• 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!

Saddest Series?

It's not insane, it's the prophet's non-linear mode of existence which isn't that difficult of a science fiction time traveling concept to grasp.

It's not consistent with what the prophets did elsewhere in the series. I feel like I had this discussion already, maybe I am a prophet.
 
It's not consistent with what the prophets did elsewhere in the series. I feel like I had this discussion already, maybe I am a prophet.
Can you provide some examples within DS9 episodes of inconsistencies regarding corporeal/linear and noncorporeal/nonlinear existence that contradict Sisko's conversation with Kasidy in WYLB. The burden of proof is yours.
 
Can you provide some examples within DS9 episodes of inconsistencies regarding corporeal/linear and noncorporeal/nonlinear existence that contradict Sisko's conversation with Kasidy in WYLB. The burden of proof is yours.

Well,it's actually very simple, in the first episode the prophets are wet behind the ears concerning "corporeal beings", they need to be explained a few things. Why is that? If time wasn't of the essence then they would know as much in the first episode than they did in the last. You can't have it both ways.
 
Well,it's actually very simple, in the first episode the prophets are wet behind the ears concerning "corporeal beings", they need to be explained a few things. Why is that? If time wasn't of the essence then they would know as much in the first episode than they did in the last. You can't have it both ways.
You're confusing a concept of science fiction time unity with an assumption it inherently bestows all-knowing knowledge. Your faulty premise isn't proof of any contradiction.
 
You're confusing a concept of science fiction time unity with an assumption it inherently bestows all-knowing knowledge. Your faulty premise isn't proof of any contradiction.

You keep misunderstanding! The point is not that they know everything. The point is that their knowledge shouldn't be dependent on time, yet it is! So you can't have it both ways, either they are independent of time and we shouldn't see them evolve with time or they are dependent on time and all this linear crap is just for show.
 
You keep misunderstanding! The point is not that they know everything. The point is that their knowledge shouldn't be dependent on time, yet it is! So you can't have it both ways, either they are independent of time and we shouldn't see them evolve with time or they are dependent on time and all this linear crap is just for show.
Where in any episode do the prophets state they are dependent on time and are evolving? You are conflating time with knowledge. lol. Posing an argument from assumption doesn't fill your burden of proof claim of inconsistency.
 
Last edited:
Where in any episode do the prophets state they are dependent on time and are evolving? Posing an argument from assumption doesn't fill your burden of proof claim of inconsistency.

They didn't have to state anything. If you watch the episodes you'll see that they need to be explained a few things in episode one so it's obvious that there is a chronology in their acquisition of information. I think we're arguing in circles. Maybe you are a prophet too, one that will forever ignore my arguments.
 
They didn't have to state anything. If you watch the episodes you'll see that they need to be explained a few things in episode one so it's obvious that there is a chronology in their acquisition of information. I think we're arguing in circles. Maybe you are a prophet too, one that will forever ignore my arguments.
I've yet to see you provide proof of an inconsistency so you don't have much of an argument to begin with.
 
Last edited:
The non-linear nature of the prophets makes it a promise that can be fulfilled at any time, or never, and given that it may have already been fulfilled, it does not necessarily count for much ... at least not to use hewmons.
 
I think in general DS9 was the saddest and most down-to-earth of the series, the ending included. I found it a bit upsetting that Sisko didn't return (I was expecting him to), because to me, Sisko's relationship with his crew and especially his son were such a central point of the show. But an open ending also means you can imagine anything you want. I'm still not sure if I was satisfied by the final episode to be honest!
 
As someone who just finished the show for the first time last night, yes, yes it is.

It's beautiful though. Exactly what I wanted out of a DS9 finale.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top