I'd like to know where exactly that statement about "alternate universe" comes from. I've read the books and quite a bit of background (as its available) on the writing of the series, and never heard anything even remotely akin to that.
As well, since we are discussing canon as it relates to the game Star Trek Online, and not as it relates to official canon, somethings certainly are canon insofar as the game is concerned. For example, numerous concepts from Rihannsu are used, such as the Sundering as she wrote it (Generation ships on a decades long voyage), Romulan honor concepts (mnhei'sahe is mentioned by name in a Romulan front Fed mission), Ael t'Rllailieu's holding the throne, and many other things. On the other hand, the Tyhon pact novels are generally irrelevant to STO, as the Borg are very much present, as is Sela, Janeway is still alive, DS9 is still the former Terok Nor, etc.
As far as it goes, I cannot think of a single thing (at the moment) in Rihannsu that is invalidated by canon or STO canon.
i always did love that part of judgment day; hopefully this new terminator manages to come up with a nuclear explosion as equally impressive - and a little bit truer to real life nuclear physics, because i've never heard of a blast wave being able to outright disintegrate buildings made of steel and concrete
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
You either slot quake resist consoles or nuke resist consoles. It's two different damage types. Come on, that's basic knowledge
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
how do you know it's LA? i don't think the name of the city was ever mentioned in the film
and a nuclear blast wave still shouldn't be causing damage like that to steel girder skyscrapers - at the very least, some of the framework should've still been standing, but EVERY building there collapsed like sand castles under a tidal wave
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
how do you know it's LA? i don't think the name of the city was ever mentioned in the film
The shots were filmed at Elysian Park, and the whole film pretty much takes place in the L.A. area.
James Cameron isn't the type of director to leave that kind of thing ambiguous. Sarah's nightmares took place in L.A.
Fun fact: Linda Hamilton's twin sister played her (still as a waitress) in the dream sequence (and the far-away shots of her when the T-1000 imitated her).
lol, you guys. I've seen this same routine before from catoblepas, and I'm very well aware of what Ms. Duane has said about her own work. However, interpreting what she said as admitting that her work is not canon is of course an interpretation based on a fundamentalist-like hardline view of canon. Nowhere did she say anything about canon, except insofar as referring to "the filmed version of Trek," which to some means "the only Trek canon, because everything else is mere fanon," a notion which is patently ridiculous. A licensed work is not "fanon." Fanon is canon which includes fan fiction. Fan fiction is unlicensed. btw, The Way of D'era is not taken into account by "the filmed version of Trek," either, yet I see so many of the TNG-lovers hold it up as if it be holy writ.
On the subject of book canonicity, as I have pointed out before- The later date of the Tal Shiar's founding was retconed by a later book into existing roughly as far back as the Enterprise shows. Likewise, the 'Rihannsu' novels are officially set in an "alternate Star Trek universe" according to their publisher, which is something Ms Duane was completely aware of and took full advantage of the liberty it gave her-she herself doesn't expect and didn't really intend for her work to become full canon.
Touting examples from Vulcan Soul or Rihannsu as Star Trek Fact is....misguided IMO. According to other Trek sources around the same level of canon, by this point in the timeline: The Borg are extinct, Sela committed suicide more than two decades ago, Janeway is also dead, and we are a bit overdue for something called the 'Typhon Pact'.
Games, books etc are obligated to follow what's set down by the movies and shows rather closely, but are under no obligation to treat other games or books the same courtesy. So just because something happened in one game/book (stand-alone or series) does not mean it holds true for everything, particularly in regards to the movies & shows.
"Some people have the idea that my work is somehow being slighted, or that I'm being done some kind of wrong, by the filmed version of Trek not taking my stuff into account. While I take their concern for me very kindly, I still think the idea is fallacious." -Diane Duane
Yes, you've pointed this alternate date for the founding of the Tal'Shiar out before, although in the past, you generally attempted to pass it off as having been done in ENT the series, and not any novel. To claim that it is a "retcon" is to misuse the term. For it to be a "retcon," previous works would have to be subjected to revisionism. As they were not, it is by no means a retcon.
You've also more recently attempted to claim that the Rihannsu saga is set in an alternate universe. I have the books in their first publication, before they were collected into one book (and another book added to the saga later), and I have the one book into which they were collected, as well as the final book. Nowhere on the covers nor between them is any such claim made. What it does say is "Based upon Star Trek® created by Gene Roddenberry." Where you got this claim of it being set in an alternate universe, I have no idea, but it's not from the books themselves.
Again, when it comes to canon, hard or soft, or even fanon, as I have pointed out previously, one must use discernment. Hard canon is itself self-contradictory. When you go beyond to soft canon, the inconsistencies multiply. NOBODY DENIES THIS, except targ there, who seems to be unwilling to admit that hard canon is far from inerrant, for what reason(s) I can only speculate.
Nobody once said that it holds true for everything, but your refusal to admit that it holds true for STO is asinine; STO used the Rihannsu saga as inspiration, and if you knew anything about the saga, you would see it in the Romulan references in "Path to 2409" and throughout the Romulan story arc in STO.
We've addressed the quote before, and I see no reason to do so again, apart from noting, yet again, that it is one comment taken out of context and twisted to support something it does not actually support. Speaking of "fallacious," this is the same old tired technique you guys have been trying since LoR went live, making an assertion, having it disproven, and still trotting it out again and again (as was done over and over with the claim that the Capitol City on New Romulus is "D'Tan's grand imperial palace"). It's a fallacy known as Argumentum ad Nauseum. Look it up.
*pat on head* Troll harder, because this isn't cutting it.
how do you know it's LA? i don't think the name of the city was ever mentioned in the film
and a nuclear blast wave still shouldn't be causing damage like that to steel girder skyscrapers - at the very least, some of the framework should've still been standing, but EVERY building there collapsed like sand castles under a tidal wave
A lil tidbit for you!
The physical-damage mechanisms of a nuclear weapon (blast and thermal radiation) are identical to those of conventional explosives. However, the energy produced by a nuclear explosive is millions of times more powerful per gram and the temperatures reached are briefly in the tens of millions of degrees.
Much of the destruction caused by a nuclear explosion is due to blast effects. Most buildings, except reinforced or blast-resistant structures, will suffer moderate damage when subjected to overpressures of only 35.5 kilopascals (kPa) (5.15 pounds-force per square inch or 0.35 atm). Data obtained from the Japanese surveys found that 8 psi (55 kPa) was sufficient to destroy all wooden and brick residential structures. This can reasonably be defined as the pressure capable of producing severe damage.[8]
The blast wind at sea level may exceed one thousand km/h, or ~300 m/s, approaching the speed of sound in air. The range for blast effects increases with the explosive yield of the weapon and also depends on the burst altitude. Contrary to what one might expect from geometry the blast range is not maximal for surface or low altitude blasts but increases with altitude up to an "optimum burst altitude" and then decreases rapidly for higher altitudes. This is due to the nonlinear behaviour of shock waves. When the blast wave from an air burst reaches the ground it is reflected. Below a certain reflection angle the reflected wave and the direct wave merge and form a reinforced horizontal wave, this is known as the 'Mach stem' (named after Ernst Mach) and is a form of constructive interference.[9] [10] [11] This constructive interference is the phenomenon responsible for the bumps or 'knees' in the above overpressure range graph.
For each goal overpressure there is a certain optimum burst height at which the blast range is maximized over ground targets. In a typical air burst, where the blast range is maximized to produce the greatest range of severe damage, i.e. the greatest range that ~10 psi (69 kPa) of pressure is extended over, is a GR/ground range of 0.4 km for 1 kiloton (kt) of TNT yield; 1.9 km for 100 kt; and 8.6 km for 10 megatons (Mt) of TNT. The optimum height of burst to maximize this desired severe ground range destruction for a 1 kt bomb is 0.22 km; for 100 kt, 1 km; and for 10 Mt, 4.7 km.
Two distinct, simultaneous phenomena are associated with the blast wave in air:
Static overpressure, i.e., the sharp increase in pressure exerted by the shock wave. The overpressure at any given point is directly proportional to the density of the air in the wave.
Dynamic pressures, i.e., drag exerted by the blast winds required to form the blast wave. These winds push, tumble and tear objects.
Most of the material damage caused by a nuclear air burst is caused by a combination of the high static overpressures and the blast winds. The long compression of the blast wave weakens structures, which are then torn apart by the blast winds. The compression, vacuum and drag phases together may last several seconds or longer, and exert forces many times greater than the strongest hurricane.
Acting on the human body, the shock waves cause pressure waves through the tissues. These waves mostly damage junctions between tissues of different densities (bone and muscle) or the interface between tissue and air. Lungs and the abdominal cavity, which contain air, are particularly injured. The damage causes severe hemorrhaging or air embolisms, either of which can be rapidly fatal. The overpressure estimated to damage lungs is about 70 kPa. Some eardrums would probably rupture around 22 kPa (0.2 atm) and half would rupture between 90 and 130 kPa (0.9 to 1.2 atm).
Blast winds: The drag energies of the blast winds are proportional to the cubes of their velocities multiplied by the durations. These winds may reach several hundred kilometers per hour.
Effects
Explosive yield / Height of burst
1 kt / 200 m
20 kt / 540 m
1 Mt / 2.0 km
20 Mt / 5.4 km
Blast—effective ground range GR / km
Urban areas completely levelled (20 psi or 140 kPa) 0.2 0.6 2.4 6.4
Destruction of most civilian buildings (5 psi or 34 kPa) 0.6 1.7 6.2 17
Moderate damage to civilian buildings (1 psi or 6.9 kPa) 1.7 4.7 17 47
Railway cars thrown from tracks and crushed
(62 kPa; values for other than 20 kt are extrapolated using the cube-root scaling) ≈0.4 1.0 ≈4 ≈10
Thermal radiation—effective ground range GR / km
Conflagration 0.5 2.0 10 30
Third degree burns 0.6 2.5 12 38
Second degree burns 0.8 3.2 15 44
First degree burns 1.1 4.2 19 53
Effects of instant nuclear radiation—effective slant range1 SR / km
Lethal2 total dose (neutrons and gamma rays) 0.8 1.4 2.3 4.7
Total dose for acute radiation syndrome2 1.2 1.8 2.9 5.4
how do you know it's LA? i don't think the name of the city was ever mentioned in the film
and a nuclear blast wave still shouldn't be causing damage like that to steel girder skyscrapers - at the very least, some of the framework should've still been standing, but EVERY building there collapsed like sand castles under a tidal wave
A lil tidbit for you!
The physical-damage mechanisms of a nuclear weapon (blast and thermal radiation) are identical to those of conventional explosives. However, the energy produced by a nuclear explosive is millions of times more powerful per gram and the temperatures reached are briefly in the tens of millions of degrees.
Much of the destruction caused by a nuclear explosion is due to blast effects. Most buildings, except reinforced or blast-resistant structures, will suffer moderate damage when subjected to overpressures of only 35.5 kilopascals (kPa) (5.15 pounds-force per square inch or 0.35 atm). Data obtained from the Japanese surveys found that 8 psi (55 kPa) was sufficient to destroy all wooden and brick residential structures. This can reasonably be defined as the pressure capable of producing severe damage.[8]
The blast wind at sea level may exceed one thousand km/h, or ~300 m/s, approaching the speed of sound in air. The range for blast effects increases with the explosive yield of the weapon and also depends on the burst altitude. Contrary to what one might expect from geometry the blast range is not maximal for surface or low altitude blasts but increases with altitude up to an "optimum burst altitude" and then decreases rapidly for higher altitudes. This is due to the nonlinear behaviour of shock waves. When the blast wave from an air burst reaches the ground it is reflected. Below a certain reflection angle the reflected wave and the direct wave merge and form a reinforced horizontal wave, this is known as the 'Mach stem' (named after Ernst Mach) and is a form of constructive interference.[9] [10] [11] This constructive interference is the phenomenon responsible for the bumps or 'knees' in the above overpressure range graph.
For each goal overpressure there is a certain optimum burst height at which the blast range is maximized over ground targets. In a typical air burst, where the blast range is maximized to produce the greatest range of severe damage, i.e. the greatest range that ~10 psi (69 kPa) of pressure is extended over, is a GR/ground range of 0.4 km for 1 kiloton (kt) of TNT yield; 1.9 km for 100 kt; and 8.6 km for 10 megatons (Mt) of TNT. The optimum height of burst to maximize this desired severe ground range destruction for a 1 kt bomb is 0.22 km; for 100 kt, 1 km; and for 10 Mt, 4.7 km.
Two distinct, simultaneous phenomena are associated with the blast wave in air:
Static overpressure, i.e., the sharp increase in pressure exerted by the shock wave. The overpressure at any given point is directly proportional to the density of the air in the wave.
Dynamic pressures, i.e., drag exerted by the blast winds required to form the blast wave. These winds push, tumble and tear objects.
Most of the material damage caused by a nuclear air burst is caused by a combination of the high static overpressures and the blast winds. The long compression of the blast wave weakens structures, which are then torn apart by the blast winds. The compression, vacuum and drag phases together may last several seconds or longer, and exert forces many times greater than the strongest hurricane.
Acting on the human body, the shock waves cause pressure waves through the tissues. These waves mostly damage junctions between tissues of different densities (bone and muscle) or the interface between tissue and air. Lungs and the abdominal cavity, which contain air, are particularly injured. The damage causes severe hemorrhaging or air embolisms, either of which can be rapidly fatal. The overpressure estimated to damage lungs is about 70 kPa. Some eardrums would probably rupture around 22 kPa (0.2 atm) and half would rupture between 90 and 130 kPa (0.9 to 1.2 atm).
Blast winds: The drag energies of the blast winds are proportional to the cubes of their velocities multiplied by the durations. These winds may reach several hundred kilometers per hour.
Effects
Explosive yield / Height of burst
1 kt / 200 m
20 kt / 540 m
1 Mt / 2.0 km
20 Mt / 5.4 km
Blast—effective ground range GR / km
Urban areas completely levelled (20 psi or 140 kPa) 0.2 0.6 2.4 6.4
Destruction of most civilian buildings (5 psi or 34 kPa) 0.6 1.7 6.2 17
Moderate damage to civilian buildings (1 psi or 6.9 kPa) 1.7 4.7 17 47
Railway cars thrown from tracks and crushed
(62 kPa; values for other than 20 kt are extrapolated using the cube-root scaling) ≈0.4 1.0 ≈4 ≈10
Thermal radiation—effective ground range GR / km
Conflagration 0.5 2.0 10 30
Third degree burns 0.6 2.5 12 38
Second degree burns 0.8 3.2 15 44
First degree burns 1.1 4.2 19 53
Effects of instant nuclear radiation—effective slant range1 SR / km
Lethal2 total dose (neutrons and gamma rays) 0.8 1.4 2.3 4.7
Total dose for acute radiation syndrome2 1.2 1.8 2.9 5.4
Wow, a Tal'Shiar flag officer knowing technobable around WMDs, what a surprise. lol jk
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch." "We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Passion and Serenity are one.
I gain power by understanding both.
In the chaos of their battle, I bring order.
I am a shadow, darkness born from light.
The Force is united within me.
lol, you guys. I've seen this same routine before from catoblepas, and I'm very well aware of what Ms. Duane has said about her own work. However, interpreting what she said as admitting that her work is not canon is of course an interpretation based on a fundamentalist-like hardline view of canon. Nowhere did she say anything about canon, except insofar as referring to "the filmed version of Trek," which to some means "the only Trek canon, because everything else is mere fanon," a notion which is patently ridiculous. A licensed work is not "fanon." Fanon is canon which includes fan fiction. Fan fiction is unlicensed. btw, The Way of D'era is not taken into account by "the filmed version of Trek," either, yet I see so many of the TNG-lovers hold it up as if it be holy writ.
On the subject of book canonicity, as I have pointed out before- The later date of the Tal Shiar's founding was retconed by a later book into existing roughly as far back as the Enterprise shows. Likewise, the 'Rihannsu' novels are officially set in an "alternate Star Trek universe" according to their publisher, which is something Ms Duane was completely aware of and took full advantage of the liberty it gave her-she herself doesn't expect and didn't really intend for her work to become full canon.
Touting examples from Vulcan Soul or Rihannsu as Star Trek Fact is....misguided IMO. According to other Trek sources around the same level of canon, by this point in the timeline: The Borg are extinct, Sela committed suicide more than two decades ago, Janeway is also dead, and we are a bit overdue for something called the 'Typhon Pact'.
Games, books etc are obligated to follow what's set down by the movies and shows rather closely, but are under no obligation to treat other games or books the same courtesy. So just because something happened in one game/book (stand-alone or series) does not mean it holds true for everything, particularly in regards to the movies & shows.
"Some people have the idea that my work is somehow being slighted, or that I'm being done some kind of wrong, by the filmed version of Trek not taking my stuff into account. While I take their concern for me very kindly, I still think the idea is fallacious." -Diane Duane
Yes, you've pointed this alternate date for the founding of the Tal'Shiar out before, although in the past, you generally attempted to pass it off as having been done in ENT the series, and not any novel. To claim that it is a "retcon" is to misuse the term. For it to be a "retcon," previous works would have to be subjected to revisionism. As they were not, it is by no means a retcon.
You've also more recently attempted to claim that the Rihannsu saga is set in an alternate universe. I have the books in their first publication, before they were collected into one book (and another book added to the saga later), and I have the one book into which they were collected, as well as the final book. Nowhere on the covers nor between them is any such claim made. What it does say is "Based upon Star Trek® created by Gene Roddenberry." Where you got this claim of it being set in an alternate universe, I have no idea, but it's not from the books themselves.
Again, when it comes to canon, hard or soft, or even fanon, as I have pointed out previously, one must use discernment. Hard canon is itself self-contradictory. When you go beyond to soft canon, the inconsistencies multiply. NOBODY DENIES THIS, except targ there, who seems to be unwilling to admit that hard canon is far from inerrant, for what reason(s) I can only speculate.
Nobody once said that it holds true for everything, but your refusal to admit that it holds true for STO is asinine; STO used the Rihannsu saga as inspiration, and if you knew anything about the saga, you would see it in the Romulan references in "Path to 2409" and throughout the Romulan story arc in STO.
We've addressed the quote before, and I see no reason to do so again, apart from noting, yet again, that it is one comment taken out of context and twisted to support something it does not actually support. Speaking of "fallacious," this is the same old tired technique you guys have been trying since LoR went live, making an assertion, having it disproven, and still trotting it out again and again (as was done over and over with the claim that the Capitol City on New Romulus is "D'Tan's grand imperial palace"). It's a fallacy known as Argumentum ad Nauseum. Look it up.
*pat on head* Troll harder, because this isn't cutting it.
*munches on popcorn*yep knew it a bit shorter than expected really
Again, when it comes to canon, hard or soft, or even fanon, as I have pointed out previously, one must use discernment. Hard canon is itself self-contradictory. When you go beyond to soft canon, the inconsistencies multiply. NOBODY DENIES THIS, except targ there, who seems to be unwilling to admit that hard canon is far from inerrant, for what reason(s) I can only speculate. (...)
You can speculate about the reasons - if you come up with one please tell me I have never stated that I think Star Trek canon is without inconsistencies. In fact, I have given one of those cases just a few postings ago and it is even basically the exact same case you are fighting for.
My point is simply that you cannot treat non-canonical information (no matter where it comes from) as a fact to answer someones question without adding a remark where it comes from. Then, a healthy discussion can take place. You, however, disregard other interpretation on the basis of treating your collecion/interpretation of information as canon. I never even talked about inconsistencies being the reason for why this cannot work.
There is an official definition of canon for Star Trek. Novels cannot be canon, by definition. Novels are fan-fiction that happened to become licensed by the IP holder because someone liked it and fees have been paid. I think it is difficult to disregard CBS/Paramounts authority about canon, yet at the same time argue that a piece of work licensed by CBS/Paramount could make it canon because it has been licensed and as such somehow been elevated over the 'common rabble'.
(...) Nobody once said that it holds true for everything, but your refusal to admit that it holds true for STO is asinine; STO used the Rihannsu saga as inspiration, and if you knew anything about the saga, you would see it in the Romulan references in "Path to 2409" and throughout the Romulan story arc in STO. (...)
We also hve the Luna-class and Vesta-class in the game. Does this mean the novels those are from are also STO-lore? (Honest question, I don't know). Again: I am not even sying STO has not been inspired by those works, maybe they even treat it as lore but there are no claims about that by Cryptic. And even for STO, if there's no mention of something in the game it's a blank spot.
*pat on head* Troll harder, because this isn't cutting it.
While I do appreciate a pat on my bristled head I do feel treated unfairly being labled a "troll" because I have an opinion that seems to be different from yours and I honestly wouldn't have thought you of all people would resort to this kind of rhetorical middle finger.
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
*pat on head* Troll harder, because this isn't cutting it.
While I do appreciate a pat on my bristled head I do feel treated unfairly being labled a "troll" because I have an opinion that seems to be different from yours and I honestly wouldn't have thought you of all people would resort to this kind of rhetorical middle finger.
I'm not sure when you became the same person as catoblepas beta. That is, after all, the person to whom I was replying (after the brief introductory comment before the quoted post), as I thought would be obvious by virtue of the only post I quoted being one by catoblepas.
I'm not sure when you became the same person as catoblepas beta.
I think because your post began with "lol, you guys." hence addressing more than one person
And then quoted catoblepas and replied to his/her post, even going so far as to refer to targ in the third person, while otherwise using the second person, which should have made it obvious that I was not addressing targ at any point after I quoted catoblepas.
I'm not sure when you became the same person as catoblepas beta.
I think because your post began with "lol, you guys." hence addressing more than one person
And then quoted catoblepas and replied to his/her post, even going so far as to refer to targ in the third person, while otherwise using the second person, which should have made it obvious that I was not addressing targ at any point after I quoted catoblepas.
yeah *I* got it but c'mon proto... by now you of all people on these forum should know to cover your bases and not expect much linquistic comprehension here.... or sense... or reason... or courtesy... or anything positive... Imma stop now lol
I did indeed recognize your posting, @protogoth , as a general response to multiple people, myself included. I know that I did not use the quote in question but being mentioned I did feel adressed. Now I realise I did so in error. For that, I want to apologize for my confusion. But then again, if the English language is unable to differentiate between singular and plural pronouns (you(r) and you(r) in this case) I blame it at least partly *foreign grunt*
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
I did indeed recognize your posting, @protogoth , as a general response to multiple people, myself included. I know that I did not use the quote in question but being mentioned I did feel adressed. Now I realise I did so in error. For that, I want to apologize for my confusion. But then again, if the English language is unable to differentiate between singular and plural pronouns (you(r) and you(r) in this case) I blame it at least partly *foreign grunt*
American Standard English and British Standard English do not distinguish between plural and singular second person pronoun. Various dialects, however, do. When speaking/writing in English, I am generally inclined to utilize the second person plural pronoun of the dialect of my raising (Southern American English), which is "y'all," although I will sometimes say "you guys," having lived for a time in the North, or "yas," which was used by a longtime housemate of mine (she was from the Southwest, but I'm not sure that's dialectical instead of personal). I never use "you" as plural. If formal writing allowed the author to address the reader, I might do so in that context (but it does not), but otherwise, I avoid it due to its imprecision, reserving it solely for the singular.
Wow, a Tal'Shiar flag officer knowing technobable around WMDs, what a surprise. lol jk
In all seriousness, a very informative read.
the only thing he knows is how to use copy-paste; the entire thing is from wikipedia, and while informative, it didn't answer my question
I wasn't attempting to answer your question, but merely providing information, in regards to the staement of a thermo-nuclear weapons capability vs structures.
The information provided, only shows up to a maximum of 20megatons, while today we ourselves are capable of easy 50megaton thermo-nuclear warheads on an I.C.B.M.
After seeing, just how easily the World Trade Center buildings fell to an aircraft crashing into them, than the jet fuel igniting super heating the structure from the inside!
You would doubt, a thermo-nuclear weapon could topple one?
I have not attempted to pass off that novel as taking part of the movie/show universe. As a novel published nearly a decade later though, it does indeed 'retcon' the Tal Shiar's founding in regards to the novel universe.
It's the position of the Publisher of the Rihannsu series, Pocket Books. It's mentioned in the same interview that the Diane quote came from. Considering Richard Arnold's opinion of the series and Gene's attempt to keep it from being published, this status should not be surprising.
And being of lower level canon then the shows themselves, the argument goes that the Romulans should resemble the ones from the shows first and foremost, which the Romulans did prior to Legacy of Romulus (albeit a rather shallow interpretation) Again, the games are not beholden to hold to true to what happens in X, Y or Z novel-otherwise we'd have stuff like Typhon pact in game, or Janeway and Sela would be dead. So the inclusion of Rihannsu content was in no way mandatory and is just as appropriate to criticise as any other Cryptic plot development, which itself is fairly commonplace.
That would be of course, be assuming that it had actually been 'proven' to be wrong at some point. Sadly (for you) simply insisting something is a fallacy time and time again is not enough alone to prove that something is, in fact a fallacy. Proof by Assertion
Your 'proof' almost universally comes from two book series. Which as has been pointed out, are solidly in the 'soft canon' side of the spectrum, if not outright borderline 'fanon'.
Again, it was Warmaker who made the 'grand imperial palace' statement, and a simple forum search reveals that it is in fact, you who bring up his/her hyperbolic joke in every other thread.
If you are going to assert that the quote is somehow fabricated or twisted out of context, you are going to have to show how it has been.
To close, here's another Quote from Ms Duane 'taken out of context' that I think shows the pragmatic attitude she has in regards to her work's standing in Star Trek canon (her reaction to Star Trek Nemesis):
"...I've been working in both TV/film for long enough that I knew perfectly well where books fit into the mass-media pecking order (quite low down...), and what was likely to happen to non-canonical material when it came into contact with a production crew eager to prove that it wasn't beholden to anybody else's take on the Romulans..."
-Diane Duane
In her own words, books are low on the totem pole when it comes to Trek canon, and that them being contradicted by later trek stuff should be no surprise. Heck, she outright calls her stuff 'non-canon' in that quote.
I have not attempted to pass off that novel as taking part of the movie/show universe. As a novel published nearly a decade later though, it does indeed 'retcon' the Tal Shiar's founding in regards to the novel universe.
Pretty sure you have in the past attempted to portray this "retcon" of the date of the founding of the Tal'Shiar as being from ENT, and not from an ENT novel. And no, it does not "retcon" any such thing, because the novel universe has never attempted to be consistent, and because in order for it to do so, the older material would have to be subjected to revisionism, which it has not. As such, you are still pulling the "All-or-Nothing" fallacy, rather blatantly, by asserting that we have to accept it all (and yet somehow reject older examples when new examples contradict the older examples) or we have to reject it all.
It's the position of the Publisher of the Rihannsu series, Pocket Books. It's mentioned in the same interview that the Diane quote came from. Considering Richard Arnold's opinion of the series and Gene's attempt to keep it from being published, this status should not be surprising.
Really? Source your claim for this being Pocket Books' position.
And being of lower level canon then the shows themselves, the argument goes that the Romulans should resemble the ones from the shows first and foremost, which the Romulans did prior to Legacy of Romulus (albeit a rather shallow interpretation) Again, the games are not beholden to hold to true to what happens in X, Y or Z novel-otherwise we'd have stuff like Typhon pact in game, or Janeway and Sela would be dead. So the inclusion of Rihannsu content was in no way mandatory and is just as appropriate to criticise as any other Cryptic plot development, which itself is fairly commonplace.
And they do resemble the Romulans from the shows themselves, just not your beloved fascist police state from TNG. Your problem is that you are willing to totally dismiss and ignore the original presentation in TOS because it doesn't fit with your preferred take on Romulans. And again, the All-or-Nothing fallacy. The choice of Cryptic to use some soft canon material does not mean that they have to use ALL soft canon material. You are perfectly well aware of this, yet you persist in the fallacy. Hence, trolling.
That would be of course, be assuming that it had actually been 'proven' to be wrong at some point. Sadly (for you) simply insisting something is a fallacy time and time again is not enough alone to prove that something is, in fact a fallacy. Proof by Assertion
I didn't say this was a fallacy. I said it was taken out of context, and it was. But you can bet your sweet ... that if I say something is a fallacy, it is indeed a fallacy.
Your 'proof' almost universally comes from two book series. Which as has been pointed out, are solidly in the 'soft canon' side of the spectrum, if not outright borderline 'fanon'.
On the contrary, my proof comes from The Original Series and several instances of the earlier cultural presentation in the later series, demonstrating that even in TNG, the fascist police state was not the only way to be Romulan. So all your "The Republic isn't like the Romulans from the shows" is just so much horsepoo, and again, you know this. THus, trolling.
Again, it was Warmaker who made the 'grand imperial palace' statement, and a simple forum search reveals that it is in fact, you who bring up his/her hyperbolic joke in every other thread.
Of course it was warmaker, but he was parroted by several of you TNG lovers multiple times, and the example I gave was only one example of many (hence the word "as"). Need I remind you of the "the Republic is a dictatorship because it has no Senate" nonsense that was spewed incessantly (and occasionally still gets brought up by your pals), even though others on the same side as you pointed out that you were wrong? And it is by no means I who bring it up. You were (seemingly) away for a while, but perhaps you should refresh your memory of things that occurred in your absence and actually read the threads in which it is brought up, to see who actually brought it up, and who merely responded to it.
If you are going to assert that the quote is somehow fabricated or twisted out of context, you are going to have to show how it has been.
Two sentences referring to fan reactions to her work being ignored being used as a support for your claim that the story is in an alternate universe? Yeah, I'm gonna say that the burden of proof is on you, not me.
To close, here's another Quote from Ms Duane 'taken out of context' that I think shows the pragmatic attitude she has in regards to her work's standing in Star Trek canon (her reaction to Star Trek Nemesis):
"...I've been working in both TV/film for long enough that I knew perfectly well where books fit into the mass-media pecking order (quite low down...), and what was likely to happen to non-canonical material when it came into contact with a production crew eager to prove that it wasn't beholden to anybody else's take on the Romulans..."
-Diane Duane
In her own words, books are low on the totem pole when it comes to Trek canon, and that them being contradicted by later trek stuff should be no surprise. Heck, she outright calls her stuff 'non-canon' in that quote.
Here's another fallacy for you: Equivocation. Try looking that one up, because you're pulling that one here. "Canon" is not an unambiguous term. Anyone who accepts soft canon and views her work as part of it is naturally going to look at the quote and see "non-canonical" there, and understand it properly as meaning "not part of hard canon."
Just give up already. Your side lost the forum war (which is now long since over), the whole load of dung about how Republic Romulans are somehow "not like Romulans from the shows" is pointless (and always was patently false to anyone with familiarity with the shows, including your beloved "Star Trek: The New Guys"), and Cryptic is never going to allow you to play the fascist bully boy you so ache to play. You don't like Romulans from TOS and the Rihannsu saga? Fine. You don't get to deny that the Republic Romulans are like like Romulans from the shows, because they are like Romulans from the shows. And frankly, so is Hhakhifv, or need I remind you of the incompetence and ham of Commander Toma-Lax the Perpetually Constipated?
Tho I gotta say I dont see as much disconnect as proto does from ToS Rom and TNG Rom, and imo she's not really got a lot of wiggle room when it comes to calling people out on ignoring things from the series... but hell this is fun
Enterprise era, not Enterprise show. It specifically takes place after the show. I'm not sure where the 'all or nothing' fallacy thing is coming from (besides your usual affection for accusing anything you don't agree with of being a fallacy)
Material for an IP is often retconned without actively going back and rewriting the preceding stories that contradicts the new material. Fairly typical, actually. Sometimes there will be an attempt to reconcile the two (like the ridgeless Klingons vs the ridged klingons in ENT) but this is far from given.
Really? Source your claim for this being Pocket Books' position.
Again, the same interview with Diane Duane which you are supposedly so familiar with that you knew immediately that I was twisting and distorting her words.
And they do resemble the Romulans ...Hence, trolling.
My position is that Romulan society more appropriately resemble what we see on TNG more than on TOS because Romulans were fairly consistent with their portrayal outside of those two TOS episodes, making TOS Romulans the outlier.
My position is actually quite the opposite. I'd prefer that Cryptic ease off the soft canon stuff and focus more on how things were portrayed in the shows and movies. But you are persistent in your insistence that a few select books are the go-to guide for what Romulans are up to when not on screen. The ENT era novel is used as an example that even within the Trek literary world, this is not undisputed.
On the contrary, my proof comes from The Original Series and several instances of the earlier cultural presentation in the later series, ... you know this. THus, trolling.
Yes. Two episodes. Not a whole lot of comparative screen time.
As for the rest, you use examples of a few sympathetic, friendly or honorable Romulans to extrapolate that the majority of all Romulans are all secretly like that. Which is a huge leap.
I see those same Romulans and come to the conclusion that TNG Romulans aren't as one dimensional as their detractors would like to strawman them as- that they can be a militaristic, traditionalist and xenophobic society and still have their own virtues.
If you read some threads, you might realize that most of the times that folks mock the tent city of New Romulus, it's because Cryptic still hasn't gotten around to making a New Romulus that makes sense in a narrative sense.
It shows that she doesn't think much about her books being contradicted or ignored by the shows and movies.
In other words, the fact that the movies and shows ignore her books as far as canon goes.
Uh...what? That's not equivocation. In the literal way Trek canon is defined- only the shows, movies, and animated series are 'canon'. everything else that got the rubber stamp of approval, like books and games is officially not canon. Fan-made stuff is then 'fanon'.
So when she calls it 'non-canon' she means 'soft canon', that shouldn't be too hard to grasp.
For another example, one could say "The events of the game Klingon Academy are not canon" or "The events of the game Klingon Academy are soft canon". It means the same thing, essentially.
Just give up already. Your side lost...Constipated?
Since you love dropping fallacies into every other sentence you use with no regard to if they are actually used or not, here's one for you-repetition fallacy The very existence of ongoing debate within this very thread shows that this matter is far from settled.
And as for the shows thing... Because Romulans acted a certain way in two episodes is not proof that the majority of Romulans were like that. The overwhelming majority of depictions point in another direction. Tomalak had a lot more depth to him than Hakeev ever had, and there examples of more sympathetic and fleshed out Romulan characters- but nice go at cherry picking and strawman-ing.
As for the rest, you use examples of a few sympathetic, friendly or honorable Romulans to extrapolate that the majority of all Romulans are all secretly like that. Which is a huge leap.
I see those same Romulans and come to the conclusion that TNG Romulans aren't as one dimensional as their detractors would like to strawman them as- that they can be a militaristic, traditionalist and xenophobic society and still have their own virtues.
This is kinda how I see it too honestly... I don't see how the actions in ToS invalidate or clash so horribly with TNG+ if you look at it, they actually kinda support how TNG+ Romulans act imo, it DOES show the Tal Shiar became much more omni-present and powerful by TNG and the associated mindset as well. But honestly a secret mission to cross the neutral zone and attack the federation in order to test their defenses and response? If not for the Commander's dislike of it that could have been a Tal Shiar operation. In TEI our new Romulan goes out of her way to take the Enterprise whole and intact because it would bring her a ton of publicity and help her power base nicely. Sure she went after Spock for BOTH professional and personal reasons, but she was a scheming manipulator on the whole. Not Tal Shiar material, but also not irreconcilable with TNG era behavior either.
The issues is not that there is no ability to reconcile the two. I have no issue whatsoever, and believe characters like that are perfectly fine. The issue is that the poster before you seems to believe that all Romulans must be like that, and that any who aren't are not "true Romulans". This ignores the majority who A) Prefer the pre-TNG portrayal (Which never would have gone away, considering the short by Romulan standards period of time between TOS-era and TNG) or B ) Don't want to play a mustache twirler, or any sort of villain, or C) Genuinely like where Cryptic has gone with the Romulans. I have no objection at all to someone playing RSE just cause thats what they want. But when someone defecates all over what I like, I'l not stand still and take it like a Fed should.
Comments
As well, since we are discussing canon as it relates to the game Star Trek Online, and not as it relates to official canon, somethings certainly are canon insofar as the game is concerned. For example, numerous concepts from Rihannsu are used, such as the Sundering as she wrote it (Generation ships on a decades long voyage), Romulan honor concepts (mnhei'sahe is mentioned by name in a Romulan front Fed mission), Ael t'Rllailieu's holding the throne, and many other things. On the other hand, the Tyhon pact novels are generally irrelevant to STO, as the Borg are very much present, as is Sela, Janeway is still alive, DS9 is still the former Terok Nor, etc.
As far as it goes, I cannot think of a single thing (at the moment) in Rihannsu that is invalidated by canon or STO canon.
I was able to record it.
yep...thats about what I expected
i always did love that part of judgment day; hopefully this new terminator manages to come up with a nuclear explosion as equally impressive - and a little bit truer to real life nuclear physics, because i've never heard of a blast wave being able to outright disintegrate buildings made of steel and concrete
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
and a nuclear blast wave still shouldn't be causing damage like that to steel girder skyscrapers - at the very least, some of the framework should've still been standing, but EVERY building there collapsed like sand castles under a tidal wave
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
The shots were filmed at Elysian Park, and the whole film pretty much takes place in the L.A. area.
James Cameron isn't the type of director to leave that kind of thing ambiguous. Sarah's nightmares took place in L.A.
Fun fact: Linda Hamilton's twin sister played her (still as a waitress) in the dream sequence (and the far-away shots of her when the T-1000 imitated her).
Yes, you've pointed this alternate date for the founding of the Tal'Shiar out before, although in the past, you generally attempted to pass it off as having been done in ENT the series, and not any novel. To claim that it is a "retcon" is to misuse the term. For it to be a "retcon," previous works would have to be subjected to revisionism. As they were not, it is by no means a retcon.
You've also more recently attempted to claim that the Rihannsu saga is set in an alternate universe. I have the books in their first publication, before they were collected into one book (and another book added to the saga later), and I have the one book into which they were collected, as well as the final book. Nowhere on the covers nor between them is any such claim made. What it does say is "Based upon Star Trek® created by Gene Roddenberry." Where you got this claim of it being set in an alternate universe, I have no idea, but it's not from the books themselves.
Again, when it comes to canon, hard or soft, or even fanon, as I have pointed out previously, one must use discernment. Hard canon is itself self-contradictory. When you go beyond to soft canon, the inconsistencies multiply. NOBODY DENIES THIS, except targ there, who seems to be unwilling to admit that hard canon is far from inerrant, for what reason(s) I can only speculate.
Nobody once said that it holds true for everything, but your refusal to admit that it holds true for STO is asinine; STO used the Rihannsu saga as inspiration, and if you knew anything about the saga, you would see it in the Romulan references in "Path to 2409" and throughout the Romulan story arc in STO.
We've addressed the quote before, and I see no reason to do so again, apart from noting, yet again, that it is one comment taken out of context and twisted to support something it does not actually support. Speaking of "fallacious," this is the same old tired technique you guys have been trying since LoR went live, making an assertion, having it disproven, and still trotting it out again and again (as was done over and over with the claim that the Capitol City on New Romulus is "D'Tan's grand imperial palace"). It's a fallacy known as Argumentum ad Nauseum. Look it up.
*pat on head* Troll harder, because this isn't cutting it.
A lil tidbit for you!
The physical-damage mechanisms of a nuclear weapon (blast and thermal radiation) are identical to those of conventional explosives. However, the energy produced by a nuclear explosive is millions of times more powerful per gram and the temperatures reached are briefly in the tens of millions of degrees.
Much of the destruction caused by a nuclear explosion is due to blast effects. Most buildings, except reinforced or blast-resistant structures, will suffer moderate damage when subjected to overpressures of only 35.5 kilopascals (kPa) (5.15 pounds-force per square inch or 0.35 atm). Data obtained from the Japanese surveys found that 8 psi (55 kPa) was sufficient to destroy all wooden and brick residential structures. This can reasonably be defined as the pressure capable of producing severe damage.[8]
The blast wind at sea level may exceed one thousand km/h, or ~300 m/s, approaching the speed of sound in air. The range for blast effects increases with the explosive yield of the weapon and also depends on the burst altitude. Contrary to what one might expect from geometry the blast range is not maximal for surface or low altitude blasts but increases with altitude up to an "optimum burst altitude" and then decreases rapidly for higher altitudes. This is due to the nonlinear behaviour of shock waves. When the blast wave from an air burst reaches the ground it is reflected. Below a certain reflection angle the reflected wave and the direct wave merge and form a reinforced horizontal wave, this is known as the 'Mach stem' (named after Ernst Mach) and is a form of constructive interference.[9] [10] [11] This constructive interference is the phenomenon responsible for the bumps or 'knees' in the above overpressure range graph.
For each goal overpressure there is a certain optimum burst height at which the blast range is maximized over ground targets. In a typical air burst, where the blast range is maximized to produce the greatest range of severe damage, i.e. the greatest range that ~10 psi (69 kPa) of pressure is extended over, is a GR/ground range of 0.4 km for 1 kiloton (kt) of TNT yield; 1.9 km for 100 kt; and 8.6 km for 10 megatons (Mt) of TNT. The optimum height of burst to maximize this desired severe ground range destruction for a 1 kt bomb is 0.22 km; for 100 kt, 1 km; and for 10 Mt, 4.7 km.
Two distinct, simultaneous phenomena are associated with the blast wave in air:
Static overpressure, i.e., the sharp increase in pressure exerted by the shock wave. The overpressure at any given point is directly proportional to the density of the air in the wave.
Dynamic pressures, i.e., drag exerted by the blast winds required to form the blast wave. These winds push, tumble and tear objects.
Most of the material damage caused by a nuclear air burst is caused by a combination of the high static overpressures and the blast winds. The long compression of the blast wave weakens structures, which are then torn apart by the blast winds. The compression, vacuum and drag phases together may last several seconds or longer, and exert forces many times greater than the strongest hurricane.
Acting on the human body, the shock waves cause pressure waves through the tissues. These waves mostly damage junctions between tissues of different densities (bone and muscle) or the interface between tissue and air. Lungs and the abdominal cavity, which contain air, are particularly injured. The damage causes severe hemorrhaging or air embolisms, either of which can be rapidly fatal. The overpressure estimated to damage lungs is about 70 kPa. Some eardrums would probably rupture around 22 kPa (0.2 atm) and half would rupture between 90 and 130 kPa (0.9 to 1.2 atm).
Blast winds: The drag energies of the blast winds are proportional to the cubes of their velocities multiplied by the durations. These winds may reach several hundred kilometers per hour.
Effects
Explosive yield / Height of burst
1 kt / 200 m
20 kt / 540 m
1 Mt / 2.0 km
20 Mt / 5.4 km
Blast—effective ground range GR / km
Urban areas completely levelled (20 psi or 140 kPa) 0.2 0.6 2.4 6.4
Destruction of most civilian buildings (5 psi or 34 kPa) 0.6 1.7 6.2 17
Moderate damage to civilian buildings (1 psi or 6.9 kPa) 1.7 4.7 17 47
Railway cars thrown from tracks and crushed
(62 kPa; values for other than 20 kt are extrapolated using the cube-root scaling) ≈0.4 1.0 ≈4 ≈10
Thermal radiation—effective ground range GR / km
Conflagration 0.5 2.0 10 30
Third degree burns 0.6 2.5 12 38
Second degree burns 0.8 3.2 15 44
First degree burns 1.1 4.2 19 53
Effects of instant nuclear radiation—effective slant range1 SR / km
Lethal2 total dose (neutrons and gamma rays) 0.8 1.4 2.3 4.7
Total dose for acute radiation syndrome2 1.2 1.8 2.9 5.4
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
Wow, a Tal'Shiar flag officer knowing technobable around WMDs, what a surprise. lol jk
In all seriousness, a very informative read.
Tal'Shiar/Reman Resistance/Romulan Nemesis uniform, pls.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7403/13262502435_5604548f2c_o.png
the only thing he knows is how to use copy-paste; the entire thing is from wikipedia, and while informative, it didn't answer my question
#LegalizeAwoo
A normie goes "Oh, what's this?"
An otaku goes "UwU, what's this?"
A furry goes "OwO, what's this?"
A werewolf goes "Awoo, what's this?"
"It's nothing personal, I just don't feel like I've gotten to know a person until I've sniffed their crotch."
"We said 'no' to Mr. Curiosity. We're not home. Curiosity is not welcome, it is not to be invited in. Curiosity...is bad. It gets you in trouble, it gets you killed, and more importantly...it makes you poor!"
I know, but I still agree with Iconians that the Terminator movies are very SoCal centric.
Tal'Shiar/Reman Resistance/Romulan Nemesis uniform, pls.
https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7403/13262502435_5604548f2c_o.png
*munches on popcorn*yep knew it
The names of the city is rather clear, as it is mentioned several times, and especially when the police are driving LAPD squad cars.
You can speculate about the reasons - if you come up with one please tell me
My point is simply that you cannot treat non-canonical information (no matter where it comes from) as a fact to answer someones question without adding a remark where it comes from. Then, a healthy discussion can take place. You, however, disregard other interpretation on the basis of treating your collecion/interpretation of information as canon. I never even talked about inconsistencies being the reason for why this cannot work.
There is an official definition of canon for Star Trek. Novels cannot be canon, by definition. Novels are fan-fiction that happened to become licensed by the IP holder because someone liked it and fees have been paid. I think it is difficult to disregard CBS/Paramounts authority about canon, yet at the same time argue that a piece of work licensed by CBS/Paramount could make it canon because it has been licensed and as such somehow been elevated over the 'common rabble'.
We also hve the Luna-class and Vesta-class in the game. Does this mean the novels those are from are also STO-lore? (Honest question, I don't know). Again: I am not even sying STO has not been inspired by those works, maybe they even treat it as lore but there are no claims about that by Cryptic. And even for STO, if there's no mention of something in the game it's a blank spot.
While I do appreciate a pat on my bristled head I do feel treated unfairly being labled a "troll" because I have an opinion that seems to be different from yours and I honestly wouldn't have thought you of all people would resort to this kind of rhetorical middle finger.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
I'm not sure when you became the same person as catoblepas beta. That is, after all, the person to whom I was replying (after the brief introductory comment before the quoted post), as I thought would be obvious by virtue of the only post I quoted being one by catoblepas.
And then quoted catoblepas and replied to his/her post, even going so far as to refer to targ in the third person, while otherwise using the second person, which should have made it obvious that I was not addressing targ at any point after I quoted catoblepas.
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
American Standard English and British Standard English do not distinguish between plural and singular second person pronoun. Various dialects, however, do. When speaking/writing in English, I am generally inclined to utilize the second person plural pronoun of the dialect of my raising (Southern American English), which is "y'all," although I will sometimes say "you guys," having lived for a time in the North, or "yas," which was used by a longtime housemate of mine (she was from the Southwest, but I'm not sure that's dialectical instead of personal). I never use "you" as plural. If formal writing allowed the author to address the reader, I might do so in that context (but it does not), but otherwise, I avoid it due to its imprecision, reserving it solely for the singular.
I wasn't attempting to answer your question, but merely providing information, in regards to the staement of a thermo-nuclear weapons capability vs structures.
The information provided, only shows up to a maximum of 20megatons, while today we ourselves are capable of easy 50megaton thermo-nuclear warheads on an I.C.B.M.
After seeing, just how easily the World Trade Center buildings fell to an aircraft crashing into them, than the jet fuel igniting super heating the structure from the inside!
You would doubt, a thermo-nuclear weapon could topple one?
Praetor of the -RTS- Romulan Tal Shiar fleet!
I have not attempted to pass off that novel as taking part of the movie/show universe. As a novel published nearly a decade later though, it does indeed 'retcon' the Tal Shiar's founding in regards to the novel universe.
It's the position of the Publisher of the Rihannsu series, Pocket Books. It's mentioned in the same interview that the Diane quote came from. Considering Richard Arnold's opinion of the series and Gene's attempt to keep it from being published, this status should not be surprising.
And being of lower level canon then the shows themselves, the argument goes that the Romulans should resemble the ones from the shows first and foremost, which the Romulans did prior to Legacy of Romulus (albeit a rather shallow interpretation) Again, the games are not beholden to hold to true to what happens in X, Y or Z novel-otherwise we'd have stuff like Typhon pact in game, or Janeway and Sela would be dead. So the inclusion of Rihannsu content was in no way mandatory and is just as appropriate to criticise as any other Cryptic plot development, which itself is fairly commonplace.
That would be of course, be assuming that it had actually been 'proven' to be wrong at some point. Sadly (for you) simply insisting something is a fallacy time and time again is not enough alone to prove that something is, in fact a fallacy. Proof by Assertion
Your 'proof' almost universally comes from two book series. Which as has been pointed out, are solidly in the 'soft canon' side of the spectrum, if not outright borderline 'fanon'.
Again, it was Warmaker who made the 'grand imperial palace' statement, and a simple forum search reveals that it is in fact, you who bring up his/her hyperbolic joke in every other thread.
If you are going to assert that the quote is somehow fabricated or twisted out of context, you are going to have to show how it has been.
To close, here's another Quote from Ms Duane 'taken out of context' that I think shows the pragmatic attitude she has in regards to her work's standing in Star Trek canon (her reaction to Star Trek Nemesis):
"...I've been working in both TV/film for long enough that I knew perfectly well where books fit into the mass-media pecking order (quite low down...), and what was likely to happen to non-canonical material when it came into contact with a production crew eager to prove that it wasn't beholden to anybody else's take on the Romulans..."
-Diane Duane
In her own words, books are low on the totem pole when it comes to Trek canon, and that them being contradicted by later trek stuff should be no surprise. Heck, she outright calls her stuff 'non-canon' in that quote.
Pretty sure you have in the past attempted to portray this "retcon" of the date of the founding of the Tal'Shiar as being from ENT, and not from an ENT novel. And no, it does not "retcon" any such thing, because the novel universe has never attempted to be consistent, and because in order for it to do so, the older material would have to be subjected to revisionism, which it has not. As such, you are still pulling the "All-or-Nothing" fallacy, rather blatantly, by asserting that we have to accept it all (and yet somehow reject older examples when new examples contradict the older examples) or we have to reject it all.
Really? Source your claim for this being Pocket Books' position.
And they do resemble the Romulans from the shows themselves, just not your beloved fascist police state from TNG. Your problem is that you are willing to totally dismiss and ignore the original presentation in TOS because it doesn't fit with your preferred take on Romulans. And again, the All-or-Nothing fallacy. The choice of Cryptic to use some soft canon material does not mean that they have to use ALL soft canon material. You are perfectly well aware of this, yet you persist in the fallacy. Hence, trolling.
I didn't say this was a fallacy. I said it was taken out of context, and it was. But you can bet your sweet ... that if I say something is a fallacy, it is indeed a fallacy.
On the contrary, my proof comes from The Original Series and several instances of the earlier cultural presentation in the later series, demonstrating that even in TNG, the fascist police state was not the only way to be Romulan. So all your "The Republic isn't like the Romulans from the shows" is just so much horsepoo, and again, you know this. THus, trolling.
Of course it was warmaker, but he was parroted by several of you TNG lovers multiple times, and the example I gave was only one example of many (hence the word "as"). Need I remind you of the "the Republic is a dictatorship because it has no Senate" nonsense that was spewed incessantly (and occasionally still gets brought up by your pals), even though others on the same side as you pointed out that you were wrong? And it is by no means I who bring it up. You were (seemingly) away for a while, but perhaps you should refresh your memory of things that occurred in your absence and actually read the threads in which it is brought up, to see who actually brought it up, and who merely responded to it.
Two sentences referring to fan reactions to her work being ignored being used as a support for your claim that the story is in an alternate universe? Yeah, I'm gonna say that the burden of proof is on you, not me.
Here's another fallacy for you: Equivocation. Try looking that one up, because you're pulling that one here. "Canon" is not an unambiguous term. Anyone who accepts soft canon and views her work as part of it is naturally going to look at the quote and see "non-canonical" there, and understand it properly as meaning "not part of hard canon."
Just give up already. Your side lost the forum war (which is now long since over), the whole load of dung about how Republic Romulans are somehow "not like Romulans from the shows" is pointless (and always was patently false to anyone with familiarity with the shows, including your beloved "Star Trek: The New Guys"), and Cryptic is never going to allow you to play the fascist bully boy you so ache to play. You don't like Romulans from TOS and the Rihannsu saga? Fine. You don't get to deny that the Republic Romulans are like like Romulans from the shows, because they are like Romulans from the shows. And frankly, so is Hhakhifv, or need I remind you of the incompetence and ham of Commander Toma-Lax the Perpetually Constipated?
Tho I gotta say I dont see as much disconnect as proto does from ToS Rom and TNG Rom, and imo she's not really got a lot of wiggle room when it comes to calling people out on ignoring things from the series... but hell this is fun
Enterprise era, not Enterprise show. It specifically takes place after the show. I'm not sure where the 'all or nothing' fallacy thing is coming from (besides your usual affection for accusing anything you don't agree with of being a fallacy)
Material for an IP is often retconned without actively going back and rewriting the preceding stories that contradicts the new material. Fairly typical, actually. Sometimes there will be an attempt to reconcile the two (like the ridgeless Klingons vs the ridged klingons in ENT) but this is far from given.
Again, the same interview with Diane Duane which you are supposedly so familiar with that you knew immediately that I was twisting and distorting her words.
My position is that Romulan society more appropriately resemble what we see on TNG more than on TOS because Romulans were fairly consistent with their portrayal outside of those two TOS episodes, making TOS Romulans the outlier.
My position is actually quite the opposite. I'd prefer that Cryptic ease off the soft canon stuff and focus more on how things were portrayed in the shows and movies. But you are persistent in your insistence that a few select books are the go-to guide for what Romulans are up to when not on screen. The ENT era novel is used as an example that even within the Trek literary world, this is not undisputed.
HA HA HA. You have this vulcan howling with tears of laughter, looks at what you have done now.
Yes. Two episodes. Not a whole lot of comparative screen time.
As for the rest, you use examples of a few sympathetic, friendly or honorable Romulans to extrapolate that the majority of all Romulans are all secretly like that. Which is a huge leap.
I see those same Romulans and come to the conclusion that TNG Romulans aren't as one dimensional as their detractors would like to strawman them as- that they can be a militaristic, traditionalist and xenophobic society and still have their own virtues.
If you read some threads, you might realize that most of the times that folks mock the tent city of New Romulus, it's because Cryptic still hasn't gotten around to making a New Romulus that makes sense in a narrative sense.
It shows that she doesn't think much about her books being contradicted or ignored by the shows and movies.
In other words, the fact that the movies and shows ignore her books as far as canon goes.
Uh...what? That's not equivocation. In the literal way Trek canon is defined- only the shows, movies, and animated series are 'canon'. everything else that got the rubber stamp of approval, like books and games is officially not canon. Fan-made stuff is then 'fanon'.
So when she calls it 'non-canon' she means 'soft canon', that shouldn't be too hard to grasp.
For another example, one could say "The events of the game Klingon Academy are not canon" or "The events of the game Klingon Academy are soft canon". It means the same thing, essentially.
Since you love dropping fallacies into every other sentence you use with no regard to if they are actually used or not, here's one for you-repetition fallacy The very existence of ongoing debate within this very thread shows that this matter is far from settled.
And as for the shows thing... Because Romulans acted a certain way in two episodes is not proof that the majority of Romulans were like that. The overwhelming majority of depictions point in another direction. Tomalak had a lot more depth to him than Hakeev ever had, and there examples of more sympathetic and fleshed out Romulan characters- but nice go at cherry picking and strawman-ing.