(44)Old Trek Inconsistencies 

Gene Roddenberry's life and treatment of people vs what fans insists he held true as values biggest inconsistency ever :P

So true which is kinda sad, can’t we all just get along and enjoy Star Trek for what it is?

Another inconsistency is Trilithium. In the episode where the Enterprise is basically going through a Trek version of a car wash criminals board her to steal trilithium a waste by product of warp cores. However by the film Generations Trilithium has become something largely unknown by Starfleet. It's become an experimental compound created by the Romulans. Either a retcon or inconsistency in the TNG era.

Careful this will likely trigger gatekeepers who think all og Star Trek is FLAWLESS LOL! Great video man!

Two inconsistent I spotted One: after Dr Bashier was outed as genetically augmented an Admiral mistakenly says that the Eugenics wars happened 200 years earlier despite occurring during the 1990's Two: the number of shuttle's Voyager goes throughout it's 7 year journey

This was a well made video. I've always had a "cut-off" of sorts for inconsistencies (as far as my own enjoyment of Star Trek goes), so that anything below a certain level of inaccuracy does get ignored. I know these shows are written by different teams of writers, and sometimes even different episodes might have a different team. So things like the number of decks on the Enterprise-E, or the EMH having/not having a backup program I can overlook, because people are just trying to tell their story. It's when the changes get too radical does it begin to affect my enjoyment, and I suppose that's my biggest complaint against Discovery. I still enjoy the show, but the universe is so radically different from what is shown to be coming in just a decade, that I can't really get behind it. I agree with you though, that if you like Star Trek (doesn't matter which one) that makes you a Star Trek fan.

The only thing consistence with Star Trek lore is the inconsistencies. Maybe folks should just repeat the MST3K mantra when watching Trek: "If you're wondering how he eats and breathes And other science facts Then repeat to yourself 'It's just a show, I should really just relax.'"

I get you. Personally I’m not a big fan of “New Trek” not because of the cosmetic changes or the minutia of in universe procedures. For me it just doesn’t feel like Trek. It’s too dark. Not hopeful. A bit pandering. I get each series is a product of its time but I think it’s gone too far for my taste. It just doesn’t feel unique anymore.

There is some inconsistency with the number of decks on the Enterprise-A in Star Trek V, namely the scene where Kirk, McCoy, and Spock are flying up the out of order turboshaft on Spock's rocket boots. And the folks that gripe about the look of discovery have forgotten or are unaware of Star Trek phase II, from which the model for Discovery was based. Great episode, you're doing good work here and I'm looking forward to the next one 😃

Its not only the inconsistencies, but also the argument that "why do we never see that advanced technology again?" One could make a whole list of advanced technologies or techniques that could have been used later, but are never seen again. Here are a few A device that you can beam down to the surface and transmit your ship's main weaponry through from orbit - "the Cage"/"The Menagerie" Setting ship's weapons to stun to knock out a city block of people - "A Piece of the Action" Slingshot "Breakaway" maneuver to travel back in time - "Tomorrow is Yesterday", "Assignment Earth", Star Trek IV the Voyage Home ... imagine how many lives could have been saved at Wolf 359 if Picard just did a slingshot around the star after arriving in the lifeless debris field And for anyone whining about the "why do they have holograms a century early?" the holographic communications we see in Discovery are just projections of light, NOT "Photonic" as not only are they translucent but clearly have no physical substance. Hell, we can almost do that TODAY. and that is the big problem with much of the tech in TOS, we have already surpassed much of it in the 21st Century.

The SNL skit where Shatner tells Trekkies to get lives and move out of their parents' basements applies here. It's entertainment, not history! There are plenty of real-world problems to devote one's energy towards. Actually, virtually everyone in these debates should find more productive outlets for their wrath...like season 4 of BSG!! ;)

Love the video. It amazes me how people get upset about little things, but nobody's perfect. Inconsistencies to me in Star Trek aren't even that much of a big deal to me.

I think Ex-Astris-Scientia by Bernd Schneider has an entire Subsection devoted to the funky inconsistencies.... The only caveat I bear is with Scotty. Cut that old walloper some slack, will ye! He's been in a transporter buffer for almost his own lifespan all over. Can ye fergive tha' auld man brain a wee slipup? ;)

Thank you so much. This needed to be said. Too many haters of the New Trek were the same people that hated every new series of Star Trek (TNG, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise) only to remember them fondly when the next new series comes out to hate. I remember when each one debuted and how they were received. I foolishly let their hate comments about Discovery keep me from watching it for almost 2 years, but when I did I was absolutely shocked. It was far better than anything I had heard. And that Season 2 Discovery finale? It is amazing. It also firmly works out how it can still fit in the canon and be so dramatically different from the established Star Trek history. Thank you sir. Well done.

Spock tells Uhura that Vulcan has no moons, yet in The Motion Picture it has TWO

Star Trek continuity has inconsistencies? I am shocked, SHOCKED! *SHOCKED*

Another inconsistency for them DSC Klingon haters: Honour wasn’t a thing for them back in TOS.

One of the worst aspects of social media platforms is that idiots can claim want they want, then other idiots believe it as gospal truth. I have been a trek fan for decades, its all good and the inconsistencies are fun to look to for.

I've never watched Star Trek as it was coming out until Discovery, I watched TOS back in the '80s with my Dad but that was it as I was "to cool" for it when TNG aired in the UK. Thank you for doing these videos as it makes me want to go back and watch TNG, DS9, Enterprise, and Voyager to see what I missed.

.. i love your work .. it's well researched , well put together , and well presented .. bravo !

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I've been fed up of new trek haters for a long time now. If they don't like it then stop making excuses and just grow a pair and say they don't like it. You can't expect it to be the same as TOS or TNG as science has changed so much from when they came out. If you don't like it then don't watch it, it's as simple as that. In my opinion I enjoy Discovery and I'm really interested to see where the story goes but I also understand if some don't. So sad to see some in the community hating on others. To hate on others just shows how much they miss the point in trek's morality lessons. Rant over!! Live long and prosper.🖖

I do think you should make as series of videos pertaining to those major inconsistencies. Your series about problems within episodes is definitely something I and other viewers enjoy, but having a video(s) to reference that is full of inconsistencies would be a great counter to ppl like Midnight's Edge and Doomcock Dvd and others that bash Disco and Picard.

Thank you much for addressing this. It’s such relief to hear someone else knock down the “bullet counters”. I’ve developed the practice of retconning explanations to complaints about minutiae from my friends. Most of the time, the answer takes place off screen, such as when Jack Bauer eats and uses the toilet on “24”. It’s obvious to me that he does it at the same time as the viewers do, during the ad break!

One thing that I always noticed was ships going to warp while within a solar system. It's mentioned in both TMP and the DS9 episode "By Inferno's Light" about how dangerous it is to go to warp while in a star system. But in the TOS episode "Tomorrow Is Yesterday", the Enterprise flies towards the sun at high warp. In STIII, the Enterprise warps toward the Genesis planet right after leaving spacedock in Earth's orbit. In STIV, the bird of prey enters warp while still in Earth's atmosphere. And in the Abram's films, the Enterprise was always coming out of warp near orbit of Vulcan, Earth, the moon, Saturn, and so forth.

Star Trek may have Inconsistencies but I still love it

Nothing in Star Trek is as consistent as Klingons changing

Nothing is perfect, not even Star Trek. But it is an entertaining franchise and especially the old series give rise to hope for a better humanity.

First of all, I would like to thank you for your immense amount of research that you have made to produce this video. I imagine that you would be a great scientist, especially in terms of making peer reviews (merely fact checking scientific papers before release). Secondly, I think that in a few years, the conflicts in fandom concerning new trek are starting to settle, as we see it with ENT. In the beginning, there were heavy debates concerning ENT, but they now get less attention or even stopped due to the fact that there are new topics and series to discuss and that that ENT is now a part of the history of star trek. And remember: we also had those debates about "real Star Trek" in the early days of TNG, but today, TNG is an integral part of the Star Trek lore. I hope that this is the fate of the Star Trek series and movies we today call "new Trek" and that this time will be remembered as the second golden age of Star Trek and that the franchise will continue to thrive. Live Long and Prosper

I just like Star Trek, ancient, old, and new... period. Damn, these are so many good points, though, Tri.

yeah i remember on TNG when they first encountered the borg, exploring their ship they found a borg nursery, then later they said borg don't have babies, they only assimilate new species. and that point about the number of decks in Nemesis, that's a new enterprise after enterprise D was destroyed in generations. then so it could have more decks than the one before

I was 7 years old when Trek premiered in 1966 and have watched them all till I got to Discovery, I was one of those that pointed out all the inconsistencies after I watched the first few episodes. I think older Star Trek fans have a harder time with change than younger Trek fans. That being said, I've had many discussions with people on Facebook Star Trek groups and have revised my way of thinking. I now know that there were many inconsistencies in the first treks and your video confirmed all that I had realized were inconsistencies. I now can watch Discovery and Picard and just enjoy them for what they are. They are still Trek, just different. Very good video by the way, enjoy all of yours.

Thank you for providing a safe haven for us to co-exist much like how George Takei worked hard on star peace to provide a safe haven for those who like BOTH Star Trek and Star Wars. I too am a Star Peace'er myself. One inconsistency that I have noticed was them saying that there's no money in the future, but yet, in Encounter at Far-point you see Beverly Crusher buying stuff with money. And you hear Janeway saying that she bought something as well in the Alpha Quadrant and such. Which makes me make minor wounded animal noises every time they go to pay for the pizza in Star Trek IV - The Voyage Home. (Almost called it "The Undiscovered Country" But I dropped out of warp before I could complete it. End of confession)

Thanks for another good video. I don't think inconsistencies but hiccups in the timeline that's why we have temporal investigations. It could also be trek and from what you've shown us the man himself, showing us that no matter how far we've come at times we're all still human and make mistakes.

This was a great video. Very interesting to see all the mistakes and you make great points!

My pet peeve has always been that Kahn in STII -The Wrath of Kahn recognized Checkov when he wasn't in the episode 'Space Seed". Star Trek has always been full of inconsistencies

Apologies if it is mentioned later in the comments, but there is a MAJOR inconsistency that was over looked. That being that in the TOS, there was mention of going to the Galatic Center (center of the galaxy) how can that be when the Constitution Class had a MAX warp speed of 8 (even with the implementation ofa new warp scale on TNG). Also that in Star Trek 5, with Spocks brother Sybock, they allegedly went again to the center of the galaxy. Yet in the TNG episode that included the Sytherians, they programmed Lt. Barclay and he introuduced a speed far beyond warp to take the Enterprise 30K light years, near the center of the galaxy. (Not even to the center fully but a fast mode of propulsion was used) that one has always stood out to me.

All of discovery's inconsistencies with explanation: The new Klingon look: how long have you been watching star trek? The federation would never go to war: have you heard of the Dominion (seriously watch deep space 9) The federation will always find a way to reason with species: have you head of the Borg (even gene roddenberry introduced them) The use of hologram technology: this could actually have a canon explanation for it. It could be said that the federation developed hologram communications however at the time it was so energy inefficient that they removed the holoemitters neccessary from the ships and kinda put the tech on the back burner until late 24 century where they created the EMH. The spore drive: seriously this has been explained in the show. First off, the technology has been highly classified (not even captain Pike knew about it until he came on to the discovery. That's how secretive this whole project was. I'm mean seriously this thing is more secretive than the omega directive). Second, the spore drive was only on the cross field class ship and two were ever created into existence. The USS discovery and The USS Glenn. of you got past episode three you will know what happened to the Glenn leaving the discovery with the only spore drive on existence. And finally, "officially" according to starfleet records the Discovery was destroyed in combat with all hands and was never to be spoken of again. Unofficially however The discovery went to 930 years into the future to protect the sphere data from control. If you're going to complain about Discovery complain about how messy the writing is. That's the main problem with the show.

I like the new trek but out of Discovery and Picard I prefer Picard. Its amazing how so many Trek fans are closed to the idea of something new. Great video and very good points made.

7:24 - Family Guy made a joke about that in the episode "Not All Dogs Go to Heaven." At a Star Trek convention, these two nerds discuss that inconsistency, with one of the nerds saying that the reason Scotty didn't remember was that because he was caught in a transporter pattern buffer for 75 years and Riker mentioned the less than 0.003% signal degradation which would have accounted for Scotty's memory loss. Just then, Patrick Stewart and Jonathan Frakes walk up and proceed to beat them up. Patrick Stewart: Give me $6.00!

One of the odd things that really stands out to me is the way the Defiant docks at DS9 it docks its deflector section first and every master system display we see shows no docking port there but we see people walking on and off the Defiant and if they are using the transport why walk to the dalking port before transport. Also odd that DS9 has that port suited for docking the defiant why not just dock it at a normal docking point. its still my favourite ship and series though.

Here's my fancy dancing around. Spaceballs!

I hope you make a part 2, 3,... of this video. It's fun to watch this list

How DARE you....Hahaha. great video man. Always enjoy them.

Great video, and much appreciative of your long research of these episodes/inconsistencies. I Like old, middle, new and future trek.

One of the supposed inconsistencies that I constantly had thrown in my face about Discovery was that in the TOS episode The Tholian Web, Spock and Chekov discuss, after seeing how the crew of the Defiant had apparently turned on and slaughtered each other that there has never been a record of a mutiny aboard a Federation Starship. So, therefore, Michael Burnham committing mutiny against Captain Georgiou was a violation of canon. However just a few episodes after The Tholian Web, in Whom Goes Destroy, we meet former Starfleet captain Garth of Izor, who's crew, years earlier, rebelled -- mutinied -- against him when in a fit of madness he ordered them to wipe out a civilization, leading to his commitment to a mental institution. So that bit of canon was broken years before Discovery.

Thank you for this video. It put into words a lot of what I have been thinking. One more thing on the Klingons that I have always found funny. Not only did we have the major change in TMP but they have also gone though subtle changes though out the later series. Worfs ridges goes though a couple small changes throughout TNG. He kind of looks funky in season 1. What’s nuts about all this though is that I have always thought inconsistencies where a part of trek. It’s one of the things trekies like to do; talk about them and try to work them out to find explanations. I enjoyed doing that with people online (a long time ago). Then suddenly we aren’t allowed to do that with discovery. It’s to bad. Anyways good job.

My explanation of Odan and the Trill is, he was a special kind of symbiont that subsumed his host's personality, and that required a different species of host to handle it.

One glaring inconsistency I remembered seeing was in an episode of DS9 when it was discovered that Dr. Bashir's parents had genetic modification done to Julian There was a character that made reference to the eugenics wars when Khan nearly conquered the Earth and that this person said that happened 300 years earlier In the TOS episode of "Space Seed" Khan had done these things in 1996 which was 300 years before TOS was set, by the timeline of DS9 being set in the 24th century, just like TNG, this would've been 400 years ago

"Olde Trek was ALWAAAAYS consistent." Oh, you cheeky blighter. I think we can agree there are (at least) three levels of consistency: Within an episode, within the series, and within general canon. Bad storywriting leads to "But you just said a scene ago..."

Another amazing video keep up the good work!

The best example of an inconsistency I'm aware of is the end of Star Trek the Undiscovered Country originally it was a joint venture between Starfleet intelligence and a rogue element of the Klingon Empire to assassinate the Chancellor. And the the original VHS tape has this ending and it was the ending I saw in the cinema but the DVD collection and 50th anniversary Blu-ray disc has the ending that just shows it was apart of a Klingon conspiracy. Now if they're kept this ending in it would been used to lay the groundwork for section 31 when it was introduced in Deep Space Nine and continued in every other franchise since.

To keep myself sane I usually think that Enterprise, Discovery and the rest of New trek are in a parallel universe lol

I honestly want to thank you for this video. I understand what canonical Star Trek is. But I also understand how people are trying to expand and make Star Trek even greater. And I appreciate their efforts because I know they love Star Trek. I'm all for whatever keeps the franchise going. 💪🏼💯

Great video as always, love your channel.

Great video, I completely agree with all your statements and more hard core fans of Star Trek need to relax a bit IMHO. I don't know if you caught this, but in Star Trek First Contact: 1. Picard is able to turn off the safety protocol for the holodeck (he does not do this verbally, I'm assuming that he keys it in when selecting the holodeck program). Also, he is wandering around the ship and the borg do not recognise him at all, though we are shown in other episodes (hue, and in the picard series), that the borg do recognise him as Locutus. I think that alot of the complainers need to calm down and use their imagination. A big complaint I always hear is how the technology looks more advanced for prequel shows (Enterprise, Discovery), then for TOG, TNG, DS9, etc. The truth is that its to do with the budgets of the shows. There was not that much money back in the 60's compared to the 90's, or today. Klingons were just dirty rough looking humans in different uniforms, and now they have forehead ridges. Just accept it and enjoy the show and the story. Phasers, torpedoes, the ships, explosions, etc, will change because special effects get better, computers and software used in the post production get more powerful, and more cost effective. And I don't know about everyone else, but this video was so entertaining, I personally would not mind seeing more, even "hours" as you claim. I would enjoy it. Keep up the great work!

Scotty's memory was affected by being in transporter purgatory for so long. There's even a reference when they bring him out that there's a 3% loss or something to that effect.

I always enjoy your videos. You tend to bring a fresh perspective that is also very welcoming, regardless of what side of a debate someone may fall on. The inconsistencies are certainly there in "old" Trek as well as "new" Trek -- though I'm less clear on what constitutes new Trek (do we begin with the 2009 reboot, ST Discovery, or do we go back to ENT or even TNG?). As for the inconsistencies, I think it is more profound when found within a given series or period. TOS, for example, has lots of inconsistencies; largely these are tied to back story (e.g., Vulcan being conquered). The same with the Klingons as part of the Federation (doesn't Q refer to them as conquered by humans?). I think these are moments of "finding one's way" in putting a series together. Inconsistencies between series, however, strike me as being acts of reading or, as Bloom would put it, misreading for the sake of creative interpretation and transformation of intertextual activation of material. Some inconsistencies are (1) rose-tinted glasses even for script writers, (2) minor errors arising from telling new stories in a convoluted continuity (all longstanding franchises face this problem), or (3) deliberate disrespect and dismissal of past continuity (and often of those fans viewed as traditional). The third is what most fans (I think) are upset about -- and often attribute to other acts of inconsistency. I know I felt this when watching the Abrams films and even a bit with Discovery (I'm just watching this series now, so forgive me for not engaging it more closely). The minor inconsistencies can often be overlooked or, as you noted, explained away. The major ones, however, are more difficult to fit into a broader continuity (e.g., holographic tech in discover at a level beyond TNG era tech or Ensign Chekov being on the Enterprise in the Kelvin timeline, when in the prime line he wouldn't even be old enough to be in Starfleet). When an inconsistency is so profound that it disrupts the narrative world, and not just a minor plot point, then we need to address it if we want continued continuity. And that is where creative writers can come in and patch up continuity (e.g., in the world of comics, Kurt Busiek was a master at this kind of writing with the Avengers in the late '90s). So to build on your observations, I think we could refine and classify these inconsistencies a bit more precisely -- in extent, type, and context. On a personal note, I am enjoying Discovery (and I was surprised to find myself feeling that way!), though I wish they had set the series ten or twenty years after Nemesis and simply referred to the "new" Klingons as an ethnic faction that rose to power etc. That would help with the technology continuity cognitive dissonance I keep having (though that would also negate the "fascinating" plot line with Sarak). Finally, let me say that while I do care about continuity, I fully agree and appreciate your main point: Star Trek is entertainment and a fan is a person who enjoys Trek, in whatever form or forms they embrace it. There are some wonderful values that Trek articulates and exhorts, and those values - as you noted - do transcend things like a ridged forhead on a Romulan or a cloaked ship in ENT. Thanks again for another thoughtful and interesting video. :) (p.s. - sorry for such a long comment. I was just caught up in thinking through the ideas lol)

You are absolutely right! 🖖🏼

How long did it took you to watch all these episodes and movies?

I love the way you address your detractors!

Amen! Thanks for doing this.

People who worked with Roddenberry remember that he used to handle canon not on a series-by-series basis nor an episode-by-episode basis, but point by point. If he changed his mind on something, or if a fact in one episode contradicted what he considered to be a more important fact in another episode, he had no problem declaring that specific point non-canon.

I have often expressed the view that if the info on the Borg and the cure was classified, then that might be the vague whispers and rumor the Hansons found

I don't dislike Nu Trek because of inconsistencies. I dislike it because it is untrue to Gene L. Coon's original vision of a utopian future. It also relies on emotional storytelling instead of cerebral plotlines, and that is its ultimate betrayal of the Star Trek spirit.

I don't like Discovery which is "new" trek or voyagar which is "old" trek but if you do I good with that and so should everyone be. I like Picard, the first season has its problems but have you ever watched the first seasons of TNG or DS9 they had there problems too. So like you said just watch what you like and leave others to there own taste.

A wonderful, well produced video. As much as I like enterprise, it certainly created a lot of messes with continuity. Expanding on the inconsistencies related to balance of terror, when the enterprise incident was made, they made it seem like that was the first time the romulans used a cloaking device. They completely ignored balance of terror.

Back when Voyager was airing w Fandom had a term YATI ( Yet Another Trek Inconsistencie) We had contests to see who could spot the most.

In regards to the TNG episode "Relics" when Scotty made reference to Kirk pulling the Enterprise out of mothballs to look for him That episode of TNG was filmed before the scenes in the opening of "Generations" which would explain how Scotty didn't have an explanation for Kirk's alleged death

Personally with regards to Discovery, I feel it would've worked better as a sequel to Voyager/TNG films. The setup could then be a Starfleet experiment/mission to explore into the Delta Quadrant, build on the data brought back by Voyager and see if there were any other ships transported by the Caretaker. The Spore Drive could function as a way to address the vast distances. Though on the subject of Inconsistencies, in TNG it was stated that Warp travel would have to be restricted as it was damaging sub-space to the point where Warp travel wouldn't be able to function. Now to the Borg in Enterprise, the signal makes sense as to tip the Borg off but it's possible that they needed the encounter with the Enterprise D for the final piece in the puzzle. As to Starfleet's apparent lack of knowledge on the Borg, I prescribe to the theory that Section 31 covered up the events of the episode Regeneration. It fits with how S31 operates, especially if they're trying to come up with a counter to the Borg or to simply use the tech for their own ends. Likewise Pholx's cure could've just been buried by S31 or simply forgotten about even the amount of time that passed before the Borh rocked up.

The only ones i can explain, with any certiainty, the klingons and romulans change in appearence from TOS to TNG was due to the penny pinching during the filming of TOS. With TNG they had a larger budget, and so they could make those two races look the way they intended. As for the 22nd century encounter with the Borg, the Borg themselves never directly introduce themselves as such. Their opening hail in that case was simply "you will be assimilated, resistenace is futile" But you're right that information about the message and what not should have been archived. The only reason i can think of for it not being so, is they knew the message would take 200 years to get to the delta quadrant. And they probably thought the Borg would take the same amount of time again to get to the alpha quadrant, not being aware of transwarp. Another possibility would be the temporal prime directive. We don't know when that was written, but its possible that at some point in time information about the borg was erased from the archives by someone from the future who was aware of the fact that the borg encountered were from a future where the federation was amply aware of them. And in fact it was the federation being unaware that allowed for the federation to learn from its defeats and make proper ships to combat them. Before I go thougn, i would like to say that I do enjoy new trek. I understand that a lot of writer issues and also who holds what copyrights determines why new trek looks the way it does. Finally I enjoyed this video immensly. I would do vids like this myself if i knew what i was doing with editing software. Looking forward to the next one.

Very well done. I love that you mentioned the cloaks in the mirror universe. I noticed that too. Another is Alexander Rozhenko. According to memory alpha, he was born in 2366 yet all through TNG he is a child of roughly 6 to 9. Then according to memory alpha he joins the klingon defence forse in 2374, when we see him in DS9. So in the span of 8 years he became an adult. At best he should be a little older than Molly O'brien. And even her age is suspect but at least she stays closer to her true age. But she still is only supposed to be like 2 when Miles takes the post at DS9. But it again just shows inconsistencies.

By all Series are inconsistencies. That this normal by as long Franchise like Star Trek or James Bond

I used to be bothered by inconsistencies, but I now accept that being a series that is so long, mistakes will exist. Can’t expect the writers to remember every single thing. Sometimes, things have to be ignored for some stories to work, however unfortunate that is.

There also Star Trek 4 where the Enterprise crew travel back in time to the 80s, and several episodes of Voyager where the crew travel back in time to the 90s even though the Eugenics Wars would be going on at that time.

I really love this episode. Its really good, and is a great example of how Star Trek can still be awesome, but at times a little bit inconsistent. Greetings from the UK by the way! 🖖

The self-destruct authorisation on the diferent ships was what puzzled me most, three different officers for the starships Enterprise, 2 I think for the Defiant and with Voyager, just the most senior officer- Captain Janeway. Just going out on a limb here but perhaps diffeent ships have different personalised options for the self destruct function and command override systems?

Thank you! Nostalgia often puts rose colored glasses on fans. Well, that and the fact that complaining online has become big business. Discovery and Picard have better first seasons than TNG. That's fact. Now, I know the politics of new Trek writers, but watching everything from my center right perspective, I really don't understand what the fuss is about. I'm just watching everyone on both sides flipping out at each other, and I'm here like... soooooooooo Picard saving a bunch of Androids from Romulans before becoming an Android himself while saving the universe from a big space octopus is a metaphor for Brexit. Umm...what? Hey, whatever. If that's what one gets out of it, that's cool. Frankly, I love the updated look of the 1701, and can't wait for Strange New Worlds. In my mind, inconsistencies can be attributed to the events of First Contact. That was my justification for some of the issues with Enterprise about 20 years ago. Now you have Michael Burnam's mother doing extensive timeline tampering in season 2 of Discovery. Cool. That pretty much explains everything that everyone is complaining about. Now, with the adjustments that the writers are making towards fan reaction, let's see what story we get out of that.

I've always loved Star Trek for the alien cultures they encounter, but for me I personally love the "new trek" ship designs more then the "old" designs

I always treat inconcistancies in Trek as an opportunity for fun, creative thought exercises. Why did another Intrepid class have the same mess hall as Voyager? Because Neelix rearranged it based on pre-existing variant plans in the starfleet database. Why do Trill look different in TNG? Because there two subspecies of Trill. It's fun. And I love doing the same for Disco. But some inconsistencies are there that you can't talk your way out of and at that point you just have to sit back and enjoy the work for what it is. I wouldn't really mind the New Trek haters if that was all they disliked. Some people just can't suspend their disbelief as much as others and that's ok. And some people just don't like the writing and the pacing of the new show and that is also ok. But way WAY too often these people start talking about how the makers don't know what they're doing and don't respect the show and hate Trek and the Cast are talentless hacks and that's where I draw the line because then they're just being vicious and cruel. Like there is a keen difference between saying that you don't like an actor's particular style and saying that they are a terrible actor, or an ugly actor (I once had an argument with a guy who said that he didn't like Tilly, not because she was a bad actor but because she was too fat to be a Starfleet officer) and you only need to see the level of detail the writers and crew put into the tiniest details to see that these people have a passion for what they're doing, and all they are doing is creating the Trek show that they want to make that has its own direction and it's own feel that has maximum respect for what came before without feeling confined by it and that is exactly what any new Trek should be.

"I no want to. I no want... insert new Star Trek series here" seems to be a running theme for the Star Trek fan base. I seem to remember a lot of people whining and whingeing about Star Trek Enterprise and then some months or years after the last episode aired. "want more Star Trek" or " why did Star Trek Enterprise get cancelled we want it back". It seems quite Commonplace in the past 20 years for fans to complain when they get something new that's not quite what they were expecting and then as soon as it's over going "oh I didn't want that too end I was just starting to like it actually. It's not fair it's not my fault people don't like it." It makes being a fan of any franchise difficult

Regardless of mistakes, errors, or inconsistencies, I am and always have been a Trekkie. It is science fiction after all. Every Trek series has brought me happiness, joy, intrigue, and wonder. IDIC can not be stated enough. Peace and long life 🖖🏽

I always thought of what was going on with JJ Trek, Discovery and etc. as more of a retcon than "going against canon". The production crew didn't wanna meticulous re-create things as they looked in TOS, cuz sometimes you just want things to be different! Instead of a convoluted list of reasons why things look different, we're just being asked to imagine/accept that "this is what it always looked like". I can roll with that. i read comics as a kid :P

All of what you said was spot on!! For the life of me I couldn’t understand the absolute hate that discovery got. What made it even more bizarre was that the ones who hated it were still watching it just to be mad… 🤯 And like you said their main argument was the Klingons which I actually didn’t mind because they actually looked like aliens and I understood that they were going for the savage angry look. But I also noticed that for some strange reason Michael burnham received a ton of hate as well for whatever reason. If you didn’t like discovery then that’s fine, I wasn’t a big fan of VOY and DS9 was mostly ok to me but it’s just strange hating a ST show to the point of trying to ruin it for all of us. Thanks for this explanation 🙏🏾

The other thing is... Every show is it's own thing. Star Trek is Star Trek, Nex Gen is next gen, DS9 and so on. Shows deserve to be critqued based on their own merits. The idea a show has to do things a certain way or look a certain way just because they exist in a continutiy with other shows limits what creatives can do. Opinons are always personal, don't take someone elses.

Aside from the Scotty and "safety protocols" issues; "Relics" being written prior to "Generations" I can only guess the writers; A) weren't paying attention, B) didn't think anyone would notice, or C) weren't completely paying attention to their own in-universe details. I like the explanation from Sussman regarding the Borg in "Enterprise" that because the Borg never identified themselves they made OFFICIAL First Contact with the Enterprise-D, though it could also just be an alternate timeline given the Temporal Cold War. If it came from Series A, but appeared in Series C (prequel) then I could easily guess; 1) unintended temporal chicanery, 2) retcon, or 3) None of the writers cared to really explain why. Cloaks? Writer A thought it was cool, but Writer B decided to pretend they didn't exist. DS9-MU: alternate? ENT; Suliban: Temporal Cold War, Romulans: It looks cool. Novels: archaic stealth not "cloak"

My thought about the clone murder: It's not necessarily an inconsistency. It can be explained away that Odo was referring to Bajoran law, and Starfleet has different ones regarding illegal clones. It'sd nitpicking really, but it's a possible explanation.

Dude you are totally correct, well done for this I hope at least one of these people will realise their mistake and start loving all the new Star Trek, by gosh soon their will be plenty of choice to go around! :)

I'm putting this one on my Facebook page! That was so TRUE!

Yeah sadly this seems to be the case in every fandom. It just is to simple to just not like something and not attack others if they disagree with you. Sadly some things just won’t likely change. Good video though you are way more patient then me I wouldn’t be able to go through logging all these. Bravo man and well done.

I noticed when the Enterprise -E came about I noticed someone forgot to set the specs for the ship and writers seemed to put how many decks they felt it should have. It was a much bigger ship in there minds I guess. Lol yet they must have forgot that it had less decks than the D.

I've probably said this a few times on your videos, especially ones that detail different ships, costumes, etc. My biggest gripe with the fandom, aside from the vocal gatekeepers, is not enough people can just accept changes in our real life special effects to making the shows look better. My parents were huge Star Trek fans, and they said the fandom has always been like this, ever since the first movie came out. A lot of people wrote into the magazines and discussed at early conventions the changes to the designs of everything, especially the klingons. My mom always argued, as an artist herself, that art changes, and that this was the first big budget Star Trek film, in a time when movies were getting better special effects. NOT to mention a certain other series had come around and blew people's expectations. I've watched all the series. I have no issue with any of the changes to the special effects, the costumes, the make-up. I can logically get around to the in-verse inconsistencies about it. I definitely that the Roddenberry quote to heart. I just see it how it needs to be seen. I want more Discovery/Picard/Kelvin movie effects. It's what I expect the future to look like. I expect shiny consoles and holographic displays, because WE ARE GETTING THERE IN OUR OWN TIMELINE. I expect war to be brutal, because its war, and because we can show a lot more realistic destruction. And when it comes to the alien races, I want them TO LOOK ALIEN. I love the new look. It makes them look dangerous, as a war-oriented species living on a very harsh world to be like. As for story, sci-fi is changing. Look at the early 00s. It was getting more serialized. This is no longer about reruns making money. This is about telling a consistent story. You can have episodic series that still tell a serial story. And I should also point out that DS9 was far more serialized, and that people hated it then but love it now. So Discovery having a very serialized story was great. There's some depth to all the characters. Anyways, keep up the good work. Hopefully you'll be able to change some people opinions and learn to just love Trek. Atleast we have Trek. Still.

Great video. I always look at stuff like this as a timeline or universe shift. I think it had great writing and acting. I always like new perspectives:)

Good video... GREAT summary and conclusion!!!

Just like I said to the housecoat gamer when he reviewed the crossfield class in sto (star trek online ) but I think that just triangulm stated this better then I did. " Hindsight is not always 20 20."

Well done, and thanks.I like Trek. My opinions will always be no more than that.😷⚖🕊💪

Funny, I never remembered the Borg-Baby. :-D

I've recently been going through TOS again on Netflix while working from home.. that can barely keep the continuity in its own seasons haha

Nu Trek hater here. I like your opinion and the way you voice it here. But I think, this isn't about nitpicks like the ones presented here. It's about fundamental mistakes. I think, the canon issues are far from the biggest issues here, although I find the design and technology level of Starfleet alone simply unessessary as they can't be explained in universe. The biggest problem is the writing. Most plots makes zero sense, the characters talk and behave like ordinary human beeings instead of evolved ones. AND: To me at least, the core of what Star Trek is is missing. There is no more exploration of the human condition, the solving problems by understanding the viewpoint of the oposition, no growing as a person by expanding one's horizon. Instead, we get pure evil villains, we cheer after killing the enemy and we don't care about different opinions at all.

CBS owns the franchise and we do not, so we can deal with it or refuse to consume Star Trek.

Oh the only one I can kinda explain is the sovereign class one gaining decks in the separate movie. It went through a refit in between FC and Nemesis. As for the number they do in the same movie there is no getting around that mistake lol.