How does it demystify something that was explained the very moment it was introduced? And what esoteric concept? The energy field created by living beings? How is that esoteric?

It's all there in the movies, the living component that allows living beings to connect with the Force and vice versa was simply given a name in The Phantom Menace. It's what makes a plant, an animal or a sentient being connect with the Force instead of a droid or a rock.

HELLO!

When does Yoda talk about all life being connected? Not that it isn't because it is. And midi-chlorians also reinforce that point since all living beings have them.

That's not what midi-chlorians are. Rewatch the movie.

Like I said, midi-chlorians sound as much like science as "an energy field created by all living things".

Yes, so what? Midi-chlorians are not the Force. They are not a measurement of the Force. If you watch the movie and pay attention to what is actually said instead of what you think it's said, you'll realize that.

Watch the movie.

Yes, reinforce and explain in a measurable way, detectable with scientifiv instruments. What Yoda is talking about isn't like that at all.

I don't think I'm the one who needs to do that. You're the only one getting everything wrong :D

No, they are a measurable, scientificaly provable explanation of the Force and how it works.

The burden of proof is on you.

Yes, life forms in cells can be detected. So...?

Yoda doesn't talk about that at all.

Because you say so? It doesn't work that way. You have yet to provide any valid argument.

Midi-chlorians are not the Force, they are not an explanation of the Force (watch A New Hope for that) nor do they explain the Force. They are the biological means through which a living being is able to connect with the Force. It's why a plant is connected to the Force while a rock isn't. Han doesn't believe in the Force, yet he's connected to it wether he likes it or not. Why do you think that is? Because of midi-chlorians, which is a requirement for life to exist.

Why?

I honestly don't know how to answer that. Thank you for concedeing our point?

Right back at ya. I don't think this is getting us anywhere :D

Exactly, thank you for conceding our point. I guess we are done here.

What what what?

Seriously though you disagree? X)

I don't just disagree, I find that stement so absurd it's hilarious.

How? Star Trek has some good stories to tell but that's not it's prime focus like Star Wars.

Uhm... it's the exactly other way around? On one hand you've got Star Trek tackling important socio-political issues and complex sci-fi concepts and on the other you have a very nice, but absolutely basic story of good vs evil. You can argue Star Wars superiority in many areas, like the scope and special effects, but in terms of story? It's ridiculous.

Oh well, agree to disagree? X)

That's not actually the measure of "good storytelling". The most basic of stories, with hardly an analogy to our own culture, beautifully and emotionally told, can still be a profoundly satisfying experience.

...I still think you're right and Lucius is wrong. :)