Finally...a continuity glitch explanation

E

Moderator
Excelsior Club
Joined
May 17, 2004
Messages
33,346
Location
MI
Here, finally, is an explanation for the continuity glitches in the UU. You know, stuff like Reed attending college with Tony Stark, the UFF appearing before the Ultimates (quiet, Irish :D ), etc.

The culprit? Ben Grimm.

When the UFF went back in time and Reed told Ben not to step on any plants or anything because it would have ramifications throughout the rest of history, he was right. But Ben had already socked the T Rex.

It fell, plants were squashed, and history was altered.

I want a No-Prize.

:D
 
UltimateE said:
Here, finally, is an explanation for the continuity glitches in the UU. You know, stuff like Reed attending college with Tony Stark, the UFF appearing before the Ultimates (quiet, Irish :D ), etc.

The culprit? Ben Grimm.

When the UFF went back in time and Reed told Ben not to step on any plants or anything because it would have ramifications throughout the rest of history, he was right. But Ben had already socked the T Rex.

It fell, plants were squashed, and history was altered.

I want a No-Prize.

:D
...... :shock:

I'm speechless.
 
Wow! That seriously works! Even though some people will think its a cop-out, I think its great.
 
I always hated the explanation of not screwing around with time in the past when you time travel.

Think about it, if it happened in the past, it already happened, therefore, Ben Grimm already went into the past an hit the dinosaur because it happened in the past.
 
Ultimate Houde said:
I always hated the explanation of not screwing around with time in the past when you time travel.

Think about it, if it happened in the past, it already happened, therefore, Ben Grimm already went into the past an hit the dinosaur because it happened in the past.

You get into a whole thing with alternate timelines and junk like that if you overthink it...obviously for this to work it has to be established that the UU doesn't have alternate timelines.

But that's a theory, and one that can be ignored for this to work.
 
At this point, yeah, it would kind of be a copout. If they had used this in #21 when they returned to the present it would've been feasible and I would've accepted it.

But for someone to say in a Q&A, for example, this far after the fact that this is what happened...I'd be kind of bummed.
 
word.up.yours.jpg
 
Going back in time to change things wouldn't change your own reality.
You simply create a new reality the moment anything changes, like opening a portal. So really, why did they bother going back to get the guys anyway? It wouldn't have been their reality that changed, and this had already happened in the reality that it would happen to.

Millar can't go ****ing around with time so willy nilly, Ellis would get away with it, not Millar leave the pop culture and politics to him and the science out of the equation.

Good try though E :D
 
Last edited:
Actually no-one knows what would happen if you go back in time and change things because it has never been done. There are two major theories in this area thou.
The first one says that there is only onetime line. Mess with that and you change history as we know it, past,present and future. For example in the Back to the Future movies.
The second one says that there are many different timelines and every major incident that happens creates atleast one new alternative timeline, one where the incident happened and one where it didn't. Of course there are variations to that as in the incident could have happened differently or didn't happen because of something else so the numbers of new alternetive timelines created is a variabel. The theory says that if you go back in time and change history you create a new timeline that replaces the one that you know. The timeline you originated from still exist but has been replaced for the new timeline as the official real timeline for you. For example in Marvels 616 universe on many occasions.

Hope that made a little sense anyway :?

But nobody knows if these theories are correct for timetravel because nobody has ever done it so......

Personally I belive that history is constant and only the moment we experince right know exists. Past, present and future is something that mankind has made up to explane our lifecycle. With this theory timetravel is impossible since there exist no past or future, only present.
 
Ultimate Warrior said:
But nobody knows if these theories are correct for timetravel because nobody has ever done it so......

Correction - nobody knows if it has ever been done. If some could time travel back to 2 BCE, then... time travel has happened. If it is going to happen, it has happened - we just don't know if it has yet.
 
Bass said:
Correction - nobody knows if it has ever been done. If some could time travel back to 2 BCE, then... time travel has happened. If it is going to happen, it has happened - we just don't know if it has yet.
Well, you are right. But if you had to put your money on one of the options, if it had happened or if it hasn't, what would you pick. :wink:
 
Ultimate Warrior said:
. Personally I belive that history is constant and only the moment we experince right know exists. Past, present and future is something that mankind has made up to explane our lifecycle. With this theory timetravel is impossible since there exist no past or future, only present.


Good god man! Stop reading Sarte and Camus before you philosophize all of us out of existence!
 
This is a stretch, but it works... I thought something was supposed to come out of this moment where he punched the t-rex. Reed said something about changing stuff whenever he interacated with the stuff... Cool, E.
 
Ultimate Warrior said:
Actually no-one knows what would happen if you go back in time and change things because it has never been done.

Right. And while I understand what you are saying, Guij - Millar has established that this is the end result or consequence of time travel for the UU.

So, Guij and Warrior - ignoring that Millar's concept of time travel may be wrong since at this point it's moot anyway, would you agree that this explanation fits?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top