Talk:Season two timeline discontinuity/Archive 1 - Revision history

Joe Beaudoin Jr.: Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

2020-04-11T01:58:09Z

Text replacement - "Peter Farago" to "April Arcus"

Nicoftime at 17:25, 12 July 2011

2011-07-12T17:25:19Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:25, 12 July 2011
Line 101:		Line 101:

	::Suggestion: Logistics issues held elections off for a couple months (It is necessary for candidates to have some amount of time to campaign, or at least declare candidacy.) Roslin's cancer went into remission, this is actually common enough to be plausible, and in one case happened so unexpectedly to a friend of mine that he went from expecting to die to having several years left. Unfortunately, it came back 18 months later.		::Suggestion: Logistics issues held elections off for a couple months (It is necessary for candidates to have some amount of time to campaign, or at least declare candidacy.) Roslin's cancer went into remission, this is actually common enough to be plausible, and in one case happened so unexpectedly to a friend of mine that he went from expecting to die to having several years left. Unfortunately, it came back 18 months later.

			:::I know the United States has fixed election dates, but many other countries do not. In Canaada, a Prime Minister's term can be anywhere fromo three to five years, and that may be the case in Colonial society as well. In "Bastille Day", Roslin says to Lee "you've committed me to holding elections within a year." Holding elections nine months later (rather than seven) would therefore still be respecting that commitment. That only leaves Roslin's cancer, which held out for much longer than Cottle predicted (judging by the progression of Sharon's pregnancy) but is still plausible.

PhoenixFlight: /* The 75 day gap: not important. */

2007-01-06T19:43:18Z

The 75 day gap: not important.

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 6 January 2007
Line 74:		Line 74:
	::Admiral Cain said it was six months since the Apocalypse. That is 180 days. Of course since humans round off very often the estimated 175 days in which the events of '''Resurrection Ship Parts I and II''' happen is very reasonable match.		::Admiral Cain said it was six months since the Apocalypse. That is 180 days. Of course since humans round off very often the estimated 175 days in which the events of '''Resurrection Ship Parts I and II''' happen is very reasonable match.

	::Sharon and Helo made love on the 24th day. Let's say they conceived Hera the very first time they had ~~intercourse~~ That would mean by '''Resurrection Ship Part I''' The future Athena was around 156 days (180-24 days) or five months and about five days pregnant Let's for laughs and to make the math easier say she was five months and a week pregnant or 21 weeks. It is true that during '''Pegasus''' Athena did not appear pregnant, however I think in real life there have been cases of pregnancies that gave very little outward sign of itself until surprisingly late in the gestation period. However, I do agree that this is unlikely.		::Sharon and Helo made love on the 24th day. Let's say they conceived Hera the very first time they had That would mean by '''Resurrection Ship Part I''' The future Athena was around 156 days (180-24 days) or five months and about five days pregnant Let's for laughs and to make the math easier say she was five months and a week pregnant or 21 weeks. It is true that during '''Pegasus''' Athena did not appear pregnant, however I think in real life there have been cases of pregnancies that gave very little outward sign of itself until surprisingly late in the gestation period. However, I do agree that this is unlikely.

	::If you don't like that explanation, there is always the very relevant that this is a mixed Cylon Human child, something that doesn't exist in the real world of course. And we have seen two in show ways that Sharon Agathon's pregnancy and her child are different. One was before Hera was born. Sharon somehow knew it was a girl in [[Home, Part II]]. She '''''knew''''', she did not feel or guess. The other more telling and obvious was post pregnancy. That is, from a human perspective, Hera's lack of development. Hera is about two years old now as of [[The Eye of Jupiter]], but appears to be just one year of age. Working backwards, within a few minutes after most of the humans left New Caprica on the Second Exodus (something like five and a half months ago in BSG time as of '''The Eye of Jupiter'''), when Baltar found her in the arms of her dead foster mother Maya she appeared to be only around six to eight months old. Before that in Roslin's school in '''Lay Down Your Burdens Part II''' after the Colonials had been on New Caprica for a year Hera still seemed to be about the size of a baby only a month or so old; so there is plenty evidence of Cylon/Human "under development" relative to fully human babies. Since they grow post-natally slower than a human child, it stands to reason that they develop slower pre-natally as well, hence Athena's flat appearing stomach in '''Pegasus''' while she was doing crunches at 21 weeks.		::If you don't like that explanation, there is always the very relevant that this is a mixed Cylon Human child, something that doesn't exist in the real world of course. And we have seen two in show ways that Sharon Agathon's pregnancy and her child are different. One was before Hera was born. Sharon somehow knew it was a girl in [[Home, Part II]]. She '''''knew''''', she did not feel or guess. The other more telling and obvious was post pregnancy. That is, from a human perspective, Hera's lack of development. Hera is about two years old now as of [[The Eye of Jupiter]], but appears to be just one year of age. Working backwards, within a few minutes after most of the humans left New Caprica on the Second Exodus (something like five and a half months ago in BSG time as of '''The Eye of Jupiter'''), when Baltar found her in the arms of her dead foster mother Maya she appeared to be only around six to eight months old. Before that in Roslin's school in '''Lay Down Your Burdens Part II''' after the Colonials had been on New Caprica for a year Hera still seemed to be about the size of a baby only a month or so old; so there is plenty evidence of Cylon/Human "under development" relative to fully human babies. Since they grow post-natally slower than a human child, it stands to reason that they develop slower pre-natally as well, hence Athena's flat appearing stomach in '''Pegasus''' while she was doing crunches at 21 weeks.
Line 99:		Line 99:
	::::::Once again (and I don't know why everyone keeps misunderstanding), I didn't put forth my arguments as fact, but as possible explanation for the apparent discrepancies. Believe me, I know the purpose and rules of a Wikipage. I have been a contributor to Wikipedia for a bit over a year now, so I am very familiar with the rules and concept of sources. I have never proposed that my theories where what in fact happened. I don't have anything to back that up via official source. Never claimed they were. I put them forth here merely as theories as to '''why''' these so-called discontinuities happened, not as a hard fact. If you look all my contributions to this article they have been strictly derived from facts in the show, most notably the my mathematical derivation of the five month elapsed time between '''Collaborators''' and '''Unfinished Business'''. I would never place in the body of an article (in this case about discontinuities) an explanation that was not from an official source. For example I know that Roslin's extended life was not explained on the show but I gave a plausible reason for it for example. However, would I put it in the article? No. It is speculation; speculation based on real life, but speculation none the less. The same with Athena's lack of visible manifestation of her pregnancy just before the attempted rape and I backward extrapolated it to the apparent lag in development of Hera. I aired my explanations not to argue to have them included in the article, but as an explanation as to '''''why''''' they may have happened and that it was no big deal anyway. After all, some here have written that the apparent discontinuities were the result of sloppiness on the part of the writers and producers. I say that may not be the case and I gave scenarios as to why they are probably aren't and/or if they are they are not that important in at least two of them. That is all.		::::::Once again (and I don't know why everyone keeps misunderstanding), I didn't put forth my arguments as fact, but as possible explanation for the apparent discrepancies. Believe me, I know the purpose and rules of a Wikipage. I have been a contributor to Wikipedia for a bit over a year now, so I am very familiar with the rules and concept of sources. I have never proposed that my theories where what in fact happened. I don't have anything to back that up via official source. Never claimed they were. I put them forth here merely as theories as to '''why''' these so-called discontinuities happened, not as a hard fact. If you look all my contributions to this article they have been strictly derived from facts in the show, most notably the my mathematical derivation of the five month elapsed time between '''Collaborators''' and '''Unfinished Business'''. I would never place in the body of an article (in this case about discontinuities) an explanation that was not from an official source. For example I know that Roslin's extended life was not explained on the show but I gave a plausible reason for it for example. However, would I put it in the article? No. It is speculation; speculation based on real life, but speculation none the less. The same with Athena's lack of visible manifestation of her pregnancy just before the attempted rape and I backward extrapolated it to the apparent lag in development of Hera. I aired my explanations not to argue to have them included in the article, but as an explanation as to '''''why''''' they may have happened and that it was no big deal anyway. After all, some here have written that the apparent discontinuities were the result of sloppiness on the part of the writers and producers. I say that may not be the case and I gave scenarios as to why they are probably aren't and/or if they are they are not that important in at least two of them. That is all.
	::::::I thought that was part of the purpose of the Discussion/Talk page, not only to list the apparent discontinuities but why they exist or even if they are and to show why or why not. That was my only intent; to explain and hopefully clarify, not to have my unsourced pet theories insinuated into the article. That was the original intent of this section "The 75 day gap: not important." [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 21:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)		::::::I thought that was part of the purpose of the Discussion/Talk page, not only to list the apparent discontinuities but why they exist or even if they are and to show why or why not. That was my only intent; to explain and hopefully clarify, not to have my unsourced pet theories insinuated into the article. That was the original intent of this section "The 75 day gap: not important." [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 21:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)

			::Suggestion: Logistics issues held elections off for a couple months (It is necessary for candidates to have some amount of time to campaign, or at least declare candidacy.) Roslin's cancer went into remission, this is actually common enough to be plausible, and in one case happened so unexpectedly to a friend of mine that he went from expecting to die to having several years left. Unfortunately, it came back 18 months later.

Hunter2005: added rebuttal

2006-12-29T03:57:43Z

added rebuttal

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:57, 29 December 2006
Line 96:		Line 96:

	:::::The article's name alone gives us the answer, it seems. If our count, ''derived by official sources'', contradicts what was shown in "Flight" and "Pegasus" (another official source) AND if no official source has retconned or admitted the error, we as contributors cannot guess or estimate or synthesize any plausible speculation. Any attempt is fanwanking since we would be generating content. So, do we note the discrepancy and leave it alone (given that later episodes resume a meaningful timeline)? I recommend we do. Essentially, "it's just a TV show" and we should really relax about it. I do recommend that we clarify the discrepancy, without comment or explanation. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:34, 28 December 2006 (CST)		:::::The article's name alone gives us the answer, it seems. If our count, ''derived by official sources'', contradicts what was shown in "Flight" and "Pegasus" (another official source) AND if no official source has retconned or admitted the error, we as contributors cannot guess or estimate or synthesize any plausible speculation. Any attempt is fanwanking since we would be generating content. So, do we note the discrepancy and leave it alone (given that later episodes resume a meaningful timeline)? I recommend we do. Essentially, "it's just a TV show" and we should really relax about it. I do recommend that we clarify the discrepancy, without comment or explanation. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:34, 28 December 2006 (CST)

			::::::Once again (and I don't know why everyone keeps misunderstanding), I didn't put forth my arguments as fact, but as possible explanation for the apparent discrepancies. Believe me, I know the purpose and rules of a Wikipage. I have been a contributor to Wikipedia for a bit over a year now, so I am very familiar with the rules and concept of sources. I have never proposed that my theories where what in fact happened. I don't have anything to back that up via official source. Never claimed they were. I put them forth here merely as theories as to '''why''' these so-called discontinuities happened, not as a hard fact. If you look all my contributions to this article they have been strictly derived from facts in the show, most notably the my mathematical derivation of the five month elapsed time between '''Collaborators''' and '''Unfinished Business'''. I would never place in the body of an article (in this case about discontinuities) an explanation that was not from an official source. For example I know that Roslin's extended life was not explained on the show but I gave a plausible reason for it for example. However, would I put it in the article? No. It is speculation; speculation based on real life, but speculation none the less. The same with Athena's lack of visible manifestation of her pregnancy just before the attempted rape and I backward extrapolated it to the apparent lag in development of Hera. I aired my explanations not to argue to have them included in the article, but as an explanation as to '''''why''''' they may have happened and that it was no big deal anyway. After all, some here have written that the apparent discontinuities were the result of sloppiness on the part of the writers and producers. I say that may not be the case and I gave scenarios as to why they are probably aren't and/or if they are they are not that important in at least two of them. That is all.
			::::::I thought that was part of the purpose of the Discussion/Talk page, not only to list the apparent discontinuities but why they exist or even if they are and to show why or why not. That was my only intent; to explain and hopefully clarify, not to have my unsourced pet theories insinuated into the article. That was the original intent of this section "The 75 day gap: not important." [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 21:57, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Spencerian: +reply

2006-12-28T18:34:14Z

+reply

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:34, 28 December 2006
Line 94:		Line 94:

	::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)		::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)

			:::::The article's name alone gives us the answer, it seems. If our count, ''derived by official sources'', contradicts what was shown in "Flight" and "Pegasus" (another official source) AND if no official source has retconned or admitted the error, we as contributors cannot guess or estimate or synthesize any plausible speculation. Any attempt is fanwanking since we would be generating content. So, do we note the discrepancy and leave it alone (given that later episodes resume a meaningful timeline)? I recommend we do. Essentially, "it's just a TV show" and we should really relax about it. I do recommend that we clarify the discrepancy, without comment or explanation. --[[User:Spencerian\|Spencerian]] 12:34, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Hunter2005 at 16:56, 28 December 2006

2006-12-28T16:56:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:56, 28 December 2006
Line 93:		Line 93:
	:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)		:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)

	::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why ~~this~~ discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has ~~often~~ said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)		::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Hunter2005: added rebuttal

2006-12-28T16:07:13Z

added rebuttal

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:07, 28 December 2006
Line 92:		Line 92:

	:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)		:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)

			::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why this discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has often said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)

April Arcus: /* The 75 day gap: not important. */

2006-12-28T11:49:34Z

The 75 day gap: not important.

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:49, 28 December 2006
Line 90:		Line 90:
	: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)		: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

			:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)

Hunter2005: /* The 75 day gap: not important. */

2006-12-28T05:37:35Z

The 75 day gap: not important.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:37, 28 December 2006
Line 80:		Line 80:
	::This is not a mere fanwank. I don't think this was accident. I am using what was presented in the episodes. I don't think it would be too difficult to have an casting call for a two year old Eurasian female baby; and before that a year and five month old at the time of the Second Exodus and before that a year old baby at the time of the Cylon invasion. I think RDM is deliberately showing us that Cylon/Human babies develop slower.		::This is not a mere fanwank. I don't think this was accident. I am using what was presented in the episodes. I don't think it would be too difficult to have an casting call for a two year old Eurasian female baby; and before that a year and five month old at the time of the Second Exodus and before that a year old baby at the time of the Cylon invasion. I think RDM is deliberately showing us that Cylon/Human babies develop slower.

	::Therefore, while judging strictly within the realm of human Obstetrics Athena's lack of any visible signs of pregnancy in '''Pegasus''' is strange (most if not all human woman begin to "show" at the beginning of the second trimester), this is a special case that doesn't exist in reality of course; a human/Cylon hybrid, and it goes without saying that the "rules" will be different. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::Therefore, while judging strictly within the realm of human Obstetrics Athena's lack of any visible signs of pregnancy in '''Pegasus''' is strange (most if not all human woman begin to "show" at the beginning of the second trimester), this is a special case that doesn't exist in reality of course; a human/Cylon hybrid, and it goes without saying that the "rules" will be different.

			::Oh I almost forgot: Athena wasn't raped, but almost raped, at least that is how it was originally broadcasted. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

	:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.		:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.

Hunter2005: /* The 75 day gap: not important. */ rebuttal argument concerning 75 day gap.

2006-12-28T05:32:51Z

The 75 day gap: not important.: rebuttal argument concerning 75 day gap.

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:32, 28 December 2006
Line 68:		Line 68:
	:*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant.		:*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant.
	:Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 15:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)		:Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 15:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)
			:: I believe that with a little thought these problems are not so big. As to the election and the diagnosis, I don't think it is that big and issue. As I said, given the the reasons I gave, the near civil war the influx of new people, I don't think it is that so out ragious that the election was postponed for two months. As for Doctor Cottle's diagnosis of Roslin's cancer, I didn't say that Cottle was so much wrong as that Roslin beat the odds a little. Again, this sort of thing happens in real life. It is no reflection on Dr. Cottle's competancy that Roslin got a bonus one or two months to live. It does happen in real life. It happens the other way too and you kick sooner than the doctor thought you would. I just don't think it is that big an issue that she didn't drop dead on schedule.

			::Now I admit that Athena's pregnancy is a hurdle, but even that has a viable explainaton:

			::Admiral Cain said it was six months since the Apocalypse. That is 180 days. Of course since humans round off very often the estimated 175 days in which the events of '''Resurrection Ship Parts I and II''' happen is very reasonable match.

			::Sharon and Helo made love on the 24th day. Let's say they conceived Hera the very first time they had intercourse That would mean by '''Resurrection Ship Part I''' The future Athena was around 156 days (180-24 days) or five months and about five days pregnant Let's for laughs and to make the math easier say she was five months and a week pregnant or 21 weeks. It is true that during '''Pegasus''' Athena did not appear pregnant, however I think in real life there have been cases of pregnancies that gave very little outward sign of itself until surprisingly late in the gestation period. However, I do agree that this is unlikely.

			::If you don't like that explanation, there is always the very relevant that this is a mixed Cylon Human child, something that doesn't exist in the real world of course. And we have seen two in show ways that Sharon Agathon's pregnancy and her child are different. One was before Hera was born. Sharon somehow knew it was a girl in [[Home, Part II]]. She '''''knew''''', she did not feel or guess. The other more telling and obvious was post pregnancy. That is, from a human perspective, Hera's lack of development. Hera is about two years old now as of [[The Eye of Jupiter]], but appears to be just one year of age. Working backwards, within a few minutes after most of the humans left New Caprica on the Second Exodus (something like five and a half months ago in BSG time as of '''The Eye of Jupiter'''), when Baltar found her in the arms of her dead foster mother Maya she appeared to be only around six to eight months old. Before that in Roslin's school in '''Lay Down Your Burdens Part II''' after the Colonials had been on New Caprica for a year Hera still seemed to be about the size of a baby only a month or so old; so there is plenty evidence of Cylon/Human "under development" relative to fully human babies. Since they grow post-natally slower than a human child, it stands to reason that they develop slower pre-natally as well, hence Athena's flat appearing stomach in '''Pegasus''' while she was doing crunches at 21 weeks.

			::This is not a mere fanwank. I don't think this was accident. I am using what was presented in the episodes. I don't think it would be too difficult to have an casting call for a two year old Eurasian female baby; and before that a year and five month old at the time of the Second Exodus and before that a year old baby at the time of the Cylon invasion. I think RDM is deliberately showing us that Cylon/Human babies develop slower.

			::Therefore, while judging strictly within the realm of human Obstetrics Athena's lack of any visible signs of pregnancy in '''Pegasus''' is strange (most if not all human woman begin to "show" at the beginning of the second trimester), this is a special case that doesn't exist in reality of course; a human/Cylon hybrid, and it goes without saying that the "rules" will be different. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

	:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.		:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.
			::Could had been address in dialogue, but there was no real need. As to Athena's prenancy, see my response to Peter Farago. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	:Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST)		:Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST)
			::I don't think it is weird at all. There is nothing to contradict. Even Athena's quirky pregnancy has a very viable explaination given what we have seen. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)		: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)
			::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:49, 28 December 2006
Line 90:		Line 90:
	: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)		: As Peter and Serenity said, the gap is there and it's not something that can be easily dismissed, at least after the fact. Does it affect the enjoyment factor? Probably not for most, but it's important to note anyway. -- [[User:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|Joe Beaudoin]] <sup>[[User talk:Joe Beaudoin Jr.\|So say we all]] - [[Battlestar Wiki:Site support\|Donate]]</sup> 16:00, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

			:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:Peter Farago\|Peter Farago]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:58, 11 April 2020
Line 9:		Line 9:
	:*Lee nags Tyrol about Viper 289, leading him to come up with the idea for the Blackbird.		:*Lee nags Tyrol about Viper 289, leading him to come up with the idea for the Blackbird.
	:*Tyrol starts the Blackbird project		:*Tyrol starts the Blackbird project
	:Still, all the construction work on the blackbird takes place after Roslin's diagnosis. I can see fudging a week here at the outside, but nothing more than that. Anyone else have thoughts? --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 21:44, 4 March 2006 (CST)		:Still, all the construction work on the blackbird takes place after Roslin's diagnosis. I can see fudging a week here at the outside, but nothing more than that. Anyone else have thoughts? --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 21:44, 4 March 2006 (CST)

	::There's always the "different scenes do not take place concurrently" explanation. --[[User:Redwall\|Redwall]] 22:27, 4 March 2006 (CST)		::There's always the "different scenes do not take place concurrently" explanation. --[[User:Redwall\|Redwall]] 22:27, 4 March 2006 (CST)
Line 31:		Line 31:
	:In either case, this page and the timeline need to be re-edited as several of the statements made are based on the faulty premise that Roslins final diagnosis was before Cally's release. Given that this is not the case I think that the discussion on these pages needs to be changed. I would suggest that the timeline is kept fairly clear of discussion and this page state the facts and discussion for or against and then let the reader decide --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 12:51, 5 March 2006 (CST)		:In either case, this page and the timeline need to be re-edited as several of the statements made are based on the faulty premise that Roslins final diagnosis was before Cally's release. Given that this is not the case I think that the discussion on these pages needs to be changed. I would suggest that the timeline is kept fairly clear of discussion and this page state the facts and discussion for or against and then let the reader decide --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 12:51, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	::I think Tyrol's work on [[Viper 289]] argues against this very strongly. We first see him inspect the craft and label it defunct prior to Cally's release. Apollo speaks to him about it, and he starts work on the Blackbird that night. I really don't think the amount of work accomplished on the Blackbird between that event (which was a few days after day 84 at most) and the airframe we see after Roslin's diagnosis can be stretched over two months. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 13:13, 5 March 2006 (CST)		::I think Tyrol's work on [[Viper 289]] argues against this very strongly. We first see him inspect the craft and label it defunct prior to Cally's release. Apollo speaks to him about it, and he starts work on the Blackbird that night. I really don't think the amount of work accomplished on the Blackbird between that event (which was a few days after day 84 at most) and the airframe we see after Roslin's diagnosis can be stretched over two months. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 13:13, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	:::I don't know how long it would take to build a spacecraft so don't have an accurate estimate. I suspect that it would be the same as building a modern fighter aircraft. Looking at Google I have one [http://www.iiss.org/confPress-more.php?confID=731 article] (last paragraph) claiming it takes 2 years to build one F-15. Keep in mind that Tyrol is working on the Blackbird in his spare time so probably can only spend a few hours of a day working on it. Given these two facts I don't see 2 months being too outlandish. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST)		:::I don't know how long it would take to build a spacecraft so don't have an accurate estimate. I suspect that it would be the same as building a modern fighter aircraft. Looking at Google I have one [http://www.iiss.org/confPress-more.php?confID=731 article] (last paragraph) claiming it takes 2 years to build one F-15. Keep in mind that Tyrol is working on the Blackbird in his spare time so probably can only spend a few hours of a day working on it. Given these two facts I don't see 2 months being too outlandish. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	::::It's not outlandish at all, but what I'm trying to say is that it just doesn't fit with what we've been shown. The majority of the Blackbird's construction takes place after Roslin's diagnosis, thus, within the span of about three weeks. It seems implausible to argue that the earlier stages of construction took over twice that long. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 13:47, 5 March 2006 (CST)		::::It's not outlandish at all, but what I'm trying to say is that it just doesn't fit with what we've been shown. The majority of the Blackbird's construction takes place after Roslin's diagnosis, thus, within the span of about three weeks. It seems implausible to argue that the earlier stages of construction took over twice that long. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 13:47, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	:::::Remember that after Roslin's diagnosis several people started helping Tyrol with the work, the key scene being when one of the engineers helped Tyrol with fitting the wing (which he was having trouble doing by himself). At this point the shot shows the airframe being complete, with cabling and electronics fitted to it some places. After this point the remainder of the deck crew start working on the ship with Tyrol, so its likely that work after the diagnosis moved far quicker than before because more people were working on the project. So I don't think its implausible to argue that with more hands and more time spent, the quicker the project would be completed. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST)		:::::Remember that after Roslin's diagnosis several people started helping Tyrol with the work, the key scene being when one of the engineers helped Tyrol with fitting the wing (which he was having trouble doing by himself). At this point the shot shows the airframe being complete, with cabling and electronics fitted to it some places. After this point the remainder of the deck crew start working on the ship with Tyrol, so its likely that work after the diagnosis moved far quicker than before because more people were working on the project. So I don't think its implausible to argue that with more hands and more time spent, the quicker the project would be completed. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	::Also, note that if we do "delay" "Flight of the Phoenix" to match up with "Epiphanies", we have to explain Boomer's pregnancy advancing by about two months within the span of a week. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 13:21, 5 March 2006 (CST)		::Also, note that if we do "delay" "Flight of the Phoenix" to match up with "Epiphanies", we have to explain Boomer's pregnancy advancing by about two months within the span of a week. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 13:21, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	:::I'm willing to write this one off as one of the side effects of working with an actress who isn't really pregnant and the production staff trying to keep costs down by not wanting to invest money into more than one prosthetic. Many shows get this wrong so its not an uncommon mistake. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST)		:::I'm willing to write this one off as one of the side effects of working with an actress who isn't really pregnant and the production staff trying to keep costs down by not wanting to invest money into more than one prosthetic. Many shows get this wrong so its not an uncommon mistake. --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 13:42, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	::::I'm not. There's plenty of other evidence to indicate that they simply lost track. Sharon is still doing ''sit-ups'' in "Pegasus". By "Epiphanies", she's quite... heavy with child. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 13:46, 5 March 2006 (CST)		::::I'm not. There's plenty of other evidence to indicate that they simply lost track. Sharon is still doing ''sit-ups'' in "Pegasus". By "Epiphanies", she's quite... heavy with child. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 13:46, 5 March 2006 (CST)

	:::::I'm not arguing that there haven't been production screw ups with the timeline. It happens all the time on TV shows. What I am arguing is that the discontinuity isn't as great as is being made out and in some cases can be accounted for (to a certain degree). --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST)		:::::I'm not arguing that there haven't been production screw ups with the timeline. It happens all the time on TV shows. What I am arguing is that the discontinuity isn't as great as is being made out and in some cases can be accounted for (to a certain degree). --[[User:Rexpop\|Rexpop]] 14:07, 5 March 2006 (CST)
Line 67:		Line 67:
	:*Elections delayed by two months (consistantly predicted to be around month 7 in season 1, actually depicted around month 9)		:*Elections delayed by two months (consistantly predicted to be around month 7 in season 1, actually depicted around month 9)
	:*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant.		:*In ''Pegasus'', when Sharon is raped, she is not visibly pregnant (consistant with the first half of the season). In "Resurrection Ship", we learn that it is six months post-holocaust and that she should be five months pregnant.
	:Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 15:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)		:Lastly, to simply suppose that Cottle was somehow "wrong" in the diagnosis he gave in "Flight of the Phoenix" is outright fanwankery. The show takes itself seriously and invites a close reading. If it can't stand up to that level of scrutiny, we shouldn't invent explanations in an attempt to let it off the hook. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 15:41, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	:: I believe that with a little thought these problems are not so big. As to the election and the diagnosis, I don't think it is that big and issue. As I said, given the the reasons I gave, the near civil war the influx of new people, I don't think it is that so out ragious that the election was postponed for two months. As for Doctor Cottle's diagnosis of Roslin's cancer, I didn't say that Cottle was so much wrong as that Roslin beat the odds a little. Again, this sort of thing happens in real life. It is no reflection on Dr. Cottle's competancy that Roslin got a bonus one or two months to live. It does happen in real life. It happens the other way too and you kick sooner than the doctor thought you would. I just don't think it is that big an issue that she didn't drop dead on schedule.		:: I believe that with a little thought these problems are not so big. As to the election and the diagnosis, I don't think it is that big and issue. As I said, given the the reasons I gave, the near civil war the influx of new people, I don't think it is that so out ragious that the election was postponed for two months. As for Doctor Cottle's diagnosis of Roslin's cancer, I didn't say that Cottle was so much wrong as that Roslin beat the odds a little. Again, this sort of thing happens in real life. It is no reflection on Dr. Cottle's competancy that Roslin got a bonus one or two months to live. It does happen in real life. It happens the other way too and you kick sooner than the doctor thought you would. I just don't think it is that big an issue that she didn't drop dead on schedule.

Line 85:		Line 85:

	:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.		:While I think that the issue isn't nearly as big as its made out to be, it's nonetheless there. Sure, the missing time can be accounted for, but contradictions are is still there. Sharon's pregnancy progression is a more practical error, but the election and Roslin's diagnosis could have been adressed in dialogue.
	::Could had been address in dialogue, but there was no real need. As to Athena's prenancy, see my response to ~~Peter Farago~~. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::Could had been address in dialogue, but there was no real need. As to Athena's prenancy, see my response to April Arcus. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	:Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST)		:Personally, it doesn't affect my ejoyment of the show, but when I think about it, it's a bit weird that stuff like this happens --[[User:Serenity\|Serenity]] 15:52, 27 December 2006 (CST)
	::I don't think it is weird at all. There is nothing to contradict. Even Athena's quirky pregnancy has a very viable explaination given what we have seen. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::I don't think it is weird at all. There is nothing to contradict. Even Athena's quirky pregnancy has a very viable explaination given what we have seen. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)
Line 91:		Line 91:
	::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)		::To note maybe, but not so important, except that in the case of Hera, it is an insight on Cylon/Human admixture. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 23:32, 27 December 2006 (CST)

	:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:~~Peter Farago~~\|~~Peter Farago~~]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)		:::Hunter, just because you ''can'' fanwank doesn't mean you should. If you want to indulge the showrunner's sloppiness by inventing ridiculous explanations, you can feel free to do so privately, but do not attempt to propagate it as fact, or use it to supplant the meaningful analysis we have painstakingly assembled here. --[[User:April Arcus\|April Arcus]] 05:49, 28 December 2006 (CST)

	::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)		::::First of all, point to any time in my arguments that I present my explanations as fact. Just once. What I did was use plausible in show and real life arguments as to what could had happened and why these discontinuities are not as serious as they are made out to be or even necessarily discontinuities, especially when it comes to Roslin's dire diagnosis and the postponements of the elections. As to the issue of the pregnancy, I used a real life argument but I used mostly in show explanations. Do you deny the visual record of Hera's constant under development? It has been consistent hasn't it? Many people have complained about it. I just point out that it has been too consistent to be chalked up to sloppiness or laziness on the part of the production staff and it is deliberate on their part for a reason. I merely extended that phenomena pre-nataly as well as post-nataly. Anyway, it seems that some don't want to discuss the merits of my arguments. RDM has said that he will not explain every thing explicitly and will rely on the intelligence of the audience to deduce things. I just made the attempt. And here I thought this was a discussion board. [[User:Hunter2005\|Hunter2005]] 10:07, 28 December 2006 (CST)