213374U

That is precisely the point. The cat needs to be observed to be once again under our concept of reality (that is, dead or alive). However, since the cat is in the box, it's safe to assume that it's still under our reality. That is a logical reasoning, which may or may not be suitable for this situation. But anyway, that would only prove that logic isn't necessarily a constant of reality, which makes even more room for a God to exist outside logic, but within reality. My bad. No. You are assuming that the logic of your reasoning is universally true. While the logic itself isn't flawed, there is no guarantee that it's enough to explain reality itself, or that reality ultimately responds to logic. Which takes us to the concept of reality once again. While our concept of reality might be flawed since it appears it doesn't necessarily obey to logic, it's just the concept that isn't ultimate, not reality itself.

Heh. It all comes down to semantics, I guess. If you need to justify a military action as revenge, then it was probably not necessary to begin with. And an act that could be considered a vengeful atrocity but was totally necessary to achieve victory is not revenge, it's strategy. The bottom line is, a military commander shouldn't be more concerned with revenge than he should be with politics.

Poetic license.

Not really. There was this little neat experiment in which a cat was put inside a closed box. There was some deadly trap or poison that would kill the cat depending only on a certain isotope's possible disintegration. According to theory, at certain point, the isotope would have disintegrated and it wouldn't. Thus, the cat would be simultaneously alive and dead in that scenario, the only deciding factor would be opening the box. That is an instance of something seemingly impossible and obviously illogical happening within our very reality. If it's possible for a particle, why should it be impossible for God? And, at any rate, what makes you think that God would exist inside reality? Our not understanding reality doesn't mean it's not "true". The key word here being "perceive". If you mean measure, or calculate, then by all means. But if you mean "exist in", it's pretty arrogant to think that what we know so far is set in stone and true.

A paradox which is only such if you admit that God is subject to worldy proportions, limitations, notions, etc. But you could have a God that could fulfill both premises simultaneously. Why? How? Simple, he is God. If such mundane judgements could be used to solve metaphysical questions, we would be Masters of the Universe long ago.

In war, revenge is irrelevant.

Uh? Can you prove that a God can't exist? I think a lot of people would be very interested in that. On second thought, don't bother. If philosophers throughout History have failed, you will understand I don't have much faith in your chances to succeed at that task.

No, there isn't.

I know that. But the answer given by the databank or Lucas himself, while being law, would still be inconsistent with reality. If God himself came down and said, "I created the Universe, and I'm telling you, all that stuff about gravity is nothing but BS", he would be technically right, since he created the freaking thing and if he doesn't know, no one does. But it would be inconsistent with reality. That's all I say. Is the Leviathan a Republic ship? Yes. Is the Leviathan a rakatan design? Yes. Both are true, and both exclude each other. In the real world such a thing would not be possible, because the real world's laws are not established by writers. That's why the scientific method and fiction are incompatible. You are right on something, though. Discussing this is a waste of time, and hence, I'm quitting now.

The opposite being true as well. The Sith could have modified the Leviathan ships to work without being Force-powered if they ever were. That works for the weird computer terminals too. But again, this is speculation. Hence, it's worthless as proof.

Actually no. As I said, the databank for example state that it is a republic ship. You can't possibly debate that (it would mean that you're saying that the databank *doesn't* say it's a republic ship, a statement that is easy to check). The game itself have some hints that indicate that it's a republic ship (dialogue, mostly) and some that indicate that it's a Star Forge ship (the design). Both are disputable in various ways, thus we fall back on the only indisputable source, which in this case is the databank which states that it is a republic ship. Hence, the burden of proof lies on whoever claims that it's a Star Forge ship, and unless that person manages to discredit any hints towards a republic ship and any alternative explanation to the "proof" that he or she presents that it is a Star Forge ship, then the only reliable source will remain the databank, which in turn means that we still assume that it is, in fact, a republic ship. It may not be the actual truth, but it is the accepted truth. You may disagree with it (as you have) and try to find other explanations (as you have), but until you've managed to do what I said above, it will remain the accepted truth, not a mere theory. And that, is the scientific method. Feel free to look it up. Well, in fact what you are doing is nothing like the scientific method, but whatever. The scientific method first stablishes a theory. Then it compares the theory to the observed phenomenon, and if the theory can explain the phenomenon in a satisfactory manner, the theory becomes law. In this case, the theory contradicts the observed. Not to mention that trying to apply the scientific method to something ruled only by the writer's whim is nothing but a waste of time. Let's see. Whoever wrote the stuff in the databank has probably not played the game. All the info on the databank is made up of resumes, design notes, and perhaps, the game script. Not only that, the databank is aimed at people who hasn't actually played the game, because if you had, you wouldn't be reading it in the first place. I am not debating that originally they meant to make the Leviathan a Republic warship. In fact, Carth's dialogues hint that possibility. But there are too many ways to interpret Carth's dialogues to take them as proof. And for whatever reasons, the Leviathan turned out to be a rakatan vessel. It might just have been something as simple as laziness, or time constraints. It's obvious that whoever wrote Carth's dialogues wasn't responsible for CGI cutscenes. Now, all the proof I have seen supporting that the Leviathan is a Republic vessel is nothing but a lot of wild speculation, and interpretation of conversations. On the other hand, it is clearly stated that Malak's fleet is largely composed of alien vessels. In the cutscenes you see only one kind of ship. It is only logical to assume that those vessels are the alien ships they are making reference to. That is consistent too with the fact that the Republic fleet doesn't have a single one of those "Leviathan" ships. In fact, it is consistent with everything, except Carth's dialogues, and that only if you interpret them in a certain way.

You could open a new thread and post the URL. That'd be one of the most useful threads we've seen around here in a long time.

There's a little problem with that. The Jedi weren't responsible for what happened to the exile. They just cast him/her out, but that's about it. I agree.

The underlined statement proves that the bulk of the Sith fleet was made up of alien vessels. That is consistent with what you can see in the cutscenes. The Leviathan is one of those ships, therefore the Leviathan was a rakatan vessel. End of story. You have nothing to back this up, and the arguments you seem to think to be true aren't worth jack outside your mind. That proves nothing. We already know that the Leviathan was used in the attack on Telos. How does that prove it was a Republic ship? You have an odd notion of what constitutes "proof".

European. Spanish, particularly.

Well, you are applying the reasoning based on what you can do with a staff. However, you can't slice your opponent in two or stab him with a staff, now can you?

You wish. The western civilization is already showing the signs of its decay. The corruption of the young generations being the most serious. You think the romans were decadent? Look around... But they didn't have the Internet or nuclear weapons. Everything was much slower back then. And I'm not sure the US can survive the fall of Europe (if it were to happen before the fall of the US), the same way Europe would go to hell if the US were to collapse. The hegemony of the western culture has lasted for a long time already and it won't be long before history repeats itself. I wouldn't bet the world itself will last so much.

What? KotOR III: Force Choke? Uh, I don't know dude... what if I want to go LS?

And you would be damn right.

:'(

How 'bout KotOR III: The End of the Stupid Polls?

Funny you would say that. I'm pretty sure that the guy who voiced Uthar returned for K2 as Master Kavar. I've tried to find some info on him, but he is well hidden and has managed to avoid me so far. Do I know you? ROFL

Of course they were joking. And I don't think anyone was particularly disturbed by it. However, if I, in all my maleness, were to make a similar comment, I wouldn't be regarded very highly by the female public (and a large part of the male public, too), and would probably draw a hefty amount of flak. You know this is true, and that's all I was commenting on. No need to get on the defensive.

I'm thinking it was some sort of command ship during the battle of Malachor V, just like the Executor was the imperial command vessel during the battle of Endor. Massive, powerful, unique of its kind.

Cool! Does that mean I'll soon be elected president of the US? "