Maybe Chef is a Pandronian and just the lower half at that.
[sub]I am really confused about the view from the conference room window. Any help would be appreciated.[/sub]
RE: Malcolm’s bachelorhood: Yes, I know there weren’t enough women to go around…but couldn’t someone have gotten separated or divorced? Didn’t anybody cheat? Didn’t someone decide that polygamy might be okay? They could have taken a cue from Phlox. Just wondering. We’ll never know.
So who said he never got any? :dubious:
He just never married.
This is a man who can barely SPEAK to a woman. You expect him to be playing casanova to a bunch of women who have their choice of men?
HA!
He didn’t seem to have any trouble with the female tactical officer in “Cogenitor.”
The writers missed an opportunity to discuss homosexuality, group marraiges, open sexuality, etc…
I for one, would’ve liked to have seen Malcolm come out during that scene.
Maybe Reed offered the seat at that table because he was going to go over to that other crewman’s table and ask to sit down. Ya never know!
“Hey, wanna see my torpedo?”
Man, these threads are next to impossible to read all the way through if you don’t get in on the ground floor.
I’m still in Alabama, doing the whole WeddingDope thing until Monday. Hope you guys don’t miss me too much (This is when you tell me just how much you have and how the threads just aren’t the same without me.) and I look forward to trying to decipher this thread when I have more time on my hands.
If nothing else, **Cervaise ** liking it gives it some sort of novelty appeal.
The lack of such Treknobabble may be unusual for a Trek time travel episode in general, but it’s not all that unusual for Enterprise. I don’t see nearly as much Treknobabble on Enterprise as there was on ST:TNG or Voyager.
And warp emitter consoles are never happy. It’s the nature of the job.
It’s a well-established Trek fact that transporters can’t operate through shields. (Barring knowledge of the shield recycling harmonic frequency window thingy that O’Brien used to beam onto the U.S.S. Phoenix.)
Archer was able to beam things out of the other NX-01 because the NX-01 doesn’t have shields (it only has polarizable hull plating).
That’s the story of my life with most threads!
I love that Styx song! I wish I could listen to music while surfing too. 
[sub]And, yes, we miss you.[/sub]
And don’t forget the contribution of the Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator.
Yeah, but the writers/producers just ain’t got the balls.
Or am I confusing them with Malcolm?
You started it.
P.S. I’d spend more time on the EZ Board if I got email notifications once in a blue moon. Short term memory and all, ya know.
fyi, veeve, there is a box at the bottom of the reply page that must be checked (each thread) in order to get e-mails of replies. The default setting for all of EZB is no subs, I know not why.
Where is Aes? It just isn’t the same without him. These aren’t the droids you want.
Bad editing. However, they’d already determined that there are an infinite numbr of dimensions spitting at all possible decisions, so they still exist; just in another possible reality. Whioch actually sucks, now that I think about it, because it means that really I’m watching the reality that got lucky, more or less.
Like D.C. Fontana? 
Roddenberry thought gayness wouldn’t be an issue anymore by the time of Trek.
Remember Cogenitor?
There was a TOS episode where Riker got the hots for a member of a bisexual species.
Phlox is into tri-something or other. Talked about meeting “two or three others in a bar”.
Worry about something important, like Kirk’s hair.
It’s already been established (in ST:TNG “Yesterday’s Enterprise”) that in the Trek universe, time travel that results in something having never existed in this dimension also results in everybody forgetting about it. (Except for Guinan).
Not exactly.
Stay with me here.
If you go back in time and change events such that you have erased your own future existance - you don’t vanish. The Grandfather paradox does not exist in Trek time travel. (I cite the Star Trek RPG’s information on Time Travel, and the general ability to conduct a temporal cold war at all… )
Further proof : Daniels screwed up and erased his future… but he was temporally displaced, so the changes didn’t affect him. He remembered the Federation.
A similar thing happens with the TOS episode City on the Edge of Forever … McCoy wipes out the Federation, but he, Kirk, and Spock don’t vanish… (as for the folks who were merely standing at the mouth of the Guardian… well, I can only conjecture that it projects some sort of temporal stability.)
Yesterday’s Enterprise is different. From the perspective of the Enterprise C, they travelled forward in time … but because of the delicate situation regarding the battle, they travelled forward to an alternate future. (We rarely see an Enterprise travel to the future. )
The difference with Yesterday’s Enterprise Is that you’re looking at it form the perspective of the Enterprise D, which isn’t the time-travelling vessel.
I can’t speak to the consistency of the DS9 episode, though. The basic rule of thumb is that people displaced to the past can prevent their own birth but will not blink out of existence as a result.
So, in this episode, the time-displaced Enterprise wouldn’t blink out of existence even if they’d gone and destroyed Zefram Cochrane.
Actually, in Trek time travel, even canon isn’t consistant. (And remember, unlike other franchises, games do not figure in to canon.)
In First Contact, an alternate reality was set up (or altered?) in that First Contact, and thus StarFleet and the Federation, was never established, even though the first cause for such a scenario was predicated by the Federation, namely NCC-1701E. And… the Enterprise wasn’t affected because of being in some sort of temporal wake.
Now, in City On The Edge Of Forever, Spock was able to determine, while in the alternate past, exactly where the divergance happened, because he had both histories available to him. Let’s also comment on the past and future traveling with whales later in their carreers.
In VOY’s Season I reset button episode, the Janeway was able to determine where she was in the timeline of the displaced reality.
In the best reset button ep yet, Year Of Hell, all was forgotten when the timeline was reset and no divergence happened. No memory of the past (future) year at all.
In All Good Things, Picard was able (with the aid of Q) to be fully aware of all the divergence in each timeline, including the first cause of human evolution, and was able to keep his memory of the possiblities. Let’s forget Tapestry, either, where the past alternate twice removed of Picard remembered not just the event in question, but also the two different futures (at least for that one instant where he laughed).
And then we have the ENT set of episodes with some futres being reset, others being saved, and only remembering when it suits the script.
So, as you can see, when t comes to time travel and alternate realities, Star Trek Canon is very convoluted. In fact, I would venture that there is no canon when it comes to Trek Time Travel. So, the writers can do whatever the hell they want in that regard.
I’m just saying… :dubious:
First Contact’s Time Travel is consistent with the non-erasure of past-displaced time travellers. … I don’t remember the circumstances of Spock’s history-access well enough to address that comment… the Whales, on the other hand, have nothing to do with this scenario at all, as far as I can tell.
Can’t address Voyager comments, I never watched it.
All Good Things - It’s not clear to me that the events actually happened outside Picard’s head. Q may have been projecting himself into Picard’s dreams for all we know… and the Q continuum may be outside the conventional rules of the spacetime continuum.
As for Tapestries… I honestly don’t remember it well enough, I’ll have to catch it again.
[QUOTE=
I’m just saying… :dubious:[/QUOTE]
You’re always just saying. That’s why your post count is so high.
Joke! Joke!
'Toine, don’t get mad…*)
My canon is still pure. How’s yours?
*Extry credit if you recognize and identify this reference.