Answer (1 of 14): The term “continuity error” gets thrown around a lot in reference to Trek, oftentimes erroneously. Some of the most famous “continuity errors” can be explained with a little imagination and common sense. WHY DOES KHAN KNOW CHEKHOV IF CHEKHOV WASN’T INTRODUCED TO STAR TREK UNTI...
  • Solumbran@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    3 months ago

    The red angel, who is supposed to be either Burnham or her mother, and neither of them had a reason to go back in time to save a random church, and teleport it to a random planet. Also absolutely no mention of how they would achieve such a thing.

    • ValueSubtracted@startrek.websiteMEnglish
      0·
      3 months ago

      Gabrielle basically used the church as an experiment in altering history.

      Time’s motion depends on the observer, on the action. The people I was able to move from Earth to Terralysium, as they call my planet, are thriving. Their survival means that time is fluid. The future can be changed. Maybe the past, as well.

      • Solumbran@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        3 months ago

        It feels a bit pulled out of nowhere though. If it was the plan from the start, it’s not very good writing.

        • ᓚᘏᗢ@piefed.socialEnglish
          0·
          3 months ago

          Lmao it’s Star Trek, of course the writing isn’t good. You guys claim to love all the shit writing in other Trek shows, so why do so many of you shit on Discovery for ir in particular, I wonder?