“Jean-Luc Picard is back”: will new Picard show eclipse Discovery?
- Thread starter Groppler Zorn
- Start date
With all those there could be a Justice League of the Federation!
You don't get out much, do you?
You obviously don't browse this subforum often.
People here have been complaining about it since day 1.
It’s cute you think that Trek was scientifically accurate before Discovery.
It wasn't only one more, and the whole concept was integral to Wesley Crusher's character arc.
Besides, what about Q and all sorts of other nigh-omnipotent beings, etc.?
-MMoM
Wesley didn’t have an arc after SFA. He got brought back for two more episodes. The traveller was only in two episodes.
Q and others, particularly the Prophets, are now rendered significantly less interesting, because 23rd century humans are now in the same approximate zone. Stamets is borderline Prophet embryo. Ignoring humans, the network means any species technologically comparable could have access. Why bother with phased cloaks Romulans?
‘Evolution’ into a higher life form, a Trek staple, is now rendered moot. Three seconds gene editing a human, and you have a borderline god simply through ‘be anywhere, anywhen’ with the spores. It’s a dealbreaking thing in the Trek milieu. Yes we can stick it in a box with the genesis torpedo, but it’s so big, the box better be big too.
It literally breaks the core premise of the franchise. It’s wagon train to the stars, not Passport to Pimlico, since they’ve just popped the intergalactic London Underground in there.
It may be based on something from a real scientific theory, but it’s not working to scale...it’s also very silly in its feel. I know they will backpedal hard on it eventually if they have to line things up, but everything in this series made the universe smaller. Katra Skype calls between two species, soul sharing rather literally, new lead is spocks sister...we even had a time jump that did little more than save us the bother of sitting through it. Even the characters didn’t need to sit through it.
They’re not gonna use a rest button if they line things up, it’s gonna be a reset keyboard.
Naw. But this isn't black or white, there are multiple different shades of it. Trek's science was usually pretty grey-ish: Pretty good in the overarching recurring stuff, sometimes pretty wild in the one-off stuff.
But it actually has never, ever before fallen to this level of idiocy - not even the ST09's red matter or VOY's warp 10 salamanders come even close. And they hung up more than an entire season upon this idea!
A fair chunk of that was at least pseudo-science in its day. Shedloads of cash into some of those things being researched. Super speed serums..yeh..that ones a mess in execution.
Nope, jaime's right. One of these is a scientific fact, the other isn't:
You may want to go back and rewatch "Threshold" before making such a bold claim.
"Threshold" pretty much gets every single detail about evolution wrong that exists. But still... it's so friggin' more scientifically accurate than a galaxy spanning mushroom-network that is partly human-DNA but also FTL-instantanious at every place in the universe at the same time, but still an Earth-like living mushroom creature that just "grows" in the nothingness of space and has sentient animals travelling from one planet to another on it.
Honestly, if you'd ask me, Q is probably a more scientific sound being than that. And he clearly was never intended as one.
The main problem I have is the general tone of this idea: I really wouldn't mind the space funghi in an episode of Dr. Who. Actually, I'd probably be even a fan of it. But the writers of DIS treat it with the seriousness that nuBattlestar Galactica treats it's science.
And that's just laughable.
I think it's time you put your bias away for the day. You're starting to scare the children.
All of these pretty objectively scientifically impossible. I don't quite see how there'd be a hierarchy of things that aren't possible at all.
Nope, not at all.
The Spore network was inspired by an actual scientific theory.
Threshold wasn't.
Not if someone is being fairly objective.
If a Unicorn and a Twonicorn procreate do we get a Onepointfiveicorn? Or would it be a Halficorn?A Unicorn is more probable than a Twonicorn.
It is known.
Similar threads
