Did Palpatine bury the Lusankya with Telekinesis?

Contradiction by omission given the only means of transporting the vessel given is the repulsorlift cradle itself.

So not only is it a fully functional ship, but it also had a repulsorlift cradle as well, yet it was still necessary for Palps to do the lifting?

Golly, he must of really want to show off to.... no-one.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Contradiction by omission

That's not a thing.

Well it begs the question as to why such an important detail was omitted.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Well it begs the question as to why such an important detail was omitted.

I've no idea.
But since there's no contradiction in the sources, that speculation isn't particularly salient.

Perhaps.

Anyway for the record its from Fact File 9: http://i.imgur.com/8yMyud1.jpg

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Perhaps.

?

Originally posted by Beniboybling
Anyway for the record its from Fact File 9: http://i.imgur.com/8yMyud1.jpg

Good find. 👍

Like I've said, in no way does the quote require TK to be involved.

Well I just noticed an important piece of info:

So it seems the cradle was in fact to designed not to lower the ship to the planet's surface, but support it once buried.

Not to mention the fact that the Emperor also used the Force to not only lower the Destroyer, but also its surrounding disguise.

Even more impressive, really.

All of this is still predicated on the idea that the OP's quote implies the use of telekinesis. If I say that a politician used his political influence to destroy some papers, it doesn't have to mean that his political influence literally allowed him to physically shred them. That's absurd.

But it helps Sheev, so I'm tempted to just agree. mmm

That's a clumsily worded analogy tbh.

The text says the Lusankya was buried as a demonstration of Sheev's dark side powers. That's hilariously straightforward.

Except that other sources then clarify how the dark side powers were demonstrated, and so it makes more sense that the "demonstration" was not our first guess of TK, rather than that different sources are just arbitrarily omitting different information for the sh*ts and giggles.

The context is that in a book I think it was Wedge who speculated that Palpatine was strong enough in the dark side to compel people to forget about the Lusankya, and then whoever wrote the factpile probably just took the "strong in the dark side" part and put it in.

Even if the ship was lowered onto Coruscant via repulsorlift, this does not mean they buried it this way. There is no contradiction. Sidious is a TK demigod.

Originally posted by The Ellimist
Except that other sources then clarify how the dark side powers were demonstrated, and so it makes more sense that the "demonstration" was not our first guess of TK, rather than that different sources are just arbitrarily omitting different information for the sh*ts and giggles.

The context is that in a book I think it was Wedge who speculated that Palpatine was strong enough in the dark side to compel people to forget about the Lusankya, and then whoever wrote the factpile probably just took the "strong in the dark side" part and put it in.

Nah. Other sources explain that Sheev used the dark side to conceal the burial of the ship. This source says the act of burying the ship itself was a demonstration of dark side powers.

Which isn't a contradiction with him using his mind fogging only.

It's flat out said that Imperial engineers buried it.

I think the subtext is that he buried it without anyone noticing, yeah.

Originally posted by Beniboybling
I think the subtext is that he buried it without anyone noticing, yeah.

Yeah. Per the sources, he buried it with the dark side and then used the dark side to conceal the burial.

Originally posted by The_Tempest
Nah. Other sources explain that Sheev used the dark side to conceal the burial of the ship. This source says the act of burying the ship itself was a demonstration of dark side powers.

It's just silly semantics. If he says "I used his influence to drive across the border", that influence doesn't have to apply to making the car physically capable of locomotion; it can also apply to having the guards look the other way.

The explanation that both sources refer to the same demonstration of dark side powers better fits Occam's razor, and doesn't beg the question of why they're deliberately omitting different information. It grows stronger if you let authorial intent seep in and realize that the factpile authors were clearly just basing this off of Wedge's thoughts, which were about telepathy.

Can you explain what is actually wrong with the set of analogies, and parsimony, rather than just repeating yourself again?

👆