Some elegant chess playing there. You are thinking 10 moves ahead!
--- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Daryle Lockhart <dar...@...> wrote: > > Yeah see, once Spock spilled the trans-warp equation, I knew he > was going to be a problem. He proved to BE said problem by having a > conversation with himself. > > To be specific, everything we know in Star Trek, as of now, did not > happen. Because Nero went back in time and destroyed the Kelvin, > thus killing George Kirk, James Kirk never served on any other ship > but the Enterprise, which means "The Cage" never happened. As I > theorized earlier, if Spock makes the case to the Klingons, then > even IF Kirk and Carol Marcus have a son, his Genesis discovery will > go off without a hitch, the target moon will become a test ground, > life will form on it, and David Marcus wil live a long and happy > life. So will Spock, by the way, which would leave everyone on > Earth when the probe comes looking for the whales. Which means > Transparent aluminum won't be invented in the 20th Century. If all > the Vulcans are gone, then Sybok went with 'em. Same goes for > Saavik and Tuvok's clan. If David Marcus lives long, Dr. Soong will > look like a parlor magician with his robotic theories, never be > taken seriously, and no Data/Lor. (by the way, Romulan/Federation > Alliance means no more oppressing the Remans, so "Nemesis" never > happens) > > > On May 10, 2009, at 4:32 PM, sincere1906 wrote: > > > > > > > Daryle, > > > > Those are some great points! True indeed, how many times has the > > timeline been altered already with flagrant offenders like Kirk > > (old Kirk)? And, one more time, what about those Temporal > > Authorities that exist in the far future that attempt to assure the > > timeline remains generally intact? Somehow they have to exist > > outside of these temporal changes and must be aware. I'm wondering > > too how many changes Spock's presence will bring. Spock however > > came from a Federation that obeyed the Prime Directive...somewhat. > > How much does he interfere in this timeline with his knowledge of > > the possible future? Does Spock give away future scientific > > knowledge (like he did with trans-warp teleporting), or keep his > > mouth/brain shut. > > > > So if I get this straight, this timeline does not "erase" the old > > one we're used to right? That timeline--that I'm going to call the > > Trek Universe 1.0--still exists, no? This new timeline is just > > another reality now, like Worf's bouncing around in Parallels. > > > > Sin/Black Galactus > > > > --- In scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com, Daryle Lockhart <daryle@> wrote: > > > > > > And the canonical differences are the things we were always arguing > > > about ANYWAY, which makes this reset brilliant. > > > > > > A lot of the things we accept as Trek law is stuff that happened > > > under Berman and Braga. Let's not forget, if we follow the actual > > > timeliine of events, time had been changed by the events of "First > > > Contact" ANYWAY, so things were already different. I have an > > > analysis coming on things that changed that we hadn't considered, > > > and some of it's good, like the idea that "Voyager" probably won't > > > happen in this timeline, and that no Klingons ever join the > > > Federation. Having a leading science officer from the future with > > > knowledge of their mining accident will DEFINITELY impact how the > > > Klingons get down. But more importantly, it is quite possible that > > > either the Founders or The Borg WIN this time. The small advantages > > > the Federation had were due to the political climate in the galaxy. > > > Change those things (make the Romulans into allies, for example), > > > and everything changes. I believe that this new Trek universe is > > > going to be FANTASTIC for novels. All bets are off! > > > > > > FOR THIS REASON, it's crucial that J J Abrams not direct the next > > > Star Trek movie. He can produce all day, I'm not saying the man > > > shouldn't get paid, but JJ has a habit of derailing something in > > > the middle and having it never recover (or is there someone here who > > > understands what's happening on "Lost"?) > > > > > > > > > On May 10, 2009, at 11:43 AM, Adrianne Brennan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I dunno. I don't see what they're doing as being any different > > from > > > > the reboot of Doctor Who, except with more major canonical > > > > differences. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ "Where love and magic meet" ~ > > > > http://www.adriannebrennan.com > > > > Experience the magic of Blood of the Dark Moon: http:// > > > > www.adriannebrennan.com/botdm.html > > > > Take a bite out of Blood and Mint Chocolates: http:// > > > > www.adriannebrennan.com/bamc.html > > > > Dare to take The Oath in this fantasy series: http:// > > > > www.adriannebrennan.com/books.html#the_oath > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 10:31 AM, <GWashin891@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 5/10/09 4:24:35 AM, sincere1906@ writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > My great fear is that this spawns a whole Trek series that won't > > > > have some universal appeal because they adhere to any dynamic set > > > > of principles, but a Trek universe where things get blow'd up real > > > > good and the movie crowd can clap on cue. Too early to make that > > > > judgment before the next film, so we'll just have to wait and > > see... > > > > > > > > MHO > > > > > > > > Sin/Black Galactus > > > > > > > > > > > > I was about to stay silent on this but the paragraph above > > prompted > > > > me to put my .02 cents in. > > > > > > > > What Sin/Black Galactus stated is something I call "The Galactica > > > > Syndrome". That is you got a show based on a earlier project that > > > > while forming it's own audiance base is shunned by most-if not all > > > > of the orignials show's base. Shows like this usually don't have > > > > that much of a long shelf-life being period 'flashes in the pan". > > > > > > > > Pre-new movie Star Trek (OST, ST:NG, ST:DS9, ST:V) while set > > > > either/or different time periods, situtations, characters, etc. > > > > could have went this way. Their was something about those shows > > > > (and the movies based on them) that fans from other shows could > > > > like and this brought in many fans from those shows. Which in turn > > > > made the great. However the flipside of this is that it produces > > > > 'lazy' exicution, that eventually results in bad products which > > > > angers and drives of the fans of those shows. Forcing efforts to > > > > bring new life into those shows. Sometimes successful, sometimes > > > > not. It depends on how much cannon they 'break' when doing it to > > > > make the show new/hip to make it acceptable to both new/old fans. > > > > > > > > This, IMO is why Enterprise was not well recieved by the pre-new > > > > movie Star Trek community. It broke too much cannon, and many of > > > > the stories weren't that good. Which is also why it didn't get > > > > that many new fans (IMO if it wasn't for the ST name Enterprise > > > > would have been canciled in it's first season). > > > > > > > > while the new Battlestar Galactica was a somewhat hit. It was not > > > > so by many fans of the old series who concider it broke too much > > > > cannon (and the fact it's creators also had 'lazy exicution' > > > > sydrome judging from it's later episodes) and this IMO the show > > > > will probally fade over time. And in my opinion I see the new Star > > > > Trek movie and it's alternate timeline will while finding intial > > > > popular support will eventually go the way of new BG as it's new > > > > fans will stick to this movie. While fans of pre-new movie ST will > > > > eventually ignore it and continue on, asking for more stuff in the > > > > pre-new movie ST background. > > > > > > > > But hey it's only my opinon. > > > > > > > > > > > > -GTW > > > > > > > > > > > > ************** > > > > The Average US Credit Score is 692. See Yours in Just 2 Easy > > Steps! > > > > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222376999x1201454299/ > > aol? > > > > redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx? > > > > sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=May51009AvgfooterNO62) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
