JPH>CT>is to save face.  No need to explain a plot conflict away when you can
JPH>CT>merely look at the source and declare it "Non-canon" and therefore
JPH>avoid
JPH>CT>the whole issue.
JPH>        "Explaining a conflict" is also buying into the idea that there
JPH> is correct and incorrect Trek.  There is no need to "Explain"
JPH> conflicts.  Pick the one you like and keep stepping.
Actually, though, yes, there is, at least somewhat.   The
reason?  Simply because there are folks who will try to say that
*their* personal view of Trek reality (most often this attitude
seems to come from some of the more avid novel-readers, & no, I'm
not referring primarily to recent events ) is the sole
authority & therefore overrides the reality of someone _else_. ;)
If we're all able to make the distinction that ours isn't sole
arbiter, then there's no conflict & no need for rationalization of
inconsistency.  If, however, even *1* person doesn't go along with
it, then there _is_ such a problem. ;)  And as we've of course all
seen, the latter set of circumstances does unfortunately seem to
be the real one. :)
---
 * OLXWin 1.00b * "Japanese beef, Omaha beef, Alphonse Sims...."
 * wcGATE 4.1 = FidoNet: The Right Note! 502-452-1453 Music Oriented BBS
--- GEcho/32 1.20/Pro
---------------