Talk:Rapture/Archive 1 - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

2020-04-11T01:58:05Z

Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

Caldumidoan: /* A Change in Six */

2011-10-28T05:54:44Z

A Change in Six

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:54, 28 October 2011
Line 326:		Line 326:

	Forgive me if this has been stated elsewhere or if I'm misinterpreting things, but in the Miniseries, Six snaps a baby's neck seemingly without hesitation or remorse. In this episode, Boomer is about to do likewise with Hera, but Six steps in and stops it. [[User:TheUnknown285\|TheUnknown285]] 02:43, 27 October 2011 (EDT)		Forgive me if this has been stated elsewhere or if I'm misinterpreting things, but in the Miniseries, Six snaps a baby's neck seemingly without hesitation or remorse. In this episode, Boomer is about to do likewise with Hera, but Six steps in and stops it. [[User:TheUnknown285\|TheUnknown285]] 02:43, 27 October 2011 (EDT)
			:There have been some discussions on whether the baby killing in the miniseries was murder or mercy killing, given that a brutal nuclear bombardment is just a day or so away. Whether her facial expression afterwars shows indifference or remorse has also been a topic. As is to be expected, people have not agreed on a definitive conclusion.
			:One must also consider that the baby in the miniseries was a complete stranger belonging to a species considered little more (or less) than pests by the cylons, while Hera was half cylon and Caprica Six's niece (since cylons see eachother as brothers and sisters). I am sure such duality have been shown by humans within a single day during ethnic conflicts. Killing a Jew and killing a German would be two different things in the eyes of a Nazi.
			:Nevertheless, Caprica Six's change from mass produced, immature, seductive robot on a mission to exterminate the evil humans to independent woman advocating that killing humans is evil, is very much an importang plot thread in the latter episodes of season two and early episodes of season 3. Another change that has not been explained is the sudden disappearance of six's (girlish?) seductive behavior when she is around Baltar in the miniseries. She keeps switching to it even after revealing her cylon nature and it no longer serves any purpose, but it is never seen again after that. I don't think it is as prominent in the flashbacks to when she and Baltar first met either. [[User:Caldumidoan\|Caldumidoan]] 01:54, 28 October 2011 (EDT)

TheUnknown285: /* A Change in Six */ new section

2011-10-27T06:43:56Z

A Change in Six: new section

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:43, 27 October 2011
Line 322:		Line 322:
	::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::::It can't be a "possible answer" because as should now be clear, some people think Crossroads is stronger evidence that the 5 priests may be the very same final 5, and some people such as yourself think it refutes that idea. You can't declare an answer of any time when it's not clear what the possible answer even is. I don't want to debate it here, just to point out that the question is not answered, either way. A link to an "answer", even a possible one, requires that it be clear what answer is being referred to. To avoid debate here I created a [[http://ideas.4brad.com/five-priests-and-final-five blog thread on the five priests]] where we can debate in the comments if desired.		::::It can't be a "possible answer" because as should now be clear, some people think Crossroads is stronger evidence that the 5 priests may be the very same final 5, and some people such as yourself think it refutes that idea. You can't declare an answer of any time when it's not clear what the possible answer even is. I don't want to debate it here, just to point out that the question is not answered, either way. A link to an "answer", even a possible one, requires that it be clear what answer is being referred to. To avoid debate here I created a [[http://ideas.4brad.com/five-priests-and-final-five blog thread on the five priests]] where we can debate in the comments if desired.

			== A Change in Six ==

			Forgive me if this has been stated elsewhere or if I'm misinterpreting things, but in the Miniseries, Six snaps a baby's neck seemingly without hesitation or remorse. In this episode, Boomer is about to do likewise with Hera, but Six steps in and stops it. [[User:TheUnknown285\|TheUnknown285]] 02:43, 27 October 2011 (EDT)

Meian: /* Photo */

2009-05-26T20:25:06Z

Photo

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:25, 26 May 2009
Line 16:		Line 16:
	::Mmm. Minions. The twenty-first cannot come soon enough. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 08:49, 8 January 2007 (CST)		::Mmm. Minions. The twenty-first cannot come soon enough. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 08:49, 8 January 2007 (CST)
	:::13 days, 10 hours, 31 minutes :( --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 10:28, 8 January 2007 (CST)		:::13 days, 10 hours, 31 minutes :( --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 10:28, 8 January 2007 (CST)

			About the current photo: who are the actors posing as the Final Five? --[[User:Meian\|Meian]] 20:25, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

	== My Predictions ==		== My Predictions ==

Bradtem: /* Answer to five priests question? */

2007-04-23T22:54:48Z

Answer to five priests question?

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:54, 23 April 2007
Line 319:		Line 319:
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::::It can't be a "possible answer" because as should now be clear, some people think Crossroads is stronger evidence that the 5 priests may be the very same final 5, and some people such as yourself think it refutes that idea. You can't declare an answer of any time when it's not clear what the possible answer even is. I don't want to debate it here, just to point out that the question is not answered, either way. A link to an "answer", even a possible one, requires that it be clear what answer is being referred to. To avoid debate here I created a [[http://ideas.4brad.com/five-priests-and-final-five blog thread on the five priests]] where we can debate in the comments if desired.

Catrope: /* Answer to five priests question? */ reply

2007-04-23T20:18:28Z

Answer to five priests question?: reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:18, 23 April 2007
Line 318:		Line 318:
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Serenity: /* Answer to five priests question? */

2007-04-23T18:58:30Z

Answer to five priests question?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:58, 23 April 2007
Line 317:		Line 317:
	::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the ~~questions~~ that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Serenity: /* Answer to five priests question? */

2007-04-23T18:56:43Z

Answer to five priests question?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 23 April 2007
Line 317:		Line 317:
	::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the questions that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Bradtem: /* Answer to five priests question? */

2007-04-23T18:50:09Z

Answer to five priests question?

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:50, 23 April 2007
Line 316:		Line 316:
	:I actually thought about saying "Possible answer" and that's probably the best. Anyways, the idea that the priests several thousand years ago are somehow the Final Five is pretty absurd in the first place. For me that the Final Five are contemporary persons is strong evidence that they are not the ancient priests. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:37, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:I actually thought about saying "Possible answer" and that's probably the best. Anyways, the idea that the priests several thousand years ago are somehow the Final Five is pretty absurd in the first place. For me that the Final Five are contemporary persons is strong evidence that they are not the ancient priests. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:37, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

Spencerian: /* Answer to five priests question? */

2007-04-23T14:46:52Z

Answer to five priests question?

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:46, 23 April 2007
Line 315:		Line 315:
	Ok, Serenity, you've got me. You added a link that Crossroads part II has the answer to the question about whether the final five are the five priests. I mean yes, the revelation that somebody as old as Tigh is in the F5 does provide some strong evidence that it's true, but I would hardly say it's confirmed yet, so what clear answer do you see? Or are you suggesting it's answered in the negative? Either way I can't say there's an answer to that question in that episode. --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 15:40, 22 April 2007 (CDT)		Ok, Serenity, you've got me. You added a link that Crossroads part II has the answer to the question about whether the final five are the five priests. I mean yes, the revelation that somebody as old as Tigh is in the F5 does provide some strong evidence that it's true, but I would hardly say it's confirmed yet, so what clear answer do you see? Or are you suggesting it's answered in the negative? Either way I can't say there's an answer to that question in that episode. --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 15:40, 22 April 2007 (CDT)
	:I actually thought about saying "Possible answer" and that's probably the best. Anyways, the idea that the priests several thousand years ago are somehow the Final Five is pretty absurd in the first place. For me that the Final Five are contemporary persons is strong evidence that they are not the ancient priests. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:37, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:I actually thought about saying "Possible answer" and that's probably the best. Anyways, the idea that the priests several thousand years ago are somehow the Final Five is pretty absurd in the first place. For me that the Final Five are contemporary persons is strong evidence that they are not the ancient priests. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 06:37, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:54, 23 April 2007
Line 319:		Line 319:
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::::It can't be a "possible answer" because as should now be clear, some people think Crossroads is stronger evidence that the 5 priests may be the very same final 5, and some people such as yourself think it refutes that idea. You can't declare an answer of any time when it's not clear what the possible answer even is. I don't want to debate it here, just to point out that the question is not answered, either way. A link to an "answer", even a possible one, requires that it be clear what answer is being referred to. To avoid debate here I created a [[http://ideas.4brad.com/five-priests-and-final-five blog thread on the five priests]] where we can debate in the comments if desired.

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:18, 23 April 2007
Line 318:		Line 318:
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			::::I agree, maybe the Final Five are this cycle's version of the five priests (both groups were outcasts because they worship different deities) --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]]<sup>([[User talk:Catrope\|Talk to me]] or [[Special:Emailuser/Catrope\|e-mail me]])</sup> 15:18, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:58, 23 April 2007
Line 317:		Line 317:
	::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the ~~questions~~ that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the question that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:56, 23 April 2007
Line 317:		Line 317:
	::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::Remember the central premise of the Colonial faith: "All this has happened before, and all of this will happen again." The temple ''was'' built 4,000 years before the Cylons were supposed to exist. How could this temple be related to the Cylons? Are the priests and the Cylons the same? These are the valid questions, and obviously there is a connection. Recycled technology, recycled souls, something reused. And don't leave out Kara Thrace and her symbol (she never entered the Temple, yet she [[The Destiny\|has a connection]]). --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 09:46, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
	::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)		::I would venture that "Answer" or even "possible answer" means answer, not clue. I don't want to debate it here, but I think our disagreement makes it clear this question is not answered. And it is one of the central questions. Absurd? Surely you've noticed the Final Five make all their vision appearances in the Kobol-era opera house as well? --[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 13:50, 23 April 2007 (CDT)
			:::I think "possible answer" is alright, depending on how one sees it. People have different interpretations, and for some it might be an answer and for some not. That's the meaning of "possible". For me, the heavy emphasis on that whole Final Five business is not a good thing in the show. But while they might somehow be related to the priests, maybe modeled in their image or something, I think it's out of the questions that the priests literally ''are'' the Final Five, cycle of time or not. --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 13:56, 23 April 2007 (CDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 11 April 2020
Line 30:		Line 30:
	All of the above predictions are pulled directly from the darkest reaches of my rectum and should not be taken seriously. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 14:17, 21 January 2007 (CST)		All of the above predictions are pulled directly from the darkest reaches of my rectum and should not be taken seriously. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 14:17, 21 January 2007 (CST)
	: 1st idea: might actually possibly work even though it won't happen. 2nd: Good idea, actually. 3rd: Naw. 4th: Bahahahahaha. 5th: I wish. --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 14:34, 21 January 2007 (CST)		: 1st idea: might actually possibly work even though it won't happen. 2nd: Good idea, actually. 3rd: Naw. 4th: Bahahahahaha. 5th: I wish. --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 14:34, 21 January 2007 (CST)
	:As they say on the forums, Galvatron ftw. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 15:57, 21 January 2007 (CST)		:As they say on the forums, Galvatron ftw. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 15:57, 21 January 2007 (CST)
	:Slander, I have an idea to make it even better. Option 3, take the "it" out of the 3rd sentence. --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 16:26, 21 January 2007 (CST)		:Slander, I have an idea to make it even better. Option 3, take the "it" out of the 3rd sentence. --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 16:26, 21 January 2007 (CST)
	::Anders and Apollo making out? Hey, it could happen. They're both very pretty and Bamber is English. That's close enough to being a girl. And, hey, we'd get to see the inside of a heavy raider. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 17:46, 21 January 2007 (CST)		::Anders and Apollo making out? Hey, it could happen. They're both very pretty and Bamber is English. That's close enough to being a girl. And, hey, we'd get to see the inside of a heavy raider. --[[User:Slander\|Slander]] 17:46, 21 January 2007 (CST)
Line 181:		Line 181:
	::From a storytelling standpoint, Baltar can't possibly be a Cylon. They've teased it so much that there's no dramatic payoff if they reveal it now - it would be a total anticlimax. It also ruins his character's dramatic function, since Baltar's role is to be the guilt-ridden traitor. His character can't function as a Cylon. If James Callis ever intends to leave the show, revealing him as one of the final five would be a good way to write him out, but in the near-term, it's just not a possibility.		::From a storytelling standpoint, Baltar can't possibly be a Cylon. They've teased it so much that there's no dramatic payoff if they reveal it now - it would be a total anticlimax. It also ruins his character's dramatic function, since Baltar's role is to be the guilt-ridden traitor. His character can't function as a Cylon. If James Callis ever intends to leave the show, revealing him as one of the final five would be a good way to write him out, but in the near-term, it's just not a possibility.
	::Bulldog would be a completely uninteresting choice (since we know nothing about him and have no emotional investment in his character). Additionally, the actor will probably be difficult to book in the future, and the character has mitigating factors (a long military career with verified non-Cylons Bill Adama and Saul Tigh).		::Bulldog would be a completely uninteresting choice (since we know nothing about him and have no emotional investment in his character). Additionally, the actor will probably be difficult to book in the future, and the character has mitigating factors (a long military career with verified non-Cylons Bill Adama and Saul Tigh).
	::This leaves Anders as the only possibility. Messiah-Three certainly has grounds to apologize to him, and he has no real mitigating factors - no history prior to his time with the Caprica Buccaneers, and (notably) no children with his wife, Kara Thrace. It also explains his remarkable ability to withstand and quickly recover from walking pneumonia ([[Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II]]). --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 01:00, 25 January 2007 (CST)		::This leaves Anders as the only possibility. Messiah-Three certainly has grounds to apologize to him, and he has no real mitigating factors - no history prior to his time with the Caprica Buccaneers, and (notably) no children with his wife, Kara Thrace. It also explains his remarkable ability to withstand and quickly recover from walking pneumonia ([[Lay Down Your Burdens, Part II]]). --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 01:00, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	:::Love the analysis. Who you narrow it down to makes sense. Anders is just a goofy guy, though. I personally find the Bulldog theory more interesting because of his connection to Adama and Tigh. If we see the character pop up in upcoming credits that might be a sign that they're filling out his backstory. Until then, though, maybe Anders will take on more shades, or the writers will have a dramatic twist that'll make Baltar a more convincing choice.--[[User:Galactageek\|Galactageek]] 01:53, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:::Love the analysis. Who you narrow it down to makes sense. Anders is just a goofy guy, though. I personally find the Bulldog theory more interesting because of his connection to Adama and Tigh. If we see the character pop up in upcoming credits that might be a sign that they're filling out his backstory. Until then, though, maybe Anders will take on more shades, or the writers will have a dramatic twist that'll make Baltar a more convincing choice.--[[User:Galactageek\|Galactageek]] 01:53, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	I think you're making a leap on the apology thing. The apology may not be for something that Three did to the Final Five model in question, but that she was sorry she didn't know that that person was a cylon and/or a member of the final five. Make sense? --[[User:RUSnooky\|RUSnooky]] 10:13, 25 January 2007 (CST)		I think you're making a leap on the apology thing. The apology may not be for something that Three did to the Final Five model in question, but that she was sorry she didn't know that that person was a cylon and/or a member of the final five. Make sense? --[[User:RUSnooky\|RUSnooky]] 10:13, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	:It's possible, but it would be bad writing if that were the case. I'm making the (perhaps misguided) assumption that the writers respect our intelligence, and wouldn't give us a clue we can't use. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 10:23, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:It's possible, but it would be bad writing if that were the case. I'm making the (perhaps misguided) assumption that the writers respect our intelligence, and wouldn't give us a clue we can't use. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 10:23, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	::I respectfully disagree that it's bad writing. Haven't you ever been in a situation that required you to say "Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that was you." I may be wrong and I don't think the speculation as to what she meant is that plain. I think it could go either way.--[[User:RUSnooky\|RUSnooky]] 10:36, 25 January 2007 (CST)		::I respectfully disagree that it's bad writing. Haven't you ever been in a situation that required you to say "Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that was you." I may be wrong and I don't think the speculation as to what she meant is that plain. I think it could go either way.--[[User:RUSnooky\|RUSnooky]] 10:36, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	Is is possible that the person she was apologizing to was the hybrid? [[User:Aspshortjock\|Aspshortjock]] 16:29, 25 January 2007 (CST)[[User:aspshortjock\|aspshortjock]]		Is is possible that the person she was apologizing to was the hybrid? [[User:Aspshortjock\|Aspshortjock]] 16:29, 25 January 2007 (CST)[[User:aspshortjock\|aspshortjock]]
	:I don't think so. If, as I believe RDM describes her in the Torn podcast, the Hybrid is an intermediate step between mechanical and humanoid models then she is not a humanoid model. Also, she doesn't have legs and couldn't be standing on the dais. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 17:41, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:I don't think so. If, as I believe RDM describes her in the Torn podcast, the Hybrid is an intermediate step between mechanical and humanoid models then she is not a humanoid model. Also, she doesn't have legs and couldn't be standing on the dais. -- [[User:Noneofyourbusiness\|Noneofyourbusiness]] 17:41, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	There are many she could apologize too. First of all, Cylons who wish to seem to sync up memories (Sharon A remembers the life of Boomer) and remember those actions as their own past. But most of all, the Three line participated in the war and nuking of the colonies. There is no human she doesn't owe a huge apology to, unfortunately. She also oversaw New Caprica and thus owes a double one to all those who were subject to the occupation. She owes special apologies to Baltar and a few others, but alas this doesn't tell us much. Only that she had no idea the final 5 were playing whatever role in humanity that the person she sees has played.--[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 23:35, 24 February 2007 (CST)		There are many she could apologize too. First of all, Cylons who wish to seem to sync up memories (Sharon A remembers the life of Boomer) and remember those actions as their own past. But most of all, the Three line participated in the war and nuking of the colonies. There is no human she doesn't owe a huge apology to, unfortunately. She also oversaw New Caprica and thus owes a double one to all those who were subject to the occupation. She owes special apologies to Baltar and a few others, but alas this doesn't tell us much. Only that she had no idea the final 5 were playing whatever role in humanity that the person she sees has played.--[[User:Bradtem\|Bradtem]] 23:35, 24 February 2007 (CST)
	:Naturally, you are correct, but that would be the weaker way for the writers to work their way out of the situation. I choose to assume that they dropped that hint with a specific intent. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 00:25, 25 February 2007 (CST).		:Naturally, you are correct, but that would be the weaker way for the writers to work their way out of the situation. I choose to assume that they dropped that hint with a specific intent. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 00:25, 25 February 2007 (CST).
	::My impression of what was conveyed in that scene was that it was meant to be revealing, but wasn't necessarily an apology for harm done. To apologize for harming one of the Final Five would be doubly unnecessary: he or she is a Cylon and thus generally impervious to any lasting harm, and more importantly is presumably carrying out some kind of plan, in which Three would have been merely playing her part.		::My impression of what was conveyed in that scene was that it was meant to be revealing, but wasn't necessarily an apology for harm done. To apologize for harming one of the Final Five would be doubly unnecessary: he or she is a Cylon and thus generally impervious to any lasting harm, and more importantly is presumably carrying out some kind of plan, in which Three would have been merely playing her part.
	::Rather, I think the identity of that particular Cylon revealed to Three something fundamental about the nature of the Final Five and the role they are playing, something very different than she ever imagined. The apology was for having the audacity to uncover their identities and approach them, thus potentially interfering with their plan, though, as she tells Cavil, she would still do it all again.--[[User:Hylas\|Hylas]] 01:14, 26 February 2007 (CST)		::Rather, I think the identity of that particular Cylon revealed to Three something fundamental about the nature of the Final Five and the role they are playing, something very different than she ever imagined. The apology was for having the audacity to uncover their identities and approach them, thus potentially interfering with their plan, though, as she tells Cavil, she would still do it all again.--[[User:Hylas\|Hylas]] 01:14, 26 February 2007 (CST)

	===Followup===		===Followup===
	Mmph! Mmmmph! --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 16:42, 10 March 2007 (CST)		Mmph! Mmmmph! --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 16:42, 10 March 2007 (CST)
	:...? --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 16:43, 10 March 2007 (CST)		:...? --[[User:BklynBruzer\|BklynBruzer]] 16:43, 10 March 2007 (CST)
	::Oh, man. Nailed it! --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 02:03, 27 March 2007 (CDT)		::Oh, man. Nailed it! --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 02:03, 27 March 2007 (CDT)

	== Boxing the Threes ==		== Boxing the Threes ==
Line 230:		Line 230:
	** According to the [[Podcast:Rapture\|RDM podcast]], the image in Kara's apartment was a mandala that the actress had decided to paint before the actual shooting occurred.		** According to the [[Podcast:Rapture\|RDM podcast]], the image in Kara's apartment was a mandala that the actress had decided to paint before the actual shooting occurred.

	These lines were removed by [[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] ([[User_talk:~~Peter Farago~~\|Talk]]), saying: "''Remove self aggrandizement. Nobody cares who conjectured what.''".		These lines were removed by [[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] ([[User_talk:April Arcus\|Talk]]), saying: "''Remove self aggrandizement. Nobody cares who conjectured what.''".

	I personally think both would be better off as separate bullet points in ''[[Rapture#Notes\|Notes]]'' rather than ''[[Rapture#Analysis\|Analysis]]'', but I do care. The second point is factual information that simply belongs here (I readded it). The first, well... I think deciding whether it's allowed to take pride in our own analysis is up to the admins (could you respond here, please?). --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]] 06:39, 25 January 2007 (CST)		I personally think both would be better off as separate bullet points in ''[[Rapture#Notes\|Notes]]'' rather than ''[[Rapture#Analysis\|Analysis]]'', but I do care. The second point is factual information that simply belongs here (I readded it). The first, well... I think deciding whether it's allowed to take pride in our own analysis is up to the admins (could you respond here, please?). --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]] 06:39, 25 January 2007 (CST)

	:We had this same debate regarding the name of the [[Great Cylon Turkey Shoot]], which Merv arrived at before RDM's podcast revealed that the battle actually was inspired by the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot. The Merovingian wanted credit for it, but I argued at that time that the assignation of credit was irrelevant - I understand that you want to take pride in our community, but doing so is inappropriate inasmuch as it violates our NPOV policy (we certainly don't assign credit like that to non-wiki members), and isn't going to be a topic of interest to a viewer perusing the episode guide even a week from now. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 09:06, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:We had this same debate regarding the name of the [[Great Cylon Turkey Shoot]], which Merv arrived at before RDM's podcast revealed that the battle actually was inspired by the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot. The Merovingian wanted credit for it, but I argued at that time that the assignation of credit was irrelevant - I understand that you want to take pride in our community, but doing so is inappropriate inasmuch as it violates our NPOV policy (we certainly don't assign credit like that to non-wiki members), and isn't going to be a topic of interest to a viewer perusing the episode guide even a week from now. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 09:06, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	:ditto. [[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 09:17, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:ditto. [[User:Shane\|Shane]] <sup>([[User_Talk:Shane\|T]] - [[Special:Contributions/Shane\|C]] - [[Special:Editcount/Shane\|E]])</sup> 09:17, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	::I'm to blame for the entry; it's not at all crucial, and if it violates NPOV, it should be removed. The Talk page of the article has the off-air kudos to the contributors, in any case. Finding this type of stuff is part of the fun of using the wiki, so at least the talk page gives the "fun" and the credit to the contributors, and the article can stay neutral. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:37, 25 January 2007 (CST)		::I'm to blame for the entry; it's not at all crucial, and if it violates NPOV, it should be removed. The Talk page of the article has the off-air kudos to the contributors, in any case. Finding this type of stuff is part of the fun of using the wiki, so at least the talk page gives the "fun" and the credit to the contributors, and the article can stay neutral. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:37, 25 January 2007 (CST)
Line 245:		Line 245:
	:They did call it that in the episode, didn't they?		:They did call it that in the episode, didn't they?
	::'''Adama:''' I think the Chief is right. I think the supernova does look like the mandala inside the temple.		::'''Adama:''' I think the Chief is right. I think the supernova does look like the mandala inside the temple.
	:--[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 09:17, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:--[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 09:17, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	:::That's correct, they do call it a mandala. Maybe you (BklynBruzer) can add a [[Rapture#Notes\|note]] on how the ep's usage of the word "mandala" is incorrect. --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]] 09:30, 25 January 2007 (CST)		:::That's correct, they do call it a mandala. Maybe you (BklynBruzer) can add a [[Rapture#Notes\|note]] on how the ep's usage of the word "mandala" is incorrect. --[[User:Catrope\|Catrope]] 09:30, 25 January 2007 (CST)
	::::Please read in detail the definition of [[w:mandala\|mandala on Wikipedia]]. It is possible that the Thirteenth Tribe created the symbol for meditative use (it ''is'' in a Temple, after all). Mandalas don't have to be used or designed in a specific way except in a circular format, and it appears that the symbol adheres to the modern practice. Mandalas don't have to look like anything except for what it depicts or inspires, and it may relate to an ''element'' or ''concept'' of the universe, not a specific celestial object (although this one does). The fact that the symbol is all over the place gives it significance, but I feel we should stick to its modern application. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:24, 25 January 2007 (CST)		::::Please read in detail the definition of [[w:mandala\|mandala on Wikipedia]]. It is possible that the Thirteenth Tribe created the symbol for meditative use (it ''is'' in a Temple, after all). Mandalas don't have to be used or designed in a specific way except in a circular format, and it appears that the symbol adheres to the modern practice. Mandalas don't have to look like anything except for what it depicts or inspires, and it may relate to an ''element'' or ''concept'' of the universe, not a specific celestial object (although this one does). The fact that the symbol is all over the place gives it significance, but I feel we should stick to its modern application. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 10:24, 25 January 2007 (CST)