.... as hot as the surface of the Sun. There's no heat-deflecting material or cooling system OR EVEN MOLECULES at that temperature. Only plasma, like the sun's photosphere.
The only plausible thing about this movie is some of the acting. The science is *beep*
Point = Missed
Why don't you go criticise the science in Harry Potter while you're at it...
To hate another simply for proving you to be in the wrong is the lowest form of cowardice...
Harry Potter is much more plausible.
__________________________________
Get Satan a cherry pop. Satan's second choice is root beer.
harry potter is much more plausible. yea, magic is more possible. get a life you impossible moron!!
shareBeing as super-smart as you are, I'm surprised that you didn't realize that the comment was made not to tout the plausibility of Harry Potter, but to accentuate the implausibility of The Core. Both of which are by the way works of FICTION made for ENTERTAINMENT.
Also, name calling is about the most juvenile thing one can do next to wetting the bed. If you actually believe, as your profile suggests, that your opinions are the better ones (impossible by the very definition of "opinion"), find a better way to express them.
I would trust "eye of newt" to cure my tumor long before I would ever trust a vehicle to take me into 9000-degree temperatures.
"Atlas Shrugged- Part 1"- Coming soon to Canada and on DVD!
Lol, true.
shareI which case you are a moron.
---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.
There is no "science" in Harry Potter - it is fantasy.
I think the point is that "The Core" presents itself as scientific... and fails miserably.
-
Fox News: We lie, you panic!
Where does "The Core" present itself as "scientific"? It is a movie. It has a plotline based on an impending disaster and it has characters who are scientists being brought in to deal with the problem. There's no indication it is based on a true story or on real science.
share
You just contradicted yourself. Why should the movie use science as a basis for the plot and then nit just ignore science but actually spurn science? Plus, the writer not only refused to learn anything about science but refused to learn anything about good moviemaking. The film's biggest sin wasn't that it was scientifically absurd but that it was a crap film. It is like one of those comedians who says the reason they are criticized by critics is that they're too dirty... When in reality it is because they aren't funny. George Carlin and Richard Pryor were both dirty *and* funny. The "Harry Potter" movies were scientifically absurd but they were still good movies.
-
Fox News: We lie, you panic!
"...use science as a basis for the plot."
Obviously they didn't use science as a basis for the plot. They used a made-up scenario to create a disaster situation. There's no science involved in creating a fictional weapon that could cause earthquakes. It's just as much a fantasy as Harry Potter is.
I never said it was a great film. I said it didn't proclaim itself to be a science based film, they used scientists as characters involved in resolving the cause of a made-up disaster situation.
The genre is known as "science-FICTION" for a reason.
There is actually work going on and work that has gone on regarding the science around an earthquake like weapon. So yes it's not just some made up crap.
shareWhere does "The Core" present itself as "scientific"? It is a movie. It has a plotline based on an impending disaster and it has characters who are scientists being brought in to deal with the problem. There's no indication it is based on a true story or on real science.
HP is Fantasy; this is Science Fiction.
shareActually at these pressures, some materials with high melting points could stay solid.
shareAn 18th century person explaining an 18th century person with 18th century "know-how" how traveling in space is done is just as absurd as a person today would explain a person today with today's "know-how" how traveling to the core of our planet is done.
I mean even the idea of space travel in the 18th century is probably nothing short of insanity.
The only thing I ever wondered about in the movie was the black dude had to die to eject the compartments of the ship however 3 mins later the other guy used the "emergency ejection button". I enjoyed the movie I don't care about the "science" trying to think about it would ruin the movie as it would many other sci fi flicks.
shareThe ship couldn't eject a compartment that wasn't damaged. The emergency eject button (I don't remember that) would be there in case the damaged compartment didn't eject on its own.
I've wondered about something. Couldn't the black guy put on 2 suits? Would that have made a difference?
"I hardly know, which way is up, or which way down" - "I Feel Possessed", Neil Finn
(just replying behind the last reply... not directed at your post}
sigh! When was the last time fiction was allowed to be FICTION? I miss that. They used to just make crap up and it was interesting and fun: shooting a bullet space ship at the moon, and we find it is made or cheese or has ants living on it.
I hate that fiction has to be based on reality. All it needs is just enough that we can follow the thought and action. Doesn't have to always (or EVER) be scientifically accurate) jsut fun and entertaining.
RIP "Fiction"
WHY ARE YOU CRITICIZING ME? WHAT DID I EVER DO TO YOU????
J/k. I agree with what you said. 100%. As long as a story follows its own rules; ie, can't say water freezes at 0 degrees and below, then have water freeze at 30. Why, in order to tell a story about the outer core having stopped spinning, and the effort to save the planet, do the writers have to be physics scholars? Just watch the damn movie, and if they break their own rule, then b*tch about that. Not about whether whales go below 800 ft or whatever it is.
"I hardly know, which way is up, or which way down" - "I Feel Possessed", Neil Finn
"trying to think about it would ruin the movie" Yeah, don't think, like 99% of other "americans" total idiots, what a sad state of society, and people are defending this garbage? My god the world is in trouble!
sharePicasso's paintings are very unrealistic, but you probably call it art.
shareMost people don't go to a movie so they can analyze it and think about how "real" it is, most people go to the movies to be entertained.
shareAn 18th century person explaining an 18th century person with 18th century "know-how" how traveling in space is done is just as absurd as a person today would explain a person today with today's "know-how" how traveling to the core of our planet is done.
[deleted]