Originally posted by Schrodinger82
View Post
Apparently you don't need them for hive ship either, as evident by 302s.
It is when it comes to the disclosure of their nuclear program.
My point exactly. You don't know.
Oh, you've quantified the luminosity then in terms of the total number of lumins?
http://www.stargatecaps.com/sga/s2/2...rgate7108.html
Wow, so light emitted from Wraith blasts is inconsistent. See MW's comments.
Wow, so light emitted from Wraith blasts is inconsistent. See MW's comments.
See MW's comments.
Can we see highways from space? Dams from space? Contrails from space?
WEIR: Hold on a second, Colonel. I don't think you fully grasp our situation here.
EVERETT: You have three Wraith hive ships bearing down on your position and precious little to defend yourselves with. That about sum it up?
McKAY: You got our message.
EVERETT: We got your message.
EVERETT: You have three Wraith hive ships bearing down on your position and precious little to defend yourselves with. That about sum it up?
McKAY: You got our message.
EVERETT: We got your message.
And you know less. Less than the characters, that is. You're trying to tell me that your estimates of Wraith durability are billions of times better than their estimates, even though they've never been terribly surprised by the durability of wraith ships or the strength of their weapons since Siege, even though their initial estimates were supposedly off by a billion fold by your calculations. Sorry, I just have a hard time believing that.
Plus, you cannot provide evidence that they had plenty of technical information before Letters from Pegasus, or that they had what is necessary to estimate the minimal yield of a nuke, so you still have no point.
I proved that Allies was a significant change in the amount of information they got.
Please drop the point. You're just repeating yourself from the same book of no evidence.
Right, just like a zombie only has a "weakness" when you shoot it in the head. Everywhere else, it can keep on walking.
Now, remember that your argument was that they knew about the weak spots and, above all, that those mines would be enough to take out the Wraith hiveships.
Blame Carter and McKay for the calculations. I trust them more than I would trust you. It's funny how neither of them seem to be presenting any of the objections that you are, despite the fact that McKay saw the Ancient weapon first hand, and would have a much better grasp of whether or not it was "exotic."
Once again, there's a logical format for criticizing analogies you disagree with it. Feel free to use it. Otherwise, I'm going to conclude that your only reason for dismissal is the fact that it disagrees with you.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...-ridicule.html
[b]"This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show that it is false. This is especially clear in the following example: "1+1=2! That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!""
[b]"This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because mocking a claim does not show that it is false. This is especially clear in the following example: "1+1=2! That's the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!""
Your statement that I was replying to: Secondly, had the nukes exploded near the shields, their yields would have not been enough to knock them down.
I'm not seeing the "if" there. Maybe I'm too stupid?
I'm not seeing the "if" there. Maybe I'm too stupid?
I said to myself,
Now the Philistines will come down against me at Gilgal, and I have not yet sought the LORD'S blessing.
So in my anxiety I offered up the holocaust.
Samuel's response was: "You have been foolish! Had you kept the command the LORD your God gave you, the LORD would now establish your kingship in Israel as lasting;
And why wouldn't you want to do that?
On the show, John expresses specific concern about the futility of wasting ordinance. Caldwell accepts his advise and they try a new strategy. Yet you now want me to believe that they went the exact opposite strategy, to waste as much as possible.
Oh, so a Wraith hive ship is only has the thickness of a tree, now?
Oh, and it wasn't once second. It was closer to five.
The link that will save your life.
I stopped the video at two seconds. The beam had already completely pierced the whole ship at this time. In fact, upon closer inspection, we see that it takes less than a second to completely tear the hiveship a new arsehole, since I could see the glow on the other side of the hull after one second of video.
The rest of the beam is largely wasted beyond that point.
That's it.
That, and you have no way of knowing that the Satellite even used 33% of the generator's total energy. That's the maximum it could have used, but not the [i]minimum it could have used. For all you know, it only used 1% of the generators total energy. At which point, your complaints would officially be addressed, just not in the way that you would like.
Plus they're the first and last line of defense of Atlantis. There's no logic in partially charging the buffer when they have only chance.
Above all, they said that once fully charged, the satellite could shoot down three hiveships.
As evidenced, the beam had enough whatever it uses to destroy several hiveships in one blow. Therefore it was more than fully charged. They wasted the beam on the first target for too long.
Needless to say that a lantean buffer of a battle station should have no problem to store the puny energy of a man made naqahdah generator mk I.
So my figures stand, thank you.
Comment