Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
NCC-1305-E
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ryan McReynolds: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by MeGotBeer: [qb]Within the self-contained "world" of Star Trek, however, the evidence leans towards the NCC-1305-E registry as opposed to the NCC-7xxxx.[/qb][/QUOTE] And within the self-contained "world" of [i]Star Trek[/i], the evidence leans towards the Celsius scale being different from ours. And time flowing at a different rate. And four wars involving Khan spanning centuries. On the one hand, this is evidence that dialogue is often wrong. On the other hand, this could be evidence that [i]Star Trek[/i] is [i]best[/i] treated as fiction. One possibility that you haven't considered is that Riker [i]never actually said 1305-E[/i], in a revised fictional universe. The term often used is "retconning," the act of changing something after the fact and pretending the error never existed. Since we have no frame of reference to [i]Star Trek[/i] other than as a fictional creation, there is nothing inherrently wrong with [i]editing[/i] that creation, even if the editor is one's own mind. I'm sure most people would prefer to mentally edit the lines regarding the Eugenics Wars than assume that everyone who's ever mentioned them is a moron. Likewise, Riker is probably a fine officer, and "actually" said NCC-71807... but the thirtieth-century historian watching the visual logs wrote it down wrong when researching for that episode of the popular holodrama. Because of the fictional context, there are literally an [i]infinite[/i] number of ways to solve problems of contradiction. And before one accuses me of using retconning to justify [i]any[/i] change in the fictional universe I might point our that there is a vast difference between a creator correcting one's own mistake and changing things that were never contradictory to begin with. Just rpoviding another long-winded alternative solution to the problem. I don't even know which solution I like best; it [i]is[/i] canon that Riker said 1305-E, just as canon as the ship's actual registry being 71807. I'm willing to grant the possibility of Riker being (a) wrong or (b) joking/mocking/making a statement... but I'm leaning towards pretending he really said 71807 and it got garbled in the transmission. :) [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3