Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Star Trek
»
Starships & Technology
»
TNG in HD
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Mighty Monkey of Mim: [QB] @Dukhat Really, I quite agree. The points you raise are in fact the same ones that I myself have attempted to raise. I do indeed believe he was simply taking the question [i]as asked[/i] and responding to the best of his recollection, so it should be interpreted in that context. And doesn't the very same apply equally to his more recent statement? What question was he asked in that case, and how might it have led him to answer in the way he did? I just want to make sure that the whole of the available record continues to be documented and that we don't prematurely "close the books" on questions that haven't really been definitively answered, and can't necessarily be from the available information, despite some information being available. As I'm sure you're well aware, deductive reasoning is only reliable if the data relied upon in the deduction are both accurate and complete. This seems to be the chain of reasoning you are following: 1. The model bore NCC-640 in "The Naked Now" 2. Okuda doesn't recall relabeling it for that episode Therefore, 3. The model bore NCC-640 in STIV But I question whether Okuda would have been the only one who could have relabeled the model, and also how reliably he might recall having done so thirty years after the fact. In other words, I question whether the data being used to draw the conclusion are accurate AND complete. If I cited the <u>Encyclopedia</u> and <u>Concordance</u> and added a point, I might be led to a different conclusion: 1. The model bore NCC-623 in STIV 2. The model bore NCC-640 in "The Naked Now" 3. Okuda doesn't recall having relabeled it Therefore, 4. Someone other than Okuda relabeled the model, or alternatively Okuda's recollection is inaccurate. And you—completely validly—question whether the book references aren't simply mistaken. In other words, you question whether the data being used to draw the conclusion are complete AND accurate. (Not trying to be patronizing here, sorry if it reads that way.) Obviously if an actual photo of the model during STIV ever comes to light, we'll know the real answer. Until such time I remain wary of discrediting information that might yet prove to be reliable, while you and others remain wary of crediting information that you feel is already indicated to be unreliable, based on the above reasoning. I don't really intend on making it any kind of priority to pursue this in any way with Okuda, and even if I did, it wouldn't be to "hold him accountable" for anything. It would only be to look for any additional insight that might afford a better answer to a question we seem to periodically find ourselves expending some amount of time and effort in discussing, even as it mainly leads us around in circles! :D @o2 The fact remains that there are many instances where what can be seen on screen can only be made sense of by putting it in the context of behind the scenes information. Why? Because as much fun as it can be for some to pretend that they are, the episodes are not documents of some internally-consistent reality or universe. Nor are they "the best source we could have" for starship names and registries. If I have a screenshot of a display where it's not clear what the middle three digits of a number are, and a photograph taken on the set or a reproduction of the same display where those numbers are readable, the latter is in fact a better source. And while it's certainly nice to have sources properly documented, the source of something not being properly documented should not necessarily be taken to mean that there [i]is[/i] no source or that the information is wrong. Likewise, having a source documented for something doesn't necessarily mean that it is accurate. [/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