PDA

View Full Version : SG-1 in "Moebius"



Daniel Jackson
October 18th, 2006, 02:52 PM
I posted this in the Seasons 1-8 forum, but that forum is a ghost town, so I hope you guys don't mind me reposting here. :jack:

In "Moebius," the Original SG-1 had been stranded in ancient Egypt. Jack, Sam, and Teal'c all died in a failed attempt to create an early rebellion so they could return home. Five years later, Daniel was greeted by bizzaro versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c. They managed to repair the timeline, but whut happened to them after that?

I think they would have destroyed the damaged time traveling puddle jumper, but whut about the other one? Why not use that one to return to the present? We know it'll still be there when Ra leaves, because it was there in the future for Bizzaro SG-1 to find. Furthermore, this would mean we'd have two Daniel's with one being several years older... and two very different versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c if Bizzaro Teal'c's larva Goa'uld hadn't matured by the time they could return to the present. I wonder if they'll use this plot in the time travel movie they're going to make next year? Hmm...

Alternatively, they could have destroyed the damaged Puddle Jumper and left the intact one where it was just incase they didn't repair the timeline like they thought. This would leave SG-1 with two Puddle Jumpers capable of time travel in the present. If this was the decission Bizzaro SG-1 made, I wonder whut happened to Original Daniel? Did he die in Ancient Egypt, or did he figure out how to Ascend all on his own? For all we know, he may have used the Stargate to go to Keb and have Oma DeSalla ascend him. Just imagine... there could be two Daniel's... one on SG-1, and one Ascended. Spooky!

Admiral Mappalazarou
October 18th, 2006, 03:18 PM
I posted this in the Seasons 1-8 forum, but that forum is a ghost town, so I hope you guys don't mind me reposting here. :jack:

In "Moebius," the Original SG-1 had been stranded in ancient Egypt. Jack, Sam, and Teal'c all died in a failed attempt to create an early rebellion so they could return home. Five years later, Daniel was greeted by bizzaro versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c. They managed to repair the timeline, but whut happened to them after that?

I think they would have destroyed the damaged time traveling puddle jumper, but whut about the other one? Why not use that one to return to the present? We know it'll still be there when Ra leaves, because it was there in the future for Bizzaro SG-1 to find. Furthermore, this would mean we'd have two Daniel's with one being several years older... and two very different versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c if Bizzaro Teal'c's larva Goa'uld hadn't matured by the time they could return to the present. I wonder if they'll use this plot in the time travel movie they're going to make next year? Hmm...

Alternatively, they could have destroyed the damaged Puddle Jumper and left the intact one where it was just incase they didn't repair the timeline like they thought. This would leave SG-1 with two Puddle Jumpers capable of time travel in the present. If this was the decission Bizzaro SG-1 made, I wonder whut happened to Original Daniel? Did he die in Ancient Egypt, or did he figure out how to Ascend all on his own? For all we know, he may have used the Stargate to go to Keb and have Oma DeSalla ascend him. Just imagine... there could be two Daniel's... one on SG-1, and one Ascended. Spooky!

Balls of Iron, my friend.
Nice theories, but I think that the Bizarro SG-1 died in ancient Egypt. I suppose it'd be nice to explore that area though, along with the countless other plotholes they messed up. Like Danny's crazy uncle who got kidnapped by Giant Aliens? and how Daniel's crazy ex-girlfriend is coping with life after being a host to Osiris? and whatever happened to SuperGirl-Tokra Anise? And any of the Tokra for that matter? Did the Free Jaffa ever take over that cool spacestation from 'Summit'? Why did Kalowna fall to the Ori so easily, and why didn't Jonas contact the SGC for help? Why the HELL didn't the SGC replicate more of the Anti-Prior technology from 'The Forth Horseman prt 2' and give one to every SG team???????

Damn it, my head hurts...

Daniel Jackson
October 18th, 2006, 04:55 PM
You're right, the Tok'ra, Jonas and his people, Sarah Gardner, the Asguard, and so forth would be more worthy of being followed on. I just have this feeling that the time travel movie will tie into "Moebius" somehow... :daniel:

Admiral Mappalazarou
October 18th, 2006, 06:03 PM
You're right, the Tok'ra, Jonas and his people, Sarah Gardner, the Asguard, and so forth would be more worthy of being followed on. I just have this feeling that the time travel movie will tie into "Moebius" somehow... :daniel:
plus the shape shifter aliens, Seth should've been in it more, Osiris's cool ship from Egypt, and Martin Lloyd's mates who flew off in Wormhole X-treme...any more?

Daniel Jackson
October 18th, 2006, 06:11 PM
By shape shifter aliens, do you mean the ones from "Foothold?" I liked that Seth was only in one episode. We've had Apophis, Anubis, Hathor, Ba'al, and other Goa'ulds as recurring villains. It was nice to see one Goa'uld in a stand-alone episode. "Seth" is a solid story with a great ending. I don't think anyone care's about Osiris's cool ship from Egypt. I also don't think anyone cares about Lloyd's "friends" from Wormhole X-Treme!

However, let's stick to "Moebius..."

Do you think Daniel from Ancient Egypt went through the Stargate (before it was burried) to Keb and had Oma Desalla ascend him?

Blitz
October 19th, 2006, 02:51 AM
Do you think Daniel from Ancient Egypt went through the Stargate (before it was burried) to Keb and had Oma Desalla ascend him?


No....cuz that would be silly...

However, If I remember correctly from what one fo the writers/producer people said - the first SG1 team we see in Moebius, the 'no fish in my pond' team was never the original team - but the team at the end is the team we know and love throughout the whole series....

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 02:59 AM
Not this again. Ok, ignore what anyone else might have said or might say in the future that contradicts what I'm about to say unless I say not to:

OK, so there are several theories on time-travel. One allows for the Paradox-thing where you cease to exist if you kill your own Grandfather. One does not.

I don't remember what either one's called but the one used in "Moebius" is the one where you cannot cease to exist due to killing your own Grandfather.

According to this theory, every time you travel back in time, an alternate timeline is created and blablabla.

So, this is what happened:
* Original!SG-1 goes back in time to steal the ZPM from Ra. Original!Time Jumper gets discovered and Original!SG-1 is stranded. Original!SG-1 plans a rebellion but before their plan can be executed, Original!Jack, Original!Sam and Original!Teal'c are captured and executed.
* Fast-forward a few millennia and Alt!Archeologists find Original!SG-1's tape. Which leads to Alt!Hammond recruiting Alt!Sam and Alt!Daniel, who eventually bring in Alt!Jack and then they go and fetch Alt!Teal'c. However, Alt!Daniel had been implanted with Ra's symbiote, so Alt!Teal'c had to kill him. They go back in time using the Alt!Time Jumper and meet up with Original!Daniel. They successfully start the rebellion, force Ra out of Egypt and then hide the ZPM in the crypt, together with that tape and then destroy the two puddle jumpers and live out the rest of their lives in Egypt (obviously they would've refrained from having children, imagine the causality issues!).
* Our!SG-1 (as in the one we've been following for the past 10 years) finds the tape and the ZPM two weeks before the events of Moebius in the timeline and don't have to go back in time. Our!SG-1 goes fishing just like they did in "Threads" (it's the same fishing trip!), only this time, a fish jumps out of the lake.

So, did anything change due to the tampering of Original!SG-1 and Alt!SG-1? We don't know. Because we know nothing about the past events of Original!SG-1.

I very much doubt Original!Daniel, Alt!Jack, Alt!Sam and Alt!Teal'c went forward in time again because we don't have an Alt!Teal'c who hasn't been with the SGC for 8 years and Alt(Geeky)!Sam. Also, I believe Alt!Sam made it clear they had to destroy the ship.

As for what they did after being stranded? I very much doubt Sam would let them do causality-damaging things such as fathering kids (so, no, no little Jacks running around spreading the gene) or going off to Kheb to Ascend. Also, I very much Oma would Ascend Daniel and then Ascend him again. I'm also very much against the idea that Daniel ascended in Egypt, descended in our time (as a baby and snuck into his mom's womb!) and then Ascended and Descended twice more after that.

That fish in Jack's lake? We're told in the commentary track for "Moebius" that there's always been fish in Jack's lake, only that he's a really, really, really bad fisherman. Just look at how he fishes! He throws the hook out and immediately reels it in!

Blitz
October 19th, 2006, 03:07 AM
Not this again. Ok, ignore what anyone else might have said or might say in the future that contradicts what I'm about to say unless I say not to:

OK, so there are several theories on time-travel. One allows for the Paradox-thing where you cease to exist if you kill your own Grandfather. One does not.

I don't remember what either one's called but the one used in "Moebius" is the one where you cannot cease to exist due to killing your own Grandfather.

According to this theory, every time you travel back in time, an alternate timeline is created and blablabla.

So, this is what happened:
* Original!SG-1 goes back in time to steal the ZPM from Ra. Original!Time Jumper gets discovered and Original!SG-1 is stranded. Original!SG-1 plans a rebellion but before their plan can be executed, Original!Jack, Original!Sam and Original!Teal'c are captured and executed.
* Fast-forward a few millennia and Alt!Archeologists find Original!SG-1's tape. Which leads to Alt!Hammond recruiting Alt!Sam and Alt!Daniel, who eventually bring in Alt!Jack and then they go and fetch Alt!Teal'c. However, Alt!Daniel had been implanted with Ra's symbiote, so Alt!Teal'c had to kill him. They go back in time using the Alt!Time Jumper and meet up with Original!Daniel. They successfully start the rebellion, force Ra out of Egypt and then hide the ZPM in the crypt, together with that tape and then destroy the two puddle jumpers and live out the rest of their lives in Egypt (obviously they would've refrained from having children, imagine the causality issues!).
* Our!SG-1 (as in the one we've been following for the past 10 years) finds the tape and the ZPM two weeks before the events of Moebius in the timeline and don't have to go back in time. Our!SG-1 goes fishing just like they did in "Threads" (it's the same fishing trip!), only this time, a fish jumps out of the lake.

So, did anything change due to the tampering of Original!SG-1 and Alt!SG-1? We don't know. Because we know nothing about the past events of Original!SG-1.

I very much doubt Original!Daniel, Alt!Jack, Alt!Sam and Alt!Teal'c went forward in time again because we don't have an Alt!Teal'c who hasn't been with the SGC for 8 years and Alt(Geeky)!Sam. Also, I believe Alt!Sam made it clear they had to destroy the ship.

As for what they did after being stranded? I very much doubt Sam would let them do causality-damaging things such as fathering kids (so, no, no little Jacks running around spreading the gene) or going off to Kheb to Ascend. Also, I very much Oma would Ascend Daniel and then Ascend him again. I'm also very much against the idea that Daniel ascended in Egypt, descended in our time (as a baby and snuck into his mom's womb!) and then Ascended and Descended twice more after that.

That fish in Jack's lake? We're told in the commentary track for "Moebius" that there's always been fish in Jack's lake, only that he's a really, really, really bad fisherman. Just look at how he fishes! He throws the hook out and immediately reels it in!

Thats pretty much what I meant O_o I think....

Gotta admit, I love how stuck up you sound at the start though :)

'Not this again. Ok, ignore what anyone else might have said or might say in the future that contradicts what I'm about to say unless I say not to'

Much nicer ways to say things, but I love it anyway! :D

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 03:14 AM
It's just that a lot, a lot of people who really don't have any idea of what they're talking about throw in their two cents into these discussions, people who haven't even heard the commentary track and just assume the timeline was changed because of the fish or who randomly throw in theories on time travel that contradict the ones used in SG-1.

Blitz
October 19th, 2006, 04:11 AM
Thats the fun of it!

Not knowing is fun, theorys, guessing - a lot more fun than deffinate knowing...the fact you answered doesnt bother me - but some people DONT have the leasure of seeing the commentaries...im 19, and I cant afford the DVDS....

other people cant, so being brash isnt always needed

Pharaoh Atem
October 19th, 2006, 04:31 AM
here's another thread covering the subject http://forum.gateworld.net/showthread.php?t=9324

might be some help :)

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 10:04 AM
That fish in Jack's lake? We're told in the commentary track for "Moebius" that there's always been fish in Jack's lake, only that he's a really, really, really bad fisherman. Just look at how he fishes! He throws the hook out and immediately reels it in!
Watch the end of "Threads," then watch the end of "Moebius, Part 2." At the end of "Threads," the fish doesn't jump out of the water. At the end of "Moebius, Part 2," the fish does jump out of the water.

I just popped in my DVD. At the end of "Threads," when Jack and Sam are fishing, the camera zooms in, then zooms back out to reveal that Daniel and Teal'c also came along. We see them set up chairs and a cooler, then Daniel approaches Jack to hand him a beer. Fade to credits.

At the end of "Moebius, Part 2," we see this same scene, but a fish jumps out of the water as Daniel and Teal'c set up their chairs and the cooler.

The timeline was infact changed! Buahahahahaha!!!!

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 10:21 AM
Watch the end of "Threads," then watch the end of "Moebius, Part 2." At the end of "Threads," the fish doesn't jump out of the water. At the end of "Moebius, Part 2," the fish does jump out of the water.

I just popped in my DVD. At the end of "Threads," when Jack and Sam are fishing, the camera zooms in, then zooms back out to reveal that Daniel and Teal'c also came along. We see them set up chairs and a cooler, then Daniel approaches Jack to hand him a beer. Fade to credits.

At the end of "Moebius, Part 2," we see this same scene, but a fish jumps out of the water as Daniel and Teal'c set up their chairs and the cooler.

The timeline was infact changed! Buahahahahaha!!!!
Oh yes, it was changed in such a way that the fish jumped out of the water. Big whoopie.

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 10:26 AM
I didn't say it was a big change, just that it was changed. ;)

Personally, I don't see why people are so upset with the idea of original SG-1 dieing in Ancient Egypt when the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" are literally the exact same team. :confused:

It's no different than Future O'Brien from DS9 "Visionary" or Duplicate Harry from VOY "Deadlock."

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 10:33 AM
I didn't say it was a big change, just that it was changed. ;)

Personally, I don't see why people are so upset with the idea of original SG-1 dieing in Ancient Egypt with the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" are literally the exact same team. :confused:
No, it's not the same team. original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1 are part of different timelines. Timelines that together eventually spawned the timeline that became "our" timeline, the one we've been following for the past 9 and a half years.

In fact, ever since the start of the series, we've been following our!SG-1, whose timeline is the result of original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1. According to the special time travel theory used in Moebius, every time you travel back in time, you create an alternate timeline into which you are merged if you ever go back.

Only, they didn't. Because original!SG-1 couldn't (captured time jumper) and then 3/4ths of original!SG-1 died and, well, we couldn't have geeky!Sam go back and merge with our timeline, now could we?

This is how our!SG-1 could get their hands on a ZPM without ever having to go back in time. Essentially, the ending of "Threads" is the ending of "Theads" of original!SG-1.

Because around that time in our!Timeline, right after Daniel half-Ascended and then Descended and before they went on that fishing trip, they found the ZPM.

Got it? So, in effect, what we saw at the end of "Threads" is not part of our timeline but part of the timeline of the original!SG-1. We can't be sure but all of "Threads" might be the events of the original!Timeline. We know things unfolded pretty much the same in our!Timeline, though, because the Goa'uld are gone and so are the Replicators and they still go fishing (and everything's the same except the fish jumps out of the water).

(I forgot to mention the "Threads"-thing before because it just slipped my mind.)

So, in conclusion: What happened in "Threads" - original!Timeline. What happened in every single other episode of "Stargate SG-1" (including "Moebius") except "2010" - our!Timeline.

our!Timeline is the timeline we've been following since "Children of the Gods" (let's claim "Stargate - The Movie" was an alternate universe because of all of the different. I mean, "Tyler"?!). original!Timeline is that of the 1st SG-1 we saw in "Moebius" (I call it "original!" because they were the first ones (to our knowledge) to go back in time to Ra's time to meddle with the past).

Got it? Questions? I'll answe them.

Admiral Mappalazarou
October 19th, 2006, 10:50 AM
No, it's not the same team. original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1 are part of different timelines. Timelines that together eventually spawned the timeline that became "our" timeline, the one we've been following for the past 9 and a half years.

In fact, ever since the start of the series, we've been following our!SG-1, whose timeline is the result of original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1. According to the special time travel theory used in Moebius, every time you travel back in time, you create an alternate timeline into which you are merged if you ever go back.

Only, they didn't. Because original!SG-1 couldn't (captured time jumper) and then 3/4ths of original!SG-1 died and, well, we couldn't have geeky!Sam go back and merge with our timeline, now could we?

This is how our!SG-1 could get their hands on a ZPM without ever having to go back in time. Essentially, the ending of "Threads" is the ending of "Theads" of original!SG-1.

Because around that time in our!Timeline, right after Daniel half-Ascended and then Descended and before they went on that fishing trip, they found the ZPM.

Got it? So, in effect, what we saw at the end of "Threads" is not part of our timeline but part of the timeline of the original!SG-1. We can't be sure but all of "Threads" might be the events of the original!Timeline. We know things unfolded pretty much the same in our!Timeline, though, because the Goa'uld are gone and so are the Replicators and they still go fishing (and everything's the same except the fish jumps out of the water).

(I forgot to mention the "Threads"-thing before because it just slipped my mind.)

So, in conclusion: What happened in "Threads" - original!Timeline. What happened in every single other episode of "Stargate SG-1" (including "Moebius") except "2010" - our!Timeline.

our!Timeline is the timeline we've been following since "Children of the Gods" (let's claim "Stargate - The Movie" was an alternate universe because of all of the different. I mean, "Tyler"?!). original!Timeline is that of the 1st SG-1 we saw in "Moebius" (I call it "original!" because they were the first ones (to our knowledge) to go back in time to Ra's time to meddle with the past).

Got it? Questions? I'll answe them.

well, I dont know about you guys but I feel Shafted right now.

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 10:55 AM
No, it's not the same team.
Technically, it is. The team at the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" didn't have fish in Jack's pond nor did they have a ZPM. They used the time ship to go back in time and get the ZPM for Atlantis. The team at the end of "Moebius, Part 2" has fish in Jack's pond, and they recieved a crate from an archeaological dig containing a fully powered ZPM and a video camera containing footage of the original SG-1. Really, those are the only differences between the two teams. The new SG-1 is just as real as the old SG-1.


original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1 are part of different timelines. Timelines that together eventually spawned the timeline that became "our" timeline, the one we've been following for the past 9 and a half years.
We followed original SG-1 for eight years, bizzaro SG-1 for the most of "Moebius," and now we're following new SG-1 as of the end of "Moebius, Part 2." :jack: :sam: :daniel: :tealc:


In fact, ever since the start of the series, we've been following our!SG-1, whose timeline is the result of original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1. According to the special time travel theory used in Moebius, every time you travel back in time, you create an alternate timeline into which you are merged if you ever go back.
Then why does no fish jump out of the pond in "Threads," yet it does in "Moebius, Part 2?" Watch the end of both episodes. And pay attention to Daniel and Teal'c for a frame of reference. I have the DVD, so I checked. There is indeed a difference between the two episodes. Your theory has crashed and burned.


Only, they didn't. Because original!SG-1 couldn't (captured time jumper) and then 3/4ths of original!SG-1 died and, well, we couldn't have geeky!Sam go back and merge with our timeline, now could we?
Sam talked about destroying the damaged Puddle Jumper, not the good one that they would have left intact incase they failed to fix the timeline. It's possible that Daniel and the bizzaro versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c could have returned to the future, say.... in an upcoming SG-1 movie? Hmm... Most likely, they would have just remained in Ancient Egypt, but they had the option to return to the future and see if they fixed the past.

Besides, in Part 1... Carter talked about waiting for Ra to leave Earth before recovering the Puddle Jumper. Technically, it was Jack, Sam, and Teal'c's attempt at an early rebellion that screwed everything up. All they had to do was wait a few years...


This is how our!SG-1 could get their hands on a ZPM without ever having to go back in time. Essentially, the ending of "Threads" is the ending of "Theads" of original!SG-1. Because around that time in our!Timeline, right after Daniel half-Ascended and then Descended and before they went on that fishing trip, they found the ZPM.
This much, we agree on.


Got it?
We agree on some points and disagree on others. The way I see it, there are three timelines.

Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.


So, in effect, what we saw at the end of "Threads" is not part of our timeline but part of the timeline of the original!SG-1. We can't be sure but all of "Threads" might be the events of the original!Timeline. We know things unfolded pretty much the same in our!Timeline, though, because the Goa'uld are gone and so are the Replicators and they still go fishing (and everything's the same except the fish jumps out of the water).

(I forgot to mention the "Threads"-thing before because it just slipped my mind.)
Right, "Children of the Gods" through "Threads" and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" is Timeline A. :sam:


So, in conclusion: What happened in "Threads" - original!Timeline. What happened in every single other episode of "Stargate SG-1" (including "Moebius") except "2010" - our!Timeline.

our!Timeline is the timeline we've been following since "Children of the Gods" (let's claim "Stargate - The Movie" was an alternate universe because of all of the different. I mean, "Tyler"?!). original!Timeline is that of the 1st SG-1 we saw in "Moebius" (I call it "original!" because they were the first ones (to our knowledge) to go back in time to Ra's time to meddle with the past).
Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.

The Movie:
The movie is different from the TV show, because the producers wanted to make some changes to make the concept more TV friendly. This always happens when a movie is developed into a TV series.

Admiral Mappalazarou
October 19th, 2006, 10:58 AM
Technically, it is. The team at the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" didn't have fish in Jack's pond nor did they have a ZPM. They used the time ship to go back in time and get the ZPM for Atlantis. The team at the end of "Moebius, Part 2" has fish in Jack's pond, and they recieved a crate from an archeaological dig containing a fully powered ZPM and a video camera containing footage of the original SG-1. Really, those are the only differences between the two teams. The new SG-1 is just as real as the old SG-1.


We followed original SG-1 for eight years, bizzaro SG-1 for the most of "Moebius," and now we're following new SG-1 as of the end of "Moebius, Part 2." :jack: :sam: :daniel: :tealc:


Then why does no fish jump out of the pond in "Threads," yet it does in "Moebius, Part 2?" Watch the end of both episodes. And pay attention to Daniel and Teal'c for a frame of reference. I have the DVD, so I checked. There is indeed a difference between the two episodes. Your theory has crashed and burned.


Sam talked about destroying the damaged Puddle Jumper, not the good one that they would have left intact incase they failed to fix the timeline. It's possible that Daniel and the bizzaro versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c could have returned to the future, say.... in an upcoming SG-1 movie? Hmm... Most likely, they would have just remained in Ancient Egypt, but they had the option to return to the future and see if they fixed the past.

Besides, in Part 1... Carter talked about waiting for Ra to leave Earth before recovering the Puddle Jumper. Technically, it was Jack, Sam, and Teal'c's attempt at an early rebellion that screwed everything up. All they had to do was wait a few years...


This much, we agree on.


We agree on some points and disagree on others. The way I see it, there are three timelines.

Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.


Right, "Children of the Gods" through "Threads" and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" is Timeline A. :sam:


Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.

The Movie:
The movie is different from the TV show, because the producers wanted to make some changes to make the concept more TV friendly. This always happens when a movie is developed into a TV series.

Damn - Shafted again.

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 11:11 AM
Technically, it is. The team at the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" didn't have fish in Jack's pond nor did they have a ZPM. They used the time ship to go back in time and get the ZPM for Atlantis. The team at the end of "Moebius, Part 2" has fish in Jack's pond, and they recieved a crate from an archeaological dig containing a fully powered ZPM and a video camera containing footage of the original SG-1. Really, those are the only differences between the two teams. The new SG-1 is just as real as the old SG-1.


We followed original SG-1 for eight years, bizzaro SG-1 for the most of "Moebius," and now we're following new SG-1 as of the end of "Moebius, Part 2." :jack: :sam: :daniel: :tealc:


Then why does no fish jump out of the pond in "Threads," yet it does in "Moebius, Part 2?" Watch the end of both episodes. And pay attention to Daniel and Teal'c for a frame of reference. I have the DVD, so I checked. There is indeed a difference between the two episodes. Your theory has crashed and burned.


Sam talked about destroying the damaged Puddle Jumper, not the good one that they would have left intact incase they failed to fix the timeline. It's possible that Daniel and the bizzaro versions of Jack, Sam, and Teal'c could have returned to the future, say.... in an upcoming SG-1 movie? Hmm... Most likely, they would have just remained in Ancient Egypt, but they had the option to return to the future and see if they fixed the past.

Besides, in Part 1... Carter talked about waiting for Ra to leave Earth before recovering the Puddle Jumper. Technically, it was Jack, Sam, and Teal'c's attempt at an early rebellion that screwed everything up. All they had to do was wait a few years...


This much, we agree on.


We agree on some points and disagree on others. The way I see it, there are three timelines.

Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.


Right, "Children of the Gods" through "Threads" and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" is Timeline A. :sam:


Timeline A: Seasons 1-8 and the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1."
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: The end of "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes.

The Movie:
The movie is different from the TV show, because the producers wanted to make some changes to make the concept more TV friendly. This always happens when a movie is developed into a TV series.
No, because read my explanation about "Threads". The ending of "Threads" or possibly all of threads is part of the original!SG-1 timeline.

Also, the writers and producers stated in the commentary track for "Moebius" that the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (Part II)" is the same SG-1 we've been following for the past 8 (not 9 and a half) years! It's not a theory, it's facts.

No, original!Daniel, alt!Sam, alt!Jack and alt!Teal'c can never go back to meet us because they don't know whether they've fixed the future or not. Coming back to a future where it's not fixed would complicate matters.

It doesn't matter what you theorize. What the writers and producers say is canon (especially if it's supported by facts). And they said that the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (Part II)" (and for the rest of the episodes since then) is the same SG-1 that we've followed for the past 8 (now 9 and a half) years!

The alternate version of the ending of "Threads" shown in "Moebius (Part II)" was different because what occured in "Threads" was part of the original!Timeline.

This is why I said for people to ignore theories and posts unless "approved" by me, because most people haven't even heard the commentary track for "Moebius" and come up with random speculations based on theorizes they have that they [b]think are valid because they haven't heard the commentary track for "Moebius (Part II)".

The explanation given there is perfectly plausible. Now, I don't remember if they mentioned "Threads", but according to the explanation given, the ending of "Threads" should've been part of the original!Timeline (or possibly all of the episode) because AFAWK the only difference between it and that of our!Timeline is that in our!Timeline, they found a tape and a ZPM in that crypt or whatever, which, through chaos theory, caused that fish to jump out of the lake.

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 11:54 AM
First off, let me say that I am enjoying this debate with you, FallenAngelII. It's rare that I can have this kind of mature debate about a time travel story. :jack: Most other people would just delcare me wrong and not explain why. :jack_new_anime25:


No, because read my explanation about "Threads". The ending of "Threads" or possibly all of threads is part of the original!SG-1 timeline.
Oh, I read your explanation of "Threads." I just disagree with it. It doesn't make sense to me that the episode before the time travel episode would be part of the alternate timeline. :confused: That's not very linear...


Also, the writers and producers stated in the commentary track for "Moebius" that the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (Part II)" is the same SG-1 we've been following for the past 8 (not 9 and a half) years! It's not a theory, it's facts.
I agree with this assessment! There are subtle differences revolving around "Threads" and "Moebius," but other than that, they are the same SG-1 team.


No, original!Daniel, alt!Sam, alt!Jack and alt!Teal'c can never go back to meet us because they don't know whether they've fixed the future or not. Coming back to a future where it's not fixed would complicate matters.
That's very true. However, wouldn't it be hillarious of original Daniel and Bizzaro SG-1 had yet another bizzaro SG-1 show up? LOL Anyway, you're right... they would have destroyed the damaged Puddle Jumper and left the other one exactly where it is while they live out their lives in Ancient Egypt accept for poor Teal'c who would only live until his symbionte matured. :(


It doesn't matter what you theorize. What the writers and producers say is canon (especially if it's supported by facts). And they said that the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (Part II)" (and for the rest of the episodes since then) is the same SG-1 that we've followed for the past 8 (now 9 and a half) years!
Agreed, except for the fish in Jack's pond. lol


The alternate version of the ending of "Threads" shown in "Moebius (Part II)" was different because what occured in "Threads" was part of the original!Timeline.
Right, the original timeline that began with "Children of the Gods" and ended at the beginning of "Moebius, Part 2."


This is why I said for people to ignore theories and posts unless "approved" by me, because most people haven't even heard the commentary track for "Moebius" and come up with random speculations based on theorizes they have that they [b]think are valid because they haven't heard the commentary track for "Moebius (Part II)".
My timeline theory is based on on-screen evidence. In "Threads," there is no fish. In "Moebius, Part 2," there is a fish. However, SG-1 before and after is effectively the same team. I'm not arguing that SG-1 is different, but that the timeline was not fully restored. Really, some fish is not something to get worked up over.


The explanation given there is perfectly plausible. Now, I don't remember if they mentioned "Threads", but according to the explanation given, the ending of "Threads" should've been part of the original!Timeline (or possibly all of the episode) because AFAWK the only difference between it and that of our!Timeline is that in our!Timeline, they found a tape and a ZPM in that crypt or whatever, which, through chaos theory, caused that fish to jump out of the lake.
Ultimately, I don't think it really matters. Aside from fish in Jack's pond, the timeline was fully restored. The "fish" was ment to be a joke and not something to indicate that we're not in the bizzaro world. lol

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 11:59 AM
What the writers and producers say is canon as well, not just what's on screen. And you've never heard of foreshadowing? Or using a plotdevice in several episodes?

Of course it's possible to ease a little original!Timeline into "Threads". It left fans speculating for months whether or not the SG-1 in season 9 was our!SG-1 'til the DVD box was released. They obviously got a kick out of that!

I think that's why they altered the ending of "Moebius" so that a fish jumped out of the lake. Just to have us discussing it 'til the commentary track was released.

And if our!SG-1 was dead, it really would matter. A lot of people were upset at the prospect of our!SG-1 having died and us now following the adventures of alt!alt!SG-1

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 12:06 PM
What the writers and producers say is canon as well, not just what's on screen.
This is almost always true. In this case, I think they forgot that the fish in "Moebius, Part 2" occurs durring the scene in "Threads" where the fish does not leap out of the water.


And you've never heard of foreshadowing? Or using a plotdevice in several episodes?
I'm familiar with forshadowing. However, "Children of the Gods" through "Threads" all occur before SG-1 went back in time, so that effectively makes Seasons 1-8 the original timeline regardless of whut anyone says. Now, if they hadn't pulled the fish joke, I would agree with you.


Of course it's possible to ease a little original!Timeline into "Threads". It left fans speculating for months whether or not the SG-1 in season 9 was our!SG-1 'til the DVD box was released. They obviously got a kick out of that!
I didn't speculate, I thought it was glaringly obvious.


I think that's why they altered the ending of "Moebius" so that a fish jumped out of the lake. Just to have us discussing it 'til the commentary track was released.
It was a joke inspired by an episode of The Simpsons with a similar plot, nothing more.

FallenAngelII
October 19th, 2006, 12:08 PM
It doesn't matter that "Threads" occured before SG-1 went back in time. Because the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" never went back in time due to them not having to due to the theory of time travel utilized in "Moebius".

The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" never went back in time. So it doesn't matter if "Threads" occurred before that. And I doubt they'd forget something that instrumental (especially as the episode they were commenting on ending with that little joke).

I also doubt they'd be as stupid as to not have planned out this whole explanation when writing "Moebius". Leaving a plothole where the original SG-1 died in Egypt would make quite a few fans unhappy (as shown), even if the show had ended.

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 12:12 PM
It doesn't matter that "Threads" occured before SG-1 went back in time. Because the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" never went back in time due to them not having to due to the theory of time travel utilized in "Moebius".

The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" never went back in time. So it doesn't matter if "Threads" occurred before that.
It does matter! "Children of the Gods" through the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" was the first timeline. Bizzaro World was seen for most of "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2" until it was corrected as seen at the end of Part 2.

The SG-1 from "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt. The SG-1 from "Moebius, Part 2" didn't.

Evidence:
"Threads" - No Fish (http://www.stargatecaps.com/sg1/s8/818/shroomy/index6.shtml)
"Moebius, Part 2" - Fish (http://www.stargatecaps.com/sg1/s8/820/shroomy/index7.shtml)

Ergo, the timeline has been altered.

rarocks24
October 19th, 2006, 12:23 PM
The whole killing your grandfather thing is just wrong. Time is parallel, not contiguous.

The_Fifth
October 19th, 2006, 12:42 PM
Agree xD

Konman72
October 19th, 2006, 02:16 PM
It does matter! "Children of the Gods" through the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" was the first timeline. Bizzaro World was seen for most of "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2" until it was corrected as seen at the end of Part 2.

The SG-1 from "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt. The SG-1 from "Moebius, Part 2" didn't.

Evidence:
"Threads" - No Fish (http://www.stargatecaps.com/sg1/s8/818/shroomy/index6.shtml)
"Moebius, Part 2" - Fish (http://www.stargatecaps.com/sg1/s8/820/shroomy/index7.shtml)

Ergo, the timeline has been altered.
No one is arguing that the timeline wasn't alterted. It was, but that alteration led to the team we have seen for 10 years now.

You can continue to say that the team is different, but the producers have stated that that was not the intention of the story. If anything on screen contradicts this then it is a mistake. Also, you are presupposing that the team didn't go fishing again. While it may be a long shot it is still a possibility, which is more likely than it being a different team since we have been told by the makers of the show that it is the same team.

You can make all the arguments you want, but the fact is the producers intended it to be the same team, thus it is the same team. It is up to us to figure out how and why for ourselves.

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 02:30 PM
The producers may say that "Moebius" lead to whut we've seen for the past eight years, but that flat out contradicts the that the ending of "Moebius, Part 2" is different from "Threads" as evidenced by the links I provided.

I go by the actual episodes, not commentaries.

I suppose if they said Jack O'Neill is really a woman, we should believe that?

jenks
October 19th, 2006, 02:51 PM
The producers may say that "Moebius" lead to whut we've seen for the past eight years, but that flat out contradicts the that the ending of "Moebius, Part 2" is different from "Threads" as evidenced by the links I provided.

I go by the actual episodes, not commentaries.

I suppose if they said Jack O'Neill is really a woman, we should believe that?

Lots of things contradict eachother, didn't you say before that the movie was cannon and SG-1 is a sequel of that?

Dutch_Razor
October 19th, 2006, 03:01 PM
So what if the fish jumped right after Threads ended?

Maybe they went fishing twice in Moebius 2...

Cap116
October 19th, 2006, 03:24 PM
I remember reading an article in which an executive producer said that there has always been fish in O'Neill's pond and he had never caught anything and never seen one. But essentially, all the producer was trying to say was that at the end of Moebius Pt. 2, the timeline didn't change. Not saying I believe all of this, just something they forgot to mention.

VolrathEvincar
October 19th, 2006, 03:40 PM
Wouldn't the funkatated Carter recognize that if there was more than one time machine, that they should have destroyed that one as well? I don't know, I mean there didn't seem to be any point if someone could just go back in time and muss it up again? Or maybe that Carter isn't as smart or something. Meh.:sam: ?

Daniel Jackson
October 19th, 2006, 03:50 PM
I remember reading an article in which an executive producer said that there has always been fish in O'Neill's pond and he had never caught anything and never seen one. But essentially, all the producer was trying to say was that at the end of Moebius Pt. 2, the timeline didn't change. Not saying I believe all of this, just something they forgot to mention.
At the end of "Threads," when Daniel and Teal'c approach Jack and Sam, there is no fish. When this exact same scene plays at the end of "Moebius, Part 2," a fish jumps out of the water as Daniel and Teal'c approach Jack and Sam. Watch the two scenes back to back. This is not "additional footage," it happens durring existing footage, ergo... the timeline changed. Jack's line, "Close enough," suggests he knows about the fish in his pond, but didn't say anything when they watched the tape to avoid a nasty lecture from Carter. ;)

Cap116
October 19th, 2006, 05:54 PM
At the end of "Threads," when Daniel and Teal'c approach Jack and Sam, there is no fish. When this exact same scene plays at the end of "Moebius, Part 2," a fish jumps out of the water as Daniel and Teal'c approach Jack and Sam. Watch the two scenes back to back. This is not "additional footage," it happens durring existing footage, ergo... the timeline changed. Jack's line, "Close enough," suggests he knows about the fish in his pond, but didn't say anything when they watched the tape to avoid a nasty lecture from Carter. ;)

I understand that, I am not disagreeing with you. If I could remember the link I would post it, that is just something I read. I know exacting what you are talking about.

J_schinderlin56
October 19th, 2006, 10:21 PM
Why would the producers depict threads as being a differant timeline than the rest of the show? Whatever happend, it stands to reason that very similar things happed it both the A and C timelines. But the episodes themselfs with the exception of "Moebius" give no indication that "hey now we're following a differant timeline than the rest of the show". I don't see how "threads" has anything to do with it just because of a shot of a fish at the end of "Moebius." Just because we didn't see the fish dosen't mean it wasn't there.

FallenAngelII
October 20th, 2006, 01:47 AM
It does matter! "Children of the Gods" through the beginning of "Moebius, Part 1" was the first timeline. Bizzaro World was seen for most of "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2" until it was corrected as seen at the end of Part 2.

The SG-1 from "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt. The SG-1 from "Moebius, Part 2" didn't.

Ergo, the timeline has been altered.
As Konman72 said, no one's arguing the timeline hasn't been altered. And yes, the SG-1 in "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt (together with alt!SG-1).

The point of my argument (supported by statements from the people who wrote the episode) is that the SG-1 in "Threads" is not the SG-1 in "Children of the Gods" up 'til "Reckoning" (and possibly a part of "Threads").

The SG-1 we've been following for the past 9 and a half years is not the SG-1 from the original!Timeline (the one which died in Ancient Egypt). It is also not. our!Timeline is a result of the acts of original!Timeline.

How hard can it be to understand? Everything in Stargate SG-1 (and Stargate Atlantis) follows the same timeline except for a few episodes, such as "Threads" and "Moebius". Yes, the SG-1 in "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt. But the point is that they aren't the same SG-1 as the one at the end of "Moebius (part II)" and neither are they the SG-1 that had been featured up 'til "Threads" (which the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" is.

If you're going to argue that our!SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt, then you have to argue that everything past "Threads" is part of the altered timeline because right before they go fishing, they find a ZPM, which they send to Atlantis and then we move from there.


The producers may say that "Moebius" lead to whut we've seen for the past eight years, but that flat out contradicts the that the ending of "Moebius, Part 2" is different from "Threads" as evidenced by the links I provided.

I go by the actual episodes, not commentaries.

I suppose if they said Jack O'Neill is really a woman, we should believe that?
They never said that "Threads" was part of our!Timeline (which I've stated again and again and again). Of course it's not part of our!Timeline.

Why are you choosing to believe that our beloved SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt when the writers have already given us a way out? The SG-1 in "Threads" was not the SG-1 we've been following for the past 9 and a half years! They were the original!SG-1!


I remember reading an article in which an executive producer said that there has always been fish in O'Neill's pond and he had never caught anything and never seen one. But essentially, all the producer was trying to say was that at the end of Moebius Pt. 2, the timeline didn't change. Not saying I believe all of this, just something they forgot to mention.
Which I stated a few posts back!


Why would the producers depict threads as being a differant timeline than the rest of the show? Whatever happend, it stands to reason that very similar things happed it both the A and C timelines. But the episodes themselfs with the exception of "Moebius" give no indication that "hey now we're following a differant timeline than the rest of the show". I don't see how "threads" has anything to do with it just because of a shot of a fish at the end of "Moebius." Just because we didn't see the fish dosen't mean it wasn't there.
Because of what happens at the end of "Moebius (part II)". According to the timeline, because of the meddlings of original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1, our!SG-1 didn't have to go back in time and they found the ZPM two weeks prior to the events of "Moebius", thus, the fishing trip at the end of "Moebius (part II)" is the very same one as the one in "Threads".

I still don't understand why you're being so difficult about this. It's canon if the producers and writers state it. Yes, they state that Jack O'Neill was born a woman, that would be canon unless they retconned it or revealed it as a joke (Charlie could've been adopted or they could've used donated sperm).

It's simple. The events of "Threads", or at least the fishing trip at the end of it, is part of the original!Timeline. They set it up just to be able to mess with us. Episodes are written out of order and filmed almost simoultaneously. I doubt an entire crew of people would miss something that had happened the week before (especially not since Robert C. Cooper wrote and co-wrote both episodes). I also doubt they filmed the ending of "Threads", went away for a few weeks and then returned, set everything up and then did it all over again, trying to get it as similar as possible.

They filmed the ending of "Threads" and at the same time threw in the scene with the jumping fish to use in "Moebius (part II)". It was all part of a master plan to mess with our heads, knowing fully well that the story would be that the ending of "Threads" was part of the same timeline as that of original!SG-1 (which died in Ancient Egypt).

They did it to set us up, to have us discuss it. I assure you discussions such as these arose after the airing of "Moebius (part II)" where people used the same argument as you guys ("Why would they throw it into 'Threads'?").

But then the producers and writers revealed the Big Whammy and everything as settled. The ending of "Threads" was part of the original!Timeline.

Because our!Timeline (the one we've been following for 9 and a half years) is not the original!Timeline. It's been tampered with both with old!Weir going back in time to set the failsafe on Atlantis and by original!SG-1 going back in time to steal the ZPM from Ra.

our!Timeline is in fact a ******* sprung out of the actions of timetravellers! What we saw in "Threads" was just a glimpse of the events of the original!Timeline, which was pretty much identical to ours, only in that timeline, no fish (that we know of) jumped out Jack's lake (maybe one or two jumped out of it after the screen faded out), but this is due to Chaos Theory because, hey, they found a ZPM and a camera in that crypt.

If you're going to argue that current!Timeline is in fact an alt!Timeline due to our!SG-1 dying in Ancient Egypt, then both shows are following alt!Timelines. And I assure you, the writers didn't want that. Even if SG-1 had ended, Atlantis would still have been going (and it's still going). Having Atlantis being an alt!Timeline would've been stupid.

So why don't you just accept what everyone else has accepted already? original!SG-1 went back in time, all died except for original!Daniel. alt!Sam, alt!Jack and alt!Teal'c travelled back in time and they all spawned our!Timeline while old!Weir slept in Atlantis.

Daniel Jackson
October 20th, 2006, 10:12 AM
I just insterted my Season 8, Volume 5 DVD and listened to the commentary for the fishing scene at the end of "Moebius, Part 2." The director of the episode clearly said that the timeline changed and that the fish is not suppose to be there and that the joke was inspired by a The Simpsons episode also involving time travel and multiple timelines.

Ergo, Seasons 1-8 is Timeline A, "Moebius" is Timeline B, and Seasons 9-10 is Timeline C.


The point of my argument (supported by statements from the people who wrote the episode) is that the SG-1 in "Threads" is not the SG-1 in "Children of the Gods" up 'til "Reckoning" (and possibly a part of "Threads").
The "Moebius, Part 2" commentary contradicts this claim.


The SG-1 we've been following for the past 9 and a half years is not the SG-1 from the original!Timeline (the one which died in Ancient Egypt). It is also not. our!Timeline is a result of the acts of original!Timeline.

How hard can it be to understand? Everything in Stargate SG-1 (and Stargate Atlantis) follows the same timeline except for a few episodes, such as "Threads" and "Moebius". Yes, the SG-1 in "Threads" died in Ancient Egypt. But the point is that they aren't the same SG-1 as the one at the end of "Moebius (part II)" and neither are they the SG-1 that had been featured up 'til "Threads" (which the SG-1 at the end of "Moebius (part II)" is.

If you're going to argue that our!SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt, then you have to argue that everything past "Threads" is part of the altered timeline because right before they go fishing, they find a ZPM, which they send to Atlantis and then we move from there.
All that I am saying is that "Children of the Gods" through "Moebius, Part 1" is one timeline and that "Moebius, Part 2" and all future episodes is another. The timelines are identical except for a few events surrounding "Threads" and "Moebius" with no significant consequences.


They never said that "Threads" was part of our!Timeline (which I've stated again and again and again). Of course it's not part of our!Timeline.
I never said that either. I said it was part of the pre-"Moebius" timeline.


Why are you choosing to believe that our beloved SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt when the writers have already given us a way out?
Why are you choosing to ignore onscreen evidence that the timeline was changed? You keep creating these bizzaro, convoluted "explanations" that "Threads" was some how in some other timeline despite the fact that it occurts before the time travel episode! You're also choosing to ignore the director's commentary where he flat out states that the timeline changed.


The SG-1 in "Threads" was not the SG-1 we've been following for the past 9 and a half years! They were the original!SG-1!
OK, now you're contradicting yourself. The SG-1 in "Threads" is the original SG-1, but they're not the SG-1 we followed for eight years. Either they are or they aren't, make up your mind!!!!


Because of what happens at the end of "Moebius (part II)". According to the timeline, because of the meddlings of original!SG-1 and alt!SG-1, our!SG-1 didn't have to go back in time and they found the ZPM two weeks prior to the events of "Moebius", thus, the fishing trip at the end of "Moebius (part II)" is the very same one as the one in "Threads".
It's not the same fishing trip. In "Threads," there's no fish. In "Moebius, Part 2," there's a fish. WATCH THE EPISODES LIKE I DID!!!


I still don't understand why you're being so difficult about this.
I'm providing the simplest explanation which is confirmed by onscreen evidence and a director's commentary.


It's canon if the producers and writers state it.
...but they didn't state whut you claim they stated. They, infact, stated the opposite.


The events of "Threads", or at least the fishing trip at the end of it, is part of the original!Timeline.
Agreed, along with Seasons 1-8.


They set it up just to be able to mess with us.
No, they didn't. It was a Simpsons-inspired joke.


I also doubt they filmed the ending of "Threads", went away for a few weeks and then returned, set everything up and then did it all over again, trying to get it as similar as possible.
Actually, they did... I think. They used the footage from "Threads" and then added the fish and the little "Close Enough" line by Jack... why do you think that was filmed from behind them, hmm? ;)


They filmed the ending of "Threads" and at the same time threw in the scene with the jumping fish to use in "Moebius (part II)".
This is also possible.


It was all part of a master plan to mess with our heads, knowing fully well that the story would be that the ending of "Threads" was part of the same timeline as that of original!SG-1 (which died in Ancient Egypt).
There was no master plan. It was a joke to make people laugh, nothing more!


They did it to set us up...
:jack_new_anime25:


The ending of "Threads" was part of the original!Timeline.
I am not disputing that...

OK, I don't feel like responding to the rest of your post...

My conclussion:

Timeline A: "Children of the Gods" - "Moebius, Part 1"
Timeline B: "Moebius, Parts 1 & 2"
Timeline C: "Moebius, Part 2" - All Future Episodes

This is supported by the fact that for eight years, Jack has said there are no fish in his pond. Episodes have featured Jack fishing in a fishless pond. In "Threads," there is no fish. These episodes occur before the time travel epic. At the end of "Moebius," after the timeline got screwed with...

On the video tape, Jack says there are no fish in his pond... at all... Jack watches the video with a confused look on his face.

Carter, "Is that correct?"
O'Neill, "If it is... we don't do anything?"
Carter, "Apparantly, nothing we did affected the timeline."
O'Neill, "...but we didn't do anything."
Carter, "Not yet. Apparantly, we were going to two weeks from now, but now... we don't have to."
O'Neill, "Excellent. That's it. I like it!"

The episode ends with SG-1 fishing as they did in "Threads," only this time a fish leaps out of the water. Jack and Sam look at each other, and Jack says, "Close enough..." indicating he knows about the fish but didn't say anything when they watched the video tape.

All of this evidence points to the timeline being changed. Does it matter that SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt? No, because they're also alive in the present.

FallenAngelII
October 20th, 2006, 11:04 AM
If you had followed my threads from the beginning, I call the SG-1 and the Timeline at the beginning of "Moebius" original!SG-1 and original!Timeline because they're part of the original!Timeline.

I call the SG-1 we've been following for years and years our!SG-1.

The point with our!SG-1 being original!SG-1 is that if this is true, then they died and the SG-1 we're following now isn't the same SG-1, which upsets quite a few people.

Let me try and dig up the commentary.

Daniel Jackson
October 20th, 2006, 11:06 AM
If you had followed my threads from the beginning, I call the SG-1 and the Timeline at the beginning of "Moebius" original!SG-1 and original!Timeline because they're part of the original!Timeline.
I have read every post in this thread. I understand that.


I call the SG-1 we've been following for years and years our!SG-1.
I understand that.


The point with our!SG-1 being original!SG-1 is that if this is true, then they died and the SG-1 we're following now isn't the same SG-1, which upsets quite a few people.
The SG-1 we followed for eight years died in Ancient Egypt. The SG-1 we're following now is the same team, except they didn't go back in time and Jack has fish in his pond. To quote Jack, "Close enough." Whut's there to be upset about?:confused:

FallenAngelII
October 20th, 2006, 11:20 AM
I have read every post in this thread. I understand that.


I understand that.


The SG-1 we followed for eight years died in Ancient Egypt. The SG-1 we're following now is the same team, except they didn't go back in time and Jack has fish in his pond. To quote Jack, "Close enough." Whut's there to be upset about?:confused:
No, you obviously do not because you were confused about my use of the terms two posts back.

According to the Time Travel Theory (whatever it's called) used in "Moebius", that isn't the same SG-1 we've been following for the past 8 (and now 9 and a half) years. They're an alternate SG-1 forged by the SG-1s that went back in time (a simple way of putting in).

Like, remember what you call bizzarro!World spawned by the meddling of the SG-1 that went back in time? Because they changed things, Ra took the Stargate and the world got turned pretty much upside down. Now, they managed to change it back, but they had changed it in the first place. Mind you, no matter if they had changed anything or not, that would not have been the same SG-1 at the end of the episode unless they'd gone forward in time again and merged with the timeline (which they didn't because they didn't know if they'd fixed it or not).

For all intents of purposes, that is not the same SG-1. Now, the timelines are, as far as we know, pretty much identical, only a fish jumped out of the water during that fishing trip.

Daniel Jackson
October 20th, 2006, 11:30 AM
No, you obviously do not because you were confused about my use of the terms two posts back.
No, I was not.


According to the Time Travel Theory (whatever it's called) used in "Moebius", that isn't the same SG-1 we've been following for the past 8 (and now 9 and a half) years. They're an alternate SG-1 forged by the SG-1s that went back in time (a simple way of putting in).
I don't know where you get this from.

SG-1 went back in time and screwed up history by accident. Bizzaro SG-1 went back in time and with Original Daniel's help, repaired history. The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" is the same SG-1 at the beginning of "Moebius."


Like, remember what you call bizzarro!World spawned by the meddling of the SG-1 that went back in time? Because they changed things, Ra took the Stargate and the world got turned pretty much upside down.
Right, that created the Bizzaro World.


Now, they managed to change it back, but they had changed it in the first place. Mind you, no matter if they had changed anything or not, that would not have been the same SG-1 at the end of the episode unless they'd gone forward in time again and merged with the timeline (which they didn't because they didn't know if they'd fixed it or not).
It's the same SG-1 in that they look, act, and experienced everything that the original SG-1 did thus... they are the same SG-1 team.


For all intents of purposes, that is not the same SG-1.
They look like SG-1. They act like SG-1. They dress like SG-1. They did whut SG-1 did. How are they not the same SG-1 team? :confused:


Now, the timelines are, as far as we know, pretty much identical, only a fish jumped out of the water during that fishing trip.
Right. That's why it doesn't matter that SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt, because they're also alive in the present. :)

FallenAngelII
October 20th, 2006, 11:45 AM
I suggest you read up on time travel theory. The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" is not the same as the SG-1 at the beginning of "Moebius". It's the simple fact that they are different people.

It's like cloning. You can put SG-1 in a cloning machine and clone them ending up with perfect clones with the exact same memories, neither knowing which set is the cloned set.

Now kill the original set. The cloned set walks, talks and acts the same and has the exact same memories. But it won't be the same.

Or, say, an alternate universe. Where there's no difference, at all. Bring that SG-1 over, kill our SG-1. It won't be the same SG-1.

They don't have to actually be different, in any way, and we wouldn't know, now would we (I mean, 10 years prior, Daniel could've chosen to eat chicken that night instead of vegetarian). It's the fact that it wouldn't be the same SG-1 because our!SG-1 would've died in Ancient egypt (3 of them dying by firing squad, by the way).

The Sg-1 at the end of "Moebius" (and henceforth) is not the same as the one at the beginning of "Moebius". It would be the same SG-1 if the original!SG-1 had travelled forward in time again and merged with the timeline, but they didn't because they couldn't be sure whether or not they'd fixed things and, hey, alt!Sam, alt!Teal'c and alt!Jack.

Daniel Jackson
October 20th, 2006, 12:38 PM
I suggest you read up on time travel theory.
I understand it just fine, thankyou.


The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" is not the same as the SG-1 at the beginning of "Moebius". It's the simple fact that they are different people.
Technically, all three versions of SG-1 are the same four people. They are simply different versions of one team.


It's like cloning.
No, not really. A clone would be more like a twin brother or twin sister than a version of you in a bizzare, alternate timeline.


You can put SG-1 in a cloning machine and clone them ending up with perfect clones with the exact same memories, neither knowing which set is the cloned set.
In this case, the duplicates would not be SG-1.


Now kill the original set. The cloned set walks, talks and acts the same and has the exact same memories. But it won't be the same.
That doesn't apply to time travel. If I go back in time and get stranded and leave a note for my present self not to go back in time... does that mean the present me is my duplicate? Of coarse not! He'd be just as me as the me who got stuck in the past.


Or, say, an alternate universe. Where there's no difference, at all. Bring that SG-1 over, kill our SG-1. It won't be the same SG-1.
Actually, they did this on Star Trek: Voyager in the Season 2 episode "Deadlock." Voyager passed through a funky rift that duplicated every particle of matter on the ship. Unfortunately, the anti-matter wasn't duplicated, so rather than have two Voyagers side by side, we had two Voyagers existing in the space space time completely unaware of the other Voyager. In the end, one Voyager was severely damaged with a main character killed along with a baby. The undamaged Voyager was attacked by aliens intent on harvesting the crew's organs (long story). The ship's defenses were neutralised, the ship was boarded, and the crew was being slaughtered. Harry Kim (the guy that died on the other ship) grabbed the baby and ran to the little vortex that connected the two ships and joined the damaged Voyager crew as his ship self destructed to take out the alien vessel and protect the damaged, defenceless Voyager.

The episode ended with Harry saying it's not really his ship, but yet it is... ultimately, he assimilated into the crew as if Harry had simply flatlined in sickbay and had been resussitated. He was effectively the same Harry Kim that was blown out into space through a hull breach, so he was accepted with open arms.

If I died, and I was replaced by my self from a parallel reality that was almost exactly the same, I wouldn't really care. It would be like I cheated death. Although, I suspect the parallel reality would miss me, so it'd kind'a be pointless for him to replace me, because either way, there's a reality without me.


They don't have to actually be different, in any way, and we wouldn't know, now would we (I mean, 10 years prior, Daniel could've chosen to eat chicken that night instead of vegetarian).
If they're not different in any way, why is it an issue?


It's the fact that it wouldn't be the same SG-1 because our!SG-1 would've died in Ancient egypt (3 of them dying by firing squad, by the way).

The Sg-1 at the end of "Moebius" (and henceforth) is not the same as the one at the beginning of "Moebius". It would be the same SG-1 if the original!SG-1 had travelled forward in time again and merged with the timeline, but they didn't because they couldn't be sure whether or not they'd fixed things and, hey, alt!Sam, alt!Teal'c and alt!Jack.
I just don't see why it's an issue. We're not talking a parallel universe, clones, nor exact duplicates. We're talking going back in time, being stuck there, so leaving a message for the you in the present not to go back in time.

The present SG-1 is the same SG-1 that went back in time. There are subtle differences, but it's the same team for cry'n out loud.

"Moebius, Part 2"
Jack to Sam, "Close enough."

FallenAngelII
October 21st, 2006, 02:20 AM
It's not the same team. Just like the bizzarro!SG-1 isn't the same team, only they had more tangible differences. And we don't really know the differences between our!SG-1 and original!SG-1.

If we'd ended up with bizzarro!SG-1, would you have accepted that as the same team?

College football is played on Sundays. Pro on Mondays (or whatever Jack said). The same important scientific discoveries, past events practically the same. But we don't know what the past 8 years for original!SG-1 were like, there could've been subtle differences that'd make them make a difference decision down the line.

original!SG-1 (or in your opinion final!SG-1) isn't the one we've been following for 8 years. You can claim they aren't different as much as you'd like. You can claim it's close enough. But a lot of people dislike the notion that our!SG-1 is long dead.

Daniel Jackson
October 21st, 2006, 04:51 PM
It's not the same team. Just like the bizzarro!SG-1 isn't the same team, only they had more tangible differences. And we don't really know the differences between our!SG-1 and original!SG-1.
Bizzaro is the same SG-1. It consisted of Jack, Sam, Daniel, and Teal'c. Granted, they were different, but they were also the same people. However, this was unacceptable, because while SG-1 still existed in some form, the whole Stargate Program never existed! That is... bad. :jack_new_anime05:

As for the differences between original SG-1 and current SG-1, there's only one: fish in Jack's pond. The intention of the episode director is that it was the only difference between the first and third timeline thus the line, "Close enough."


If we'd ended up with bizzarro!SG-1, would you have accepted that as the same team?
"Moebius, Part 1" ended with the audience in the Bizzaro World. I was fine with that, but "Moebius, Part 2" set things right and brought us back to the real world. As far as I'm concerned, Bizzaro SG-1 is no less real than the SG-1 at the begging of Part 1 and end of Part 2. They are the same four people, the only difference is that they lead different lives.


College football is played on Sundays. Pro on Mondays (or whatever Jack said). The same important scientific discoveries, past events practically the same. But we don't know what the past 8 years for original!SG-1 were like, there could've been subtle differences that'd make them make a difference decision down the line.
You're really taking a simple joke way too seriously. :mckay:


original!SG-1 (or in your opinion final!SG-1) isn't the one we've been following for 8 years. You can claim they aren't different as much as you'd like. You can claim it's close enough. But a lot of people dislike the notion that our!SG-1 is long dead.
Really? So far, you're the only one I know of who's made a big fuss about it. In any event, our SG-1 both died in ancient Egypt and are alive in the present, so there's really nothing to be upset about. :confused:

RepliHawk
October 21st, 2006, 05:57 PM
I suggest you read up on time travel theory. The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" is not the same as the SG-1 at the beginning of "Moebius". It's the simple fact that they are different people.

It's like cloning. You can put SG-1 in a cloning machine and clone them ending up with perfect clones with the exact same memories, neither knowing which set is the cloned set.

Now kill the original set. The cloned set walks, talks and acts the same and has the exact same memories. But it won't be the same.

Or, say, an alternate universe. Where there's no difference, at all. Bring that SG-1 over, kill our SG-1. It won't be the same SG-1.

They don't have to actually be different, in any way, and we wouldn't know, now would we (I mean, 10 years prior, Daniel could've chosen to eat chicken that night instead of vegetarian). It's the fact that it wouldn't be the same SG-1 because our!SG-1 would've died in Ancient egypt (3 of them dying by firing squad, by the way).

The Sg-1 at the end of "Moebius" (and henceforth) is not the same as the one at the beginning of "Moebius". It would be the same SG-1 if the original!SG-1 had travelled forward in time again and merged with the timeline, but they didn't because they couldn't be sure whether or not they'd fixed things and, hey, alt!Sam, alt!Teal'c and alt!Jack.

:jack_new_anime05:

Admiral Mappalazarou
October 21st, 2006, 09:07 PM
:jack_new_anime05:

Holy Macaroni, Batman!

FallenAngelII
October 22nd, 2006, 01:51 AM
Neither bizarro!SG-1 or whatever-SG-1-isn't-our!SG'1 are our!SG-1.

They're not the same people! Do you even understand Chaos Theory? Or simple logic?

I give you identical clones. Identical in every way up 'til the point when they're cloned. However, we separate them and then see what happens. What they do will shape them and develop them. They won't be the same people anymore.

In "Threads", no fish jumped out of the water. In "Moebius", a fish did jump out of the water. This is but one difference (that we know of). But according to chaos theory, that event could cause the world to end. But all it might've done might've been influencing Jack to buy that can of tuna five months down the road instead of buying Pesto.

And then it snowballs and the decisions made from there will diverge from those of the reality where a fish didn't jump out of the water.

Who you are isn't set in stone at birth. Just look at bizzarro!SG-1. Sam was geeky, Daniel was geeky (and a teacher) and Jack, well, Jack was just pathetic. If we go back in time and change 10 significant events in your life, you would not be the same person.

Who you are is based on past experiences that have shaped you. If I hadn't gone to that one anime convention and met the DDR-people, that part of me wouldn't have come to be and I would've been a different person. I might not have discovered the greatness that is anime conventions either, which might've delayed me discovered the game Super Smash Bros. Melee, through which I met my first boyfriend, but, hey, if I didn't discover it, we never would've met.

Or a significant thing such as Jack going to Abydos with Daniel. Before Abydos, Jack was almost suicidal. Heck, he was suicidal on Abydos. He's just lost Tyler (Charlie) and didn't think life was worth living. In "Moebius", bizzarro!Jack never went to Abydos with our!Daniel, he never met our!Daniel and never had those little epiphanies when he learned that life was worth living. He was a completely different man.

The important thing is that the people we know and love died in Ancient Egypt. The people we, according to your theory, are following right now aren't the same people. They're "close enough", but not the same.

You might be OK with that, but a lot of people aren't!

I'm the only one arguing my point here and you're the only one (except Mapalarazzu's of however you spell his/her handle one attempt) arguing yours.

Daniel Jackson
October 22nd, 2006, 09:57 AM
Neither bizarro!SG-1 or whatever-SG-1-isn't-our!SG'1 are our!SG-1.

They're not the same people!
Are you saying they weren't Jack O'Neill, Daniel Jackson, Samantha Carter, and Teal'c? They sure looked like them to me. :confused:


Do you even understand Chaos Theory? Or simple logic?
Yes, I do. However, I also understand that if an alternate timeline does not create a duplicate you. It simply alters the existing you.


I give you identical clones. Identical in every way up 'til the point when they're cloned. However, we separate them and then see what happens. What they do will shape them and develop them. They won't be the same people anymore.
SG-1 wasn't duplicated, they were changed. There's a difference. Given they did everything the original version of SG-1 did in order to end up on the same fishing trip, we have to assume that differences in the timeline are trivial and of no significant consequence, like fish in Jack's pond.


In "Threads", no fish jumped out of the water. In "Moebius", a fish did jump out of the water. This is but one difference (that we know of). But according to chaos theory, that event could cause the world to end. But all it might've done might've been influencing Jack to buy that can of tuna five months down the road instead of buying Pesto.
I understand chaos theory. Realistically, simply being in Ancient Egypt would totally screw up the timeline. However, this is a fictional story, not an actualwhat if scenario. The writers and director went along with chaos theory which is why we got the Bizzaro World and fish in Jack's pond in the real world.


Who you are isn't set in stone at birth. Just look at bizzarro!SG-1. Sam was geeky, Daniel was geeky (and a teacher) and Jack, well, Jack was just pathetic. If we go back in time and change 10 significant events in your life, you would not be the same person.
I understand this, I'm not a dumbie.


Who you are is based on past experiences that have shaped you. If I hadn't gone to that one anime convention and met the DDR-people, that part of me wouldn't have come to be and I would've been a different person. I might not have discovered the greatness that is anime conventions either, which might've delayed me discovered the game Super Smash Bros. Melee, through which I met my first boyfriend, but, hey, if I didn't discover it, we never would've met.

Or a significant thing such as Jack going to Abydos with Daniel. Before Abydos, Jack was almost suicidal. Heck, he was suicidal on Abydos. He's just lost Tyler (Charlie) and didn't think life was worth living. In "Moebius", bizzarro!Jack never went to Abydos with our!Daniel, he never met our!Daniel and never had those little epiphanies when he learned that life was worth living. He was a completely different man.
I GET IT!!!


The important thing is that the people we know and love died in Ancient Egypt. The people we, according to your theory, are following right now aren't the same people. They're "close enough", but not the same.
The people we followed for eight years died in Ancient Egypt. They were born and lived again in the 20th century just as before. The SG-1 we are following now are the same SG-1 we followed for eight years, only they're slightly different, but who cares?


You might be OK with that, but a lot of people aren't!
Besides you, who are these people? :confused:


I'm the only one arguing my point here and you're the only one (except Mapalarazzu's of however you spell his/her handle one attempt) arguing yours.
This is true.

SG-1 wasn't duplicated, Jack's pond was slightly altered as a joke that you are getting way too upset about. :(

FallenAngelII
October 22nd, 2006, 10:02 AM
According to you, the people we followed for 8 years died in Ancient Egypt. It doesn't matter if the people at the end of "Moebius" (again, according to you) are the same only with minor differences.

The people we knew and loved died. The people we, according to you, are now following are not those same people. No matter if they're the exact same personality-wise, they're not the exact same people!

Hey, if I have to pull out those who oppose the theory that our!SG-1 is dead, you pull out those who are in favour of it. I haven't seen many of those running around in this thread, either.

Daniel Jackson
October 22nd, 2006, 10:09 AM
According to you, the people we followed for 8 years died in Ancient Egypt.
...and are alive in the present.


It doesn't matter if the people at the end of "Moebius" (again, according to you) are the same only with minor differences.
Why?


The people we knew and loved died.
No one seemed to object to this in "2010" or the numerous episodes where Daniel was brought back from the dead. How about the Atlantis episode "Before I Sleep?" No one seems to mind that the entire show is an alternate timeline.


The people we, according to you, are now following are not those same people.
Physically, no. Chronologically speaking, they are the same people.


No matter if they're the exact same personality-wise, they're not the exact same people!
Why is this an issue??? :confused:


Hey, if I have to pull out those who oppose the theory that our!SG-1 is dead, you pull out those who are in favour of it. I haven't seen many of those running around in this thread, either.
The way I see it is if people aren't boycotting Seasons 9-10, because it's not SG-1, then clearly they didn't mind the events of "Moebius." :cameron:

FallenAngelII
October 22nd, 2006, 10:12 AM
No one seemed to object to this in "2010" or the numerous episodes where Daniel was brought back from the dead. How about the Atlantis episode "Before I Sleep?" No one seems to mind that the entire show is an alternate timeline.


Physically, no. Chronologically speaking, they are the same people.


Why is this an issue??? :confused:


The way I see it is if people aren't boycotting Seasons 9-10, because it's not SG-1, then clearly they didn't mind the events of "Moebius." :cameron:
2010 was a look into our future, a future we didn't like. So we went back in time and changed it. However, the time "we" went back to was the present, to "our" SG-1. None of "our" SG-1 died in the present was were replaced.

Daniel died twice (for real), Ascended once and almost Ascended the other time. But it was still Daniel. Tons of people hated Jonas because he was Daniel's replacement and believe me, a lot of people didn't like season 6 because of Michael Shanks not being in it.

It's the physical part people are against. They're not the exact same.

I'm sure very few people boycot seasons 9-10 because our!SG-1 (according to you) died in the past. They don't have to like it either.

Daniel Jackson
October 22nd, 2006, 10:33 AM
2010 was a look into our future, a future we didn't like. So we went back in time and changed it. However, the time "we" went back to was the present, to "our" SG-1. None of "our" SG-1 died in the present was were replaced.
The timeline was altered far more in "2010" than it was in "Moebius." Why is one episode OK and the other not? Who cares if SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt when SG-1 in the present is alive and well? They're not duplicates, they're SG-1. Ooooo, there's fish in Jack's pond, we're in the bizzaro world, AAAHH!!!! :rolleyes:


Daniel died twice (for real), Ascended once and almost Ascended the other time. But it was still Daniel.
Daniel died in the following episodes:

1-06 "The Nox"
1-19 "There But For the Grace of God" (Alternate Daniel)
3-06 "Point of View" (Did Alternate Daniel die? I can't remember.)
4-16 "2010" (Future Daniel)
4-21 "Double Jeopardy" (Robot Daniel)
5-21 "Meridian" (Ascended, he didn't die.)
8-17 "Reckoning, Part 2" (Ascended, he didn't die.)
8-19 "Moebius, Part 1"
8-20 "Moebius, Part 2" (Original Daniel & Bizzaro Daniel)



Tons of people hated Jonas because he was Daniel's replacement and believe me, a lot of people didn't like season 6 because of Michael Shanks not being in it.
Tons of people loved Jonass, because it ment that the producers were willing to make great changes and take some risks. Some of those people stopped watching after "Full Circle," because they didn't like that Jonas was kicked out so the show could return to that status qou.

Personally, I liked both characters, but I am glad Daniel came back.

FallenAngelII
October 22nd, 2006, 10:58 AM
The timeline was altered far more in "2010" than it was in "Moebius." Why is one episode OK and the other not? Who cares if SG-1 died in Ancient Egypt when SG-1 in the present is alive and well? They're not duplicates, they're SG-1. Ooooo, there's fish in Jack's pond, we're in the bizzaro world, AAAHH!!!! :rolleyes:


Daniel died in the following episodes:

1-06 "The Nox"
1-19 "There But For the Grace of God" (Alternate Daniel)
3-06 "Point of View" (Did Alternate Daniel die? I can't remember.)
4-16 "2010" (Future Daniel)
4-21 "Double Jeopardy" (Robot Daniel)
5-21 "Meridian" (Ascended, he didn't die.)
8-17 "Reckoning, Part 2" (Ascended, he didn't die.)
8-19 "Moebius, Part 1"
8-20 "Moebius, Part 2" (Original Daniel & Bizzaro Daniel)



Tons of people loved Jonass, because it ment that the producers were willing to make great changes and take some risks. Some of those people stopped watching after "Full Circle," because they didn't like that Jonas was kicked out so the show could return to that status qou.

Personally, I liked both characters, but I am glad Daniel came back.
The timeline was changed, yes. But it was still our SG-1. The SG-1 from the future was our SG-1 but after 10 years so we didn't really know them anymore (Sam was married for Christ's sake!).

Daniel only died for real in two episodes, "Meridian" and "Reckoning (part II)". And I don't see what the heck Daniel dying has to do with this, because he came back every single time... the same person too!

To Ascend, you have to die. alt!Daniel in "Point of View" was never a member of Stargate Command (if it's from the same divergance as the one in "There But For The Grace of God". alt!Daniel was never mentioned or seen from).

Daniel also died in the movie.

Hey, I loved Jonas. Tons of people didn't simply because Daniel was gone. A lot of people stopped watching because they took Daniel out of the show.

Dumper
October 22nd, 2006, 12:09 PM
For crying out loud you two give it a rest, just agree to disagree before my head explodes. :confused: :)

Arga
October 22nd, 2006, 12:44 PM
For crying out loud you two give it a rest, just agree to disagree before my head explodes. :confused: :)

you have to say "Ka Keka! Ka Keka! Ka Keka!" :danielanime08:

:D

jenks
October 22nd, 2006, 12:57 PM
SG-1 went back in time and screwed up history by accident. Bizzaro SG-1 went back in time and with Original Daniel's help, repaired history. The SG-1 at the end of "Moebius" is the same SG-1 at the beginning of "Moebius."


Nope, the ones at the begining are an alternate SG-1.

rosey_angel
November 29th, 2006, 05:55 PM
holy... wow this is a great thread! i LOVE time travel theories (daniel jackson or fallen angel II please pm me the names of any and all time travel books you've read)

i gotta watch the eps again before i can weigh in. i'm pretty sure mine will involve a drawing or two...

TheUnknown
November 29th, 2006, 07:27 PM
To Ascend, you have to die.

No, you don't. The villagers in "Epiphany" were able to do it without dying.

oflyboy
November 30th, 2006, 04:39 PM
In fact i'm pretty sure that's the whole thing, you can choose to die or to ascend. Ascending isn't death, but a giving up of your tangible human form to go beyond that.

But I have to agree that the SG-1 at the end of the episode, while being esentially the same people, they are still Jack, Sam, Teal'c and Daniel, they are not the same versions of those people. And although to some extent that does occasionaly make me then wonder about what things have happened differently in their pasts. Due to it being a television programme, and the fact that they are still essentially the same people that we have come to love and know, i don't let it bother me.

Daniel Vs Jonas, they are/were great in their own distinct ways. Personally i find them both hilerious. And Jonas being there made me appreciate Danny so much more when he returned. I am so glad that MW left for a season, in my opinion it helped the show and gave it a new lease of life. t changed the dynamic and allowed for a greater understanding of ascension and the ancients, as well as allowing characters to develope in his absence.

Ok.. done..