JMSpock

JMSpock is a versus debator and very stupid person. He also goes under the name of JediMasterSpock in the StarfleetJedi.net[[1]] forums where he is the administrator.

JMSpock's greatest hits

The following quotes are collected from various forums and webpages and serve to show his scientific ignorance and dishonesty.

The Death Star Isn't a Starship

JMSpock claims that the Death Star cannot be considered a starship: "The Death Star is not maneuverable like a starship, nor as densely sprinkled with weapons mounts, nor as proportionally heavily armored; it is essentially a giant battlestation with a superweapon and hyperdrive slapped on-"Link

His first complaint is obviously meaningless since a starship will inevitably become less maneuverable as it's size, and therefore mass, grows. Thus, an X-wing will be more maneuverable than a Star Destroyer which will, in turn, be more maneuverable than the Death Star. None of this has anything to do with whether the Death Star is a ship.

His second claim about weapon concentration is completely irrelevant, since the definition of ship requires the object to be mobile, not that it be armed; by design, the Death Star can travel from system to system and within systems to reach its targets. Furthermore JMSpock ignores the fact that the Death Star possesses a superlaser weapon which far outstrips any weapon on smaller ships even when accounting for size difference.

His final remark about hyperdrive being "slapped on" is nothing but a dishonest attempt to bolster his argument without bothering to provide any evidence to support his claim. The hyperdrive is an essential component of the Death Star's design, since a planet-destroying weapon that couldn't get to its targets would be pointless.

Federation Starbases are Starships

Mike DiCenso, another fanatical starfleetjedi.net forum user, made the following comment: "If you allow millions of Imperial starships because of the Death Stars, then you probably have to do a similar thing for the Federation since we have seen that they have the industrial capacity to build a fair number of multi-km space stations (Starbase 74, the Utopia Planita space stations, ect) that are each worth thousands of Galaxy or Sovereign class starships in volume and mass."Link

JMSpock responds: "These, too, have shields and weaponry. They have highly sophisticated massive medical facilities, and on-board construction, repair, and refit facilities. These, too, can lumber about systems - watch the opening episode of DS9."Link

Notice how JMSpock dishonestly mixes large Federation starbases -- namely Starbase 74 and Utopia Planitia -- with the far smaller Deep Space 9 to make his claim that their movement capability is demonstrated in the opening episode of Deep Space 9.

In fact, larger starbases have never demonstrated any capability to move at either sublight or faster-than-light speeds, nor have they actually demonstrated any weapon or shield capabilities. Furthermore, DS9 was not even built by the Federation, making it a red herring concerning the capabilities of Federation starbases.

In a final act of desperation he tries to use their supposed "massive medical facilities", which have never been shown, as a justification for comparing Federation starbases to Federation ships.

This is also a perfect example of double standards, since JMSpock argued that the Death Star can not be used as an example of a starship, even though it demonstrated all the outward characteristics of a starship, while at the same time insisting that Federation starbases can, even though they have never demonstrated anything but the ability to float in space.

A Death Star is Easier to Construct Than a Starship

After having it pointed out to him that the Death Star was built without any shipyards and that therefore smaller ships also won't need any specialized shipyards for their construction, JMSpock responded: "The station itself is its own shipyard. The infrastructure in question are construction ships, droids, personnel, off-site manufacturing and shipping, etc."Link

Again he offers no explanation for why the Death Star can act as "it's own shipyard", but other ships can't. He also seems incapable of distinguishing between infrastructure and worker force.

JMSpock trying to justify his assertion that constructing Death Star is easier than constructing smaller ships: "It gets easier as they get larger, in fact, thanks to gravity. Microgravity helps keep things from drifting away."Link

Another vague statement. How strong is the microgravity created by the Death Star during various stages of it's construction? Why would "things" drift away in space where there are no external forces? What "things"? Imperial ships possess artificial gravity technology and tractor beams which make any lack of gravity irrelevant. Finally that microgravity will subject the Death Star's frame to mechanical stress even before its construction is complete, which makes it more difficult to construct than a small ship, not less.

Destroying a Planet Doesn't Take That Much Energy

JMSpock, after being asked to provide possible mechanisms of planetary destruction that don't require an external object to supply the necessary energy, had this to say: "Matter annihilation" includes fission and fusion. Other methods for turning matter into energy range the scale from particle-antiparticle reactions to chemical reactions to Hawking radiation.Link

Notice that he doesn't explain exactly how fission, fusion or particle-antiparticle reactions could possibly reduce the Death Star's energy requirement. Even more laughable is his claim that a chemical reaction might somehow produce sufficient energy to blow up a planet as violently as Alderaan.

These kinds of dishonest, vague and evasive statements are his trademark.

Ensigns Of Command

This TNG episode involves an alien species -- the Sheliac -- demanding the evacuation of a human colony of 15,000 people that was accidentally set up in Sheliac space. It mentions that it would take three weeks for a Federation colony ship to arrive for the evacuation. The Sheliac, however, insist that the colonists be removed before they arrive in four days time.

JMSpock interprets these statements as there being a range of four days to three weeks for evacuation ships to arrive, instead of the three weeks being the lower limit that it clearly is. He defends his position claiming that any other ships would have severely hindered their operations elsewhere. Apparently Spock thinks cataloging gaseous anomalies is more important than 15,000 lives. He insists that the Federation could have gotten ships there in under three weeks but -- because it would take over four days -- it was a "non-viable option", even though the three weeks for the colony ship was just as "non-viable".

Star Wars ships run on "Diesel fusion"

Apparently some scene cut from ROTS shows a liquid was ignighted by a spark. From this JMSpock has come up with the idea that Star Wars starships run on "Diesel Fusion".

He mentions this idea on his webpage but apparently does not mention at all where the idea came from or what led to his conclusions.

His comments on the idea from his forum: This is, by the way, still the only hypothesis which explains why in Star Wars, you mine gas giants; why Star Wars fuel looks and acts the way it does; why the energy of an exploding Star Wars ship is of a chemical order; et cetera. I am perfectly willing to debate this point for point; the simple fact is that diesel fusion is the most elegant explanation for Lucas's choice of using familiar visual and practical treatments (clear, explosive, aromatic fuel of not too great density).

Now. Is it actually official? Of course not. It's simply the most scientifically elegant explanation of the film level evidence that you're going to get. Is it going to explain everything in the entire EU? I refer you to what I jokingly coined "Gödel's incompleteness theorem for fanalysis." No coherent explanation will - mine or Saxton's.

Not that such a ridiculous idea actually needs rebuttal but here are some anyway

1. Diesel will not ignight unless compressed
2. Hydrocarbons are hardly a good candidate for fusion reaction. Pure deuterium or tritium are far better candidates since Carbon produces far lower energy output in fusion reaction than hydrogen isotopes do and will in fact interfere with deuterium-deuterium fusion, creating an obstacle to the reaction rather than helping it.
3. How does diesel fuel explain mining gas giants? Those are largely hydrogen and helium. Jupiter has trace amounts of ammonia at most. The "liquid portion" of the gas giant is liquid hydrogen and they have solid metal cores. Neptune and Uranus are thought to contain some water and methane as well.
4. The Canon explicitly mentions they're mining "Tibanna Gas", not Diesel, which according to the official literature, is used in SW weapons, not their reactors. Spock's justification is not even necessary. The literature already gives one and said justification is in direct contradiction to the canon films.
5. How does SW ship explosions show a "chemical order"? Of course Spock completely ignores the fact that Trek ship explosions look rather similar. Is he describing the size of the fireball? Why should we assume SW fuels are bombs waiting to go off the way Trek fuel is? Not all energy sources explode upon the destruction of their container.
6. Name ONE time in SW where we have actually seen the fuel Spock.