Funny, when people say this about Discovery being in continuity with TOS, you take the complete opposite view and say we should listen to our benign overlords.
Reasons why Archer is never mentioned in history
- Thread starter Nyotarules
- Start date
It had a window as their view screen. That’s not a Prime design.
If it’s mentioned in a novel, I’ll take it as Prime canon. Until then, it’s JJVerse
Oh god, no.That’s the joke.
Seriously, I still see them more canon than STD.
Since I'm defintely out of good jokes I'll just post a link to a hilarious thread from 2016:
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/what-happened-to-the-crew-of-the-nx-01.275748/
https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/what-happened-to-the-crew-of-the-nx-01.275748/
Yes it is.
Have you watched Discovery? Prime Universe isn't what it used to be.
Discovery? What’s that?
"Archer" is a forbidden word in some major galactic language. Like "belgium". 
I feel like this thread is demonstrating very well the tendency of some around here to argue without bothering to fully process the things that were previously said in the conversation. Because, yeah, it was, and that was pretty clear in the OP. Probably should have prefaced the thread title with "Funny", @Nyotarules
...With a jury to decide count-by-count whether a reply qualifies? 
A list of references to past skippers other than Kirk would be an extremely short one - one entry per name, really. In that sense, Archer is in fairly exclusive company in warranting multiple references. And indeed warranting those not just because of coincidental encounters with Archery things (such as field trips to Qo'noS), but very specifically because Archer makes it into the Famous Captains List (without any explanation given as to how he made it into the list).
So the original question is in error as such: Archer is actually mentioned exceptionally often for a past starship captain. But it is also an interesting one, as we still don't know what makes for famous skippers. Does saving the Federation twice suffice, or is thrice the absolute minimum requirement? Does saving just the Earth even count?
Timo Saloniemi
A list of references to past skippers other than Kirk would be an extremely short one - one entry per name, really. In that sense, Archer is in fairly exclusive company in warranting multiple references. And indeed warranting those not just because of coincidental encounters with Archery things (such as field trips to Qo'noS), but very specifically because Archer makes it into the Famous Captains List (without any explanation given as to how he made it into the list).
So the original question is in error as such: Archer is actually mentioned exceptionally often for a past starship captain. But it is also an interesting one, as we still don't know what makes for famous skippers. Does saving the Federation twice suffice, or is thrice the absolute minimum requirement? Does saving just the Earth even count?
Timo Saloniemi
"Archer" is a forbidden word in some major galactic language. Like "belgium".
I feel like this thread is demonstrating very well the tendency of some around here to argue without bothering to fully process the things that were previously said in the conversation. Because, yeah, it was, and that was pretty clear in the OP. Probably should have prefaced the thread title with "Funny", @Nyotarules
And with almost poetic irony the post following yours demonstrates that very self same lack of humour or contextual awareness.
Sometimes you ask why the chicken crossed the road only to get a debate about the composition of the tarmac.
Last edited:
IaMD has President Archer pass away the night of the 1701 launch in the Prime universe. Assuming he died in 2245 in the Kelvin universe too, and no Beagle can live that long, Admiral Archer is his son/daughter who has carried on the tradition.
Or the beagle is in fact a parasitic alien entity which has formed a codependent pseudo relationship with the human
You're saying the beagle is a cat?
Similar threads
