The writers were commenting on productions, not canon when they said it's "still there".
1. Those writers are now the guys who decide
what is and is not canonical.
2. If they say that a line onscreen meant that the prime timeline still exists, then that's what that line means. Period.
3. They have said that a canonical line about alternate timelines means that the original timeline still exists.
4. Ergo, canonically, the original timeline still exists.
Oh come on. We all know they were just telling 'those' TREKIES that they're not trying to piss on everything held dear for fourty years.
I'm not sure what you mean. Orci and Kurtzman found a way to tell a new version of the TOS story that gave them the creative freedom they would lack in the prime continuity without completely disregarding that continuity. I don't know why you insist on thinking that they meant to destroy that continuity or don't really care about it, especially since they've made it clear that they became Trek fans through TNG, not TOS.
They came up with a creative solution that gave them the creative freedom to do TOS according to a new interpretation whilst still allowing future Trek stories to be told in the original continuity. What's wrong with that?
Canon begone in nuTrek. ST0 is like a canon cannon!
You seem to misunderstand the definition of the term "canon."
"Canon" does not refer to a shared continuity in which multiple stories are set. That's what "continuity" means (or, if you're talking from an in-universe POV, "timeline"). A canon
is simply a collection of stories created by a common creator or owner. Sherlock Holmes is the perfect example; there is a "Sherlock Holmes canon" of the four novels and 56 short stories about Sherlock Holmes written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, but there are also numerous non-canonical stories about Holmes written by later writers. Those stories might be completely compatible in terms of continuity with the canonical stories, but it is simply the fact that they weren't written by Conan Doyle that makes them non-canonical.
In other words, the canon is simply the body of stories upon which later stories are based. That's it.
has a canon, and this new film is part of that canon. Star Trek
also has two major continuities, the original TOS/TNG continuity, and this nuTrek continuity. But the canon has always had other continuities as well -- the Mirror Universe, for example, or the various alternate timelines that have been overwritten ("Year of Hell," for instance, is a canonical story that is not part of the prime continuity since it got the Reset Button), and the alternate timelines that exist parallel to the prime timeline/continuity.
In other words, this new film is not a "canon cannon." It's not "Canon-B-Gone." It's simply a film that shifts our focus as the audience from the prime continuity to a new one.
Let me ask you all this:
If Uncle Spock travels forward to the 24th century what will he find? Will there be all the people he has ever known remembering the canon just as he does? Or will there be a completely different set of events (perhaps somewhat similar) in the canon?
That would depend upon which 24th Century he travels to -- the 24th Century of the prime timeline, or the 24th Century of this new timeline (which Memory Alpha refers to as the Alternate Reality). I rather imagine that if he were able to travel through that black hole he came through, he'd wind up back in the prime 24th Century.