That which cannot be explained

[Anticitizen]

Before anybody says 'Kirk says that Klingons don't take prisoners yet we see them do it all the time!', I'd like to suggest you selectively hear the line:

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik. The klingons don't take prisoners.

as

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik, that klingons don't take prisoners.

That way we can interpret it as Kirk saying 'you'd better pray they kill you rather than take you prisoner' and thus avoid 43 years of continuity violation.

 

[Chrisisall]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

LOL, no, it was Spock.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

as for things that can't be explained: Threshold's ideas of evolution are inexplicable.

Thank you for setting us straight on Scotty/Valeris.

As for "Threshold", yes, you're quite right. I doubt anyone could dispute that.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

LOL, no, it was Spock.

Thank you for...oh, you know

 

[kes7]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

as for things that can't be explained: Threshold's ideas of evolution are inexplicable.

Here we may default to my favorite "explanation" of Threshold: it was Capt. Janeway's or Ton Paris's nightmare, brought on by actually eating Neelix's food.

 

[Royal Fizzbin]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

as for things that can't be explained: Threshold's ideas of evolution are inexplicable.

Things that can't be explained: why anyone thought it was a good idea to write, produce, shoot, and air "Threshold" in the first place.

 

[Misfit Toy]

For TNG and later:

Do they have to touch the combadge to respond or not? If not, how does the combadge know when the user is talking to it and not to another party present in the room?

 

[Royal Fizzbin]

Before anybody says 'Kirk says that Klingons don't take prisoners yet we see them do it all the time!', I'd like to suggest you selectively hear the line:

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik. The klingons don't take prisoners.

as

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik, that klingons don't take prisoners.

That way we can interpret it as Kirk saying 'you'd better pray they kill you rather than take you prisoner' and thus avoid 43 years of continuity violation.

I assumed Kirk meant that they don't take prisoners of war. Imprisoning those convicted of criminal offenses would be a completely different thing.

 

[Kaziarl]

Before anybody says 'Kirk says that Klingons don't take prisoners yet we see them do it all the time!', I'd like to suggest you selectively hear the line:

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik. The klingons don't take prisoners.

as

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik, that klingons don't take prisoners.

That way we can interpret it as Kirk saying 'you'd better pray they kill you rather than take you prisoner' and thus avoid 43 years of continuity violation.

I assumed Kirk meant that they don't take prisoners of war. Imprisoning those convicted of criminal offenses would be a completely different thing.

Honestly? I agree with Anticitizen. To me it always sounded like he was saying to pray that the Klingons don't take prisoners.

 

[Royal Fizzbin]

Before anybody says 'Kirk says that Klingons don't take prisoners yet we see them do it all the time!', I'd like to suggest you selectively hear the line:

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik. The klingons don't take prisoners.

as

Saavik: Suggestions, Admiral?
Kirk: A prayer, Mr. Saavik, that klingons don't take prisoners.

That way we can interpret it as Kirk saying 'you'd better pray they kill you rather than take you prisoner' and thus avoid 43 years of continuity violation.

I assumed Kirk meant that they don't take prisoners of war. Imprisoning those convicted of criminal offenses would be a completely different thing.

Honestly? I agree with Anticitizen. To me it always sounded like he was saying to pray that the Klingons don't take prisoners.

To each their own.

Or maybe, as I posited above, there's a timeline (or more accurately, a subset of quantum universes) where the Klingons take absolutley no prisoners, and one where they do, and one where they take no prisoners of war but do imprison criminal offenders, and so forth. And all the various Trek media just take place in different timelines/universes.

And if you add in the possibility that the universe being viewed can change within one medium (movie/episode), even from scene to scene, then pretty much all continuity errors are solved.

 

[captcalhoun]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

as for things that can't be explained: Threshold's ideas of evolution are inexplicable.

Things that can't be explained: why anyone thought it was a good idea to write, produce, shoot, and air "Threshold" in the first place.

this is true

 

[sbk1234]

The change in color of Klingon blood from bright pink (Pink, mind you!) to human-looking red. No, these were not hybrids or anything. They were full-blooded Klingons.

Humans vary in skin color, caused by the amount of melanin in the skin, and also have different blood types. Similarly, Klingons vary in blood color; there are more or less of certain substances in the blood of Klingons from different areas of their planet. And depending how much of these substances is present, the blood can range from bright pink to red.

I think that's a noble effort to explain, but I can't buy it. Humans have different blood types, but different blood types don't have different colors. My O- blood looks no different than my friend's AB+ blood type. At least not without a microscope to do some cross matching.

I do kinda like Deranged Nasat's explaination. I think I'll go with that one.

 

[Mysterion]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

Well, why should we take her word, then? Liar and traitor. Case closed.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

Well, why should we take her word, then? Liar and traitor. Case closed.

Why would she lie about something that could easily be proven a lie by anyone with knowledge of Klingon physiology?

 

[Cyke101]

For TNG and later:

Do they have to touch the combadge to respond or not? If not, how does the combadge know when the user is talking to it and not to another party present in the room?

Heck, I'm utterly convinced that the E-D's turbolifts read the script before filming. If there's an emergency or battle, it never fails to open on time (if it's stationed on the bridge during such cases, then that's no problem). But if there are character interaction moments that must be had for the story to develop, such as conversation or awkward silence or contemplation, the turbolift will take a while to get there, but just long enough for the proper emotions and thoughts to process. It never fails

Forget the Shakespearean-trained Patrick Stewart: the turbolifts have a sharper sense of dramatic timing!

 

[Mysterion]

it was Valeris who said Klingons have no tear-ducts, not Scotty.

Well, why should we take her word, then? Liar and traitor. Case closed.

Why would she lie about something that could easily be proven a lie by anyone with knowledge of Klingon physiology?

But, at that point, the Enterprise crew didn't seem to be that in the know about Klingon physiology. Even Dr. McCoy elsewhere in the movie was stumped. And since we've seen Klingons elsewhere crying, she's obviously wrong.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

Well, why should we take her word, then? Liar and traitor. Case closed.

Why would she lie about something that could easily be proven a lie by anyone with knowledge of Klingon physiology?

But, at that point, the Enterprise crew didn't seem to be that in the know about Klingon physiology. Even Dr. McCoy elsewhere in the movie was stumped. And since we've seen Klingons elsewhere crying, she's obviously wrong.

Good point about McCoy. Where did we see Klingons cry? I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't remember seeing tears. When was it?

 

[Alidar Jarok]

For my part, I'd say that the year 1996 went by without eugenics wars bring waged is hard to explain

Well, there's no evidence the Eugenics Wars was fought in the United States, so that's not all that bad (there was a model of Botany Bay in the episode, so it wasn't completely removed from Khan).

For Klingon tear ducts, I'm going to go with Khaless wept as a translation. Maybe some kind of mourning that is similar without actual tears.

Then again, I'm pretty sure we've seen Worf cry before. And, if not, he at least appears to have tear ducts.

 

[sbk1234]

I just thought of another one. All those smiling Vulcans in Star Trek 4.

 

[FormerLurker]

Klingon tear-ducts don't look like human tear-ducts. Maybe.

The pink Klingon blood that was seen was shed by those Klingons who had been exposed to Praxis.(and not any others. Remember, any other Klingon blood seen was either long before, or long after Praxis exploded)

"Threshold" proves that not all evolution goes up the scale. Some of it goes down. Evolution literally means change, but not necessarily change for the better.