h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"Treaties are negoated by people working for military organisations who don't wear uniforms. Same in Star Trek."

No, it isn't. Picard has been seen to negotiate treaties. In uniform. In his role as *Captain* Picard.

"people working for military organisations "

Somebody better go tell Bush, Blair et al that they work for the military then. I'm sure they'll be most interested to hear it.

" "Also, there clearly IS a use for money in a society which has access to replicators, otherwise the entire point of Ferengi society falls apart. Do please try not to forget whole swathes of Trek in your desperation to defend it."

The ferengi brought their technology and not from the federation. Besides had you ever heard trade? "

So how exactly have you answered that point Appy? Your point was that society owuld not need money due to replicator technology, Hoo said no what about Ferengi.

Your answer was that the Ferengi aquired their technology through trade, does not answer the point, they still have both money and access to replicator technology.

"So your tactic is to not read earlier posts, launch an insult at someone else and counter nothing - oh what skill, are you in highschool?"

Did you miss in entirity what Hoo and other have had to say about the Raven? That there is some dispute as to whether or not it is a federation ship anyhow, and secondly that even if it is does not proove wide access to these things. I take it you missed Hoo's example about space tourism.

Or was this just another case of you ignoring facts and arguments you have no counter for? hmmm... hard one there.

""The POINT here is this: in today's developed world, the vast, vast majority of people own cars." - back that up?"

So let me get this straight, you are saying that in the devloped world it is only a minority of people who have cars? Must be different in New Zealand from the UK that is for sure.

""Starfleet has a disturbing level of involvement in all levels of Federation society, a level of involvement which, if it were replicated in todays world, would invite parallels with Nazi Germany."

If any series had taken place from outside the POV of starfleet then you could have a basis for that statement but it hasn't so you don't."

But we dont have any other perspective, all we can judge Star Trek on is what we know, and from that perspective you can see the Federation military is scarily involved.

Dunno if you read the post properly (I doubt it given it is you) but Hoo's origional post which led to this journal entry was merely showing how by looking at certain aspects of fiction you could read what you wished in a way. He demonstrated this with an example of how Star Trek *could* be interpreted as a Marxist military dictatorship, heck there might well be other ones but does not stop the validity of what he said. From the perspective we have the military is very involved.

"" Starfleet OWNS access to transporting technology." - is there a chance you may act by your own standards?"

Ok so where exactly is there *any*, really any evidence anywhere in Trek of civilians having any access or control over transporters? Which episode or film? I cannot remember any.

On the other hand in *every* single episode of Trek star fleet is shown to have and control transporters. In my books that is at least pretty good anecdotal evidence. I am not a massive trek fan, but it is pretty clear to me that they control transporters.

Bit of advice, you will look loads less silly if you dont open your mouth mate, on the other hand I enjoy a good laugh.

Also as a point of general interest Bain (who obviously is not Appy/Wraith/RmtC) who is an "Impartial Observer" who Della does not know is now on her friends list.

Spooky eh?

Nothing escapes your eagle eyed vision, does it Sergeant? There's nothing conspiratorial about it. Bain had a journal entry about something political that interests me. Lots of people are on my frineds list. Big deal!

<>

Hoo said, the vast, vast majority. That just isn't so! In places with good public transport, it just isn't necessary. From what he said about humans loving speeding, hooning and owning private vehicles, I have to assume that although he's 50+ he's still a boy racer at heart. But he shouldn't assume that's true of everybody! (Hey, didn't he say that I was guilty of assuming everybody thought like me? The pot calls the kettle black!) (NB Blinky, that's not a racist remark...)

Hoo said, the vast, vast majority.

Where?

Not on this thread.

I think what has happened could be one of two things.

Della you have either ignored what he really said and turned it to something that suits the position you are argiung from.

This is dishonest and underhand.

Or

You have genuinely misunderstood what Hoo posted because it was long and somewhat too complicated for you to comprehend.

This would mean that your intellect was not up to grasping what he was telling us.


Now having observed you for sometime I cant honestly rule either on of these out completly.

OK, I'll come to Bain in a moment, but first, Adelaide/Della/Adele/Debbie's latest hilariousness:

"In places with good public transport, [wide car ownership] just isn't necessary."

Oh what a lovely little planet you live on Adelaide, I must visit it some day. Meanwhile, back in the real world, the places with the best, most comprehensive public transport systems (i.e. capital cities like London and Tokyo) are, SURPRISE!, also the places with the densest patterns of car ownership and use, DESPITE measures such as punitive taxes and congestion charging to discourage car use.

"From what he said about humans loving speeding, hooning and owning private vehicles, I have to assume that although he's 50+ he's still a boy racer at heart."

Adelaide/Della/Adele/Debbie: you can't help yourself, can you dear? Every time you say something you think is a deft insult, it just ends up making you look stupid.

Newsflash, genius: I'm THIRTY FIVE. Take a look at the photo of me in azahar's album. Do I LOOK 50+? I don't think so. And I am not now, nor have I ever been, a boy racer.

And I was not implying anything about people liking to speed, "hoon" (NZ slang?) or anything else. I was making an observation of reality - a concept I've come to understand you're not familiar with. Anyone looking around on a motorway or train can see that people, generally, prefer to travel alone, at a time of their choosing. This IS a generalisation, but so is "people like to eat tasty food", although I expect you'd deny that, too.

Anyway, onto Bain.

"The ferengi brought their technology and not from the federation."

Do you mean "bought"? Again, so hard to tell what illiterate people *mean*, when all you have to go on is what they *say*.

In which case, you're saying I'm right and you're wrong, and that there IS a use for money in an energy rich, replicator equipped society. QED.

"Besides had you ever heard trade?"

Again, it's hard to tell what you're getting at here. If you mean the Federation runs on barter, I have to ask where your evidence is coming from. For a society to take such a massive backward step in social organisation spontaneously seems unlikely. But I'll be glad to be proven wrong by a single example showing that barter is the basis of the Federation economy.

""desperation to defend" the desparation is not mine"

It's "desperation". See? It's right there. Pay attention.

"So your tactic is to not read earlier posts, launch an insult at someone else and counter nothing - oh what skill, are you in highschool?"

Um... no. I read what you've posted, then answer it. You've so far failed to answer any of my substantive points. Are you in kindergarten? (Your spelling suggests so...)

"The POINT here is this: in today's developed world, the vast, vast majority of people own cars." - back that up?

Very well - from a Department of Transport Report, from 1995:

"Over the last forty years, the car has become the main form of land transport in Britain, accounting for just over 40% of passenger miles travelled in 1953 and just over 90% in 1993. The automobile accounts for all the increased travel over that period. Meanwhile, both rail and bus mileage has declined even while total passenger miles have grown rapidly; in 1993 they accounted for less than 10% of passenger miles travelled."

This of course applies to Britain, which I think one could reasonably say is typical developed country.

"[...]Starfleet is a military organisation." - and your point is?

My point is it is not some altruistic Jacques Cousteau-meets-International Rescue organisation as some of the more idealistic fans would like to think. Starfleet is The Man. That's all I'm saying.

"Treaties are negoated by people working for military organisations who don't wear uniforms. Same in star trek."

I'm afraid the one in the dreamworld is you. Treaties in the real world are negotiated by things grownups call "diplomats" - look the word up if you've never heard it before. These people do not wear uniforms, do not salute, are not trained in the use of weapons, and do not bear titles like "Captain" or "Admiral". Whereas in Trek, treaties are negotiated by soldiers like Captain Picard, uniform-wearing, weapon-carrying military personnel. This is observed reality. I don't know where you're getting your "facts" from, but it's neither the real world or the episodes of Trek that have been aired in it.

"If any series had taken place from outside the POV of starfleet then you could have a basis for that statement but it hasn't so you don't."

I have the evidence of Starfleet's involvement in civilians' lives: trying civilians for civil and criminal offences in military courts, declaring martial law, controlling access to rapid transport, etc. etc. I am using the evidence available. If you have counter evidence, bring it on. But please, don't appeal to non-existent evidence. Let's keep it as real as possible, eh?

"You don't remember Picard's brother house do you?"

Perfectly well, if you mean "brother's house". It didn't look like any Frenchman's home I've ever been in. (Over two dozen, before you ask)

"Decorating bothers you doesn't it?"

I have absolutely no idea what this comment is meant to mean.

"You have precisely NO evidence that the Picards or Siskos own anything. You have evidence of their possession of those properties."
Hmm evidence... Then you say this
" Starfleet OWNS access to transporting technology." - is there a chance you may act by your own standards?

Sorry? I don't understand. You seem to be implying I've contradicted myself.

And yet, in the one sentence I'm pointing out that it appears that no individual owns anything in Trek, and in the second, I'm pointing out that access to transporter technology - a pretty basic service at that level of technology - is not in public or private hands, but in the hands of the military. And I backed up that assertion with evidence, to wit, the existence of mass transit systems. Why would a world with public access to transporter technology install mass transit systems? It makes no sense - UNLESS access to transporter technology is strictly controlled and available only to military personnel. Which is what we find, again and again.

Possibly you overlooked this evidence. Look again.

"Until you're able to grasp basic concepts I don't see a need to counter any more of your ramblings"

One of us is certainly struggling with basic concepts, Bain, but it isn't me.



H.

blicky: re "vast, vast majority".

I did say it. Post 27, this thread.

Sorry to have to pick you up, but if we don't maintain standards, we can't make fun of Adele/Della/Adelaide/Debbie for not doing, can we?

H.

No problem I should have been much more clear about things especially considering the audience here.

You did indeed say:
The POINT here is this: in today's developed world, the vast, vast majority of people own cars.

And "vast, vast majority" *is* a part of that. However I suspect that leaving out "in todays developed world" was a deliberate ploy discredit what you said because it did not apply to the "vast, vast majority" in the entire world. Which includes New Zealand.

New Zealand and you may not know this as it is only Della out of all the people in the world who has ever said this to me is at once an idyllic rural backwater unsullied by the fastpace of modern life and contemporary dynamic changes in language, but also at the same time a hip cosmopolitan country at the cutting edge of modern culture.

But that's another story for long dark witners nights.

"Its all gone quiet over there!"

I wonder what spurious arguments Clan Della will come up with tonight?

<>

Yes, Blinky, he said it - post 27 on this very thread. Pinged! Check it out, dear boy, and apologise - oh, sorry, you don't do apologise, do you?

Hoo, what a hoot... You said on a post about the media ignoring old people, that you're 55! Pinged, just like your loyal friend Blinky! (BTW, what makes you think I've seen your photo? Why would I bother?)

Blinky, don't make things up. I've never said anything to you about NZ, neither would I!
It's a mixture of rural and urban, but that's beside the point. Many people, the more mature among them, in the sense of being grown up, not in the sense of old, BTW, choose not to own cars. QED.

"No problem I should have been much more clear about things especially considering the audience here.

You did indeed say:
The POINT here is this: in today's developed world, the vast, vast majority of people own cars."

Err, why ask for an apology when the point has already been conceeded?

You mean this thread?

F19585?thread=407217

Hoo never posted in it. Member did though. Having meet Hoo in RL, I can safely say that if he's 55, he's hiding the fountain of youth...

Thanks for making that point Kerr and from having to hunt down that link.

Hi Adele
unsullied by the fastpace of modern life and contemporary dynamic changes in language, but also at the same time a hip cosmopolitan country at the cutting edge of modern culture.

The above is not a direct quote admittedly but it is the essence of what you have told me. Remember when you were trying to assert your superior Knowledge of language and youth culture but then tried to back track and claim ignorance. IT might be hard I know how your memory is these days dear. Its nothing new for you to start off with one position then have a major change of tack once your argument has been shown up for the rubbish it usually is.

Kerr Avon, I think you misunderstood. When I asked Blinky to apolgise, I hadn't read Hoo's concession, which was further down the page.

Blinky, dear, I don't talk like a travel brochure! Thanks for at least acknowledging that what you say isn't a direct quote... As for your assertion that I said that about language, don't be silly! If you want to know something about the New Zealand version of English, read my Guide Entry...

Adelaide/Della/Adele/Debbie:

I do so love your triumphalist tone. "Pinged"?

What on Bod's earth would make me say "I'm 55" when I've been photographed at a meet of h2g2 researchers and am quite clearly in my mid-thirties? Do try to separate what is going on out here, in reality, from what is going on entirely in your head. I know it's difficult for you...

And I wasn't suggesting that you had actually seen my photo. I was pointing out for you that my photo is available, since you're obviously confused, poor dear. OK?

Bain is noticeable by his absence...

H.