posted
Firstly, yes Bernd, that's probably the closest we've got thus far to a legitimate continuity error.
As everyone's proven above me, it's a fairly easy exercise, however, to rationalize it out and make it work. "200 years ago" could indeed have been more like 225. The flight out to Moab IV (which was pretty out-of-the-way in the 24th century) could have taken 15 years using wimpy warp-2 capable ships. That puts their departure in 2128, which could easily be before the invention of a cargo-only transporter by some Vulcan researcher, which will later be refined for biological use.
What I find more intersting is that no member of the collective intelligence-gathering network of Star Trek geekdom could present this info until now, three or four months after we've known that the show would have transporters. Let's face it, this implied early limit on transporter development from "The Masterpiece Society" is so obscure that Okuda could never be expected to note that. When it takes four months for fandom to do their worst to find a continuity error, how the hell can anyone lay any blame on the producers for "missing" this with a straight face?
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
posted
Agreed. And since we've even come up with an explanation, we are obviously the lords of all cheesedom. Or something.
And regarding the Ferengi: Sorry, don't buy it. Apparently every alien race in the galaxy had contact with them, as did several members of the Federation, and yet Starfleet had nothing on them, beyond "they're very capatilist, and a bit scary"?
Besides, how shit would a Starfleet admiral have to be to want to classify the Ferengi? Especially the early TNG Ferengi? Or did Vice-Admiral Toto of Starfleet Intelligence have a morbid fear of the winged monkeys from the Wizard of Oz?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
quote:When it takes four months for fandom to do their worst to find a continuity error, how the hell can anyone lay any blame on the producers for "missing" this with a straight face?
I'm not blaming them. I never expected Okuda or anyone else to find obscure evidence pro or contra the use of transporters or any other technology. If they wanted transporters for the new series, they would have made them possible also against canon evidence. First the premise, then the continuity. The will to make the look and feel visually different from what we know, like in the cases of the shuttle launchers and the tractor beam, was not there.
OnToMars
Now on to the making of films!
Member # 621
posted
quote: I would think that we can tell *today* if DNA has been affected by transport.
How would we do that when we don't know how transporters work and therefor what affect they would have on DNA? You wouldn't be referring to recent interesting experimens in quantum physics would you?
-------------------- If God didn't want us to fly, he wouldn't have given us Bernoulli's Principle.
posted
"It could mean that since a century transporters just became more precise, and didn't affect DNA anymore."
Shouldn't that mean that everytime Kirk and Archer's crews used the transporter, they'd grow an extra nose, or turn into fish, or make you look like Meatloaf (going by the Star Trek pattern that altering your DNA immedietly changes your physical appearence)?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
posted
In a realworldscience sense, early transporters might've knocked out one-in-a-trillion base pairs here and there, occasionally causing what would resemble radiation-induced mutations in one's genome.
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Anyway, I think we're getting off the point here. Geordi really says that there is a century of evidence proving that transporters don't change DNA. Maybe you just couldn't *prove* it back in Archer's time?
posted
Hey ho, has any one here actually watched the TNG episode "The Battle"? It establishes that in the early to mid 2350's, the Federation starship Stargazer, commanded by Captain Jean Luc Picard, was traveling throught the Maxia Zeta system, when an alien ship appeared on its sensors. The Stargazer went in to establich First Contact with the ship, but when the Stargazer approached the ship, which would later turn out to be a Ferengi ship, fired on the Stargazer, hammering its shields with intense fire. Realizing that the Ferengi ship used old light speed carrier waves as its sensor systems, and realizing that jumping to high warp and pulling out abreast of the Ferengi ship would leave two sensor images of the Stargazer on the Ferengi sensors: the image of the Stargazer moving to warp speed, and the actual Stargazer alongside the ship. While the Ferengi were still confused by the two images, Picard ordered for full weapons fire on the Ferengi ship, effectively destroying it. This manuever was later termed the Picard Manuever. The weapons fire from the Stargazer actully crippled it self, and Picard ordered abandon ship. The crew "limped through space for weeks" before help arrived.
-------------------- Fry- How will we get out of this? George Takei's head- Maybe we can use some kind of auto-destruct code like one-A, two-B, three-C... (Bender's head blows up) Bender- Now everybody knows! -Futurama's obligatory Star Trek episode
Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Great. Now how about a five minute summary of "Home Soil"?
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Yes Jack, we've seen "The Battle". Er, was there a point?
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
