Victory-Class Star Destroyer vs. Modern Day Earth

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
So wait...you said that I should have noticed right away that it was a spite, yet you didn't until later. You argued for the Empire, and then realized that you were wrong and that my side (Earth) wins. Therefore, does that not mean that I won because you realized that Earth wins and not the Empire? Sure now you claim that it's a spite, but you didn't notice it at first and argued for one side and LOST because your side didn't win. So "after debate I (you) came to realize that they would actually lose"...this is proof that I won.

And I DID ADMIT in my PM that this thread was a little bit unbalanced (but not really a "spite"😉, but it's really immature of you to argue for a side, realize that you're wrong and instead of admitting it just go and blame the other side for making a spite thread.

In other words:

You argued for Empire
I argued for Earth

You say Empire wins
I say Earth wins

We argue

Eventually, you get defeated and realize that Earth wins...easily

You then go on to blame me about making a spite thread...well a spite thread is a thread that one can EASILY recognize as one sided, and you didn't even notice it for several pages.

Conclusion:

I won arguement. OK then, maybe it WAS a bit unbalanced, but you didn't notice that either.

PS. how come you keep on changing your story? At first you said that the thread was balanced at first but my modifications twisted it, and now you said that it's a spite from the start...

You fail to read. He tried to explain it very simply to you but you still don't understand.

Maybe you should go out for a few days and come to your senses.

Originally posted by Slash_KMC
You fail to read. He tried to explain it very simply to you but you still don't understand.

Maybe you should go out for a few days and come to your senses.

Chill dude, or at least counter my arguments. What did I misunderstand?

Slash, please put him on ignore. You're giving him what he wants. Instead of thinking 'oh, another poster' think, 'oh, a creepy old man fapping off to [our] outrage.' It makes ignoring/adding him to ignore so much easier.

... Okay, you keep saying that you won the argument, you were on Earth's side, blah blah.

But you are the freakin' OP. It's easy to be in a war when you control the settings.

To me it's not about the thread, but how you were acting in it.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Slash, please put him on ignore. You're giving him what he wants. Instead of thinking 'oh, another poster' think, 'oh, a creepy old man fapping off to [our] outrage.' It makes ignoring/adding him to ignore so much easier.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
Slash, please put him on ignore. You're giving him what he wants. Instead of thinking 'oh, another poster' think, 'oh, a creepy old man fapping off to [our] outrage.' It makes ignoring/adding him to ignore so much easier.

Too late. 🙁

It's never too late to fix a problem. Ever.

I'll fix it starting now.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
And BTW, please DON'T put me on ignore, I'm just responding to a LOT of threads, but at least I try to be on topic (or at least in most of the threads) and I'm not insulting anyone or making spite threads or anything. What have I done wrong other than post a lot of (mostly on topic) replies due to being bored?

radu, you seem pretty clued up on your Science and I was wondering (if you know) whether scientists have so far been able to prove the existence of an indivisible unit of matter, as I know that there are a lot of theories going around that you could theoretically separate a piece of matter into multiple smaller parts an infinite number of times, and I was just wondering because I can disprove those theories.

SHU UP NEB!! (Do you really want to try to use pop philosophy to disprove the Higgs-Boson or whatever pop-science term is in vogue? Data>Speculation)

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
SHU UP NEB!! (Do you really want to try to use pop philosophy to disprove the Higgs-Boson or whatever pop-science term is in vogue? Data>Speculation)

How do you know that he's Neb?

I believe I was speaking to ramu.

edit - whom is Higgs-Boson out of curiosity?

1. Who are Higgs-Boson.
2. Not who, but what is the Higgs-Boson particle.
3. CERN is studying it.
4. Also, Wikipedia knows about it too.

I think that Earth wins IF they can harm the star destroyer. If not, then they lose. Badly.

Anybody else have a different opinion?

Whom is Higgs-Boson.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
1. [b]Who are Higgs-Boson.
2. Not who, but what is the Higgs-Boson particle.
3. CERN is studying it.
4. Also, Wikipedia knows about it too. [/B]

Ok so have elementary particles been scientifically and/or logically proven? I ask because the wikipedia page doesn't state whether they are simply theorized or accepted to definitively exist.

What do you know. Who is Higgs?

I think that they are strictly theoretical, CERN was hoping to find empirical evidence?

Unlike the gauge bosons, the Higgs boson has not yet been observed experimentally.

So some have been, this particular type is going to be new?

Cool thanks for the info lol, I was curious because I came across the y=k/x graph, which is said to produce two linearly asymptotic curves that tend towards +/- infinite x and y values, which doesn't appear to make sense and seems to be relying on the idea that there is no such thing as an indivisible unit of matter/space/distance and that you can divide something into smaller parts an infinite number of times.

lol, i forgot to check this thread from time to time >.>

They can't prove theres an indivisible unit of matter, nor they can separate it past what's the atom made of (electrons/neutrons/protons) . Dunno what they proved about gauge bosons, but i don't think they can do it(break atom particles), they might have observed such the gauge ones somewhere. Dunno for sure.

The Large Hadron Collider was ment to prove it. It is made out of a large tube in which 2 atom particles are introduced(one at a time) and forced to spin with the help of magnets. When the particles collide, they should break in smaller pieces and thus proving the theory that atom particles(i belive they used electrons) could break in smaller pieces...

It was turned off after like a month because of some crack inside the tube that hindered the particles rotation.

Theoretically The Hadron Collider should prove or dismiss the theory, but i say they won't be able to prove anything and sth will break again/they won't be able to observ the particles after the collision/the particles won't break and the theory will be dissmissed. Many options, but the one that they'll break into sth smaller isn't on my list ... i don't think they'll be able to break anything but their heads in the process.

BTW everything scientific i used was kinda elementary, i'm not really that up phisics ass.

EDIT : They might have obs the gauge ones (remove the such)...i hate this "can't edit after 15 mins" shit.

Off topic: Check out this site...it has some awsome pics :
http://pics.nase-bohren.de/starwarscar.jpg
(just felt the need of sharing)

Look at all the pics, you won't regret it