Problems that required simple soloutions

[Cyke101]

Hell, I got an easier solution to the E-D/BoP battle, and really all of Generations:

Have Starfleet order all the E-B's parts a week earlier. Done and done! No death of Kirk, no Soran getting sucked out of the Nexus, no alliance with the Duras sisters, no death of the E-D, no second-death-of-Kirk, and no death of Harriman's dignity!

And they could even make a quick buck with product placement using FedEx's Next Day Shipping!

 

[MaximRecoil]

But the scene would make no sense if Y or Z were possible. David says "You can't shut it down, the process is inreversible or something". Kirk says "We have to run, then...", but the ship isn't up to it. "Great, we're all gonna die!" is what everybody's body language, faces and even dialogue is constantly expressing from that timepoint on. Now, if David did know of an alternative course of action, it's quite implausible that he wouldn't butt in with "Hey, wait, what about doing this instead...?" - no matter how harebrained that scheme.

It is called lazy writing in order to shoehorn a plot device into place. You are attempting to rationalize this as though these characters were real people.

Quite plausible, if the whole device is based on some sort of adaptation of the transporter principle in the first place. Transporters may be able to move delicate objects without harming them, yes. But the use of transporters may still send out types of radiation or subspace resonance or whatnot that will trigger the Genesis device into doing something really, really bad, even before the actual transport process starts.

Indeed, one might argue that David didn't say "You can't (shut it down)", but "You can't (beam over to shut it down)", exactly because transporters would be incompatible with the device.

Really, if there was room for argument in that situation, the argument would have taken place. Perhaps arguments between disciplined Starfleet officers are rare, but David the all-knowing civilian expert wouldn't have been held back by regulations, or by faith in the ability of Starfleet to come up with answers for him.

The Genesis device was already beamed once without setting it off. Your method of rationalization here is ridiculous. It could be used to rationalize anything. "They couldn't have done it because if they could have done it, they would have done it." What kind of reasoning is that?

All of those cases have one thing in common: Kirk didn't have a stun weapon available.

And in the case of a non-functioning phaser, he wouldn't have a stun weapon available either.

When he did, he always used it instead of a lethal one. So carrying both a Colt and a phaser wouldn't be an option he'd lightly choose, because it would mean giving up on one of his (and Starfleet's) principles. A phaser, a tranq gun and a Colt, perhaps (Stargate did that a lot). But not just phaser plus a lethal weapon.

A tranq gun is even more of a liability than their unreliable phasers. Tranq guns work due to drugs, and drugs have different effects depending on the type of organism they are used on. Additionally, they are not very powerful (their power is inherently limited because if that limit is exceeded, it would become a lethal device). I'll give you a quick example of where the tranq gun would have been useless; the armored knight on the horse. A dart never would have penetrated that armor. Even heavy clothing or thick skin/scales could render the tranq dart ineffective.

By the time you need a backup weapon to save your life, you don't have time for experiments.

 

[bluedana]

Here are two times when they did use the simplest solution. In ENT:Regeneration, the bad guys are on the ship, doing bad things to the systems. The captain orders security out of that part of the ship, then has the science officer open the airlock. The bad guys are whooshed out into space. And then in ENT:In A Mirror Darkly, they just waited until the bad guy reached a certain spot and then turned up the gravity. The bad guy goes splat.

Refreshing lack of technobabble, easy low-tech solutions.

 

[Timo]

It is called lazy writing in order to shoehorn a plot device into place. You are attempting to rationalize this as though these characters were real people.

But you are doing the same thing, rationalizing this as though this were a real universe with real rules on what can and cannot be done.

I find it very irritating when people think they should know better than the heroes, in the heroes' own field of expertise. If your Chief Engineer says something can't be done, you don't check if he thought of solutions X, Y, Z and so forth. He's smarter than you, and has the credentials to prove it. If your resident Genesis expert says you can't stop Genesis, you don't try and become a competing Genesis expert.

Sure, the writers may not have thought about every single possibility. But the whole structure of drama suffers if you start assuming that the characters are only as smart as the writers. They are as smart as they are written to be - and David Marcus was written to be smart.

The Genesis device was already beamed once without setting it off.

Only when turned off, though.

Your method of rationalization here is ridiculous. It could be used to rationalize anything. "They couldn't have done it because if they could have done it, they would have done it." What kind of reasoning is that?

The kind that always works in the real world - indeed, is the only thing that works. If you tried any other approach, such as constantly questioning the authorities around you on their competence, you'd be a very unpopular person indeed.

By the time you need a backup weapon to save your life, you don't have time for experiments.

Agreed. But if Starfleet is willing to risk Kirk's life by forcing him to stun his enemies at war, there are probably some very severe ideological reasons there that would make it undesirable for Kirk to pack a Colt. Kirk isn't out there to stay alive. Kirk is out there to promote UFP policies through services provided by Starfleet, and has sworn to die for those policies if need be. Granted that Kirk never seriously considered suicide as an option, only as a bluff - but he might still get into serious trouble if he did his soldier duty in a more violent way than television ratings, oops, UFP policies allow.

Timo Saloniemi

 

[MaximRecoil]

But you are doing the same thing, rationalizing this as though this were a real universe with real rules on what can and cannot be done.

What I am doing is not the same thing. This is a fictional universe with fictional rules on what can and cannot be done. Some elements of this fictional universe parallel the real universe, as do some of the rules. You can discuss what can on can't be done based on what has been established by the writers of this fictional universe; and beaming things is well-established. On the other hand, David's omniscience has not been established in this fictional universe, nor has any other being's. You speak as if you know the mind of David.

I find it very irritating when people think they should know better than the heroes, in the heroes' own field of expertise. If your Chief Engineer says something can't be done, you don't check if he thought of solutions X, Y, Z and so forth. He's smarter than you, and has the credentials to prove it. If your resident Genesis expert says you can't stop Genesis, you don't try and become a competing Genesis expert.

Sure, the writers may not have thought about every single possibility. But the whole structure of drama suffers if you start assuming that the characters are only as smart as the writers. They are as smart as they are written to be - and David Marcus was written to be smart.

That's the problem with lazy writing; it can make your characters look foolish.

Only when turned off, though.

You have suggested that "the use of transporters may still send out types of radiation or subspace resonance or whatnot that will trigger the Genesis device into doing something really, really bad, even before the actual transport process starts." If this is the case, beaming should have caused problems whether the countdown was started on the device or not. A countdown doesn't actually set its mechanisms in motion until it is finished counting down (because if it did, bad things would have started happening all around it as soon as the countdown started); it is simply a countdown to the point that its mechanisms are started. Given that its mechanisms were not yet started, the dangerous part of the Genesis device was still "turned off". It should have made no difference whether it was beamed with the counter started or not.

Additionally, I would question the intelligence and/or sanity of a character who created a device of such destructive power that didn't have an abort function. Even the self-destruct mechanism on starships has an abort function, and that is intended to be a destructive device. How absurd is it to create a scientific device (not intended to be a weapon or "doomsday device") which can reshape an entire planet, and not include an abort function?

BTW, getting back to David's alleged state of "all knowing" with regard to the Genesis device; well, the device was a failure; it ended up destroying the planet. I guess he didn't know as much about the device as you think he did.

The kind that always works in the real world - indeed, is the only thing that works. If you tried any other approach, such as constantly questioning the authorities around you on their competence, you'd be a very unpopular person indeed.

This isn't the real world, it is a world created by writers; writers which made their characters look stupid in this case for the sake of a plot device. I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt here based on such a far-fetched notion that beaming would have triggered the Genesis device, and David decided that it went without saying.

That method of rationalization can be used on any piece of bad writing in any TV show or movie. This in turn marginalizes the accomplishments of good writers who don't create plotholes or situations which make their characters look inexplicably foolish.

Agreed. But if Starfleet is willing to risk Kirk's life by forcing him to stun his enemies at war, there are probably some very severe ideological reasons there that would make it undesirable for Kirk to pack a Colt.

Do you have a citation which establishes that Starfleet forced Kirk to stun his enemies at war? I've always gotten the impression that the phaser settings were completely at Kirk's discretion.

Kirk isn't out there to stay alive. Kirk is out there to promote UFP policies through services provided by Starfleet, and has sworn to die for those policies if need be. Granted that Kirk never seriously considered suicide as an option, only as a bluff - but he might still get into serious trouble if he did his soldier duty in a more violent way than television ratings, oops, UFP policies allow.

I don't believe there was a particularly strong "don't kill" Starfleet policy; certainly not to the point that Kirk was sworn to die before upholding it; because he was always willing to kill before being killed, or before one of his crew or other ally was killed. In fact, Kirk was even willing to kill (or at least, expressed the desire to do so) out of revenge (see the bow and arrow episode where Kirk wanted to kill the Klingon for revenge).

The policy on the matter seemed similar to that of modern day law enforcement departments. They often have night sticks, pepper spray, Tasers, and guns. Regardless of their non-lethal options, they are trained to meet deadly force with deadly force (i.e., guns).

The problem with Star Trek's phasers is that the non-lethal option and the lethal option are both packaged in the same device, and when that single device fails, they lose both options simultaneously. Not having a last-ditch deadly force option that is simple and reliable is quite an oversight for people who are routinely sent on dangerous missions.

 

[The Badger]

Why, in the recent movie, did only one of the skydiving party, Olson, carry explosive charges to destroy the drilling platform? If Kirk and Sulu had carried back ups, they might have saved Vulcan.

Particularly egregious as modern day military units always spread vital equipment out just in case.

A countdown doesn't actually set its mechanisms in motion until it is finished counting down (because if it did, bad things would have started happening all around it as soon as the countdown started); it is simply a countdown to the point that its mechanisms are started.

Sorry to butt in, but as I recall when Khan activated the Genesis Device Spock detected it's energy signature, but did not recognize it. David then looked at the screen and said something like "My God, the Genesis wave."

To me that strongly suggests (though I'll concede it does not prove) that we are not getting a four minute countdown followed by activation. Rather, the machine is activated by Khan, and starts building power until it is ready, four minutes later. As an aside, it might be perfectly safe to transport the device in it's inert state, but hideously dangerous once active.