Although… didn’t Luke, Leia and Han say “Copy that” several times while using communicators in the original Star Wars movie? Hardly a timeless phrase.
Looks like I picked the wrong day to stop sniffin’ glue.
You’re right, I did say something about the Staff Report’s claim. The claim I was talking about was their claim that “roger roger” in TPM was a reference to the movie Airplane.
There’s not a claim in the Staff Report that “roger roger” in TPM was a reference to the movie Airplane? Then I seriously misread it!
You’re right about this. I did say something about a claim–the claim that’s in the Staff Report.
-FrL-
There is no claim that “Roger Roger” originated with the movie, presupposition or not, and it is that claim to which Q.E.D. is referring. Your words again, bolding mine.
Nothing is even remotely hinted about the* origination* of the term; only that Lucas may have been quoting “Airplane” in his use of it. You know, for the comedic effect. The claim you reference is not about the origin of the term, only the its relation to Star Wars.
Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit amphetamines. :smack: 
The point of the article wasn’t to document every possible use of the term “roger” under every circumstance, but to trace its etymology. Considering that “roger” is the near-universal term for “I got your message, understand it, and will follow through with your instructions,” it’s safe to say that that’s the usage that Lucas et al. intended, knowing it would be widely understood by the audience.
The same holds true with the space program, which was (and is) populated by military types. It doesn’t matter why they say it, except that (again) it’s widely understood.
It seems to me that the OP simply glommed on to a minor point then used it to try to discredit the entire report. It’s his right to argue until he’s blue in the face, but I’m perfectly happy to drown him out with the OED.
Robin
Roger, Robin.
Why pretend? We both know perfectly well what this is about. You want me to have an abortion.
You bolded a presupposition, not a claim!
Color you confused indeed.
Have you read my post #15?
-FrL-
There was no claim. You can’t have a claim based on a presupposition if there is no claim.
What claim do you contend is based on said presupposition?
I’ve said this I think three times already. I do not contend that any claim was based on any presupposition. I think the OP thinks someone could try to defend the Staff Report by reference to a certain imputed presupposition.
Read post 15 yet?
Staff report claim: Lucas used “roger roger” as a reference to Airplane.
OP’s argument: “Roger Roger” is in use in radio communications, and that is sufficient to explain Lucas’s usage. There’s no reason to think Airplane has anything to do with it.
OP anticipates the following defense: Maybe it wasn’t a reference to Airplane, but still, maybe the usage was in Lucas’s movie because of Airplane after all, because maybe the expression “roger roger” itself comes from Airplane. (This does not defend the Staff Report’s claim exactly, but rather, tries to save something from it, namely, a possible insight that there is some important historical relationship between Lucas’s usage and the Airplane usage. That is not stated in the article, but someone trying to save something from it might read it in as a presupposition.)
OP answers this defense: But it was used before Airplane was filmed.
I’m not saying the OP read the article right. I’m saying QED misunderstood the OP in his first reply to the OP. I am saying QED missed the purpose of the OP’s comment about the chronological relationship between Conrad’s use and the filming of Airplane. QED thought the OP was saying the article says Conrad’s use was because of Airplane. But QED was wrong to think that this is what the OP was saying. I was telling QED what the OP was actually trying to do.
-FrL-
.
Oh, for Ed’s sake . . .
Looky here:
“Roger” is a radio term.
“Roger, roger” has been used, at least once, as a radio term.
“Roger, Roger” was a joke in Airplane!
“Roger-roger” was a recurring line in SW: tPM.
The Staff Report includes this line:
So, simple questions for Robin: Whose consensus, and why?
.
There is ample reason to believe that it was used in reference to Airplane!. The obvious one is that the battle droids were used as slapstick comedy over and over again. To deny that would be like saying that Jar-Jar Binks was a good character. The other reason is that everything that the droids said was ridiculous, and indicative of Lucas’ simplistic writing abilities.
Of course, you could also note what the Staff Report said, which was as follows:
Underlining mine.
You’re free to disagree. You can attribute it to whatever you want to. But since the assertion was about a consensus and you’re outnumbered, that’s kind of fighting the current, so to speak. Of course, you could Google it, but I think you’ll find that the consensus holds true there as well inasmuch as anybody cared enough to say anything about it.
.
No offense, Doors, but the presence of slapstick alone, absent any other Airplane! references, doesn’t strike me as ample evidence.
I’ll accept there’s a consensus, but I want to know who is all in concurrence, and why they are. and it’d be nice if there were direct evidence. Not that it’s all that big a deal, really, and not that it would surprise me in the least if the consensus is correct, but I love a little more detail if it’s available.
.
OK, let’s do a little experimentation with Google. Again, barring confirmation from George Lucas himself, we’re left to determine the consensus opinion. So let’s do it.
Searching “roger roger” “phantom menace” “conrad”, we have no results that would indicate that anybody thought it was a reference to anything that Pete Conrad said over the radio from space or on the pad.
Now, if we search “roger roger” “phantom menace” “pete conrad”, we get no results whatsoever. I think by now we can discount this theory, barring the confirmation from George Lucas.
So, onto what is asserted to be the consensus opinion: let’s search “roger roger” “phantom menace” “Airplane!”. The first hit notwithstanding (it is the staff report), there are numerous other people that thought the same thing. Like here:
…and here:
There’s more where that came from. But not a single person anywhere that I can find referenced Pete Conrad. That, to me, is a lead pipe lock, and the very definition of, a consensus.
I suppose you could ask George, but I don’t know that you’ll get an answer. So there it is.
I don’t think that the OP is claiming that Lucas was specifically referencing Pete Conrad - he was just using Conrad as an example of someone using “roger roger” prior to Airplane. So googling “roger roger” “phantom menace” “conrad” is missing the point.
.
Yah, I thought the Conrad thing was just brought up by way of demonstrating that “roger roger” had been recorded as a legitimate radio usage well prior to the movie gag.
But . . . :shrug:. Ok. I guess a lot of people think George was intending an Airplane! homage. I’m not going to disagree with them. Just wondering what they base it on, that’s all.
.
Your analysis is certainly interesting and surprising. Few would have thought to analyze the matter in such a way. Some corrections, however:
(1) It is not the case that the absence of a consensus that the Droids’ use of “roger, roger” in Phantom Menace references Conrad’s use of the term on Apollo 12 is relevant either to a purported consensus that the Phantom Menace usage referenced Airplane!, or to any prior discussion in this thread at all.
(2) Neither you nor the staff member who penned the original implausible analysis of the use of the term “roger roger” in Phantom Menace present evidence that there is a consensus that the term references Airplane. The staff member did not even purport to present evidence, and you adduced one or two people who were reminded of Airplane by the phrasing. But that a few people on the web were reminded of one movie by another movie does not suggest that that there is a consensus that the second movie intentionally referenced the first.
Indeed, many propositions, no matter how absurd and no matter how few people hold them, are averred by a few people on the web or within some message board or other; this does not suggest there is a consensus as to the propositions.
(3) It is not the case that because the droids are presented as “slapstick” that their use of the term “roger roger” was intended to reference Airplane.
(4) In fact, there does not appear to be a consensus that Lucas referenced Airplane in Phantom Menace. My search found no evidence either of such a belief’s being widely held (or, for that matter, of any evidence to back up the belief).
“He said-she said” doesn’t help a bit. What were the parameters of your search? What were your criteria for evidence of consensus?
.
rbnn, it’s not up to me to provide the proof that the use of “roger roger” came from Conrad. It’s up to you to back up your assertion.
Unless someone asks George Lucas his inspiration for “roger roger”, it’s a moot point anyway. You’re talking about two words in a much longer movie.
Really, what difference does it make?
Robin
The OP said that it was unlikely that Conrad was parodying Airplane. Since no one that we have any knowledge of has made the claim that that was the case, and, in fact, the only mention of Conrad was in the OP, **Q.E.D. **quite properly pointed out that such a claim does not appear anywhere in the Report.
The OP said, and I quote, “It is unlikely that Conrad was parodying the Airplane movie in his use of the term “Roger, roger” for several reasons.”
**Q.E.D. **said that no one has made such a claim. And no one has. He was right.
Your response? “The OP is accounting for the possibility that the Staff Report’s claim relies on a presupposition that the term ‘roger roger’ originates in the movie Airplane.”
And then change it to this, bolding mine. “I **think **the OP thinks someone could try to defend the Staff Report by reference to a certain imputed presupposition.”
How did we get from “is” to “I think?” How did we get from “Staff Report’s claim relies” to “someone could try?” How did we get from “a presupposition” to “a certain imputed presupposition?” Even granting that the Staff Report was somehow referencing Conrad when referring to Airplane, which appears to be made up out of whole cloth by you, where did we get “originate” from? No one except you has remotely suggested that such an origin was on the table, the OP included.
The OP does say this : “Third, Airplane would not be released for eleven years.”
Can’t we assume that MsRobyn knew this, and therefore would never advance the theory that Conrad was parodying Airplane? Can we not assume that in a moment when “clear communication” was important, an astronaut would not be parodying anything? Why invent an extremely unlikely scenario to account for the possibility of an event that no one says happened?
You people have me confused. You keep talking about a movie by George Lucas named “The Phantom Menace” when no such movie exists and Lucas died immediately after finishing the [del]first[/del] only theatrical release of “Return of the Jedi.”