Imagine Nero destroying the Earth first, and O/K still declaring “no, we’re done with time travel even though it’s possible”. It’s manifestly ludicrous, but no more so except to the audience; the characters won’t see it that way.

As to those other debatably rollback-worthy events — they are indeed debate-worthy. So long as it’s a known option, it must be considered. To ignore it is a defect, perhaps forgivable but a defect nonetheless. (TOS, of course, had more or less deliberately random stardates, meaning one can never be entirely sure that the time-travel episodes didn’t happen after all the others, and the consequences never known. ASSIGNMENT: EARTH might well have been the last episode…)

To paraphrase Douglas Adams, “Time travel: loathe it or like it, you can’t ignore it.” Hence the desirability of doing a clean reboot with time travel declared off-limits from start.

But of course they can always count on the fans to patch things for them. I myself just figured out a credible way for those post-apocalyptic cavemen in BATTLEFIELD EARTH to fly thousand-year-old Harriers, and I didn’t even like that movie…

I’m not sure how that would preclude Starfleet from making use of the recorded telemetry from the Narada (no doubt brought aboard one of the shuttles by one of the 800 survivors from the USS Kelvin) and the debris salvaged from the area of the attack over the next two decades.

“Imagine the Warren Commission discovering that Lee Harvey Oswald was from 2063 and considering it an unimportant detail.”

Who says that Starfleet would consider any of the details of these events to be unimportant?

What I said was that one of the writers of the sequel has made clear that they won’t be telling another story involving time travel. That is not the same thing as suggesting that Starfleet is going to pretend it did not happen or ignore the potential scientific ramifications of these events.

Suggestion: reading comprehension.

Try reading the post to which the response was made. That may help you to view the statement in its appropriate context.

I know this is fiction, but some of the points I’ve made are about as contrived as a really bad slasher film. This is the creative team behind the series “Lost” which is the most incredible plot-storyline-continuity effort there’s ever been, especially considering it has spanned 4 seasons. I’m disappointed because this brilliant group of talent couldn’t be more imaginative with their plot points in roughly 2 hours with well-known establisged characters–and believe me–I’m not a fan with an obsession for canon. Kirk’s portrayal as a delinquent who has to have his own way is the equvalent of Annikan Skywalker’s spoiled rotten brat. I don’t care what kind of timeline tampering you have it just doesn’t ring true. Now unless there was a large amount of exposition left on the cutting room floor, ther’s some holes in the script you could drive the Enterprise through. I wanted this to be the greatest movie of all time & it wasn’t. In fact, despite all the money & talent, it’s not even the best Trek film. However, like many of you–and Spiderman 3 is a good example–dood Star Trek is not as good as great Star Trek, but it’s better than no Trek at all.

Anyone?