Re: B5 and Sir Isaac

>> >All-in-all, B5 is remarkably clear 
>> >of the pseudoscientific doubletalk which passes for science in much
science 
>> >fiction.  [Lest anyone misunderstand, I don't have problems with
doubletalk 
>> >per se, I just think that most SF handles it poorly, especially on
TV:  
>> >Writers get to the point where _anything_ can be justified by
stringing enough 
>> >polysylabic words together.]
>> 
>> At which point I toss it into the category of Science Fantasy, and
not Science
>> Fiction.  :-)
>
>Mark... are implying that B5 is, instead, the latter rather than
>the former? That it isn't Science Fantasy?

Sorry, clarification: I was referring to the doubletalk polysylabic
words
strung together.

Okay, it's a fine line 'tween the two. I put B5 in the category of
Science
Fiction. I put a lot of stuff more fantastic like what Star Trek has
become
(esp the more recent movies) into Science Fantasy.

>Just curious.

S'alright. If I'm ever unclear, ask away and I'll see if I can't
be any more vague.  :)

Mk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
All that is gold does not glitter,
     all those who wander are not lost.

http://www.bcpl.lib.md.us/~indy/index.html