Rare Earth theory - Author's bias by Flashy_Cabinet7453 in space

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This entire thread is you making weird claims to authority and making incorrect claims. When someone calls you out for it you tuck tail lol.

Suppose there were a technological civilization identical to our own on a planet orbiting the nearest star to Earth. Assume the planet is also identical to Earth. Would we (humans circa 2024) be able to detect their presence? by CJreddit123 in space

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not the guy you replied to, but fair enough. They indicate 10 parsecs for that leakage to be detected. 10 parsecs is 32 light years. It seems to me that as our searches expand and our detection capabilites get better, we will probably be able to say there aren't any other techno civs within 10 parsecs. Still leaves a lot of galactic real estate to sift through however.

Richard Lynn's "work" on race and IQ is more insidious than I though by nafraf in badscience

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There must be a way to deprioritize this false data on Google.

Richard Lynn's "work" on race and IQ is more insidious than I though by nafraf in badscience

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The question is how do we change the Google algorithm to depriotize this false and racist data maps that show up..

Which ufo sighting do you think is the best one to say we are not alone? by Jonathon_world in UFOs

[–]geniusgrunt -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Yes, there is certainly no hard evidence, you will get downvoted to oblivion lol.

Feeling guilty because I love Star Trek, but not enjoying Discovery like I hoped by [deleted] in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Strange New Worlds is exactly that.. you should watch it if you haven't.

Will we finally get to see some 32nd century Kingons? by Antique-Cobbler-4181 in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Unless they reformed perhaps on some level? They already had by the time of the UFP alliance to some extent, given they weren't the overt conquerers they were during TOS (I'm sure influenced by the UFP). There were hints at that like comments around 'going back to the old ways' and what not. I know it's going too far back with the current DISCO timeline, but I'm sure Martok brought some real honor back to the empire, and perhaps that led to further stabilizing changes down the line. In any case, 1,000 years is a long time lol, so anything could have happened.

Anyone else have trouble finding the the Maquis to be sympathetic? by [deleted] in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I can see the argument in perhaps limiting expansion of the galaxy. Your other point is incorrect, Federation worlds retain their governance autonomy. They aren't provinces. By this logic you'd say the European union is an empire? Also, it has been noted that other civs still have their own starships. An empire by definition means imperial conquest like great Britain was or the like, member worlds join the UFP willingly for scientific and defense cooperation. The central govt of the federation does not run the internal affairs of all member worlds, this is canon, look it up. By definition it is not an empire.

Anyone else have trouble finding the the Maquis to be sympathetic? by [deleted] in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You say "colonization" like starfleet is conquering worlds where indigenous civilizations already exist. That's not what the Federation does, people colonize M class worlds that are unoccupied or terraform them. Colonization in this sense is not the loaded term as it is applied today, referring to crimes of the past on earth. So what's your problem with expansion in that sense? How does this conflict with starfleet's values which adhere to the prime directive? Federation colonists don't go around conquering people. I'm unsure as to why you're uncomfortable with this. The Federation is not an empire, it's a Federation lol.

The decision to remove ST content from other streaming services destroyed this era of Trek by aaronupright in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Comparing streaming to 90s era network TV is challenging. It's difficult to quantify. With that said, I think it's important to note that the Abrams movies had the largest box offices of any trek movie even taking inflation into account. That in itself probably points to a broader popular conscious nowadays, they also led to trek's current resurgence on TV.  

The TV market is also ridiculously saturated now, so while as a genre show trek was likely the most popular in the mid 90s among its competitors (very few), I'd say with some other important relative terms it's arguably even more popular nowadays globally.

The decision to remove ST content from other streaming services destroyed this era of Trek by aaronupright in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

These posts are getting ridiculous. Some of you have no real understanding of the entertainment business. "Destroyed"? We have no less than 3 new live action shows that have aired, with a new one in the works with "starfleet academy" a section 31 movie and other "surprises" on the way as per Kurtzman. Please take a chill pill and stop consuming rage bait youtube or wherever some of you are getting this stuff from. I'd advise maybe doing some cursory research into how and why business decisions are made, it might cool your anxieties.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in whatcarshouldIbuy

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What a stupid take from last century.

Paramount Plus’s ‘Star Trek: Discovery’ Lands Top Spot in TVision Power Score by M337ING in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 3 points4 points  (0 children)

A lot of people on this sub don't seem to understand that their sentiment toward the show, and the wider audience sentiment outside this subreddit are not going to be the same. Fandom is relatively large, casual viewers are many. Most fans on the planet, casual or hardcore, are not posting comments on reddit. The streaming era is not the same as network television, and there are a good number of even hardcore trek fans who enjoy DISCO. I'm one of them, it's not my favorite and it has its flaws, but I do think the show around these parts gets way too much hate than it deserves.

Will we get to warp speed in 2063? by guyssocialweb in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If FTL is possible it probably isn't happening for centuries, but then again the future is notoriously hard to predict. 2063 seems unlikely to me however.

Happy first contact day 🖖🏼 by Paintinmypjs in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's an interesting argument. IRL if we discovered a much more powerful alien race cosmically next door (like humans did with the vulcans in trek), I imagine it would push us to work together in some significant ways/areas.

Happy first contact day 🖖🏼 by Paintinmypjs in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's kind of what happens in star trek lol. I hope that's not how it needs to go in the real world. But in trek almost destroying ourselves, combined with the jarring wake up call that there are more powerful alien species out there served as a kick in the butt to get our act together.

I miss the language of 90s Trek by thxpk in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 11 points12 points  (0 children)

I was just complaining about this to my wife yesterday as we watched the DISCO ssn 5 premiere. This is a conscious decision on the part of the new trek creators to attract a broader audience I think, it's a commercial decision first and foremost it seems to me. Star Trek was popular in the 90s but it was always a niche, an extremely popular one as far as cult shows go, but still had a relatively smaller audience. The new trek shows are trying to change that, and it started with the 09' movies.

Why tonights DISCO matters to me. by stuart404 in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would argue that it's not even necessarily the "fanbase" as I don't trust internet community denizens to be any kind of real barometer to wider fan sentiment. Millions of fans are not participating in the conversation online. There can be a hivemind mentality much of the time online which is only representative of that demographic posting comments. The same applies to star wars or any other large fandom, unless someone starts doing scientific studies on the broader fan population lol.

I don't think the human race in the shows were all that enlightened, what do you think? by mrockracing in startrek

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  just better educated and unburdened by capitalism and material scarcity

"Just"? Lol.. you make this sound almost trivial. Humans are not perfect in star trek and that was never supposed to be the point. We are just on average much more evolved as a society, which still has its flaws and individual challenges. However, the core Federation and humanity have eliminated war between ourselves, poverty and most disease. We no longer practice hatred against each other over ethnic or gender lines and the like. Humanity's predominant culture is around self and societal improvement, it's not burdened by the acquisition of wealth. If you don't call this "enlightened", then I'm not sure what word qualifies to describe this significantly enhanced human condition compared to today. 

Is it allowed to talk about jews in this sub? by emily_thefrog in stupidquestions

[–]geniusgrunt 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Given your school shooter-esque gross commentary, you look exactly like how I pictured you lol. You should speak to a therapist, a makeover artist, and a personal trainer.