| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 18: |
Line 18: |
| ==Did they do it?== | | ==Did they do it?== |
|
| |
|
| Ricimer, since I know you tape the episodes, I'll let you watch it again before removing that question. I think you'll agree with me that it's very clearly implied that Apollo stops things before they get that far. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 02:10, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | Ricimer, since I know you tape the episodes, I'll let you watch it again before removing that question. I think you'll agree with me that it's very clearly implied that Apollo stops things before they get that far. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:10, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :I actually watched this with several friends, and we got into a raging debate over whether this happened or not. About a third said no, a third said yes (including me), and a third said they weren't sure at all. It's sort of like how after "Pegasus", a lot of people were asking if Boomer got raped or not, because the editing was (intentionally) chaotic and confusing. However, we all know from the podcast of that that there were two versions and that was officially the "not raped" version. | | :I actually watched this with several friends, and we got into a raging debate over whether this happened or not. About a third said no, a third said yes (including me), and a third said they weren't sure at all. It's sort of like how after "Pegasus", a lot of people were asking if Boomer got raped or not, because the editing was (intentionally) chaotic and confusing. However, we all know from the podcast of that that there were two versions and that was officially the "not raped" version. |
| :The podcast for this episode is ''vague''; he mentions only once the idea that "they'd get so drunk that they'd be in a state where they'd try to have sex with each other"--->OKAY, it wasn't quite that, but the point is he uses the word "try" in such a context (I listened to the podcast with friends) that after repeat listening...It didn't really give evidence one way or the other, plus these weren't the guys that directed it, etc. When *I* saw it, I got the ''impression'' that, through careful editing......frak. I can't put this more delicately forgive me. Frak. Well, to cut through it using Ad-libs; I thought that ''after Starbuck gets her panties pulled down, editing gets chaotic; Starbuck spreads her'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''and Apollo proceeds to'' _Verb_ ''her'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''with his own (conspicuous)'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''however Starbuck is proceeding too rough and really fast and Apollo keeps telling her to "slow down", which in context could mean *any number of things*. Starbuck then removes herself from the "presence" of his'' _Adverb_ _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''just as (off camera) he yanks his towel (or whatever) up, so when we actually see him in his first wideshot, he ''appears'' to have not removed his towel, when in reality he did but put it back off camera. ''--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 02:30, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | :The podcast for this episode is ''vague''; he mentions only once the idea that "they'd get so drunk that they'd be in a state where they'd try to have sex with each other"--->OKAY, it wasn't quite that, but the point is he uses the word "try" in such a context (I listened to the podcast with friends) that after repeat listening...It didn't really give evidence one way or the other, plus these weren't the guys that directed it, etc. When *I* saw it, I got the ''impression'' that, through careful editing......frak. I can't put this more delicately forgive me. Frak. Well, to cut through it using Ad-libs; I thought that ''after Starbuck gets her panties pulled down, editing gets chaotic; Starbuck spreads her'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''and Apollo proceeds to'' _Verb_ ''her'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''with his own (conspicuous)'' _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''however Starbuck is proceeding too rough and really fast and Apollo keeps telling her to "slow down", which in context could mean *any number of things*. Starbuck then removes herself from the "presence" of his'' _Adverb_ _Adjective_ _Noun_ ''just as (off camera) he yanks his towel (or whatever) up, so when we actually see him in his first wideshot, he ''appears'' to have not removed his towel, when in reality he did but put it back off camera. ''--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 02:30, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| ::I really didn't find it at all ambiguous, and even if they did accomplish penetration extremely briefly, it's a crass thing to speculate about. The emotional consequences for Kara and Lee are the same regardless. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 19:23, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | ::I really didn't find it at all ambiguous, and even if they did accomplish penetration extremely briefly, it's a crass thing to speculate about. The emotional consequences for Kara and Lee are the same regardless. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 19:23, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :::I am not being crass. I literally turned to the person next to me and said "Hey, wait a minute, did they just do it?" and no one was sure. It's not like I expect us to get any conclusive answeres based on analysis; I'm just saying "we're not sure"--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 19:28, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | :::I am not being crass. I literally turned to the person next to me and said "Hey, wait a minute, did they just do it?" and no one was sure. It's not like I expect us to get any conclusive answeres based on analysis; I'm just saying "we're not sure"--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 19:28, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
| Line 35: |
Line 35: |
| Was it just me, or when Starbuck and Kat launched from the ''Galactica'' in Viper VIIs, didn't the tube sequence show a Viper '''II'''?--<font color="#4b0082">'''[[User:Mitsukai|み使い]]'''</font> <font color="#2f4f4f">'''''[[User_talk:Mitsukai|Mitsukai]]'''''</font> 02:21, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | Was it just me, or when Starbuck and Kat launched from the ''Galactica'' in Viper VIIs, didn't the tube sequence show a Viper '''II'''?--<font color="#4b0082">'''[[User:Mitsukai|み使い]]'''</font> <font color="#2f4f4f">'''''[[User_talk:Mitsukai|Mitsukai]]'''''</font> 02:21, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :Noticed this as well. Apparently the show has no stock footage of a Mk. VII launch sequence. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 02:22, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | :Noticed this as well. Apparently the show has no stock footage of a Mk. VII launch sequence. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:22, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
| ::Unless they referred to Kat or Starbuck talking over wireless from within the launch tube, this could be explained as being the "other" Vipers flying on patrol for other parts of the asteroid belt.--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 02:32, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | ::Unless they referred to Kat or Starbuck talking over wireless from within the launch tube, this could be explained as being the "other" Vipers flying on patrol for other parts of the asteroid belt.--[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 02:32, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
| :::Then it's a case of bad editing, as it implies (at least from how I saw it) that Kat's flying a II, as we saw Starbuck getting into a VII.--<font color="#4b0082">'''[[User:Mitsukai|み使い]]'''</font> <font color="#2f4f4f">'''''[[User_talk:Mitsukai|Mitsukai]]'''''</font> 02:35, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | :::Then it's a case of bad editing, as it implies (at least from how I saw it) that Kat's flying a II, as we saw Starbuck getting into a VII.--<font color="#4b0082">'''[[User:Mitsukai|み使い]]'''</font> <font color="#2f4f4f">'''''[[User_talk:Mitsukai|Mitsukai]]'''''</font> 02:35, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
| Line 41: |
Line 41: |
| :::: I think what Ricimer means is that we can intnetionally misconstrue that as seeing someone ''else'' launching, even though, in actuality, it was an editing goof.--[[User:Day|Day]] 20:20, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :::: I think what Ricimer means is that we can intnetionally misconstrue that as seeing someone ''else'' launching, even though, in actuality, it was an editing goof.--[[User:Day|Day]] 20:20, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :::::Yes, we could, but it would be quite disingenuous to do so. I think we should call it the way it is. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 20:24, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :::::Yes, we could, but it would be quite disingenuous to do so. I think we should call it the way it is. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 20:24, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :::::: Well, depends on whether you want to start talking about how the Vipers changed appearances or whatever by assuming that the mistake makes canon. Anyway... I was just trying to clarify. --[[User:Day|Day]] 21:20, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :::::: Well, depends on whether you want to start talking about how the Vipers changed appearances or whatever by assuming that the mistake makes canon. Anyway... I was just trying to clarify. --[[User:Day|Day]] 21:20, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| ==You are all driving me mad== | | ==You are all driving me mad== |
| Please, for the love of god, use the "edit" link on the section you are working on. This allows other editors to work on other sections without incurring edit collisions. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 02:37, 4 February 2006 (EST) | | Please, for the love of god, use the "edit" link on the section you are working on. This allows other editors to work on other sections without incurring edit collisions. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 02:37, 4 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :This place is getting really busy lately. Collisions are becoming more frequent, even on talk pages. Not sure if there is long-term help for this (or any wiki). --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:42, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :This place is getting really busy lately. Collisions are becoming more frequent, even on talk pages. Not sure if there is long-term help for this (or any wiki). --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 10:42, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
| Line 72: |
Line 72: |
| ::Any other ideas, lemme know. --[[User:BMS|BMS]] 22:47, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | ::Any other ideas, lemme know. --[[User:BMS|BMS]] 22:47, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
| :::I like the "Scar-Firing" picture, the right most one. It's easy to see without actually having to click on it. --[[User:Bane Grievver|Bane Grievver]] 22:56, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :::I like the "Scar-Firing" picture, the right most one. It's easy to see without actually having to click on it. --[[User:Bane Grievver|Bane Grievver]] 22:56, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
| ::::That's my favorite as well. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 23:05, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | ::::That's my favorite as well. --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 23:05, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| :::I hate to be picky, but: the one with contrails has the camera so far away that the Vipers look too small, "Scar Firing" is good, but for a character named "Scar" the pic is of his least "scarred" side of his head, and although I like the Scar-Death one, I think that out of context it might be confusing. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 23:06, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | :::I hate to be picky, but: the one with contrails has the camera so far away that the Vipers look too small, "Scar Firing" is good, but for a character named "Scar" the pic is of his least "scarred" side of his head, and although I like the Scar-Death one, I think that out of context it might be confusing. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 23:06, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| ::::Why don't we use the "Scar firing" pic for this article, and leave the existing one alone on Scar (Raider)? --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 23:10, 5 February 2006 (EST) | | ::::Why don't we use the "Scar firing" pic for this article, and leave the existing one alone on Scar (Raider)? --[[User:Peter Farago|Peter Farago]] 23:10, 5 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
|
| == In a Room Somewhere... == | | == In a Room Somewhere... == |
| Line 93: |
Line 93: |
|
| |
|
| Well yeah, RDM mentioned that in the podcast; just don't read into everything so much. Yeah, a lot of camerawork/director stuff could be a flashback for the purposes of telling a story; I mean lots of shows intercut this kind of stuff. It's not big revelation. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 18:02, 6 February 2006 (EST) | | Well yeah, RDM mentioned that in the podcast; just don't read into everything so much. Yeah, a lot of camerawork/director stuff could be a flashback for the purposes of telling a story; I mean lots of shows intercut this kind of stuff. It's not big revelation. --[[User:Ricimer|Ricimer]] 18:02, 6 February 2006 (EST) |
|
| |
| *The DVD commentary says that the scene was planned for the end of the episode, but they moved it up during editing. They explained the uniform change as Kat wanting to dress appropriately for a formal occasion - posting the picture of Reilly's girlfriend as a memorial to her. [[User:Dogger55|Dogger55]]
| |
|
| |
|
| == Scar's Kill Count == | | == Scar's Kill Count == |
| Line 131: |
Line 129: |
|
| |
|
| *A) It is not spelled the same B) it is so obscure that it does not warrant mention here. If these were the two primary villians on a show, there would at least be question, but this is just pushing it. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 21:18, 5 March 2006 (CST) | | *A) It is not spelled the same B) it is so obscure that it does not warrant mention here. If these were the two primary villians on a show, there would at least be question, but this is just pushing it. --[[User:The Merovingian|The Merovingian]] 21:18, 5 March 2006 (CST) |
|
| |
| == A worthy quote? ==
| |
|
| |
| Kat's retort to Starbuck's "stim junkie" insult in the pilot's lounge: "One Tigh on the ship's enough." A brutal and efficient comment--killing two officers with one stone. Should it go in the Noteworthy Dialogue section?--[[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 10:06 pm, 6 March 2006 (EST)
| |
| :Actually, the parallel is even deeper - Kat's slugging Thrace in the face is extremely reminiscent of Thrace doing the same thing to Tigh in the miniseries. I've long felt that Kara was basically going to grow up to be Tigh eventually. --[[User:April Arcus|April Arcus]] 21:29, 6 March 2006 (CST)
| |
| ::Thanks, April Arcus. Added Kat's "Tigh" comment to the page. --[[User:BlueResistance|BlueResistance]] 20:34, 7 March 2006 (EST)
| |
|
| |
| == Moved from Questions ==
| |
|
| |
| Per [[BW:FORUM]], these answers needed to be removed from the questions area. Here's what I removed. These points can probably be re-integrated into the analysis section, though I should reiterate that the analysis sections must not look like a thrice damned forum. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 02:34, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| **When ''BattlestarWiki'' [[Battlestar Wiki:Official Communiques/Archive1#Scar|asked]] the writer of this episode, [[Bradley Thompson]], this question he said: "Sharon is speculating. She doesn't know, but it could have happened that way." So it remains an unconfirmed possibility.
| |
| **It is likely that the ''Pegasus'' production facilities will create Mark VIIs, as the ''Pegasus'' is a more modern battlestar than ''Galactica'' (which does not have these facilities). Since the Mark IIs are outdated models that were only on ''Galactica'' for museum purposes, the blueprints and equipment molds in the production facilities are most likely not set to produce equipment for the older Vipers.
| |
| **They may also decide to produce more of the stealth fighters, as they have now seen their combat and surprise capabilities. However, since these aren't robust fighters and sustain damage easily, the odds favor making more protection over stealth.
| |
| **The three basic Cylon models represent something of a spectrum of advancement: from their original, purely mechanical form (the Centurions), to the almost-entirely "organic" forms (the humanoid Cylons). The Raiders are described (podcast, "[[Six Degrees of Separation]]") as supposed to be "in the gap" between [[Number Six]] and a Centurion. Centurions cannot resurrect, and they also contain none of the more advanced bio-mechanical technology the Cylons have developed (as demonstrated by destroyed Centurions, etc). Raiders, on the other hand, ''do'' contain "bio-mechanical" technology, albeit not as advanced as that used in humanoid Cylons. Perhaps the resurrection technology is based on that bio-mechanical "wetware".
| |
| ***Also, the Cylons may believe that fighter-piloting takes more skill than infantry combat.
| |
| **Although humanoid Cylons are truly sentient, Raiders are not. Raiders do have a level of self-awareness, as an animal. Basestars make use of some bio-mechanical materials, but little else is known on how they use their bio-mechanics (This may be answered in a Season 3 episode).
| |
| **Based on the population counts or Fleet status, it's not likely that the episode events are running concurrently. In "Black Market," the Fleet is united (else, Apollo could not fly to ''[[Cloud Nine]]'' or the ''[[Prometheus (ship)|Prometheus]]''). In "Scar," ''Galactica'' and the ''Majahual'' are in one system while ''Pegasus'' guards the rest of the Fleet in another location.
| |
| **As CAG of two battlestars, Apollo need not fly in every mission now with the relatively high levels of existing pilots and new recruits from ''Pegasus'' as well as ''Galactica's'' own pilots. Since Starbuck appears to have returned to her 2nd pilot in command status (acting as CAG in Apollo's absence), she manages some CAG responsibilities on ''Galactica'', such as pilot briefings. Kat appears to brief pilots as well, suggesting she is higher in the pilot command chain than before.
| |
| **There may have been bio-mechanical brains in storage we didn't see; also, the ship acts as a transmitter and could simply transmit their consciousnesses to accompanying basestars.
| |
|
| |
| == Asteroid spacing ==
| |
| The note about the unrealistic distances between asteroid is quite right (virtually the same mistake has often been made in the series' representations of nebular density), but we never see the asteroid belt in its initial state (i.e. before mining operations commenced). Maybe all those rocks flying around close to each other are debris from the blasting of one or two huge asteroids to get at the desired ore deposits.--[[User:Steve|Steve]] 06:07, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| *I don't think they're blasting. Starbuck tells the nuggets that "this star system is full of rocks and dust". They are drilling, not blasting, as Roslin requests an extension of time to replace a broken bit. The mining ship shows no sign of blasting, and it is doubtful that they would blast without containment, since the debris would increase the risk of damage to small craft such as Vipers and Raptors. This appears to be a young star system in the process of forming planets, perhaps with large objects occasionally colliding and breaking apart. [[User:Dogger55|Dogger55]] 17:45, 2 July 2011 (EDT)
| |
| === Citation ===
| |
|
| |
| Per [[BW:CITE|our Citation Jihad]], we need a better source than Wikipedia. Sadly, Wikipedia is not a primary or secondary source -- an article from a scientific journal would work, Wikpedia does not. (Another thing against Wikipedia, particularly on the article that Boogaloo cited, is that it was listed as lacking sources itself!) Until we have a better cite, I've moved the bullet point here. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 09:43, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| *A classic error made in most sci-fi franchises is made in this episode. It depicts asteroids in an asteroid field being in extremely close proximity with one another. In actuality, however, asteroids are normally spaced very far apart from one another. For more information, check out the [[Wikipedia:Asteroid Belt#The_asteroid_belt_in_fiction_and_film|'In film and fiction' section of the Wikipedia article on asteroid belts]].
| |
|
| |
| *Oh, come on. It's basic science. Just look in any good scientific work and you'll find conformation that asteroids are spaced apart. And I doubt that all those rocks flying about were a result of the mining operations, or they would have got rid of them to stop them hindering the mining. Besides, if all those rocks were the result of one asteroid being blasted apart, it would have to be one '''MASSIVE''' asteroid. [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 09:48, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| ** Regardless, it still needs to be sourced. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 10:25, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| *Here's a source I found:
| |
|
| |
| [[http://www.solarviews.com/eng/asteroid.htm]]
| |
|
| |
| And here's the appropiate sentence from said source:
| |
|
| |
| ''Spacecraft that have flown through the asteroid belt have found that the belt is really quite empty and that asteroids are separated by very large distances''
| |
|
| |
| Now ''there's'' a source. Can I put that little bit back in now? [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 11:27, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| :That's pretty "science-y". The [[Template:Cite web|web cite]] would probably be the best way to cite it. My only concern with it is that the whole article is about our solar system's asteroid belt, but being as small as they are I don't think we could have much definitive info about belts in other systems. So I'd favor slapping a web cite template with that site info, and actually not using the sentence or anything in the article. It's copyrighted text so it's better to just provide the link via the cite (so people can check it themselves). --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 11:53, 6 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| :I agree with Steelviper that extrapolation from Sol's asteroid belt doesn't definitively peg this as an error. My understanding (I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm mistaken) is that asteroids can either be closely spaced or not, but a system in which they are closely spaced is unstable - the collective gravity of so many bits of rock in close quarters will cause them to coalesce into some kind of planetary body. The context for what we see on screen is limited - for all we know the asteroids we see may very well be coalescing into one mass, but doing it slowly enough that it's not apparent within the time span of the episode.--[[User:Steve|Steve]] 03:45, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| *Well, Sol's asteroid belt is a normal asteroid belt, so in a way it applies to all asteroid belts. And besides, I remember seeing countless asteroids in the distance during the episode. Well, regardless, whether it's a small asteroid or not, it's still an error. Asteroids are never (or extremely rarely at the very least) spaced so close together like they were shown. In deep space, objects rarely congregate so close together--they just hurtle through space. Obviously, the makers of the show used Star Wars as a reference on how asteroids are spaced. 2001: A Space Odyssey got it right: a passing through the asteroid belt is signfied by sighting of a lone, small asteroid shooting through space. Like it or not, it's an error, unless of course the Colonials collected asteroids and put them all together as some sort of bizarre pilot training course or something. [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 05:10, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| ::Sol's asteroid belt is typical for a planetary system of a certain age, but the age of the system the Fleet is mining is never made clear (of course, it has nothing to do with the story). I fully agree that the environment depicted in the episode can't exist in a fully formed planetary system. However, as I understand it, in a young star's protoplanetary disk there would be regions like this, with gas, dust, and rocks of varying sizes all converging to form new and larger planetary bodies. This explanation (that they are mining a dense region in a protoplanetary disk, rather than a Sol-style asteroid belt) would fit nicely with the apparent density of the interplanetary medium in this episode's space sequences - it's so dense that the Vipers have visible wingtip vortices. I share your beef with conventional depictions of asteroid belts, I'm just not sure this qualifies as a clear scientific error or breach of naturalism. --[[User:Steve|Steve]] 06:13, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| *Well, I doubt that it would ''that'', as I highly doubt that the Colonials would as imbecilic as to mine in a trubulent proto-star system. And I'd say that it's just a plain scientific error, as nearly all sci-fi franchises make the same mistake. [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 07:26, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| ::Though I imagine it has more to do with the fact that the tight clustering of the asteroids is far more visually appealing. They'd probably accuse the VFX team of laziness if they sent back a rendered scene of just one or two asteroids in frame. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 07:42, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| :::Yeah, I guess you're right. But it's still an error, and I'm going to put it back in, unless someone objects. Oh, and has anyone noticed another error made in the series: asteroids are depicted as having gravity, whereas in real life they don't have enough mass for gravity. Although on the other hand they could have been outfitted with artificial gravity generators...[[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 09:41, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| ::::I wouldn't object to the readdition as long as it comes with the citation. --[[User:Steelviper|Steelviper]] 10:32, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| ::::Ditto. That was my only issue with it anyway and now it's been satisfied. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support|Donate]]</sup> 10:35, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
| :::::Well, in it goes then. [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] 13:31, 7 December 2006 (CST)
| |
|
| |
| :As an astrophysicist in the making, I back up everything [[User:Steve|Steve]] wrote (all his theories are quite correct), and even dare to reply to [[User:Boogaloo|Boogaloo]] regarding his comment about how "imbecilic" it'd be to mine a proto-planetary disc; In fact, despite being turbulent, it is much easier to mine a undiferentiated, proto-planet than an eons old asteroid. (undifferentiated means that heavier elements have not yet sank deeper than lighter ones). I would like to see the part about this being a sci-fi error deleted, as it is not an error per se: it is merely a situation we are not used to. [[User:Tanketai|Tanketai]] 05:02, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| ::Given that BSG is a work of fiction that sticks to real physics models models more often than most shows, we fans are still often short of people who can vouch for celestial behavior since none of us (so far) have any formal training about it. So, Tanketai, welcome again to the wiki, and tear this article up to make it correct and/or more plausible than it's present form. Be bold! --[[User:Spencerian|Spencerian]] 05:21, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| :::So, boldly editing where no astrophysicist has edited before, I'm removing the item about asteroid spacing, using as main argument the following:
| |
| :::"However, asteroids in our and other solar systems (...)"
| |
| :::We DO NOT know enough of other star system's asteroid belts to dismiss the one portrayed in the episode as a mistake. Taking ours as a definite example is classic example of antropocentrism, and we all know how dangerous that can be. Our galaxy has billions of stars in all stages of evolution; we are merely opening our eyes. [[User:Tanketai|tanketai]] 02:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
| |
|
| |
| == Helo and Sharon ==
| |
|
| |
| I might be wrong, but it hit me that this might be the first episode in which [[Karl Agathon|Helo]] and [[Sharon Valerii|Sharon]] both appear, but don't have a scene together. If so, is it worthy of mention? --[[User:JemHadar359|JemHadar359]] 23:30, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
| |
