FTL Navigation- ST v SW

[Mike DiCenso]

Khan was a villian right from the get go. A sometimes honorable and admirable one, but a villian nonetheless. Consider that he tried to usurp unlawfully Kirk's command of the Enterprise using coercive methods on Marla McGivers (seduction and brainwashing), attempted torture and murder of Kirk himself, and the threat to the crew of doing the same. That is not a good guy in any real sense of the word, especially since Khan, like the other Augments, was driven by the need for power and control. Again traits of the villian, not a misunderstood hero.

But at any rate, the navigation issue is still one of a statisitcal outlier versus numerous others before and since that clearly contradict it. The TWoK example should never have happened since not only did they have a reasonable charting of the system since the days of the NX-01 in the 22nd century, but we have seen in TOS' "The Doomsday Machine" that they should easily be able to scan a star system and note that all the planets are where they should be.... or not be, and if there is life on them as was the case in "The Changeling". Everytime they need to go somewhere, they almost without fail get there to a specific planet or outpost.

So how should we treat TWoK? The best way the writers could have done it would have been to have the phenomena switch the two worlds in their orbits without destroying either, and that way the mistake is understandable since all the planets would have there. Unfortunately they didn't so given other examples, we have to discard CA5 as an outlier that makes no sense given all other information.

The Falcon is less impressive as you make it out to be since that example not only has the ship simply being able to navigate there (blindly) where the planet is thought to be, but the ANH novelization has Han simply verfifying the lack of Alderaan being there by simple visually via the old Mark I eyeball since they were supposed to be only one planetary diameter out from it. Also of note in both the movie and in the novelization, Han completely fails to notice that the "small moon" they're headed for is not an abnormal thing. Hell, his sensors fail to even note the Death Star for what it is, an artifical structure.
-Mike

[User1446]

Khan was a villian right from the get go. A sometimes honorable and admirable one, but a villian nonetheless. -Mike

LOL (eyeroll)
No. Just... no. Way, way deeper. (Let me guess: you haven't read Milton :-)
Khan was a figurehead consolidation-character of contemporary 20th-century elitist belief-systems and characters: some real, some fictitious, taken to their logical conclusion, to show why a philosophy of elite anti-populism is a self-destructive path.
Again, Star Trek was deeper than that type of black-and-white, egocentric labelling; Khan was complex. Like the Romulan commander in "Balance of Terror," Khan was a good man on the opposite side. Even the Gorn in "Arena" were simply a paranoid race: and because Kirk reacted in hastily in vengeance, even when Spock warns him otherwise, both humans and the Gorn were judged by a more advanced civilization as primitive hostiles in a Trial of Ordeal.

Consider that he tried to usurp unlawfully Kirk's command of the Enterprise using coercive methods on Marla McGivers (seduction and brainwashing), attempted torture and murder of Kirk himself, and the threat to the crew of doing the same.

No. Again, that's a very shallow mindset: as well as inaccurate. First of all, those methods are used today, worldwide. Khan was being perfectly honest wtih McGivers from square 1: he risked everything in trustign her. He was also honest and straightforward with Kirk and the crew: he believed that humanity had stagnated off the path of evolution, by simply improving machines rather than improving man himself: and in doing so, he believed that mankind had become machine-dependent. He was trying to save Mankind, by leading them away from what he believed was the path to extinction, by improving the human species. (Suppose you woke up in 200 years, and found that everyone had become a weakling-idiot, depending on machines to do everything for them including their thinking?)

However the moral was that Khan, like McGivers the historian, was a person with values from the past (i.e. today), which involved rule by coercion and dominance; that's why McGivers followed Khan, since he embodied the ideal of that age, which she embraced.
He also simply used Kirk as a hostage, simply to coerce others to follow him, as he was trying to recruit them using the old ways: and so the moral of the story was that mankind had evolved in terms of values rather than abilities, by advancing beyond coercion toward populism. That's why no one would follow him, even to save Kirk or themselves: and eventually even McGivers converted to Kirk's side, which saved the ship. (Kirk also made this moral clear to her in the beginning: i.e. that one person can mean the difference between salvation and destruction.)

The old black-and-white, "good-vs-evil" mentality, is what the series was trying to break from. Notice that when re-taking the ship, Kirk uses no more force than necessary, and even avoids hitting Khan in the head with the pipe when it would be the easiest thing to do, since it would be deadly force when it wasn't absolutely necessary: even though it involves a risk. He also drops all charges, and gives Khan exactly what he wanted from the start: a new life, and a new world.

That's what makes Kirk a hero in a class by himself: unfortunately, few are capable of reaching this level, but rather respond in Pavlovian fashion by sinking to the very level they claim to oppose. That's why Star Trek wasn' timmediately popular wit the shot-em-up audience.

And that, sadly, is also the mentality to which the movie sank... and pandered, thereby selling out the premise that Roddenberry and the writers had worked so had to present as the model for the future. Unfortunately, it's a moral that the teenage movie-going audience just don't get: and let's just say that at least Hollywood has knows it's audience!

The Falcon is less impressive as you make it out to be since that example not only has the ship simply being able to navigate there (blindly) where the planet is thought to be, but the ANH novelization has Han simply verfifying the lack of Alderaan being there by simple visually

At least he got to the right spot: unlike the (ironically mis-named) "Reliant." It takes a pretty pathetic nav-consule to get you to the wrong planet, when the right one is gone! LOL

[Who is like God arbour]

Hello? Why are you ignoring my post?

• • Is that a question of navigation or a question of cartography?
    
    We know that the UfP is still cartographying space. That's one of the main purposes of the Enterprise.
    
    And if the map is wrong, the best navigation skills and abilities can not help.
    
    Maybe the Reliant did not have detailed maps of the Ceti Alpha system that was only visited once by the Enterprise to resettle Khan Noonien Singh and the crew of the SS Botany Bay after their attempted takeover of the USS Enterprise in 2267.
    
    Maybe the maps were deleted by Starfleet or decreed secret to prevent others going for the habitable Ceti Alpha V, either to deliberately liberate Khan Noonien Singh and the crew of the SS Botany Bay or to colonize the planet and undeliberately liberate them.

We know that ships like the Enterprise have sensors with which they can detect planets in a star system from light years away.

Insofar, we have to assume, that the Reliant too could scan the Ceti Alpha system from several light yeas away and has detected all planets in that system.

But, to notice that there is a planet missing, you have to know how many planets were in that system. And you can only know that, if you have detailed maps.

The easiest conclusion is not, that they couldn't scan the system and couldn't see that there is a planet missing, but that they simply didn't have a map from that system that says that there, where no planet but an asteroid field was, was a planet supposed to be.

Now we can speculate why the Reliant didn't have a map - although the Enterprise has already visited this system.

I think, it is plausible to conclude that Starfleet has decreed that map or at least the existence of a certain planet in that system a secret. And as Starfleet is a big organisation, the left hand often-times does not know what the right is doing. When someone has given Cpt. Terrell the task to look for suitable planets for the Genesis Project, this someone simply didn't know, that the maps about the Ceti Alpha system were manipulated and those, who knew that, didn't know about Cpt. Terrells task or that the Reliant will enter the Ceti Alpha system. Or they assumed, that, because Cpt. Terrell was supposed to look for planets without live, he would never go on Ceti Alpha V, that was supposed to be an » habitable, although a bit savage, somewhat inhospitable « planet. Thus they saw no reason to inform him.

I think, that this is a better explanation than to assume that the Reliant was incapable of scanning the system and not noticing a missing planet. Because that is incompatible with the informations we have about the capabilities of such ships.

[User1446]

Insofar, we have to assume, that the Reliant too could scan the Ceti Alpha system from several light yeas away and has detected all planets in that system.

But, to notice that there is a planet missing, you have to know how many planets were in that system. And you can only know that, if you have detailed maps.

The easiest conclusion is not, that they couldn't scan the system and couldn't see that there is a planet missing, but that they simply didn't have a map from that system that says that there, where no planet but an asteroid field was, was a planet supposed to be.

Are you running for Miss Teen America? LOL

They wouldn't be looking at a planet that they didn't know existed in the first place. And a Ceti Alpha 6, automatically implies a Ceti Alpha 5: so it would be silly to say that "someone erased it from the archive records."

"Lost a planet he has: how embarassing, how embarassing!"

It's also hard to say that it wouldn't be listed as an inhabited planet: it's possible that someone might want to go prospecting there. In order to make it off limits, either it woul be listed as classified, or deignated teh site of a pre-warp civilization.

[Who is like God arbour]

They wouldn't be looking at a planet that they didn't know existed in the first place. And a Ceti Alpha 6, automatically implies a Ceti Alpha 5: so it would be silly to say that "someone erased it from the archive records."

The existence of Ceti Alpha VI does not automatically imply the existence of an actually existing planet called Ceti Alpha V.

What was it that Khan has said?

• • • • • • Khan:
        Ceti Alpha VI exploded six months after we were left here. The shock shifted the orbit of this planet and everything was laid waste.

If now the orbit of Ceti Alpha V shifted behind the orbit of Ceti Alpha VI, the positions of both planets (or Ceti Alpha V and what is left of Ceti Alpha VI) would be reversed. The Ceti Alpha system would have four planets, an asteroid field from an exploded planet and a sixth planet. The sixth planet is what was Ceti Alpha V and the asteroid field is what was supposed to be Ceti Alpha VI.

And it is imaginable that they are giving even a destroyed planet a number because otherwise it would be difficult to speak of that planet.

Et voila: You have a starship that has no maps of a system, enters that system and finds, counting from the star of that system, four planets, an asteroid field from an exploded planet and a sixth planet. They are naming the first four planets Ceti Alpha I to IV, the asteroid field Ceti Alpha V and the sixth planet Ceti Alpha VI.

And maybe Cpt. Terrel would have recommended that Starfleet sends a science ship to investigate why Ceti Alpha V exploded. If you are living on planets, it is always good to know, why they are exploding. After such an investigation, the research team would have written a dossier with the name » Why Ceti Alpha V exploded «. All that would be a little bit difficult if a planet does not get a name or number only because it exploded.

[User1446]

LOL that makes it just sound even sillier, weaving a tangled web to cover up lies.
Planets aren't time-bombs, but the lowest energy-state, therefore they can't explode that long after formation: and it takes more energy to move a planet than to melt it.
Also, ships make maps when they travel to systems: even the Talos IV system wasn't "erased," it was simply declared off-limits, with the death-penalty for anyone who went there. It would be odd for Starfleet to lie to the Federation in order to protect them from some antique thawed-out dictator, without warning anyone who might go there otherwise.

Simply put: a wizard did it, just like a terrorist-bomb released Gen. Zod from the Phantom Zone. Hollywood smelled a sequel, and so logic became secondary.

[Who is like God arbour]

LOL that makes it just sound even sillier, weaving a tangled web to cover up lies.

What lies?

Do you think, that Khan has lied when he stated that Ceti Alpha VI exploded six months after he and his Augment followers were left on Ceti Alpha V and that the shock shifted the orbit of the planet and everything was laid waste?

What would be his motivation to lie to Cpt. Farrel and Cmd. Chekov in this situation? What could he have achieved with that lie?

And even more important, what do you think has happened if his story is not true? The whole base of that debate would vanish if Ceti Alpha VI has not exploded.

Planets aren't time-bombs, but the lowest energy-state, therefore they can't explode that long after formation: and it takes more energy to move a planet than to melt it.

With other words, you are saying, that Khan has lied: Ceti Alpha VI has not exploded.

But what would be his motivation to lie to Cpt. Farrel and Cmd. Chekov? What could he have achieved with that lie?

And even more important, what do you think has happened if his story is not true? The whole base of that debate would vanish if Ceti Alpha VI has not exploded.

Furthermore, no one has said, that Ceti Alpha VI exploded like a time bomb without external influences. The only fact we know - that is, if we believe Khan who had no reason to lie to Cpt. Farrel and Cmd. Chekov in that situation - is that Ceti Alpha VI exploded. We do not know why.

But we know, that (in the Star Trek universe) sometimes planets do explode (e.g. Booby Trap) even without external influences (e.g. Pen Pals).

Insofar, there is no reason to not believe Khan - unless you can provide a motive why he should have lied to Cpt. Farrel and Cmd. Chekov, who he had already captured.

Also, ships make maps when they travel to systems: even the Talos IV system wasn't "erased," it was simply declared off-limits, with the death-penalty for anyone who went there.

I did not claim that no maps were made when the Enterprise visited the Ceti Alpha system in 2267.

I proposed the possibility that these maps or at least part of these maps were decreed secret and were manipulated by Starfleet or that for whatever reason the Reliant did not have these maps when entering the Star system in 2285.

That Talos IV was not decreed secret too, has no bearing.

There is a difference between Talos IV and Ceti Alpha V and the thread that the Talosians and the Augments presented.
Even Kirk and Spock considered to » return to that world in a hundred years and to learn what crop has sprung from the seed (Kirk) planted «.
This differences are justifying another treatment.

And General Order 7, the directive that forbade contact with the planet Talos IV, was made part of Starfleet policy in 2254, while Khan Noonien Singh and his Augment followers were exiled to Ceti Alpha V in 2267. That's 13 years. Much can happen in 13 years. Another commander-in-chief of Starfleet could make another decision. After all, General Order 7 was the only Starfleet regulation that carried the threat of capital punishment. It is not difficult to imagine, that someone would be reluctant to impose this order on other planets too.

Or maybe Kirk has manipulated the maps, the Enterprise has made when visiting the Ceti Alpha system himself before sending them to Starfleet.

It would be odd for Starfleet to lie to the Federation in order to protect them from some antique thawed-out dictator, without warning anyone who might go there otherwise.

It wouldn't be more odd, than the U.S. Navy or the U.S. Army or the U.S. Air Force having secrets which they are not telling everybody in the U.S. government.

And the chances, that someone goes to the Ceti Alpha system, that, according to the maps, has nothing of interest, are very small in a galaxy with 100–400 billion star systems - especially because Starships are not as common as cars are today.

[User1446]

LOL thanks, I needed a good laugh: it's also good to remind myself that simply ignoring ridiculous aguments is always an option.

Again, this just shows how the movies were the death of ST's original concept, by dumbing it down to the average movie-goer's mentality: i.e. somehwere between Rick Beman and a gravy-boat. The notion that the Federation would lhide planets on its maps, when it wouldn't even hide its ships from enemies via cloaking-devices, shows how far-fetched and simiplistic the plots became in dumbing down Trek's advanced philosophy and sicience to Braga-levels of jinks-science and preachy dimestore morals LOL
Its even funnier than the notion that Khan went through all that trouble to recruit Kirk's crew and improve humanity, when he could have just put a bug in their ears and stole a plot-hole device ROTFL

[Who is like God arbour]

With other words, you have no in-universe argument any more and you can not explain what happened.

You admit, that it is not hard to navigate to a planet. Then you explain that » Planets move at precise rates, and their positions and orbits have precise orientations to the galactic map, just like their stars; so if a federation ship was ever in a star-system, you'd definitely be able to tell exactly where a planet should be, at any time: 15 years later, or 1500. And likewise you'd know immediately if it wasn't there as on the map, that something changed: as well as the type of planet, it's atmophere, it's gravity when you set up in orbit, etc. «

I totally agree: If the Reliant had the maps, the Enterprise made when visiting the Ceti Alpha system in 2267, when entering the Ceti Alpha system in 2285, they should have noticed a missing planet.

But they did not notice a missing planet.

More than that: They went to a planet they thought is Ceti Alpha VI but it was Ceti Alpha V.

What is your solution to that problem?

You think » Just saying "a wizard did it" would have been better. «

But that is not an in-universe explanation.

Besides, what did the wizard?

Has he caused the explosion of Ceti Alpha VI and confunded the crew of the Reliant that they didn't notice the missing planet and went to the wrong planet?

Or did he confunded Khan and his Augment followers into believing that Ceti Alpha VI exploded and changed the environment of Ceti Alpha V?

What is your explanation?

If you have none, if you have nothing to contribute, then shut up.

[KirkSkyWalker]

With other words, you have no in-universe argument any more and you can not explain what happened.

You admit, that it is not hard to navigate to a planet. Then you explain that » Planets move at precise rates, and their positions and orbits have precise orientations to the galactic map, just like their stars; so if a federation ship was ever in a star-system, you'd definitely be able to tell exactly where a planet should be, at any time: 15 years later, or 1500. And likewise you'd know immediately if it wasn't there as on the map, that something changed: as well as the type of planet, it's atmophere, it's gravity when you set up in orbit, etc. «

I totally agree: If the Reliant had the maps, the Enterprise made when visiting the Ceti Alpha system in 2267, when entering the Ceti Alpha system in 2285, they should have noticed a missing planet.

But they did not notice a missing planet.

More than that: They went to a planet they thought is Ceti Alpha VI but it was Ceti Alpha V.

What is your solution to that problem?

You think » Just saying "a wizard did it" would have been better. «

But that is not an in-universe explanation.

Besides, what did the wizard?

You do realize, that it's FICTION? That means that, technically, a wizard did EVERYTHING; it doesn't have to make sense. But you're claiming here that it HAS to make sense, when in reality there are more plot-holes than wormholes.

I'd tell you to read Gogol's "The Nose," but you'd spend a lifetime explaining how the nose did everything, and miss completely the moral of the story-- i.e. that fiction does not require logic!

(Sorry to spoil it for you like that; but like I said, you'd never get it anyway).

[Mike DiCenso]

LOL (eyeroll)
No. Just... no. Way, way deeper. (Let me guess: you haven't read Milton :-)
Khan was a figurehead consolidation-character of contemporary 20th-century elitist belief-systems and characters: some real, some fictitious, taken to their logical conclusion, to show why a philosophy of elite anti-populism is a self-destructive path.
Again, Star Trek was deeper than that type of black-and-white, egocentric labelling; Khan was complex. Like the Romulan commander in "Balance of Terror," Khan was a good man on the opposite side. Even the Gorn in "Arena" were simply a paranoid race: and because Kirk reacted in hastily in vengeance, even when Spock warns him otherwise, both humans and the Gorn were judged by a more advanced civilization as primitive hostiles in a Trial of Ordeal.

I have read Milton's Paradise Lost, thank you very much, and that in turn has little bearing on the subject, except to unnecessarily distract from the issues at hand. Even if we go with your description of Khan and Star Trek, it still does not change the fact that Khan, while and interesting and dynamic character, is still a villian. He is going to do things that while may feel justified in doing them, they are still arguably wrong and evil methods, and thus must be dealt with.

As Kirk and Spock put it:

KIRK: Well, they were hardly supermen. They were aggressive, arrogant. They began to battle among themselves.

SPOCK: Because the scientists overlooked one fact. Superior ability breeds superior ambition.

No matter how good Khan or his fellow Augment's intentions, they were still very much at heart conquerors who would bring bloodshead and eventually opression to those they deemed lesser to them. Remember the dinning room conversation?

KIRK: Forgive my curiosity, Mister Khan, but my officers are anxious to know more about your extraordinary journey.

SPOCK: And how you managed to keep it out of the history books.

KHAN: Adventure, Captain. Adventure. There was little else left on Earth.

SPOCK: There was the war to end tyranny. Many considered that a noble effort.

KHAN: Tyranny, sir? Or an attempt to unify humanity?

SPOCK: Unify, sir? Like a team of animals under one whip?

KHAN: I know something of those years. Remember, it was a time of great dreams, of great aspiration.

SPOCK: Under dozens of petty dictatorships.

KHAN: One man would have ruled eventually. As Rome under Caesar. Think of its accomplishments.

SPOCK: Then your sympathies were with

KHAN: You are an excellent tactician, Captain. You let your second in command attack while you sit and watch for weakness.

KIRK: You have a tendency to express ideas in military terms, Mister Khan. This is a social occasion.

KHAN: It has been said that social occasions are only warfare concealed. Many prefer it more honest, more open.

KIRK: You fled. Why? Were you afraid?

KHAN: I've never been afraid.

KIRK: But you left at the very time mankind needed courage.

KHAN: We offered the world order!

KIRK: We?

KHAN: Excellent. Excellent. But if you will excuse me, gentlemen and ladies, I grow fatigued again. With your permission, Captain, I will return to my quarters.

As you can see by this little talk that Khan reveals his true nature. To want to control and dominate others, just as he did with Marla, and it sets the stage for him later attempting the unlawful attack on Kirk and his crew and the attempt to hijack the Enterprise as part of his plans to resume his abitions of conquest.

No. Again, that's a very shallow mindset: as well as inaccurate. First of all, those methods are used today, worldwide. Khan was being perfectly honest wtih McGivers from square 1: he risked everything in trustign her. He was also honest and straightforward with Kirk and the crew: he believed that humanity had stagnated off the path of evolution, by simply improving machines rather than improving man himself: and in doing so, he believed that mankind had become machine-dependent. He was trying to save Mankind, by leading them away from what he believed was the path to extinction, by improving the human species. (Suppose you woke up in 200 years, and found that everyone had become a weakling-idiot, depending on machines to do everything for them including their thinking?)

However the moral was that Khan, like McGivers the historian, was a person with values from the past (i.e. today), which involved rule by coercion and dominance; that's why McGivers followed Khan, since he embodied the ideal of that age, which she embraced.
He also simply used Kirk as a hostage, simply to coerce others to follow him, as he was trying to recruit them using the old ways: and so the moral of the story was that mankind had evolved in terms of values rather than abilities, by advancing beyond coercion toward populism. That's why no one would follow him, even to save Kirk or themselves: and eventually even McGivers converted to Kirk's side, which saved the ship. (Kirk also made this moral clear to her in the beginning: i.e. that one person can mean the difference between salvation and destruction.)

The old black-and-white, "good-vs-evil" mentality, is what the series was trying to break from. Notice that when re-taking the ship, Kirk uses no more force than necessary, and even avoids hitting Khan in the head with the pipe when it would be the easiest thing to do, since it would be deadly force when it wasn't absolutely necessary: even though it involves a risk. He also drops all charges, and gives Khan exactly what he wanted from the start: a new life, and a new world.

That's what makes Kirk a hero in a class by himself: unfortunately, few are capable of reaching this level, but rather respond in Pavlovian fashion by sinking to the very level they claim to oppose. That's why Star Trek wasn' timmediately popular wit the shot-em-up audience.

And that, sadly, is also the mentality to which the movie sank... and pandered, thereby selling out the premise that Roddenberry and the writers had worked so had to present as the model for the future. Unfortunately, it's a moral that the teenage movie-going audience just don't get: and let's just say that at least Hollywood has knows it's audience!

I don't think that the movie sank to any such level, it was a bout a once great man (Khan) who falls from whatever grace he had by allowing the death of his wife and friends on Ceti Alpha 5 break him after a fashion and he gradually sinks into the madness of revenge at all costs, turning into a villian who is now tragic, but still danagerous and in need of being dealt with. And not every story has a happy ending. Kirk tried doing the right thing, and unfortunately an unforeseen consequence cost both Khan and Kirk dearly. Ad for Trek's populatiry, the Original Series actually was popular, but as has been demonstrated, the Nielson ratings at the time did not take the proper demographics into account, but again all of that is neither here nor there, and only is a distraction to the real issues here.

At least he got to the right spot: unlike the (ironically mis-named) "Reliant." It takes a pretty pathetic nav-consule to get you to the wrong planet, when the right one is gone! LOL

Again, you are being disengenous here. How do you know that the "Reliant" did not "get to the right spot"? They clearly could navigate to the right star system out of potentially thousands, they even went to the right place. as Khan himself says:

"This is Ceti Alpha Five. ...Ceti Alpha Six exploded six months after we were left here. The shock shifted the orbit of this planet and everything was laid waste."

Shifted the orbit of the planet so that C5 takes C6's place, thus when Reliant arrives, the wrong planet is in the right place so to speak. However they should have noticed that one of the planets was gone, just as previous and in all other subsequent movies and episodes they are able to scan and see that things are amiss, even from light years away, and so TWoK in that aspect is a statisitcal outlier and should either be ignored or someone should find a better explanation.
-Mike

[Mike DiCenso]

You do realize, that it's FICTION? That means that, technically, a wizard did EVERYTHING; it doesn't have to make sense. But you're claiming here that it HAS to make sense, when in reality there are more plot-holes than wormholes.

I'd tell you to read Gogol's "The Nose," but you'd spend a lifetime explaining how the nose did everything, and miss completely the moral of the story-- i.e. that fiction does not require logic!

(Sorry to spoil it for you like that; but like I said, you'd never get it anyway).

None of which really addresses WILGA's points, and you are being unnecessarily insulting to him. All of the Versus-type debates are generally based around finding an "in universe" explanation where possible, even though we understand that the issue is clearly a clumsy plot device. In other words, a McGuffin. The one planet blowing up is not the problem, or even necessarily that it shifted CA5 so that it took CA6's place, but that the Reliant's sensors did not pick up the missing planet, even though we have seen previously that the capability exists to do so.
-Mike

[Praeothmin]

Are you running for Miss Teen America? LOL

SarahStar, since you are a new member here, I would recommend you read the rules.
There you will see we do not like insults aimed at members, we prefer civil discourse...
Please aim your replies at the arguments you disagree with, not the person.
Thank you.

[KirkSkyWalker]

I agree that ST went downhill, when they had the Federation start this "Section 31" crap about hiding dangerous threats from the people; populism and shadow-government don't mix.

It also became stupid and non-scientific, i.e. a cheap rip-off of Star Wars.
Here's back-to-back PROOF:



Look familiar?

"To boldly go where others have gone before.... and erasing everyhwere we've been."

[Praeothmin]

By this token, KirkSkywalker, every movie where a villain or hero lifts someone by the shirt using one hand is then a rip-off of SW...
Except that in Khan's case, he was demonstrated as having that strength way before SW was even "born", so then SW is a rip-off of ST, by your logic...