Depends on the custom.Also I'm not sure how much time I would spend discussing American Earth customs if I hadn't seen the person I was hot for in a while.
Depends on the custom.Also I'm not sure how much time I would spend discussing American Earth customs if I hadn't seen the person I was hot for in a while.
Might want to update your database. It's been canon for decades.TAS isn't supposed to be canon.
Yet we see folks who are adults talking about their holo adventures as children.Everyone who encounters the holodeck in S1 of TNG talks about it like it's a remarkable piece of technology they've never seen.
Odd, if it's been around for 100 years.
Since the Year 2006 Paramount has disagreed. The only reason it was ever decannonized was because at the start of TNG in 1987, Filmation still existed, and they let Paramount know that they would demand royalties for anything TAS related that showed up in a TNG script.TAS isn't supposed to be canon.
It clearly wasn't. As evidenced in "The Space Adventure Hour,"Fine, then. But the holodeck we see in SNW shouldn't be as advanced as the ones in TNG because, again, they act like it's something new and impressive.
TAS is canon.TAS isn't supposed to be canon.
Everyone who encounters the holodeck in S1 of TNG talks about it like it's a remarkable piece of technology they've never seen.
Odd if it's been around for 100 years.
The holodeck we saw on TAS was not as advanced as the one we saw on TNG, as the animated holodeck could only replicate landscapes. The only reason the Strange New Worlds holodec was able to create people was because it was using transporter patterns of real people. It couldn't just create people out of the ether.Fine, then. But the holodeck we see in SNW shouldn't be as advanced as the ones in TNG because, again, they act like it's something new and impressive.
I'd allow for some level of primitive holodeck technology (no smells, good, primitive sensations overall less "real") to account for even Berman era folks speaking of earlier holodeck technology but when we're shown it in S1-2 of TNG everyone acts like what we're shown is remarkable and brand new.
You're not being treated like an idiot, you're just being told what the actual facts are regarding some of your assumptions such as the Canon status of TAS.I'm just going to breathe and shut-up since I'm being ganged up on here and treated like I'm an idiot.
It clearly wasn't. As evidenced in "The Space Adventure Hour,"
The TOS enterprise doesn't have a canon size, so...the larger Enterprise etc.
All the numerous differences & conflicts with TOS/TAS continuity would be easily explained if you treat SNW as an alternate Time-Line from TOS/TAS.They pigeon holed it in like spocks sister who basically mentored him, the spock chapel and spock la'an romances, the larger Enterprise etc. It goes on and on.
Matt Jefferies who designed the TOS Enterprise has a Canon Size, and most old school fans recognize his dimensions.The TOS enterprise doesn't have a canon size, so..
It's the "best info" we have for that Connie.The "canon size" was only established in secondary materials, not in the show itself.
Not any more.It's the "best info" we have for that Connie.
So it'll have to do.
Good Luck in convincing all the other Trek Nerds to accept the new Size figures.Not any more.
Doesn't change the fact that we now have an official size of the Enterprise. Everything else is just fan speculation.
Yeah no.Not as speculative as you would think considering there are plenty of "Official Reference Source Material" that states the TOS Connies dimensions.![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.