You're wrong. STO is Star Trek, and yes, it's currently supported. And it has nothing to do with Paramount, or J.J. Abrams.
I'm sorry, I didn't realise there was an argument.
LOL OK STO does currently support the old series, kind of, but how long do you think that would last if Paramount offered Cryptic the resources from the movie at a reasonable cost?
Instant T6 Connie and everyone would be flying it.
However in the non MMO world where everyone else lives, JJ Trek is THE Star Trek now.
No amount of explaining or facts will take away the fact that JJ's movies are the only currently running series there is.
As for an argument, this is a Trekker forum, we call them "discussions."
Arguing free will is pointless - if you don't believe in it, then my disagreement with you is not something that I can change (since changing that implies I have the free will to choose my position), and therefore you can't possibly change my position through discussion.
Your conclusion is a common misconception. The absence of free will would not mean your position on something on an issue can't change, it would just mean you have no control over it. And unless you can somehow predict the future, it makes no real difference anyway, because the illusion of free still exists.
An alternate universe exists, yes. Technically thousands do.
I subscribe to the alternate universe where Sisko returns from the wormhole, travels through time and punches JJ Abrams in the face to prevent his movies from ever being created. That is the universe that is canon to me.
That works.
If you don't like JJTrek, you can choose to live in an alternate reality in which it doesn't exist.
Just like I choose to live in an alternate reality in which George Lucas died in 1989.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
No where is it written in stone that anyone has to acknowledge that the JJ movies even exist. Simply ignore their existence and everything you know and love about Star Trek is safe and sound. Just like my Mom does with The Alien series, Newt and Ripley are safely home on Earth and the Third movie NEVER HAPPENED...EVER!
Of course you have nothing further to say because the existance of alternate universes in Star Trek is so easily proven and absolutely nothing you can say will refute their existance.
Every episode involving the Mirror Universe storyline
In a Mirror Darkly pts I & II
Mirror Mirror
The Tholian Web
Crossover
Thru the Looking Glass
Shattered Mirror
Resurrection
The Emperor's New Cloak
TNG Episode Parallels where a subspace fissure has thousands of Enterprises from alternate timelines/universes appearing.
Voyager introduced Species 8472 from the alternate timeline/universe containing fluidic space
So JJtrek exists as an alternate timeline/universe, but feel free to deny it. We find your self delusions entertaining.
Who is talking about parallel Universes, all the episodes you mentioned are from a parallel universe called the Mirror Universe. Fluidic space is an Alternate/extra Dimension so a different entity entirely.
Nero did not swap dimensions he did not exist in a parallel Universe before time travelling he travelled from the future into the past and effected a change in the past and in every Star Trek canon before that changes in the past changed the present and we as the omniscient viewer witnessed the change whether the characters were aware of it or not.
As I said JJ wanted to cheap out, couldn't be bothered learning the lore or familiarising himself with the franchise and he did not want people poking continuity holes in his cash cow so he came up with a pithy excuse that does not even hold. It reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons where Lucy Lawless in answer to a fan question regarding a plot hole replies "Every time you see something like that, A wizard did it" JJ would have had more credibility if he said "A wizard did it" or better still "Q did it!"
Hydrogen is an element; its distinguishing characteristic is that it has only one proton, and no neutrons. Its stable form has one electron; there are two known ionic forms, with two and three electrons respectively. If it has more than one proton, it's not hydrogen, it's some other element, and won't behave the way hydrogen does.
I am aware of all that and am saying that future science may have a more nuanced view of very basic things like the periodic table and gravity.
For example, two protons entangled across universes that form a single atom with an atomic weight of 1 in each universe or something. That's one idea. The whole point of what I'm suggesting is that I think characters in sci-fi should shoot down things that we take for granted as hard fact without explaining why present day understanding is flawed or incomplete.
I hold that sci-fi needs to be inexplicable and contradictory to real world knowledge in certain respects to create room for new discoveries.
I would have a future where anything we know present day is seen as generalization.
If you say that Hydrogen has one proton or that the Gravity of Earth exerts a force of 9.8 meters per second or that there are eight planets in the solar system, I'd give characters in the future the wiggle room for science or events that could alter their worldview. Maybe they have an artificial 9th and 10th planet. Maybe they redefine the term planet to only refer to planets with a physical surface, in which case the term would no longer apply to several bodies we currently consider planets.
So when using present knowledge, always suggest that it is flawed or incomplete and never define HOW it is flawed or incomplete. When introducing new concepts, make sure that they do not connect with or are not perfectly understandable using 21st century science.
Always imply that people in the future know things which undermine, challenge, expand on, or contradict what we presently know.
If even the most obvious or accepted thing gets treated as hard fact in sci-fi, there's too much room for it to become dated.
Who is talking about parallel Universes, all the episodes you mentioned are from a parallel universe called the Mirror Universe. Fluidic space is an Alternate/extra Dimension so a different entity entirely.
Nero did not swap dimensions he did not exist in a parallel Universe before time travelling he travelled from the future into the past and effected a change in the past and in every Star Trek cannon before that changes in the past changed the present and we as the omniscient viewer witnessed the change whether the characters were aware of it or not.
As I said JJ wanted to cheap out, couldn't be bothered learning the lore or familiarising himself with the franchise and he did not want people poking continuity holes in his cash cow so he came up with a pithy excuse that does not even hold. It reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons where Lucy Lawless in answer to a fan question regarding a plot hole replies "Every time you see something like that, A wizard did it" JJ would have had more credibility if he said "A wizard did it" or better still "Q did it!"
I strongly lean towards the idea that the Mirror Universe was created via time travel.
Or perhaps the Prime Universe is an offshoot of the Mirror Universe, created by time travel.
Who is talking about parallel Universes, all the episodes you mentioned are from a parallel universe called the Mirror Universe.
Not exactly. In "Parallels", mentioned in that post, not one of the universes Worf slid through was the famed Mirror Universe. He lived in a number of worlds where Picard was lost to the Borg and he was first officer of the Enterprise under Capt. Riker; IIRC, the last one he was in was one where Riker was killed fighting Locutus, and Worf was captain. They also got a short look at an Enterprise from a timeline where the Borg won, and the poor ship was a near-hulk, one of the few remaining free ships in that Milky Way galaxy. (Short, because when that Riker, half-crazed as he was, heard that they would have to return to their own universe in order to heal the subspace rift, he went completely around the bend and opened fire on the other Enterprises to stop them. Several of them returned fire; it turned out the firing ship had no shields left to speak of.)
So, as I said, the idea of multiple timelines was already Trek canon; Orci and Kurtzman (the writers - Abrams was the producer/director) merely took advantage of this fact. I still dislike the ending - it should have had Kirk promoted to Ensign as a reward, followed by a montage of Kirk's promotions and assignments, until finally Capt. Kirk took command once more of the Enterprise - but the basic concept itself does not violate Star Trek canon.
Canon is what zealots used to cram ideas people's throats and cannon is what people used to cram projectiles down people's throats, though they sound the same, they are not spelled the same, you lose all credibility when you cannot even spell the idea that you are trying to cram down people's throats.
There are multitudes of Trek episodes that prominently feature parallel timelines that was created by altering the past and just because you cannot comprehend it does not mean we have to listen to you ramble on and on about it. The best episode is DS9's The Visitor, the whole premise of the episode is about Jake Sisko changing the present timeline by altering the past.
Download the pdf file to read the full paper. The introduction is as follows:
This is a brief survey of the current status of Stephen Hawking's ``chronology protection conjecture''. That is: ``Why does nature abhor a time machine?'' I'll discuss a few examples of spacetimes containing ``time machines'' (closed causal curves), the sorts of peculiarities that arise, and the reactions of the physics community. While pointing out other possibilities, this article concentrates on the possibility of ``chronology protection''. As Stephen puts it:
``It seems that there is a Chronology Protection Agency which prevents the appearance of closed timelike curves and so makes the universe safe for historians.''
"I don't want to live in a universe that would allow time travel. Unfortunately, the universe cares little for what I want." - Prof. Stephen Hawking.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Canon is what zealots used to cram ideas people's throats and cannon is what people used to cram projectiles down people's throats, though they sound the same, they are not spelled the same, you lose all credibility when you cannot even spell the idea that you are trying to cram down people's throats.
There are multitudes of Trek episodes that prominently feature parallel timelines that was created by altering the past and just because you cannot comprehend it does not mean we have to listen to you ramble on and on about it. The best episode is DS9's The Visitor, the whole premise of the episode is about Jake Sisko changing the present timeline by altering the past.
Firstly you made my point for me further Jake changed the timeline, not created a new alternate universe. Secondly in Star Trek CANON one theory of time travel has prevailed in that fiction. I am not talking about current theories on spacetime, if you want the current theories on spacetime write your own Sci Fi. Thirdly I am sorry that my Dyslexia offends you, having Dyslexia I rely heavily on the spell check function so as is common with Dyslexics on computer sites words that sound the same yet have various spellings are often misused but being a forum regular of such wide intellect surely you would have realised this. I hate absolute non-entities who make sweeping statements from found-less observations, I hope that you never have to deal with someone you care about having Dyslexia but it may give you some humility!
Also Mr High and mighty while we are picking people up on their English skills, I find your use of the word Zealot hilarious not only because of the irony in a game based on science but the word means specifically someone who is for God or a god. So can you kindly tell me what god I am promoting please!
I mention only in passing that zealot has a slightly broader definition:
zeal?ot (zlt)
n.
1.
a. One who is zealous, especially excessively so.
b. A fanatically committed person.
2. Zealot A member of a Jewish movement of the first century a.d. that fought against Roman rule in Palestine as incompatible with strict monotheism.
[Middle English zelote, from Latin zlts, from Greek, from zlos, zeal.]
In that episode, two timelines were presented, the first one is where Sisko died and and second one is where he did not. These two universes were connect at one single focal point that Jake Sisko used to change our (the viewer if you did not understand that) timeline into the one that Sisko survives in.
Which means that first timeline still exists, just like the other timelines presented in TNG Parallels.
The term zealot does not have a relation to God or to any deity. If you are going to insult with the use of the word at least know its definition. For your benefit, a zealot is an individual who shows zeal or intensity or passion for a particular object, ideology (which is you), or a person.
Long ago us TOS lovers were usurped by The Next Generation lovers who trod upon us and refused to share their space with ships from that series that "ruin their immersion."
Now with JJ Trek, it's the genner's turn to be ostracized as JJ Trek picked what they believed was the most exciting and pertinent series to copy, TOS.
Don't worry, most of us TOS lovers are nowhere near as viscious and most of us were willing to share space with all the new ships.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, those who were so mean before can see how it feels now that everything beyond the 2009 movie only exists in a probable timeline.
In that episode, two timelines were presented, the first one is where Sisko died and and second one is where he did not. These two universes were connect at one single focal point that Jake Sisko used to change our (the viewer if you did not understand that) timeline into the one that Sisko survives in.
Which means that first timeline still exists, just like the other timelines presented in TNG Parallels.
The term zealot does not have a relation to God or to any deity. If you are going to insult with the use of the word at least know its definition. For your benefit, a zealot is an individual who shows zeal or intensity or passion for a particular object, ideology (which is you), or a person.
I think you will find the etymology of the word steeped in religion and it comes from Hebrew where it means one who is zealous on behalf of God. Like all words it has evolved a wider meaning but still has heavily religious connotations even the words used to describe it such as Zeal, the origins of which can be traced back to ancient Greece and the God Zelus. The word fanaticism comes from the word Fanatic which was a word derived from an old Latin/Roman word of someone who visits a Temple or Place of worship although in recent history fanaticism has been used to describe political movements such as the Third Reich but then we come back to religion again.
I may have trouble spelling words but my vocabulary and understanding of the language is unsurpassed so I am afraid you are wrong the word is heavily religious and my point stands. What deity am I promoting or more correctly which deity do I have Zeal for!
In First Contact when the Borg Sphere goes back in time and prevents Zephram Cochrane's warp flight the Enterprise still in the present witness a change immediately and then go back fix what went wrong and return to the unaltered present.
Again these events change slight things in the past as Borg are left on Earth and that is an example of effect preceding cause as this is what causes the first Borg cube to come to Earth as seen in Q-Who. Again changes in the past effecting the present not creating an alternate timeline where nothing remains changes in the prime universe and an alternate universe is created. There is one timeline, it is a singular and it can be changed and fixed.
Did I miss this part of the movie???
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] ***Disenchanted***
Real Join Date: Monday, 17 May 2010
Please, let's not get into a vocabulary-measuring contest. You will lose.
Or is that what's left, as your original point has been shredded by reference to events actually in Star Trek canon? Yes, there are multiple timelines, with various points of divergence, that have been shown on screen - it is not merely a binary choice between the classic Roddenberry timeline and the Mirror Universe. In "Parallels", the entire sector was threatened by the mass proliferation of Enterprises. There were literally thousands of timelines represented. One of them might well have been the future of the new Trek movie!
As for the meaning of "zealot", your point there stands only if we are speaking Hebrew. Last I checked, though, we're using English in here, and in English, while the term derives from a particular school of Judaic semi-mystics of the Maccabean era, it in fact means someone devoted to a particular cause. It is not outside the bounds of our language to refer to someone's zealotry for atheism! (It is, to be sure, amusing - but it's still a valid usage of the term.) And attempting to deconstruct someone's argument by quibbling about the source of a single word used indicates that you lack any more substantive argument to support your own position.
No this is explored in an Episode of Enterprise I think it is called Assimilation where they find 24th century Borg from the crashed Sphere destroyed in First Contact
And Jonsills I merely stated it is a word steeped in religious origin, I did acknowledge that it can be used to wider meaning however even the words used to describe it are also words that originate from religion. It is heavily Ironic that he used that word to try and insult me because I have a disability. Would you all be jumping to his defence so quick if he had for instance called a person with Cerebral Palsy "limpy", I doubt it and just as misguided as him attacking my spelling, which showed that his argument was found-less as he had to resort to picking my up on my spelling to try and belittle me, using the word Zealot was just as misguided. I do admit my asking him which deity do I have Zeal for was an attempt at reductio ad absurdum but all I said is the question stands as it does.
EDIT: Just googled the enterprise episode and it is called Regeneration, I was close
This is why I hate time travel stories in Star Trek. They've gone to that well once to many times. If there ever is a new series or even series of movies they should make it a rule that time travel is out.
But that doesn't mean that JJ Trek doesn't exist. Its just a different timeline which any fan of sci-fi nowadays could understand in concept. If you don't like it, hey, you don't have to watch it. But with another movie being released soon its a bit silly to claim the timeline doesn't exist in treklore.
This is why I hate time travel stories in Star Trek. They've gone to that well once to many times. If there ever is a new series or even series of movies they should make it a rule that time travel is out.
But that doesn't mean that JJ Trek doesn't exist. Its just a different timeline which any fan of sci-fi nowadays could understand in concept. If you don't like it, hey, you don't have to watch it. But with another movie being released soon its a bit silly to claim the timeline doesn't exist in treklore.
Yeah I am not saying it does not exist it was just that it is not an alternate Universe or more specifically an alternate Spacetime universe. However this thread did give me one idea to deal with it.
Nero in our reality (I say our meaning the last 40+ years of Trek ) went back in time and failed to destroy Vulcan and that is why it is still here. At the same time in an almost identical but parallel Universe but this time he succeeded, this for my comprehension and peace of mind is the JJ Universe and always has been parallel to "Prime" as it is so called. The distinction it is not time travel that created it, it has always been parallel.
Yeah I am not saying it does not exist it was just that it is not an alternate Universe or more specifically an alternate Spacetime universe. However this thread did give me one idea to deal with it.
Nero in our reality (I say our meaning the last 40+ years of Trek ) went back in time and failed to destroy Vulcan and that is why it is still here. At the same time in an almost identical but parallel Universe but this time he succeeded, this for my comprehension and peace of mind is the JJ Universe and always has been parallel to "Prime" as it is so called. The distinction it is not time travel that created it, it has always been parallel.
whatever helps you sleep at night....still does not make it not canon....JJ trek is canon like it or not.
It's canon it's just not part of the timeline in which this game is based and at any time in the future anyone could make a story that resets Abrams changes and if CBS and Paramount approves of it, it too will be canon.
Last scene in the last Abrams film, Spock wakes up in his quarters scratches his head TRIBBLE an eyebrow and says "fascinating", we then pan backwards out of a window to view his quarters as part of the Romulan capital city. Bam, it was all a dream, it never happened, welcome to the wonderful world of fiction.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
It's canon it's just not part of the timeline in which this game is based and at any time in the future anyone could make a story that resets Abrams changes and if CBS and Paramount approves of it, it too will be canon.
Last scene in the last Abrams film, Spock wakes up in his quarters scratches his head TRIBBLE an eyebrow and says "fascinating", we then pan backwards out of a window to view his quarters as part of the Romulan capital city. Bam, it was all a dream, it never happened, welcome to the wonderful world of fiction.
And then Kirk comes out of the sonic shower...
(Admittedly, that's only funny if you're old enough to remember "Dalla$".)
And then Kirk comes out of the sonic shower...
(Admittedly, that's only funny if you're old enough to remember "Dalla$".)
I'm old enough to remember Wagon Train. I remember Dallas, I hated that show, had a girlfriend who was into that TRIBBLE, but it did make me think of such a scene, it's so easy to undo history in story telling, I don't know why anyone is getting so upset about it.
The Studio had to do something to draw in new interest to the franchise, to make it palatable to the mindless masses who have different tastes than the old die hard Trek fans, love it or hate it, if it helps to keep the franchise alive, I'm all for it.
If something is not broken, don't fix it, if it is broken, don't leave it broken.
The Bottom line is that the JJ Abrams Star Trek Universe has been dubbed an Alternate Timeline...similar to the lines of what happened in Back to the Future. The Alternate Timeline only affects the ones who create the Alternate Timeline...in this case Spock Prime, and Nero and his crew before getting kills. They would only be the ones that would notice that they changed their future and no one else.
The Bottom line is that the JJ Abrams Star Trek Universe has been dubbed an Alternate Timeline...similar to the lines of what happened in Back to the Future. The Alternate Timeline only affects the ones who create the Alternate Timeline...in this case Spock Prime, and Nero and his crew before getting kills. They would only be the ones that would notice that they changed their future and no one else.
The new ones aren't as good as the original movies. (I hear the new Trek is supposed to be a remake of TWOK)
You think The Final Frontier is better than 09 :eek:.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though. JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Comments
LOL OK STO does currently support the old series, kind of, but how long do you think that would last if Paramount offered Cryptic the resources from the movie at a reasonable cost?
Instant T6 Connie and everyone would be flying it.
However in the non MMO world where everyone else lives, JJ Trek is THE Star Trek now.
No amount of explaining or facts will take away the fact that JJ's movies are the only currently running series there is.
As for an argument, this is a Trekker forum, we call them "discussions."
That works.
If you don't like JJTrek, you can choose to live in an alternate reality in which it doesn't exist.
Just like I choose to live in an alternate reality in which George Lucas died in 1989.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Who is talking about parallel Universes, all the episodes you mentioned are from a parallel universe called the Mirror Universe. Fluidic space is an Alternate/extra Dimension so a different entity entirely.
Nero did not swap dimensions he did not exist in a parallel Universe before time travelling he travelled from the future into the past and effected a change in the past and in every Star Trek canon before that changes in the past changed the present and we as the omniscient viewer witnessed the change whether the characters were aware of it or not.
As I said JJ wanted to cheap out, couldn't be bothered learning the lore or familiarising himself with the franchise and he did not want people poking continuity holes in his cash cow so he came up with a pithy excuse that does not even hold. It reminds me of the episode of the Simpsons where Lucy Lawless in answer to a fan question regarding a plot hole replies "Every time you see something like that, A wizard did it" JJ would have had more credibility if he said "A wizard did it" or better still "Q did it!"
I am aware of all that and am saying that future science may have a more nuanced view of very basic things like the periodic table and gravity.
For example, two protons entangled across universes that form a single atom with an atomic weight of 1 in each universe or something. That's one idea. The whole point of what I'm suggesting is that I think characters in sci-fi should shoot down things that we take for granted as hard fact without explaining why present day understanding is flawed or incomplete.
I hold that sci-fi needs to be inexplicable and contradictory to real world knowledge in certain respects to create room for new discoveries.
I would have a future where anything we know present day is seen as generalization.
If you say that Hydrogen has one proton or that the Gravity of Earth exerts a force of 9.8 meters per second or that there are eight planets in the solar system, I'd give characters in the future the wiggle room for science or events that could alter their worldview. Maybe they have an artificial 9th and 10th planet. Maybe they redefine the term planet to only refer to planets with a physical surface, in which case the term would no longer apply to several bodies we currently consider planets.
So when using present knowledge, always suggest that it is flawed or incomplete and never define HOW it is flawed or incomplete. When introducing new concepts, make sure that they do not connect with or are not perfectly understandable using 21st century science.
Always imply that people in the future know things which undermine, challenge, expand on, or contradict what we presently know.
If even the most obvious or accepted thing gets treated as hard fact in sci-fi, there's too much room for it to become dated.
I strongly lean towards the idea that the Mirror Universe was created via time travel.
Or perhaps the Prime Universe is an offshoot of the Mirror Universe, created by time travel.
So, as I said, the idea of multiple timelines was already Trek canon; Orci and Kurtzman (the writers - Abrams was the producer/director) merely took advantage of this fact. I still dislike the ending - it should have had Kirk promoted to Ensign as a reward, followed by a montage of Kirk's promotions and assignments, until finally Capt. Kirk took command once more of the Enterprise - but the basic concept itself does not violate Star Trek canon.
There are multitudes of Trek episodes that prominently feature parallel timelines that was created by altering the past and just because you cannot comprehend it does not mean we have to listen to you ramble on and on about it. The best episode is DS9's The Visitor, the whole premise of the episode is about Jake Sisko changing the present timeline by altering the past.
"I don't want to live in a universe that would allow time travel. Unfortunately, the universe cares little for what I want." - Prof. Stephen Hawking.
...Oh, baby, you know, I've really got to leave you / Oh, I can hear it callin 'me / I said don't you hear it callin' me the way it used to do?...
- Anne Bredon
Firstly you made my point for me further Jake changed the timeline, not created a new alternate universe. Secondly in Star Trek CANON one theory of time travel has prevailed in that fiction. I am not talking about current theories on spacetime, if you want the current theories on spacetime write your own Sci Fi. Thirdly I am sorry that my Dyslexia offends you, having Dyslexia I rely heavily on the spell check function so as is common with Dyslexics on computer sites words that sound the same yet have various spellings are often misused but being a forum regular of such wide intellect surely you would have realised this. I hate absolute non-entities who make sweeping statements from found-less observations, I hope that you never have to deal with someone you care about having Dyslexia but it may give you some humility!
Also Mr High and mighty while we are picking people up on their English skills, I find your use of the word Zealot hilarious not only because of the irony in a game based on science but the word means specifically someone who is for God or a god. So can you kindly tell me what god I am promoting please!
zeal?ot (zlt)
n.
1.
a. One who is zealous, especially excessively so.
b. A fanatically committed person.
2. Zealot A member of a Jewish movement of the first century a.d. that fought against Roman rule in Palestine as incompatible with strict monotheism.
[Middle English zelote, from Latin zlts, from Greek, from zlos, zeal.]
Which means that first timeline still exists, just like the other timelines presented in TNG Parallels.
The term zealot does not have a relation to God or to any deity. If you are going to insult with the use of the word at least know its definition. For your benefit, a zealot is an individual who shows zeal or intensity or passion for a particular object, ideology (which is you), or a person.
Now with JJ Trek, it's the genner's turn to be ostracized as JJ Trek picked what they believed was the most exciting and pertinent series to copy, TOS.
Don't worry, most of us TOS lovers are nowhere near as viscious and most of us were willing to share space with all the new ships.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot, those who were so mean before can see how it feels now that everything beyond the 2009 movie only exists in a probable timeline.
I think you will find the etymology of the word steeped in religion and it comes from Hebrew where it means one who is zealous on behalf of God. Like all words it has evolved a wider meaning but still has heavily religious connotations even the words used to describe it such as Zeal, the origins of which can be traced back to ancient Greece and the God Zelus. The word fanaticism comes from the word Fanatic which was a word derived from an old Latin/Roman word of someone who visits a Temple or Place of worship although in recent history fanaticism has been used to describe political movements such as the Third Reich but then we come back to religion again.
I may have trouble spelling words but my vocabulary and understanding of the language is unsurpassed so I am afraid you are wrong the word is heavily religious and my point stands. What deity am I promoting or more correctly which deity do I have Zeal for!
Did I miss this part of the movie???
***Disenchanted***
Real Join Date: Monday, 17 May 2010
Or is that what's left, as your original point has been shredded by reference to events actually in Star Trek canon? Yes, there are multiple timelines, with various points of divergence, that have been shown on screen - it is not merely a binary choice between the classic Roddenberry timeline and the Mirror Universe. In "Parallels", the entire sector was threatened by the mass proliferation of Enterprises. There were literally thousands of timelines represented. One of them might well have been the future of the new Trek movie!
As for the meaning of "zealot", your point there stands only if we are speaking Hebrew. Last I checked, though, we're using English in here, and in English, while the term derives from a particular school of Judaic semi-mystics of the Maccabean era, it in fact means someone devoted to a particular cause. It is not outside the bounds of our language to refer to someone's zealotry for atheism! (It is, to be sure, amusing - but it's still a valid usage of the term.) And attempting to deconstruct someone's argument by quibbling about the source of a single word used indicates that you lack any more substantive argument to support your own position.
No this is explored in an Episode of Enterprise I think it is called Assimilation where they find 24th century Borg from the crashed Sphere destroyed in First Contact
And Jonsills I merely stated it is a word steeped in religious origin, I did acknowledge that it can be used to wider meaning however even the words used to describe it are also words that originate from religion. It is heavily Ironic that he used that word to try and insult me because I have a disability. Would you all be jumping to his defence so quick if he had for instance called a person with Cerebral Palsy "limpy", I doubt it and just as misguided as him attacking my spelling, which showed that his argument was found-less as he had to resort to picking my up on my spelling to try and belittle me, using the word Zealot was just as misguided. I do admit my asking him which deity do I have Zeal for was an attempt at reductio ad absurdum but all I said is the question stands as it does.
EDIT: Just googled the enterprise episode and it is called Regeneration, I was close
But that doesn't mean that JJ Trek doesn't exist. Its just a different timeline which any fan of sci-fi nowadays could understand in concept. If you don't like it, hey, you don't have to watch it. But with another movie being released soon its a bit silly to claim the timeline doesn't exist in treklore.
Yeah I am not saying it does not exist it was just that it is not an alternate Universe or more specifically an alternate Spacetime universe. However this thread did give me one idea to deal with it.
Nero in our reality (I say our meaning the last 40+ years of Trek
whatever helps you sleep at night....still does not make it not canon....JJ trek is canon like it or not.
Last scene in the last Abrams film, Spock wakes up in his quarters scratches his head TRIBBLE an eyebrow and says "fascinating", we then pan backwards out of a window to view his quarters as part of the Romulan capital city. Bam, it was all a dream, it never happened, welcome to the wonderful world of fiction.
(Admittedly, that's only funny if you're old enough to remember "Dalla$".)
The Studio had to do something to draw in new interest to the franchise, to make it palatable to the mindless masses who have different tastes than the old die hard Trek fans, love it or hate it, if it helps to keep the franchise alive, I'm all for it.
http://youtu.be/5OPkqY9doGE?t=1m4s
:cool:
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
You think The Final Frontier is better than 09 :eek:.
Norway and Yeager dammit... I still want my Typhoon and Jupiter though.
JJ Trek The Kelvin Timeline is just Trek and it's fully canon... get over it. But I still prefer TAR.
#TASforSTO
'...I can tell you that we're not in the military and that we intend no harm to the whales.' Kirk: The Voyage Home
'Starfleet is not a military organisation. Its purpose is exploration.' Picard: Peak Performance
'This is clearly a military operation. Is that what we are now? Because I thought we were explorers!' Scotty: Into Darkness
'...The Federation. Starfleet. We're not a military agency.' Scotty: Beyond
'I'm not a soldier anymore. I'm an engineer.' Miles O'Brien: Empok Nor
'...Starfleet could use you... It's a peacekeeping and humanitarian armada...' Admiral Pike: Star Trek
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!