• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Red Angel Theories- Post Here

But why would Future Michael Burnham travel back in time to 2053 Earth and rescue a group of people in Indiana just before a nuclear bomb detonates? See, that's where the "it's Burnham" theory really breaks down.

Why would she visit World War III Earth and abduct a group of survivors, transplanting them to a distant planet?
Because she saw herself do it in the past. She has to retrace every step.

Same reason why the Doctor needed a mop when he time jumped around in Pandorica opens...
 
I give you Jane Lucy Picard:

2lxgh7a.jpg
Ru Paul must be jealous as hell.
:guffaw:
 
The interesting thing is then the "threat from the future" could be a red herring.

Spock got the memory from an attempted mold with the Red Angel. Burnham got it from Spock via the Talosians. If Burnham becomes the Red Angel, the memory can go full circle without ever actually happening.
Dang, we just can't get away from those mushrooms, can we.
<snicker>


(Gees... I gotta stop doing quickie posts as I read through these threads.. I don't realize that they pile up when nobody else is around)
:brickwall:
 
Well, that other shoe dropped quickly...
:crazy:
Maybe English is not my first language?
Maybe I have a disability that interferes with my typing?
Maybe I am Dyslexic?
Maybe I am Dysphraxic?
Maybe I am all or some of the above?
I can tell you I am at least one of them but it none of your business what one (or more) I fall into.

While you are virtual signalling over the meaning of the word "fanboi" your showing REAL bigotry by potentially mocking someone in the above situations.
 
Hon, just drop it and stop picking fights. Nobody has a beef with you, okay? All is well. Let's just quit it and get back on topic.
 
Maybe English is not my first language?
Maybe I have a disability that interferes with my typing?
Maybe I am Dyslexic?
Maybe I am Dysphraxic?
Maybe I am all or some of the above?
I can tell you I am at least one of them but it none of your business what one (or more) I fall into.

While you are virtual signalling over the meaning of the word "fanboi" your showing REAL bigotry by potentially mocking someone in the above situations.
Maybe you should just calm down?

And perhaps target the right person for your anger?
 
Dang, we just can't get away from those mushrooms, can we.
<snicker>


(Gees... I gotta stop doing quickie posts as I read through these threads.. I don't realize that they pile up when nobody else is around)
:brickwall:
But if you're not around to spot my funny typos, who will?
 
Heh ....
I just wish someone would point out mine when I do them...
It sucks being the only English Nit(wit)Picker around here.
;)
I'm actually an editor and a horrible pedant. Around here, though, I tend to hit the post button too quickly when I feel the overwhelming need to annoy everyone with my Very Important Opinions.

I can be pedantic with you if it makes you happy. :hugegrin:
 
Maybe English is not my first language?
Maybe I have a disability that interferes with my typing?
Maybe I am Dyslexic?
Maybe I am Dysphraxic?
Maybe I am all or some of the above?
I can tell you I am at least one of them but it none of your business what one (or more) I fall into.

While you are virtual signalling over the meaning of the word "fanboi" your showing REAL bigotry by potentially mocking someone in the above situations.
I'm not sure what any of those has to do with posting internet slang terms, but okay.

No one was being bigoted to you over something they couldn't have even known you had.

And it's "virtue signalling." Virtual signalling is when you're a social justice warrior in the Matrix or Tron.

As far as I know, most of the online use of "boi" is simply to say "boy" but in a more mocking and insulting way to call out the supposed stupidity of someone's words or actions. So, it's rude, but that's about it.

So everybody chill.
nF4Mct2.gif
 
Assuming it is Michael: Nope it only becomes a paradox if she did die in the past, because then she wouldn't be able to later on become the RA to go back in time and save herself. Also, I think the point was that as a child he was warned about a possible future outcome and prevented it, just like he's being expected to prevent the total destruction of the founding Federation worlds that he's also 'seen happen'. We know the four worlds are not destined or supposed to be destroyed because we already have canon that they are fine in TOS and beyond. Therefore these are events which were always prevented due to the RA's, Spock's, Michael's and Discovery's intervention. Basically this is going to be a closed temporal loop.

What strikes me as interesting here is that Spock/Burnham dialogue suggests the four worlds were already "barren" and all "sentient life eradicated" from the galaxy when the alien spacecraft blew them up. So are the spacecraft doing good or ill there? Perhaps blowing out planets where everybody is dead for reason X is a good idea?

The Angel could be in cahoots with the alien ships, containing damage by blowing up the "infected" planets, while also trying to preempt the "infection" by meddling with the past.

Timo Saloniemi
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top