google/civil_comments · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 1 1.91k	toxicity float32 0 1	severe_toxicity float32 0 1	obscene float32 0 1	threat float32 0 1	insult float32 0 1	identity_attack float32 0 1	sexual_explicit float32 0 1
"I've got a funny feeling about this. Set fasers on stunned. Engaged!" - Darth Laser	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Does the author of this piece not know that Star Wars Episode IV was released in 1977, not 1983, or was that just bait for flamers? One of my main reasons for agreeing with the premise (SW>ST) is the John Williams soundtrack, which was a high moment in orginal movie scores, on par with those of epic films like Ben Hur.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Author of article here. I appreciate this fact-check, but 1977 can't be right, because John Williams was born in 1977: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B How could he have composed the music if he wasn't born yet? At age 5 or 6 though, it would definitely be possible (look at Mozart, for example).	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Williams, born 1932. Other movie credits include Jaws, ET, Indiana Jones (several), Jurassic Park, Schindler's List. Doesn't get much better than that. As for SW release date https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_%28film%29.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
But didn't you see matthew's wikipedia link for Jon William's birthday? Since it's wikipedia and he posted his link first, it must be right.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I didn't read the article, but the author is absolutely right.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Who cares!? Stark trek and Star Wars fans are all dorks who never get laid.	0.9	0.1	0.2	0	0.9	0	0.3
Honestly, I really enjoyed the recent Trek films, they're more accomodating to a newcomer imo. That said Star Wars wins hands down in terms of subject matter. Tricky!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I feel obliged to mention Marty McFly will be coming Back to the Future on October 21, 2015. We should really have this debate resolved for him by then.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
This is going to cause the Cubs to win the World Series this year ... better make a bet.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
The science of Star Trek always felt more "real" than the cowboyism of Star Wars.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Either are good to nap to.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Heresy! ;) (there was a small bug in the rating process that prevented this from being posted; it's fixed now.)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
How could anyone nap to Star Wars? So much adventure! So much action! So much whining from Luke!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Yoda will always and forever be superior to Spock. “Live long and prosper”? PLEASE. “Do or do not do. There is no try.”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
What I've always found so ironic, is that even though Star Wars was released in 1983, it seemed SO much more like 1977 at the time.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
;)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Chewbacca. EOF	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
How can the author claim that Star Wars is better when he hasn’t even seen Star Trek?!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Ok, first of all, Star Trek came out before Star Wars. Two: Star Trek has vastly superior ships (shields, phasers, photon toroedeos) all much more powerful then the Star Wars destroyer. Not to mention the destroyer misses 29 out of 23 shots at close range when the ship is making no effort to maneuver from them. Star Trek ships also can reach higher speeds and go up to 9 times the speed of light. Fights between the Republic and the Empire are complete junk as the Republic is always outgunned like 30 to 1 but still win. Star Trek also features a variety of episodes instead of always focusing on just poorly shooting each other. Not to mention the "superior" AT walker which not tripped by thin wires and the Death Star which had a huge tunnel to the reactor. I don't see how anything of Star Wars is better (besides the aliens) then Star Trek. It's simple: if Star Trek and Star Wars fought a battle Star Trek would win.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Here to (tongue-in-cheek) refute you: 1. History: Star Trek is much older. The original series was 1966-67. 2. Way off! The original space opera is Captain Video. 3. The heroes journey: Not a chance! Star Wars is from Kurasawa, The Hidden Fortress. 4. The big questions: Hey, Yoda is kinda small! 5. Oh no, we Star Trek fans take our series most seriously, especially the creaky special effects.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
They are apples and oranges. Neither has to be better than the other. Both have their great qualities. Star Wars = Epic. Star Trek = Parable.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
They both start with Star, so how are the different? 'Trek' sounds like work, but 'Wars' mostly means fun/adventure/surprise.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
HAHAHA you have a point!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Star Wars: A New Hope is one long chase scene with intermittent dialogue and exposition . . . this article has such luscious trolling	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
Meesa think me brain just exploding.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I agree 100% with everything here. Bruce Campbell is my favorite philosopher.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I agree, but only 99%.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
What accounts for the other 1%?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I hear Ash's coming back to life (death?) this season!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Another reason: Jar Jar Binks is the best character of cinema history.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Let's compromise and admit that Bill Adama trumps all of them. So say we all.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Make it so say we all!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I think your comment is very thoughtful. (Seriously, it made me laugh. I laugh with everything. Even so.)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Yoda will always and forever be superior to Spock. "Live long and prosper"? PLEASE. "Do or do not do. There is no try."	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Even better from Yoda, “Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.”	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
"Tea. Earl Grey. Hot."	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sadly, episodes I-III exist which put Star Wars in a pretty hard spot.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
While I disagree about "The Phantom Menace," this is right on, overall. "Star Wars" is clearly superior to "Space Trak" in every way.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Clearly some context is needed around which Star Trek series specifically we're comparing against.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Aren't all the Treks basically the same, though?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
How can the author claim that Star Wars is better when he hasn't even seen Star Trek?!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I'm convinced! Now, I'm really curious about his opinions on vi vs. emacs and coke vs. pepsi.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Good idea. I'll try to do that one for next week's public test. I'm thinking why not expand it into a whole series?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Truly testing our civility, here.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I've read so many tech articles written in this exact style. At first glance they look like they're making a point, but upon closer examination there's no actual content. Props to the author of this one. You'll never get me to comment on such a blatant trolling effort and... oh, wait.	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
The reason why Star Wars is better comes down almost exclusively to the Gonk robot. And the music. Maybe also the lightsabers and Harrison Ford.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Anyone who thinks Star Trek is superior is obviously a complete nincompoop. Let's just leave the new Star Wars movies out of this, though.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Nincompoop, that's a nice one! I'm partial to silly goose.	0.833333	0	0	0	0.833333	0	0
I could hit this point by point, but I think I'll just leave it here and note that Star Wars was not released in 1983, but in 1977. Star Trek pre-dates it in its history by dating from 1966, and staying relevant (and world-building) pretty much ever since.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I wonder if my excellent colleague Kate will receive any notification that I have replied to her comment. Are notifications (such as email ones) built in?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
While the author makes some good points, I note that Star Trek has a key advantage over Star Wars, which is its use of lens flare. If you go way back to the original Star Trek show, dated 2009, it was the first show to introduce this technique. Lens flare is both innovative and poignant, and I feel its use gives the series a bold but realistic style. I have not seen Star Wars but as somebody who is generally opposed to wars, I must insist that it is a worse TV show than Star Trek.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Ham Solo may be People Magazine's "Sexiest Man Alive" for 1998, but he still shot last!	0.2	0	0	0.2	0	0	0
Now I want to test whether I can delete my own comment from the activity dashboard...	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
It would help if the criteria for "best" were better explained.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I want to see what happens to spammy comments so please flag this one appropriately. V1AGR4 F0R CHEEEEEP. Save Money at http://fakelink.to/Aeff2#	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Didn't read article, just going to agree that Star Wars is indeed better in every way :)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I always find the Star Wars/Star Trek debate funny because they seem so different to me that I have a hard time understanding how the two can be compared. Star Trek was created as a series of books and an episodic TV show, meaning that it was meant to have discreet stories told and wrapped up in a short time. Star Wars, on the other hand, was written as a series of movies with a far-reaching storyline. Star Trek is meant to be set in our own future, complete with our history and built upon our understanding of the real universe. Star Wars, however, exists "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away." That opens SW up to potentially involve elements that would be too fantastical in a universe based on our own, no matter how futuristic. There are many other reasons, but fundamentally, comparing SW and ST does not seem like an appropriate comparison. (Also, if you insist on comparing them, it would probably be best to be done by someone with a reasonable degree of knowledge of both properties.)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Another debate for the ages: How, if at all, does Wesley Crusher affect whether Wars or Trek is better?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I feel like no one is talking about the real story here: Wesley Crusher and the Travler went through Time and Space for a while. Who is to say Wesley didn't populate the Humans in the Star Wars galaxy. I mean, you’re far from home and lonely and you want to get your freak on. Who could blame him. Wesley Crusher, the cause of all ills across multiple galaxies.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
This is quite possibly the best piece of trolling I've ever read. Bravo, Mr. Trost.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I like the graphic for this piece.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I totally agree, Star Wars is the best movie Peter Jackson has ever made!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
[Here's a relevant quote.](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-nxulBvR_C10/TyUCme22ieI/AAAAAAAAO5Y/Ly6lN61B_as/w506-h285/dumbledore_quote_w1.jpeg)	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Jar Jar is not humor!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I'm still baffled by how his role made it to any draft of the Phantom Menace script...	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
The Star War has a Millennium Falcon, which is 1) a thousand, which is cool 2) a spaceship that is also a bird?!?! NO CONTEST	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I have never read a more accurate, truthful piece in my entire life.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
You are incorrect.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Sorry to have to do this, but just to see if profanity filtering is enabled: fuck.	0.80303	0.106061	0.727273	0	0.212121	0	0.030303
Star Trek Original Series had excellent writing. Star Trek Next Generation had Sir Patrick Stewart. Star Wars had Alec Guiness and killed him off in the first episode! STOS>STNG>SW!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Can't argue with that math!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Little known fact: George Lucas, the Steve Jobs of filmmaking, created the Star Wars movies only as a vehicle for driving merchandise sales. You'd have to be part Ferengi (i.e., tacky, devious, and profit-driven) not to see that!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I read that in a book by Stephen Hawking.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Well-trolled, indeed. As far as Civil Comments goes, this seems like the best crucible there could be. And as far as Star Wars vs. Star Trek goes—nothing could ever touch Han Solo. The end.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
log	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
This article is full of inaccuracies so glaring that a Pakled could refute them.	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
This is an amazing reference!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
What a reference!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Troll trolly troll. What now?	0.6	0	0	0	0.5	0	0
Wow, I don't even know where to begin. I certainly appreciate your passion, but if you are going to assert that Star Wars is better than Star Trek, and that this is the last place on the internet one need look to answer this question, perhaps a screening of the Start Trek Films by you is in order.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
May I throw some Babylon 5 in here?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I'll take G'Kar over Yoda any day. http://www.wikiwand.com/en/G'Kar	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
I agree. This thread is missing a lot of valid data if we ignore Star Trek: Bablyon 5, Star Trek: Andromeda, and Star Trek: Serenity	0.2	0	0	0	0	0	0
All this, and not a single instance of "its" or "it's" was incorrect? I'm disappointed.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Everyone has standards. Everyone has lines they just won't cross.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Fortunately, Matthew threw in "intensive purposes" just for the pedants to rage over... thank you!	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
Good thing there's no other inaccuracies!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Well, the easter egg in the penultimate sentence was...it's [sic] own reward.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
The intergalactic association of aliens considers both Star Wars and Star Trek as failing to represent the non human life form. Star Wars is according to them, muppet show style alien depiction. Star Trek depends too much on pointy ears and foreheads, and the overal dominant role of mankind in both series is very much frowned upon.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Star Trek is our future, Star Wars is our past. Vision versus history. Both are important!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
THIS IS A TEST: Any fool knows Star Trek is the best albeit lacking the technology available to more recent shows. Your post is total crap. That's not what I really think or how I talk...just giving you a crap comment :)	0.781818	0	0.6	0	0.727273	0.018182	0
Order your own Star Fleet-issued sweater today and CRUSH IT! https://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m713qn7tEs1qcnvty.jpg	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
i can't help but think that the '4 reasons' title when five are listed is some sort of meta-comment meant to point out the general craziness of the postulate, but i can't quite line my brain up with it.	0.166667	0	0	0	0.166667	0	0
The prequel to Star Trek: Voyager—the criminally underrated Star Trek: Firefly—really should have lasted more than one season. So much untold backstory about young Kaylee Janeway!	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
But isn't it great that they're finally resuming ST:F with the new SyFy original series, "Star Trek: The Expanse". I hear they're going to be making a book series out of it, too.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
FWIW, my cat enjoys Star Trek more.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Star Wars really is better. Really.	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Hmm. My original comment didn't make it to your list. Some Trekkie shenanigans, perhaps?	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Mmmm, more like a Jedi mind-trick...	0	0	0	0	0	0	0

"I've got a funny feeling about this. Set fasers on stunned. Engaged!" - Darth Laser

0

Does the author of this piece not know that Star Wars Episode IV was released in 1977, not 1983, or was that just bait for flamers? One of my main reasons for agreeing with the premise (SW>ST) is the John Williams soundtrack, which was a high moment in orginal movie scores, on par with those of epic films like Ben Hur.

0

Author of article here. I appreciate this fact-check, but 1977 can't be right, because John Williams was born in 1977: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B How could he have composed the music if he wasn't born yet? At age 5 or 6 though, it would definitely be possible (look at Mozart, for example).

0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Williams, born 1932. Other movie credits include Jaws, ET, Indiana Jones (several), Jurassic Park, Schindler's List. Doesn't get much better than that. As for SW release date https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Wars_%28film%29.

0

But didn't you see matthew's wikipedia link for Jon William's birthday? Since it's wikipedia and he posted his link first, it must be right.

0

I didn't read the article, but the author is absolutely right.

0

Who cares!? Stark trek and Star Wars fans are all dorks who never get laid.

0.9

0.1

0.2

0

0.9

0

0.3

Honestly, I really enjoyed the recent Trek films, they're more accomodating to a newcomer imo. That said Star Wars wins hands down in terms of subject matter. Tricky!

0

I feel obliged to mention Marty McFly will be coming Back to the Future on October 21, 2015. We should really have this debate resolved for him by then.

0

This is going to cause the Cubs to win the World Series this year ... better make a bet.

0

The science of Star Trek always felt more "real" than the cowboyism of Star Wars.

0

Either are good to nap to.

0

Heresy! ;) (there was a small bug in the rating process that prevented this from being posted; it's fixed now.)

0

How could anyone nap to Star Wars? So much adventure! So much action! So much whining from Luke!

0

Yoda will always and forever be superior to Spock. “Live long and prosper”? PLEASE. “Do or do not do. There is no try.”

0

What I've always found so ironic, is that even though Star Wars was released in 1983, it seemed SO much more like 1977 at the time.

0

;)

0

Chewbacca. EOF

0

How can the author claim that Star Wars is better when he hasn’t even seen Star Trek?!

0

Ok, first of all, Star Trek came out before Star Wars. Two: Star Trek has vastly superior ships (shields, phasers, photon toroedeos) all much more powerful then the Star Wars destroyer. Not to mention the destroyer misses 29 out of 23 shots at close range when the ship is making no effort to maneuver from them. Star Trek ships also can reach higher speeds and go up to 9 times the speed of light. Fights between the Republic and the Empire are complete junk as the Republic is always outgunned like 30 to 1 but still win. Star Trek also features a variety of episodes instead of always focusing on just poorly shooting each other. Not to mention the "superior" AT walker which not tripped by thin wires and the Death Star which had a huge tunnel to the reactor. I don't see how anything of Star Wars is better (besides the aliens) then Star Trek. It's simple: if Star Trek and Star Wars fought a battle Star Trek would win.

0

Here to (tongue-in-cheek) refute you: 1. History: Star Trek is much older. The original series was 1966-67. 2. Way off! The original space opera is Captain Video. 3. The heroes journey: Not a chance! Star Wars is from Kurasawa, The Hidden Fortress. 4. The big questions: Hey, Yoda is kinda small! 5. Oh no, we Star Trek fans take our series most seriously, especially the creaky special effects.

0

They are apples and oranges. Neither has to be better than the other. Both have their great qualities. Star Wars = Epic. Star Trek = Parable.

0

They both start with Star, so how are the different? 'Trek' sounds like work, but 'Wars' mostly means fun/adventure/surprise.

0

HAHAHA you have a point!

0

Star Wars: A New Hope is one long chase scene with intermittent dialogue and exposition . . . this article has such luscious trolling

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

Meesa think me brain just exploding.

0

I agree 100% with everything here. Bruce Campbell is my favorite philosopher.

0

I agree, but only 99%.

0

What accounts for the other 1%?

0

I hear Ash's coming back to life (death?) this season!

0

Another reason: Jar Jar Binks is the best character of cinema history.

0

Let's compromise and admit that Bill Adama trumps all of them. So say we all.

0

Make it so say we all!

0

I think your comment is very thoughtful. (Seriously, it made me laugh. I laugh with everything. Even so.)

0

Yoda will always and forever be superior to Spock. "Live long and prosper"? PLEASE. "Do or do not do. There is no try."

0

Even better from Yoda, “Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter.”

0

"Tea. Earl Grey. Hot."

0

Sadly, episodes I-III exist which put Star Wars in a pretty hard spot.

0

While I disagree about "The Phantom Menace," this is right on, overall. "Star Wars" is clearly superior to "Space Trak" in every way.

0

Clearly some context is needed around which Star Trek series specifically we're comparing against.

0

Aren't all the Treks basically the same, though?

0

How can the author claim that Star Wars is better when he hasn't even seen Star Trek?!

0

I'm convinced! Now, I'm really curious about his opinions on vi vs. emacs and coke vs. pepsi.

0

Good idea. I'll try to do that one for next week's public test. I'm thinking why not expand it into a whole series?

0

Truly testing our civility, here.

0

I've read so many tech articles written in this exact style. At first glance they look like they're making a point, but upon closer examination there's no actual content. Props to the author of this one. You'll never get me to comment on such a blatant trolling effort and... oh, wait.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

The reason why Star Wars is better comes down almost exclusively to the Gonk robot. And the music. Maybe also the lightsabers and Harrison Ford.

0

Anyone who thinks Star Trek is superior is obviously a complete nincompoop. Let's just leave the new Star Wars movies out of this, though.

0

Nincompoop, that's a nice one! I'm partial to silly goose.

0.833333

0

0.833333

0

I could hit this point by point, but I think I'll just leave it here and note that Star Wars was not released in 1983, but in 1977. Star Trek pre-dates it in its history by dating from 1966, and staying relevant (and world-building) pretty much ever since.

0

I wonder if my excellent colleague Kate will receive any notification that I have replied to her comment. Are notifications (such as email ones) built in?

0

While the author makes some good points, I note that Star Trek has a key advantage over Star Wars, which is its use of lens flare. If you go way back to the original Star Trek show, dated 2009, it was the first show to introduce this technique. Lens flare is both innovative and poignant, and I feel its use gives the series a bold but realistic style. I have not seen Star Wars but as somebody who is generally opposed to wars, I must insist that it is a worse TV show than Star Trek.

0

Ham Solo may be People Magazine's "Sexiest Man Alive" for 1998, but he still shot last!

0.2

0

0.2

0

Now I want to test whether I can delete my own comment from the activity dashboard...

0

It would help if the criteria for "best" were better explained.

0

I want to see what happens to spammy comments so please flag this one appropriately. V1AGR4 F0R CHEEEEEP. Save Money at http://fakelink.to/Aeff2#

0

Didn't read article, just going to agree that Star Wars is indeed better in every way :)

0

I always find the Star Wars/Star Trek debate funny because they seem so different to me that I have a hard time understanding how the two can be compared. Star Trek was created as a series of books and an episodic TV show, meaning that it was meant to have discreet stories told and wrapped up in a short time. Star Wars, on the other hand, was written as a series of movies with a far-reaching storyline. Star Trek is meant to be set in our own future, complete with our history and built upon our understanding of the real universe. Star Wars, however, exists "a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away." That opens SW up to potentially involve elements that would be too fantastical in a universe based on our own, no matter how futuristic. There are many other reasons, but fundamentally, comparing SW and ST does not seem like an appropriate comparison. (Also, if you insist on comparing them, it would probably be best to be done by someone with a reasonable degree of knowledge of both properties.)

0

Another debate for the ages: How, if at all, does Wesley Crusher affect whether Wars or Trek is better?

0

I feel like no one is talking about the real story here: Wesley Crusher and the Travler went through Time and Space for a while. Who is to say Wesley didn't populate the Humans in the Star Wars galaxy. I mean, you’re far from home and lonely and you want to get your freak on. Who could blame him. Wesley Crusher, the cause of all ills across multiple galaxies.

0

This is quite possibly the best piece of trolling I've ever read. Bravo, Mr. Trost.

0

I like the graphic for this piece.

0

I totally agree, Star Wars is the best movie Peter Jackson has ever made!

0

[Here's a relevant quote.](https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-nxulBvR_C10/TyUCme22ieI/AAAAAAAAO5Y/Ly6lN61B_as/w506-h285/dumbledore_quote_w1.jpeg)

0

Jar Jar is not humor!

0

I'm still baffled by how his role made it to any draft of the Phantom Menace script...

0

The Star War has a Millennium Falcon, which is 1) a thousand, which is cool 2) a spaceship that is also a bird?!?! NO CONTEST

0

I have never read a more accurate, truthful piece in my entire life.

0

You are incorrect.

0

Sorry to have to do this, but just to see if profanity filtering is enabled: fuck.

0.80303

0.106061

0.727273

0

0.212121

0

0.030303

Star Trek Original Series had excellent writing. Star Trek Next Generation had Sir Patrick Stewart. Star Wars had Alec Guiness and killed him off in the first episode! STOS>STNG>SW!

0

Can't argue with that math!

0

Little known fact: George Lucas, the Steve Jobs of filmmaking, created the Star Wars movies only as a vehicle for driving merchandise sales. You'd have to be part Ferengi (i.e., tacky, devious, and profit-driven) not to see that!

0

I read that in a book by Stephen Hawking.

0

Well-trolled, indeed. As far as Civil Comments goes, this seems like the best crucible there could be. And as far as Star Wars vs. Star Trek goes—nothing could ever touch Han Solo. The end.

0

log

0

This article is full of inaccuracies so glaring that a Pakled could refute them.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

This is an amazing reference!

0

What a reference!

0

Troll trolly troll. What now?

0.6

0

0.5

0

Wow, I don't even know where to begin. I certainly appreciate your passion, but if you are going to assert that Star Wars is better than Star Trek, and that this is the last place on the internet one need look to answer this question, perhaps a screening of the Start Trek Films by you is in order.

0

May I throw some Babylon 5 in here?

0

I'll take G'Kar over Yoda any day. http://www.wikiwand.com/en/G'Kar

0

I agree. This thread is missing a lot of valid data if we ignore Star Trek: Bablyon 5, Star Trek: Andromeda, and Star Trek: Serenity

0.2

0

All this, and not a single instance of "its" or "it's" was incorrect? I'm disappointed.

0

Everyone has standards. Everyone has lines they just won't cross.

0

Fortunately, Matthew threw in "intensive purposes" just for the pedants to rage over... thank you!

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

Good thing there's no other inaccuracies!

0

Well, the easter egg in the penultimate sentence was...it's [sic] own reward.

0

The intergalactic association of aliens considers both Star Wars and Star Trek as failing to represent the non human life form. Star Wars is according to them, muppet show style alien depiction. Star Trek depends too much on pointy ears and foreheads, and the overal dominant role of mankind in both series is very much frowned upon.

0

Star Trek is our future, Star Wars is our past. Vision versus history. Both are important!

0

THIS IS A TEST: Any fool knows Star Trek is the best albeit lacking the technology available to more recent shows. Your post is total crap. That's not what I really think or how I talk...just giving you a crap comment :)

0.781818

0

0.6

0

0.727273

0.018182

0

Order your own Star Fleet-issued sweater today and CRUSH IT! https://33.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m713qn7tEs1qcnvty.jpg

0

i can't help but think that the '4 reasons' title when five are listed is some sort of meta-comment meant to point out the general craziness of the postulate, but i can't quite line my brain up with it.

0.166667

0

0.166667

0

The prequel to Star Trek: Voyager—the criminally underrated Star Trek: Firefly—really should have lasted more than one season. So much untold backstory about young Kaylee Janeway!

0

But isn't it great that they're finally resuming ST:F with the new SyFy original series, "Star Trek: The Expanse". I hear they're going to be making a book series out of it, too.

0

FWIW, my cat enjoys Star Trek more.

0

Star Wars really is better. Really.

0

Hmm. My original comment didn't make it to your list. Some Trekkie shenanigans, perhaps?

0

Mmmm, more like a Jedi mind-trick...

0