Introduction

	Welcome to ST-v-SW.Net.

I'm sure you have a few questions.  Let's answer some:

You know that Trek is just a TV show, and that Star Wars is just some movies, right?

Of course!   But that doesn't mean we can't have fun thinking about them.

You know this means you're a geek, don't you?

Yup . . . pretty much.   But, then, you came here and you're reading this, so you're probably one, too.  :-)

Why bother with such a silly subject?

Long ago, I encountered one of those websites where the author claimed that the Star Wars Galactic Empire would whoop the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek. If you've ended up at my site, this comparative backwater in the universe of such sites, then you've probably seen some of the pro-Wars sites and forums by now.   As one rather rabid Warsie debater put it, the "purpose is not to discover truth; the purpose is to win."  And with that, you know just the type of thing that I'm talking about, and the standard tactics . . .

Don't argue rationally . . . yell down opposition.
Don't argue rationally . . . insult opposition.
Don't argue rationally . . . ignore the opposition.
Don't argue rationally . . . misrepresent the opposition.

My defiant personality didn't take too kindly to such things, and thus this site was born.  Sure, there are plenty of other things to argue about, but this topic had virtually no representation from the rational side of the aisle (though there were and still are many pretenders).  

Don't you think you're a little biased?

Perhaps. It could be argued that everyone is biased to some degree regarding what they spend their time on. And of course, let's not forget that a lot of what I'm doing revolves around quashing the popular anti-Trek and pro-Wars myths and distortions. I'm not writing in a vacuum, after all . . . much has come before, and, in my estimation, much of it is in error.  However, I am absolutely not trying to replace those other myths with anti-Wars, pro-Trek myths . . . that would be just as bad.  I'm aiming for fairness and balance, equal treatment for both sides. 

That is not bias . . . that is sticking to the facts.  Sure, this is science fiction, but we can still investigate it and consider it rationally.

And you know, I'd like to point out here that contrary to many of the pro-Wars site authors' views on pro-Trek parties (the term "Federation Cultist" comes to mind, but that's also probably one of the *least* insulting names you'll find), I do not immediately assume that pro-Wars individuals are evil, stupid, or mentally ill.  After all, in regards to some arguments I'm just as pro-Wars as anyone else.   That having been said, though . . . there are many pro-Wars debaters out there who *are* sick, demented, self-deceptive, dishonest, and all that.  Just take a look at this.  But, I certainly don't assume that is the case with everyone.

As far as my personal opinion goes, I like both Trek and Wars, but I prefer Star Trek story-wise.  In the realm of special effects, though, Star Wars is far superior.   But, to be honest, all the hostile encounters with the more rabid Warsies have significantly reduced my ability to enjoy Star Wars, since they give the franchise a bad reputation. Even so, I make every effort to be as fair and even-handed as possible, to the point of giving Star Wars every benefit of the doubt, within reason. In general, other sites on the topic do not do the opposite for Star Trek, no matter how pro-Wars the authors are.  

From such authors come a mass of arguments that would seem to suggest that Star Wars has the edge, and those arguments are often quite alluring, on the surface.  However, such arguments are almost invariably wrong.  Of course, make no mistake:  the Death Star rules.  But, as demonstrated twice, even Death Stars aren't invincible . . . nor are the Death-Star-sized volumes of fanboy wankery which purport to show that a lone Star Destroyer would destroy the Federation fleet (followed by the Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians, Dominion, Borg, and anyone else). All that one has to do is point out the flaws in the claims about the evidence, logic, and math. The first two are the most likely, since most of the time the math is flawless . . . however, mathematics proves nothing when based upon false assumptions. 

I realize that even the best of us are capable of being misled by a subtle error or subtle deception, especially when it is repeated ad infinitum.  There are so many argument variants which branch from the same misbegotten sources that, by sheer volume alone, some would want to say "Okay, Star Wars wins it". However, this is not necessary, or prudent. The facts alone are the final arbiter . . . not popularity, box office draw, the clash of egos so prevalent in such debates, or any other criteria . . . just the facts the two science-fiction universes present of themselves. 

In my opinion, based on my research of the topic, the facts suggest that Star Trek technology is superior, though the question of who would win a war is still open.  Your opinion may differ, and that's fine.  This site is an exposition of how I arrived at my opinion . . . if you think I've missed an important fact, let me know. 

Granted, this is not the most important topic on the planet . . . or in this country . . . or even in this room. But, that which is false must be challenged. Oh, I could engage in some other debate, but this one is kinda fun, and makes good practice for the others.

G2k

There's a lot to talk about in regards to ST vs. SW . . . though the site is small, it's growing. If there's anything you would like to see addressed, let me know via the Feedback page.

This site makes extensive use of the Arial Narrow and Trebuchet fonts.  Windows users can acquire these standard fonts here (700kb download). 

Other Questions:

What about the Star Trek vs. Star Wars material on Mike Wong's StarDestroyer.Net, or the pages of Michael January, et cetera?

Some of that work is very well thought out, and well-presented.  However, there are several points of departure in the logic used at this site compared to those, and where one ends up definitely depends on where one starts.  Most notably, the above sites both make heavy (sometimes exclusive) use of the non-canon materials of both Star Trek and Star Wars, sometimes ignoring or contradicting canon (i.e. onscreen) fact.  That is a methodology I do not agree with.   This site and the findings thereon are based strictly on canon material, though there are a few references and rebuttals to certain popular arguments based on non-canon data.  A further explanation of this position can be found on the Preface and Canon.  

What about Babylon 5, or Stargate SG-1's Goa'uld or Asgard, or Iain M. Banks' "Culture", et cetera? 

You came here expecting to find that?!?   ;-)

I confess, I didn't see much Babylon 5, but for a few episodes here and there of the main show and a couple of episodes of Crusade.  I very much liked what I saw of B5 (the finale was extremely moving, even to me, and I had only the slightest knowledge of the show's arc), but I certainly don't know enough about it to make reliable technical comparisons.  If you're interested, this site seems to focus more on the canonical representation, whereas this one seems to include a bit more independent guesswork at times.  Their opinions differ rather greatly, and there are times when one is probably more correct than the other, but I'm not getting in the middle of that one.  :-)

I know far more about Stargate SG-1, though I'm rather behind.  Frankly, I think it's some of the best sci-fi ever made.  Even when they borrow a plot or two from Star Trek, it's rendered in such a fresh form that it is still a joy to watch.  

I'm not sure about the current tech level of the Goa'uld . . . and it's hard to say what that is, since they're more of the tech leeching sort, as opposed to being tech developers.  I do know that rather early on in the series Goa'uld ships started being able to make much better speed than their prior 10 times lightspeed hyperdrive limit, and they seemed to make some surprising advances in shielding technology (personal shielding for certain Goa'uld and starship shields effortlessly withstanding 1000 megaton nuclear weapons).   In any event, the peculiar fragmentation and "checks and balances" of the Goa'uld system lord culture would make it hard to say just who has what.  Ship to ship, though, I'd guesstimate them as a rough match for many types of Federation starship.   But, that's just a rough placement.  In a total war scenario, though, I think the Federation would "clean their chronometers", to coin a phrase, if even only because it is a united Starfleet.

As for the Asgard . . . they would quite probably wipe the floor with the UFP and the Empire, as could the Culture, several times over.

But, this site is about Star Trek and Star Wars.   Click the link below, and see how the comparison will be made. 

Star Trek vs. Star Wars:   Preface and Canon Policies, or "How can you even compare them?"