VaBeachGuy

Nog wasn't really in too many episodes in the first 2 seasons. In fact looking at the list I can't think of any season 2 episodes he was in except the final episode "The Jem'Hadar". That would be a good one to add to a Nog-A-Thon.

The one with Jake teaching Nog might have been "Rules of Acquisition", I'd have to go back and watch to be sure though. Before season 3 though Nog's parts could be said to have been D-Plots or E-Plots. Heart Of Stone was broken into 2 parts Odo/Kira and Nog/Sisko. Either could have stood alone as a single episode plot.

I do agree though, to get a more complete view of Nog's journey you need to see a complete picture of where he came from to where he went to.

No Quark-a-thon is complete without "The Magnificent Ferengi", IMHO, the best Ferengi episode ever.  This episode had well-executed comedy and really got to the core of how Ferengi differed from other species (as if we didn't already know)--they're not soldiers, they're negotiators, and darn good ones at that.

I agree 100% I was just trying to think of my favorite part of the episode but there are so many classic moments.

Click for Spoiler:

Or

Click for Spoiler:

Now I have to watch that epiosde again lol

something about "nog-a-thon" just cracks me up hehe. But seriously, I think it was with those episodes that I started to take a strong interest in his character, because here was somebody that is doing something completely unexpected, something that most of us thought Jake Sisko would do for sure.

Not only doing it but doing it well, and we all thought he was the little criminal lol

Well, when we first saw Nog in "Emissary", he really was a criminal, stealing stuff from an abandoned store, but getting caught by Odo.

 

In order to do the character justice, I think a Nog-a-thon needs one or two more episodes from before "Heart of Stone", from when Nog was going to school and Jake was teaching him to read. If one were to see Nog for the first time in "Heart of Stone", we'd think it was odd to see a Ferengi trying to get into Starfleet, but we wouldn't truly understand what a journey this character was really taking. That's just my opinion, though. Nevertheless, the six you picked already are great choices.

Yeah, you could put one or two of the earlier Nog episodes in there, but I don't believe any episodes really focused in on Nog until Heart Of Stone. Other episodes have him in them but the stories weren't really about him. If someone were new to DS9 and didn't know the background of the character then they really should watch some of the earlier episodes like Emissary.

I think one of the biggest problems going into space would be the radiation.

 

http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/books/apollo/S2ch3.htm

Radiation is a big concern for sure. Especially during times of heavy solar flare activity. All of these issues would have to be answered before we could really have a long term presence in outerspace.

I don't know why but Mars has never captured my imagination like the moon has. Maybe it's because I am just barely old enough to remember the last lunar flights and I have memory of being in the car looking up at the moon while laying in the back seat and my father "giving me" the moon. Telling me it was all mine and I could do whatever I wanted to do with it.

Something a Mars landing won't be able to do that the moon did is give us moments like we had in 1969 when Neil Armstrong took his Small Step. We watched it live with only a few seconds delay. When (if) we go to Mars though the delay will be much longer. I forget what the time delay is but I believe it's something like an hour. That's how long it takes the signal to reach Earth and then it takes another hour or so for us to send a signal back. We'd be able to see it but by the time we see it the explorers would have been done with that aspect of the mission for quite some time. On the Moon we saw it as it happened.

Well, answer me this.  Without DVD's and CD's...  How would you take selected music along with you on a walk?  How would you watch a movie on the PC or take it to a friend's house?  What if you can't afford pay-TV?  Most people I know simply can't afford pay-TV.  Heck, we never could, that's why we have broadcast TV.

 

Anywho, I don't care if it's on DVD, CD, a computer chip, a hard drive, whatever.  As long as it's on some kind of "thing" that I can turn on and watch, I'm happy.  I just don't like the idea of paying for an expensive service that I'm almost never gonna use.  Know what I mean?

I don't know how this would all be provided tp people. If I knew all that I'd make the thing myself and be a rich man.

I'm only looking ahead at the trend I see in downloading. I could actually envision the downloading of TV shows and selected movies as completely free or with a nominal monthly fee. If it's free then commercials would be inserted into each show just as you see on regular TV now. We have commercials on Cable too so there could possibly be a small monthly fee. Nothing more then Cable TV costs I would suspect.

As far as taking it with you that's already being done with things like the Diamond Rio which is a small MP3 player that you download music into and use like a walkman (are walkmen still used? They may be dead like some of the other things mentioned and I don't know it yet.)

As far as people not being able to afford it goes, it may seem harsh or cold but if there is a fee charged for the service then those people will be left behind until they can afford it. The business aspect of it all will dictate it. What happens to the people without Cable TV now? Do they get free cable? No, they are left behind. What about the people that can't afford the internet, do they get free internet access? No, they are left behind. Besides, if you can afford to buy all these DVD's and CD's you are wanting to buy then you would be more then able to afford the small monthly fee it might cost for this kind of service.

I don't believe it would matter what they do or how they do it though. You have shown enough resistance to this idea ever since the very first time I brought it up that I don't believe you would ever agree with it at all. It's just like with my friends that refuse to get a computer, no matter what good reasons I may give them they will always come up with another excuse to not want one.

Is it a fear of change or technology? If it is I can tell you from experience, the changes are always for the good and have always improved life or the way we go about our daily business. The ones that aren't good or improve things fall by the wayside.

I know one thing, when or if this service is ever abaliable I will get it within the first weeks it is in my area. That might be 20 years from now but I know I will keep pace with technology as it marches on.

Cool, thanks VBG for the tribute and thanks for remembering.  Sometimes it makes me sad that we have these people (astronauts and their support teams) accomplishing these really amazing feats and they barely get a nod from the public.  Yet the public turns around and treats movie stars and athletes like heroes.

I have thought for years that we need a national monument on the Mall in Washington DC for the Apollo program. Something like a Life sized Lunar Module with an Astronaut out exploring about 10 feet away and another one climbing doen the ladder to join him.

The Halls of Fame are for accomplishments on the field of play in that particular sport, correct?

If that's the case then why allow behavior off the field affect who is inducted? If you allow outside actions dictate who gets in and who doesn't then how about if they disallow someone because he voted for Richard Nixon? Or disallow someone because he made an off color joke at a dinner party and offended a group of people?

The HOF is there to showcase what the player did while playing the game, not what he did in his personal life after he quit playing or became a coach. Isn't it?

Keep in mind I don't consider myself a baseball fan and if I did I would root for Baltimore. But imagine it this way (for people that know a little about Baseball):

Cal Ripkin goes to a party one night and gets really drink. He picks up a 19 or 20 year old girl (He's old enough to be her father) and cheats on his wife. While in the park a police officer shines a light into the window catching him and the girl in the act. Cal, wanting to protect his image gets out of the car and in a druken rage beats the police officer up. He then gets into his car and speeds away. After a high speed chase Cal gives himself up and the story hits all the papers and TV shows. He is convicetd of his crime of assulting the police officer and his many traffic violations, which includes DUI and he spends 2 years in jail before being freed. While he is in jail his wife divorces him and his children disown him for his actions that night.

Those actions would be horrendous, but should they keep Cal out of Cooperstown? Would those actions in any way affect the greatness he displayed on the baseball field for all those years?

If you answer no then why keep Pete Rose out? If you answer Yes then put yourself into the situation. Should you be punished by your employer for a personal matter?

Doesn't really matter to me how the music/movie/TV industry evolves, as they've done good so far.  All I ask is they have the "option" of owning the music/video on disc as well as being able to pay-for-view, or whatever it's called.

8 Track tapes did fine, cassettes did fine and LPs did fine too. For their time. People that were stuck on them though were reluctant to see something new come out. Like CD's. VCR tapes are the same way now that DVDs are here. I think you are young enough to have never experienced a sweeping change such as I am explaining and therefore you seem fearfull of it. I've seen a few in my time:

Broadcast TV to Cable

8-Track's demise because of cassettes

The LPs Demise because of DVD

Betamax to VHS

VHS to DVD

Soon Analog TV to HDTV.

Old Coke for New Coke... err... I guess that one didn't really work did it?

You keep repeating that you want the option to buy and I keep telling you that I believe that option will remain for quite some time to come. But eventually everyone will be forced to step into the future and advance, no matter how closed off to new ideas and methods they may be. Those people that remain closed off to the possibilities will be the ones that have their 6 year old grandkids trying to teach them how to watch TV and rolling their eyes every time grandpa or grandma says "I liked it better when..."

I have friends now that refuse to get a computer and insist that there is no use for something as friviolus as the internet and e-mail. Those people are behind the curve and are struggling to catch up with the realities of life in the 21st century. Eventually most aspects of life will route through the internet or some form similar to it.

Refuse to advance with society and you will find yourself left behind wondering what happened.

I have to say that if I were forced to pick a least favorite Trek movie, this one would be it. It was ok but it is my least favorite.

On July 20th 1969 Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to actually land on another 'world', open the hatch and step outside. Neil Armstrong was the first human to set foot on the moon, but Buzz Aldrin was actually the first person to speak from the moon. Those first words spoken while in contact with the moon were simple, un-historic and strictly meant for Neil Armstrong's use and for NASA as well. They were "Contact Light", which was to announce to Neil and NASA that the lunar module had touched the surface and signal Armstrong to shut the engine down.

Today marks the 34th anniversary of that day when the Lunar Module came to rest on the Sea Of Tranquility and 4 hours later Neil and Buzz made their historic walk in the sun.

On July 20th 1969 Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to actually land on another 'world', open the hatch and step outside. Neil Armstrong was the first human to set foot on the moon, but Buzz Aldrin was actually the first person to speak from the moon. Those first words spoken while in contact with the moon were simple, un-historic and strictly meant for Neil Armstrong's use and for NASA as well. They were "Contact Light", which was to announce to Neil and NASA that the lunar module had touched the surface and signal Armstrong to shut the engine down.

Today marks the 34th anniversary of that day when the Lunar Module came to rest on the Sea Of Tranquility and 4 hours later Neil and Buzz made their historic walk in the sun.

To discuss Apollo 11 click Here.

Well, I'm never going to get cable TV as I just don't watch all that much TV.  I watch movies and my 3 favorite shows...  and that's about it.  I rarely watch anything else.  As far as news and such goes?  I read.

 

Anywho, VBG, answer me this.  What happens to those who don't want to shell out $50 a month for TV or can't afford it?  This is exactly why I prefer DVD's to pay-tv.

What happens to people that don't pay for Cable TV now? They have to get by with broadcast TV alone. Eventually broadcast TV won't be much more then PBS anyway.

And if you don't plan on getting any kind of subscription TV anyway none of this would affect you one way or the other for quite a long time after the system was adopted. Physical DVD's and music CD's will be around in one form or another for quite some time to come.

Eventually though I predict that you will have to advance your willingness to adopt other ways of obtaining the shows you enjoy. I know that everyone will have to upgrade their TV's in the near future to HDTV compatible. It's just the nature of technology to advance and improve. Think of all those people that had 8 track tapes in the 70's but now can't play them or can't but new 8 tracks of their favorite music anymore.

Space Junk is a huge problem, one that I'm not sure they know how to solve.

If we ever do go back to the moon there are already a few rules for people going there, and there's people trying to get the Apollo 11 site declared "Off Limits" to preserve it's historical aspect.

http://www.space.com/news/spacehistory/sav...nts_000418.html

I've always liked Supertramp

Here's a still from the DVD:

There is absolutly no doubt in my mind that man walked on the moon.I just laugh at people that say we didn't. And I know for sure that Alan Shepard is the first man to hit a golf ball on the moon. I watched every moon mission as it was televised and was captivated by the whole expeirence.

Yes we have walked on the moon,my only question now is when will we go back?

I am not interested in a flight back to the moon. It was an acomplishment but it was done already. I would like to see them go further. Maybe venture to other planets.

I can understand that, Mars would be the next step. The question is though what is the best way to get to Mars? To launch from Earth orbit or to launch from Lunar orbit?

Another reason to go back to the moon would be to establish a long term base of operations. Why have a long term base of operations? Well, if we plan on going to Mars the people that go there won't be going for just 1 day or even 1 week. The trip out there (with current technology) will take 6 months to a year and then another 6 months to a year back. So missions to Mars will likely stay for weeks or even months at a time. Living on a planet with no breathable atmosphere is something that needs to be perfected and the best place to do that (other then in a special lab here on Earth) would be someplace close enough to home just in case something bad happens but far enough away to have the realities of the situation in place.

If we can establish a base on the moon and perfect the realities of living in that kind of hostile environment then we will be ready to do it on Mars.

That's one argument for going back to the moon anyway. Then there's the argument about mining. There were many different minerals found on the moon that would be valuable on Earth. The problem is transporting them back to Earth in an inexpensive way to make it worth the effort.

Another argument for going back to the moon is to put a scientific lab on the back side of the moon. Something like Hubbell, I'm sure everyone has seen the amazing photos that Hubbell has taken. That's from Earth Orbit, where there is still interference from Earth's atmosphere and the lights from earth and the sun. Put a Hubbell on the back side of the moon in total darkness and the photos it would take would be 1,000 times more amazing then Hubbell.

I myself would personally want to go just out of sheer history, not to be "historical" but rather to visit the first 6 landing sites. To photograph them and study what 30 plus years has done to the things left behind. What happened to the things left behind after so many years of going from 250 degrees to -250 degrees every lunar day?

To me Mars is interesting but the moon fascinates me, at least 6 spots on the moon do anyway.

Of the things left behind in the 1960's and 1970's were there any bacteria that may have survived? For instance, before the LM would lift off from the moon it had to be as light as possible. So the backpacks were tossed out, the boots and trash like half eaten food. The "waste extraction" packs that were inside their space suits were tossed out. All these things were left on the moon. What has 30+ years done to them?

Anyway, think of it this way. If Columbus had come to the "New World" and stayed for 3 days then left and no one ever returned where would we be now? I think it's disgraceful that we don't already have a colony of sorts on the moon.

j/k, i didn't think you guys would take that seriously. actually, i'm surprised you wasted your time with that kind of remark

There was nothing in the posting to indicate you were joking so as far as anyone could tell you were serious.

As for taking the time to respond, that's why we're all here. To respond and discuss on all of the various topics. To spark discussion and even argue (in a friendly way) from time to time.

My TV schedule:

Monday - 9:00 PM - EVERWOOD

Wednesday - 8:00 PM - ENTERPRISE

Saturday - 8:00 PM - STARGATE SG-1

 

I don't watch any other TV shows, so I think it'd be awesome if you could pay per a TV show instead of per a network or service, know what I mean?  Anywho, I'd still like to have the DVD's as well as I watch movies & TV episodes on the big screen TV, the PC, and at a friend's house.

 

Anywho, I love VBG's idea, but this is how I would alter it:

1. You can order specific shows, thus having access to all the episodes as you order them.  You could also order movies!

2. You would also have the option of placing orders for costumised movies and season sets on DVD.

Do you have Cable TV in your home? If so you are paying for the entire service not just the few shows you watch.

Besides, the reality is that the majority of people watch more then a show or two. So it may not be a good thing for 1000 people but it would be a good thing for millions of others, and in business if you have 1000 people that don't watch much TV at all vs. a million that watch a good bit of TV then the 1000 don't matter in the least. TPTB will concern themselves completely with the Million and could care less if the 1000 live or die.

As for ordering the DVDs I really believe that at some point down the road they won't be needed. If you have 100% access 100% of the time to 100% of the content of a DVD what's the point of having the disc?

'Capricorn One'

 

Has anyone seen this film ?

 

Plot Summary for

Capricorn One (1978) 

 

 

 

Classic conspiracy tale about the first manned mission to Mars. All appears to be going well until the astronauts are pulled off the ship just before launch by shadowy government types and whisked off to a film studio in the desert. It transpires that the space vehicle has a major defect which NASA just daren't admit. At the studio, over a course of months, the astronauts are forced to act out the journey and the landing to trick the world into believing they have made the trip. Meanwhile, a Journalist (played by Gould) is getting suspicious and every clue he uncovers seems to result in an attempt on his life! The astronauts are just about to splashdown when a further twist to the tale occurs, leaving them with no choice but to try and escape...

 

Summary written by MT

 

Charles Brubaker is the astronaut leading NASA's first manned mission to Mars. Seconds before the launch, the entire team is pulled from the capsule and the rocket leaves earth unmanned much to Brubaker's anger. The head of the programme explains that the life support system was faulty and that NASA can't afford the publicity of a scratched mission. The plan is to fake the Mars landing and keep the astronauts at a remote base until the mission is over, but then investigative journalist Robert Caulfield starts to suspect something.

I remember the movie but how is it related to the reality of landing men on the moon from 1969 to 1972?

This movie was a Hollywood Sci-Fi movie, completely ficitional. To try to equate this movie with reality is just not reasonable. A movie is a movie, real life is real life.

Watch the videos of the moon landings that I linked earlier in this thread, the proof they give is undisputable. The physical way things react in the video is clear from the dirt to the flags to the way the men themselves bounce into the air.

I know that some people think all Trek talk should be "Serious Minded" but I like to stray from the serious at times. So here's one of those times.

Is it just me or did anyone else think Terry Farrell looked amazingly beautiful in her interview on the Season 2 Disc 7 features? I guess we have to wait till Disc 7 of season 7 to see Nicole De Boer :lol:

I don't trust the ratings or critics. I haven't believed a critic since they said Charriots of Fire was the greatest thing since sliced bread. (It was about the most boring movie I have ever sat through.)

Star Trek will be fine, and as far as this series compared to the othere goes I believe Enterprise is stronger in content then the others. It has had a better first 2 years then any of the series with the exception of TOS.

I was surprised also, he has a good voice. I had seen him on Quantum Leap many times and I recall a couple episodes where he sang but I didn't remember his voice.

The same goes the other way as well; I was just thinking about something similar yesterday.  I wish I could watch current episodes at 6:00 so I could go to bed at 9:00 - now I have to tape everthing; ENT doesn't come on here until 11:00 p.m. (though I usually stay up for this)

That's exactly why they need a viewer-programable system. This is a 24 hour world now and what was "Prime Time" in 1968 is nothing even close to "Prime Time" now. My personal "prime time" is after midnight, sounds like yours would be around 6pm. Two different lives, two different schedules. Why not have 2 different ways to watch TV? (without the hassel of the VCR).

Betting on baseball games doesn't afect his greatness as a ball player. If his uniform is good enough to be there and any other artifacts they may have like balls or bats then why not allow the person to be there as well?

O.J. is still in the NFL hall of fame so why not let Pete in the Baseball HOF?

What's your favorite feature on the board?

I myself like just about, if not everything as far as the features go but I think my favorite has to be the Spoiler feature.

It is so handy for so many different things, I don't know how we'd get along without it.