Evidence that Kestra Troi was eaten by a wolf

[chrinFinity]

Why would there be wolves anywhere near any place they’d be picnicking? And if there were why wouldn’t all the sensors be on top of that?

That's an interesting conundrum in Star Trek. They must have wildlife protection laws in place as we also see wild animals on Earth in Paradise Lost as well as (dangerous!) sehlats and other creatures roaming Vulcan's Forge in Yesteryear as well as in Kir'Shara. So dangerous carnivorous wildlife on Federation worlds is not unheard of.

In the scene where they discovered her death they stood there stunned. Yes, if she was in any state where she was not unambiguously dead they’d try to revive her.

It is much more likely to believe she could have been beamed away and revived from a drowning incident than a wolf-attack. Once again the wolf is more plausible. But this is not a conversation about plausibility, but about on-screen evidence. Which also supports the wolf attack.

But if they thought a wolf was nearby they’d rush immediately back to their unintended infant Deanna.

Lwaxana was dry so she was probably protecting the baby while Ian dealt with the wolf. That is also consistent with the irritating gender norms that Star Trek adhered to in the 80's and 90's in their storytelling. (Also it's a little presumptuous to assume Deanna was unintended.)

Did you not read what I posted above? The script proves that the dog and the wolf are the same creature. The wolf's growl is coming from the dog's mouth. And no one's bullying you.

I did read what you wrote. I wrote in my first post that I'm disregarding deleted scenes and contents that were scripted but never filmed. That's just one interpretation that never made it to screen... It is what's canon that is most important.

Also, it's entirely plausible that a six-year-old child wouldn't know how to swim.

We learn in When the Bough Breaks that 24th century Federation kids are taught Calculus at age 10. Are you suggesting that Ian and Lwaxana would choose to live at a house by a lake, take picnics at that lake, and not have their six-year-old taught basic swimming survival skills? I was in swimming lessons when I was six, and that was on Earth in the 20th century. And we lived in a suburb. I think you're stretching a lot here to fit your preferred theory of drowning.

 

[Orphalesion]

How about this:
Kestra was killed by a time travelling Tasha Yar from the mirror universe, sent back in time by...uh...T'Pol in order to prevent Chekotay from becoming a Marquis. And this led to the Hobus Super Nova.

That has just as much on-screen "evidence" as that silly Wolf idea.

 

[thribs]

She never existed. It was all a figment of her imagination.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

There is zero actual on screen evidence of a wolf and lots of on screen evidence of a head injury.

You’re just trying to make logical sense of the metaphor of the wolf in her subconscious.

 

[chrinFinity]

We see one wolf in the episode, and we see one body of water. The presented reasons for death are equal.

Okay I will grant you that.

There is not "zero on-screen evidence of drowning". Just because we do not see Hedril dead in the lake or a character state definitively that she drowned does not equal zero evidence.

I could say the same about the wolf. But at least we see and hear an angry wolf around the lake. We don't see or hear evidence of drowning.

So by your own words, the wolf is one of at least four things present in H but not M.

The Enterprise corridors are Deanna's contribution to the telepathic link, or, they're present because they are recent in Lwaxana's spatial orientation memory. The house near Lake El'Nar and the baby toys are present because they are closely linked in Lwaxana's mind with Kestra's death. As is the wolf. For obvious reasons.

1.It is the little dog that growls and barks. 2. Lwaxana does not look at an on-screen wolf. You are presenting those as facts, they are not. They are suppositions. If the dog chased a wolf that Lwaxana had looked at in fear, why would she say that, "The dog got away. She ran after him. We didn't notice." ?

1. That dog couldn't make those sounds. 2. She looks off in the general direction the dog is barking, but doesn't notice the wolf until it's too late. Later she punishes herself for missing something "so obvious" as a wolf, but clearly the wolf was stalking them.

 

[chrinFinity]

There is zero actual on screen evidence of a wolf and lots of on screen evidence of a head injury.

Disagree strongly. What evidence is there of a head injury?? There is a god damn wolf in this episode.

You’re just trying to make logical sense of the metaphor of the wolf in her subconscious.

Yes.

 

[Extrocomp]

I did read what you wrote. I wrote in my first post that I'm disregarding deleted scenes and contents that were scripted but never filmed. That's just one interpretation that never made it to screen... It is what's canon that is most important.

If you only care about what's canon, then why were you so insistent on trying to reconcile Natasha Troi-Riker and Thaddeus Troi-Riker over on the TrekLit forum?

 

[chrinFinity]

If you only care about what's canon, then why were you so insistent on trying to reconcile Natasha Troi-Riker and Thaddeus Troi-Riker over on the TrekLit forum?

The TrekLit forum concerns the LitVerse and this forum concerns TNG. Besides, the Litverse has already confirmed the drowning theory so the wolf-attack interpretation is only relevant here.

 

[Tosk]

That dog couldn't make those sounds.

In reality, that is true. We do not see the events in reality.

She looks off in the general direction the dog is barking, but doesn't notice the wolf until it's too late.

You previously said that she looks at the wolf. If she did not look at it "on screen", then you should remove it from your list of reasons why you think it was a wolf attack.

We don't see or hear evidence of drowning.

You know full well we do. A girl who falls into water. The lake. Multiple splashes. A waterlogged husband.

I could say the same about the wolf.

You have. Many times.

But at least we see and hear an angry wolf around the lake.

No we don't. Show me one single shot of the wolf at the lake.

 

[chrinFinity]

You previously said that she looks at the wolf. If she did not look at it "on screen", then you should remove it from your list of reasons why you think it was a wolf attack.

She looks off in the same direction as the dog is alerting to. We know that it is a wolf, but she does not "notice" the wolf until after the attack has started and it is too late to save Kestra. And she was on screen when she made the mystery look, trying to figure out what the dog was alerting to (the wolf).

Show me one single shot of the wolf at the lake.

We see and hear the wolf in the Hallucination, and we hear the wolf at the lake. We don't see Kestra fall in the lake at all, any more than we see the wolf attack Kestra. They couldn't have shown either on 90's TV anyway.

 

[Tosk]

We know that it is a wolf

No we don't. Submitting suppositions as fact does not make them so.

She looks off in the same direction as the dog is alerting to. [..] but she does not "notice" the wolf until after the attack has started and it is too late to save Kestra.

So as I said, if she does not notice the wolf prior to the death, then you should stop listing it as such.

It's not like it matters anyway as said before, the "memory" is as dreamlike and fallible as the hallucinations are. Even if the dream wolf was seen in the final memory, it still wouldn't prove that a wolf mauled Kestra.

It's weird that Kestra is never referred to as having been killed. It's always just that she died in an accident. That is not proof of anything, just noting it.

Edit: I have to apologize for all the times I referred to Kestra being mauled or killed by a wolf. I forgot that the thread title is actually eaten by a wolf. So in your scenario the wolf didn't just attack her and kill her. He ate her too. And then fought Ian Troi in a lake without leaving a scratch on him.

 

[Mutai Sho-Rin]

OK, enough! The wolf theory is in flat earth territory and completely without rational foundation. I’m closing this thread which I should have done in the first place.