Jump to content


Starfleet Academy
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Elladan

  • Rank
    Command Chief (P.O.)
  • Birthday 05/24/1920
  1. Elladan

    Star Trek RPG

    Hehe... Listen to the EMH, yelluh.. :P He cannot appreciate joints.. no good for his photons. ;) Nevertheless I feel kinda obliged to say Comtron can kick serious ass from deflector control... he's one helluva science officer... :) with aggressive tendencies, that is... :P
  2. I particularly dislike the Janeway. Perfect example of enhancing the drawing in spite of realism.
  3. Thx for that. I knew someone was going to say things like that... Let's take a look at quicksand. Quicksand is pretty viscous as well... though nowhere near as viscous as magma, if you wish. I could go nitpicking about the injection of a needle in quicksand, or even the fall of a drop of water in an ocean... But this is not about such things. In air, we use aerodynamic forms for aeroplanes and rockets. In water, we use hydrodynamic forms for submarines. Even though the shape of modern submarines is still miles away from being 99% hydrodynamic, we ARE working on it. In magma, we could use magmadynamic things? Nope. Magma behaves like a liquid in all circumstances, so hydrodynamic forms and shapes would be fine for a magmatic vehicle. The resistance would be very small for a vehicle of such shape... it would require not much power for a propulsion device to propel it through the magma. Take for example the hydromagnetic propulsion system known as "caterpillar" that uses the magnetic abilities of water to create some sort of marine jet engine... isn't the magnetic ability of hot magma much greater than this mere water? Could we not use the caterpillar friction drive unit for our LITTLE vehicle? Current calculations on magma movement and the effects of internal movement are a little more refined as: Push a brick in a bathtub and the waterlevel rises. Aristotle would be satisfied with such calculations, but we are not. You say "if you move that stuff around too vigourously it could have adverse effects in the earths surface". Yes, you're right. IF we were talking about injecting an object the size of 10 cubic kilometer, it would definitely affect the surface, and it would matter for our vehicle's journey. Since our vehicle cannot be 1 cubic kilometer in size, but is huge enough with a size of 125.000 cubic meters (100*50*25 in rectangular shape, because the calculation of a hydrodynamic shape would be too complex to make here) which equals 0.000125 cubic kilometer, there would be no significant movement in the magma surrounding our vehicle, so no go for the tectonic problem. Secondly, this entire discussion about the influence on the magma and the velocity of magma is irrelevant, since IF we have created a vehicle with an independent life support system, WHY would we not travel at a little above magma velocity if necessary? I know, it'll take a lot of time before we reach our desired level of depth, but we'll get there (at least the children of the children of ... of our children) in time. We do have time aplenty, don't we? No threats lurk deep inside the earth as far as we know... There is no life in the void, nor in the mantle of the earth. Our pod will be safe forever. Why? Because we cannot stand the idea we might be degenerate descendants of a superior human breed long forgotten? Because WE are the SUPERIOR ones?? Because History, repeating itself, only improves us over time? Because evolutionism does not support the degeneration of a species? Ha. :) 1. The degeneration of man is proven in the assimilation of degenerates among humans in present day society. I am not preaching the cleansing of the human genepool as some think, but I am stating the fact that humanity is weakening itself by willingly accepting weaker genes in their genome. Now don't go around slaughtering weaker humans, because I told you to, right? I DID NOT. Let's have that clear. My ideas may have roots in semi nationalsocialist ideas, but this makes not that my entire reasoning is nazistic and as such disgusting, does it? I am not calling for a genecleansing, I merely await the next Ragnarok or Apocalypse. 2. SUPERIOR? Even more "ha". Humans have, with all their technological advances, dulled their 7 senses. We cannot comprehend anything unless some extremely powerful stimulus hits their senses. Isn't it obvious? All animals have things in which they excel. Humans have the hatred of nature as their strength. Their idea of superiority is blinding their perception, and yet it makes them strong... for without reservation humanity destroys genetic information (stored in the animals humans murder) with which mankind could enhance itself. If only there was one man realising the effects of this foolish thought pattern... But there is none. 3. Three words: The Dark Ages. Can mankind not be in such a transitional phase? Maybe indeed are humans being improved. But only through degeneration can there be advance. Can you replace a computer's processor without taking it out first? 4. Degeneration flows from the non-evolutionistic ways of present day Man. They accept and even encourage the assimilation and implementation of flawed genes in their own and then start wailing that so many people die of god-knows-what disease. This is only a logical consequence of keeping genes that cause immunological failures... is it not? Enhance those genes. Find out who carries the faulty genome and repair their children's before they are even inseminated. Genetic enhancement? No, says mankind. Genetic repairs? Yes, I shout. Assuming that this 'scarper' means leaving this earth or at least it's surface... Does THIS earth give us any reason to leave? Yes, it sure does, overpopulation, famine, you name it. You have a good point there, I must admit. I cannot argue with it. I will however seek out arguments against it, for I do believe there is something wrong with it. Besides, I cannot just surrender to human reasoning... without exceeding the rules and sharing knowledge with you none of you could ever comprehend. You are giving a good argument. I like this. You think further and more serious than most humans I know... but still you are stuck in the thought pattern set for you, biologically. Exceed that and you may yet find wisdom beyond comprehension. I realise I sound very radical at times. I am not intending to overthrow all human ideas of reality and psychology though. At times I may sound a little bit out of reality, by using the term 'humans' instead of 'us'/'we'. I realise this. I am using the terminology on purpose, since we must realise that humans are not the superior species we think ourselves. What does our beloved mr. Spock say? "It is typical human arrogance to believe that any message sent would be meant for them. There are and were more sentient species on Earth." I'll end this post here... but I will keep responding to all your comments... ;) With the greatest respect, Elladan
  4. Homo Sapiens Sapiens, "modern man": oldest finding dated 130.000 years old Check in the thread "Are we alone..." I wrote about a website where it was said... Also the gap was reduced to about 100.000 years in the follow-up... With the greatest respect, Elladan
  5. Hey! Maverick I think you mixed our names up as well... ;) I'll respond l8er. K?
  6. * A BIG RED EYE IS HANGING ON TOP OF SOME TOWER * * very faintly one can hear:* "eellleeessssaaar..." The Dark One calls you, Elessar! I feel I've posted enough for today... I'm pretty exhausted. BUT I WILL RETURN TO THIS TOPIC
  7. To be precise: (website: http://www.wsu.edu contains this nice picture showing the origins of Homo Sapiens) We are Homo Sapiens Sapiens. We are 130.000 years old. We believe we are the only sentient and communicative intelligent species around. We are FOOLS. As you can see on the timetable, we are the product of 5 million years of evolution from a basic primate with little sentient abilities. This website: http://www.soton.ac.uk/~cpd/history.html shows clearly (among loads of interesting but irrelevant information) how many years of evolution it took for life to reach primate level 40 million years ago. 3.8 BILLION years... an awful amount of time. But let's face it, the universe itself is at least 11 billion years old: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/age_universe_030103.html Planets came into being at first after 4, 5 billion years of cooling and inflating (according to theory). I cannot tell how many planets there are, how many support life... and all those things. But I can tell that IF there is another planet capable of sustaining life, it WILL come to contact with us. Be it "friendly" "unfriendly" or "no feeling at all due to 'language' problems"... but they WILL get in touch. Whether they are primates like us? Not likely... but statistically seen, somewhere out there, somewhere far far away... there MUST be some planet like ours... a stellar system like ours... with evolution like ours... I hope. With the greatest respect, Elladan
  8. My opinion is this: Evolution of sentient creatures itself is, as a concept, flawed. Non-sentient creatures indeed follow every law and instinct set in their genes, but sentients seem to have "another way of thinking" (yes, nonsentients don't think, you can think so.. it matters not for the following). For example, take a look at the next. It may be a bit radical, but it is the idea that I want you to take a look at. The further the human species progresses, the more they wish to embrace the weaker parts of their society, their pack. By allowing "weak-of-genes" to live among the pack, their strength is increased and they will be able to survive. The very effort and time spent on saving them, even allowing them to spread their disrupted genes is ultimately degenerating the human species, until they come to their senses. That usually takes a war or three and the collapse of some Empires or Powers... but they will come to their senses and save their race. Their genes however will still be affected by the linear heritage of disrupted genomes. Summarising this: Humans are, as an organism, degenerating. We had our peak, aeons ago, and now we are slowly but steadily degenerating. Aside from the fact that 100.000 years of evolution according to the modern theory cannot have such profound effects on a species, WE may have been superior to what we are now. Take a look around! Don't you see, people with disrupted genes, having kids aplenty through new insemination technology? Can you not see, can you not foretell the end? I for one am not about to ask for a change in the course of history, but I am appealing to your common sense. I am not asking you to go out and eliminate all disrupted genes from our midst, for that would be against all rules of my own mind. I DO ask that you consider my theory... check it with what you think yourself, with what you see... and then decide. With the greatest respect, Elladan
  9. How do you feel about the ending of "Enterprise"? * 17731 responses Terrible, it's a great show and should continue 71% Fine, that show just never caught on like the other ones 12% Torn, it wasn't the best show, but there should always be a 'Trek' series 17% Who said Enterprise wasn't popular, eh??? :) LOL • SpongeBob critics are all wet Hehehe... ROFL
  10. 349.920.000.000 That's the number of communicating intelligent species in the universe... 350 BILLION! Must be wrong calculation... :)
  11. Haha... lol :) BTW I specifically like the Emperor: Battle for Dune... ;) Another wink and nudge... by now you must be nudged 2 meters off course? I had a pic showing the funnyness of the location of the word THESE in Skippy's pic... look at it yourselves now for mine failed to upload, or so.
  12. I like the background! SWKotOR II: Sith Lords, if I'm not mistaken?
  13. Elladan


    When was your last spelling test? :P :) *psychological is what you mean, I believe. Or physiological, in which it would be like a medical screening. With the greatest respect, Elladan
  14. Interesting question, and one that I've asked myself a million times... I once read an article about the history of man before the Ice Age. 200.000! years of generally the same circumstances as current day... be it a little warmer. We are supposedly in a short period within a large-scale Ice Age, a period of warmth and glacial melting before another freezing. If so, we are currently in a transitional climate. Humans can survive Ice Ages. Proven fact, since bones and near complete skeletons older then 24000 years have been found both in ice and in the ground. So if all this is true, we have a historical "gap" of 200.000 years wherein humans lived in their current being as homo sapiens sapiens, thus capable of every advance we have made. Since this is very likely to be the case, mankind may have reached far further in science then WE have at this moment, after 20.000 years. Maybe even traveled into space... maybe even faster than light?? But here, in the last line we passed from hypothetical history into wishful thinking, haven't we??? With the greatest respect, Elladan On a personal note, I would love to believe the theory that JRR Tolkien has launched, being that Elves existed alongside men. Since Elves were (as he put it) not exactly fit for cold temperatures (which is why some Men were friends of Elves, to guard the northern part of an evil fortress, on the northern tundra) it would be reasonable to assume that they would either die out or leave for someplace hot (maybe not on this planet). That would be fun in my opinion... ;)