Help icon

Maintenance links

Memory Alpha talk pages are for improving the article only.
For general discussion on this episode, visit the VOY forum at The Trek BBS.

Galileo parallels?Edit

"The plight of Gegen and his promotion of the Distant Origin Theory, and being labeled a heretic in his battle against established doctrine, is in all likelihood an allegory of Galileo's fight against the Catholic Church's belief in a geocentric model of the solar system."

While a valid comparison, I think the allegory here is more of a comparison of Darwin's fight against established thinking to get his theory of evolution accepted (and later, the Scopes trial, etc.) -- Renegade54 19:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

There are many more parallels between Galileo and Gegen then there are between Darwin and Gegen. I think you're misled by the fact that the Voth are portrayed as evolved dinosaurs: the show (somewhat ironically) presents evolution as a concept which is not disputed by either humans or Voth (except for the part where a common ancestry implies a distant planet of origin). Of course, the general theme is the conflict between science and religious doctrine, so the episode can be applied to both, but the story of a scientist questioning established doctrine and being forced to recant by the religious authorities is much closer to Galileo's than to Darwin's. 11:09, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

The reference is irrelevant, improperly worded, false, and unacceptable. It has been deleted... -<unsigned>

...and has since been re-added. Thank you for playing! --From Andoria with Love 20:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Chakotay mentions during the trial that Voyager's database has a record of Earth's fossil history and that the common genetic markers are in numerous Earth species. This was discovered by the Doctor's investigations on Voyager -- and Chakotay was kidnapped before this research started and isolated from the crew until after the trial. It doesn't seem likely he could have come to this conclusion independently.

The article as it is is not accurate. The Catholic Church didn't have a belief in a geocentric universe, and had actually funded folks like Copernicus in research opposing the idea of geocentrism. I believe that the statement of the allegory is valid. There certainly seems to be an allegory to the situation between the Catholic Church and Galileo, but I think it does need to be slightly reworded in order to fit in line with history. Lazerlike42 22:58, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Computer System: Bits or Quads?Edit

I was just watching the episode, and noticed that it was mentioned that Voyagers computer database is "in simple binary". This seems a direct conflict with VOY: "Future's End" when they have to convert to handle Binary. This was mentioned in that episodes talk page. Is there any more evidence one way or the other for Voyagers computer system? Considering they are always referring to information in ??quads (gigaquads, kiloquads), I would have to say that this was the error. Thoughts? -- Kooky 21:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It was an error. It was stated in TNG too that the jump from bits to quads was an important leap in computer science.

Hogan? Edit

It's mentioned here (and a few other places, notably the article on Hogan) that the bones the Voth found were that of Hogan, but this seems to be extrapolation on MA's part. It is proven that they were human, and that it was a crewman of the USS Voyager (and these two points are critical plot points as well), as well as that a gold engineering uniform was found there (doesn't necessarily mean that the uniform belonged to the owner of the skeleton as well, but as there were no other skeletons mentioned it's a reasonable assumption). The cave does look similar to that of the one on Hakon IV where Hogan met his end, but it could be just a reused set; I'm sure that Hogan wasn't the only Voyager crewman (even in the engineering division) who died in a cave, either on or off-screen, to that point. What has made MA come to the conclusion that it is Hogan's bones when this is never stated in canon? --The Time Traveller 23:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Info from the scripts which then also appeared in the "Star Trek Encyclopedia". --Jörg 05:35, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
There is another Voyager crewmember who died - Tuvok's companion when he visited the planet where the people age in reverse. It could have been him. Avengah 14:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Not really. Can't remember if he was brought back on Voyager, buried on the planet or vaporized with a shuttle, but I'm pretty sure that he wasn't simply left in a cave. But yes, there is a (small) possibility that the skeleton is not Hogan's. Although Hogan his the most logical candidate and the writers surely were thinking about him doing the episode.
Tuvok's companion, Ensign Bennett, was mentioned to have been put into stasis when he died (why not before!?) and as we didn't see his body again, it's safe to assume he was put on the shuttle and taken back to Voyager. Plus he died on a jungle planet, not a rocky desert one. As for the skeleton, there was one other known casualty on Hanon IV in "Basics"; the blue shirt that followed Chakotay and Tuvok into the same cave Hogan died in. He slipped over the edge of a ledge and was grabbed by the eel. But I agree with the other posters, it was intended to be Hogan, a recurring character, rather than the no name extra played by a stunt man.

Evolution's wrong...or is it? Edit

  • The plight of Gegen and his promotion of the Distant Origin Theory, and being labeled a heretic in his battle against established doctrine is in all likelihood an allegory of Galileo's fight against the Catholic Church's belief in a geocentric model of the solar system or the more current fundamentalist Christian attempts to eliminate the teaching of evolution from American schools. In keeping with this allegory, the name "Gegen" is the German word for "against."

Until it's proven that this is exactly what it was written to represent then we can add it back. — Morder 04:55, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

  • This episode is a reference to the controversy in the United States about evolution VS creationism/intelligent design. By accepting that species change over time, some imply that their origin is one of chance and not predestined greatness; natural selection, however, implies that Human ancestry IS great because our society was adaptive enough to survive millions of years of evolutionary history.

similar to above and will never have a citation — Morder 00:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Removed Edit

Removed the following as uncited. We can't know that unless a source says so.

  • This episode is a reference to the controversy in the United States about evolution VS creationism/intelligent design. By accepting that species change over time, some imply that their origin is one of chance and not predestined greatness; natural selection, however, implies that Human ancestry IS great because our society was adaptive enough to survive millions of years of evolutionary history.--31dot 18:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
What do you mean "we can't know unless a source says so"? Of course this episode is a reference to the controversy of creationism vs evolution. What else do you think it is? I thought it was great that this user added the information. It is _exactly_ what this episode is about. – Distantlycharmed 18:22, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

First, I was only saying that such a statement should be cited, not that it is necessarily untrue. We can't know what the writers of the episode were thinking unless they have said so. As an encyclopedia we should not be making assumptions.--31dot 18:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. Distantlycharmed, without a source, like one of the Companions, this constitutes original research. It isn't our job to put words in the mouths of production staff. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
But it is very clear what this episode is about. There is little room for speculation. No one is saying "the producers were thinking x, y, and z", which would require citation. Plus, there are many times where things are added to the background section, where comparisons are drawn etc to other events/episodes/sources and they dont all cite or know *for sure* if that is what the authors intended. Like when they say "this episode is similar to the TNG episode so and so, in which a,b, and c happened". He is just saying this episode is about the controversy of evolution vs. creationism. – Distantlycharmed 18:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

But that is what is being said; "This episode is a reference to....." says just that. We don't know that for certain, even if it is likely. It could be a coincidence, however unlikely that is. That's why a citation is needed for such a definitive statement. Also, Such assumptions aren't correct just because you see them elsewhere. We just haven't gotten to them yet. --31dot 18:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

By saying "this episode is a reference to..." that is exactly what you are doing, you are saying "the producers were thinking x, y, z." Making a reference to something is an intentional act, one we do not have cited evidence to back up. In addition, those other "examples" you bring up more and more are getting removed from this site, not added to it. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:46, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough, I guess I will then send Braga and Menosky a letter to inquire whether this episode was really intended to draw a comparison between the evolution vs. creationism "controversy" or whether the authors had something totally different in mind perhaps...:)– Distantlycharmed 18:53, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's pretty darned obvious that this is about the opposition of dogmatic peoples to the theory of evolution by natural selection. I don't think it's even necessary to mention it in the article it's so obvious. It could also be extended to refer to any opposition by dogmatic people to any scientific advancement. Since there is no statement by the creators however, it would not be right to include it in the article. I happen to be going through Voyager again at the moment, so I'll be sure to double-check whatever might be said in the DVD extras for Season 3. :-)

Warp Plasma Edit

The Voth scientists' discovery of the Human skull and subsequent search for Voyager are an example of continuity; the skull was left in "Basics, Part II", while the canister of warp plasma at the space station is an acknowledgment of the events of "Fair Trade". Despite these factors, this episode's popularity among fans is largely for its unique presentation: the story is told from the point of view of the Voth, and Voyager and its crew do not even appear until the second act.

The warp plasma retrieved by the Voth came from the Tak Tak, which presumably was obtained during the trade negotiations in "Macrocosm".

There are references to two separate theories for how the Voth obtained Voyager's warp plasma in the background information. Is either one correct and verifiable? If so, which one? I believe that one of these references should be removed or edited as it is currently confusing. --MAX 15:42, February 22, 2010 (UTC)

Gegan was shown taking the warp plasma from a Tak Tak so it came from the trades in "Macrocosm". Besides the "Fair Trade" plasma wasn't even from Voyager and was all used up in an explosion anyway.

René Auberjonois? Edit

I write this knowing that I'll be ridiculed, but still I had to shake this off. 12 minutes and 28 seconds into this episode, the Voth scientists are making an inquiry about the Voyager. At the exact said time they show a rough reconstruction image of the dead crew member they found. First he seems like a grayish alien, but after a few corrections by the people they questioned, a more precise image of a Human figure is shown. Now, is it just me, or the person's head belongs to René Auberjonois (slightly younger version of him)??? Auron85 04:34, July 21, 2010 (UTC)

Removed notes Edit

I've removed the following points:

  • Unusually, this episode is told mainly from a guest character's viewpoint, rather than from that of the Voyager crew. Specifically, the story is told from the point-of-view of the Voth. Indeed, during the episode's teaser and entire first act, Voyager and its crew are not seen; the ship and crew do not appear until the second act.
  • This episode seems to tackle the issue of science vs. religion, a matter that – in reality – has been an issue on Earth for centuries.

Neither note has a citation and both seem quite superfluous, considering what is already on the page. --Defiant 08:55, October 11, 2010 (UTC)

Vulcans Edit

if dinosaurs got warp drive before 2063 why didn't the Vulcans detect them and make first contact eariler– 13:14, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

I think you are missing some amount of perspective and time scale on this. Even the Voth who did not believe they came originally from Earth granted that their civilization had existed within the Delta Quadrant for at least 20 million years. Given that dinosaurs went extinct on Earth 65 million years ago, the Voth would need to have left Earth before that time. While we do not know when precisely the Vulcans developed warp drive, it was likely only as far back as 3000-4000 years before the main Star Trek series take place. The Voth were tens of millions of years gone by that point, and already had 20 million years of recorded history within the Delta Quadrant, far beyond the range of any Vulcan ship to make first contact. --OuroborosCobra talk 21:01, January 14, 2011 (UTC)

Planet of the Apes reference? Edit

Does anyone else notice that this episode is very similar to the original Planet of the Apes? I think we should maybe note that in Background Info somewhere. - Mitchz95 03:01, August 22, 2011 (UTC)

Only if there is a quote from production staff that this was intended as a homage. You'll note all the influences currently listed on the page have a citation.–Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 03:58, August 22, 2011 (UTC)


I removed the the bg notes

The fate of the Voth personal cloaking device is unknown and it is never again used or even mentioned on screen.
The Voth scientists referred to Voyager's computer as using a "simple binary system" while in "Future's End (episode)" Starling's binary computer data had to be converted by Voyager so it could be read.

the first for unknown info and the second for nitpicking. Compvox (talk) 03:04, January 10, 2016 (UTC)

Factual Inaccuracies Edit

There are numerous factual inaccuracies in this episode which aren't mentioned in the article. For example, it is stated in the episode that Hadrosaurs were cold-blooded, and it is heavily implied that Dinosaurs in general were cold-blooded (including the Voth). While there's no way to predict how the descendants of dinosaurs might alter their thermoregulation over tens of millions of years when subject to the environmental pressures of an alien planet, factually we know that all dinosaurs were actually warm-blooded, including the Hadrosaurs. Hadrosaurs are also displayed as a single species when in fact they were many species, in the family Hadrosauridae. Evolution is also not dealt with properly, as there seems to be a presumption (as in a few other episodes involving evolution) that one can "predict" the evolutionary path of a species based on its existing genome. Evolution is in fact determined by environmental influences, which can change drastically over time and would not be predicted based on genome alone. It is impossible to say how a species will develop in the future, as we don't know what the external pressures acting on said species will be. 03:18, July 10, 2016 (UTC)

All nitpicks. We present what was presented in the show. And remember, this episode is close to 20 years old now. Science has changed the history of "dinosaurs" a lot in 20 years. -- sulfur (talk) 03:29, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
We've known since the seventies that Dinosaurs are warm-blooded. The show isn't *that* old; it last aired in 2001. 03:31, July 10, 2016 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-NC unless otherwise noted.