What better way than Spielberg, Lucas, Gibson and hundreds of support systems to introduce a future reality to the world.
2007-07-05 09:20:47 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
The thing about most Sci-Fi entertainment is that it follows no known realities about space and travel.
I mean, look at fighter battles. Very few Sci-Fi battles have fighters use space physics. Have a bogey on your tail? Turn around, use thrusters, and fire backwards.
Or the complete and utter inefficiency of Star Trek vessels, particularly Federation. Giant saucers? Talk about easy targets.
2007-07-05 09:28:30 · answer #1 · answered by K 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, more real than we think. Here are a few extracts taken from David Darlington's book Area 51--The Dreamland Chronicles (The legend Of America's Most Secret Military Base). The extracts are addressed to Aviation writer Jim Goodall.
--"Ben Rich (director of Lockheed's Skunkworks) told me twice before he died: 'We have things at Area 51 that you and the best minds in the world won't even be able to conceive that we have for thirty years, and won't be made public for another fifty'"
--"A friend of mine at Lockheed told me, 'We have things in the Nevada desert that are alien to your way of thinking--far beyond anything you see on Star Trek.'"
This said by a Senior Master Sergeant who had been at Groom Lake (Area 51) three different times as an Air Force safety specialist: "We have things in the Nevada desert that are literally out of this world. Things that would make George Lucas envious."
Today's Science fiction is tomorrow's Science. I hope this answered you question?
2007-07-05 19:09:04 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Star Wars proved to be great entertainment but it was really based on no physics or evolution. How can a creature with suction cups for finger tips ever manipulate tools of technology. How can a space craft as big as the Death Star ever be constructed. 2001, A SpaceOdyssey is almost believable.
2007-07-08 13:30:11 · answer #3 · answered by johnandeileen2000 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you would care to ask an actual question maybe I would provide you with an actual answer.
No matter, if you think Star Wars has any relation to any potential reality of the future, well, you are in for a huge disappointment.
2007-07-05 18:16:08 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
it's not fiction after all it's soon to be a reality ~ whether we like it or not.....all of these movies for all of these years have been nothing more than easing people along to the idea of acceptance as far as ETs go
2007-07-05 20:42:59 · answer #5 · answered by ~*common sense*~ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Science Fiction made for entertainment makers:
Lucas, Speilberg and most any name associated with Hollywood.
A true futurist would be someone like Arthur C Clarke and several other authors who have true educations in science.
2007-07-05 16:31:39 · answer #6 · answered by quntmphys238 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Hi. There is a vast difference between a 'futurist' and a film maker. One is an attempt to predict what is coming and the other is simply entertainment. I like them both.
2007-07-05 16:24:47 · answer #7 · answered by Cirric 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Putting a question mark at the end of a statement does not make it a question.
2007-07-05 17:11:14 · answer #8 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Anybody else find it funny that these movies supposedly about our "future" took place "a long time ago". =P
2007-07-05 18:46:35 · answer #9 · answered by ccm_1052_tacks 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋