Active Users:371 Time:10/04/2025 07:27:05 PM
It would help if you'd leave my quotes by the arguments, but whatever. Aemon Send a noteboard - 22/12/2009 10:36:42 AM
Bombing from orbit doesn't require that much in the way of weaponry. Recall the movies "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon" and their "chunk of rock from space being exponentially worse than nukes" scenarios. That is the principle behind kinetic energy weapons. You just toss a piece of sufficiently massive matter out the door and if you aim right, you get the same effect as a nuclear weapon. This is not something I made up - it is a common idea in science fiction, called "kinetic energy weapons." And hostages? Really? You think the big profit-hungry corporation is going to let THAT stop them? A KEW strike wouldn't leave enough bits for forensics to contest their assertion that the natives whacked the hostages anyway. And anyway, I am pretty sure it means good guys. The camera showed the fat black guy and the scrawny nerd when it said that, and it showed the corporate boss guy being led off in the line of those being kicked out. So, not hostages.


I understand the principle of kinetic energy weapons. If one doesn't come prepared for that though, it's not something that's easy to do. What do they push out of the shuttle? Their stove? Not big enough. Where do they push it out? It's quite likely that a transport ship doesn't have a giant bomb-bay door that can be opened in space. You can't just throw your massive object out the window, y'know. And as far as tracking goes, you need to be pretty precise if you're going to drop an object big enough to wipe out the tree of souls, but small enough not to destroy all the unobtanium they're looking to harvest. You're not talking a nuke from space, you're talking a relatively precise strike. Perhaps it does, but I see no reason for a transport ship to have capabilities of that sort.

As to the hostages, keep in mind we're talking human beings here! Not savages. I know some pretty cut-throat businessmen, but none who would kill a few dozen of their friends and co-workers just to have another shot at a deal. Furthermore, the people of this expedition spent a few months (years?) trying to interface with the natives. They had relatively good intentions. I really can't imagine that people like that would mow down hostages (again, friends and co-workers they've lived with for a long time) as easily as you. That said, I do agree that the "select individuals" were likely the good guys. I was just saying that the statement didn't preclude the possibility of hostages. Wasn't a key argument of mine, though.

One few final notes

- The "ridiculously exposed rotors" are less exposed than helicopter rotors which have been used in combat against foes far more technically advanced than the Pandorans for over fifty years.


Helicopters don't fly at low speeds in no visibility conditions amongst floating mountains, and are rarely beset by flying things that are more maneuverable than themselves. When has a helicopter on earth EVER faced the possibility of having a rock dropped onto its rotors from above? Never? The Arabs we're fighting don't zoom around on jetpacks. Helicopters are the most maneuverable things in the sky. You don't bring them down by dropping crap on them. The pandorans, however, COULD HAVE DONE THAT in their unique situation. They flew right over the choppers many, many times. The entire invasion force was basically stationary for most of the battle.

- Your counter-argument against humans being the underdogs seems to be that humans are just so badass that severe numerical, environmental and physiological handicaps are insufficient to overcome their awesome toughness!


What? No, man. My counter argument against them being the underdogs was that Na'avi never fought humans. They fought machines powered by humans. If the colonel fights Tsu-tey man-to-man, he loses. If a mech fights Tsu-tey, well then. Tsu-tey probably loses. And like I said, this scales up. Banshee fights gunship, it probably loses (and did more times than not). Etc, etc.

Maybe you were talking about the environment comments though? The same principle holds. I don't think the humans should win in the Pandoran environment because they BEAT EARTH'S ENVIRONMENT WITH SHEER TOUGHNESS RAWR. I think they should win in the Pandora environment because they have the tools necessary to do so. Tools developed subjugating Earth's environment.

- Your arguments about the capabilities of the corporation to come back again are a little strange. You talk about the prohibitive expense of sending the expedition as if it could be reasonably expected to bankrupt the company, but at the same time seem to think that space travel is so common as to enable companies to blithely send out mining expeditions on other planets without government approval and open assistance! Any company with the wealth to invest in interplanetary mining ventures, genetically engineer avatars & patronize useless scientists on the off-chance they might come up with something interesting, is going to have significant investments in government. If they really are operating on a shoestring, with all of these prohinitively expensive investments being underfinanced gambles hoping for a big return to pay for them, then there must be other, more wealthy and powerful companies capable of learning from the mistakes and going in full bore. If the company is the most wealthy and dominant company in the world, this loss could not have undone them - they have the ability to make so much more money from the technology they demonstrate that this one expedition cannot possibly be their sole or primary hope of income.


I'm sorry if I wasn't clear; let me paint the scenario I was envisioning as likely, or at least probable enough not to cause undue skepticism.

Let's assume that, much like today, there are a lot of corporations. Only a few of them are particularly powerful, though. The space age is just beginning, and new planets are being discovered, either by long range scans of some sort, maybe some autonomous probes, etc. One of these companies gets the idea to send an expedition to one of these newly discovered planets, perhaps as a result of information discovered by one of their probes, whatever. At this point, maybe the government regulates them somehow. Whatever they do, though, I'm assuming that there aren't yet any laws regarding alien life, because they're not yet aware of it. Space is a new frontier, and the government has some safety regs, but nothing that really precludes exploration.

Anyway, off goes the expedition ship. If it fails, is it unreasonable to think that the company would go bankrupt? Or at least not have the funds to try again? I don't think so. Businesses put all their eggs into one basket all the time. Big risk, big reward. In this case, the risk wins. The ship limps home, and people on earth are informed of the happenings. The government(s) at last learns of what they were doing with the natives (maybe that there are natives in the first place?), and forbids further involvement until official negotiations can be put in place, blah blah blah.

What if that doesn't happen though? What if the other companies hear about what happened, and decide to make a go of it, like you were saying? This is, obviously, possible. However, when faced with a united population of warring natives and an extremely hostile environment, I think they would send their expedition to another world. I think it's likely that Pandora was the first visited by an expedition, but probably not the only world discovered. I was never trying to say that there are dozens of mining ships zooming all over the place, just that there are probably other worlds out there to which an expedition could realistically be sent. Pandora might still be doable, but instead they try that nice desert planet one system over.

Anyway, you see what I'm saying? I don't disagree that it's possible that another company would pick up the slack and wipe out the Pandorans for a quick game-over. I just think there are some very plausible scenarios that lead to a Pandoran "win." The first company to try them doesn't have the resources to do so again. The government changes from "ok, you can go explore, but don't do anything stupid" to "holy crap let's not start interstellar war," and forbids involvement. Other companies decide to look for easier meat in what is presumably a vast new frontier that has just opened up.

I just don't think it's as cut and dry as you make it, that's all. The wounded company can't come flying back for revenge, and copy-cats are turned away by politics and aversion to a demonstrated risk of catastrophe. Is that really so far fetched?

- If they can engineer Pandoran life-forms so as to create avatars capable of interacting biologically with the natural ones, how long do you think it would take them to whip up so bioweapons capable of taking care of all those naked savages without risking a single infantryman?


I'm not sure which of my arguments this responds to, specifically. However, I'd say "not long." That's not the point, though. The point isn't whether they could be beaten, if the humans got a do-over. The fact is that the first try failed, in a relatively plausible manner. And it's very possible that such results could dissuade the powers on earth from trying again. Which is a cut and dry, straight up WIN for the Pandorans.
Reply to message
"Avatar" discussion thread - 17/12/2009 08:10:04 AM 2381 Views
Innovative world-building sci-fi, dull cliched story - 17/12/2009 01:13:47 PM 1066 Views
Agreed for the most part... - 17/12/2009 11:05:27 PM 1047 Views
Doesn't that last paragraph describe Star Wars? *NM* - 18/12/2009 03:33:58 AM 558 Views
*snorts* *NM* - 18/12/2009 09:03:05 AM 439 Views
Re: Doesn't that last paragraph describe Star Wars? - 18/12/2009 09:49:23 AM 982 Views
Star Wars had many things. Good characters was not one of them. *NM* - 18/12/2009 09:06:18 PM 451 Views
Re: Star Wars had many things. Good characters was not one of them. - 19/12/2009 02:57:43 AM 948 Views
Avatar is basically Return of the Jedi, at least the part on Endor. But less militarily plausible - 19/12/2009 02:22:35 AM 1178 Views
Watch the movie again. - 19/12/2009 03:08:05 AM 1177 Views
It's a watered-down Dune. *NM* - 21/12/2009 08:41:39 AM 655 Views
What struck me the most about this movie... - 22/12/2009 01:25:00 AM 996 Views
Predictable with a tired & preachy plot. (spoilers) Also, the ending was completely ludicrous. - 19/12/2009 03:02:21 AM 1446 Views
You need help *NM* - 19/12/2009 07:33:52 AM 683 Views
A rebuttal! For the points I disagree with, anyway. - 20/12/2009 05:07:59 AM 1015 Views
Re: A rebuttal! For the points I disagree with, anyway. - 21/12/2009 08:48:55 PM 1100 Views
It would help if you'd leave my quotes by the arguments, but whatever. - 22/12/2009 10:36:42 AM 998 Views
Heh... - 29/12/2009 11:01:41 PM 943 Views
wow, you really do need help - 21/12/2009 07:23:12 AM 1205 Views
If the bad guy has all the stones and still loses, how heroic were the heroes? - 21/12/2009 08:53:00 PM 1035 Views
Wow...you're serious? Really?? - 22/12/2009 04:56:20 PM 952 Views
lol - 22/12/2009 04:59:47 PM 914 Views
That's uncalled for IMO - 25/12/2009 09:04:01 PM 1128 Views
I am pretty sure she refered to the fact that he sheered for the bad guys and wished the Na'vi ill. - 25/12/2009 09:19:32 PM 976 Views
He didn't cheer for them - 26/12/2009 01:05:40 AM 950 Views
...an attitude I always found a bit worrisome, too *NM* - 26/12/2009 11:48:40 AM 557 Views
I tend to agree - 21/12/2009 03:23:54 PM 925 Views
I thought the same things, but... - 25/12/2009 08:29:09 PM 941 Views
A fun time. Predictable, but not in a bad way. Minor Spoilers. - 19/12/2009 03:05:19 AM 938 Views
you said Fern Gully ^_^ - 19/12/2009 09:01:58 PM 961 Views
Spectacular - 19/12/2009 02:54:53 PM 1019 Views
A wonder of a movie experience *minor spoilers* - 19/12/2009 08:47:06 PM 1057 Views
Very good and fun, but not world-shattering. - 19/12/2009 11:19:26 PM 1245 Views
Has anyone seen this in 3D and not enjoyed it?? - 20/12/2009 06:11:52 PM 1060 Views
Cannoli, presumably. *NM* - 20/12/2009 10:41:48 PM 658 Views
Sure make fun of the visually impaired, asshole. - 21/12/2009 08:57:33 PM 1016 Views
Yeah, that's totally what I was doing. - 21/12/2009 11:59:26 PM 1066 Views
Do you buy them from antique shops? *NM* - 22/12/2009 01:10:12 AM 591 Views
Does this include the new 3D? - 22/12/2009 01:17:07 AM 1142 Views
same here - 22/12/2009 02:59:32 PM 855 Views
I'm tempted to make a joke about the depth of your posts. *NM* - 22/12/2009 04:31:04 AM 463 Views
is that what we are calling tunnel vision these days? *NM* - 24/12/2009 07:04:08 PM 571 Views
Dammit! So much better than mine. *NM* - 26/12/2009 05:19:19 AM 518 Views
Saw it with my family. - 20/12/2009 09:10:56 PM 898 Views
Sci-fi Pocahontas - 21/12/2009 01:12:02 AM 1034 Views
My friend and I spent the whole movie - 07/01/2010 12:50:56 AM 874 Views
Oh so you're the kind of movie-goer in the seat behind me... - 07/01/2010 11:20:56 AM 846 Views
No way! - 07/01/2010 03:48:48 PM 773 Views
that you mock at all is incredibly disrespectful - 07/01/2010 05:31:55 PM 962 Views
You're overreacting. - 07/01/2010 06:20:06 PM 910 Views
You said you do it quietly - 07/01/2010 08:18:07 PM 933 Views
Fair enough, fair enough. *NM* - 07/01/2010 08:57:23 PM 584 Views
Except maybe the purist who really needs to be kept in a total sensory deprivation chamber. *NM* - 08/01/2010 10:51:58 PM 483 Views
Nothing's more satisfying that seeing and hearing the crowd around you react like you do - 09/01/2010 01:36:36 PM 843 Views
*NM* - 09/01/2010 03:59:28 PM 529 Views
You should never watch a movie with me. - 10/01/2010 01:23:30 AM 914 Views
There's a gentlebot to see you, says his name is Tom Servo. - 08/01/2010 03:59:34 AM 936 Views
3D IMAX is worth the extra money... - 21/12/2009 08:40:57 AM 994 Views
The only thing I am upset about - 21/12/2009 09:38:17 AM 1173 Views
Oh yeah, that puppy's been selling out like crazy. - 22/12/2009 12:01:18 AM 847 Views
Visually stunning. - 24/12/2009 02:12:42 PM 856 Views
As usual, Hollywood shoves an ideology down peoples' throats. *NM* - 26/12/2009 04:30:20 AM 433 Views
Once they've paid their ten bucks to get in. *NM* - 27/12/2009 04:31:59 AM 520 Views
A good ideology assault doesn't come cheap! *NM* - 28/12/2009 10:03:08 AM 524 Views
$14 evening show with 3D glasses. *NM* - 29/12/2009 07:15:03 AM 630 Views
one point i haven't seen discussed yet.... - 26/12/2009 05:43:05 AM 1124 Views
It stinks!! *NM* - 26/12/2009 05:51:30 AM 655 Views
So, a silly thing I found distracting... - 29/12/2009 07:26:02 AM 1006 Views
that caught my eye too - 29/12/2009 07:36:46 AM 903 Views
A silly thing I found distracting was that the aliens were humanoid. *NM* - 29/12/2009 09:48:46 AM 602 Views
Umm you would rather watch non-humanoid aliens? Yeah thats fun *NM* - 29/12/2009 03:29:26 PM 496 Views
*sigh* - 30/12/2009 11:09:16 AM 866 Views
Yes. Yes. - 01/01/2010 08:19:58 AM 923 Views
I have missed you so much on this site. *NM* - 02/01/2010 04:13:56 AM 468 Views
well. it's not necessarily erroneous either. - 30/12/2009 06:28:57 AM 851 Views
See my response to Dark Knight above. *NM* - 30/12/2009 11:11:27 AM 513 Views
ah okay. carry on then *NM* - 30/12/2009 04:44:12 PM 589 Views
Yes. - 03/01/2010 05:08:17 PM 977 Views
I believe she was speaking about their tails. - 07/01/2010 07:37:46 AM 850 Views
If I remember it was the "USB Plug" in their hair. *NM* - 08/01/2010 08:29:38 AM 614 Views
Yep - 08/01/2010 09:33:08 AM 941 Views
*facepalm* yah, that's what i was talking about - 08/01/2010 05:31:33 PM 900 Views
I figured - 08/01/2010 05:50:22 PM 910 Views
Yes, the plot is simple, predictable and ideological - 29/12/2009 07:41:36 AM 881 Views
It was the best movie I've seen in ages. I'm seriously thinking of going to see it again. *NM* - 29/12/2009 12:20:11 PM 665 Views
We definitely will. - 29/12/2009 03:30:07 PM 920 Views
Going again tomorrow. *NM* - 02/01/2010 05:14:53 PM 669 Views
Project 880: The Avatar that might have been - 31/12/2009 10:30:21 AM 1198 Views
That is very interesting. - 31/12/2009 01:25:19 PM 863 Views
yeah - 02/01/2010 01:56:15 PM 977 Views
i think that would be interesting to see - 31/12/2009 04:29:19 PM 983 Views
Avatar is/was gonna make a pile of money anyways. - 31/12/2009 08:30:34 PM 1147 Views
Re: I hated the 3-D effect. It was horrible. - 10/01/2010 09:39:25 AM 917 Views
Stephen Colbert on Avatar - 15/01/2010 03:18:29 AM 753 Views
I liked it even better the 2nd time. *Spoilers* - 16/01/2010 12:23:50 AM 886 Views
Yeah, I really liked the music. *NM* - 16/01/2010 06:04:55 AM 629 Views
It just took the double at the Golden Globes. - 18/01/2010 04:04:08 AM 982 Views
Ok, wow, I didn't expect that to happen. *NM* - 18/01/2010 08:59:51 AM 442 Views
I can't say I'm surprised it did. Not that I agree with it. *NM* - 18/01/2010 07:37:08 PM 395 Views
Okay I bit the bullet and went to see it - 18/01/2010 11:56:28 PM 873 Views
I always forget that I saw movies in 3D. - 19/01/2010 01:11:05 AM 967 Views

Reply to Message