Kurtzman and Orci, I just don’t buy it. I have watched everything Star Trek since the first episode of TOS. Of course there have been occasional slips in continuity and timeline. The new movie plot has nothing to do with the intricacies of time travel stories or quantum physics. You — with malice aforethought — just blew up Vulcan! Now every story based on Vulcan in the various Series, Movies, etc., is, what, gone? And for what? You could have blown up the Andorians if you wanted to be showy. I think you just wanted to be edgy and show how you could do something shocking.

Let’s see if you really are good writers: For the sequel, 29th century refugees from a Dominion and/or Borg dominated future manage to get back to Kirk and Spock, and they are forced to find a way to undo your first movie’s timeline, saving both 23rd century Vulcan and 24th century Romulus, because both are vital to save the future. You can have my idea free of charge.

Never questioned it. But my issue was WITH the dialog in those stories, so using the dialog to justify the dialog isn’t very persuasive.”

Actually, you said you do not buy a lot my refutations, but that is okay :) I used dialog to justify dialog, because I wanted to demonstrate how “BOT” is internally consistent and consistent with the other episodes and movies that I had cited. However, I did draw on concepts external to Star Trek, concepts such as the purpose of nuclear weapons and the nature of cobalt devices.

” My original point was BOT contained some credibility-stretching elements that, if ignored by the new writers, would not bother me one little bit. Star Trek has ignored plenty of elements in its own backstory when it so desired, so I don’t have an issue with this new movie continuing in this tradition.”

I myself think the credibility-stretching elements can be credible if one can accept that the Romulans in their paranoia and arrogance wanted to annihilate the allies, and that in order to survive, the allies had to drive the Romulans all the way back to their capital, the Romulan Star System (I can imagine the retreating Romulans carrying out a scorched earth policy, vaporizing facilities and bodies, a la Nazi Germany and Russia during World War II.)

Yes, Star Trek ignored plenty of backstory elements: episodes and movies produced after 1992 have ignored the Eugenics Wars having occurred between 1992 to 1996 (I guess that these wars were the same as the World War III, and that the Augments imposed a new calendar on nations they had conquered, a la Orwell’s “1984″.)

” And regardless of the exact size of the Neutral Zone (let’s face it – it changed depending on who was writing a given episode, clearly), the idea that an interstellar empire was still running on impulse with their primary star/homeworld less than 75 light minutes from Federation space is pretty daffy. Could it be true? Yes. But it’s daffy. And ultimately, that was my point.”

I think the only other episode that hinted at the exact width of the Neutral Zone was “The Enemy”. As I mentioned previously, if the Romulan ship in that episode crossed the the Neutral Zone straight across, the width would be 2.5 light years, but if the ship crossed diagonally, the width could be less than a light years (maybe even 75 light minutes.)

Since the Romulan empire used subspace radios and fired enveloping high-energy plasma that can travel at warp speeds (”BOT”), then they probably run on warp. And since their cloaking system consumed much power and the plasma weapon took all the energy of the Romulan ship in “BOT”, that one ship had to sacrifice warp speed and resort to impulse power (stealth and firepower vs. speed).

Based on my calculations, their primary star/homeworld is at least 75 light minutes from Federation space. If one can accept that the allies had no choice but to drive the Romulans back to their homeworld, and that Earth had to negotiate the installation of outposts literally on top of Romulus because of the treacherous nature of the enemy (the Romulans got to keep the remainder of their empire and their homeworld from being obliterated), perhaps the idea of a thin Neutral Zone would not sound that daffy (But why did the allies stop short of conquering Romulus itself? Perhaps, they achieved their goals, a la George H.W. Bush, did not want to fight a bloody ground war with a race of suicdal warriors at best, and did not want to commit genocide at worst.)

I meant “…eighteen hundred years prior to that episode”.

“All this imply that Vulcans had lost the ability to travel to the stars and did not regain that ability until about a century before humans gained that ability themselves.”

I meant “…about two centuries before humans gained that ability themselves (and one century before they achieved spaceflight)”.

Oops, I meant “…they did not like being seen by aliens”.

“My refutations were based on dialogue from the episodes that I cited.”

Never questioned it. But my issue was WITH the dialog in those stories, so using the dialog to justify the dialog isn’t very persuasive.

My original point was BOT contained some credibility-stretching elements that, if ignored by the new writers, would not bother me one little bit. Star Trek has ignored plenty of elements in its own backstory when it so desired, so I don’t have an issue with this new movie continuing in this tradition.

And regardless of the exact size of the Neutral Zone (let’s face it – it changed depending on who was writing a given episode, clearly), the idea that an interstellar empire was still running on impulse with their primary star/homeworld less than 75 light minutes from Federation space is pretty daffy. Could it be true? Yes. But it’s daffy. And ultimately, that was my point.