| Subject: Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser |
Author:
capn hayes
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 04:46:01 09/10/02 Tue
Author Host/IP: NoHost/207.14.48.2
In reply to:
trekie
's message, "Re: Turbolaser vs. Phaser" on 04:15:56 09/10/02 Tue
>>>>>>In ALL canon sources we see, SEE!, the turbolaser
>>>>>>pulse, which is impossible to see in a vacuum if
>it
>>>>is
>>>>>>a laser. The bolt, which we can see, travels
>>>slowwer
>>>>>>than the speed of light. And it can and has
>caused
>>>>>>objects to explode before the visible portion
>>>arrives
>>>>>>at its target.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Lasers do none of these things. Therefor they are
>>>>not
>>>>>>lasers, they do not deal their damage through the
>>>>>>effects of photons heating and expanding
>>molocules.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Now stop this asinine bull about turbolasers being
>>>>>>simple photon projection weapons, because they
>>>>>>obviously aren't!
>>>>>
>>>>>have you ever heard of Laser Eye-Correction
>Surgery
>>>>>what do you think the laser does, it heats the
>>>>>molecular structer of your retena so the lens can
>be
>>>>>repaired without pulling out the butcher knives.
>>>>>Also, you ever heard of not shining a laser into
>>your
>>>>>eyes because it may cause you to go blind? Think
>>>>>about that. Lasers can be used as weapons, not
>very
>>>>>effective ones if you can just hold up a mirror and
>>>>>deflect it way from you. And if you come back to
>me
>>>>>again and say they are not lasers, I will ask you
>>>>>"WHY???!???!!!!? are they called LASERS" if they
>>>ain't
>>>>>lasers?? I am a little confused here.
>>>>
>>>>Reread the above stuff, the stuff behind ">>"
>>>>There is the evedince, compeling and sensible
>>evidence
>>>>that says, without doubt, that they are not lasers!
>>>>You can't see lasers in the vacuum of space! Lasers
>>>>travel at the speed of light, TL bolts don't!
>Before
>>>>the visible tracer hits the target it explodes,
>why?,
>>>>because it could be plasme that is so hot the heat
>>>>before the head of bolt is so extreme it causes the
>>>>instant vaporization of a nickle iron asteroid, We
>>>>have canon evidence of that, ESB, so don't even try
>>to
>>>>argue with it.
>>>>
>>>>Blasters, lasers cannons, and Turbolasers, are not
>>>>true L.A.S.A.R.s, they operate differently, THEY
>>DON'T
>>>>SHOOT LIGHT!, the discharge of visible light is
>>>>secondary and proof that they aren't true
>L.A.S.A.R.s
>>>>
>>>>It is a term that doesn't explain the operating
>>>>principle, just like the photon torpedo, the name
>>>>dosn't say it.
>>>
>>>HAHAHA! you can't even spell. LASAR?? try LASER.
>>>laser is how it is spelled in the closed captions of
>>>SW ANH try something else.
>>Were not to judge someone's spelling or grammer! Only
>>a trekling would be so picky. All you Trekies remind
>>me of those nerdy kids on "Galaxy Quest"! "Theres a
>>couple of red thingies coming toward the blue flashy
>>thingy! I think we're the blue thingy!" BOOM
>
>and your profiling by using the word Trekling.. so you
>are as derogatory as TrekGOD is.
Ahh I didn't mean to hurt you, tiny, puny, "TREKLING"! I didn't know there was a difference. I find Trekling, Trekie, and Trekker or anything "trek" to be derogatory and distastfull! But I'm willing to tolerate little trekling's such as you, cause this debate page is fun. We can all learn from each other and get a new point of veiw on both trek and wars. But nitpicking on words and grammer and whether trekling or trekie is apropriate is just plain going to far. Stick to the subject matter for Godsake! Now if I used dumbfuck or asshole I'd understand. But I wouldn't be like that. That is childish and has no place here. So I aplogize for offending anyone with a filthy, dirty word like "Trekling".
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
