Surviving Vulcan Elders.

[Awesome Possum]

They might have off-world bases set up for various scientific purposes, but no actual colony where they could bring their families and settle.

[YARN]

Nerys Myk wrote:

---

He didn't mend any timelines in ST VI. There was no alternate reality or timeline in that film. He just helped relocate some whales from the 20th Century to the 23rd Century to save the Earth from being destroyed.

He intervened in Earth's past, either completing a closed causal loop, or altering the timeline slightly and subtly changing the future. If it is the latter, then they returned to a slightly alternate timeline (they overwrote the original). What reason do we have to suspect this happened? They didn't just locate whales. They brought bought a 20th century woman, took on a whaling vessel, stole fuel from another ship, and left behind the formula for transparent aluminum.

The sequence of time in STIV did need to be fixed, not because anyone actively changed the past through temporal hijinks, but because the human race passively stood by and allowed whales to go extinct.

And we need look no further than City on the Edge of Forever to see Spock actively working to fix temporal damage. He does so in other episodes too. He only grudgingly concedes that an F104 pilot, for example, should be returned home when he finds that his future child will be a colonist on Mars. Spock is willing to go to rather extreme measures to fix and/or preserve timelines. Edith Keeler Must Die!

[Ovation]

Was willing. In his younger days. Seems to have gotten over the compulsion as of late. Past actions no guarantee of future behaviour. Etc.

[Nerys Myk]

YARN wrote:

---

He intervened in Earth's past, either completing a closed causal loop, or altering the timeline slightly and subtly changing the future. If it is the latter, then they returned to a slightly alternate timeline (they overwrote the original). What reason do we have to suspect this happened? They didn't just locate whales. They brought bought a 20th century woman, took on a whaling vessel, stole fuel from another ship, and left behind the formula for transparent aluminum.

The sequence of time in STIV did need to be fixed, not because anyone actively changed the past through temporal hijinks, but because the human race passively stood by and allowed whales to go extinct.

And we need look no further than City on the Edge of Forever to see Spock actively working to fix temporal damage. He does so in other episodes too. He only grudgingly concedes that an F104 pilot, for example, should be returned home when he finds that his future child will be a colonist on Mars. Spock is willing to go to rather extreme measures to fix and/or preserve timelines. Edith Keeler Must Die!

But he was't going there because the timeline was altered. That wasn't the reason for the trip. ST VI didn't fix anything though. The whales will still go extinct.

Yeah there are a few ripples caused by ST IV. The whales would have died if not for Kirk and Co. So that's a wash, the whales are gone either way.

Spock and Kirk had some pretty good motivations in COTEOF. They needed to rescue McCoy and give them their present back. Still it ended badly for Kirk, who had to watch Edith die. And Spock who had to witness his friends pain. Like I said, Spock has learned from his time travels and by the time of ST09 he's less inclined to meddle.

[YARN]

Ovation wrote:

---

Was willing. In his younger days. Seems to have gotten over the compulsion as of late. Past actions no guarantee of future behaviour. Etc.

Anything is possible, but we must ask what is more likely given the motivation and justification we've seen in the past. Presumption is on the side of Spock acting to save future lives. Spock's behavior in the new film is part of that which is at issue (i.e., does this make sense?) so we cannot simply point to what Spock does in the movie. Past action is no guarantee, but it does form the presumptive basis of character.

And it's not about playing God. It's about knowing a little bit more than your peers and being able to act on that knowledge to save lives. I don't see why Spock or anyone else wouldn't. It's not a TPD violation. There are no obvious "defeaters" in the cases I have discussed, aside the bare possibility of butter fly wing disadvantages. He has positive knowledge of how to prevent the countless deaths using mundane means which would not upset the balance of power or deprive the Federation of its many other problems and challenges (e.g., the Klingons).

I've already noted that they could hang a lantern on this as on opportunity (i.e., this is a perfect justification for them not to have to retell every TOS story - not only is this a different timeline, but Old Spock can steer them away from old problems so that they may have new adventures).

Ah well, it's no big deal, but I do think it is an interesting question. As of now, there is a big question mark hanging out with the surviving Vulcan elders.

[Ovation]

Again, Spock can inform them of each and every example you mention and it need not alter what we see going forward one iota. As long as there is no attempt to specifically revisit any story from TOS onscreen, Spock's actions (or lack thereof) are moot.

What I do NOT want is screen time devoted to discussions about things Spock said or didn't say about any of these things. Let it be entirely offscreen where either interpretation remains valid.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Arpy wrote:

---

It was purposely low a number to bring home the point of him being an endangered species. That there are less than 10,000 Vulcans living off-planet only shows the JJ-verse Vulcans are idiots.

But then so are we. We spend half a penny per tax dollar for everything NASA does yet we live in a time when nuclear, biological, and nano technology might have or may wipe us out not too long from now. Can we all agree on a $.02 tax-hike to quadruple our efforts off this rock?

No, that cuts into my latte budget.

Anyway, quadrupling nothing is...nothing. There have never been any serious plans for establishing an independent, viable human culture anywhere other than Earth. There's really nowhere liveable to go that we have any idea how to reach - and the economics of getting to and building on the few less-than-deadly worlds we know of are ridiculous. Putting down a few dozen or a hundred human beings to live extraordinarily limited lives in sealed environments is not exactly establishing a beachhead for species survival.

[Awesome Possum]

We only went to the Moon because the Russians said that they were and we wanted to beat them. Since they decided they didn't want to go, the space race ended.

But if China says they're putting a base on the Moon or Mars, we'll probably go back to beat them.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Going someplace and coming back - or even going there and digging a hole where you can live for a while - isn't "getting off this rock" as a way of protecting the human race from nuclear war, et al.

The reasoning seems to be that since we arguably aren't making a go of surviving in a lush, welcoming and completely livable environment with every kind of resource that we need, the best solution is for a few people to flee to some wasteland somewhere that maintaining breathable air requires a highly technical ongoing effort and seeing if we can start over better there.

Huh?

Just because imaginative and romantic images of space exploration appealed to children for a couple of generations doesn't make those stories a basis for real future planning any more than having a radioactive spider bite some high school kid constitutes a solution to New York street crime.

[YARN]

My Name Is Legion wrote:

---

Going someplace and coming back - or even going there and digging a hole where you can live for a while - isn't "getting off this rock" as a way of protecting the human race from nuclear war, et al.

The reasoning seems to be that since we arguably aren't making a go of surviving in a lush, welcoming and completely livable environment with every kind of resource that we need, the best solution is for a few people to flee to some wasteland somewhere that maintaining breathable air requires a highly technical ongoing effort and seeing if we can start over better there.

Huh?

Just because imaginative and romantic images of space exploration appealed to children for a couple of generations doesn't make those stories a basis for real future planning any more than having a radioactive spider bite some high school kid constitutes a solution to New York street crime.

Is this romanticism a flip side of an even deeper pessimism? Giving up on the hope of fixing the seemingly intractable problems we face on this planet?

[Rincewiend]

RPJOB wrote:

---

You're not the only one. They branched off a universe where all of those things are out there waiting. Spock's more concerned with setting up housekeeping with the population of a small town. How many millions or billions is he putting at risk?

Who is to say the Abramsverse will have the same wars and catastrophies as the mainverse?!?
The Mirrorverse is a good example of that, as does "Yesterday's Enterprise"...

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

The reasoning is that the Abramsverse split from Prime when Nero appeared in 2233, they share a common past. 25 years of change in local space probably wouldn't account for events like V'Ger or the Whale Probe, whose cogs have been turning for centuries.

[RPJOB]

R. Star wrote:

---

Sheer percentages would indicate more than 10,000 people were off planet at the time. Take... America today. Boom, blow it up. I guarantee there are more than 10,000 Americans alone outside of the country right now. Tourists, military personnel, businesses, foreign embassies, etc. And we're just 300 million as opposed to the 6 billion figure offered.

I think the 10,000 number was just survivors off Vulcan and that there had to be people off world, especially given it's part of the Federation. Especially when Enterprise establishes they have outposts and temples on other worlds. They probably have full fledged colonies too.

That begs the question of how 10,000 people got off Vulcan. Nero destroyed the fleet that arrived from Earth. I can't imagine him allowing Vulcans to escape seeing as he wanted to kill them all. There's no indication in the movie that there's any other surviving ships in orbit of Vulcan. The NuEnterprise may be big bit I can't imagine it was ab;e to beam up 10,000 people especially given the problems they had beaming up Kirk and Sulu to say nothing of Amanda. NuChekov may be good but he's not THAT good.

Assuming 10,000 people beamed up six at a time would require 1,666 transporter cycles. Even with 10 transporters (a guess, we don't know how many transporters the ship has) operating you're looking at each of them performing 166 beam up cycles.

And then there's the question of where you put them.

It's clear that the original intention was that there were only 10,000 Vulcans left in total.

[The Mirrorball Man]

RPJOB wrote:

---

There's no indication in the movie that there's any other surviving ships in orbit of Vulcan.

And there's no indication that there isn't. There. Problem solved.

[Dale Sams]

The Mirrorball Man wrote:

---

And there's no indication that there isn't. There. Problem solved.

It's a big planet. The Narada can't be on both sides at once tethered as it is....