Tested's very own Norman Chan raises one particularly controversial question about Star Trek, and top man Ted responds with a theory of his own. Will, Ryan, and Rorie exchange a few words on the matter, but Drew sits back and watches the debate unfold infront of him. I won't spoil Rorie's tangential remarks for you, but trust me it's hilarious.  
 
    

awesome!

I can't believe they get paid for this 
 
so envious

Thanks Lemon!

This is an awesome conversation. And I agree with Rorie, anti cannabis ads are bullshit.

Why are there no fighters in Star Trek? Oh, but there are.

The reason why the Federation never commissioned the construction of 'snub-fighters', dates back to James T Kirk's time as captain of the USS Enterprise. Kirk decreed that all Federation ships must have the capacity to entertain the company of up to, but no less than, three beautiful space women. As a result, the minimum specs of each Federation vessel must include at least two bedrooms, full bar and hot tub. As such, all 'interceptor' or 'air superiority' type fighters  were no longer suitable to meet the Federations strict construction standards and were consequently discontinued.

Too late to watch. Will watch in approximately six hours...

I love Lemon

Rorie's weed ad complaints were the best part.  :P

Did you spell 'lemon' wrong? ^^

This is by far the nerdiest conversation I have ever listened to.

I think from the federation stand-point the reason against one man fighters might just be that the human cost of that is too high vs. the tactical advantage - they're always very touchy feely about the sanctity of life so sticking valuable pilots in combat ships with much less protection than a larger vessel is probably a no-no. 
 
Then there's the more practical concerns like storing the fighters when they're not in use, if you want a decent number you have to dedicate a big chunk of the ships interior to housing and maintaining them - that's why conventional aircraft carriers are built around that idea, rather than adding fighters to a standard hull design. 
 
Then from an engineering standpoint you have a competition between power, speed, defences and offensive capabilities, if you wan't to increase the ships speed/defences or weapons you'll have to give it a larger power-plant or make cuts somewhere else, and even in the star trek universe it seems like more power = bigger power plant, so as you increase the ships capabilities in various areas you also increase it's size, to the point where it's no longer really a fighter (and as the size goes up, so does the amount of space you need to store them). 
 
THEN from the tactical point of view you have the problem that typically bigger ships have bigger engines which means they can go faster than smaller ships with smaller engines (correct me if I'm wrong on that), so against an enemy with a large compliment of fighters, the obvious tactic is to wait for him to deploy all his fighters and then just hit the button with "This Warp engine goes to 11" written on it and make them redundant, either the guy attacking waits and collects all his fighters back in before following you, giving you ample time to escape, or he abandons them and they're no longer a problem for you. 
 
So yeah, no fighters! 

I wanted to see what the conversation over by Ana was, probably amazement at the conversation we just witnessed, great vid.

Well they did have the Peregrine fighters in DS9 which held about 4 people, a warp core, 2 pulse phaser banks and a photon torpedo launcher. They seemed effective against the Cardassian Galor class ships. But I think in "reality" the targeting computers and the light speed phasers on a starship would pretty much mean instant death unless you can scramble their sensors. 
 
There was an episode of Voyager (I know, bare with me) where they woke up this civilization, only to realize they were warmongers and destroyed a civilization and there own planet, at the end of the episode Voyager is trying to take off and is being chased by hundreds of small vessels and Voyager is wiping them out with single phaser blasts while escaping the atmosphere.

A nice reminder that I know nothing about Star Trek.

This is totally what I do at work lol.  Not quite as nerdy though.

Next Whiskey Media site confirmed: Star Trek Debates

Rorie is improving the discourse here, tremendously.

I was waiting for Rorie to sing the whole way through that, he didn't disappoint.

I must say I enjoyed that Star Trek discussion and marvel at how wonderfully wrong everyone is(in a good way). Star Trek has an explanation for everything.  
Also much love to Drew for walking away in a oddly dramatic fashion.

Rorie reminded of some old guy just talking about random shit. 
 
Hey Rorie what do you think about this weather?
 
Rorie: Well, they're killing whales again, those bastards.

You can't really talk about Enterprise vs. Death Star. Star Trek is in the far flung future while Star Wars is "a long time ago". 
 
It's like saying what would win: a Galleon from 1700 or a modern Battleship? 

" You can't really talk about Enterprise vs. Death Star. Star Trek is in the far flung future while Star Wars is "a long time ago".  It's like saying what would win: a Galleon from 1700 or a modern Battleship?  "

Wait, so what was Norm's reasoning?

Rich Gallup was on Jeopardy?! Is there any surviving video of this?

That was so great. Thanks for that, Lemon.

" Rich Gallup was on Jeopardy?! Is there any surviving video of this? "

" @Milkman said:

" Rich Gallup was on Jeopardy?! Is there any surviving video of this? "

His roommate was "

Should've called it Lemon Lensflare. Missed opportunity.

" I can't believe they get paid for this  so envious "

i can't give a rats ass about Star Wars or Star Trek, i'll be honest...but my theory is pretty simple. 
In Star Wars they use transport shuttles to go from capital ship to planet, therefore they need escort fighters.
In Star Trek, they just teleport...no need for small fighter ships.