6494 réponses à ce sujet

[100k]

Arkitekt wrote...

Now you are effectively lying.

So you're saying you didn't quote me out of context two seperate times, cherry pick my analysis of those that fell from several km, or revive a dead argument?

Good luck with that. 

So there goes any shred of decency from you.

What are you, six years old? 

I'm just gonna skip your ulterior ramblings as trash trolling. Have a nice life.

Okay, cya. Just know that you attempted to argue with someone who agreed that -- under astronomical odds of occurance -- a human body could remain intact after a fall through orbit onto a large hard cold planet -- essentially your original argument.

Which means that in an attempt to get 'the last word' you argued for the plain and clear point of nothing but argument's sake.

Oh, but I'll still let you get the last word. Lemme just requote you...

Have a nice life.

Modifié par 100k, 12 septembre 2011 - 09:39 .

[Arkitekt]

To the onlookers that will perhaps get distracted by the red herrings and lies of some trolling posts here, I wasn't advocating that Shepard survived the fall, that his body could "remain intact", etc. All I did was expose the handwaving that Smudboy presented in his "case" while pretending to do rigorous maths. He merely described one possible sequence of events that "proved" his point.

This is not how logic works. In order to prove that Shepard'd body couldn't have been ressurected after the fall, you must find the best possible case for Shepard and prove that even in such a case it is quite impossible.

But in such a case, it doesn't seem impossible to me. What it seems is that the rest of the team's reasoning that Shepard is "definitely dead" so they don't even attempt to "save" him is reasonable. Even Liara's purpose on getting Shepard's body is to give him proper burial, not to save him. Only later is she even aware of such a possibility. This means that Shepard's ressurection was a very amazing combination of luck and a big interest on the part of a heavy funded organization on having him / her alive.

There are many things "wrong" in ME2. This part is not one of them.

[string3r]

100k wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Those were different quotations, 100k. My opinion on your intelligence is falling faster than Shepard was there I gotta tell you.

I could care less about your opinion of my intelligence. You've quoted me twice out of context in an attempt to continue a day old argument. You know what that tells me? It tells me that you don't "do your homework" in regards to this thread.

It's "couldn't" care less.

[KotorEffect3]

Enough about the damn fall of the damn body already! Shepard died and cerberus scientists brought him back that is all that important! This has been nitpicking to the Nth degree!!

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 12 septembre 2011 - 10:50 .

[Arkitekt]

Nitpicking is BSN's job Kotor. That's perfectly alright. Lying and making **** up however is something that annoys me.

[Sgt Stryker]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Enough about the damn fall of the damn body already! Shepard died and cerberus scientists brought him back that is all that important! This has been nitpicking to the Nth degree!!

I'm still surprised that some people still think the body was incinerated, even though all evidence clearly points to the contrary.

[Iakus]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Enough about the damn fall of the damn body already! Shepard died and cerberus scientists brought him back that is all that important! This has been nitpicking to the Nth degree!!

I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with you on this thread.

Frightening 

[didymos1120]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Enough about the damn fall of the damn body already! Shepard died and cerberus scientists brought him back that is all that important! This has been nitpicking to the Nth degree!!

I'm still surprised that some people still think the body was incinerated, even though all evidence clearly points to the contrary.

It's not that they think it was.  It's that they think it should have been. 

[Iakus]

 Can we just stipulate that, for whatever reason, the body survived atmospheric entry and remained (mostly) intact after impact?

How the body, and in particular, the mind got put back together "exactly" as before makes that look perfectly reasonable in comparison.

[Killjoy Cutter]

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

@dreman9999 and Killjoy Cutter...this is clearly a debate that can't be one by either side cause neither of you have shown any sense of agreement. And the things you are debating are so small and insignificant I'm astounded this has gone on so long...

Just a crazy thought.

If it weren't for the fact that he's just plain wrong about so much basic science, I'd have given up on refuting  his rambling, convoluted, confused nonsense long ago. 

It just bugs the hell out of me to see people so openly, blatantly, and confidently expounding incorrect nonsense on topics they clearly know nothing about. 

I'm sorry I am using basic sciene to prove my point. You not understanding the details of it. Your stating the only reason that Venus is like the way it it is because it has a lot of co2on the planer....Forget the fact that co2 is one of the most common compounds on this planet...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co2
The only reason it not in our atmosphere the way it is on venus is because it's locked in to everything else...... Is the main reason we have greenhouse effects but instead of the sun produing the effect, we are doing it. We are to well protected to gave the sun do it on it's own. Venus does not have this protection.....so it happens on it own. Why it don't have this protection is because of cosmic rays.

The reason that CO2 is not locked away in rocks on Venus has nothing to do with your silly notions about the cosmic rays and magnetic fields. 

Whatever. 

Learn to spell, type, and read -- and stop making silly leaps. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 13 septembre 2011 - 01:00 .

[string3r]

jreezy wrote...

string3r wrote...
It's "couldn't" care less.

Seriously? That's you're contribution to their debate? A punctuation correction?

Pretty much, I'm just that bored.

[The Interloper]

iakus wrote...

 Can we just stipulate that, for whatever reason, the body survived atmospheric entry and remained (mostly) intact after impact?

How the body, and in particular, the mind got put back together "exactly" as before makes that look perfectly reasonable in comparison.

Suspension of disbelief explains the resurrection-it is a sci-fi, after all. The only real issue with the whole death/resurrection thing is that it's not explained why resurrection is only possible for shepard.

If there's a plot twist involved, it's really obvious. Same thing with Vasir-shepard never questions her intent.

Otherwise, the scene mostly works. Not saying it couldn't have been cleaned up (like a comment about alliance ships close by to explain Harbinger's hit and run, maybe give Shep an escape pod, a few other minor details) and it's fine.

Oh, and since when has there been an escape pod in the airlock? That did always bother me....

Arkitekt wrote...

 All I did was expose the handwaving that Smudboy presented in his "case" while pretending to do rigorous maths. He merely described one possible sequence of events that "proved" his point.

 

Smudboy does this constantly, and it's one of the reasons I dislike him. It's one thing to complain about lack of exposition-I understand that. I don't agree (all the time), but it's a legitimate complaint. What's not legitimate is to also argue that events in ME2 contradict information that the narrative never presents in the first place. The details of the fall are never given, so Smudboy takes one possible version of events that makes the resurrection impossible and calls it a day. Same thing with wilson-he argues at length in the squee response that Wilson's actions contradict motives and contexts that the narrative never gave. Again, it's one thing to complain about the lack of explanation (though I thought wilson was explained plenty). It's another to make crap up.

Plus, he says people can't make up an explanation to fill in gaps in the narrative. At one point when Squee does this, he makes up an explanation that says the narrative doesn't make sense and says "see, if you can make stuff up to help your argument, I can too." But he does this several other times all on his own. If I can't make up an explanation of why the plot works, why can smudboy make up an explanation of why it doesn't? And even if we can both make stuff up, what use is it to make up fictional scenarios that disprove the game's events and call it a plothole?

Oh, wait. Logic isn't at play here, huh.

Modifié par The Interloper, 13 septembre 2011 - 01:05 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

The Interloper wrote...

iakus wrote...

 Can we just stipulate that, for whatever reason, the body survived atmospheric entry and remained (mostly) intact after impact?

How the body, and in particular, the mind got put back together "exactly" as before makes that look perfectly reasonable in comparison.

Suspension of disbelief explains the resurrection-it is a sci-fi, after all. The only real issue with the whole death/resurrection thing is that it's not explained why resurrection is only possible for shepard.

It's one thing to suspend your disbelief. 

It's another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.

[Iakus]

The Interloper wrote...

iakus wrote...

 Can we just stipulate that, for whatever reason, the body survived atmospheric entry and remained (mostly) intact after impact?

How the body, and in particular, the mind got put back together "exactly" as before makes that look perfectly reasonable in comparison.

Suspension of disbelief explains the resurrection-it is a sci-fi, after all. The only real issue with the whole death/resurrection thing is that it's not explained why resurrection is only possible for shepard.

If there's a plot twist involved, it's really obvious. Same thing with Vasir-shepard never questions her intent.

Otherwise, the scene mostly works. Not saying it couldn't have been cleaned up (like a comment about alliance ships close by to explain Harbinger's hit and run, maybe give Shep an escape pod, a few other minor details) and it's fine.

The scene doesn't work because we haven't seen any technology, human or otherwise, that's even close to doing this.  They didn't just rebuild a body and toss in some cybernetics for s&gs, they rebuilt a brain!  They reconstructed a mind and a personality with all it's complexity.  None of the Council races or Terminus societies can create an AI personality from scratch with certainty.  Yet they perfectly recreated an already established one, complete with memories, emotions (such as they are) and all relevant skills?  That makes rebuilding a body seem like child's play.

Sure, anything is possible when you don't care about what's possible in the first place, but when the answer is "a wizard did it" "suspension of disbelief" what do you suspend the disbelief on?  

What's next?
Will Shepard be rescued at the eleventh hour by giant space eagles?  
Will Shepard upload a virus into Harbringer to drop the kinetic barriers of the entire Reaper fleet simuitaneously?
Is Shepard going to sacrifice himself to reboot the Reapers' programming, creating a truce between organics and synthetics?

I mean, it's sci-fi, right?  Just suspend your disbelief!

Edit:  In other words, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief that Shepard's body is recoverable and rebuildable.  More than that I need something to work with.

Modifié par iakus, 13 septembre 2011 - 01:37 .

[KotorEffect3]

iakus wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Enough about the damn fall of the damn body already! Shepard died and cerberus scientists brought him back that is all that important! This has been nitpicking to the Nth degree!!

I think this is the first time I've ever agreed with you on this thread.

Frightening 

yeah I know

[didymos1120]

The Interloper wrote...
Oh, and since when has there been an escape pod in the airlock? That did always bother me....

It's not in the airlock.  It's across from the airlock:



The airlock is that blue door in the background.

[The Interloper]

iakus wrote...

The scene doesn't work because we haven't seen any technology, human or otherwise, that's even close to doing this.  They didn't just rebuild a body and toss in some cybernetics for s&gs, they rebuilt a brain!  They reconstructed a mind and a personality with all it's complexity.  None of the Council races or Terminus societies can create an AI personality from scratch with certainty.  Yet they perfectly recreated an already established one, complete with memories, emotions (such as they are) and all relevant skills?  That makes rebuilding a body seem like child's play.

Sure, anything is possible when you don't care about what's possible in the first place, but when the answer is "a wizard did it" "suspension of disbelief" what do you suspend the disbelief on?  

Edit:  In other words, I'm willing to suspend my disbelief that Shepard's body is recoverable and rebuildable.  More than that I need something to work with.

I never disagreed that the situation could have been explained better. I'm saying that it's not improbable that in a sci-fi universe it's possible, with enough money and talent and time, to bring someone back to life. The nebulousness of sci-fi power is what you suspend your disbelief from-same thing with the scene where Darth Vader blocks lasers with his hand. Okay, that's like magic. Let's try again- the Death Star. A ship the size of a planet build by mortal men in 25 years. Twice. Oh, yeah. That wasn't crazy or anything, was it?

Same thing here-our own medical technology is pretty amazing already, so the idea isn't totally implausible given the context. To argue that even in sci-fi it shouldn't be physically possible is asinine. I've also seen people argue (more plausibly) that making resurrection a medical operation takes any tension out of it-there's no consequence for death. I can see where that's coming from but I'd argue that losing two years on both friends and enemies, ending up in the pocket of TIM, and having a massive project dedicated only to you (a project that's unlikely to happen again, especially in time to stop the reapers) is hardly "without consequence."

The problem with the scene is, as you say, despite the power of Sci-Fi aside there's no indication that such an operation has ever occured before in the ME universe. As it should be-Shepard should be a special, one time case. The problem is, as I already admitted, why only Shepard? Did cerberus develop/find experimental technology, as Squee suggested? That's quite plausible (I wouldn't be surprised that reaper/prothean tech is involved somehow) but the fact that Shepard never asks,"hey, how did you bring me back to life exactly?" is pretty strange.

Again, maybe it's a poorly disguised plot twist (you're indoctrinated! Surprise!). Also yet again, I'm not saying the scene didn't have writing problems. But like most of ME2's problematic scenes, it all could have been solved with one or two lines of dialogue (smudboy himself admits it). For instance (on the reaper/prothean vein) add one audio log of miranda saying TIM gave them some amazing technology she's sure nobody else has, and a dialogue option of  Shepard asking about his resurrection and TIM giving an evasive answer.

Does...that make any sense? You did say that all you were asking for is more to go on, and I'm not saying you don't have just cause to demand that. But the act of scientific resurrection isn't out of place here-it just needs proper context. Which I agree ME2 didn't quite give.

didymos1120 wrote...

It's not in the airlock.  It's across from the airlock:



The airlock is that blue door in the background.

Maybe my brain just isn't working right now, but I'm staring at that picture and I'm still confused.

Modifié par The Interloper, 13 septembre 2011 - 03:08 .

[Sgt Stryker]

The escape pod is on the starboard (right) side of the Normandy, while the airlock is on the port (left) side. In ME1, there was just a wall across from the airlock, though. Maybe that section of wall is supposed to retract into the ceiling/floor when the Abandon Ship command is given?

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 13 septembre 2011 - 03:29 .

[dreman9999]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

111987 wrote...

@dreman9999 and Killjoy Cutter...this is clearly a debate that can't be one by either side cause neither of you have shown any sense of agreement. And the things you are debating are so small and insignificant I'm astounded this has gone on so long...

Just a crazy thought.

If it weren't for the fact that he's just plain wrong about so much basic science, I'd have given up on refuting  his rambling, convoluted, confused nonsense long ago. 

It just bugs the hell out of me to see people so openly, blatantly, and confidently expounding incorrect nonsense on topics they clearly know nothing about. 

I'm sorry I am using basic science to prove my point. You not understanding the details of it. Your stating the only reason that Venus is like the way it it is because it has a lot of co2on the planer....Forget the fact that co2 is one of the most common compounds on this planet...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co2
The only reason it not in our atmosphere the way it is on Venus is because it's locked in to everything else...... Is the main reason we have greenhouse effects but instead of the sun producing the effect, we are doing it. We are to well protected to gave the sun do it on it's own. Venus does not have this protection.....so it happens on it own. Why it don't have this protection is because of cosmic rays.

The reason that CO2 is not locked away in rocks on Venus has nothing to do with your silly notions about the cosmic rays and magnetic fields. 

Whatever. 

Learn to spell, type, and read -- and stop making silly leaps. 

Yes, that is the reason why it's not lock in rock. Listen, co2 and any carbon based compound has a very low heat capacity. This mean that it reacts to heat critically.AKA gas burn easily, wood burns easily. Carbon and co2 react violently to high temperatures. Meaning it rises and brakes apart in high temperatures, This is why Venus has a high amount of co2 in its atmosphere and earth has now were near the same amount in the atmosphere. Earth is cooler than Venus, and thus being cooler co2 has time to be able to turn to lower temperature compounds , like coal, gas, and living thing.(Yes, you and the trees outside are made mostly out of co2 and other organic elements and compounds.)Venus is to hot to allow co2 to be able to do that. So it's in the atmosphere. Why is earth cool enough for co2 to bond and make other compounds? Because it has an ozone layer to keep uv ray from over heating the planet. Why does earth have an ozone layer? Because it has a magnetosphere to keep particle radiation aka cosmic rays from effecting the ozone layer.
co2 is in the atmosphere of Venus because the planet is super heated and the common nature of element, compounds and heat happen(aka, expanding, rising and making new bonds). It's too hot on Venus for co2 to bond with any thing else but compounds that can exist in high temperatures... Why is Venus too hot to for co2 to not be anywhere but in the atmosphere? because the planet has no ozone layer. Why does Venus have no ozone layer? Because it has no magnetosphere to stop particle radiation from destroying it.

As I been trying to say, the fact that Venus has no magnetosphere and is hit heavily with particle radiation via cosmic ray show that in an event that a planet is super heat and is effected to the full effect of particle radiation, it will cause a green house effect to the planet.Which is why haestrom surface is not chocked with particle radiation.

Modifié par dreman9999, 13 septembre 2011 - 03:37 .

[111987]

@dreman9999

PLEASE STOP.

Thank you

Modifié par 111987, 13 septembre 2011 - 03:33 .

[didymos1120]

The Interloper wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

It's not in the airlock.  It's across from the airlock:



The airlock is that blue door in the background.

Maybe my brain just isn't working right now, but I'm staring at that picture and I'm still confused.

The camera in that image is inside the escape pod, looking out through its door.  The blurry blue thing is the airlock door, on the opposite side of the ship.

[dreman9999]

111987 wrote...

@dreman9999

PLEASE STOP.

Thank you

Not untill that guy understands common science.

[didymos1120]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Maybe that section of wall is supposed to retract into the ceiling/floor when the Abandon Ship command is given?

Since that's the only possible explanation that works, I'm gonna say that's a "Yes" on that.

[Sgt Stryker]

didymos1120 wrote...

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Maybe that section of wall is supposed to retract into the ceiling/floor when the Abandon Ship command is given?

Since that's the only possible explanation that works, I'm gonna say that's a "Yes" on that.

inb4 "retracting walls were never in the Codex whineb*tchmoan Normandy was retconned grumblegrumble conjecture = EVIL grumble mainstream gamers whinewhine"