RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,668
Posts: 5,429,390
Members: 24,821
Currently online: 414
Newest member: SB118_Laxyn


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies I-X

Star Trek Movies I-X Discuss the first ten big screen outings in this forum!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old December 21 2011, 08:42 PM   #196
trek_futurist
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
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
Pretty sure he was called "Kirk" in the script.
And that means?
That character is Kirk.
In namesake only.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:43 PM   #197
Robert D. Robot
Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

I am reminded of some nighttime scene where a group of somewhat patient, rational adults are trying to calm and reason with a frantic child who wants to challenge and debate them as he demands that they acknowledge that there ARE ghosts in his closet....

And on and on....

and on......
Robert D. Robot is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:44 PM   #198
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
And that means?
That character is Kirk.
In namesake only.
I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now  
Old December 21 2011, 08:46 PM   #199
Nerys Myk
Fleet Admiral
 
Nerys Myk's Avatar
 
Location: House of Kang, now with ridges
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
And that means?
That character is Kirk.
In namesake only.
He is Kirk. Just as later TOS is Kirk, even though he's different than Season One Kirk. And TWOK-TUC Kirk is Kirk even though he's different than TOS1 Kirk and TOS2-3 Kirk. Now TMP Kirk, I don't know who the hell that guy is.
__________________
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.
Nerys Myk is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:46 PM   #200
King Daniel Into Darkness
Admiral
 
King Daniel Into Darkness's Avatar
 
Location: England again
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
KingDaniel wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
In order to create a space/time portal, like the one witnessed in DS9, that we know as a 'wormhole' you have to have two points of the curvature of space/time meeting and effectively lessening the distance between two points. But in DS9, with the bajoran wormhole, it was space you were traversing, not time. But the same parameters apply. Both are based in relativity, and have potential for logical scientific explanation even in a fictional universe based on scientific principles. This red matter/black hole/time portal non-sense does not!
Read this: http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/as...s/041130a.html

Black holes were previously used for travel through space and time in "Tomorrow is Yesterday" and "Star Trek: The Motion Picture"
Star Trek the motion picture featured a wormhole, not a black hole. And it was a worm hole of relative space, not relative time.
Voyager VI fell into a black hole and emerged on the other side of the galaxy.

(of course, the Voyager VI probe getting anywhere near a black hole is preposterous. But it's one of those things fans of the movie forgive)
King Daniel Into Darkness is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:47 PM   #201
Chemahkuu
Vice Admiral
 
Chemahkuu's Avatar
 
Location: United Kingdom
Send a message via Yahoo to Chemahkuu
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
He means the black hole Voyager 6 fell into, not the warp imbalance wormhole the Enterprise engines created, nitwit.
That was not described as a time portal! Please educate yourself more.

And didn't someone say it was NOT okay to name call on this forum?

I have not called a person a name once and this person gets away with it? Talk about bias.
It was never clarified in the film that it wasn't also displaced in time, the novel of the film implies the probe was thrown centuries into the past. The "black hole" in question would also have been close to or even at the edge of our solar system, possibly some short lived event, so we already have a precedant of this phenomena, naturally occuring even, as far back as 1979 (2273).
Chemahkuu is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:48 PM   #202
Robert D. Robot
Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

BillJ wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
That character is Kirk.
In namesake only.
I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
"trek_futurist has an illusion, and you have reality. May you find your way as pleasant!"
Robert D. Robot is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:49 PM   #203
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Robert D. Robot wrote: View Post
I am reminded of some nighttime scene where a group of somewhat patient, rational adults are trying to calm and reason with a frantic child who wants to challenge and debate them as he demands that they acknowledge that there ARE ghosts in his closet....

And on and on....

and on......
Is that where the adults laugh at the kid and then the pedophile steps out of the closet?
JarodRussell is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:50 PM   #204
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

BillJ wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Santa Kang wrote: View Post
That character is Kirk.
In namesake only.
I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
So star trek was philosophically void, scientifically void, morally void, spiritually void, ideologically void all this time and 'we' didn't know it? For the record I have not been alive 45 years. But long enough to know that what you just said is non-sense.
trek_futurist is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:51 PM   #205
Robert D. Robot
Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Robert D. Robot wrote: View Post
I am reminded of some nighttime scene where a group of somewhat patient, rational adults are trying to calm and reason with a frantic child who wants to challenge and debate them as he demands that they acknowledge that there ARE ghosts in his closet....

And on and on....

and on......
Is that where the adults laugh at the kid and then the pedophile steps out of the closet?
Hmmm.... I don't remember for sure. Might be the one where the tree eats the kid after the clown doll tries to strangle him....
Robert D. Robot is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:52 PM   #206
RoJoHen
Awesome
 
RoJoHen's Avatar
 
Location: QC, IL, USA
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
In namesake only.
I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
So star trek was philosophically void, scientifically void, morally void, spiritually void, ideologically void all this time and 'we' didn't know it?
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 am the Quintessential Admiral.
RoJoHen is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:53 PM   #207
The Dominion
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Gamma Quadrant
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
Chemahkuu wrote: View Post
He means the black hole Voyager 6 fell into, not the warp imbalance wormhole the Enterprise engines created, nitwit.
That was not described as a time portal! Please educate yourself more.

And didn't someone say it was NOT okay to name call on this forum?

I have not called a person a name once and this person gets away with it? Talk about bias.
It was never clarified in the film that it wasn't also displaced in time, the novel of the film implies the probe was thrown centuries into the past. The "black hole" in question would also have been close to or even at the edge of our solar system, possibly some short lived event, so we already have a precedant of this phenomena, naturally occuring even, as far back as 1979 (2273).
I was going to say, it would be reasonable (especially in the Trek universe) to assume that the blackhole it fell into was some weird anomaly that popped up in it's way.
__________________
A witty saying proves nothing. ~ Voltaire
The Dominion is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 08:57 PM   #208
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

trek_futurist wrote: View Post

For the record I have not been alive 45 years. But long enough to know that what you just said is non-sense.
Just like your alcoholic remark...

Montgomery Scott was willing to take a derivative of a Klingon nerve gas "...it merely deadens certain nerve inputs to the brain" to mix with Scotch in The Tholian Web. Scott was looking for a "higher-high", which is indicative of someone with a substance abuse problem.

This man was in charge of handling anti-matter which could cause the ship to go ka-blooey with a single misstep.

Somehow you've missed the fact that Star Trek: The Original Series was full of flawed humans.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is online now  
Old December 21 2011, 08:58 PM   #209
Robert D. Robot
Captain
 
Location: Pre-Warp Civilization of New England
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
So star trek was philosophically void, scientifically void, morally void, spiritually void, ideologically void all this time and 'we' didn't know it?
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.
Of course this is true... for every Devil in the Dark there is a space cutie in a short skirt out crusin' the stars looking for a good brain!...
Robert D. Robot is offline  
Old December 21 2011, 09:04 PM   #210
trek_futurist
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: If you don't think Nemesis is better than Star trek 2009....

RoJoHen wrote: View Post
trek_futurist wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post

I've noticed that you seem to have a very idealized view of what Trek is, but it doesn't really match the reality of what we've seen on screen over the last forty-five years.
So star trek was philosophically void, scientifically void, morally void, spiritually void, ideologically void all this time and 'we' didn't know it?
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.
trek_futurist is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
nemesis, philosophy, science, star trek (2009 film)

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.