Kelvin Timeline all but confirmed
- Thread starter captainkirk
- Start date
What else do we really have to talk about? Seriously?
Nonsense again. There is demonstrable evidence that our brains work differently than they used to. Almost all our "negative" psychological problems are derived from the older parts of the human brain, and we are making exponential progress in understanding and mapping it.
Social evolution is still a byproduct of our surroundings, you cannot have it exist in a vacuum..sure you can take away modern conveniences and we might devolve socially, but the very reason we evolved is because our development changes our reactions..moving away from Hunter-gathering, centralizing ourselves, mixing racially and becoming less tribal and provincial. A lot of it is tied to technology, speed, and travel.
The facts show we are less violent, more affluent and more aware than any time in history. We react differently to social injustice and perceived crimes than even a century ago. The worldwide anti-war movement was a social construct that wouldn't have even been possible a quarter century before, and while that movement is dead, the after-affects are still with us. People don't blindly follow governments anymore. The fact there is an outcry against the damage we've done to our atmosphere is also a positive social change.
Postulating exponential technologies, space travel, unlimited renewable energy, and post-scarcity, there is no reason those cannot further social changes..even surpassing star trek levels(as I believe, aside from some of the more exotic tech, well have surpassed maybe 80% of trek tech in less than 50 years). In trek history, post-scarcity triggered social development.
RAMA
More the fact that they seem to be very specifically imitating the movies when there are other way to update TOS. And as @BillJ says, we don't have much else to talk about.
It's not that specific. That's the point. To equate a lens flare or a modern production technique to the Kelvin timeline is tenuous at best. Every other bit of evidence contradicts the premise..
Chalk it up to not looking like Star trek Continues... Althoughh, I think I saw a lens flare in ST:Continues once. I'm certain I saw one in ST:New Voyages. Must start thread about them in Kelvin timeline now.
So you just came in to look down and comment on people who were discussing something you don't approve of? I'll waste my time any way I like. Thankyouverymuch.
I would never expect them to make it look like Continues, nor would I want it to. In fact my preference is for DSC to be set in the Kelvin-timeline. My intention was to point out that everything we've seen so far is in direct contrast to Ted Sullivan's tweet that the show is a true prequel to TOS.
You don't understand. There is no compromise for some folks. Either you love what they are doing now, or you want everything to look like it was made in 1966.
Does it take place before TOS? Yes.
Does it look different than TOS? Yes.
Therefore, it's a prequel.
QED
I'll compromise. I'm indifferent to what they're doing now and I want it to look like it was made in 1991. That's exactly halfway between both opinions.
Undiscovered Country is actually one of my favourite aesthetics...
There are more people living with malnutrition and starvation than at any time in history.
The "Oh but percentage-wise..." argument is bullshit. I mean, congratulations on the fact that the boat's not leaking at your end, but we've created a world where billions of people suffer deprivation that would break you or me, every day, in exchange for your living in that "more affluent" world that you're so satisfied by.
Not that there will ever be justice for them when our modern world collapses, because they will die along with most of the rest of us.
You keep saying this but it isn't true.
Malnutrition is an issue. Actual starvation is becoming less common. Try and don't make this claim again, I'm a bit tired of having to correct it.
Which is why I only corrected your starvation claim.
I hate to bring up politics here Are you blind to what is happening in the U.S. post Donald Trump's election? I ask because if anything, it shows HOW MUCH (and how many people) still harbor VERY prejudiced attitudes, and BOTH sides can an will resort to violence. We have a U.S. Administration that wants a return to the attitudes and values from a much earlier time in the 20th century; and while not a majority, it's a very sizable ;portion of the U.S. population.
Europe to in many countries also have large segments of the population (and leadership) that feel similarly as well.
Unfortunately, I don't think that socially, we've really made a lot of the gains you suggest; or that in general most of the the world's population believes such change is wanted/good. I wish it were different, I REALLY do - but I don't really think mankind will change all that much. We've been this way since formal Civilization began. There have been times of small pockets of progressive tolerance (even in ancient times); but overall they don't last.
Well he didn't nuke the rest of the world in the first 24 hours after his inauguration like most people predicted, so there's that. 
Well he didn't nuke the rest of the world in the first 24 hours after his inauguration like most people predicted, so there's that.
It is sad that that is the bar we have set for his presidency to be considered a success.
I guess he realised a nuclear fallout does not respect boundaries.Well he didn't nuke the rest of the world in the first 24 hours after his inauguration like most people predicted, so there's that.
Similar threads
