Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ahtman wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
This is how you get Genesis torpedoes

They weaponized the Genisis device from Star Trek II at some point? Or is it just a similar name?

Someone at some point used the phrase "Genesis Torpedo."


But everyone was thinking it.

Kruge correctly perceived that, whatever the intentions of the scientists working on the Genesis Project, the reality was that the Federation now had the power to near-instantaneously destroy all life on a planet. The political result was a Doomsday Weapon “gap” in the Federation-Klingon cold war arms race.

The fact that Carol Marcus and her team were allowed to work on this project not only implies a crisis in scientific ethics within the Federation but also either an absolutely astounding naïveté on the part of Starfleet Command or, more likely, a willingness to give super weapon R&D cover as legitimate research.

That or they were also looking at the future. Consider that whilst space is vast, habitable worlds are not highly common and the Federation offers a very high quality of life to its people. Furthermore they don't appear to aim to the ideal of living like rats in a den, all swarming atop each other. In fact whenever we see Federation worlds they show high standards of living coupled to low population densities.

With a high standard of living, long life etc.. its likely that the Federation faces a continually expanding population. Having a machine that could terraform worlds in moments; even totally dead worlds, would be an astounding thing. It would give them the ability to stave off population problems for a vast period of time.
Furthermore with refinement of the life generated it could even lower the period of time to adapt the world - for the tiny (comparative) cost of 1 Genesis device they could colonise new worlds far quicker, with reduced risk and investment and with a likely far higher success rate.

So you’re saying the Federation needs Lebensraum?

Ja, I’ve heard that one before. And I’m sure it also dawned on Kruge.

But I don’t think overpopulation is a problem for the Federation generally or humans specifically. I really doubt people in the Federation are having lots of kids. Federation culture seems to be very, very much about self-fulfillment. Plus there are apparently plenty of M-class planets with scarcely anything but nascent colonies.

Yes, but considering that their death rate is likely super low then chances are their populations are not going to stagnate easily. Plus that's just the humans and vulcan parts; there are many other species, some of which might breed far more so, esp with increased lifespan and survival that improved Federaiton medical care provides.

We can only go by what we have been shown, which very rarely is more than a very small family. Longer lifespans are also less of an issue because each life requires so much less space beyond the immediate conditions of one’s lifestyle. That is to say, vast tracks of land farmed or mined for resources to support the population — this is no longer any sort of factor. Yet nonetheless, we know very well that there are large areas of Earth itself that remain wilderness. The Picard family has to itself, a tiny little family, an entire vineyard. This is a lot of land to run for what amounts to nothing more than a sort of ethnic hobby if overpopulation is actually any sort of factor.

True, but don't forget most of our interaction is with the spaceforce. Whilst ships like the Enterprise were very spacious they were still spaceships at risk exploring. It wasn't the best of places to found a large family and like as not the workload and life (both parents on a spaceship are likely serving) meant that whilst it wasn't discouraged, large families were not encouraged.

You see a bit of a shift with DS9 but not a huge one but then its a subject area that the series never really focuses on.

Meanwhile back in the Original series days the ship didn't seem to have any kids on board. If anything it was more the Galaxy class edition that was more focused on that; the newer Enterprise seems to revert more twoard the original series, but it might also be that after the Bork, Dominion War etc....; families are not encouraged onto the capital ships (and might well be many family minded people don't want to serve on those ships because of the increased risk or at least not bring the family with them)

 Manchu wrote:
Kruge correctly perceived that, whatever the intentions of the scientists working on the Genesis Project, the reality was that the Federation now had the power to near-instantaneously destroy all life on a planet.

It seemed that it Khan, and Spock, also saw that possibility pretty quickly. IIRC Spock mentions its use as a weapon when first shown the info on the Enterprise; he thought it was interesting but saw the destructive potential fairly quickly. The Scientists may have been naive but I doubt that Starfleet was which raises questions about their intent, as has been pointed out.

 Overread wrote:
Meanwhile back in the Original series days the ship didn't seem to have any kids on board.

Darn tootin'! grumblegrumblegrumble

Actually it was McCoy who saw the destructive capability, which was why he was borderline in shock. Spock just illustrated the catastrophic power in an emotionless way.

It's also worth pointing out that Kruge saw it's use as an economic weapon right away. When his officer commented that it was impressive that they could make planets, Kruge's response was to sarcastically respond with how wonderful it would be to live on a paradise planet, with the flag of the Federation over your head. We've seen before in Star Trek how economic weapons can be valued very highly over simply destructive weapons.

I feel it’s a shame that Project Genesis was seemingly abandoned.

The theory is sound, but the alternative uses too much to ignore.

I wouldn’t mind a novel exploring the political side of that. I mean, which power wouldn’t want the ability to terraform planets in minutes? But how do you develop that tech, without the downside being exploited politically?

Crossing genres, but consider Sg-1, where a terraforming ship is adapting an fairly unique planet for its crypto-suspended species.

To be able to tailor a genesis probe for any species? That’s one hell of a tool of peace. Specific planets for anyone. What might that ability do for the Alpha Quadrant? Pick any non-M Class planet, squirt a prove at it. PRESTO BONGO! New planet for colonisation.

It could prevent wars, as a once scarce resource can now be made to order.

Heck, the ‘ideal world’ version is a simple concept. (Though good luck arranging it!). Collective, cross-power council. Representatives from each of the major powers, who solely produce the probes to order, with a mixed fleet to deliver the probe and oversee the terraforming.

In terms of minor powers, pirates/privateers trying to still a probe risk pissing off all the big boys at once. And with the major powers collaborating? Certain amount of safety.

So much of interest!

Heck, I’d settle for a series incorporating that (possibly post-Dominion war, given its unifying benefits) along with other relic projects.

I think Genesis is an example of where the films build something extreme that we never see much of again. Many of the films focus around very extreme situations or powerful entities that we don't see appear in the regular series. Take the Probe ship or Gensis or even the concept of travel to the centre of the glaxay - all things that happened and exist and yet vanish into the series after their respective films.

Of course we get things like the Borg and Q who are just as dangerous; but I was always a bit sad that we never found anything else out about the whale probe.

In Star Trek 3, we learn that Project Genesis is a failure, at least in terms of how its creators defined its purpose. The Genesis Planet self destructed because David Marcus used proto-matter as a short cut, and perhaps the only way to get Genesis to work at all.

The only remaining application was military and, absent any appearance of legitimacy, Starfleet Command would not be able to justify further development (much less use!) of this Doomsday Device. Even Federation hypocrisy has its limits.

 Manchu wrote:
In Star Trek 3, we learn that Project Genesis is a failure, at least in terms of how its creators defined its purpose. The Genesis Planet self destructed because David Marcus used proto-matter as a short cut, and perhaps the only way to get Genesis to work at all.

The only remaining application was military and, absent any appearance of legitimacy, Starfleet Command would not be able to justify further development (much less use!) of this Doomsday Device. Even Federation hypocrisy has its limits.

In a meta sense, it is notable they never deployed Genesis as a weapon against the Dominion or the Borg. It ever even comes up as an option.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
In Star Trek 3, we learn that Project Genesis is a failure, at least in terms of how its creators defined its purpose. The Genesis Planet self destructed because David Marcus used proto-matter as a short cut, and perhaps the only way to get Genesis to work at all.

The only remaining application was military and, absent any appearance of legitimacy, Starfleet Command would not be able to justify further development (much less use!) of this Doomsday Device. Even Federation hypocrisy has its limits.

In a meta sense, it is notable they never deployed Genesis as a weapon against the Dominion or the Borg. It ever even comes up as an option.

They probably buried it. Sometimes a weapon is so potentially horrific that you know your people won't accept its use. For a faction which is built on the backs of interspecies diplomacy such revelations could produce a shockwave sufficient to tear the Federation apart. It would be a case of winning a war through means that would lose them the war in the long run. Plus as powerful as the Dominion and Borg were, neither was honestly as grand a threat as would necessitate such a weapon. Both were defeated with losses, but use of conventional weapons.

In fact the Borg's direct threat to the Federation was defeated by a fleet of only Federation ships. One could argue that the Dominion, which required a full allied fleet of multiple factions, presented a far more real and direct threat. Of course the Borg threat has always been their vast resources outside of Federation reach; however save for the Queen making a one cube strike at the heart of the Federation, we don't actually see the Borg ever mobilise in great numbers. In fact I think the only time was potentially when they faced species 8472. Otherwise the Borg are quite cautious with their expansions. Even their Federation strike, had it worked and taken out Earth, might well have only caused local destabilising of the Federation. Ergo the Borg perhaps reacting to a long distance threat in advance ,but otherwise not committing large scale forces to cause total destruction/assimilation.
Even in the Delta Quadrant, where they have their powerbase, they similarly appear to haunt space, but not strike out in vast numbers. They take whole worlds, but nothing like what their potential numbers should allow them to take; esp when you consider that there's no unified single powerbase in that region of space to rise and oppose them.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
In Star Trek 3, we learn that Project Genesis is a failure, at least in terms of how its creators defined its purpose. The Genesis Planet self destructed because David Marcus used proto-matter as a short cut, and perhaps the only way to get Genesis to work at all.

The only remaining application was military and, absent any appearance of legitimacy, Starfleet Command would not be able to justify further development (much less use!) of this Doomsday Device. Even Federation hypocrisy has its limits.

In a meta sense, it is notable they never deployed Genesis as a weapon against the Dominion or the Borg. It ever even comes up as an option.

Unfortunately, Star Trek is full of mcguffins like that, though. Kind of the nature of an episodic tv series.

 Just Tony wrote:
Actually it was McCoy who saw the destructive capability, which was why he was borderline in shock. Spock just illustrated the catastrophic power in an emotionless way.

"My God Man you're talking about universal Armageddon!"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If the Fed wanted to they could go back in time and hit the Borg, romulan, Klingon, and Dominion homeworlds with genesis torpedoes.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Actually it was McCoy who saw the destructive capability, which was why he was borderline in shock. Spock just illustrated the catastrophic power in an emotionless way.

"My God Man you're talking about universal Armageddon!"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If the Fed wanted to they could go back in time and hit the Borg, romulan, Klingon, and Dominion homeworlds with genesis torpedoes.

Thing is Time Travel is never that simple. Who knows any one of a number of minor races could have risen to be worse than any of those races. Plus look at the Klingons, one time enemies and another the bastion of power that holds up the military end of the Federation (when pressed into service and not mourning the loss of their Empire)

 Manchu wrote:
So you’re saying the Federation needs Lebensraum?

The development of the Genesis device instantly meant that the Federation no longer needed lebensraum. Unlike the Klingon Empire a few years later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the families on board the Enterprise D, that was a wasted story element in TNG. Not as terrible as Voyager ditching its premise almost instantly, but the idea was originally that as the Enterprise D was on a 12-year mission rather than the 5-year missions of the Constitution-class ships a couple of generations earlier it was decided that separating people from their families for so long wasn't viable. YMMV on balancing that with the danger of having your kids along while poking at this week's negative space wedgie, but there you are. Instead, because the separation idea turned out to be expensive and time-consuming, it was left mostly ignored except when they needed some children to scare Picard with.

 AndrewGPaul wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
So you’re saying the Federation needs Lebensraum?

The development of the Genesis device instantly meant that the Federation no longer needed lebensraum. Unlike the Klingon Empire a few years later.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As for the families on board the Enterprise D, that was a wasted story element in TNG. Not as terrible as Voyager ditching its premise almost instantly, but the idea was originally that as the Enterprise D was on a 12-year mission rather than the 5-year missions of the Constitution-class ships a couple of generations earlier it was decided that separating people from their families for so long wasn't viable. YMMV on balancing that with the danger of having your kids along while poking at this week's negative space wedgie, but there you are. Instead, because the separation idea turned out to be expensive and time-consuming, it was left mostly ignored except when they needed some children to scare Picard with.

I mean, Siskos backstory shows exactly why having families on board is a horrid idea.
Hell, Star Trek itself is dangerous around every corner. Keiko couldnt even go to a cave without getting possed by a space alien.

To be fair, Keiko was an O’Brien, so her suffering should be viewed as exceptional, rather than the norm

Well, the exception for everyone else. For an O'Brien, just another Tuesday.

 Frazzled wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Actually it was McCoy who saw the destructive capability, which was why he was borderline in shock. Spock just illustrated the catastrophic power in an emotionless way.

"My God Man you're talking about universal Armageddon!"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If the Fed wanted to they could go back in time and hit the Borg, romulan, Klingon, and Dominion homeworlds with genesis torpedoes.

Sorry, gotta go just a touch OCD nerd here...


"My God, do you thing we're intelligent enough? I mean, suppose this thing was used where life already existed..."

"It would destroy such life in favor of its new matrix."

"'Its new matrix'? Do you have any idea what you're saying?!?!?!?"


Later was:

"Logic?!?!?! My God, the man's talking about logic! We're talking about UNIVERSAL ARMAGEDDON here!!"

 Overread wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
Actually it was McCoy who saw the destructive capability, which was why he was borderline in shock. Spock just illustrated the catastrophic power in an emotionless way.

"My God Man you're talking about universal Armageddon!"



Automatically Appended Next Post:
If the Fed wanted to they could go back in time and hit the Borg, romulan, Klingon, and Dominion homeworlds with genesis torpedoes.

Thing is Time Travel is never that simple. Who knows any one of a number of minor races could have risen to be worse than any of those races. Plus look at the Klingons, one time enemies and another the bastion of power that holds up the military end of the Federation (when pressed into service and not mourning the loss of their Empire)

If the Dalek has taught us anything, its that, thats not a problem either. Exterminate! Exterminate!
They could always just do the proper short term time loop thing. If they lose a fight, just go back six months or so, tell yourselves proper strategy, and win the battle. After all, thats how we won Midway. It took 27 tries!*

*Not how we won Midway. We borrowed some haggis bombs from the Brits. No one expects the Haggis!

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
To be fair, Keiko was an O’Brien, so her suffering should be viewed as exceptional, rather than the norm

That is 100% true. I fear for molly, she might want to change her name later on.

But its more of my point that star trek is so infinetly dangerous because every week they needed to make a threat to the crew.
Think of it as a military vessel today, While having families onboard is a bad idea, for its infinetly more safer than it would be on the enterprise.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

But its more of my point that star trek is so infinetly dangerous because every week they needed to make a threat to the crew.
Think of it as a military vessel today, While having families onboard is a bad idea, for its infinetly more safer than it would be on the enterprise.

One thing that I think is important to keep in mind is the span of time between these super dangerous situations happen. . . The world of Trek is more like a modern military deployment than say, WW1. By that I mean that, if we turned my deployments into episodic adventures in a TV show, you'd undoubtedly skip a ton of "boring bits" . . . in my 2nd tour to the sandbox, the instances where my life was genuinely in peril, you could count on one hand easily, and 2 hands if you start expanding. In contrast, in WW1, if you were on the front you had the breakfast shelling, the 2nd breakfast shelling, the tea-time shelling, the dinner "rush" to counter the shelling you've been receiving all day, etc. (ie, the danger is much much more close together given the same timeline).


In the world of Trek its the same thing: the episodes are written and tailored to only show us glimpses of the "exciting" bits of a tour of duty in starfleet. You really don't ever see the day-to-day work that goes on for the vast majority of time.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

But its more of my point that star trek is so infinetly dangerous because every week they needed to make a threat to the crew.
Think of it as a military vessel today, While having families onboard is a bad idea, for its infinetly more safer than it would be on the enterprise.

One thing that I think is important to keep in mind is the span of time between these super dangerous situations happen. . . The world of Trek is more like a modern military deployment than say, WW1. By that I mean that, if we turned my deployments into episodic adventures in a TV show, you'd undoubtedly skip a ton of "boring bits" . . . in my 2nd tour to the sandbox, the instances where my life was genuinely in peril, you could count on one hand easily, and 2 hands if you start expanding. In contrast, in WW1, if you were on the front you had the breakfast shelling, the 2nd breakfast shelling, the tea-time shelling, the dinner "rush" to counter the shelling you've been receiving all day, etc. (ie, the danger is much much more close together given the same timeline).


In the world of Trek its the same thing: the episodes are written and tailored to only show us glimpses of the "exciting" bits of a tour of duty in starfleet. You really don't ever see the day-to-day work that goes on for the vast majority of time.

That episode where Data is going through a daily routine was one of my favorite episodes PRECISELY because of that.

I just finished DS9, and I want to respond to like, half the posts in this thread, but the main thing I want to share for now is my theory of how the federation (as distinct from star fleet) operates.

The Federation is pretty consistently portrayed as a damn near utopia for its citizens. Everybody is fed, safe, sheltered, educated, and given medical care. Nobody we meet from the federation knows want. Even explicitly "unsuccessful" people like Bashir's father have a high standard of living. Some of this is clearly due to being, if not completely post scarcity, at least able to replicate most consumer goods. Replicators also replace societies crappiest jobs: unskilled manufacturing, food service, and retail.

But... scarcity isn't the only reason utopias collapse. the other reason is greed or ambition from people that want to "advance." Hence, Star Fleet. I'm sure Star Fleet does important work, but it's also a place to stash all of your ambitious, enthusiastic, risk taking folks. If a person can't handle that level of militaristic discipline, you always have the freighter ships, or colonial life. I think the Federation succeeds because it takes virtually all of it's most driven people, and pushes them into star Fleet. It's enough like a military to serve as the defense force and to provide discilpline and oversight, but it's also broad enough to pull in people from virtually every profession. They make a big deal of getting into the academy, but pretty much everybody we meet does.

Star Fleet, especially as an exploration and skirmish force, is the release valve for all of the Federation, to allow everybody else to be poets, chefs, etc.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
So. Yeah. DS9 ruined Star Trek by being utterly brilliant.

You're god-damned right. DS9 is by far the best Star Trek and sadly nothing will come close to matching it from now on because people simply don't have the stomach for it.

Since were talking about doomsday devices...You really would have thought that the Romulans of all species would be okay with using one. Yet when they secretly invaded the dominion - they only brought plasma torpedoes - which I believe they said a 30 minute bombardment with 30 ships (I think) would have destroyed the planet. Realistically I find it hard to believe this was the best method. Destroying a planet cant actually be that hard when you have antimatter and subspace weapons and your ships are literally powered by mini black holes.