Re: Celebrity paradoxes
Nerys Myk wrote:
Its a series of TV shows/films. How can a ship created for a an iteration of the show created in 2001 appear in earlier iterations? The NX-01 omissions in older versions of Star Trek has nothing to do with the E's time trip.
You appear to be getting "in-universe," and "out-universe" mixed up and combined. From a production point of view, obviously the NX-01 wasn't design when we first saw the legacy display. However, in-universe the NX-01 didn't appear among the legacy ships Decker and the Ilia-unit looked at in TMP, nor was the NX-01 present in the observation lounge wall in TNG series.
In-universe, something changed to place it there. If the NX-01, a ship with a prominent history (first this and that), wasn't present, it's not being initially named Enterprise could account for it's absence.
In the original history, Deanna never told Cochrane the Enterprise's name, because she wasn't there the first time through.
I'm not confusing them at all. I just don't go for the alternate universe explanation for every little "discrepancy". Even for things, stories and concepts I don't like. For a prequel like Enterprise the most logical explanation is every thing that happened is supposed to happen. And all those thing were always part of the history and lead to TOS.
I find the need to discredit Enterprise
( or any of the films or shows) to be petty and counter-productive.
The boring one, the one with Khan, the one where Spock returns, the one with whales, the dumb one, the last one, the one with Kirk, the one with the Borg, the stupid one, the bad one, the new one, the other one with Khan.