From Newsgroup: alt.tv.star-trek.tos
From Address: dxmm{at}albury.nospam.net.au
Subject: Re: STAR TREK THE WRATH OF KHAN: was What Did You Watch?
2013-06-01(Saturday)

anim8rFSK wrote:
> In article ,
>   "Daniel47{at}teranews.com"  wrote:
>
>> anim8rFSK wrote:
>>> In article ,
>>>    "Daniel47{at}teranews.com"
 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lewis wrote:
>>>>> In message 
>>>>>      Arthur Lipscomb  wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/2/2013 10:03 PM, ToolPackinMama wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/2/2013 10:31 PM, Arthur Lipscomb wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Most of the other characters were from TOS
or just a random alien.
>>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>> guy stands out because TOS had no cyborgs
like that on the Enterprise.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> TOS did have an android on the Enterprise in
one episode.  He wore a
>>>>>>> Starfleet uniform and everything.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://allyourtrekarebelongto.us/imudd.htm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not entirely the same thing.  Androids were
clearly established in TOS,
>>>>>> which made Data's claims of uniqueness a little
odd.  The character in
>>>>>> the movie is humanoid with cybernetic implants
which apparently
>>>>>> (according to online sources) have a direct neural
interface with the
>>>>>> Enterprise.  He's more Borg than Starfleet and
more advance than
>>>>>> anything Starfleet should have had during TOS (or even TNG).
>>>>>
>>>>> Different History. Different developments.
>>>>
>>>> Lewis, I was going to give a similar response to Arthur, up thread,
>>>> along the lines of "Different Timeline, so who knows what is
>>>> possible!!", but as this is only a shout time
(months/years??) after the
>>>> re-boot, is it really likely that there would be a Borg in
Starfleet??
>>>>
>>>> Daniel
>>>
>>> The history of the universe and basic physics were already completely
>>> different in the first movie when Nero first appeared.
>>
>> Yeap, the timeline is the same until Nero appears out of nowhere and
>> destroys Kirk's Dad's ship!
>
> No it's not.  Look at Dad's ship.  It's *vastly* advanced of ships of
> the TOS era, which would be almost 40 years later.  And McCoy should
> already be like 10 years old, but his birth got delayed - before Nero
> showed up.

Yes, the look of the StarShips have changed significantly *in our time 
stream*. If Gene Roddenberry had been alive and imagining Star Trek now, 
TOS-now might look significantly different from TOS-1960's!! Maybe even 
something like the TOS-now!!

 From http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/James_T._Kirk
Quote
"He was born on March 22nd, 2233 (Stardate 1277.1), in Iowa on Earth, 
the son of George and Winona Kirk. His mother and father were serving on 
board the USS Kelvin under the command of Captain Richard Robau while 
Winona was pregnant with him."
End Quote

And, near the bottom of that website.....
Quote
Roberto Orci, co-writer of Star Trek, has said that in an early draft of 
that film, dialogue confirmed that in the prime reality, Kirk was born 
in Iowa and not aboard the USS Kelvin: "If not for the attack from the 
Narada, the Kelvin would've reached earth and Kirk would've been born in 
Iowa. The attack made Winona Kirk go into labor early." [7] The dialogue 
in question was likely Prime Spock's line in which he tells the 
alternate James T. Kirk that he was born on a farm in Iowa, to which 
Kirk corrects him, stating he (the alternate Kirk) was born on a 
starship. This line appears in the novelization of the film, which used 
an early draft of the screenplay as a basis.
End Quote

So, if the Writers can actually explain how/when TOS-1960's and TOS-now 
diverged, who are we to argue?? Although in the 2009 version, because of 
the attack Winona Kirk did go into labor early, so James T Kirk was 
probably born some hours/days/weeks early, not Years let alone decades!!

But, of course, we will!!

Daniel

--- Synchronet 3.15a-Linux NewsLink 1.92-mlp
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Linux