Star Wars>Star Trek

[Deeko]

Holy Crap, from glancing over this thread, sirpappy is the biggest loser alive.

 

[Psycho18]

my vote goes to Star Wars!

 

[viking66]

trek because the capton always got layed.

 

[SithSolo1]

/thread

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: JoeKingpushes up glasses... uhh hello! Star Wars tech has stagnated. In KOTOR the tech is exactly the same as 2000yrs later. Meanwhile star trek tech progresses rapidly. Look what happened in a decade. From lasers and polorized hull plating to energy shields and quantum torpedoes.!!!

Not exactly the same. But similar. Also it seems to have more of a dune quality to me. As in, so highly advanced that traditional thinking on technology no longer applies. Maybe their lasers penetrate shields in a similar way that dune shields can only be penetrated by knives, thus making it seem like they are low tech.

Their AI and cloning technology also seems superior. There's a huge gap between data and everything else in trek, and most star wars stuff falls in the middle.

And don't forget that wars has figured out planetary shields and also has a much more tightly interwoven mix of species.

 

[Phokus]

star wars owns star trek. Yes the new movies suck horribly, but overrall it's still more EXCITING and COOLER than star trek. Star trek is for BORING nerds while star wars is for the COOL nerds

 

[EpsiIon]

It's pretty silly to talk about SW vs ST tech.

Besides: Suncrusher.

/thread

 

[SirPappy]

Originally posted by: Deeko
Holy Crap, from glancing over this thread, sirpappy is the biggest loser alive.

I'm guessing your a trek fan

Dont know why you would call a total stranger a loser, but eh,to each there own.


Star Wars stills Owns, the polls dont lie.

 

[GamingGuy246]

For the last time, Star Trek ships would destroy any Star Wars ship, hell, a Yellowstone class Runabout could destroy the Deathstar, LASERS cannot penetrate (that means cannot touch/destroy) any federation vessel, a type 1 shuttlecraft could destroy the Deathstar.

Star Trek ships are literally invulnerable to star wars weaponry, there is no way that a laser of any power could touch any federation ship.

But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

It would take one phaser blast to destroy a Star Destroyer as the phaser would instantly punch through the shields and impale the ship with a devastating beam of light.

Just imagine what a photon/quantum torpedo would do to the Deathstar, theres no contest.

Now in terms of everything else but tech, I still think Star Trek owns, its not necessarly about the space travel and science that draws me to the show, although it is appealing, its something that George Lucas/Star Wars cannot ever do. That is the fact that Roddenberry made this story of a Utopian society, a paradise Earth, no disease, no famine, no murders, no terrorist bombings, nothing harmful to society basically and depicted it as a socialistic society that actually works. All the resources are so plentiful that no one kills over greed, because there is none on Earth, everything is free. The one flaw everyone says that a socialistic society has, they have solved, they grew out of humanities infancy and desire for material needs, they do what they do to better themselves, and live their lives to the fullest through bettering themselves. It is a perfect society, plain and simple, Star Wars cannot ever emulate that because Star Wars society is too unevolved and still in its infancy no matter how historically aged they may be, they are still children desiring money and power and nothing else.

P.S.

My dogs name is Tiberius, educated Trek fans will understand.

 

[MegaWorks]

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
For the last time, Star Trek ships would destroy any Star Wars ship, hell, a Yellowstone class Runabout could destroy the Deathstar, LASERS cannot penetrate (that means cannot touch/destroy) any federation vessel, a type 1 shuttlecraft could destroy the Deathstar.

Star Trek ships are literally invulnerable to star wars weaponry, there is no way that a laser of any power could touch any federation ship.

But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

It would take one phaser blast to destroy a Star Destroyer as the phaser would instantly punch through the shields and impale the ship with a devastating beam of light.

Just imagine what a photon/quantum torpedo would do to the Deathstar, theres no contest.

Now in terms of everything else but tech, I still think Star Trek owns, its not necessarly about the space travel and science that draws me to the show, although it is appealing, its something that George Lucas/Star Wars cannot ever do. That is the fact that Roddenberry made this story of a Utopian society, a paradise Earth, no disease, no famine, no murders, no terrorist bombings, nothing harmful to society basically and depicted it as a socialistic society that actually works. All the resources are so plentiful that no one kills over greed, because there is none on Earth, everything is free. The one flaw everyone says that a socialistic society has, they have solved, they grew out of humanities infancy and desire for material needs, they do what they do to better themselves, and live their lives to the fullest through bettering themselves. It is a perfect society, plain and simple, Star Wars cannot ever emulate that because Star Wars society is too unevolved and still in its infancy no matter how historically aged they may be, they are still children desiring money and power and nothing else.

P.S.

My dogs name is Tiberius, educated Trek fans will understand.

:thumbsup: :beer:

Edit: James T. Kirk

 

[Riceball]

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
For the last time, Star Trek ships would destroy any Star Wars ship, hell, a Yellowstone class Runabout could destroy the Deathstar, LASERS cannot penetrate (that means cannot touch/destroy) any federation vessel, a type 1 shuttlecraft could destroy the Deathstar.

Star Trek ships are literally invulnerable to star wars weaponry, there is no way that a laser of any power could touch any federation ship.

But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

It would take one phaser blast to destroy a Star Destroyer as the phaser would instantly punch through the shields and impale the ship with a devastating beam of light.

Just imagine what a photon/quantum torpedo would do to the Deathstar, theres no contest.

Now in terms of everything else but tech, I still think Star Trek owns, its not necessarly about the space travel and science that draws me to the show, although it is appealing, its something that George Lucas/Star Wars cannot ever do. That is the fact that Roddenberry made this story of a Utopian society, a paradise Earth, no disease, no famine, no murders, no terrorist bombings, nothing harmful to society basically and depicted it as a socialistic society that actually works. All the resources are so plentiful that no one kills over greed, because there is none on Earth, everything is free. The one flaw everyone says that a socialistic society has, they have solved, they grew out of humanities infancy and desire for material needs, they do what they do to better themselves, and live their lives to the fullest through bettering themselves. It is a perfect society, plain and simple, Star Wars cannot ever emulate that because Star Wars society is too unevolved and still in its infancy no matter how historically aged they may be, they are still children desiring money and power and nothing else.

P.S.

My dogs name is Tiberius, educated Trek fans will understand.

Phaser = laser. Roddenberry just substited the word because he did not want to use the term laser.

Not like SW is strictly limited to laser weponary. Off the top of my head SW has ion cannons which can bypass shields, disruptor technology(romulans/klingons) something that is comparable to phasers.

 

[GamingGuy246]

Originally posted by: Riceball

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
For the last time, Star Trek ships would destroy any Star Wars ship, hell, a Yellowstone class Runabout could destroy the Deathstar, LASERS cannot penetrate (that means cannot touch/destroy) any federation vessel, a type 1 shuttlecraft could destroy the Deathstar.

Star Trek ships are literally invulnerable to star wars weaponry, there is no way that a laser of any power could touch any federation ship.

But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

It would take one phaser blast to destroy a Star Destroyer as the phaser would instantly punch through the shields and impale the ship with a devastating beam of light.

Just imagine what a photon/quantum torpedo would do to the Deathstar, theres no contest.

Now in terms of everything else but tech, I still think Star Trek owns, its not necessarly about the space travel and science that draws me to the show, although it is appealing, its something that George Lucas/Star Wars cannot ever do. That is the fact that Roddenberry made this story of a Utopian society, a paradise Earth, no disease, no famine, no murders, no terrorist bombings, nothing harmful to society basically and depicted it as a socialistic society that actually works. All the resources are so plentiful that no one kills over greed, because there is none on Earth, everything is free. The one flaw everyone says that a socialistic society has, they have solved, they grew out of humanities infancy and desire for material needs, they do what they do to better themselves, and live their lives to the fullest through bettering themselves. It is a perfect society, plain and simple, Star Wars cannot ever emulate that because Star Wars society is too unevolved and still in its infancy no matter how historically aged they may be, they are still children desiring money and power and nothing else.

P.S.

My dogs name is Tiberius, educated Trek fans will understand.

Phaser = laser. Roddenberry just substited the word because he did not want to use the term laser.

Not like SW is strictly limited to laser weponary. Off the top of my head SW has ion cannons which can bypass shields, disruptor technology(romulans/klingons) something that is comparable to phasers.

An uneducated person yet again.

In Star Trek there have been numerous distinctions between phaser and laser, they are not the same thing.

If you watch TOS Kirk comments when a ship threatens to destroy the Enterprise bearing laser weaponry that laser technology cannot even penetrate the navigational shielding of the old Enterprise, how would you think a laser would fair against the newer Enterprises? Considering navigational shielding is the lowest form of shielding they have on their starships.

End of story, don't believe me look it up.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

hahahaha...

Watch Trekkies sometime

They're both sci-fi. Escape fiction. The sort of thing we indulge in because we find it more interesting than our real life. Different things interest different people, and ST probably does have a bit more philosophy than SW, but I don't think "intellectual" is the word I would use to describe either of them. People don't watch those shows to stretch their minds and learn, it's just mental masturbation.

Do I enjoy sci-fi? Yes. But I don't kid myself about how serious or applicable to real life it is.

 

[JoeKing]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

hahahaha...

Watch Trekkies sometime

They're both sci-fi. Escape fiction. The sort of thing we indulge in because we find it more interesting than our real life. Different things interest different people, and ST probably does have a bit more philosophy than SW, but I don't think "intellectual" is the word I would use to describe either of them. People don't watch those shows to stretch their minds and learn, it's just mental masturbation.

Do I enjoy sci-fi? Yes. But I don't kid myself about how serious or applicable to real life it is.

that's true. But over the years sci fi has proven to be a sort of window into what is possible in the future (Wells and Orwell for example). And there's even debate that sci fi helps shape the future it attempts to predict.

To me it's just fun to look at a "what if" world that I'll probably not live long enough to see.

btw... trek ships still kicks star wars ships ass

 

[Riceball]

An uneducated person yet again.

In Star Trek there have been numerous distinctions between phaser and laser, they are not the same thing.

If you watch TOS Kirk comments when a ship threatens to destroy the Enterprise bearing laser weaponry that laser technology cannot even penetrate the navigational shielding of the old Enterprise, how would you think a laser would fair against the newer Enterprises? Considering navigational shielding is the lowest form of shielding they have on their starships.

End of story, don't believe me look it up.

"?we realized that lasers might very well become commonplace by the time the show got on the air. We decided to say phaser instead. The reason we picked phaser is the phasing principle in physics in which power can be increased. It was logical, and it sounded good, so we used it?"

http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/startrek.htm

The technobabble behind it was just added on later. You still haven't addressed disruptor and ion tech.

 

[GamingGuy246]

Originally posted by: Riceball

An uneducated person yet again.

In Star Trek there have been numerous distinctions between phaser and laser, they are not the same thing.

If you watch TOS Kirk comments when a ship threatens to destroy the Enterprise bearing laser weaponry that laser technology cannot even penetrate the navigational shielding of the old Enterprise, how would you think a laser would fair against the newer Enterprises? Considering navigational shielding is the lowest form of shielding they have on their starships.

End of story, don't believe me look it up.

"?we realized that lasers might very well become commonplace by the time the show got on the air. We decided to say phaser instead. The reason we picked phaser is the phasing principle in physics in which power can be increased. It was logical, and it sounded good, so we used it?"

http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/startrek.htm

The technobabble behind it was just added on later. You still haven't addressed disruptor and ion tech.

I'll accept that, however you do realize that the lasers on a Star Wars ship, could not touch a Star Trek ship because of this very thing stated, although they may be extremely similar, however in the two different sci-fi realities they are anything but. Which leads me back to my statement earlier.


------------------------------

The differences in disruptors, from what I have learned over the years from the two sci-fi realities is that in Star Wars its another name for an ordinary laser that is a lot more powerful than your standard issue. Meaning it is still a laser, just a more powerful one.

Now in Star Trek, I have learned that when they call something a disruptor its literally disrupts the molecular cohesion, lack of better word, the "togetherness" of an object/lifeform and actually tears it apart as it is destroying it in the process.

Star Wars has Ion Cannons, which is basically like an emp (electro magnetic pulse), although these cannons may be ale to penetrate the shields of a Star Wars ship with ease I doubt they could do the same with a Star Trek ship, because their shields operate on a specific frequency, unlike just the massive protective bubble a Star Wars ship creates. Until this frequency is matched, or the shirlds are lowered or pounded down to where they no longer are active, matter is not allowed to pass through the bubble.

Star Trek has ion cannon technology aswell specifically the Klingons, just think of it has a more focused, and more powerful phaser delivered in a quick burst that has a lot more destructive power.

I hope I answered your questions.

 

[GamingGuy246]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: GamingGuy246
But as someone pointed out earlier in this thread Star Wars is for kids, as much as I love both Star Wars and Star Trek, I feel Star Trek offers more depth in terms of story, society, moral messages, respect for life, science, and intellectual discussion.

Star Trek is more for an intellectual person while Star Wars just has a "cool" factor because they have impossibly huge ships, and lightsabers.

hahahaha...

Watch Trekkies sometime

They're both sci-fi. Escape fiction. The sort of thing we indulge in because we find it more interesting than our real life. Different things interest different people, and ST probably does have a bit more philosophy than SW, but I don't think "intellectual" is the word I would use to describe either of them. People don't watch those shows to stretch their minds and learn, it's just mental masturbation.

Do I enjoy sci-fi? Yes. But I don't kid myself about how serious or applicable to real life it is.

Maybe I should rephrase my statement, Star Trek has a much more intellectual following, feel free to deny it all you want, but theres no denying the truth. Like I said, SW is kids stuff, while ST, for me personally provokes thought and wonder about a society that could be as that is. I believe currently the world's smartest man, Stephen Hawking, was such a fan of ST TNG that he actually had a ship named after him in the show, he was a fan because the show provoked thought and the wonderous technology that could await us in the future.

It is very possible that we might have transporter technology in the future, I remember in a popular science article I read a few years back that they managed to somehow transport several molecules from one place to another, although this may seem insignificant compared to a human being or a tangible piece of inorganic/organic matter it is still a start. Have you heard about those combat suits that the military has developed that is like your own personal cloaking device, it debuted in national geographic I believe, they said the only part you can really see, is the tip of helmet they put on, other than that it makes you virtually invisible.

I don't doubt some things in ST will never in our lifetimes or ever at all be invented, however it has much more grounds for scientific exploratrion than anything Star Wars, and think tanks have launched studies up on technology that originally debuted in ST.

 

[stevty2889]

Star Trek: BOTF > Star Wars: Rebellion

 

[Papagayo]

Star Trek is geared toward adults.
Star Wars is geared toward kids..


Star Trek blows away Star Wars..

Lucas sucks a$$ at directing..

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: SirPappy

Originally posted by: Deeko
Holy Crap, from glancing over this thread, sirpappy is the biggest loser alive.

I'm guessing your a trek fan

Dont know why you would call a total stranger a loser, but eh,to each there own.


Star Wars stills Owns, the polls dont lie.

No, I don't really care about either.

I'm referring to the fact that you posted about 800 times gloating over the fact that star wars was winning in the poll. Why do you care so much? We can clearly read the poll for ourselves.

 

[amoeba]

Theres a lot of talk about how the last few star wars movies have sucked and while that is generally agreed upon, if we took the worst star trek movies and compared them to the worst star wars movies, I think star trek is miles ahead in terms of suckiness.

Theres maybe 3 or 4 star trek movies that are gems while the others are just plain bad.

 

[SithSolo1]

Guess everyone neglected to read the page I posted. Anyway blasters and turbolaser are not firing lasers. here

 

[y2kc]

trek is superior to wars.

 

[SirPappy]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: SirPappy

Originally posted by: Deeko
Holy Crap, from glancing over this thread, sirpappy is the biggest loser alive.

I'm guessing your a trek fan

Dont know why you would call a total stranger a loser, but eh,to each there own.


Star Wars stills Owns, the polls dont lie.

No, I don't really care about either.

I'm referring to the fact that you posted about 800 times gloating over the fact that star wars was winning in the poll. Why do you care so much? We can clearly read the poll for ourselves.

hehehe, riiight. i guess thats why you PMed me. sorry it was bothering you so much you had to call a stranger you know nothing about a loser. I was just poking fun at the polls and the die hard trekies.
Dont get me wrong, I actually like both Star Wars AND Star Trek, i just favor SW.
i was just thinking it would be kinda fun to get all the die hards out and voice there opinion on my 2 fav Sci-fi shows.

and yes, i was acting like a kid reminding the die hard trekies they were losing the poll.
(i do that a lot, it keeps me young)
sorry it bothered you so much, but dude, you need to learn how to relax, lifes too short.

and BTW, if i was bothering anyone else with my poking fun at SW winning the polls, sorry bout that, but like i said, just having fun, didnt think it would rile ppl up like that.


off my soap box

no go out and injoy your day. I know I will, its Sci-Fi Friday on the Sci-fi Channel


SG1,SG_Atlantas,and BattleStar Galactica,my other fav Shows

 

[SirPappy]

oh, and if anyones wondering, I only ACT like a 12 year old

I'm actually a 36 year old who injoys life WAY too much

but at least my wife puts up with it