Editing Talk:Cylon transponder/Archive 1
Discussion page of Cylon transponder/Archive 1
More actions
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
== Obvious technical fallacies == | == Obvious technical fallacies == | ||
*How can it be said that possession of a transponder classifies the carrier as a "friendly" if Cylons were seeking to destroy Galactica while she had an apparently functional transponder on board? Clearly one (or both) notions must be discarded. Before one argues that transponders must come in "friendly" and "foe" varieties, how come the Cylons didn't react adversely to the transponder sneaked aboard a Basestar by [[Sharon Valerii]] with a nuclear warhead? | *How can it be said that possession of a transponder classifies the carrier as a "friendly" if Cylons were seeking to destroy Galactica while she had an apparently functional transponder on board? Clearly one (or both) notions must be discarded. Before one argues that transponders must come in "friendly" and "foe" varieties, how come the Cylons didn't react adversely to the transponder sneaked aboard a Basestar by [[Sharon Valerii]] with a nuclear warhead? | ||
*How is it possible that a transponder does not emit any signal until it is in the range of other units? If it emits no signals, how does it ever realise it is in the range of other units? This flies in the face of common sense and as such violates the basic principle of [[Naturalistic science fiction]]. | *How is it possible that a transponder does not emit any signal until it is in the range of other units? If it emits no signals, how does it ever realise it is in the range of other units? This flies in the face of common sense and as such violates the basic principle of [[Naturalistic science fiction]]. | ||