ST-v-SW.Net: Trek. Wars. Pew-pew.

Here's a "pinned tweet" thread because I want to pin more than one.

@DarinWagner6 V'Ger was a scare, but I rather doubt the name Voyager would be infamous in that way. The event was notable but didn't shift any balance of power or what-have-you.

One of the problems I've always had with ST: VOY was the ship's name. You see, in continuity, Voyager 6 is responsible for the murder of the Epsilon IX station, a trio of Klingon ships and who knows what else. The name would be infamous, like naming the ship "Botany Bay." @SCShipyards

The problem with "disruptor" thinking is that you cannot walk in thinking you're smarter than everyone else and don't have to learn the rules, especially when they are written in blood. That's how you get OceanGate.

Duds matter.

I am a million years old.

My brain does not fully know what to do with this.

RT @nocontextmemes:

We have gigantic creatures in the sea which can sing for hours and have arteries so big you can crawl through them. (whales) We have birds that fly 50,000 miles every year. From the antarctic to the arctic and back again. (arctic tern) We have living creatures which never get old and never die naturally. (jellyfish) We have animals which you can force through a sieve, and they can reassemble themselves. (sponges) We have an ancient line of animals which once had 30 or more successful species, and has gone extinct down to just one single representative, and that representative has conquered the entire world (us). We have horrors that look just like rocks and if you step on them your whole world becomes agonizing pain. (toadfish) We have animals who hide inside other animals, and when you eat that animal, they enter your intestines and live there. (tapeworms) We have plants which live on other plants and never touch the ground. There's a fruit tree that grows around another tree, and eventually kills and replaces it. (strangler fig) We have gliding lizards, marsupials, snakes, frogs, and rodents. What the heck do you need fairies for?

Did Obi-Wan just fart to save the scene…💀

@poe_collector @illjoy_ @WookieeSlayer97 She was already speechless ... no need to try to out-do the pic-quote. You saw two obvious leftists (by usernames, but easily confirmed by profiles) being idiots, and in your Marxist-tribalist constant misdirected rage you tried to twist it into being capitalism's fault. Wow.

@illjoy_ @WookieeSlayer97 This has got to be a combination of illiteracy and the severe overemphasis on individuality and isolation that capitalism creates

I’m honestly kind of speechless at how stupid this is

Then let them die. #StarTrek VI Undiscovered Country from 1991. The Starfleet briefing room. #scifi

Bass Windu is becoming an AI masterpiece. I want a full movie.

@AmericanDebunk TBH, I prefer the tree to the Starbucks sign

Bukele has proved that living in a shit hole is a choice.

@Rainmaker1973 It's called "replicative fading".

For decades, many scientists assumed that serial cloning — the repeated cloning of clones — could theoretically continue indefinitely. A landmark 20-year experiment has now demonstrated that this is not the case. Researchers found that successive rounds of somatic cell nuclear transfer lead to the progressive accumulation of genetic mutations, eventually creating insurmountable barriers to further cloning. The study, conducted by Teruhiko Wakayama and colleagues at the University of Yamanashi in Japan, began in 2005 using cells from a single female mouse. Over nearly two decades, the team produced more than 1,200 cloned mice across 58 generations. Early generations appeared healthy, with cloning success rates even improving slightly in the first 25–26 rounds. However, from around the 27th generation onward, success rates began to decline steadily. By the 57th generation, the average success rate had fallen to just 0.6%. All mice from the 58th generation died within a day of birth due to severe genomic instability. Whole-genome sequencing revealed that each round of cloning introduced new mutations at a rate approximately three times higher than in naturally mated mice. These included an accumulation of single-nucleotide variants and large structural abnormalities, such as chromosomal losses and translocations. Unlike sexual reproduction, which benefits from natural DNA repair and recombination mechanisms during meiosis, cloning bypasses these processes, allowing deleterious mutations to build up unchecked — akin to the progressive degradation seen in repeated photocopying. Importantly, while the late-generation cloned mice still appeared phenotypically normal and had typical lifespans up to the 57th generation, the accumulated genetic load proved fatal when attempting the 58th round. The study underscores that, without the introduction of genetic diversity through sexual reproduction, long-term serial cloning in mammals is ultimately unsustainable. These findings have significant implications for biotechnology. They highlight fundamental limits for applications such as de-extinction efforts, long-term agricultural cloning, and conservation breeding programs. While cloning remains a powerful tool for producing genetically identical animals, the research serves as a clear reminder that current techniques cannot indefinitely replace the evolutionary safeguards provided by sexual reproduction. [Wakayama, S. et al. (2026). Limitations of serial cloning in mammals. Nature Communications. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-026-69765-7]

@TrekTrekkie Not true. Such tweets happened, just with opposite meaning.

No one has ever tweeted like this for Nutrek.

Count Dooku (Sir Christopher Lee) didn't hold back in this interview😨👀

.... And? I mean, when you absolutely need to destroy something most anywhere on the planet, is there any better substitute?

Again, this would be expensive and a technical challenge, but it's easy to imagine needing to hit a deep crucial target with only minutes to do so and no B-2 or B-21 for thousands of miles.

@FilmLadd Responding: - it's a tungsten cylinder - 11.5 tons KE from 37.5% of orbital velocity retained (USAF number), no warhead - deorbit thrusters are old hat - re-entry guidance doesn't require fuel (ref.: SpaceX) Would I prefer a cheap drone? Sure, but this has a place, too.

I just threw up.