ENT had a western episode with horses, but my traumatic amnesia won't let me remember the details.
You're right! North Star!! And there were tons of horses and it was a western town! How could I have forgotten this.
Sci-fi vs Sci-Fantasy
- Thread starter JeffinOakland
- Start date
You're right! North Star!! And there were tons of horses and it was a western town! How could I have forgotten this.
Are horses sci-fi stuff or science-fantasy stuff?
By the way, TOS was clearly a medical drama, since there was a doctor in almost all episodes and he's oftenly doing doctor thing. He also does doctor things in TOS movies.
By the way, TOS was clearly a medical drama, since there was a doctor in almost all episodes and he's oftenly doing doctor thing. He also does doctor things in TOS movies.
Horses are space westerns stuff. See, Firefly.
I remember last autumn, someone kept insisting VOY was a police procedural.
And a dessert topping and floor wax . . . .
I can accept Warp or any sort of FTL travel because it's completely necessary for any story telling in a sci fi series like this. The transporter idea goes back to the 19th century with speculation of the time. I don't think people realize how that was probably the era of greatest scientific progression in all of human history. I think we are less optimistic these days than we were then or even in the 1960's and that's why we aren't interested in speculation.
The biggest flaw of all was that humanoids all evolved into what was essentially the same species. Love or hate "The Chase," it is absolutely necessary to explain the Trek universe.
The biggest flaw of all was that humanoids all evolved into what was essentially the same species. Love or hate "The Chase," it is absolutely necessary to explain the Trek universe.
I would say all versions of Trek are pretty hard science fiction--straight out of EE Doc Smith and Robert Heinlein. Space opera. Anytime the story centers around quasi-military space adventurers on an FTL ship roaming the galaxy that's pretty much classic hard s.f.
I'm not sure how it could get much harder actually.
ETA: Just take a look at "Forbidden Planet." If that's hard s.f.--which it must be--then so is Star Trek--since just about everything in Star Trek is more or less foreshadowed in Forbidden Planet.
I'm not sure how it could get much harder actually.
ETA: Just take a look at "Forbidden Planet." If that's hard s.f.--which it must be--then so is Star Trek--since just about everything in Star Trek is more or less foreshadowed in Forbidden Planet.
"Hard Science Fiction" typically refers to sci-fi which is based on and around actual science fact or theories which very little to no inaccuracies. Which rarely applies to Star Trek.
Except in TOS at least, they tried to get the science right as best they knew, right? Employing a research firm, etc. Clearly "inertial dampers" (never mentioned but necessary at least when not using warp drive) and deck-by-deck gravity stretch credulity, but many stories considered sci-fi from that era had an element or two that weren't probable.
Honestly, the most improbable thing in TOS is Mr. Spock. A human-alien hybrid one can almost accept, but when the alien parent has a completely different, copper-based blood chemistry . . . how is cross-breeding even possible? Vulcans and humans aren't even compatible on the most basic level . . . .
And yet who among us would want to do without Mr. Spock for the sake of "hard" science?
And yet who among us would want to do without Mr. Spock for the sake of "hard" science?
How do we know there is not something in that Vulcan blood beyond the extent of human science and knowledge that allows Vulcans to breed with alien species? Perhaps the pon farr causes Vulcan blood to match or blend with the blood type of a chosen mate, and it was discovered this chemical change works with certain alien species as well, including humans. This would explain the sensation of their blood burning during pon farr.
A better question is why isn't there more biodiversity among humans who grew up on different environments? As much as I hate the episode "Melora," at least they approached the issue in some way.
For me, the pinnacle of actual science fiction is Ringworld and its accompanying "Known Space" universe, where almost nothing is just explained 'as is.' It isn't like I need that in Star Trek more than once or twice. It's annoying when they ignore what they had already established in past movies or episodes. It's why TMP is one of my favorites as well: I assume, as I think we're supposed to, that by TOS they had reached a level where their society cannot advance beyond. They use the budget to show all of the things they would naturally have had, such as counter-grab lifting devices, a good space suit with thrusters, and the warp speed at least being emphasized a lot more.
For me, the pinnacle of actual science fiction is Ringworld and its accompanying "Known Space" universe, where almost nothing is just explained 'as is.' It isn't like I need that in Star Trek more than once or twice. It's annoying when they ignore what they had already established in past movies or episodes. It's why TMP is one of my favorites as well: I assume, as I think we're supposed to, that by TOS they had reached a level where their society cannot advance beyond. They use the budget to show all of the things they would naturally have had, such as counter-grab lifting devices, a good space suit with thrusters, and the warp speed at least being emphasized a lot more.
Star Trek is soft scifi with pretensions to be the hard variety. It at least pays lip service to plausibility. Star Wars is pure fantasy in SF clothing, and doesn't care about plausibility at all.
To my way of thinking, film and TV wise, the non-ape and non-stargate sections of 2001 are HARD scifi. They're logical extrapolations of what could be done given our understanding of space and technology, even if a few of the details and timelines are off.
Star Trek is "soft" because it doesn't pay much attention to plausibility. Warp drive and transporter beaming aside, things like splitting a person in two to make a Jeckle-Hyde pair, pixie eared aliens who look just like us but are based on different biology yet can breed with humans, FTL telepathy, and the sequel series' endless parade of ____yon particles of week are not based on much that's scientifically plausible at all. It's not science fantasy, though.
To my way of thinking, film and TV wise, the non-ape and non-stargate sections of 2001 are HARD scifi. They're logical extrapolations of what could be done given our understanding of space and technology, even if a few of the details and timelines are off.
Star Trek is "soft" because it doesn't pay much attention to plausibility. Warp drive and transporter beaming aside, things like splitting a person in two to make a Jeckle-Hyde pair, pixie eared aliens who look just like us but are based on different biology yet can breed with humans, FTL telepathy, and the sequel series' endless parade of ____yon particles of week are not based on much that's scientifically plausible at all. It's not science fantasy, though.
You're missing the point. Greg's talking about an explanation that would have been explicitly explained by the writers and the deal is bigger than simply Sarek's sperm and Amanda's egg.
How do we know there is not something in that Vulcan blood beyond the extent of human science and knowledge that allows Vulcans to breed with alien species? Perhaps the pon farr causes Vulcan blood to match or blend with the blood type of a chosen mate, and it was discovered this chemical change works with certain alien species as well, including humans. This would explain the sensation of their blood burning during pon farr.
How could a red-blooded mother have carry a green-blooded child? Why's Spock anatomy definetely Vulcan? All his human part seems to do is lightening some Vulcan traits.
Spock's alien characteristics had been largely exploited. So, if the answer for Spock's conception was an adaptive blood, it would have been used at least one time by TOS writers.
They freely ignored the research firm when it suited them. So their devotion to science wasn't that hard fast.
Maybe its like a Michael Crichton novel where he uses 1% real science to make it "seem" real and 99% pseudo-science to entertain.
