Don't know how to use the 3 sea shells?
Spoilers Strange New Worlds General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter NewHeavensNewEarth
- Start date
Don't know how to use the 3 sea shells?
Okay you want onscreen evidence that refutes your supposition?
TNG S2 - "Emissary" - In it there are combat maneuvers against a Klingon ship from the TOS movie era timeframe. They are stating warp speeds normally, BUT if the older ship were on a different scale, there's no way it would be able to attain the warp speeds Data states is is achieving during the episode - and they certainly would math the new scale's integer factors (IE - Data would be sayiny "the Klingon is at warp 3.3..." or something to that effect.
What IS the 'Warp 10 speed limit' <--- It's a retcon. But that said, Again, I find it interesting what pieces of 'canon' some fpolks really want to insist are a part of 'true Trek' <-- and I say it that way because various Trek producers have come under fire for changing/retconning certain things to the point of many people claiming:
- They don't know Trek.
OR
- Aren't "True" Trek fans.
Again, canon is what's stated on screen - so yeah, I will say that no, there is NO absolutely clear evidence ON SCREEN that the TNG era warp scale is different; and hell, we all know Star trek ships move at "the speed need by this week's plot..."
But yeah, GR retconned Star Trek's FTL Warp in the TNG era because that's what he wanted as a limitation. That's not supported by Trek canon, it just is.
Here in episode 1 of SNW - the production staff decided to retcon (and ignore) one appearance of "Commodore Robert April" in an episode of TAS.
So, what is it? It's a YATI, or "Yet Another Trek Inconsistency" <--- Which is NOTHING NEW for Star Trek, past or present. Its not the first retcon in Star Trek's 58 year production history (counting the fact production on "The Cage" began in 1964); and it won't be the last.
What amazes me as a fan since 1969 is how many other fans want to cling to the fallacy that Star Trek in general has been a consistent narrative from day one; when all the empirical evidence proves otherwise.
The fact is:
Alex Kurtzman is a Star Trek fan. he probably realizes anytime he's retconning, or changing something to better suit the story he wants to tell this week. Gene Roddenberry did the exact same thing during his time on TOS and TNG. Yet many consider GR a 'Great Visionary' (even though most of what fans know as Star trek today was actually envisioned by Gene L. Coon and GR started taking credit for those ideas after Gene Coon's death); while Alex Kurtzman is considered by many a 'Hack who doesn't get Star Trek™" because of some choices he's made.
Please unterstand; there are plenty of decisions VARIOUS producers and staff behind Star Trek have made during and since TOS that I've not liked, or not agreed with; but overall, nothing has so uppset me that I haven't enjoyed continuing to watch and get some enjoyment (sans Star Trek: Voyager of course - which I gave up really watching or caring about after "The 37's". And yes, I have seen a few VOY episodes after "The 37's" and for example the 2 part introduction of 7 of 9 and the VOY 2 part finale and "Threshold" <--- which caused more of my circle of Star Trek fan friends to quit watching); but my point:
The ONLY consistent thing about the Star Trek franchise over it's 58 years, is it's INCONSISTECY due to the fact that the story they're telling this week has ALWAYS had priority where it was during TOS, TAS, the TOS era feature films, TNG, The TNG feature films, DS9, VOY, ENT, or the current slate of Star Trek series.
I'm not sure that makes any sense. You can state the speed a ship is doing based on your own scale regardless of what scale the other crew is using in their own conversations, which we don't hear in that episode.
Well that's certainly one answer, which I've given in the post prior to yours, but it's not one that's consistent with the on-screen evidence. My suggestion is the only one that fits both, and it doesn't even require a lot of thought since it's been stated by the people making the show.
That's very simplistic, though. A lot of what's stated on screen contradicts either basic logic or other things stated on screen.
My bugaboo is a porta-John at a campsite with a freshly-installed roll of toilet paper and a Brown Recluse emerging from within it after taking a very satisfying dump.
Seriously. That happened. I almost used leaves that day.
^^^
Exactly - Data is stating the warp speed of the Klingon ship as it makes its maneuvers to Riker and Picard multiple times in the episode. And its always a full integer Warp Factor when he does so. Go watch the scene. IF there was in fact a 'new scale' as you posit - Data shouldn't be stating their speed in integer warp factors (or warp speeds that high)...but he is.
For anyone who doesn't like the seams and pleats of the SNW uniform shirts, just a reminder circa 1968 that even the TOS shirts had some pleats and seams that weren't always visible but were there:
Extra fabric added when Shatner's top needed letting out!
I'm getting on for middle-age and can sympathise.
Is that the idea with the black panels down the sides, I wonder, to make the fuller figure slimmer?
I'm getting on for middle-age and can sympathise.
Is that the idea with the black panels down the sides, I wonder, to make the fuller figure slimmer?
You don't need to put arrows. I know what you're responding to.
Why would you think that? Why shouldn't he?
Because the scales by their very nature can't possibly line up properly? 80 degrees fahrenheit isn't 26 degrees celcius, it's 26.6667 degrees celcius.
That doesn't answer my question. In what say specifically is Data's use of units incorrect for his time period? Since we never hear the Klingon side of the episode how can there be an issue? It's not like I remember the whole franchise by heart.
I was thinking about SNW starting in a few days and how Serveaux has seen some episodes and he's a pretty good critic and he doesn't pull punches, and even he made positive noises about the show.
Then I said out loud to my wife, "I wonder what they are talking about in the SNW General Discussion Thread" and my wife said, "I bet it is fighting".
And you know what, when I looked, she was right. It was all fighting, all the way.
Anyway, Robert April obviously swaps brains with another officer in a transporter accident and that's why he's white in TOS. It's easy. Or just ignorable. Like how Cochram looks like a different man in TOS then in First Contact.
I just don't think it's a problem?
Then I said out loud to my wife, "I wonder what they are talking about in the SNW General Discussion Thread" and my wife said, "I bet it is fighting".
And you know what, when I looked, she was right. It was all fighting, all the way.
Anyway, Robert April obviously swaps brains with another officer in a transporter accident and that's why he's white in TOS. It's easy. Or just ignorable. Like how Cochram looks like a different man in TOS then in First Contact.
I just don't think it's a problem?
The Companion learned human biology from the Talosians, but was a better artist.
How did you know the spider had just taken a satisfying dump?
Rod didn't seem to know of a direct connection from "Red" Colt to Cage Colt, as it come as we prepared this archive update (we sadly lost Laurel Goodwin just as we were preparing her interview in late Feb):
https://variety.com/2022/film/news/star-trek-pilot-recreation-set-otoy-virtual-1235257230/
More info here: https://home.otoy.com/roddenberry_archive_may2022/
Well, fortunately, I had already shit myself (by design, based on my locale), so there wasn't much extra effort required to finish the job.One could assume the TP was also brown?
A quick tap of a K-bar and a quick tap of the boot made efficient work of the interloper.
I stated what was incorrect in my original post upthread on TNG S2 - "The Emmisary". You seem to think that makes no sense (or you didn't really bother to read it); so I'm not going to sit here and try to explain something I've already explained.
Goggles like in "The Cage." Nice. 
