• 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!

The Enterprise That Wasn't

ST fan 1. "Only what is shown on screen is canon, and so can be discussed. Anything else, whether fanfic, personal canon or speculation is invalid."
ST fan 2. "So, First Contact must be a reboot, or an alternative timeline, since it contradicts Metamorphosis as regards Zephram Cochrane's age. 35 in M, 55 in FC."
STf1 " It must have just been a 20 year rounding."
ST f2 " That sounds an awful lot like speculation to me. I thought that only exactly what was shown on screen is canon, and any speculation is invalid?"
Me - Time to quit this forum I think !!!
 
ST fan 1. "Only what is shown on screen is canon, and so can be discussed. Anything else, whether fanfic, personal canon or speculation is invalid."
ST fan 2. "So, First Contact must be a reboot, or an alternative timeline, since it contradicts Metamorphosis as regards Zephram Cochrane's age. 35 in M, 55 in FC."
STf1 " It must have just been a 20 year rounding."
ST f2 " That sounds an awful lot like speculation to me. I thought that only exactly what was shown on screen is canon, and any speculation is invalid?"
True. That said, what are you talking about? If it’s in reference to disagreements about old canon vs new canon, the point here is to explore what was intended earlier. I think some interpretations of that, even if wildly different than ours, are breathtaking in their creativity.
 
That's why I say reboot.
I don't know about that. I think I'd be less inclined to do a hard reboot than I would a subtler reboot, where it's a "broad strokes" kind of continuity. Kind of what Doctor Who has done, from what I understand. Most of the stuff that was previously shown on the shows still happened, but if a new story you're telling contracts something that was established in 1968, so be it. (Kind of close to what they're doing now with the CBS All Access shows, I suppose.) Because once your franchise has been running for 40, 50, 60 years, continuity becomes a bit of a millstone and it's almost impossible to stay consistent with everything.
 
I don't know about that. I think I'd be less inclined to do a hard reboot than I would a subtler reboot, where it's a "broad strokes" kind of continuity. Kind of what Doctor Who has done, from what I understand. Most of the stuff that was previously shown on the shows still happened, but if a new story you're telling contracts something that was established in 1968, so be it. (Kind of close to what they're doing now with the CBS All Access shows, I suppose.) Because once your franchise has been running for 40, 50, 60 years, continuity becomes a bit of a millstone and it's almost impossible to stay consistent with everything.
Isn't that also what they kinda did with TNG?
 
I don't know about that. I think I'd be less inclined to do a hard reboot than I would a subtler reboot, where it's a "broad strokes" kind of continuity. Kind of what Doctor Who has done, from what I understand. Most of the stuff that was previously shown on the shows still happened, but if a new story you're telling contracts something that was established in 1968, so be it. (Kind of close to what they're doing now with the CBS All Access shows, I suppose.) Because once your franchise has been running for 40, 50, 60 years, continuity becomes a bit of a millstone and it's almost impossible to stay consistent with everything.
At this point in time I am less inclined towards a soft reboot and think a hard reboot would establish where it has been and where it is going, and what tech does what.

At this point "broad strokes" continuity simply isn't working for Trek, in my opinion.
 
Sorry, but I firmly believe that continuity and canon are a blessing, not a curse.Which is why I think we need to relegate everything post 2002 to non-canon and continue where we left off. They were just officially produced fan fiction, now let's get back to the real thing.

It's clear that Canon is quite obviously
- The version of ENT that, as of yet, only exists inside my brain.
- ST
-TNG
-DSN
-VOY
-The ten movies.
 
No, it's not clear. If it were, we would not be having this conversation. Relegating it back to 2002 means that basically we have Berman's era as canon, and that's it. And maybe that's OK for those who like Berman but I do not.

Sorry, calling some the "real" canon" in this franchise is baffling to me. And, it's why I want a full reboot because the real/not real/canon/ not canon debates are tiresome.

A reboot is the way to set the playing field level.
 
ST fan 1. "Only what is shown on screen is canon, and so can be discussed. Anything else, whether fanfic, personal canon or speculation is invalid."

Not true. Non-canon topics and discussions are just fine. It’s when someone uses a non-canon source to prove something, is when the issue of non-canon versus canon comes up.

ST fan 2. "So, First Contact must be a reboot, or an alternative timeline, since it contradicts Metamorphosis as regards Zephram Cochrane's age. 35 in M, 55 in FC."

I’m confused. First of all, where in either Metamorphosis or FC was it stated what age Cochrane was when he made his flight? The Companion’s de-aging of Cochrane had nothing to do with how old he was in FC.

STf1 " It must have just been a 20 year rounding."
ST f2 " That sounds an awful lot like speculation to me. I thought that only exactly what was shown on screen is canon, and any speculation is invalid?"

What is shown on screen is canon. However, that doesn’t mean that everything shown on screen will be consistent. James R. Kirk is just as canon as James T. Kirk, but it’s not consistent.

Me - Time to quit this forum I think !!!

That would be a very silly thing to do if topics like this make you run for the hills. Because there are topics like this on the TrekBBS all the time.
 
Last edited:
What is shown on screen is canon. However, that doesn’t mean that everything shown on screen will be consistent. James R. Kirk is just as canon as James T. Kirk, but it’s not consistent.

But it CAN be consistent if you use your...Imagination.
 
D_2J9v4W4AEMh1s.jpg
 
Sure, you can do that. But I prefer to see it as just a changed premise and ignore it.
This. The gymnastics fans do to keep things consistent are so Byzantine that they destroy the life of the content. It makes the tech, the timelines, etc far less realistic and shatters the very suspension of disbelief that the content, original and new, would have you consider.
 
Not true. Non-canon topics and discussions are just fine. It’s when someone uses a non-canon source to prove something, is when the issue of non-canon versus canon comes up..

Yes, that's about it.

I’m confused. First of all, where in either Metamorphosis or FC was it stated what age Cochrane was when he made his flight? The Companion’s de-aging of Cochrane had nothing to do with how old he was in FC..

It is a fact that in the physical sciences important discoveries tend to be made by scientists aged in the range between twenty and forty. So we can presume that Zefraim Cochrane probably "discovered the space warp" when he was somewhere between 20 and 40, although the interval between Cochane's discovery and the first voyage in a manned warped ship is not specified, nor is Cochrane's age when he made his first warp voyage.

In "Metamorphosis":

COCHRANE: That's what I call it. As a matter of fact, Captain, I didn't crash here. I was brought here in my disabled ship. I was almost dead. The Companion saved my life.
SPOCK: You were injured?
COCHRANE: I was dying, Mister Spock.
KIRK: You seem perfectly all right now. What was the matter?
COCHRANE: I was an old man.
KIRK: You were what?
COCHRANE: Well, I don't know how it did it, but the Companion rejuvenated me, made me young again, like I am now.
SPOCK: I prefer to reserve judgment on that part of your story, sir. Meanwhile, would you please explain exactly what this Companion of yours is?
COCHRANE: I told you, I don't know what it is. It exists, it lives, and I can communicate with it.
MCCOY: That's a pretty far out story.
KIRK: Mister Cochrane, do you have a first name?
COCHRANE: Zefram.
KIRK: Zefram Cochrane of Alpha Centuri, the discoverer of the space warp?
COCHRANE: That's right, Captain.
MCCOY: But that's impossible. Zefram Cochrane died a hundred and fifty years ago.
SPOCK: The name of Zefram Cochrane is revered throughout the known galaxy. Planets were named after him. Great universities, cities.
KIRK: Isn't your story a little improbable, Mister Cochrane?
COCHRANE: No, it's true. I was eighty seven years old when I came here.
KIRK: You say this Companion found you and rejuvenated you? What were you doing in space at the age of eighty seven?
COCHRANE: I was tired, Captain. I was going to die, and I wanted to die in space. That's all.
SPOCK: True, his body was never found.
COCHRANE: You're looking at it, Mister Spock.
SPOCK: If so, you wear your age very well.

McCoy says:

MCCOY: But that's impossible. Zefram Cochrane died a hundred and fifty years ago.

And I say that McCoy's "150 years" should be between 125 and 175 year, allowing for imprecision.

Cochrane said:

COCHRANE: No, it's true. I was eighty seven years old when I came here.

If Cochrane was 87.000 to 87.999 years old when he came there 125 to 175 years earlier, he would have been born about 212 to 262.999 years earlier, and would probably have made his great discovery probably aged aged 20 to 40 about 172 to 242.999 years earlier.

Did the S.S. Valiant use warp drive to reach the edge of the galaxy, hundreds or thousands of light years from Earth?

In "Where No Man Has Gone Before":

Captain's log, Star date 1312.4. The impossible has happened. From directly ahead, we're picking up a recorded distress signal, the call letters of a vessel which has been missing for over two centuries. Did another Earth ship once probe out of the galaxy as we intend to do? What happened to it out there? Is this some warning they've left behind?

And:

KIRK: This is the Captain speaking. The object we encountered is a ship's disaster recorder, apparently ejected from the S.S. Valiant two hundred years ago.

However, i believe the transcript of the second statement left out the word "almost" in "almost two hundred years ago". So I just watched the beginning and Kirk does say "The object we encountered is a ship's disaster recorder, apparently ejected from the S.S. Valiant almost two hundred years ago."

So the Valiant became missing over two hundred years earlier, and ejected the recorder almost two hundred years earlier, implying that part of the voyage of the Valiant was exactly two hundred year before "Where No Man Has Gone Before".

So Zefraim Cochrane might or might not have discovered the space warp before the Valiant left Earth.

James Cromwell who portrayed Zefram Cochrane in Star Trek: First Contact was born on January 24, 1940, and his scenes were filmed something between the beginning of production on 8 April 1996 and the end of production on 2 July 1996, and thus when he was aged.between about 56 years and two months and about If someone assumes that a movie character is usually supposed to be about the same age as the actor who portrays them, they would assume that Zefraim Cochrane was about 56 in Star Trek: First Contact .

According to the official - but not necessarily canon or correct - chronology, "Metamorphosis" happens in 2267 and Cochrane's first warp flight in Star Trek: First Contact happens in 2063. So according to "Metamorphosis" Cochrane should have disappeared about 2092 to 2142 aged 87, and thus been born about 2005 to 2055 and made his discovery about 2025 to 2095. By assuming a degree of vagueness in McCoy's 150 years I thus make it possible for Cochrane to make his warp discovery when Star Trek: First Contact says it happened.

But if someone considers McCoy's 150 years to be 150.000 to 150.999 years, then Cochrane disappeared about 2116.001 to 2117.999 aged 87.000 to 87.999, and thus was born 2028.002 about 2028.999 to 2030.999, and made his great discovery about .2048.002 to 2070.999. That time span also includes 2063, but is a much narrower one.

If Zephram Cochrane was 56 in 2063, he would have been born about 2006 to 2007, and would have been 87 about 2093 to 2095, and "Metamorphosis" about 125 to 175 years later would be about 2218 to 2270. But if someone considers McCoy's 150 years to be 150.000 to 150.999 years, "Metamorphosis" would be about 2243 to 2246, over twenty years earlier than it's date in the official chronology. Making Cochrane 20 to 40 years old in 2063 makes him born about 2022 to 2043, and thus 87 years old in 2109 to 2131, and thus "Metamorphosis" exactly 150 years later would be about 2259 to 2282, thus including the official date of "metamorphosis".

So two reasons why many fans consider Star Trek: First Contact to contradict "Metamorphisis" is that they consider time spans mentioned to be exact and not approximate, even when mentioned by characters who aren't as precise as computers, or Spock, or Data, and that they consider characters to look like the actors who portray them. The first assumption unnecessarily narrows down the possible time spans of various events, and the second assumption involves assuming that characters are the same age as their actors, which is not necessarily true and in some cases is obviously wrong.

Another reason is that "Metaamphosis" didn't mention first contact with Vulcans or any other aliens, and did mention Alpha Centauri (with a rather controversial meaning) and Star Trek: First Contact makes first contact with Vulcans an important part of the plot and doesn't mention Alpha Centauri at all.

What is shown on screen is canon. However, that doesn’t mean that everything shown on screen will be consistent. James R. Kirk is just as canon as James T. Kirk, but it’s not consistent..

My head canon or fanon is that James Kirk has several middle names, one being Tiberius and on starting with an R. When Kirk entered Starfleet he chose James R. Kirk as the official version of his name instead of other possible versions. Possibly Kirk thought that Robert, or Rhadames, or Radagast, or whatever, was a better name than Tiberius. But in "Where No Man Has Gone Before" Kirk saw his best friend create a tombstone for Kirk with "James R. Kirk" inscribed on it, and later dropped that tombsone on that best friend. Kirk couldn't stand seeing or hearing "James R. Kirk" any more, so he changed the official s Starfleet form of his name to James T. Kirk. There are othe rpossible explanations, but I consider this the most natural.

That would be a very silly thing to do if topics like this make you run for the hills. Because there are topics like this on the TrekBBS all the time.

"That much is certain."
 
Last edited:
Did the S.S. Valiant use warp drive to reach the edge of the galaxy, hundreds or thousands of light years from Earth?

...So the Valiant became missing over two hundred years earlier, and ejected the recorder almost two hundred years earlier, implying that part of the voyage of the Valiant was exactly two hundred year before "Where No Man Has Gone Before".

So Zefram Cochrane might or might not have discovered the space warp before the Valiant left Earth.

I'd like to specifically single this point out. Ever since the first Okuda Star Trek Chronology book, it was assumed that the Valiant had warp drive, and that it was launched two centuries before the Enterprise found its recorder buoy (i.e. it was launched and then lost at the edge of the galaxy in the same year.) Even the model Greg Jein built for it had warp nacelles, to go along with the model he also built for Cochrane's warp ship, because he also assumed it must have had warp drive. But there's no evidence at all that the Valiant had warp drive, or how long it was already in space before it reached the edge of the galaxy by whatever means brought it there. Remember that this was just the second pilot of the show; they had no idea how far into the future Star Trek took place at the time. Saying that the ship was lost 200 years before would be meaningless if it was 200 years before the 28th century. But besides that, if Earth already had advanced sleeper ships in 1996 that could be lost in interstellar space only two hundred years before, then a ship with no warp drive could absolutely have reached the edge of the galaxy by 2065 if it had been launched at the same time as the Botany Bay.

So two reasons why many fans consider Star Trek: First Contact to contradict "Metamorphosis" is that they consider time spans mentioned to be exact and not approximate, even when mentioned by characters who aren't as precise as computers, or Spock, or Data, and that they consider characters to look like the actors who portray them. The first assumption unnecessarily narrows down the possible time spans of various events, and the second assumption involves assuming that characters are the same age as their actors, which is not necessarily true and in some cases is obviously wrong.

Good point. And in that regard, no one should be singling out FC to be contradictory based on those points, because Star Trek does that all the time. But let's play devil's advocate and just focus on FC for now.

Let's not even get into any dates for WWIII, since there was no specific date for it. But the time period in FC is 2063. As you say, there are ways to establish why Cochrane looks older than the info we get about him from Metamorphosis (i.e. unreliable statements of time). As for his appearance, do I really need to trot out the Saavik example? People had no problem accepting that Kirstie Alley's Saavik and Robin Curtis's Saavik were the exact same person, despite looking nothing alike. So why is this such a problem? (I know, because of Cochrane's alleged age, but again that's a non-issue.)

Another reason is that "Metamorphosis" didn't mention first contact with Vulcans or any other aliens, and did mention Alpha Centauri (with a rather controversial meaning) and Star Trek: First Contact makes first contact with Vulcans an important part of the plot and doesn't mention Alpha Centauri at all.

But that doesn't mean FC is inconsistent with anything. In fact, Cochrane makes a point to call out Spock being a Vulcan. So that ties directly into him making first contact with them in the film.
 
ST fan 1. "Only what is shown on screen is canon, and so can be discussed. Anything else, whether fanfic, personal canon or speculation is invalid."
ST fan 2. "So, First Contact must be a reboot, or an alternative timeline, since it contradicts Metamorphosis as regards Zephram Cochrane's age. 35 in M, 55 in FC."
STf1 " It must have just been a 20 year rounding."
ST f2 " That sounds an awful lot like speculation to me. I thought that only exactly what was shown on screen is canon, and any speculation is invalid?"
Me - Time to quit this forum I think !!!
That's pretty much how a lot of discussions go. They're making it up as they go along and rewriting the past to match what's happening now. I can see why some hate that they do it that way but at the end of the day it's just a TV show and Zefram Cochrane is now an alcoholic bipolar older human and not an idealistic Alpha Centurion or the old Enterprise is bigger, shinier and somehow fits a fleet of 100 shuttles and fighters and none of it matters so much. It's less strict right and wrong answers and more that Trek is this huge and deep mythology where everything's been reinterpreted in old TV, old movies, new movies, new TV and decades of novels and comics and everything else under the sun.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top