You might wanna use an image-hosting service. I use ImgBB, myself.
Well... yes. Unused ideas are still evidence of creator intent, and therefore just as the original ending of When Strikes Mutilor suggests the writers intended the kat planet to be an alien one, the original concept for Cry Turmoil means that they also believe Feral has it in him to turn bad under the right circumstances. I may not like it, but it is the case that Lance Falk thought so and that Buzz Potamkin vetoed it not because he thought it went against Feral's character, but because he thought it would be more interesting if Turmoil fell for T-Bone instead, due to his "always focus on the SWAT Kats" attitude that kept a lot of the supporting cast relegated to the sidelines.EditorElohim wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:34 pmIf we go down that road, that means Feral is an unscrupulous cretin willing to ally himself with a criminal capable of threatening the city HE swore to defend just to have a chance to defeat the Swat kats. But we know he's not like that from the HQ Enforcer incident, right?
Again, I don't like it, and don't really agree with it, but clearly Lance Falk thinks Feral could turn evil under the right circumstances, even though this has never actually happened in the show (and I hope it never does). For what it's worth, I think people assume Feral was intended to turn on a dime, whereas, when clarifying things, Falk insisted that the Commander would have to endure not simply being fired but an extended string of humiliations and bad luck before finally being pushed to the brink. Based on having it put that way, it's less "Feral has it in him to turn evil" and more "almost everyone does."
Potamkin was also the one who torpedoed the original ending for When Strikes Mutilor, apparently because he just personally found the idea of the crew turning out to be humans dumb. Based on his track record, the man was the king of doing the right things for the wrong reasons.
Wrong. Whether you like it or not, Earth doesn't have green skies. And while, yes, the sky has been other colors in other episodes (red in The Giant Bacteria and The Ghost Pilot, blue in Chaos in Crystal and yellow in When Strikes Mutilor), it is nevertheless consistently green throughout the series, ergo this is most likely its primary color, and the other instances are (out of universe) stylistic choices and (in-universe) likely the result of things like the time of day or weather conditions. For example, the backgrounds for The Giant Bacteria indicate that they're for early morning. Combine this with the fact the red sky in The Ghost Pilot is seen after the sun rises (the Red Lynx escapes the museum at night and attacks City Hall in what appears to be the morning) and we have evidence that skies on their world are reddish in the morning.EditorElohim wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:34 pmThat evidence is extremely poor to the point that it is not even circumstantial: It is the same as saying that the series does not take place on Earth because the sun and the moon look too big in the sky, when we all know that this is done as an artistic resource to give more drama or better aesthetics to the scene.
And speaking of yellow skies, the sky is a kind of yellowish in the Dead Forest in The Giant Bacteria, which makes me think a yellow sky on the kat world means haze or possibly heat or humidity. Likely the former, given the blue sky in the very hot desert in Chaos in Crystal.
So, bottom line, the sky is usually green, which, when combined with the fact the planet is popular by anthropomorphic felines, lends itself towards the world not being Earth. It's not definitive, it's no smoking gun, but it is in fact a little more than just circumstantial.
But Invader Zim does take place on Earth and is highly stylized with a completely different visual and artistic approach to SWAT Kats. So how it portrays the skies of Earth has nothing to do with what we're discussing. Pick a different show with an aesthetic and tone closer to SWAT Kats that is demonstrably set on Earth and has weird green skies and then maybe I'll agree that funky sky colors in a show with an otherwise (relatively) naturalistic aesthetic aren't evidence that it isn't supposed to take place on Earth.EditorElohim wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:34 pmOr, it may be mere artistic license: in Invader Zim, the sky was reddish-yellowish during the day and purple-violet at night, while in Rocket Power, the daytime sky was yellowish, except for cloudy days when it was blue or gray. And if I remember correctly, both series take place mostly on Earth.
I did acknowledge that other shows that were definitely set on Earth had their own fictional species of dinosaurs.
This is true, but a reach.
As someone who was a dinosaur nut growing up, I can tell you that the dinosaurs in The Pastmaster Always Rings Twice are inaccurate even for 1993. In fact, in many ways they're kind of a regression in terms of dinosaur portrayal, since they have more in common with 1980s portrayals of dinosaurs than with 1990s ones, being big, lumbering fatsos with dragging tails. Heck, until Jurassic Park came along and popularized scientifically accurate dinosaurs, fiction saw fit to basically ignore everything scientists said. Even back during the 80s, it was generally accepted that they were warm-blooded, a lot slimmer than generally depicted, didn't drag their tails, and didn't live in swamps, but this was generally ignored.
So, yes, there is precedent for inaccurate dinosaurs in fiction not meaning the story they're in takes place on another world, but, like the green skies, their portrayal can be added to the column of evidence that the kat world isn't Earth. Like the sky color(s), on its own, it isn't evidence of anything, but when combined with the fact kats and not humans inhabit the planet, it is nevertheless suggestive.
Again, these things are nothing conclusive, but they add up.
Ah, yeah. I forgot about those things.
The bottom of the sea, clearly.
Which, while never proven, I've always assumed to be creations of Dark Kat as opposed to naturally occurring creatures.
That's because even if their world isn't Earth, for the most part, they clearly made an effort to make it as similar to own world as possible in order for the audience to actually relate. And not every example of flora in their world is entirely like ours. I give you the Dead Forest in The Giant Bacteria. Find me trees like that on Earth. Not trees shaped like that; how they're shaped is not the issue. Their size is. They're gigantic, the size of skyscrapers, big enough that Dr. Viper lives in the hollow of the largest one like it's a studio apartment.
This seems more likely to me than it being the future of our own planet. Mostly because, for lack of anything better to call it, I had the planet referred to as "Earth" in a few lines of dialogue in my fan rewrite of The Doctors of Doom. Not because I thought their world was Earth, at least our Earth, but because I'm not sure what else they'd call their planet.
I've heard of a lot of similar theories about ancient civilizations, and none of them hold much water. It's fun for fiction, but it's pseudoscientific (or perhaps pseudohistorical would be a better description) gobbledygook IRL.
And rightly so.
That doesn't change the fact there's no evidence for it. We have no evidence for extraterrestrial life (or lack thereof). The concept of ancient aliens is a fun idea, and while someday there may be some definitive proof of such things, at present, there isn't. It amounts to "Wouldn't it be cool if...?" wishful thinking. All signs do in fact point to humans being the first intelligent sentient life to emerge after the dinosaurs went extinct, and that before the time of the dinosaurs the world was a mess of volcanic upheaval that couldn't yet support life.EditorElohim wrote: ↑Tue Feb 02, 2021 10:34 pmPersonally, I find it absurd to think that in the nearly 600 million years that the Earth has been harboring complex life, no alien species has colonized it for some time, or else, that only humans have evolved as an intelligent species and that before us there was nothing.
Of course, I'm no scientist, so actually explaining much less fully comprehending all these things is a little beyond me, but I generally trust accredited experts. Particularly ones who will change their ideas as new evidence emerges. It's the people who won't change their minds in the face of evidence I don't trust. And it has to be credible evidence. Although you note that the scientific community has dismissed a lot of things as insufficient, the fact remains that evidence was presented and examined; they have actually looked at all the claims made over the years, so the notion that they suppress evidence that clashes with their worldview is incorrect (not that you suggested they did; merely that people who tend to believe in things like Atlantis, Lemuria, the hollow Earth, etc. often use that claim whenever their "evidence" gets rejected).
And it wasn't that there was nothing before us. Between the world's volcanic beginnings and the rise of humans, it was teeming with life. In fact I daresay there was more life, and more variety of it, back then than there is now. It was just mostly small rodents and reptiles and insects and such, as opposed to primates.
No, there'd be something. If not evidence of buildings and technology, then fossil evidence of living things. But no fossils of any intelligent non-human beings have been discovered. And the claim that it's "very difficult or almost impossible" to find evidence of them is, in my opinion, a copout, akin to saying that "lack of evidence for something isn't evidence against it." If there's no evidence for them, what makes you think they existed? Where does the idea of them come from? Our imaginations. We want there to be more to the surrounding world than there is, and, heck, there could be/could've been, until such time as actual evidence for such things surfaces, we can't have a proper debate on the issue because it's all a matter of belief. And debating belief never got anyone anywhere. At least not anywhere good.
Well, we've been to the moon several times and there's nothing up there. That said, I wonder if you'd like the movie Moontrap, which does deal with astronauts finding evidence of an advanced, ancient human civilization up there, along with a bunch of evil robots that cannibalize humans for spare parts.
I don't think enough dinosaurs escaped from Lockwood Manor to properly overrun the Earth, no matter what the movie suggests.
Yeah. Depending on how long ago they existed, they'd leave either ancient ruins and artifacts for them to be find, or, if they predated the dinosaurs, then there'd be fossil evidence. The thing is they'd need to dig down particularly deep to find them, since the older something is, the deeper in the strata of the planet it is. If you wanted to do a story where fossil evidence of humans is discovered, they mention in Caverns of Horror that the titular caverns are "deeper than any kat's gone before," Conklin dumping his toxic waste down there notwithstanding. While Conklin only went down there to dump the waste and apparently didn't do any exploring, perhaps you could write a story where Dr. Sinian decides to poke around down there after all the scorpions have been taken care of and finds fossilized human skeletons or something.
How can they forget about something they never knew about to begin with? Up until now, you've been suggesting the humans existed so long before the kats that without any archaeological or paleo-anthropological evidence there's no way they could've even known about them. Now suddenly the kats used to know but "forgot" over time. Which is it?
Well, yeah, if they don't know what something is, they usually won't presume to pretend like they know. At least the professional ones won't. This has unfortunately led to many overly imaginative people to dismiss scientists as a bunch of stuffy killjoys who won't let them have fun with their wild ideas about ancient aliens and cryptids.
I think they would be. The nature of science, one of the major things about it, is that it changes when new evidence comes along. The problem is that new evidence often comes along in very small increments as opposed to huge, sweeping discoveries, so scientists have to be on their guard when a ton of evidence comes in all at once, because that usually means it's a hoax. Not always, but the odds are that if something seems like it's too good to be true, it usually is. Scientists are actually very openminded, usually; they just always have to be on their guard against scams, hoaxes and phonies, so they don't just accept even mountains of seemingly totally convincing evidence right out of the gate.