Burnham, Spock, and Pike met Vina in that episode.
Spoilers Star Trek: Strange New Worlds 3x05 - "Through the Lens of Time"
- Thread starter Commander Richard
- Start date
True, plus SNW has also done a a follow-up episode regarding the Enterprise's mission to Rigel, the disastrous mission which happened just prior to The Cage which resulted in heavy losses, among them Pike's Yeoman, who we actually survived in S2's Among the Lotus Eaters.
And yes, Pike did reunite with Vina in that Disco episode.
"Brain and brain! What is brain?!"
We need it for many science reasons.
Solid 9. Nice and creepy.
The "Curiouser and Curiouser" line by Spock was a nice throwback to Discovery and Spock and Michael having their mom read Alice in Wonderland to them. I like little touches like that.
The "we're going to need a bigger boat" reference was good too.
The "Curiouser and Curiouser" line by Spock was a nice throwback to Discovery and Spock and Michael having their mom read Alice in Wonderland to them. I like little touches like that.
The "we're going to need a bigger boat" reference was good too.
Me too. I goofed on how recent that was. Mea culpa (beats back with thorny vines) It was 13 years ago in The Menagerie. It all seemed sooner to me because Nimoy didn't really age between The Cage and The Menagerie.
I haven't watched much of Discovery, life got in the way, I didn't even own a TV in the decade it came out. The few episodes I saw were at friend's houses or Trek parties.
Funny thing about the alien script is that it’s apparently veeery limited. Take that shot of the tablet they found; it only seems to consist of three distinct symbols that are only rotated and oriented differently.
not unknown. Cree syllabics manages a syllabary (realistically more complicated than an alphabet) with a few basic shapes.
There are cameras that far exceed the eye's capabilities while there's nothing anywhere near close to replicating kidney functions. Pretty straightforward. Thanks for playing though. But I'm sure this isn't the time or place for this discussion!It was about the comparative complexity of kidneys versus eyes and their connections. Factually the retina is more complex than the kidney. Optical light bending is only the beginning of how an eye works, and it's the retina that matters here. There are no cameras that can replace the retina. Relativity is the key here. All organs are somewhat complex seen by themselves, includeling the kiddleys, but relative to the neural circuitry, synaptic connections, sheer processing power, the retina is less simple than the kidney. That's all I said, diddle I?
In the Awe Mister's defense he already mentioned that and noted the difference in functionality, and the appropriate thought to the complexity of the kidney compared to the eye.Except for dialysis, sure.
Knowing very little about dialysis I'll agree that his argument seems good enoughWell, I suppose it’s a matter of degree. People live a longer time using a dialysis machine, so they definitely work.
Anyway, it’s not that important. I’m happy to give up the argument.
The topic of course was comparative tissue complexity, not how well technology can mimic its general function. But since we're talking about different things, you win yours, and I win mine, and we can all be happyThere are cameras that far exceed the eye's capabilities while there's nothing anywhere near close to replicating kidney functions. Pretty straightforward. Thanks for playing though. But I'm sure this isn't the time or place for this discussion!
They do work but they are bulky imperfect machines that only perform some of the kidney functions. Meanwhile we have cameras that far exceed the eye's capabilities.Well, I suppose it’s a matter of degree. People live a longer time using a dialysis machine, so they definitely work.
Anyway, it’s not that important. I’m happy to give up the argument.
Heck they're both complicated organs for sure! All I'm saying is that kidneys are not much simpler than eyes (which is what the other poster said).
I think the evidence suggests kidneys are more complex but they're definitely not simpler! But, as you say, it's not important enough to keep discussing!
Last edited:
It's not a contest and I'm not aware of any BBS rule stating that you determine the nature of the topic.The topic of course was comparative tissue complexity, not how well technology can mimic its general function. But since we're talking about different things, you win yours, and I win mine, and we can all be happy
I was just responding to a post (not sure if was yours or someone else's) that claimed that kidneys were far simpler than eyes. That's not true and that was my point.
But, yes, both are very complicated.
I found it! This is the specific comment I replied to. I'm just saying that kidneys are NOT "much simpler than eyes." That's all!
And there's nothing about "tissue complexity" here either. But, let's move along from this dead horse!
As in all forums and discussions (I would assume everywhere), the topic of an exchange is what one replies to, regardless of who brought up the point you are responding to. I stand by my facts (evidence of which is available online and offline), and you can of course stand by yours.
Now let's move along home, Allamaraine!
Last edited:
i don't think Q is on the same level as the Vada thing, but then someone powerful had to corral all these dangerous things into one prison, and it would take something like Q or Apollo or another godlike Trek being to do so.
No, that loose connection comes from Episode 2, not this episode.
Memory-Alpha editors and others are connecting two lines of dialogue that may or may not have been intended to be connected.
Trelane said he found Korby digging around on the 'old homeworld', and for some reason people are connecting that to Korby mentioning working on Vadia IX earlier in the episode.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll
