Talk:A Measure of Salvation/Archive 1

Picture?[edit]

Is that picture from A Measure of Salvation? I don't remember Three and Six projecting themselves into a forest. The outfits they are wearing look like what they wore while torturing Baltar, so maybe it's from a deleted scene. Unless I've forgotten the scene for some reason, shouldn't we get a picture that actually came from the episode? -- Alpha5099 12:10, 11 November 2006 (CST)

Some Poor Writing[edit]

Attention to detail is what has set BSG apart from so many other science-fiction shows - including Mr. Moore's Star Trek franchises. So I was very disappointed last night to see the sloppy errors piling up deep. I'd have to see the epsiode again to list them all, but mainly them problems concerned the virus.

The scene where potentially infected Galactica crew are "quarantined", together with Sharon, in a room with cold-storage plastic flaps was ridiculous.

It's preposterous to think that a cylon would casually betray his race for the anti-viral drug. He has no assurance that he won't be double-crossed, and he certainly - even after torture - wouldn't spell out the danger the virus poses to the cylon fleet. The audience isn't stupid and neither should the Galctica crew be. Seeing Lee with a dim little lightbulb over his head was just insulting to us all.

Past episodes have cleary shown that cylon ressurection occurs over significant distances, (greater than FTL jumps), and that calls into question the fundemental logistics of Adama's infection plan.

There would be no reason to jump Galactica itself, just sending one raptor with a cylon transponder and one infected cylon would have done the trick. (Nevermind the ease with which two cylon raiders almost instantly materialize into a whole cylon fleet with a resurrectionship conveniently in tow.)

The analysis on the episode summary page provides an excellent plot device allowing the raid to "succeed" thus justifying the major build-up of the two part story. In fact, it would have made a superb three part arc.

Hypothetical episode 3: Spend some realistic period of time finding a reasonably sized cylon fleet, infect them, virus begins spreading throughout area covered by the "local" resurrection ship. Cylons scramble to head off disease, Baltar gains points by developing Hera vaccine, cylons survive but with major "body-blow" giving Galactica and fleet some breathing room as they prepare to investigate the new lead to Earth.

Please don't get me wrong, I love this show, but sci-fi writing has always been done on the cheap and it make my eyes roll as I struggle to care about characters forced through non-sensical plot contortions. Please, Mr. Moore, DON'T LET BSG SINK TO THE SAME SAD FATE! I'm trusting that this was just a hiccup not a trend.

--IanB 13:08, 11 November 2006 (CST)

In defense of the writers, I think you are wrong on two points:

Jumping Galactica makes sense. In Scar Cylon Raiders are engaging in skirmishes despite the absence of a resurrection ship. A Raptor is not a big enough threat to guarantee the presence of a resurrection ship. If one isn't in range by accident the Cylons would probably engage the Raptor without it and take a minor risk of permanently loosing a few raiders. And after Kobol's Last Gleaming, Part II the Cylons could be exspected to take a closer look to any unexpected Raptors with a Cylon transponder showing up. If they destroy it without a resurrection ship in range, the plans failed. Also Racetrack stated last episode that there is a shortage of Raptors in the fleet, noone is going to be eager to sacrifice one. Jumping Galactica ensures the Cylon require lots of forces, expect lot's of casualties and have a resurrection ship nearby, though I could have done without seeing it arrive on the battlefield, that's bad and inconsistent strategy, just to make sure the audience knows that it is in range.

There is probably a greater timespan between arrival of the patrol and that of the strikeforce then shown onscreen. Helo manipulates the oxygen-system after the jump, nevertheless the prisoners are already dead by the time the resurrection ship appears, indicating a least a few minutes have passed. The process can be seen in Flight of the Phoenix in the firing range scene (it's likely that Helo manipulated the same system).

Two more plotholes I noticed: How do the Colonials know the Cylon supply lines? And given that they know Athena is immune because she's given birth to a hybrid child, they should wonder if there a more human-cylon hybrids. Even without knowing that Hera is still alive, if the massive Cylon effort to create hybrids resulted in creating at least one more hybrid the cylons would take a blow, but would not be exstinct. By the way it would be nice if we would hear something about these efforts. When Hera is shown for the first time in Cylon hands would be a good opportunity to close that chapter with a throwaway line that all these efforts were fruitless and stopped. Nevfennas 11:24, 12 November 2006 (CST)

That's an interesting question -- one that I had myself, actually. Even if the effort didn't destroy the Cylon race (and I think that goal is overly optimistic), the virus would have given a serious blow to the Cylons, which would only serve to give the survivors more breathing room -- not to metion the increase in general morale, which the survivors seriously need after the farce at New Caprica. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 16:53, 12 November 2006 (CST)

I would have to agree the writing is poor. The series seems to be drifting from its roots and moving into the Hollywood PC political statement world. This season has already thrown in suicide bombing and implied it was acceptable, now there is a drift into making political statements about biological weapons (even though nuclear weapons have been freely used in the past.) It seems the writers are abandoning their science fiction roots and reaching to make their own personal social or political commentary. I do hope they get back to what I considered truly exceptional science fiction and stop these editorials.--GeorgeW 00:06, 12 November 2006 (CST)

Followup: According to and article on the Gateworld site ([1]) the ratings have been slipping. As much as I truly love this show, I know my wife and I were both rather disgusted with the previous inclusion of the suicide bombers and now the “loss of humanity” references associated with the potential use of biological weapons. I have also heard complaints from two of our friends. I’m concerned that if this direction is continued it will not only ruin the show, it will also drive away viewers resulting in cancelation. As a long time science fiction fan (I even remember watching the original showings of Lost in Space and the first Star Trek) this has been my all time favorite show up until now. I would hate to see it have an early demise. As I mentioned above, I hope the writers can return to science fiction and entertainment.--GeorgeW 16:13, 12 November 2006 (CST)

Ratings have been slipping for SG-1 and Atlantis as well; neither have the strong allegories to today's world, or the world of yesteryear for that matter. So I don't fully buy that there's a direct correlation between the creative direction BSG is going and the loss in viewership. Actually, one could probably argue (more successfully in my informed opinion) that the loss of ratings has more to do with Sci-Fi's scheduling decisions of breaking up the "Three Amigos" (Stargate SG-1, Stargate Atlantis and Battlestar Galactica). As for the "loss of humanity" and suicide bombing themes, these have existed since the miniseries (Number Five's suicide bombing attempt in "Litmus" and Adama's speech in the miniseries and platitudes since then). -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 16:53, 12 November 2006 (CST)

In my very informed opinion, I would have to disagree on several points. While time slots and lineup can affect ratings, this usually is reflected in those of the shows with the weaker individual draw. Galactica is a cornerstone show which should draw up the ratings for those around it rather than have such a slump from a lineup change.

As for the previous Friday lineup, SG-1 ratings have steadily declined since the departure of Richard Dean Anderson. His departure also seemed to coincide with decline in the quality of the writing, though I’m not convinced the two were related rather than just coincidental. I have always believed the SG Atlantis was the weak link in that lineup and was carried by its position between SG-1 and BSG. As mentioned in the article I referenced above, Dr. Who, which leads into BSG, has had poor ratings this season. I believe the replacement of the very likable actor playing the title role, though consistent with the original BBC series, was a detriment to this series. In addition, this season’s writing has seemed less creative and entertaining. I greatly enjoyed their first season, but have found the current one to be rather dull and uninteresting. This certainly doesn’t help with the Galactica ratings, but I don’t believe it is the major factor in the decline.

The introduction of controversial topics into plot lines is often risky, particularly with science fiction which is typically considered pure escapism, even when it has a dark element like BSG (i.e.: The potential extermination of the human race and the continued threat from the Cylon.) Generally, Sci-Fi fans want to escape the real world and be entertained, not lectured on the writers’ political or social views of modern events. While any controversial topic is a risk, the introduction of those that are currently so polarizing is almost a guarantee of distancing a significant portion of your fan base.

You associated the bombing executed by a Cylon against those carried out by human suicide bombers. The two aren’t even remotely comparable. The first was not executed by a human, was not condoned by the humans, and was executed by an individual who (as already had been established) would be reborn (“downloaded”) into a new body, but as the same individual. The later was not only condoned by members of the upper human leadership, it was presented as a reasonable and acceptable approach in a given situation – a strong statement considering current world events. (As someone who’s nephew’s squad was attacked by the first suicide bomber in the gulf war, killing many of his squad just a few yards in front of him, I will freely admit to strong personal feelings in this matter. None the less, such controversial plot elements are invariably going to strongly offend a significant number of viewers.) The inference that the humans must limit their use of weapons against an enemy bent on the genocide of humanity is another PC component. Biological weapons as a plot element would have been better completely left out rather than used as a mechanism for additional political commentary. Remember, people watch for entertainment, not a reminder of current events or a thinly disguised lecture from Hollywood writers on their political and social opinions.

It is also rather telling that the ratings dropped rather significantly after the season 3 premiere (where suicide bombings by humans were introduced and condoned.) I’ll be interested in seeing how the ratings are affected after this latest one sided (read: “PC”) foray into contemporary controversial issues.

--GeorgeW 20:40, 12 November 2006 (CST)

I doubt that the suicide bombings in Occupation and Precipice were "condoned" by the show. Roslin didn't like them. Tigh, who planned them, thought they were bad. Even Baltar (who's been developing a conscience this season, thank the Gods) didn't like them. The first was a waste of life and counterproductive, causing a massive Cylon freakout that would have killed off Roslin, Zarek, Cally and a bunch of other people if the resistance hadn't saved them in the last minute. The second took down the power grid, which was more helpful, but it should be noted that in this case the bomber didn't kill any civilians, just herself and some Cylons. Tigh is still suffering because of the choices he made on New Caprica, and it doesn't look like he's coming out of those moral woods anytime soon.

Furthermore, I don't think the show has condemned the use of the Cylon virus, either. Roslin was all about it, after all, and I don't think there's anything less PC than a schoolteacher with a Messiah complex jonesing for some genocide. --Noindiecred 22:33, 12 November 2006 (CST)

The use of nuclear weapons are logical in a space setting where great distances are involved and ships are heavily armoured. I would suspect, though, that a Presidential order would have been required to use nukes on the surface of a populated planet. The use of bio-weapons would probably have similiar restrictions because of their nature. I disagree that this show was PC. The weapon that the humans stumbled upon had a unique ability to wipe out the entire race of cyclons. To use it does carry far more ethical problems than simply using a nuke on a basestar. To use a rl analogy even during WWII the US would have been reluctant to have used a weapon that would have destroyed every Japanese person on the planet--Boonton 09:39, 13 November 2006 (CST)

I think the show has been attacking issues that are important in our modern world since the beginning. Basic issues like balance of power, whether civilian government should stay in power during a massive crisis and war, religion in general, how to treat thouse different from yourselves (the show has been very ambivalent about killing Cylons, even though they are "just robots"), Baltar's initial refusal to believe in the gods or a god. It has even tackled thitngs like terrorism as a means to an end (Zarek was introduced at the beginning of the first season), abortion, infanticide, torture, treatment of prisoners. In all, it has been very current and politically involved since the beginning. However, with the first 4 episodes of season 3, it took a decidedly controversial and risky turn by depicting our favorite valiant and noble heros under brutal occupation. The writers have guts, and their ratings may have suffered, but they are doing the same thing they've been doing since the beginning of the show. It's just now a lot of poeple who watch TV don't agree with the particular direction the show took. However, even then, it left the viewer to choose for him or herself what to think, it was again ambivalent, which may be what makes it the best show on TV. No, the show will not supply you with easy answers and moral certitude to very important current questions. But that's a good thing, not a bad thing. --Yaneh 15:49, 13 November 2006 (EST)

I have to agree that it's been dealing with controversial issues from the start. One thing I've learned about BsG from watching it is that every time you think there's a line they won't cross, they seem to cross it. I think Yaneh has it right. Now, with them back in space, I do think it might turn more towards classic sci-fi, but I do agree this is not an unprecedented pattern. As for the writing on this particular episode, I think there were some odd references or slip-ups, which to my mind were made for the sole purpose of bailing Galactica out of the responsibility for a genocide. But I'm not going to judge the whole show at this point--it's WAY too early for that. I'm even more of a music buff than a TV buff, and I don't write off a band until there are 3 stinkers in a row. Let's wait and see if this a pattern before we write BsG off. --Rose Immortal

My additional $.02 - I'm going to have to disagree with my esteemed colleague from across the aisle, GeorgeW. I have no complaint with the political/moral questions that the writers have chosen to tackle this season. I do not believe that sci-fi was ever supposed to be purely escapist. Think of Frank Herbert's Dune which was essentially a political novel in sci-fi clothing. And the reason it is still regarded as one of the greatest sci-fi novels ever written was attention to detail!

What's made BSG so engaging has been its willingness to tackle the dark and gritty sides of a sci-fi story and thus make it far more real. This season's espisodes especially, have dug into tough questions about the justification of actions taken by a society being oppressed and even threatened with extinction - and kudos to Mr. Moore and Co. for going there! While they chose Nazi-esque imagery to illustrate the cylon occupation of New Caprica, the physical and psycological torture depicted there is exactly what Palestinians have been living with every day for decades, and I think it's extraordinary that this show has dared to ask American audiences to speculate how they would react if the same sort of conditions were imposed on us.

Consider Fox's 24, an unabashed advertisement for torture in the name of patriotism - nothing more than fearmongering to stir up a post-911 traumatised public into a state of jackboot-stamping, flag-waving paranoia, willing to hand over their civil liberties to facists. As grim as the first two episodes of this BSG season were, it was refreshing to see some element of pop culture actually asking viewers to stop and think - rather than just telling them what to believe.

If there's been a drop in ratings as a result of this storyline, it's only because so many Americans have let their capacity for critical thought atrophy over the last 40 years. (But just as likely, as was stated above, it was Sci-fi's choice to break up its powerhouse Friday night schedule. Frankly, canning Atlantis and popping the new Doctor Who episodes into the vacant slot would have been the prefered alternative.)

So back to my original point. With a wink and a nod to technobabble - the show's about homicidal robots for gosh sake - can we please just pay attention to the logical details. It's science-fiction, and we, the viewers, have already given the writers our willing suspension of disbelief. I'm just asking not to be abused with rediculous and downright stupid plot loopholes and gaffes in return for the privilege. I'm not writing off BSG either. Yet. But this last episode, which held such promise for having raised the stakes to the level of genocide, fell utterly flat - tripped up by the banana peels of sloppy writing.

--IanB 16:54, 14 November 2006 (CST)

In response to the original poster, I agree with you. This is not one of the show's shining moments.

--Crazyrabbits 10:00, 15 November 2006 (CST)

Explanations[edit]

A note about the Resurection ship jumping into the battle... it would seem that this is actually a good tactical move from the Cylon perspective. After Pegasus and Galactica easily destroyed the first resurrection ship and it's escorts, it would be prudent for the Cylons to keep the new ship with their fleet... even if this means taking it into battle with them. From their point of view it might look as if Galactica was trying to sucker the baseships away from the resurrection ship so the colonials could attack it. They've already used the "sucker" strategy a number of times, we could just be seeing a Cylon reaction to that strategy. Bringing the ship with them would negate such a threat as several basestars (more than enough to hold galactica off) would be able to cover for it.

As far as supply lines, it would figure that Galactica would know about this. Basic military strategy is to harass or at least keep an eye on enemy supply lines.

Also a note about the raptors and their missiles. The colonials may have found, after the battle over new caprica, that the missile attachments for the raptors were effective and could be adapted for other (combat) uses as well. It would also figure that after the loss of Pegasus, the colonials would be trying everything they could to increase firepower. This is probably just a jury-rig solution for increasing galactica's firepower.

And all this has yet to be supported on screen. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 09:45, 13 November 2006 (CST)

In The Captain's Hand Admiral Adama orders a recon of 5 Raptors, 2 of them SAR and 3 Escort. Though never seen onscreen heavily armed Raptors must have been around for some time. Nevfennas 14:57, 13 November 2006 (CST)

It is also distinctly possible that the weapon pods were not available until the arrival of the Pegasus. The cache at Ragnar Anchorage was likely primarily the weapons themselves, and not a supply of launchers or similar hardware. Since Galactica was slated for retirement and Pegasus was fully operational it is very likely the later ship was much better equipped with combat military hardware.--GeorgeW 22:30, 13 November 2006 (CST)

About Gaeta[edit]

Looking at the question here:

Why is Gaeta so surprised to hear that Baltar is alive, given the fact that he was actually there when D'Anna offered Baltar to be evacuated from New Caprica?

Er, well, the last time Gaeta saw Baltar, he gave him a gun and told him his last chance at redemption was to stop Three from setting off the nuke. Given that the nuke didn't go off, it isn't unreasonable to believe Baltar was successful, and that in succeeding he would have either died or been stranded on New Caprica. --Saforrest 02:50, 13 November 2006 (CST)

Gaeta knew that he was chummy with the Cylons. For him to convince them not to detonate the nuke (not hard, given that it would be at best a symbolic gesture) and still make it off the planet alive is well within the realm of possibility. --Peter Farago 02:56, 13 November 2006 (CST)

A quick battle[edit]

I was just wondering but is the skirmish with Galactica and the Basestars going to be added into the Second Cylon War or not? Sure it was short but it still had combat and casualties so it should be added to the list. Commander Mazien 19:54, 13 November 2006 (CST)

Sure, I don't see why not. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 20:10, 13 November 2006 (CST)

Baltar's Torture[edit]

This is just pure speculation for speculation's sake, but I can't help thinking something more than Three being "touched" by Baltar's insane screaming of "don't stop..." "I believe in you" and "I love you with all my heart" (with internal Six's coaching) is going on in this scene. Three's indiference at the onset of her torturing, and her musing over which torture tool she should use doesnt seem like it could be changed or swayed by anything Baltar would say. i would say that judging from the torture tools they have, and their experiences on New Caprica at extracting information on detainees they know a little about torturing, it doesn't seem that Baltar saying anything he could to stop the torture would be unexpected. This leads me to wonder about exactly what he did say with the help of internal Six. perhaps those phrases, or the way he said it struck something in Three that only Cylons are aware of...maybe it means something that neither the Viewer or Baltar is aware of...I just find it hard to believe that Three, fully prepared for torture, even having fun picking what instrument to use...could be so easily moved from some snivelling bleating human saying he loves her with all his heart...Did Six give Baltar these phrases to say because she knew they'd strike a cord in a fellow Cylon, Three's reaction was quite a reaction, and then touching his lips like she couldn't believe those words came out of his mouth.....I don't know...just speculating.--Gallion 12:23, 14 November 2006 (CST)

--I wonder if the incongruity of those phrases to the situation of being tortured made Three wonder if Baltar was projecting. Now, if they've tortured other humans, they've probably seen people break with reality and shut down before, but perhaps that's a reaction beyond anything they've ever seen before. More like a Cylon being tortured? Is that what their instinct is, if they're in the same situation as Baltar? --Rose Immortal

Note about the virus is incorrect[edit]

The note:

Dr. Cottle identifies the disease as Lymphocytic encephalitis, however encephalitis is a condition (swelling of the brain) that can be caused by a pathogen, not a pathogen itself. More likely the pathogen is Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus.

When a doctor identifies a disease, he normally states the name of the disease, not the name of the virus. The note itself states that Doc Cottle identifies the "disease," not the pathogen. I think the note needs to be modified or deleted. --123home123 20:58, 13 November 2006 (CST)

Accessing the "Hybrid?"[edit]

Is that what Athena is doing? Do we know that? It just sounds odd when phrased that way. Wldkt1 02:56, 14 November 2006 (CST)

The antibody degradative debate?[edit]

Ok, the latest addition to this point is the most scientifically accurate (antibodies do not have degradative functionality)! Read the wiki articles yourself to confirm and help you understand. On a more serious note if contributors (chiefly the second one on this topic) feel that an explanation or analysis point is incorrect or poorly explained than they need to do their homework before they dispute it and make up their own science. I know its only a fan wiki on battlestar but lets not plague our site with scientific inconsistencies like in 'A measure of Salvation' (Their science advisor must of been on holiday when this was written), after all we have luxury of being able to correct ourselves in hindsight ;) Jxh487 18:10, 15 November 2006 (CST)

After spending over 25 years working in the clincial field (including being a lab director and now consultant), much of it involving research in imunology, immunohematology, genetics, and similar areas, I believe I know a bit more than what's presented in a few overly simplistic paragraphs in some an abbreviated article. I've dealt with far to many on the internet like yourself who reads a few sentences and brands themselves an expert. I came to this site because I believed it would be an enjoyable place to talk about my favorite show, but apparently this is just another one flled with those who prefer to hide behind their monitors and make snide comments. I'm not here to get into this type of garbage, so that's it, I'm done and out of here.--GeorgeW 01:07, 16 November 2006 (CST)

There will always be people that claim to know all and others that really do belive that they know the right answer. The solution is just to provide loads of sourced for what you say. I dont know of your technical background but it would be very beneficial for all if you stayed and we can work this bit out. --Mercifull ^{(Talk/Contribs)} 04:02, 16 November 2006 (CST)

I'm sorry you feel that way, and I do have a solution to the above issue. It's a really simple solution, so here goes: all the science information needs to be sourced. I'm not talking about using links to Wikipedia (which we shouldn't really be sourcing from anyway), but I'm talking about adding sources from scientific journals and the like. References that GeorgeW should have access to, if I'm correct on that. Otherwise, I'm inclined to yank the entire thing since it isn't sourced at all. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate} 09:41, 16 November 2006 (CST)

I have cited an excellent reference on this topic in the article, a text that was very useful to me in my first undergrad year. It would be rather difficult to cite an appropriate journal (even a review) because the topic is very basic. In addition very few people would have access to any article cited without paying or having a subscription (personal or institutional), though most major libraries are bound to stock this text. My inclusion of Wiki articles as references were due to the fact that they provide a sound and simplistic (extremely accurate, believe it or not!) explanation of the relevant topics, as I assume most people reading these articles don't have a degree in a biological science. As for George W. Bush's 25 years of clinical experience (hmm?), I'd like to know if he's willing to dispute a scientific textbook! Jxh487 17:51, 16 November 2006 (CST)

Regardless of who is right or wrong (I'm NOT taking sides here), there shouldn't be debate in the analysis section. Currently it reads like:

A

NOT (A)

NOT (NOT (A))

Which is NOT (Encycopledic) to read. Pull out your sources, measure them (weigh them, whatever), and the winner takes all (and gets a quick blurb about A (or NOT (A)) in the "Analysis" section). Also, when citing your sources you may want to make use of the citation templates when citing books, journal articles, etc. That's what makes the cool little footnotes that show up in the "References" section. --Steelviper 18:06, 16 November 2006 (CST)