View Single Post
Old December 21 2011, 11:45 PM   #227
Lieutenant Commander
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Santa Kang wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
RoJoHen wrote: View Post
It's not one or the other. Star Trek has been full of philosophy and science and morals, but it's also been full of plotholes, technobabble, explosions, and crazy battles.
I have to defend the techno-babble as being scientifically rooted. It is not just made up jargon, especially since TOS and TNG had science advisors on hand to help with that process.

And the ratio of meaningful philosophical conundrums, scientific educational dialog and meaningful plots definitely outnumbers the ratio of meaningless plot-holes.
Their science advisors were often over ruled for the sake of drama and needs of the story. ST09 was no different. Though It's "reboot" is based on Many Worlds Interpretation. And as mentioned before the "black hole" used to travel in time is also based on scientific theory.

Made up stuff: Phasers, transporters, dilithium, viable human alien hybrids.....
There is a book called 'the physics of star trek' which I recently had the pleasure of reading, and in it the author, a prominent physicist, compares the physics and science of star trek to 'real life' physics and concludes that, not only does star trek (meaning TNG, TOS and VOY mainly) get the science right, but has predicted certain scientific phenomenon that has come to pass. So I see your statement as being fallacious, unless it is referring to that once in a while error of specifics.
trek_futurist is offline