| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: STAR TREK THE WRATH OF KHAN: was What Did |
From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: Obveeus{at}aol.com
Subject: Re: STAR TREK THE WRATH OF KHAN: was What Did You Watch?
2013-06-01 (Saturday)
"anim8rFSK" wrote:
> In article , "Obveeus"
> wrote:
>> Notice that, despite the individual pads, they transported larger objects
>> as
>> needed for the plot as well. Heck, in the whale film they transported a
>> cubic area of water and whales with no trouble at all...and with one of
>> those cheap foreign transporters If they can do that, then why would it
>> be
>> more difficult to have transported out sections of mining tunnel?
>
> Dirt should be easier than whales, since you don't care what it looks
> like on the receiving end.
One would think. After all, you wouldn't want the whale turning out like
Kirk's ex-wife in STAR TREK: TMP.
> And even if there's some reason not to use
> transporters, "It took the Starfleet Corps of Engineers ten months in
> space suits to tunnel out all this" is just silly.
Yep.
--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux
* Origin: A noiseless patient Spider (1:2320/105.97)* Origin: telnet & http://cco.ath.cx - Dial-Up: 502-875-8938 (1:2320/105.1) SEEN-BY: 3/0 633/267 712/0 101 620 848 @PATH: 2320/105 0/0 261/38 712/848 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.