Was there ever a planet, where u said... "Surely that's good enough?"

[Jeri]

Personally, despite all the colonization seen in space operas, I would be surprised if anything that arose on one planet would grow on another, including human beings. After all those millenia, our relatively close relations, the Voth, were still living on ships. I think this was an accurate portrayal of what would be necessary.

There wouldn't be the correct nutrients and elements in neither the soil nor the atmosphere to sustain earth organisms long term, nor the proscribed seasons and sunlight. The only reason we have a fairly stable climate is that we have a good moon.

No moon, and your planet wobbles wildly, creating havoc in your seasons. Also, higher organisms depend on micro-organisms that would not be supported by an alien environment -- which might in fact contain detrimental factors, not just neutral ones.

Living on ships is a good idea; and I always thought it right that the VOY crew felt at home on theirs.

[Guy Gardener]

You're forgetting that most life in the (fictional) galaxy was seeded by a single race, who chose in particular which planets to seed.

With out intelligent design proved, as seen in TNG The Chase, you'd be spot on the money.

[Jeri]

There wouldn't be any two planets so alike that life wouldn't change and adapt over millions of years to meet the unique requirements of its own ecosystem.

[teacake]

I wish we would hurry up and find out. It depresses me that I'll most likely be long dead before we find any kind of life anywhere.

[tighr]

Damn, I got to this thread too late to make the obvious "Fair Haven" joke...

[Alpha Flyer]

tighr wrote:

---

Damn, I got to this thread too late to make the obvious "Fair Haven" joke...

Still plenty of time (especially since I only got here just now myself)! Just imagine, a galaxy littered with identical Irish Pubs. The preservers/guardians/galactic Johnny Appleseeds have nothing -- but NOTHING -- on the Guinness franchise for discovering the secret of universal fecundity.

As for the whole idea of colonization, though, I think that only came up three times: the 37s (where it was voted down 144 to zero); Resolutions (a life with no one but Chakotay? the horror! death by boredom by year's end...); and Year of Hell when the crew was sent out in escape pods with not much more than their uniforms on their backs (so much for all that technology). And that was a false start, obliterated with the universal reset button.

So methinks the Voyagers were always intended to be ... well, just what it says on the tin.

[Alpha Flyer]

PS: I think the only Voyager with a reasonable chance to have something named after him would be Paris.

Oh wait, it's been done ...

[Timewalker]

teacake wrote:

---

Haha you wrote "T'Pring".

Still, they all look the same.

That wasn't nice.

Nor is it accurate. T'Pring and T'Pau had noticeably different features and hairstyles from each other, let alone those dumb unisex bowl-haircuts used on TNG, DS9, and VOY.


I have a suspicion that the reason Janeway didn't schedule a prolonged stopover on some planet was because she didn't want the crew to get too attached to being on a planet instead of in space. She didn't institute "growing new crew" because - given the increased lifespans of humans in the 24th century - SHE firmly intended to still be Captain when they got back. Janeway was 40-something when the mission started; add 70 years to that, and she'd still be well within human lifespan. So who needs a new generation of crew when Janeway intends to command basically forever?

[teacake]

Timewalker wrote:

---

That wasn't nice.

Nor is it accurate. T'Pring and T'Pau had noticeably different features and hairstyles from each other, let alone those dumb unisex bowl-haircuts used on TNG, DS9, and VOY.

In the dark all Vulcans smell of dust.

[Deks]

Timewalker wrote:

---

She didn't institute "growing new crew" because - given the increased lifespans of humans in the 24th century - SHE firmly intended to still be Captain when they got back. Janeway was 40-something when the mission started; add 70 years to that, and she'd still be well within human lifespan. So who needs a new generation of crew when Janeway intends to command basically forever?

Ah, but remember, human life expectancy in the 24th century seems to be up to 150 (on average) - which is not that large given their technological capabilities and humans in real life already reached 120 - and setting a standard for people would not be that difficult since longer life expectancy seems to be correlating with lower calorie intake. Throw meditation into the mix, and you can probably surpass 120.
Though, humans in real life are effectively poisoning their bodies with all sorts of chemicals that are used in agriculture (outdated as it is for our day and age - with too large of a footprint seeing how vertical farming employing hydroponics alone could severely reduce our footprint and produce foods that are rich in nutrition without using any chemicals, pesticides or gmo).

Setting what I said aside... you are correct that Janeway seemed to be in her 40-ies when Voyager departed and barring any premature death, could (canon-wise) still be in command 70 years later - and yet, in Endgame, she (and the rest of the crew) were portrayed as ageing geriatrics some mere 26 years later.
Trek writers conveniently forgetting about the longer life expectancy.

[Timewalker]

teacake wrote:

---

In the dark all Vulcans smell of dust.

Including those who don't live on desert planets? You don't seem to have understood the concept of IDIC...

Deks wrote:

---

Ah, but remember, human life expectancy in the 24th century seems to be up to 150 (on average) - which is not that large given their technological capabilities and humans in real life already reached 120 - and setting a standard for people would not be that difficult since longer life expectancy seems to be correlating with lower calorie intake. Throw meditation into the mix, and you can probably surpass 120.
Though, humans in real life are effectively poisoning their bodies with all sorts of chemicals that are used in agriculture (outdated as it is for our day and age - with too large of a footprint seeing how vertical farming employing hydroponics alone could severely reduce our footprint and produce foods that are rich in nutrition without using any chemicals, pesticides or gmo).

Setting what I said aside... you are correct that Janeway seemed to be in her 40-ies when Voyager departed and barring any premature death, could (canon-wise) still be in command 70 years later - and yet, in Endgame, she (and the rest of the crew) were portrayed as ageing geriatrics some mere 26 years later.
Trek writers conveniently forgetting about the longer life expectancy.

Huh? How is what you said any different from what I said? We both agree that Janeway starts the mission in her 40s, and even a full 70-year trip would still be within a normal human lifespan - so she could theoretically expect to still be in command 70 years later, assuming she didn't become physically or mentally incapacitated or dead.

[teacake]

Timewalker wrote:

---

Including those who don't live on desert planets? You don't seem to have understood the concept of IDIC...

You'll have to take that up with Tholos, he said it (and Ben Franklin).

[teacake]

Timewalker wrote:

---

Huh? How is what you said any different from what I said? We both agree that Janeway starts the mission in her 40s, and even a full 70-year trip would still be within a normal human lifespan - so she could theoretically expect to still be in command 70 years later, assuming she didn't become physically or mentally incapacitated or dead.

Janeway was not that old.

From Memory Alpha:


According to an okudagram shown in "The Killing Game", she was born in 2344, however, this would mean she was only 27 in 2371 when she took command of the USS Voyager. For comparison, Mulgrew was 39 when she took the role. Not having played tennis for nineteen years since high school in 2373, Janeway was probably around the age of 35 when Voyager's mission began, placing her actual year of birth closer to 2336.An okudagram biography on the video game Starship Creator Warp II states her birth date as 2332.
Kate Mulgrew stated in an interview on The Late Late Show with Craig Kilborn (18 May 2001) that Admiral Janeway was 76 in "Endgame". It had taken her 23 years to return to Earth and they were celebrating the ten year anniversary at the beginning of the episode, making the year 2404, which puts her year of birth in 2328

[Deks]

Timewalker wrote:

---

Huh? How is what you said any different from what I said? We both agree that Janeway starts the mission in her 40s, and even a full 70-year trip would still be within a normal human lifespan - so she could theoretically expect to still be in command 70 years later, assuming she didn't become physically or mentally incapacitated or dead.

Indeed... but my point was that the writers portrayed her future-self in Endgame as a woman who was too old - whereas she would reach 'half' her life expectancy if they adhered to the 150 years lifespan and appearance-wise, she shouldn't have had silver hair at all or look any older than her younger-self from 2378.

[Guy Gardener]

Some people go grey before they're old.

the admiral was only from 17 years in the future.

besides we don't know how human longevity works.

their youth seems to flutter by just like our from all evidence, so really, I think that they don't even out/stabilize get ready for the long haul to two hundred until after their 60th birthday.

Forever Young is a fancy, most methods of immortality are a fecking curse.