Circumstantial Evidence?/Why did spock end up in alt. universe?[Merge]

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

At this point I see Star Trek XI as what I call a pseudo-reboot. What I mean by this: In the timeline that that Spock prime came from, the main events of TOS, TNG, ect, did happen, but other details where different. For example, the design and size of Federation ships.

The Narada looking like no Romulan ship we had seen before is fine with me. I just assume that it is a highly specialized mining ship, built for function instead of aesthetics.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

But if you're gonna play Time Police and go back to undo the attack on the Kelvin (thus changing countless lives) why stop there? Seven million humans died when the Xindi attacked Earth. Proven tampering from the future. Let's undo that. What about that entire colony killed in ENT: "Shockwave"?

Many big historical Trek events are rife with tampering from future aliens. Some had halfway hack-job fixes (the Xindi attack left seven million humans dead that shouldn't be, many were killed in the First Contact Borg attack, microchips are supposedly the result of a timeship from the future that crashed in the 60's) Yet much damage was left unfixed. Same thing in STXI.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

And I'm still waiting to see that, because it really should have been undone. But I regard ENT as being an alternate timeline anyway. The Klingon from the pilot episode was not supposed to be there, he was part if the TCW, then there where a couple of big events of which was said "this should not have happened", and then there were the remains of First Contact. The entire series is not in the same timeline as TOS, TNG, DS9 and VOY. Which is why Riker is much fatter in ENT: TATV compared to TNG: Pegasus.

At the same time ENT is evidence that in the Star Trek universe there is only one timeline. In "Shockwave", as soon as Daniels removes Archer from the 22nd century and transfers him to the 31st century, the timeline of the 31st century is instantly fucked up.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

Riker's fatness may be an even lamer excuse to put a show in an alternate reality than a slightly different stardate system

I think you're making an incorrect assumption about TOS: That it's the pure/correct/original timeline to begin with. Even ignoring Enterprise (which conclusively proves TOS/TNG/etc. to be the result of several major shifts in the timeline), TOS itself interfered in the past more than a few times (they stole whales! Left a phaser behind! Invented transparent aluminum - all in just one film) TNG went back to a 19th century full of aliens from the future who were killing the homeless. Sisko replaced Gabe Bell.

Don't forget Captain Braxton's 29th century time police and Crewman Daniels' 31st century time police who always cause far more trouble than they stop.

Long story short: The timeline is screwed. Utterly. As time goes on, more and more spiecies will learn how to go back, and make it worse. Unendingly.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

Since, IMO it is another univers and not an altered timeline, the Prime Universe DTI is not getting involved.
Now why Spock would not try to alter the timeline of his current universe to prevent the destruction by Nero, that is another question....

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

They said it was an alternate - as opposed to parallel - universe for one very specific reason: they thought that would go down easier for the fanbase. In retrospect, this seems like an unnecessary complication, but hindsight is 20/20; if I had been asked back in 2008, I probably would have agreed with the decision. It is true that the little differences work a lot better if it is a totally different universe, and personally, I'm fine with just believing that on my own. My guess is, give Abrams, Kurtzman, and Orci another successful movie under their belt, ask them the question about a thousand more times, and they will say (in essence), "Okay whatever, you're right, it makes more sense as a parallel."

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

You don't create a divergence point when you go forward in time, only when you go back. Thus the timeline was screwed up in "Shockwave" and "Yesterday's Enterprise" (but curiously not "Azati Prime" where Archer was taken briefly to the future without destroying it).

We clearly saw two versions of Captain Braxton in "Future's End". The second one actually said "I never experienced that timeline" to Janeway at the end.
We also saw different versions of Crewman Daniels in Enterprise, each from a different version of the future (at least one of whom died).

Need I mention the alternate timelines in "All Good Things", "Endgame", "Twilight" etc?

Star Trek has never had a single timeline. We've just, until now, seen the multiverse from the POV of one group of people down one branch of the timeline-tree.

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Are you saying the universe that Spock Prime is from is an alternate Universe? What are you basing that on? It's not like we've seen every Federation or Romulan ship ever built. . .

Can you explain the difference between an Alternate Universe and a Parallel Universe? The way I see it, there is no difference; so maybe I'm missing something obvious?

~FS

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

I view the universe that Spock Prime came from as not the original Trek universe in terms of some aspects, such as the visual style. So for example, the events of TOS more or less took place, except the Enterprise looked like the "Abramsprise". I'm not tying to force this opinion on anyone, it just works better for me to look at it this way.

I have to admit though that I do kind of go back and forth between the reboot and alternate time line arguments. I can't seem to pick a side.

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

http://www.photobucket.com
http://www.imageshack.us
http://www.tinypic.com

These are all free.

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Interesting. The way I see it is Spock Prime came from the TOS, TNG, DS9, VOY universe; I don't see anything in his ship that visually contradicts that POV. . . My view is the new Universe is the TOS until the very moment that the Kelvin saw the "lightning storm in space" and engaged the Narada. . . that is what sets it on the path to being an alternate/parallel universe: The Federation learns of the Romulan/Vulcan connection thirty-something years earlier (which probably had some big changes to some of the politics of the Federation). . . and with information gathered from the Narada encounter, StarFleet builds bigger, beefier ships like the Enterprise (which was built later, and is more technically advanced that its TOS counterpart (which accounts for the different visual style). . . because the Enterprise is not in service, Pike and Spock are at the Academy instead of out exploring. . . like ripples in a pond. . . lots of little things keep changing in that 25 years between the emergence of the Narada and the defining alternative event of the alternate timeline/universe: the destruction of Vulcan. . . That's my view, anyway.

~FS

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

It's fiction. The writers say these characters came from the old Trek universe, therefore they did. There is no other existing universe for them to have come from, unless made up by the writers.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

The timeline was mostly patch up correcltly by then end of "Yesterday's Enterprise"

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

Could Spock Prime undo what happened after the Narada attacked the USS Kelvin and go back in the prime universe just wondering.

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

Precisely right.

What visual differences there are, are so because of creative choices made by the producers - just like every other incarnation of Trek.

That is the explanation for every makeup and uniform change over the years.

As an aside: Spock Prime wouldn't have been termed "Prime" unless he meant to have come from the original universe.

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

The thing is, there really aren't too many visual differences. The Romulan ship looks different? Big fucking deal, we never saw what a mining vessel looked like in the 24th century, so who says what it should look like? Spock's ship doesn't look like a 24th century Starfleet vessel? That'd be fine except it's not necessarily Starfleet. Whose to say what Vulcan tech looks like in the 24th (I'm pretty sure we never saw a Vulcan ship in the TNG era).

 

Re: Circumstantial Evidence?

We did they looked a bit like shoeboxes with engines in Unification.
Those were also a radical difference from TMP Vulcan transport. Why do species need to only use one type/style of ship anyway?

Sharr

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

To what end? The franchise has now moved to the "alternate universe" so it would be counter-intuitive for TPTB to move them back to the TOS universe.

How's things, there, startrekrcks-startrekk-chriskirkgeek?

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

Look stop aggravating the situation leave me alone.

 

Re: Why did spock end up in the alternate universe??

That's your response? Leave me alone?

Seriously, why would TPTB want Spock Prime to "fix" anything at this point? Why would you want to see that? I thought you liked the new movie and the new "version" of Star Trek. Have you changed that opinion along with some others?