RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,455
Posts: 5,508,643
Members: 25,132
Currently online: 510
Newest member: Commander Balok

TrekToday headlines

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13


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 XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 4 2013, 11:20 AM   #76
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Surely if anyone would know for sure, it'd be the 30th century time cops who scan time as easily as the 24th century Trekkers scan space. And they called it a "pogo paradox", where interference to prevent an event is what causes it.

It's always a bitch to try and reconcile 45 years of Treks, with generations of writers and producers all with their own idea of how the Trekverse is meant to work. First Contacy and the Enterprise TV series are huge retcons, but I'm more than willing to go with it and pretend Trek's history "always happened" like that. Even if the subject of the NX-01 never once came up in TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY, except for those extra scenes in "The Pegasus" where Riker and Troi suddenly look a lot older.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 6 2013, 03:12 AM   #77
Dale Sams
Fleet Captain
 
Dale Sams's Avatar
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Pavonis wrote: View Post
How can someone tell the difference between a predestination paradox and a timeline that was altered and/or subsequently restored to a "close-enough" condition? Seems to me the events depicted in the movie First Contact are a "close-enough" restoration of the original timeline and not necessarily a predestination paradox.
There's no way to prove it was not a predestination paradox, let's put it that way.
What a headache.

The events of ENT vs The Borg suggest a predestination paradox.

Yet, are we supposed to believe that Riker and LaForge were predestined to be one of the top five most famous astronauts in history? Shit...what was Cochrane's cover-story for his crewmates? "ahhh...they were some Australian guys who jumped in to help in a pinch, and the Vulcans took them with them."
Dale Sams is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 6 2013, 10:46 PM   #78
Rķu rķu, chķu
Fleet Admiral
 
Rķu rķu, chķu's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View Rķu rķu, chķu's Twitter Profile
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Dale Sams wrote: View Post
Yet, are we supposed to believe that Riker and LaForge were predestined to be one of the top five most famous astronauts in history?
Apparently so.

I agree, it does seem a bit weird. But we have very little to suggest otherwise. Picard and crew returned to the same timeline they left; therefore, it's safe to assume that there was indeed predestination going on here.

Otherwise, the butterfly effect would result in a completely different future - even if La Forge and Riker performed exactly the same actions, spoke the same words, etc. that any "original" astronauts might have done, that's still a change. Even the smallest, most insignificant change will ripple through the centuries and cause massive alterations in time. Ever read "A Sound of Thunder"?
__________________
"A hot dog at the ballpark is better than a steak at the Ritz." - Humphrey Bogart
Rķu rķu, chķu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 7 2013, 05:23 PM   #79
Ketrick
Lieutenant Commander
 
Location: Maryland
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

Mr. Laser Beam wrote: View Post
Dale Sams wrote: View Post
Yet, are we supposed to believe that Riker and LaForge were predestined to be one of the top five most famous astronauts in history?
Apparently so.

I agree, it does seem a bit weird. But we have very little to suggest otherwise. Picard and crew returned to the same timeline they left; therefore, it's safe to assume that there was indeed predestination going on here.

Otherwise, the butterfly effect would result in a completely different future - even if La Forge and Riker performed exactly the same actions, spoke the same words, etc. that any "original" astronauts might have done, that's still a change. Even the smallest, most insignificant change will ripple through the centuries and cause massive alterations in time. Ever read "A Sound of Thunder"?
Not necessarily. In "Trials and Tribble-ations", Dulmer and Lucsly confront Captain Sisko about Worf, O'Brien, and Bashir getting involved in the bar fight with the Klingons saying that they may be in a new timeline because of it. Sisko counters that had the timeline changed he and the others would have known. Dulmer and Lucsly didn't contradict him and let him continue reporting what happened. Also, earlier that episode, Sisko refused to describe what happened as a predestination paradox. At no point did Dulmer or Lucsly suggest what happened was one and if anyone would know they would. Therefore, within the confines of Star Trek physics, it appears possible to go back in time and for minor things to be altered without creating a new timeline. Though, this isn't true in all cases as Star Trek demonstrates.

Last edited by Ketrick; February 7 2013 at 10:05 PM.
Ketrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8 2013, 06:29 AM   #80
Pavonis
Commodore
 
Re: Does nu-Trek exclude Enterprise too?

It is possible some minor alterations damp out rather than amplify. Not every butterfly wing flap has to radically alter the timeline.
Pavonis is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

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 01:55 AM.

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