• 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!

Nitpicky Things that just get on your nerves

Looking at my comment history, there are many things in Star Trek that I'm perfectly able to rationalize away, except for one thing that somehow grinds my gears every single time I think about it.

Namely, the Federation President's office tower from DS9's Homefront. It just bugs me to no end how they basically just inserted a futuristic office block right on top of a contemporary shot of the Notre Dame, and inserted the Eiffel Tower into the background just so that even the dimmest viewer would recognize it as Paris.

Just to reiterate: the building in the foreground is Hôtel-Dieu, the oldest hospital in Europe, and from this vantage, the Notre Dame should be right where the office tower is. And why did they have to insert the Eiffel Tower? Because in real life, it's way out of frame, far to the viewer's right. The Eiffel Tower on the screencap is roughly in the same direction where the Panthéon should be if viewed from here.

The funny thing is I'm not even French, it just triggers my European sensibilities and causes an unnecessary amount of annoyance.
 
The Roman Empire was comprised of "Roman citizens" mostly outside of Rome, even when it split in two and half of it was ruled by Greeks. The definition got a bit... byzantine as the centuries went on.
Though in fairness, it was never referred to as Byzantine until over 100 years after it ceased to exist. It was always called the Roman Empire by it's residents and by outsiders.
 
Looking at my comment history, there are many things in Star Trek that I'm perfectly able to rationalize away, except for one thing that somehow grinds my gears every single time I think about it.

Namely, the Federation President's office tower from DS9's Homefront. It just bugs me to no end how they basically just inserted a futuristic office block right on top of a contemporary shot of the Notre Dame, and inserted the Eiffel Tower into the background just so that even the dimmest viewer would recognize it as Paris.

Just to reiterate: the building in the foreground is Hôtel-Dieu, the oldest hospital in Europe, and from this vantage, the Notre Dame should be right where the office tower is. And why did they have to insert the Eiffel Tower? Because in real life, it's way out of frame, far to the viewer's right. The Eiffel Tower on the screencap is roughly in the same direction where the Panthéon should be if viewed from here.

The funny thing is I'm not even French, it just triggers my European sensibilities and causes an unnecessary amount of annoyance.

I believe that in th The Nitpicker's Guide to The Next Generation Phil Farrand discussed the views of the Eiffel Tower in "We'll Always Have Paris". There is a presumably accurate holodeck recreation of a cafe in Paris with views of the Eiffel Tower. And views in different directions show the Eiffel Tower. So Farand speculated that maybe future Paris had several different replicas of the Effiel Tower in different locations.

Paris might have been largely rebuilt after World War Three. And possibly building replicas of the Eiffel Tower might have been easier than reconstructing many of the older stone built Parisian monuments. So maybe they built several different replicas of the Eiffel Tower to compensate for not rebuilding many of the older stone monuments of Paris like Notre Dame.

Another theory is that the Federation President's office, like the Dark Fortress of the Beast in Krull (1983), moves from place to place over time. So possibly the building settled into the space between the Hotel-Dieu and Notre Dame during the time it was scheduled to be in Paris, blocking Notre Dame from view in that shot.
 
Having just finished S2 of TNG last night (a rewatch for me and I'm proud to say I've shown my wife the way and she's a confirmed Trekkie now) I have to say...

I really wish someone in wardrobe or makeup had told Brent Spiner to shave his chest. Seeing hairs poking up above the neck line in the S1 and S2 uniforms had my wife asking a few times "He's fully functional so that includes body hair does it?"
 
Khan's "On Earth, 200 years ago" line in TWOK. Try 300. :p

Whenever the Enterprise approach Earth or an Earth-like planet in un-remastered TOS and there were no clouds. It looked like the Enterprise always arrived on the clearest of clear days. ;)
 
...

Yep. Found in searches for "pay" and "how much" for TOS & the first six movies at Star Trek Script Search:

From "Who Mourns For Adonias?":

From "The Doomsday Machine":

From "Mudd's Women":

From "I, Mudd":

From "Requiem For Methuselah":

From "The Enterprise Incident":

From "The Devil in the Dark":

From "The Apple":

We have a whole haggling scene in "The Trouble With Tribbles":

From " A Piece of the Action":

And from the end of the episode, Kirk proposes re-investing Starfleet's cut into a planetary treasury:

There's more haggling in Star Trek III:

And in a cut scene from the original Nicholas Meyer/Denny Martin Flynn script for Star Trek VI, Kirk tells Carol Marcus: "This sailor is in port for good. Take a good look at my retirement pay if you don't believe me. I can hardly afford to cross the street."

So yeah, I think it's a safe assumption that they had some sort of monetary or credit exchange on TOS. And Starfleet officers definitely draw some sort of salary and are allowed to make financial transactions on behalf of Starfleet or the Federation. :)

Good points, as well as this nugget in which Kirk actually uses the term "money", although as Spock might say, it could be used colloquially

ERRAND OF MERCY:
KIRK: "Well, Mr. Spock... It seems it's up to you and me."
SPOCK: "It would appear so, Captain."
KIRK: "The Federation has invested much money in our training. They're due for a small return."

I've always been on the side of "they do use money".
 
Khan's "On Earth, 200 years ago" line in TWOK. Try 300. :p

Both are inaccurate. It was around 250-275. Kirk never corrected his estimate, and Khan "never bothered" to learn the truth. But it was a great quote.

Whenever the Enterprise approach Earth or an Earth-like planet in un-remastered TOS and there were no clouds. It looked like the Enterprise always arrived on the clearest of clear days. ;)

That was common across science fiction for a long time. It wasn't until we regularly saw images of Earth from orbit that we began to realize that the clouds are visible from out there. Until then, we assumed that the view was one we were more familiar with from the surface.
 
How come every time our heroes need to contact whoever....they (the whoever) arn't in bed? Or don't answer with "Do you have any idea what time it is here??
And they can always immediately get the planetary leader. Like he/her are at Starfleet beck and call. You'd think the starship captain would instead get some assistant, or military guy.
 
Khan's "On Earth, 200 years ago" line in TWOK. Try 300... :p
. ;)

My post here: https://moviechat.org/tt0050066/Tales-of-Wells-Fargo/5c2c530ec5aa8f67558adbe0/Lola-Montez

States that if the Tales of Wells Fargo episode "Lola Montez" happens in real history instead of some imaginary wild west, it must happen in or before 1861 and also in or after 1879, which of course is impossible.

My guess is when (and if) anyone checked the script for chronological plausibility they were thinking backwards and figured it would have to be in or after 1861 and in or before 1879, and thus could happen in the period of 1861-1879.

People working on Star Trek chronology should assume that there is a great danger, for example, of proving that a specific episode must happen before the year 2250 and also after the year 2270, which of course is impossible. To avoid that they should use the broadest possible interpretation of chronological terms.

So when someone says some event was X hundred years in the past, one should not interpret it as being between X hundred and 0.000 and X hundred and 0.999 years. It would be much better to interpret it as X hundred plus or minus 10 years. And it would be even better to interpret it as X hundred plus or minus 25 years, and even better still to interpret it as X hundred plus or minus 33.3333 years, and so on and so on.

The greatest amount of leeway in interpreting X hundred years is interpreting it as (X plus or minus 1) hundred years. And I think that should be the rule for interpreting X hundred year statements in Star Trek. A chronologist should not try to narrow down the possible date range of Star Trek as much as possible. They should try to interpret the date range from each piece of evidence as broadly as possible, so that in the end there will be a date range that fits all of the evidence.

So in "Space Seed":

(The ship appears on the viewscreen.)
KIRK: An old Earth vessel, similar to the DY=500 class.
SPOCK: Much older. DY-100 class, to be exact. Captain, the last such vessel was built centuries ago, back in the 1990s.

So if the 1990s go from 1990.000 to 1999.999, and if centuries are 200.001 to 999.999 years, the date of "Space Seed" must be between 2190.000 and 2999.998.

SPOCK: Hull surface is pitted with meteor scars. However, scanners make out a name. SS Botany Bay.
KIRK: Then you can check the registry.
SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid=1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.
MCCOY: The Eugenics Wars.
SPOCK: Of course. Your attempt to improve the race through selective breeding.

And:

KIRK: I'm not. Oh, I'll need somebody familiar with the late 20th-Century Earth. Here's a chance for that historian to do something for a change. What's her name? McIvers?

At the very broadest, "late 20th century" would mean sometime between about 1950.000 and 2000.999. Obviously Kirk doesn't think that DY-100 class ships were used for very long after they were built.

MARLA: Captain, it's a sleeper ship.
KIRK: Suspended animation.
MARLA: I've seen old photographs of this. Necessary because of the time involved in space travel until about the year 2018. It took years just to travel from one planet to another.

So obviously they don't expect the ship to have been launched any time after about 2018. Marla says:

MARLA: A man from the twentieth century coming alive.

So I guess that Marla thinks that any expedition after about 2000 would use a DY-200 class ship or other more advanced class of ship.

KHAN: How long?
KIRK: How long have you been sleeping? Two centuries we estimate. Landing party to Enterprise. Come in.

Later on the bridge:

KIRK: Kirk out. Seventy two alive. A group of people dating back to the 1990s. A discovery of some importance, Mister Spock. There are a great many unanswered questions about those years.

Kirk assumes that they must have left Earth in the 1990s.

Later, in the Enterprise sickbay:

KHAN: I remember a voice. Did I hear it say I had been sleeping for two centuries?
MCCOY: That is correct.

And later Kirk tells Khan:

KIRK: What was the exact date of your lift off? We know it was sometime in the early 1990s, but

Kirk thinks that he knows that Khan's group left Earth sometime in the early 1990s, so they should have strong evidence so far to think that was the period. Therefore, the statement that Khan had been sleeping for two centuries means for two centuries after the early 1990s.

The early 1990s would be between 1990.000 and 1993.333. Interpreting two centuries as broadly as possible, as 100.001 to 299.999 years, puts the date of "Space Seed" sometime between about 2090.001 and about 2293.332.

Later they discover who Khan is:

(A large picture of their guest in on a screen)
KIRK: Name, Khan, as we know him today. (Spock changes the picture) Name, Khan Noonien Singh.
SPOCK: From 1992 through 1996, absolute ruler of more than a quarter of your world. From Asia through the Middle East.

So Khan ruled his realm on Earth until sometime in 1996. So Khan must have left Earth sometime after 1996.000.

In Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan there are two statements which indicate that the movie should be about 15 years after the episode "Space Seed".:

KHAN: You are in a position to demand nothing, sir. I, on the other hand, am in a position to grant ...nothing. What you see is all that remains of the ship's company and crew of the Botany Bay, marooned here fifteen years ago by Captain James T. Kirk.

And:

KIRK: There's a man out there I haven't seen in fifteen years who's trying to kill me.

If a computer or Spock said that it was fifteen years, I would say it was between 15.001 and 15.999 years. But since two humans said it, I will assume it was between 14.001 and 16.999 years just to be safe.

Therefore, the year of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan of should be sometime between about 2101.002 and about 2309.331, if there was no further contact between Kirk and Khan since shortly after "Space Seed".

Khan tells Captain Terrell:

KHAN: Captain! Captain! Save your strength. These people have sworn to live and die at my command two hundred years before you were born. Do you mean he never told you the tale? To amuse your Captain? No? Never told you how the Enterprise picked up the Botany Bay, lost in space in the year nineteen hundred and ninety-six, myself and the ship's company in cryogenic freeze?

This proves that the Botany Bay left sometime in 1996, sometime between 1996.001 and 1996.999. But that doesn't matter too much, since nobody ever states exactly how long Khan & co. were in suspended animation.

Captain Terrell was portrayed by a forty five year old actor. Assuming that Khan estimates that Terrell is between 30.001 and 60.999 years old, Khan should think that Terrell was born between 2040.003 and 2279.33. Assuming that Khan's people swore allegiance to him between 100.001 and 299.999 years before Terrell was born, they would have done so between 1740.004 and 2179.329.

Or "Space Seed" and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan can be date from the time that the other supermen/augments swore allegiance to Khan. That could have been sometime between about 1960 when they were kids in school together or 1996 when they swore allegiance to Khan so he let them on the Botany Bay.

So 1960.001 to 1996.999 plus 100.001 to 299.999 years equals about 2060.002 to 2296.998, when Khan might assume that Captain Terrell was born, plus about 30.001 to 60.999 years puts Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan about 2090.003 to 2357.997. Subtracting 14.001 to 16.999 years, "Space Seed " would happen about 2029.004 to 2343.996.

Khan also said:

On Earth, ...two hundred years ago, ...I was a prince, ...with power over millions.

Since Khan ruled a large part of Earth from 1992 to 1996, we can calculate that 1992.001 to 1996.999 plus 100.001 to 299.999 years gives 2092.002 to 2296.989 as the range for Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, which thus give 2075.003 to 2282.988 as the range for "Space Seed".

So by interpreting "two centuries" and "two hundred years" as 100.001 to 299.999 years, the date range of "Space Seed" should be 2090.001 to 2293.332, and 2029.004 to 2343.996, and 2075.003 to 2282.988; and the range of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be 2101.002 to 2309.331, and 2090.003 to 2357.997, and 2092.002 to 2296.989.

Combining the three calculations gives a possible date range of "Space Seed" as 2090.001 to 2282.988, a possible range of 192.987 years, and the possible date range of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan as 2101.002 to 2296.989, a possible range of 195.987 years.

And by doing this for all the productions that give clues about when TOS happens, one can get several such broad possible date ranges for various episodes and movies. And thus there could be a time period where all those ranges overlap for five, ten, or twenty years perhaps, a time period where TOS could possibly happen.

But if you imagine that "two centuries" or "Two hundred years" means 200.001 to 200.999 years, then calculating from 1990.001 to 1993.333 "Space Seed" should be between 2190.002 and 2194.332. If Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should be 15.001 to 15.999 years lit should happen around 2205.003 to 2210.331.

If Khan's people swore allegiance to him sometime between 1960.001 and 1996.999, Khan should believe that Captain Terrell was born about 2160.002 to 2197.998. If Khan believed that Captain Terrell was about 45.001 to 45.999 years old, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should happen about 2205.003 to,2243.997 and thus "Space Seed" should happen about 2189.004 to 2228.996.

If Khan was a prince on Earth between 1992.001 and 1996.999, then Star Trek II:The Wrath of Khan should happen about 2192.002 to 2197.998, and "Space Seed" should happen about 2176.003 to.2182.997.

So "Space Seed " should happen about 2190.002 to 2194.332, 2189.004 to 2228.996, and 2176.003 to 2182.997 and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan should happen about 2205.003 to 2210.331, 2205.003 to,2243.997, and 2192.002 to 2197.998.

Since those possible ranges don't overlap, assuming that "two centuries" or "Two hundred years" means 200.001 to 200.999 years, will not work with the date from merely two productions, let alone work with every production which might be used to date TOS and the TOS movies.`
 
Well, when you have seven regulars and anywhere from four to thirty extras and guest stars in an episode, flying rigs for all of them get pricy. To me, that isn't annoying so much as needing a passing line about how the gravity is such a priority system it's almost impossible to knock out, and thank goodness.
 
Khan's "On Earth, 200 years ago" line in TWOK.
KHAN: How long?
KIRK: How long have you been sleeping? Two centuries we estimate.
It might be as simple as Khan initially heard Kirk say "two centuries" and just went off of that from that point forward.

Khan might have been intelligent, but at the same time he often wasn't all that bright.
KIRK: An old Earth vessel, similar to the DY=500 class.
When Kirk told Khan two centuries, Kirk could have been holding on to his original identification of the ship as a DY-500.
 
It might be as simple as Khan initially heard Kirk say "two centuries" and just went off of that from that point forward.

Yes, its not like Khan might have looked up the current Earth time and date while browsing though the computer files, or like Kirk might have left Khan a personal computer with, among other things, a file of historical information, or a chronometer that gave the year and date as well as the time, or might have left with Khan a crew member who knew what year it was, possibly someone whose job assignment was, perhaps - historian. :lol:

Khan might have been intelligent, but at the same time he often wasn't all that bright.When Kirk told Khan two centuries, Kirk could have been holding on to his original identification of the ship as a DY-500.

Except that Spock corrected Kirk and said it was a DY-100 class ship.

KIRK: An old Earth vessel, similar to the DY=500 class.
SPOCK: Much older. DY-100 class, to be exact. Captain, the last such vessel was built centuries ago, back in the 1990s.

So if the last DY-100 class hisps were built in the 1990s, the DY-200 class hips should have been built in the 1990s and/or 2000s, and so on, with the DY-500 class ships being built decades after the the DY-100 class ships. In the original TOS, before it was remastered with CGI, the Botany Bay model was reused as the Woden, an automated freighter, in "The Ultimate Computer". So DY-500 or DY-600 or some other DY class vessels, externally indistinguishable from the Botany Bay to our eyes, were still being used in the era of TOS. Kirk would know that the era of DY-500 class vessels was long after the 1990s that people were discussing as Khan's era..

Everything that Kirk hears, and everything that Kirk says, about the Botany Bay in general, and Khan's expedition in particular, is "late twentieth century", "twentieth Century", "1990s". "Mid 1990s", and "early 1990s".

For example:

[SS Botany Bay]

(Men and women are lying in clear-sided compartments, seemingly asleep.) KIRK: Scotty?
SCOTT: Definitely Earth-type mechanism, sir. Twentieth century vessel. Old type atomic power. Bulky, solid. I think they used to call them transistor units. I'd love to tear this baby apart.

And:

KIRK: What was the exact date of your lift off? We know it was sometime in the early 1990s, but

The only way to get the "two hundred years" or "two centuries" statements in "Space Seed", "Tomorrow is Yesterday", and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan to add up is to assume that "two hundred years" means between 100.001 and 299.999 years.
 
Last edited:
Just watched "The Lights of Zetar". Scott is wearing a Science Division patch! Why?! :scream:

:lol:
 
Just watched "The Lights of Zetar". Scott is wearing a Science Division patch! Why?! :scream:

:lol:

He was trying to impress Mira, who was into those sciencey types. As a warp physicist and transporter expert, he might be qualified to wear a science patch. In fact, as second officer (and future Captain) he might be qualified to wear the command uniform and patch, but sticks to the engineering uniform.

Really, they took the patches off to clean them, and probably put the wrong one on Doohan's uniform and it wasn't caught for a few days. Season 3 wonkiness.
 
The security on Kirk's Enterprise. I'm starting to think I could steal the damned thing from him.

Clearly you’ve never watched Rocky Jones: Space Ranger! His rocket was stolen several times off the launch pad at Space Ranger HQ! Not to mention space stations and other planets. Seriously, I love the show but they have no concept of security at HQ. LOL!


The amount of intruders on the E-D was annoying since it was described in one ep as a space fortress.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top