Re: [ENT+] Re: Changing rules for Time Travel

GeneK wrote:

> "KalElFan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > [crosspost to rec.arts.sf.tv and rec.arts.startrek.current added]
> >
> > "David Johnston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > So why would it "take time" for an historical change to reach the
> > > future now and not on previous occasions?  Perhaps it's an issue
> > > of how "long" it takes for a change to become "certain".
>
>
> I'm not watching Enterprise regularly, so my answer to this is purely
> hypothetical rather than an attempt to be "canonical."  It doesn't make
> sense that some changes in the timeline would take longer to "reach
> the future" than others. 


Why not?  Once one allows for traveling in time, there can
easily be room for a rate of erasure of the old timeline.
That's how "Back to the Future" worked in theory, Marty's
older siblings disappeared before he did, he being the youngest.

snip
> GeneK

Lucas