The 'Get a life' one?
I'd heard of it. ;-) _____ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Marc Martin Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 1:37 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers That would be season 1, episode 22. :-) On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 13:32 -0700, "Deborah Rorabaugh" <[hidden email] <mailto:momkat%40dandello.net> > wrote: > Which season? *grin* [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by andelendir
I couldn’t find it on a American website, but here is as close to the whole scene I could find ;)
http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_Life Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:32 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Which season? *grin* _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:38 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Perhaps we should all step back, and watch the opening SNL (That's Saturday Night Live for you non US Citizens:) of the infamous William Shatner episode :) Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:20 PM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Assuming - just for argument's sake - that it DID take 5-7 years to complete SHADO HQ because the then current building techniques and extreme security requirements would have made it impossible to do it faster - How long did it take to build Moonbase? Quarter million mile supply runs, working in low gravity and hard vacuum. Even with the upper sections being prefab modules, the interceptors are in under surface hangers which would have required excavation by whatever means - in low gravity and in hard vacuum. Did it take one year? Five years? Seven years? Never? - Since we didn't have the tech to do it in 1970-80 and I'm real sure we still don't, thirty years later. And when did SHADO acquire artificial gravity? Because it's pretty obvious from just watching that the occupied areas of Moonbase function under 1G rather than 1/6G. (Or does that simply constitute an annoying and ignorable complication since nothing was ever said about it on screen although both Miall and Bentley felt obliged to address it in their writings?) So if SHADO HQ needs 5-7 years to complete due to limitations of real world technology, then logically those same limitations mean that Moonbase shouldn't exist at all. Nor should Sky-diver as it cannot work as shown, based on real world engineering. (Ask the local techies here, they have tried valiantly for years). :-) The lunar module and module transport *may* be within the realm of possibility of 1970-80's tech. Barely. And Utronics? That's FTL. We don't have FTL. We don't even have a decent theory that would even allow it to happen, much less work as shown. So if we accept that Moonbase *does* exist complete with artificial gravity, Sky-diver works as shown, and SHADO has Utronics, why is it such a leap that SHADO HQ took about 12 months to build? And we're just talking about the main shell here with the control room and Straker's office being finished enough to use. Work on finishing the other areas (medical center, armory, security cells, crew lounge) would have taken longer obviously, but the control room area would be occupy-able while that was going on. (People do live in houses that are torn up for remodeling or being added on to, so I think Straker et al could manage.) Deb http://www.shadolibrary.org <http://www.shadolibrary.org/> (The SHADO Library & Archives - founded 1997) _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of An Delendir Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 5:07 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Hi Grant, > *cough* > Kelvedon Hatch > *cough* ;-) Yes, I'm aware of the various large nuclear shelters and bunkers. One which I was pointed at and which actually strikes me being closest to SHADO HQ would be the Static War Headquarters Castlegate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_War_Headquarters_Castlegate It has 14.000 square meters, fully equipped with state of art electronics and HQ infrastructure, roughly the size SHADO HQ would have been, a little smaller even, going by the amount of soil removed. It took 9 years to construct, from 1983 to 1992. Cheers An http://edstraker.net (The Herald) http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by Denise Felt
Did someone say something about awarding medals? No doubt, like the Victoria Cross, made from fallen cannon! :)
Grant Sent from my iPod On 16 Jun 2011, at 19:08, "Neesierie" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > --- In [hidden email], "Marc Martin" <marc@...> wrote: > > I don't see why you are so concerned with the feasibility of the > > SHADO HQ construction timeline while completely ignoring the feasibility > > of the Moonbase, Skydiver, etc. timeline... :-) > > Marc, > You are so right! Fans are free to make whatever they want from the facts onscreen, and no one minds at all. It's when it's treated as though their way is the only possible way that it enters the realm of fantasy. And it really is funny how they can wave off any pesky details that don't fit their 'timeline' and yet still maintain with a straight face that their way is the correct one. > Yours, > Denise > > ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by Bruce Sherman
Netflix - It'll be on Netflix.
_____ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 1:46 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers I couldn't find it on a American website, but here is as close to the whole scene I could find ;) http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_L ife Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:32 PM To: [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Which season? *grin* _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:38 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Perhaps we should all step back, and watch the opening SNL (That's Saturday Night Live for you non US Citizens:) of the infamous William Shatner episode :) Bruce [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by Bruce Sherman
If I remember correctly, William Shatner is at a Star Trek Convention. He is asked questions like.. how come in season 3 episode 10, how comes this happens?
how many horses does he have, he finds out one of his horses gave birth and such..... Finally has enough and gives this famous speech. George Sulu Takai, in his book, takes William Shatner to task for this. Saying how can he say this ?? Thinking he was putting down people who enjoyed watching Star Trek. I saw the humor in the sketch. I also enjoy watching UFO, but its also just a TV show. Mistakes in ‘canon’ might have been made. Come one people... its just a TV show :) I see some fellow group members getting a little overworked about how long things could have happened in real time on the show. Not worth getting upset about. Bruce From: Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:46 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers I couldn’t find it on a American website, but here is as close to the whole scene I could find ;) http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_Life Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:32 PM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Which season? *grin* _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:38 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Perhaps we should all step back, and watch the opening SNL (That's Saturday Night Live for you non US Citizens:) of the infamous William Shatner episode :) Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:20 PM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Assuming - just for argument's sake - that it DID take 5-7 years to complete SHADO HQ because the then current building techniques and extreme security requirements would have made it impossible to do it faster - How long did it take to build Moonbase? Quarter million mile supply runs, working in low gravity and hard vacuum. Even with the upper sections being prefab modules, the interceptors are in under surface hangers which would have required excavation by whatever means - in low gravity and in hard vacuum. Did it take one year? Five years? Seven years? Never? - Since we didn't have the tech to do it in 1970-80 and I'm real sure we still don't, thirty years later. And when did SHADO acquire artificial gravity? Because it's pretty obvious from just watching that the occupied areas of Moonbase function under 1G rather than 1/6G. (Or does that simply constitute an annoying and ignorable complication since nothing was ever said about it on screen although both Miall and Bentley felt obliged to address it in their writings?) So if SHADO HQ needs 5-7 years to complete due to limitations of real world technology, then logically those same limitations mean that Moonbase shouldn't exist at all. Nor should Sky-diver as it cannot work as shown, based on real world engineering. (Ask the local techies here, they have tried valiantly for years). :-) The lunar module and module transport *may* be within the realm of possibility of 1970-80's tech. Barely. And Utronics? That's FTL. We don't have FTL. We don't even have a decent theory that would even allow it to happen, much less work as shown. So if we accept that Moonbase *does* exist complete with artificial gravity, Sky-diver works as shown, and SHADO has Utronics, why is it such a leap that SHADO HQ took about 12 months to build? And we're just talking about the main shell here with the control room and Straker's office being finished enough to use. Work on finishing the other areas (medical center, armory, security cells, crew lounge) would have taken longer obviously, but the control room area would be occupy-able while that was going on. (People do live in houses that are torn up for remodeling or being added on to, so I think Straker et al could manage.) Deb http://www.shadolibrary.org <http://www.shadolibrary.org/> (The SHADO Library & Archives - founded 1997) _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of An Delendir Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 5:07 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Hi Grant, > *cough* > Kelvedon Hatch > *cough* ;-) Yes, I'm aware of the various large nuclear shelters and bunkers. One which I was pointed at and which actually strikes me being closest to SHADO HQ would be the Static War Headquarters Castlegate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_War_Headquarters_Castlegate It has 14.000 square meters, fully equipped with state of art electronics and HQ infrastructure, roughly the size SHADO HQ would have been, a little smaller even, going by the amount of soil removed. It took 9 years to construct, from 1983 to 1992. Cheers An http://edstraker.net (The Herald) http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
But it increased traffic for a day or so. *VBG*
_____ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 2:07 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers If I remember correctly, William Shatner is at a Star Trek Convention. He is asked questions like.. how come in season 3 episode 10, how comes this happens? how many horses does he have, he finds out one of his horses gave birth and such..... Finally has enough and gives this famous speech. George Sulu Takai, in his book, takes William Shatner to task for this. Saying how can he say this ?? Thinking he was putting down people who enjoyed watching Star Trek. I saw the humor in the sketch. I also enjoy watching UFO, but its also just a TV show. Mistakes in 'canon' might have been made. Come one people... its just a TV show :) I see some fellow group members getting a little overworked about how long things could have happened in real time on the show. Not worth getting upset about. Bruce From: Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:46 PM To: [hidden email] <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers I couldn't find it on a American website, but here is as close to the whole scene I could find ;) http://www.myvideo.de/watch/127096/Star_Trek_TOS_William_Shatner_SNL_Get_A_L ife Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:32 PM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Which season? *grin* _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bruce Sherman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 11:38 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Perhaps we should all step back, and watch the opening SNL (That's Saturday Night Live for you non US Citizens:) of the infamous William Shatner episode :) Bruce From: Deborah Rorabaugh Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:20 PM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com <mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com> Subject: RE: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Assuming - just for argument's sake - that it DID take 5-7 years to complete SHADO HQ because the then current building techniques and extreme security requirements would have made it impossible to do it faster - How long did it take to build Moonbase? Quarter million mile supply runs, working in low gravity and hard vacuum. Even with the upper sections being prefab modules, the interceptors are in under surface hangers which would have required excavation by whatever means - in low gravity and in hard vacuum. Did it take one year? Five years? Seven years? Never? - Since we didn't have the tech to do it in 1970-80 and I'm real sure we still don't, thirty years later. And when did SHADO acquire artificial gravity? Because it's pretty obvious from just watching that the occupied areas of Moonbase function under 1G rather than 1/6G. (Or does that simply constitute an annoying and ignorable complication since nothing was ever said about it on screen although both Miall and Bentley felt obliged to address it in their writings?) So if SHADO HQ needs 5-7 years to complete due to limitations of real world technology, then logically those same limitations mean that Moonbase shouldn't exist at all. Nor should Sky-diver as it cannot work as shown, based on real world engineering. (Ask the local techies here, they have tried valiantly for years). :-) The lunar module and module transport *may* be within the realm of possibility of 1970-80's tech. Barely. And Utronics? That's FTL. We don't have FTL. We don't even have a decent theory that would even allow it to happen, much less work as shown. So if we accept that Moonbase *does* exist complete with artificial gravity, Sky-diver works as shown, and SHADO has Utronics, why is it such a leap that SHADO HQ took about 12 months to build? And we're just talking about the main shell here with the control room and Straker's office being finished enough to use. Work on finishing the other areas (medical center, armory, security cells, crew lounge) would have taken longer obviously, but the control room area would be occupy-able while that was going on. (People do live in houses that are torn up for remodeling or being added on to, so I think Straker et al could manage.) Deb http://www.shadolibrary.org <http://www.shadolibrary.org/> (The SHADO Library & Archives - founded 1997) _____ From: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of An Delendir Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 5:07 AM To: mailto:SHADO%40yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers Hi Grant, > *cough* > Kelvedon Hatch > *cough* ;-) Yes, I'm aware of the various large nuclear shelters and bunkers. One which I was pointed at and which actually strikes me being closest to SHADO HQ would be the Static War Headquarters Castlegate: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Static_War_Headquarters_Castlegate It has 14.000 square meters, fully equipped with state of art electronics and HQ infrastructure, roughly the size SHADO HQ would have been, a little smaller even, going by the amount of soil removed. It took 9 years to construct, from 1983 to 1992. Cheers An http://edstraker.net (The Herald) http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by andelendir
--- In [hidden email], "Deborah Rorabaugh" <momkat@...> wrote:
> > The 'Get a life' one? > > I'd heard of it. ;-) Deb and Bruce, You know, I always felt for him in saying that. He had fans demanding specs for the USS Enterprise as if he knew it inside and out! He's an actor, people! Not a spaceship captain! (eye roll) Yeah, some fans take their favorite shows just a bit beyond the bounds of TV and try to make it their reality. I guess it works for some. Yours, Denise
Straker, somehow it's always about you.
|
In reply to this post by Marc Martin
> Uh, well, condescendingly telling people that they are *wrong* when they are not
> might possibly be interpreted as impolite. :-) I agree Marc, 100%! And this is the real problem. For me, I'm perfectly happy to discuss and compare the different ideas that have been put forth, and some valid points have been made on both sides of the issue. But there is NOT enough canonical evidence for either view, for one of them to be labeled as wrong. We can disagree, but I'd rather not see anyone told that they are wrong. Right or wrong does not play into it, these are matters of opinion. :) Deb you raised a valid point about the onscreen clues. If the Korean Campaign ribbon shown on Ed's uniform is taken as canon then he was in the age group of the original Mercury astronauts and that would make him about 50 in 1980. It also solves the issue of his being a full bird at 40. Maybe it was Gerry's intention to have both Straker and Collins as Gemmni (1964-66) astronauts, and they flew together. Just a random thought. |
Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she
was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) _____ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Matt Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:12 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers > Uh, well, condescendingly telling people that they are *wrong* when they are not > might possibly be interpreted as impolite. :-) I agree Marc, 100%! And this is the real problem. For me, I'm perfectly happy to discuss and compare the different ideas that have been put forth, and some valid points have been made on both sides of the issue. But there is NOT enough canonical evidence for either view, for one of them to be labeled as wrong. We can disagree, but I'd rather not see anyone told that they are wrong. Right or wrong does not play into it, these are matters of opinion. :) Deb you raised a valid point about the onscreen clues. If the Korean Campaign ribbon shown on Ed's uniform is taken as canon then he was in the age group of the original Mercury astronauts and that would make him about 50 in 1980. It also solves the issue of his being a full bird at 40. Maybe it was Gerry's intention to have both Straker and Collins as Gemmni (1964-66) astronauts, and they flew together. Just a random thought. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by andelendir
--- In [hidden email], "Deborah Rorabaugh" <momkat@...> wrote:
> > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) She'd have been fired if she worked on a tv show today! The fans these days can get downright irate with continuity errors! Especially on sci-fi or police procedurals. I'll bet Gerry Anderson is so glad that UFO was done 40+ years ago! *grin* Yours, Denise
Straker, somehow it's always about you.
|
In reply to this post by andelendir
It does take things in a new direction, the idea of an older Commader changes the playing field quite a bit. The Straker/Foster dynamic would take on a whole new meaning. Having known people that looked much younger than they were, I wouldn't have an issue with Straker being 50 in 1980. :)
--- In [hidden email], "Deborah Rorabaugh" <momkat@...> wrote: > > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) > > > |
In reply to this post by Denise Felt
You got that right Denise. It's amazing that even with all it's faults, UFO still was so far ahead of it's time. I wonder if Gerry would have paid closer attention to detail if he realized what he had, and at the time I don't think he knew.
Matt :) > She'd have been fired if she worked on a tv show today! The fans these days can get downright irate with continuity errors! Especially on sci-fi or police procedurals. I'll bet Gerry Anderson is so glad that UFO was done 40+ years ago! *grin* > Yours, > Denise > |
In reply to this post by Denise Felt
yes, we all know hat he did!!!
straker that is, with the too curious, just ask ''oh you're so wrong!'' foster about how shado deals with security risks. jim --- On Thu, 6/16/11, Neesierie <[hidden email]> wrote: From: Neesierie <[hidden email]> Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers To: [hidden email] Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 10:19 AM Jim, You're really scary how easily you come up with these plausible cover stories. WHAT part of the army were you in? *grin* Seriously though, you make a very valid point and it's one I always assumed from the show. They got the base built in the timeframe the episode suggests (between one and two years) and didn't worry about it. I'm sure any overly suspicious persons were dealt with summarily. It's SHADO's way, after all. Yours, Denise --- In [hidden email], "." <aquaboi@...> wrote: > > as far as this being a forum, you have every right to be cannon anal....... > and to express it here. im sorry about my alien joke, i was just trying to be funny. > i do see your points, and since there is no explanation for all the dirt or cement talked about on the screen, we have to guess. what would be most reasonable? > trucking out the dirt and then trucking in the cement i suppose. or elevating the entire lot with the spreading of dirt. it does seem that in one or two shows there are fields and ridges for the field boundries that run for acres......is that what happened to the dirt? > also i would like to point out that layering of cement walls is a practice to avoid shock or earthquake damage, so prefab 1 foot thick walls could be rebar'd through and layered into the full thickness mentioned, as a protective measure. > and think about all the military bases and bunkers that have been built all over the world, and also in cities, airports, portsmouth virginia for one. i have never read one suspicious letter about those, until the ufo craze in the early 1990's about covert, secret bases and such. having seen a lot of construction go up in california over the years i can only say that people stop caring and get used to it. i know that england would be different about that, but once told no, and to refrain from complaining, only the old and fringe population would pay attention enough to find a valid complaint, and then that complaint would be dismissed. > so, i still think that a very large underground base , something like hoover dam being poured and dug out, could be done with the proper security, and without too much hassle on the part of the citizens protesting. stops and starts due to finances, or enviromental concerns that had to be resolved, things put in and then having to be torn out due to faulty granite or something could all be execellent cover stories. > jim > > --- On Thu, 6/16/11, An Delendir <andelendir@...> wrote: > > > From: An Delendir <andelendir@...> > Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers > To: [hidden email] > Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 4:38 AM > > >  > > > > Hi Yuchtar, >  > > Okay, seriously, this is becoming ridiculous.  First, off, it was NOT > > hidden from public view. They were building A FILM STUDIO as cover - > > only what was going on underground was supposed to be secret and the > > construction above ground hid that. >  > They were even building an apartment and office block adjacent to the studios as a cover, not just the studios! >  > As Straker himself says and as anyone with some basic knowledge about construction sites, building and excavations can tell you, you cannot keep removing several million cubic feet on a sheer endless fleet of trucks coming out of a very small excavation site without being noticed. Without any logical explanation for this enormous amount of soil you have the typical rabbit in the hat effect, with people wondering what the hell is taking place there. >  > And yes, the underground HQ was supposed to be hidden. Thus - no one should notice it is being excavated (see above). And - the excavation must take place with the topside unchanged to the public eye. The static calculations for this alone are a nightmare. The relevant installation of equipment as well. None of that can be done in a matter of months, especially not when entirely hidden from the public. >  > > Second, who says they didn't use any pre-fab materials?? You? >  > It is prefab modules or units, not materials. >  > I suggest you inform yourself here: >  > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefab#Current_uses > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefab#Disadvantages > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prefabricated_building >  > And any architect worth his salt could also tell you why there are no prefab units for an underground building constructed to measure and spec and in secrecy. >  > Which mass-producing factory would you have build 10+ feet thick, leadlined concrete walls? How would you transport these, especially in secrecy? How get them down a covered construction site? They would definitely not have fitted through the studio gate and quite likely strained any lifting gear available for the site. >  > > Who are you? Why don't you just admit you're > > not the be all, end all of UFO canon and give it a rest, chica? >  > At this point I take exception to your mail and consider both your tone, the content and the address as being quite offensive.  > > "Chica" is a demeaning term to refer to a (Latino) girl as per enough dictionaries. Trying to curb my participation in this discussion, rsp. telling me what I may or may not talk about, is offensive, outside your competence and rather blatantly the contrary of what a discussion list is supposed to be. >  > There is a general Netiquette for discussion lists of any sort, which says pretty much this: >  > "No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is marked by an attack > on an opponent's character/person rather than by an answer to the > contentions made in the debate." >  > So far I tend to believe that a discussion about canon is on topic for the SHADO-list. So far *I* have not once attacked anyone on a personal level and been perfectly polite as well. I certainly nowhere attacked anyone's character or person. I used no derogatory terms to address anyone, and I certainly also told no one to shut up already, as you did while addressing me. >  > As to me and canon - I am anal about canon. I readily confess to that. People will have to live with it. I'm not going to change in that respect. >  > There are modelmakers on this list, not too few, and artists, both of whom replicate UFO machinery, from Interceptors to SHADO Jeeps. The attention to the most minute detail these artists give their creations, getting it "just so" right, so that they are as close as they can be to what the original models on the UFO set were, is nothing else but canon as well. Anyone who is intent on recreating or understanding something in such detail and to such an extent should by all means grasp why canon can be important, and how people can become anal enough about it, to discuss and argue at times over something someone else may think non-essential. >  > I do not think that any one participating in this discussion, myself included, twisted anyone else's arm to contribute, or even read. I have no problem accepting it intrigues only those also in some way interested in canon. >  > That said, it is for those just as anal and fascinated about verifiable, logical detail that Lightcudder and I have sat down for hours daily and started off that wiki. We're not getting paid for this, we don't even expect getting a thumbs up, and even though quite a few have started reading and consuming it, few opted to help so far. You did not do so either, I might note. >  > If I am outspoken about canon facts, then this is because I am prepared to discuss their veracity. With those wanting to or willing to discuss. >  > > Y, a little fed up with this argument when there is nothing to argue > > over .... >  > If you are fed up with this argument, you can do the correct thing and hit the delete button or simply not read this thread and refrain from participating in it. Nothing stops you from being civilized in that respect. >  > Cheers, >  > An >  > http://edstraker.net (The Herald) > http://ufopedia.edstraker.com (UFOpedia) > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by Denise Felt
Yes, it is amazing how some fans get<g>. They will argue over the equallant of
how many angels can dance on the head of a pin about a minor point on a show of a fictional nature and swear its all cannon. Okay enough harping from me before Marc puts me back under really strict restrictions again. However one point about An Delendir's comments on digging the undergound base and trucking out mega tons of earth. If they did it and wanted to keep it secret it would have to be done rather like the way prisoners dig tunnels and the earth the dig is carried out by prisoners and scattered over the prison yard a pocket full at a time. So it would not be going out in big trucks. Some would be added a bit at a time to the studio lot to bulid it up, and more to out door sets to make well ground. How they would get the rest out well being as its a fictional situation they'd find a way! James K. ________________________________ From: Neesierie <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Sent: Thu, June 16, 2011 6:37:13 PM Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers --- In [hidden email], "Deborah Rorabaugh" <momkat@...> wrote: > > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) She'd have been fired if she worked on a tv show today! The fans these days can get downright irate with continuity errors! Especially on sci-fi or police procedurals. I'll bet Gerry Anderson is so glad that UFO was done 40+ years ago! *grin* Yours, Denise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by Matt
-- In [hidden email], "ka1bqp" <ka1bqp@...> wrote: > > You got that right Denise. It's amazing that even with all it's faults, UFO still was so far ahead of it's time. I wonder if Gerry would have paid closer attention to detail if he realized what he had, and at the time I don't think he knew. Matt, There really is no way to be sure after just one season. At the time, the producers didn't want to continue it. Part of that was because of its unclear audience focus. It was an adult show by someone who routinely did kiddy programs. And perhaps the second season would have jumped the shark anyway. But it surprised everyone by becoming a cult classic. I still remember when I found Marc's group on the internet back in '99 and realized that someone else besides me loved the show! I'd thought I was a lone fan in the big bad world. *grin* (Thanks, Marc, for setting up the egroup for all us UFO fans!) Yours, Denise
Straker, somehow it's always about you.
|
In reply to this post by andelendir
They're arranged in the right order, though, so SOMEone knew what they
were doing. Y Deborah Rorabaugh wrote: > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Yuchtar zantai-Klaan | [hidden email] I am not a number! I am a FREE FAN! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "An apple a day, keeps the, uh ... No, never mind." -- Doctor Who =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= http://www.yuchtar.com/ |
I'm pretty sure the Missileman badge belongs on the opposite side of the
uniform from where it was placed in Identify and I suspect the Purple Heart ribbon is in the wrong place - assuming that dark one with the white stripes on the ends is actually a Purple Heart - I couldn't find an exact match for the colors, so that's the closest one I could find. http://www.shadolibrary.org/pix/eps/array1.jpg _____ From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Yuchtar Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 7:18 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers They're arranged in the right order, though, so SOMEone knew what they were doing. Y Deborah Rorabaugh wrote: > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Yuchtar zantai-Klaan | [hidden email] <mailto:yuchtr%40earthlink.net> I am not a number! I am a FREE FAN! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "An apple a day, keeps the, uh ... No, never mind." -- Doctor Who =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= http://www.yuchtar.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
In reply to this post by James Killian
The security aspect would have been the easiest thing to manage as long as it was kept compartmentalized. You can be sure that none of the construction gang knew what the purpose of the underground vault was. And the goverment block would not have stopped people from seeing the huge excavation going on, all it did was limit the exposure. A cover story would have been released sometime later, water storage tank, bomb shelter for Parliment, underground bowling alley, (grin) something that would not raise too many eyebrows. Even the security boys as Alec called them would not have known all the details, they would be told only what they needed to know. Make this person disappear, and they do it. No questions asked. The workers would have been told, "You see nothing, you hear nothing, you think nothing, and you damn well better say nothing." They are paid well and they sign a non-disclosure agreement that gives a hint as to what would happen to them if they open their mouths. The Manhattan Project employed over 100,000 people and none of the general public had any idea what they were up to, although the Russians did through their spy network.
Defense contractors do the same thing, a secret project might be divided among several different contractors, each one given a module that they build and test to meet certain specs and the final product is assembled at a government lab. If anyone asks what the final product does, they are told that they don't need to know. :) --- In [hidden email], Billy Killian <sumitonjd@...> wrote: > > Yes, it is amazing how some fans get<g>. They will argue over the equallant of > how many angels can dance on the head of a pin about a minor point on a show of > a fictional nature and swear its all cannon. >    Okay enough harping from me before Marc puts me back under really strict > restrictions again. However one point about An Delendir's comments on digging > the undergound base and trucking out mega tons of earth. If they did it and > wanted to keep it secret it would have to be done rather like the way prisoners > dig tunnels and the earth the dig is carried out by prisoners and scattered over > the prison yard a pocket full at a time. So it would not be going out in big > trucks.  Some would be added a bit at a time to the studio lot to bulid it up, > and more to out door sets to make well ground. How they would get the rest out > well being as its a fictional situation they'd find a way! >    James K. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Neesierie <neesierie@...> > To: [hidden email] > Sent: Thu, June 16, 2011 6:37:13 PM > Subject: [SHADO] Re: UFO Bloopers > >  > --- In [hidden email], "Deborah Rorabaugh" <momkat@> wrote: > > > > Or maybe the costume department messed up. Sylvia was good but I doubt she > > was an expert on US military campaign ribbons. :-) > > She'd have been fired if she worked on a tv show today! The fans these days can > get downright irate with continuity errors! Especially on sci-fi or police > procedurals. I'll bet Gerry Anderson is so glad that UFO was done 40+ years ago! > *grin* > > Yours, > Denise > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > |
In reply to this post by andelendir
An Delendir wrote:
> And yes, the underground HQ was supposed to be hidden. Thus - no one should notice it is being excavated (see above). And - the excavation must take place with the topside unchanged to the public eye. The static calculations for this alone are a nightmare. The relevant installation of equipment as well. None of that can be done in a matter of months, especially not when entirely hidden from the public. > But it does NOT have to be ENTIRELY hidden if it can be explained as being required for something else ... >>Second, who says they didn't use any pre-fab materials?? You? > > > It is prefab modules or units, not materials. Oh, sorry, is 'material' the wrong word? Let's see what the dictionary says ... material (n) the substance or things from which something is or can be made or with which something is done. No, that sounds about right to me. > Which mass-producing factory would you have build 10+ feet thick, leadlined concrete walls? How would you transport these, especially in secrecy? How get them down a covered construction site? They would definitely not have fitted through the studio gate and quite likely strained any lifting gear available for the site. > Military. Does not have to be SECRET. Tell them to make this and they make it - they don't ask why. > Trying to curb my participation in this discussion, rsp. telling me what I may or may not talk about, is offensive, outside your competence and rather blatantly the contrary of what a discussion list is supposed to be. > Outside my competence? In what, exactly, do I require competence before expressing my opinion here? > There is a general Netiquette for discussion lists of any sort, which says pretty much this: > > "No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is marked by an attack > on an opponent's character/person rather than by an answer to the > contentions made in the debate." When did I attack you ad hominemly? Calling you chica? Sorry, I could have sworn you used that term yourself at one point - apologies if I was wrong. > So far I tend to believe that a discussion about canon is on topic for the SHADO-list. So far *I* have not once attacked anyone on a personal level and been perfectly polite as well. > I think Marc, the list owner, has already pointed out how impolite it was for you to tell everyone else they were WRONG when they weren't ... > As to me and canon - I am anal about canon. I readily confess to that. People will have to live with it. I'm not going to change in that respect. > No, no, hon, you're not anal about canon, you're anal about YOUR VERSION of canon and that's not quite the same thing. Petulantly stamping your foot and demanding everyone accept your version of canon as the one true gospel is called 'not playing well with others.' (As an aside, and apropos of nothing, is slash canon, BTW? According to your version? Just wondering). > That said, it is for those just as anal and fascinated about verifiable, logical detail that Lightcudder and I have sat down for hours daily and started off that wiki. We're not getting paid for this, we don't even expect getting a thumbs up, and even though quite a few have started reading and consuming it, few opted to help so far. You did not do so either, I might note. > And if I did, would my contribution be included if it differed from YOUR version of canon? > If I am outspoken about canon facts, then this is because I am prepared to discuss their veracity. With those wanting to or willing to discuss. > But you're not discussing, you're brow-beating - again, there's a difference. Y -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Yuchtar zantai-Klaan | [hidden email] I am not a number! I am a FREE FAN! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "An apple a day, keeps the, uh ... No, never mind." -- Doctor Who =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= http://www.yuchtar.com/ |
Please forgive my possible ignorance, as I am reading these quotes taken out of context.
I've always thought of "pre-fab" as applying to "modules or units" made (as in assembled) out of various "materials" (such as steel and concrete) offsite, then hauled in and installed in sections (or whatever they would be called). Bolting girders together to form a framework, then trucking it in as an assembly, as opposed to bringing in a truckload of girders, then assembling them onsite, for example. Or pouring a concrete wall into a form offsite, then bringing the finished wall to the site, as opposed to pouring the wall onsite. I've never heard of separate components/materials such as steel girders or a cement mixer full of wet cement referred to as "pre-fab". My experience is somewhat limited, so I suppose I could be mistaken, or just misunderstanding the quotes that I have read in this discussion. :-) Jeff --- On Thu, 6/16/11, Yuchtar <[hidden email]> wrote: From: Yuchtar <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [SHADO] UFO Bloopers To: [hidden email] Date: Thursday, June 16, 2011, 10:36 PM An Delendir wrote: > And yes, the underground HQ was supposed to be hidden. Thus - no one should notice it is being excavated (see above). And - the excavation must take place with the topside unchanged to the public eye. The static calculations for this alone are a nightmare. The relevant installation of equipment as well. None of that can be done in a matter of months, especially not when entirely hidden from the public. > But it does NOT have to be ENTIRELY hidden if it can be explained as being required for something else ... >>Second, who says they didn't use any pre-fab materials?? You? > > > It is prefab modules or units, not materials. Oh, sorry, is 'material' the wrong word? Let's see what the dictionary says ... material (n) the substance or things from which something is or can be made or with which something is done. No, that sounds about right to me. > Which mass-producing factory would you have build 10+ feet thick, leadlined concrete walls? How would you transport these, especially in secrecy? How get them down a covered construction site? They would definitely not have fitted through the studio gate and quite likely strained any lifting gear available for the site. > Military. Does not have to be SECRET. Tell them to make this and they make it - they don't ask why. > Trying to curb my participation in this discussion, rsp. telling me what I may or may not talk about, is offensive, outside your competence and rather blatantly the contrary of what a discussion list is supposed to be. > Outside my competence? In what, exactly, do I require competence before expressing my opinion here? > There is a general Netiquette for discussion lists of any sort, which says pretty much this: > > "No ad hominem attacks. An ad hominem attack is marked by an attack > on an opponent's character/person rather than by an answer to the > contentions made in the debate." When did I attack you ad hominemly? Calling you chica? Sorry, I could have sworn you used that term yourself at one point - apologies if I was wrong. > So far I tend to believe that a discussion about canon is on topic for the SHADO-list. So far *I* have not once attacked anyone on a personal level and been perfectly polite as well. > I think Marc, the list owner, has already pointed out how impolite it was for you to tell everyone else they were WRONG when they weren't ... > As to me and canon - I am anal about canon. I readily confess to that. People will have to live with it. I'm not going to change in that respect. > No, no, hon, you're not anal about canon, you're anal about YOUR VERSION of canon and that's not quite the same thing. Petulantly stamping your foot and demanding everyone accept your version of canon as the one true gospel is called 'not playing well with others.' (As an aside, and apropos of nothing, is slash canon, BTW? According to your version? Just wondering). > That said, it is for those just as anal and fascinated about verifiable, logical detail that Lightcudder and I have sat down for hours daily and started off that wiki. We're not getting paid for this, we don't even expect getting a thumbs up, and even though quite a few have started reading and consuming it, few opted to help so far. You did not do so either, I might note. > And if I did, would my contribution be included if it differed from YOUR version of canon? > If I am outspoken about canon facts, then this is because I am prepared to discuss their veracity. With those wanting to or willing to discuss. > But you're not discussing, you're brow-beating - again, there's a difference. Y -- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= Yuchtar zantai-Klaan | [hidden email] I am not a number! I am a FREE FAN! =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= "An apple a day, keeps the, uh ... No, never mind." -- Doctor Who =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= http://www.yuchtar.com/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |