Also...there is some doubt about the validity of the paper..... http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/01/24/italian-scientists-claim-cold-fusion-breakthrough/
It was rejected by several peer review journals. It was published online at a site founded by the authors. So don't get your hopes up.
Yeah, right. the italians.
hmno, I just heard that somewhen in the 60'ies they imagined to use nukes to create oil tanks under the earth with not much work..
just make the nuke melt the stone, wait some years, fill your oil inside, done.
After watching this review...
It makes the problems with star trek all that much more obvious.
This is the 'best of' mind you and it's got the borg-eats-picard episode cliffhanger pair on it.
This is the best star trek has to offer? It's amazing it didn't die an earlier death.
I realize the point of science fiction is to protray stories of moral and ethical dilemmas in a science fiction background.
But you lose all sense of reality when the three people who are going to save the known universe and are in a real bind can't do more than slowly stroll down the hallway rather than FUCKING RUN to where they need to be.
Notice how kirk ran all over the place in star trek the star trek? And picard can't ever do more than stroll.
TNG is so lame and boring I'm amazed they got as many seasons out of it as they did.
And if you guys haven't seen plinketts reviews, you gotta waste an hour and a half (yes, an hour and a half) review of star wars episode 1. It's hysterical.
TNG is definately my least favorite trek series (even Voyager was vastly superior, IMHO). In my mind, the only way it got through the first couple dreadful season was because it had the trek name. The middle seasons weren't bad, and the last couple they ran out of steam (Data almost invaribly saved the day).
However, TNG did change how sci-fi was portrayed on television. Television Sci-fi is much more character driven, and carried by the ensemble, then in shows prior. The term "character growth" didn't apply in the original Trek, or pretty much any sci-fi show prior to TNG (even where the emphasis was on charcters because of the total lack of budget, like in Blakes 7), and because of it, allowed television-based science fiction to gain a larger audience than it had before.
I thought Babylon 5 drove the character development, and Star Trek, DS9 had to do much the same to keep from being obsoleted.
That may be, but I still preferred Babylon 5 for their amazing 5 year story line. The other wasn't so bad, either, but I really, really liked Babylon 5. I think Star Trek had too much baggage to endure to do what Babylon 5 could do.
Bruce Boxleitner didn't hurt, either....
What came first - the Trill or the Go'uld?
If it's cutting edge, genre defining television we're talking about, the real game changer was Mystery Science Theater 3000.
Stargate (the movie) was released in 1994, Deep Space 9 in 1993. So the Trill were first. If I remember correctly, the Trill first were introduced earlier in an episode TNG.
But, the whole concept of a parasite controlling or merging with a Human being is a pretty old plot device.
To go one step further, the Goa'uld, as a race, weren't really presented until the "Stargate SG-1" TV series premiered in 1997. The Trill definitely came first.
I remember "Space: Above and Beyond," too, and, though I wouldn't call it one of my favorites, I did find it to be a very compelling show. I don't know if it would be a stretch, but I almost consider it to be a precursor to the modern "Battlestar Galactica." Both shows portrayed a military group operating in space, and both portrayals did their best to not hold any punches when it comes to violence in war and its consequences.
IG's right, though. Cutting-edge, genre-defining programming has to pull in a big audience very early or it gets quashed. To wit, two science-fiction TV series that I've been avidly watching, "Stargate Universe" and "Caprica" have been nixed or are likely to be nixed in the near future. Another short lived series I like, "Journeyman," was cancelled after only one season.
lot of potentuial...probably doomed.
same thing happened to the dresden files.
very well done series about a wizard/private
detective in chicago. cancelled in one short
NOOOOO!!! I am loyal viewer of both Caprica and Stargate Universe. I also loved the Dresdan Files. SyFy - just teases me. I love the British version of "Being Human" not completely sold on the America version yet but I'm willing to give it more time.
Last I read, SyFy channel decided not to order a third season for Stargate Universe. Which means we'll get to see the remainder of season two in Spring or Summer, but after that, there may not be any more. From what I've read, when a channel decides not to order new episodes, it effectively means the show is cancelled.
There's certainly a possibility that either show could be picked up by another channel, but what I've read about both shows says that ratings have fallen, so it's unlikely that another channel would want to pick them up. Babylon 5 was one of those shows that changed channels during its lifetime. It aired in syndication for the first four seasons until it got picked up by TNT.
I haven't watched "Being Human" but I've definitely been following "Doctor Who" and "Torchwood" on BBC America. I know Doctor Who is slated to return in the spring. I'm not sure when Torchwood returns, though.
Oh man! Oh I do know what's the deal with Torchwood - I think it is moving to Showtime - which sucks because I don't get Showtime. It will be interesting because only Gwen and Jack made it through the chaos of last season.