Brutal Strudel wrote:
...Trek was many things but it was never remotely hard SF. Its take on biology (a human/Vulcan hybrid? with the radically different internal layouts, biochemistry and, presuambly, genetics? better a human/begonia hybrid, they'd be more closely related...)...
Did you steal that from Carl Sagan? I'm pretty sure it was him who said Spock's mother would have had a better chance reproducing with a rutabaga.
As for later Trek's contributions, tho', with the TNG episode that established all life on worlds populated by humanoids was seeded long ago by the same ancient race, then there could be some connection between all humanoid forms. Could be that on those seeded worlds, all the humanoids are similar enough where with little or no intervention, they can reproduce. We've heard the non-canon things about Amanda's pregnancy being carefully monitored and procedures done during it. We also see on DS9 Bashir saying something about needing to do one little thing so that Jadzia and Worf would be sure to conceive a viable child.
Yeah, you got me vis-a-vis Sagan.
Seriously, though, I don't really want Star Trek to be all that accurate--a long time ago, I tried to interest people in a thread that re-imagined Trek as hard SF and , though I got few takers, the conclusion I came to was that Trek--like Pkilip K. Dick--would lose a lot of its charm if it were to rigorous. I like hard SF--Lem and Robinson rock--but Trek is Trek, only slightly less silly than Star Wars. That's how I like it.