Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 44

Thread: Battlefield Earth bad science in a lousy movie

  1. #1
    Guest
    Just a Quick question to settle a dispute,
    If the atomosphere of the aliens homeworld ignited every time it was exposed to concentrated radiation how cuold it ever orbit close enough to a star to support life? I may be wrong but I thought the upper atmosphere of planets recieve a pretty good dose of radiation, from high energy UV to Gamma, and that only our ozone layer and the earths magnetic field kept us from recieving a daily lethal dose?



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    357
    On 2001-12-04 09:09, ronin wrote:
    Just a Quick question to settle a dispute,
    If the atomosphere of the aliens homeworld ignited every time it was exposed to concentrated radiation how cuold it ever orbit close enough to a star to support life? I may be wrong but I thought the upper atmosphere of planets recieve a pretty good dose of radiation, from high energy UV to Gamma, and that only our ozone layer and the earths magnetic field kept us from recieving a daily lethal dose?


    I have a question. What kind of radiation? Radiation goes from low energy (UV and radio) to high energy (gamma rays). Gamma rays are fairly uncommon. UV and visible light are very common. Also, is the term "concentrated" an important distiction? Concentrated light makes a laser. Other concentrated radiation may be the stuff that ignited the atmosphere.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,078
    Ok. . . since you brought it up.

    Was this the dumbest movie you've ever seen or what! I normally don't give much credence to movie critics, but they sure nailed this one on the head. Travolta must have bought "Directing For Dummies" from the local book store, then followed it to the letter. I mean come on! What was with that scene with the "hero" running the qauntlet in slow-mo while bullets shredded everthing around him, and he makes it untouched! The guy didn't even have a reason to do this, but hey, ya gotta have a slo-mo/hero running/bullets flying scene in a movie, right??? I've watched the darn thing twice now, just because I can't believe how God-awful it is!

    Anyways, sorry for not addressing your question. . .

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    76
    Couldn't sit through more than about 5 minutes of this turkey, so I'm not sure of exactly what you're referring to. I'd probably assume that the author of the script (or Hubbard, the lunatic that wrote the book) simply didn't know enough about radiation to realize how silly that premise would be. Or else the specific kind of radiation was omitted or something. Definately sounds fishy.

  5. #5
    While not a great movie, I thought it was entertaining. I can understand why people didn't like it, but I don't understand why everyone hated it so much. Sure, some of the science was bad, and the plot wasn't great, but it was still enjoyable to me, so I'll say that I liked it and see if anyone agrees.

  6. #6
    Guest
    On 2001-12-04 10:20, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    On 2001-12-04 09:09, ronin wrote:
    Just a Quick question to settle a dispute,
    If the atomosphere of the aliens homeworld ignited every time it was exposed to concentrated radiation how cuold it ever orbit close enough to a star to support life? I may be wrong but I thought the upper atmosphere of planets recieve a pretty good dose of radiation, from high energy UV to Gamma, and that only our ozone layer and the earths magnetic field kept us from recieving a daily lethal dose?


    I have a question. What kind of radiation? Radiation goes from low energy (UV and radio) to high energy (gamma rays). Gamma rays are fairly uncommon. UV and visible light are very common. Also, is the term "concentrated" an important distiction? Concentrated light makes a laser. Other concentrated radiation may be the stuff that ignited the atmosphere.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    315
    On 2001-12-04 10:20, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    On 2001-12-04 09:09, ronin wrote:
    Just a Quick question to settle a dispute,
    If the atomosphere of the aliens homeworld ignited every time it was exposed to concentrated radiation how cuold it ever orbit close enough to a star to support life? I may be wrong but I thought the upper atmosphere of planets recieve a pretty good dose of radiation, from high energy UV to Gamma, and that only our ozone layer and the earths magnetic field kept us from recieving a daily lethal dose?


    I have a question. What kind of radiation? Radiation goes from low energy (UV and radio) to high energy (gamma rays). Gamma rays are fairly uncommon. UV and visible light are very common. Also, is the term "concentrated" an important distiction? Concentrated light makes a laser. Other concentrated radiation may be the stuff that ignited the atmosphere.
    Having read the book too, which is better than the movie (but it's still mediocre, turgid Hubbard), I get the impression that it's stuff like alpha and beta particles that do it, not EM radiation.

    But keep in mind this is L.Ron we're talking about. The science in E.E. Smith's Lensman was better (better stories too).

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    819
    I'm with you MongotheGreat. I liked the movie. (Come on flamers, come at me! Show me what you got! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] )

    I would say it was a great movie as in greatly entertaining! I liked it. Yeah, I did, OK!

    I don't have any irrational disdain for that Hubbard guy either.

    Well, my two cents which will get me seriously flamed, charbroiled to perfection. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    23
    On 2001-12-06 00:11, Mr. X wrote:
    I'm with you MongotheGreat. I liked the movie. (Come on flamers, come at me! Show me what you got! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] )

    I would say it was a great movie as in greatly entertaining! I liked it. Yeah, I did, OK!

    I don't have any irrational disdain for that Hubbard guy either.

    Well, my two cents which will get me seriously flamed, charbroiled to perfection. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]
    Mr. X, Mongo, I'll stand with you.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    819
    Well, we will be three VERY SERIOUSLY toasted people, but what the hey, as long as we fry together, right? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    On 2001-12-06 08:58, Mr. X wrote:
    Well, we will be three VERY SERIOUSLY toasted people, but what the hey, as long as we fry together, right? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]
    Well, since I admitted enjoying reading Sitchin's books on another thread, I can hardly be the one to flame-on here! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gif[/img] And nobody flamed me then, so you're probably safe.

    Unless, of course, you start taking LRH seriously. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif[/img]

    The (there's no excusing some things) Curtmudgeon

    Oh boy! I'm now a Bad Apprentice! (I always was bad at taking direction.)

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Curtmudgeon on 2001-12-06 14:55 ]</font>

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,011
    On 2001-12-06 14:53, The Curtmudgeon wrote:
    Oh boy! I'm now a Bad Apprentice! (I always was bad at taking direction.)
    Congrats! Here's your fireworks.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    On 2001-12-06 15:00, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
    Congrats! Here's your fireworks.
    Beauty! Thanx! (Now I'm ashamed that I hadn't checked into the 'Comet LINEAR' thread over in the General Astronomy forum. Looks like I've been missing something, if they have any more pictures like that one.)

    The (awesome, from any view of the origin of the cosmos) Curtmudgeon

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    819
    Geez, how many of those The Something Something Curtmudgeon are you able to make up!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    8
    Stichin? Hubbard?

    All we need is a guy that likes Deepak Chopra and we have the trifecta!

    Shouldn't you guys be at http://www.ridiculousnonsense.com?? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    It's hard to have a beef with Hubbard, directly. Even he didn't believe his own nonsense.

    It's Travolta and Tom Cruise that give me the creeps.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    On 2001-12-06 17:39, Mr. X wrote:
    Geez, how many of those The Something Something Curtmudgeon are you able to make up!
    Sorry, X, but I've never counted. That .sig form started on a pre-Internet in-house network umpteen-fratz years ago. I admit that there have been times when I couldn't make up something fitting (or even one size off), but I'm usually good for something trivially amusing.

    The (sometimes I just punt) Curtmudgeon

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    On 2001-12-30 23:28, Wyz_sub10 wrote:
    Stichin? Hubbard?

    All we need is a guy that likes Deepak Chopra and we have the trifecta!
    Like him!? I can't even spell him! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif[/img]

    At least, both Sitchin and Hubbard have good Biblical names (no, wait, that was 'the witch of N. Dor', not 'L. Ron', wasn't it?). [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    It's hard to have a beef with Hubbard, directly. Even he didn't believe his own nonsense.

    It's Travolta and Tom Cruise that give me the creeps.
    If you've heard anything about the schmooze number the Co$ does on celebrities, it's not hard to believe that otherwise empty-headed camera-whores would fall for it. I'm more worried about the more-or-less "normal" people who are taken in by the non-celebrity side of it all, where things are not nearly so glamourous. These people can easily get their lives seriously screwed up, if not completely wasted, by the Co$.

    At least Sitchin doesn't set up a religion based on destroying peoples lives, so I can continue to enjoy his science-fantasy books (whether he calls them that or not!) without guilt. Really, he's a better writer than George Lucas.

    The (Obi-Wan EN.ki, where are you?) Curtmudgeon

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    8
    Hahaha! "Good Biblical names."

    See, I've always felt L.Ron had more of a Tolkeinesque ring to it (no pun intended...okay, maybe a little one)

    The problem I have with Scientology is that it outright exploitive. I know many would argue that all religion fits into this category, but Scientology has a real "Amway" feel to it. Combine that with superstar endorsement and you have a dangerous combination. (maybe Cruise has the $$$ to take all the "courses" but most people don't)

    In the end, though, it is still the responsibility of the individual, and if you want to put a copy of 'Dianetics' in an ark over the fireplace, well...

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,677
    What I really hate about Scientology (in addition to the fact that it's an outright scam) is that it's not even a religion. There's no god/gods, no worship (except L.Ron himself maybe), no services, faith, scripture, or anything that makes what is considered a real religion. It's really just a collection of pseudo-psychlogical babble mixed with some new-age/mystical imagery. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, I'm sure most scientologists would scoff at the ideas and beliefs of organized religions. The CO$ is basically exploiting the tax-free status and psycological impact that churchhood brings. The whole thing is just a hypocritical, mind-controlling, money-making farce and those in control seem capable of doing anything.

    Frankly these people scare me. There was a time in my life when I was attracted to that kind of thing and I would have been suceptable to their hooks. But now that I've read a little about them I get nervous just thinking about what might of been had I followed that path.

    Ok, enough of this. Back to Astronomy. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    13

    BA and Battlefield Earth (BA and BE)

    I rented "Battlefield Earth" after having read dozens of reviews on the net. It is not as bad as some said it was - how could it be? - but it is definitely in the Ed Wood / Ice Cube range of criminally insane bad directorship. Hard to pick out the BA when one is gagging at the "acting", the "humor", the "cinematography", etc. I would never criticize Scientology on the internet because I don't wish to die yet, but I do think "L. Ron" would be a good name for a phony corporation that steals people's energy and money and then goes bankrupt - but perhaps that's already been done by now...

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,405
    *hates reading a thread and then realizing it is two yeard old* -Colt

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    2,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Colt
    *hates reading a thread and then realizing it is two yeard old* -Colt
    True.dat!!

    Calculon you sure did some dredging to find this thread eh??? :wink:

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Calculon
    I do think "L. Ron" would be a good name for a phony corporation that steals people's energy and money and then goes bankrupt - but perhaps that's already been done by now...
    I was going to make some witty comment about stealing people's "energy" (what, you're going to put them in a reverse orgone accumulator box or something?) -- until I got the joke and realized you were making a sly reference to Enron. Dang you! Dang you all to heck!!

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,214
    If I remember the book correctly, it wasn't radiation that caused the explosion, it was contact with uranium.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,677

    Re: BA and Battlefield Earth (BA and BE)

    Quote Originally Posted by Calculon
    I would never criticize Scientology on the internet because I don't wish to die yet...
    I would, have, and will criticize $cientology, especially now that I know even more about it than I did in my last post a year ago. I recently finished reading the online book A Piece of Blue Sky, and there is very little I can find about the Co$ to even give it a polite response. It's a scam, pure and simple. Scientology is nothing more than third-rate science-fantasy masquarading as a religion, the organization practices the worst forms of mind and body control leaving people weak, ill-educated and destitute, and L.R.Hubbard himself was an arrogant pathological liar, paranoid, con-man, exploiter-of-others who often betrayed people close to him and used his organization as a personal tool for power and money games. He even had his own private intelligence agency once that spied on the U.S. government, infiltrating the IRS and other offices and stealing any documents relating to the Co$ they could get their hands on. There is nothing redeeming about them at all and the sooner the whole thing is shut down completely, the better.

    Operation Clambake (the anti-Scientology clearinghouse)

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    3,364
    [/Counselor Troi voice] I sense . . . anger. [/end Counselor Troi voice]

    C'mon David Hall don't hold back, tell us how you really feel about it. :wink:

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    1,405
    I've never heard of "Scientology". What is it, in short?

    Just about any religion that actively exploits its followers is bad in my book. -Colt

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    4,183
    Scientology (in short):

    A long time ago there were some sort of aliens inhabiting Earth. They had magical, mystical powers over space, time, and energy. Then some other aliens came and threw all the 'good' aliens into volcanoes and then used nuclear bombs to destroy them. The good aliens discorporated and became spirits. These spirits are called Thetans and they inhabit everyone. If you can cleanse your mind and awaken the Thetan, then you will have magical, mystical powers. In order to be cleansed, of course, you have to spend a lot of money getting 'audited.' this is a process where the scientolgists use a special machine to read your mental state and help you work through the blocks that are keeping you from realizing your full potential. Oh yeah, if you decide you don't want to be a Scientologist anymore or if you say anything that they disagree with, you are labeled a "disruptive Person' or something like that and they will not associate with you anymore. This includes family, friends, even spouses.

    And technically, I'm not sure that they want to be considered a religion (except for tax purposes).

  29. #29
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    6,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Colt
    Just about any religion that actively exploits its followers is bad in my book. -Colt
    Any organization that actively (or passively) exploits its followers/members/subjects is bad in my book.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,284
    Quote Originally Posted by The Supreme Canuck
    Quote Originally Posted by Colt
    Just about any religion that actively exploits its followers is bad in my book. -Colt
    Any organization that actively (or passively) exploits its followers/members/subjects is bad in my book.
    Me to. Well except G'ism. That is the best religion. Now problems there. And absolutely no exploiting of anyone except Jim Brewer. I hate him.

Similar Threads

  1. And I thought I was lousy at math...
    By Buttercup in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 2012-Jan-05, 01:26 PM
  2. Best Science In a Movie
    By sarongsong in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 152
    Last Post: 2008-Feb-19, 09:53 PM
  3. Favorite BAD science movie?
    By Romanus in forum Small Media at Large
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 2008-Feb-01, 11:45 PM
  4. Lousy technical writing at NASA/JPL
    By Hornblower in forum Space Exploration
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2007-Aug-05, 04:26 AM
  5. Battlefield 2 demo out in less than an hour
    By Tranquility in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 2005-Jun-12, 01:08 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •