I challenge darkstar to a debate

[Picard]

EU =/= canon

As far as I'm concerned, if its EU, it doesn't exist.

Too bad for you then. You claimed that Dankayo was non-canon but fit with established canon, and later changed your mind and said that it contradicted canon. You then attempt to dismiss it on these ground, even though you're the one to bring it up. It's still silly that you cannot admit that you're backtracking.

Beacouse my only sources on EU are second-hand? And yes, your interpretation does contradict canon and rest of EU (first thing is basically irrelevant, since EU is separate continuity). And no, I'm not going to waste my time, patience, and HD on bunch of poorly-written books (I mean, I was told here that Zahn is one of better EU writers, and even RODF was of average quality at best). And yes, Dankayo is non-canon, and yes, it does not fit with rest of non-canon, unless you can explain me how base can survive supposed atmosphere-removing DET bombardment, even thought I remember one or two quotes specifying mop-up operations over planet/moon, and cratered - not melted, cratered - surface.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

My interpretation is correct, and you yielded to it when your only response was "so we have a contradiction of canon".

[Praeothmin]

My interpretation is correct, and you yielded to it when your only response was "so we have a contradiction of canon".

Your interpratation is flawed, as Mr. O so nicely showed in the DS thread...

[Picard]

My interpretation is correct, and you yielded to it when your only response was "so we have a contradiction of canon".

Read first. post later.

You did not even read my reply.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

Read first. post later.

You did not even read my reply.

I did read your reply. Your whining about it being non-canon is irrelevant because the premise of that sub-section of the debate was to debate "non-canon", so you're arguing a tautology.

[Picard]

No, you did not.

and yes, it does not fit with rest of non-canon, unless you can explain me how base can survive supposed atmosphere-removing DET bombardment, even thought I remember one or two quotes specifying mop-up operations over planet/moon, and cratered - not melted, cratered - surface.

[StarWarsStarTrek]

No, you did not.

That's silly. We know from the quote that 3 ISD's removed the atmosphere of the planet. Why they did so is irrelevant. Whether they were able to completely destroyed a base of unquantified material/durability/size/etc is also irrelevant. You can quantify the atmosphere feat, you cannot quantify the base feat.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

That's silly. We know from the quote that 3 ISD's removed the atmosphere of the planet.

It was from the base not the planet.

Unless you can answer the issues i already pointed out like:

1. FACT, a atmosphere blasted off a planet at escape velocity does not "DRIFT" away.

2. 3 ISD's quite literally lack the coverage required to achieve the effect even if they had the firepower due to what is required to blast away a planets atmosphere.

3. They only have a fraction of the firepower required to do so anyway.

[Mike DiCenso]

Ah jeez. The flavor text in "Scavenger Hunt" leaves open very little margin for an ICS level firepower. We know clearly that three ships undertook the bombardment of the Rebel base, and the rest is so vague that you can easily make the assumption that the base's atmosphere is what is escaping, not the planet's. Not to mention, it's hard to justify atmosphere-removing energies, short of technobabble, since we have nothing more than an evenly cratered planet's surface. Even then, we can't be sure the entire planet is that way, just the area around the base. The same base that survived the assault partially intact, and was there for the Rebel agent to crawl up and see what'd happened, and to witness Storm troopers recover sensitve Rebel computers.
-Mike

[Picard]

No, you did not.

That's silly. We know from the quote that 3 ISD's removed the atmosphere of the planet. Why they did so is irrelevant. Whether they were able to completely destroyed a base of unquantified material/durability/size/etc is also irrelevant. You can quantify the atmosphere feat, you cannot quantify the base feat.

And we know from the quote that surface of planet was evenly cratered, not melted, as it would be with firepower levels you want quote to imply.

[Praeothmin]

C'mon guys, stop wasting your time...
You know you are debating with SWST, who in every example, picks the one phrase or quote that supports him, and completely ignores the rest...
Just like, for example, the Dankayo event...
He sticks with the atmosphere being supposedly blow off the planet, yet the surface is only evenly cratered...
No river or pool of molten soil, no firestorms of unimmaginable proportions that such a bombardment would leave, nada...
The lone survivor was even able to go back to the surface, IIRC...
How can that be if there is no atmosphere?

[StarWarsStarTrek]

That's silly. We know from the quote that 3 ISD's removed the atmosphere of the planet.

It was from the base not the planet.

Because obviously bases on an inhabited planet can have the last of their atmosphere drift away just like good old physics.

Unless you can answer the issues i already pointed out like:

1. FACT, a atmosphere blasted off a planet at escape velocity does not "DRIFT" away.

Technically, it does. It's the only plausible interpretation that does not involve the base's atmosphere magically being removed:

a) AFTER the planet's topsoil was atomized
b) without atmosphere from the surrounding environment moving in

2. 3 ISD's quite literally lack the coverage required to achieve the effect even if they had the firepower due to what is required to blast away a planets atmosphere.

I wasn't aware that their engines were malfunctioning.

3. They only have a fraction of the firepower required to do so anyway.

Silly circular reasoning.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Because obviously bases on an inhabited planet can have the last of their atmosphere drift away just like good old physics.

Yes.

Technically, it does.

Bullshit, how is drift in anyway the same as blasted away at escape velocity..

It's the only plausible interpretation that does not involve the base's atmosphere magically being removed

There is nothing plausible about your position it is absurd.

Magically? (ah yes the usual low brow word morons use to try and appeal to ridicule), you mean a sealed bases own atmosphere being released after its containment is breached by weapons fire.

I wasn't aware that their engines were malfunctioning.

Unless the engines can allow them to hit all points around the planet at the same time not only once but multiple times then your red herring is worthless.

Silly circular reasoning.

G canon fact.

[Praeothmin]

And again ignoring the fact that a planetoid which supposedly had its atmosphere blow off, as in had it expelled at escape velocity, only had an evenly cratered surface, as in, no river of molten rocks...

[Mike DiCenso]

The problem with Dankayo and "Scavenger Hunt" in general is that the flavor text descriptions aren't accurate scientifically to what happened. We know the orders for the three ISDs was to slag the Rebel base on the planet, but large portions of the base itself survived the assault. If we were talking ICS-level firepower, a single heavy turbolaser hit would have obliterated the base into super-heated plasma, and left a massive molten crater in it's place. Yet not only does the base survive in such a way that large amounts of wreckage can salvaged from it, but the Rebel observer ZNT-8 survived in a shelter and was able to exit it, get a message off, and try to stop the Imperial troops scouring through the Dankayo base's remains. The evenly cratered planet's surface is also peculiar since ICS-level or planetary atmosphere-removing firepower would leave the crust not only molten, but likely shattered. We don't see any of that.
-Mike