Johns_Volition wrote:c'mon buddy do you think the robots of I robot could be so charming and evil the same time?
They're not evil. They're behaving in accordance with their programming.
Don't you feel odd hearing a Tie-Fighter screeming through the space?
This Is Not St*r W*rs
Wouldn't you agree that every guy who'd say "beam me up scotty" is a complete nuthole?
Yes, but I don't see where it fits into this argument. In fact, much of the stuff that happened in Star Trek was pretty plausible (with the possible exception of the instant communication across deep space - even the "warp" idea has some mathematical grounding)
Don't you agree that the idee of a death star is a little far fetched?
Not particularly. Build a big ship and fit it with death-rays. Done
Let's ask us the question? What went so devasting wrong here?
Why can't there be a Miracoulus substance called Nuke-Fill?
Because, unlike most of the arguments you've given above, which are improbable, but believeable, the concept of liquid nuclear fuel that you could transport easily is patent nonsense. Not "far-fetched fiction", but patent nonsense.
Why can't It be made out of Elements both found in Oil and Uranium?
Because they don't mix. Fact.
Why can't we have it in fluid form?
Because anyone with half a brain can see that it makes more sense to have it in solid form.
Why can't made up rockets, only the size of a houndered lousy pixels use it to power a made up Magnetic repulsion system that lifts them easily and without great risks into the skys?
That's fine, but why can't they use uranium rods like everyone else?
Sure it's all made up but if it were only for people like you; we'd still burn witches, and laugh about anyone who'd say that flying's possible, just because your books say otherwise.
Pitchfork at the ready, sir
Ultimately, as I've said, if the science in science fiction doesn't stand up, you end up with an Ed Wood film, or Toyland (whichever is worse).