Today happens to be scrabble day with our neighbor-lady. We'll see if a 75-year-old retired English teacher will accept "Gijinkas."
and I'm picturing that shot in Elaan of Troyius where she, you know, pivots "at Warp 2 and brings all tubes to bear."
At some point, can we figure out how to have viewable pictures, in the UK, again?
Imgur optional.
Imgur optional.
Unfortunately, that’s not up to us.
Some alternatives are listed here:
[Notice] - Imgur on TrekBBS
Hi everyone, I hope you're having a pleasant holiday season! The image hosting service Imgur (owned by MediaLabs) recently decided to cease serving the United Kingdom. As a consequence of this decision a good proportion of visitors to the BBS are unable to see content hosted by Imgur that has...
www.trekbbs.com
Also, Premium Members can upload images directly.
Just saying…
And why have I never done that in all these years?Also, Premium Members can upload images directly.
Just saying…
Done.
There's this cool cutaway of the SNW Enterprise in the 60th Anniversary trailer for the Roddenberry Archive. Reminds me of Matthew Paul Cushman's work. I wonder if he did it?
The argument has gone along "Based on what we saw on screen, a 947' ship is just too small - it HAS to be 1450'. The numbers must change, it just makes sense."
Well, based on what we have seen on screen a 1450' ship is just too small! The numbers must change! It just makes sense.
Sigh.... must we?
If nothing else, we have this:
The length of the ship is plainly and clearly displayed on screen for all to see. It's not blurry. It's not something that wasn't visible on some TVs. It's not some background graphic. It's the length of the ship, definitively shown. That should end any debate. It won't, but it should.
If nothing else, we have this:
The length of the ship is plainly and clearly displayed on screen for all to see. It's not blurry. It's not something that wasn't visible on some TVs. It's not some background graphic. It's the length of the ship, definitively shown. That should end any debate. It won't, but it should.
Which means the TOS ship is also 442.6 meters or pretty close to it. And I'm at peace with that.
"We" don't have to.
If it was clearly an plainly described on screen that Spock's first name is Ralph (it has been said on screen that Spock has a first name) it would end no debates either.
Then I suppose the issue is now "The ship 442 meters long: Why is what we see on screen so messed up? It doesn't fit in a ship anywhere close to that size."
If that screen graphic counts for anything, this screen graphic counts for something. In TOS, those ships fit that scale bar. It might be different in that different show, but everything is different, so no biggie. It isn’t the same ship and at least by every visual and story indication, not even the same reality.
BTW I woulda inserted this link within something more convenient, but none of those options are active in my posting window, and I am not going to expend valuable minutes and scarce eyesight figuring out why.
Last edited:
Maybe you missed the part about it being clearly visible for all to see and not a blurry image on a computer screen that was absolutely invisible on the televisions of the 60s. A tiny and blurred scale bar is hardly comparable to the length being presented as it was in the SNW episode.
Except it is.
No, it's the same reality. It's simply presented with an updated visual aesthetic. Your inability to accept this fact doesn't alter the official position.
Maybe they should switch to a 'the things on screen are meant to depict what is actually happening in the episode' approach like most other TV shows for the next series. That way more audience members will be able to accept it.
No and no.
Besides which Trek itself has depicted alternate realities so it’s amusing so many resist the concept that different series are portraying different realities, alternate continuities from previous series.
All this meaningless blathering equals nothing more than one person’s misinformed and unenlightened opinion. We should all show proper remonstrances that fate and The Great Bird saw fit to inhabit this particular ethereal plane with such perpetrations of illusion, illogic, and… illness.
Must we really do this every few months? Let's look at things from a factual basis.
Fact: Paramount/CBS owns Star Trek.
Fact: As the rights holder, Paramount/CBS has the final authority over what is officially recognized as Star Trek canon.
Fact: The official position, as determined by Paramount/CBS, is that all of the shows that have been produced are part of the Prime Timeline of Star Trek and share a common continuity. In other words, Paul Wesley is playing a younger version of James T. Kirk, as portrayed by William Shatner.
Fact: The Enterprise is canonically 442.6 m long, as shown both in onscreen text and legibly on the Dedication Plaque.
Has the timeline been altered? Absolutely. It's been altered countless times by virtually every series.
Was the Enterprise originally intended to be 289 m long? Yes. But that has been retconned. Just as countless other things have been retconned over the 60 years this franchise has existed. When were the Eugenics Wars? What's Kirk's middle name? What year did Data graduate? What do Trill look like, and can they use transporters? Is Spock a Vulcan or a Vulcanian? Is it Starfleet or the UESPA? Klingon forehead ridges? Etc., etc., etc.
What matters is the most recent and current official information. And whether you like it or not, right now the Enterprise is 442.6 m long. That is the canonically established length. To argue otherwise is to argue against what is currently established as fact.
Star Trek is not a period piece or a historical document.
Fact: Paramount/CBS owns Star Trek.
Fact: As the rights holder, Paramount/CBS has the final authority over what is officially recognized as Star Trek canon.
Fact: The official position, as determined by Paramount/CBS, is that all of the shows that have been produced are part of the Prime Timeline of Star Trek and share a common continuity. In other words, Paul Wesley is playing a younger version of James T. Kirk, as portrayed by William Shatner.
Fact: The Enterprise is canonically 442.6 m long, as shown both in onscreen text and legibly on the Dedication Plaque.
Has the timeline been altered? Absolutely. It's been altered countless times by virtually every series.
Was the Enterprise originally intended to be 289 m long? Yes. But that has been retconned. Just as countless other things have been retconned over the 60 years this franchise has existed. When were the Eugenics Wars? What's Kirk's middle name? What year did Data graduate? What do Trill look like, and can they use transporters? Is Spock a Vulcan or a Vulcanian? Is it Starfleet or the UESPA? Klingon forehead ridges? Etc., etc., etc.
What matters is the most recent and current official information. And whether you like it or not, right now the Enterprise is 442.6 m long. That is the canonically established length. To argue otherwise is to argue against what is currently established as fact.
Star Trek is not a period piece or a historical document.
Flaming
Well, how wonderful to be insulted in such an impressively wordy manner. It's quite remarkable how pompous someone can sound while essentially sticking their fingers in their ears and shouting, "I'm not listening, I'm not listening, I'm not listening," simply because they don't agree with the official position. Sometimes certain corners of this fandom really are just too much.
Please accept my most ceremonious and profoundly sincere invitation to go forth and fornicate with yourself.
To the extent fiction is the manifestation of an imagination, we could reasonably argue that every creation that emerges from a different team of writers is at the very least, originating in a different imagination or sum of imaginations. That would lead to each episode being its own thing, and maybe so, or each season, or each series. TNG started with a number of TOS people at the creative helm. Maybe that can get wrapped in- maybe not. It’s all up for debate. But let’s get real- something so determinedly different, that in almost every single way has struggled to differentiate itself from TOS and The Cage, born of a storyline that repeatedly dabbled in Mirror Universe mixings, created by Kelvin-adjacent creatives, would struggle mightily to be seen as anything related to Star Trek. It has the name. It uses some of the same character names. It is owned by the IP owner. They can call it whatever they want. But viewers and other consumers have no obligation to obey that edict. To sheepishly and obsequiously accept somebody telling you that the dog food in front of you is filet mignon is what it is- embarrassing.
