It's like 3 threads out of hundreds. Oh and sorry for existing while posting and all.
Theories that were Bunk
- Thread starter Vger23
- Start date
It's like 3 threads out of hundreds. Oh and sorry for existing while posting and all.
I suppose, but then the ship's registry of NCC-1031 seems strange, given Section 31 gets its name from Article 14, Section 31 of the Starfleet Charter, if they're going to advertise themselves in a ship's registry, shouldn't that registry be NCC-1431?
Then again, this show is severely dropping the ball when it comes to its Trek references.
There is absolutely no evidence of Section 31 involvement simply because of the ship's number. That's a coincidence if I ever heard one.
I mean, look at the Saratoga from DS9's pilot episode. That ship was numbered NCC-31911. It had a 31 in it, and nobody's claiming Section 31 was involved there, right? So why now?
I mean, look at the Saratoga from DS9's pilot episode. That ship was numbered NCC-31911. It had a 31 in it, and nobody's claiming Section 31 was involved there, right? So why now?
^^I really don't know, but it's been a popular theory ever since the registry number was revealed.
I was just about to say the same thing about the Saratoga, you beat me to it.There is absolutely no evidence of Section 31 involvement simply because of the ship's number. That's a coincidence if I ever heard one.
I mean, look at the Saratoga from DS9's pilot episode. That ship was numbered NCC-31911. It had a 31 in it, and nobody's claiming Section 31 was involved there, right? So why now?
1. I had a crush on a girl named Micheal in the 9th grade, but I wasn't a long haired stoner so I didn't have a chance in hell. (I did date a girl named Billie many years later)
2. I don't know why I numbered 1.
And of course there was the Intrepid from TOS... NCC-1631.
Michael. It can be spelled Micheal, but not by Commander Burnham or myself.
There is absolutely no evidence of Section 31 involvement simply because of the ship's number. That's a coincidence if I ever heard one.
I mean, look at the Saratoga from DS9's pilot episode. That ship was numbered NCC-31911. It had a 31 in it, and nobody's claiming Section 31 was involved there, right? So why now?
1031 X 31 = 31961
31961 - 50 [years of Trek] = 31911 (NCC-31911)
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE PEOPLE!
Last edited:
How about this:
What about “Wrath of Khan” writer-director (and “Discovery” producer) Nicholas Meyer?
My understanding is Meyer’s script for the second hour was scrapped and he’s left the “Discovery” writers room to work on a potential CBS All Access series that might focus on James Kirk nemesis Khan Noonian Singh.
What about “Wrath of Khan” writer-director (and “Discovery” producer) Nicholas Meyer?
My understanding is Meyer’s script for the second hour was scrapped and he’s left the “Discovery” writers room to work on a potential CBS All Access series that might focus on James Kirk nemesis Khan Noonian Singh.
you forgot 10/31 in the U.S. = Halloween
1031 X 31 = 31961
31961 - 50 [years of Trek] = 31911 (NCC-31911)
you forgot 10/31 in the U.S. = Halloween
This confirms the midseason finale will be a remake of Catspaw.
A rumor, nothing more. All we know is that he's writing on 'a Trek project'. The connection to khan is pure conjecture.
1+0=1, 3+1=4, hence 14, or article 14, hence section 31. Kelvin timeline reboot confirmed. Solved#
Meyer's credit is "Consulting Producer." That means he was never actually in the writers' room, at least not as a full-time member. A consulting producer (aka executive consultant) is basically just that, a paid consultant, generally an old hand in the industry who's on call to provide advice and experience to the creative staff upon request. It's the same credit generally used for show creators after they leave their shows, and the same credit (as executive consultant) that Gene Roddenberry had on the Harve Bennett Trek movies. Sometimes it's just a ceremonial title, but in theory it means that they're kept in the loop about what the writing staff does and free to make suggestions, which may or may not be heeded. They can contribute the occasional script, but they aren't part of the core group breaking the stories for the whole season.
In Meyer's case, I figure he was on board partly as part of the brain trust responsible for maintaining consistency with prior Trek, and partly just for the cachet of his name, as a way of reassuring the fanbase.
Wasn't there a Deltan with hair in ST II? He's one of the Regula One crew. He reports the incoming message from Reliant, and is later vaporized by the Eel-controlled Captain Terrell.
Fixed it for you.
There is absolutely no evidence of Section 31 involvement simply because of the ship's number. That's a coincidence if I ever heard one.
I mean, look at the Saratoga from DS9's pilot episode. That ship was numbered NCC-31911. It had a 31 in it, and nobody's claiming Section 31 was involved there, right? So why now?
Yeah, Fuller already admitted it was just because he loved Halloween, well before the show aired.
Similar threads
- Locked
