Enterprise 6-May-03

[JacktheRabbit]

Just saw that scene and those Borg had boarded the Enterprise and were transported back to the other vessel just before the explosion.

I like that they made sure not to use the Borg name in this episode and that they can effectively explain the sub-space message not being able to reach "deep in the Delta Quadrant" for two hundred years. A second viewing also bears out that they don't gloss over the "adapting to phasers" tech, either. I think they've done a fine job of keeping things in order for those who usually get up in arms over that sort of thing. It shows they've listened, they care and yet they still want to make use of all of the tricks they have in the bag to draw in viewers. Enterprise might be on the ropes but it still has some punches to throw.

I did not see the episode but I have to ask a silly question.

How did the Enterprise know the message was going to somewhere deep in the Delta Quadrant?

Did they somehow intercept and decode the message and get the target coordinates? If not all they would get is a bearing on the transmission beam and have no clue how far the message was expected to travel before getting to its destination.

 

[Mark]

Did they somehow intercept and decode the message and get the target coordinates?

This seems to be the case.

 

[Viking Bastard]

I reread your response to my post and...

Time is not necessarily linear. The Picard who came back to protect Cochran from the Borg may not exist in the future of the current Enterprise timeline. The events of the past for the Picard who traveled back in time to protect Cochran may not have included the events in the current Enterprise timeline. The only way to discuss continuity (which includes temporal changes) is to accept that anything that has, is happening or will happen may not be what exists at any time then, now or in the future. It's part of the canonicity of Star Trek.

My explaination is still much more simple and straightforward.
Why complicate matters? Mine works, no matter what any nay-
sayers might want. I actually am a bit puzzled with why you
responded to my post with yours.

.

As for the whole temporal thingamingy I heard another pretty
good explaination for that on another board. By going back into
the past the timeline changed, that is, for everyone except the
Ent-E because they were stuck in that temporal particle-thingaling.

The Ent-E went and saves the Earth an' all, but meanwhile created
a new timeline that's nearly identical to the old one. They
returned to the 24th century, but to a different timeline, never
realizing it was in any way different.

It's pretty much a slightly more in-detail version of your version.

But mine's still better!

 

[Mallus]

...which is why I hate how much they use time travel as a plot device. It's ok once and a while (like "Yesterday's Enterprise") but using too much strains credibility and suspension of disbelief.

Sure, piling on the paradoxes can be annoying, but time travel is one of the most valuable tools/tropes an SF writer has when it comes to making metaphors {about regret/loss/redemption/The Road Not Taken}.

There was a brilliant DS9 time-travel episode with a totally wonky set-up --basically the was a planet with a time-differential field around it and Odo, Kira and Co. essentially crashland on a town full of their descendants.

The whole time-travel/SF set-up was in service of the character drama; an exploraion of Odo/Kira's budding relationship. It rocked.

And then there was More Tribbles, More Troubles, which was damn near perfect.

 

[Mark]

I reread your response to my post and...

My explaination is still much more simple and straightforward.
Why complicate matters? Mine works, no matter what any nay-sayers might want. I actually am a bit puzzled with why you
responded to my post with yours.

Simple doesn't cover all the bases so I took things a step further. I agree that if yours works for you that's great but simply ignoring some of the facts ("no matter what any nay-sayers might want") because they don't allow your explanation to work doesn't cut it for me. I guess I want one that holds up under assault.

As for the whole temporal thingamingy I heard another pretty
good explaination for that on another board. By going back into
the past the timeline changed, that is, for everyone except the Ent-E because they were stuck in that temporal particle-thingaling.

The Ent-E went and saves the Earth an' all, but meanwhile created a new timeline that's nearly identical to the old one. They
returned to the 24th century, but to a different timeline, never realizing it was in any way different.

It's pretty much a slightly more in-detail version of your version.

Interesting.

But mine's still better!

OK

 

[Viking Bastard]

Simple doesn't cover all the bases so I took things a step further. I agree that if yours works for you that's great but simply ignoring some of the facts ("no matter what any nay-sayers might want") because they don't allow your explanation to work doesn't cut it for me. I guess I want one that holds up under assault.

I don't see how it DOESN'T work really.

To me, it just seem the logical explaination.

I've yet to see anyone debunk it with any real data.

 

[Mark]

I don't see how it DOESN'T work really.

To me, it just seem the logical explaination.

What do the nay-sayers say?

 

[Viking Bastard]

[doublepostin'fun!]

 

[Viking Bastard]

I FEEL that...

• ...Picard should've known.
  ...that the Feds should've found the Borg their no.1 worry.
  ...that the Feds couldn't have anything else to worry about.

...and such. Doesn't look like real data to me, really.

 

[Mark]

I FEEL that...

• ...Picard should've known.
  ...that the Feds should've found the Borg their no.1 worry.
  ...that the Feds couldn't have anything else to worry about.

...and such. Doesn't look like real data to me, really.

I don't want to leave you hanging but as I reread our back and forth in this thread I must admit to being completely lost at this point.

Shall we just agree that we both have viable, if somewhat differing, explanations?