What are your controversial Star Trek opinions?
- Thread starter Amasov
- Start date
Well there was a Picard at Trafalgar. They didn't say on which side.
As I mentioned, the family in England probably had a tenuous connection to the real Picard family from France, which explains why they were able to claim the vineyard and why they changed their name to Picard.
Jean-Luc Picard is the French equivalent of being called "Henry James Sussex".
IIRC, they only left during WWII after the Nazis invaded. Not sure when they returned, but it was long before Picard was born.
Though my theory (controversial in France) is the Chateau and all France are part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and France ruled over by the neo-Angevin dynasty,
Benedict Cumberbatch is not Khan. I know because J.J. Abrams told me so. Over and over and over.Benedict Cumberbatch is Mexican?
On his mother's cousin's in laws side.Benedict Cumberbatch is Mexican?
I'm so sorry... he lied.
Crimpysnot Britaugment isn't Mexican.
But he WILL do a Sombrero dance over our cold corpses!
But he WILL do a Sombrero dance over our cold corpses!
Star Trek is at its best when it's indulging in silly science and has never done 'hard-sci-fi' 100% successfully.
Remember... It was WWIII when they killed all lawyers, which is a very good point in time to ignore other $ucker's property deeds, the end of the visas and documented citizenship.
Although Listening to Guinin talk about Christobel's peace corps adventures in the 2030s as the nukes dropped along with the literacy rate, was alarming, as if the authors of season 2 did not know about WWIII, or any fake Trek history at all.
When has Star Trek done hard sci-fi? Warp drive and transporters tend to preclude it.
What about that biography of a fake 21st century astronaut?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_Small_Step_(Star_Trek:_Voyager)
But they did. Because they referenced it a couple of times. It landed very oddly where Our Heroes were more worried bout 2019 "this is bothering the writers right now because it's just the WORST" when they had already highlighted that WWIII was right around the corner.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but a quote would be nice.
You're going to ask me to dig back into Picard 2?
It's been over a year, but I think they talked about it when they arrived in the present.
I think TMP is about the closest they've ever come.
It's arguable they even tried to retcon the transporters as requiring a working machine on each end in order to function.
You asked me to do exactly the same thing when you called me a "lying liar who knows nothing because he is dumb".
So after I stopped sobbing, I found a transcript site with all of Picard and then did a few refined google searches of that site looking for terms like wwiii, world war, and 2026, and found nothing of consequence in the first few pages of results.
Pike had that cool speech where he showed earth's Major cities getting nuked, but I was really talking about Picard (the show) and not all of the new Star Trek Series currently being made forgetting about the shape of history.
PIcard (the show) was more worried about environmental collapse that started in the 20th century that was either going to be cured by Rene Picard's bug, or Soong building a planetary shield, which could not happen while china is nuking Russia.
You know what's really going to fix the environment?
600 million people dead and the end of all industrialization and pollution for 20 years.
The war, possibly a limited war using conventional weapons, or a cold war where it was just propaganda and proxies, started in 2026, but the full nuclear exchange did not being until the 2050s.
Yeah, the actual nuclear exchange itself happened in 2053, stated in FC and then reinforced in Season 2 of DSC when Burnham says that the nuclear World War III took place in the year 2053. Any conflicts leading up to that were far more conventional in nature and it's doubtful knowing human behavior that the nukes were used until the hope of keeping it limited had long expired.
Similar threads
- Locked
