but there are also many things you said that can only be proven by the show. Sorry if I am making this more complicated than it needs to be, but we were both wrong, not about our theories, our theories are both plausible, we were both wrong about arguing that the others' is not possible, because they are, both, possible. I belive that this argument is over now because of what we were arguing, oppinions, which can't be argued.
For anyone who didn't want to read the page of rambling back and forth between me and Seastallion, unless Seastalion believes otherwise, in which case we will continue the argument, both theories are plausible and only the show can say which one is used in the show, allthough this will still leave the other theory possible, just not in the show.
Is this allright with you Seastallion?
Owen Macri
Comment