133: Star Trek Strange New Worlds Season 2, episode 2 “Ad Astra per Aspera”

In today’s episode of Trek in Time, we’re going to talk about being curt in court. That’s right. We’re talking about Star Trek, Strange New Worlds, season two, episode one. No, that’s not right.

You haven’t updated everything in the notes.

In this episode of Trek in Time, we’re going to talk about being curt in court. That’s right. We’re talking about Strange New Worlds. Season 2, Episode 2, Ad Astra Per Aspera. Welcome, everybody, to Trek in Time, where we’re watching every episode of Star Trek in chronological order, according to Stardate.

We’re also taking a look at what our world was like at the time of original broadcast. So we’re currently talking about, well, just last year, 2023. This is the closest we’ve come to talking about a show in order. In our contemporary time, like, yeah, we’re going to have to go very fast if we’re going to try and get there where we’re like, and in this week’s episode, like we’re never going to get there probably, but right now this is the closest we’ve come.

And who are we? Well, I’m Sean Ferrell. I’m a writer. I write some sci fi. I write some stuff for kids. And with me as always is my brother, Matt. He’s that Matt of Undecided with Matt Ferrell, which takes a look at emerging tech and its impact on our lives. Matt, how are you doing today?

I’m doing great. And one of the reasons why, Sean, is as people listen to this, I’m on vacation.

Ooh. I’m very excited about being on vacation. Yes, right now. It’s been six, it’s been six years, Sean. I haven’t taken a vacation in six years.

That’s weird. Did something happen during the 2020, 21, 22 zone that kept you from traveling? Mm. We may never know.

That’s right. Matt is like Mayor Quimby from The Simpsons. He’s actually standing in front of a fake backdrop. He’s currently standing on a beach where somebody with a steel drum is about to walk by in the background playing it. As always, we like to start the episode by taking a look at the mailbag and seeing what all of you have had to say about our previous episodes.

So, Matt, what did you find for us today? On the previous

episode, which was 132, The Broken Circle, we had a couple of Comments about what the title of today’s episode means, uh, one from AJ Chan, Ad Astra Per Espera, the movie Ad Astra, but sans Brad Pitt, PaleGhost69 wrote, Ad Astra Per Espera to the stars with asparagus?

Is that why rockets look that way?

Mm hmm. The answer is yes. Yeah.

It smells when you pee. That’s right. And PaleGhost69 also wrote, this episode was a fun ride with some backstory, but overall it felt flat. It fell flat for me. Also, I have so many questions about the serum. For starters, how does it help human bones survive the impact into a Klingon forehead?

Excited for the next episode. And PaleGhost, I actually was thinking the same exact thing when I was watching the fight scene and it’s like they’re punching stuff and then later as the serum wears off and they punch something and they actually go, ouch. Yeah. Wait, how? How’d that make their fists, like, take more punishment?

I don’t, I don’t understand. Gotta let it wash over you a

little bit. I don’t know about that. I think that I can conceive of a sci fi trope which would be an injection which allows your body to repair at a faster rate and accelerate your muscle use. And strength, like effectively make your body function in a way that smaller biological organisms do.

Like you think of like an ant can lift a greater percentage of its own body weight in comparison to a human. What if there was a way of like magnifying what your body’s capable of, including healing and dealing with the kind of impact damage that you’re seeing in that? It’s a super serum. It’s a super soldier serum, which is a harder phrase to say than you would like it to be.

But anyway.

Okay. So the other one was from. Uh, Happy Flappy Farm. I love Pelia, but I can’t see her and not think of the Princess Bride. She was fun in that too. Sorry you don’t like her style, Matt. I actually do like her style. I love her in the Princess Bride. It’s just her in this just

feels Uh, kind of jarring with how everybody else is and then you have her just being her.

It’s a, it’s a, it’s a little kind of, for me, just a little off putting, but I do like her. Then there was Wayouts123 wrote, one child of Sarek started a war. The other stole the ship and both kind of walked away. Must be nice being the children of the most senior ambassador in Starfleet. Yeah. And then also noted, I love Pelia, don’t want to spoil future episodes, but I love her.

End. As much as her performance rubs me the wrong way, there is cool stuff about her character coming up. And, no spoilers, because Sean has not seen it yet, so. That’s right.

I get it. Thank you, everybody, for keeping it spoiler free. That noise you hear in the background, of course, is the read alert, which means that it’s time for Matt to buckle up and tackle the Wikipedia description.

Matt, Good luck. Alright. Pike recruits

Illyrian civil rights attorney Neera Ketoul as defense counsel for number one. The prosecution, led by Pike’s girlfriend, Captain Marie Batel, easily builds a case that Number One violated Starfleet’s anti genetic modification laws by hiding her identity as a genetically modified Illyrian

Ketoul argues that the law is unjust and inconsistently applied, and points out that Admiral April has violated the Prime Directive when he believed it was the right thing to do. La’an, a descendant of the genetically modified warlord Khan Noonien Singh, investigates how Starfleet learned of Number One’s status, worried that the information was taken from her own personal logs.

Number One testifies about the oppression and the marginalization Illyrians faced in her childhood, explains that she joined Starfleet because she believed it celebrated diversity, and reveals that she provided her own genetic status to Starfleet once it was known to the crew. Ketoul argues that Number One can be construed to have been seeking asylum when she joined Starfleet.

The judges accept this interpretation and acquit Number One.

Episode number two, directed by Valerie Weiss, written by Dana Horgan, broadcast originally on June 22nd, 2023. Cast includes Anson Mount, Ethan Peck, Christina Chong, Melissa Navia, Rebecca Romijn, Jess Bush, Celia Rose Gooding, Babs Olusanmokun, with guest stars Yetide Badaki as Neera Ketoul, Adrian Holmes as Robert April, and Melanie Scrofano as Marie Batel.

What was the world like on June 22nd, 2023 when this originally broadcast? Well, Matt, I don’t need to tell you, Morgan Whelan was still booming out of your boom box. That’s right. Last night was downloaded 31 million times. I will never do anything in my life 31 million times. And in theaters, Spider Man Across the Spider Verse earned 19 million to reclaim the number one spot in its fourth weekend of release.

This is the first time since the Super Mario Brothers movie. That a film had reclaimed the box office in its fourth week. And on television, a little show called Bluey was the most watched program. The second ranked most watched streaming program on television. This is a Disney Plus show, which is originally from Australia.

It was commissioned by Australian and BBC networks to, uh, be a show for children showing interactions in a family dynamic between the parents and the kids. And I don’t have children who are young enough to want to watch this, but I do have family members who are young enough to want to watch this. So I have seen episodes and I have to say this show is arguably more for the parents to teach parents how to be good parents than it is for kids.

The show focuses almost entirely on what are the parents doing to support their children to make sure they’re children. Feel safe.

I, Sean? Yes. I don’t have kids, but I’ve heard so many people say that about this show. I was like, I gotta check it out. So I watched a couple episodes. It is charming as all get out.

Yes. Yes. This is for the parents. This is not for the kids. Entertain for the kids, but it is kind of a teaching show for, hey, um, maybe you want to do this with your kids because it’s a really great way to support their imagination. Maybe it’ll help build their self esteem. It’s like, this is a fantastic show.

It’s teaching the kids and the parents.

And in the news, the New York Times had the following stories on its front page. The Federal Trade Commission was accusing Amazon of tricking users into subscribing for Prime. There was an article analyzing whether inflation, which was reaching Decades long peaks was actually over and not quite yet, and we’re still feeling the impacts of that today.

There was also an article about affirmative action and how it had impacted people’s lives as affirmative action has become a hotly contested issue in debate and in court cases, and in some cases is being rolled back. On now to our discussion of Ad Aspera Per Astra. Did I get that right? I have no idea.

Our discussion is going to revolve around, well, it’s effectively like a law and order case. It is a, what I thought was a tightly wound courtroom drama that while being focused on number one is impacting everybody on the crew. Everybody in support of number one is looking for ways to give her aid in this moment.

We’re given scenes of Pike. Looking like he can’t even stay in the room. He’s so upset about what is going on. We see, uh, La’an Noonien Singh begin her own investigation. And we see the dynamic between Number One and her attorney, who, there is clearly tension between the two of them at the beginning. We are not let in until Literally, testimony in the courtroom about what it is that has driven this wedge between two people who are clearly old friends and we don’t understand what the problem is until we find out that it is Una Chin-Riley and her family were able to pass as non modified Illyrians and so they went into the non modified .

Lifestyle, leaving behind people like Ketoul, whose family could not, for whatever reason, pass in the same way. So it is a story of effectively a metaphor for racial divisiveness or any kind of labeling of othering. a group, whether it be, you can see this as a metaphor for gender identity, for sexuality, for race, immigration, for immigration, for religious, uh, strife.

It, it applies itself to any of that. And I found myself really enjoying the courtroom drama aspects of it. What did you, what did you think about that side of the storytelling? Oh, I

loved it. Um, someone paid a shock to Sean, but one of my favorite episodes of all Star Trek is Star Trek Next Generation’s The Measure of a Man, where Data is put on trial because Starfleet owns him and Picard ends up being his advocate, arguing, you know, he is a sentient life form.

He has his own free will. We don’t own him. That is probably one of my favorite episodes of all time. Um, in fact, I wrote my master’s thesis on that episode. That’s how much of a geek I am. Uh, but this, while this episode doesn’t quite hit that height for me, it still scratched that itch. It was right in that wheelhouse of this is why I love Star Trek, dealing with kind of weighty issues.

Um, and so the, the courtroom aspect of the structure, I thought was the perfect way to explore this exact. thing. And also the fact that they were hitting on the, just because it’s a law, it doesn’t mean it’s moral or it doesn’t mean it’s ethically right. It’s like, I love that whole aspect of the courtroom drama.

The law and orderness of this didn’t bother me at all. I just ate it up. It was great.

Yeah. I found myself flashing back not to that episode. It’s interesting that you, that you brought that one up. It hadn’t occurred to me. The one that I kept flashing back to is the episode of the original series called Court Martial in which Kirk is put on trial.

And In that episode is the character Samuel Cogley, who is played by Elijah Cooke, Jr., a character actor from the 60s, who plays his attorney, and I found myself Like, really thinking, like, are they gonna pull somebody into a scene and refer to him by that name? Like, are we gonna get a little bit of, of, uh, a reference to that character?

And I was hoping for it. But maybe that’s too deep a cut because we did not get it. But the appearance of this episode, the way it all presents, the dress uniforms of the officers, the formalities of the ringing of the little bell, those are pulled right from the court martial episode. And I found myself really resonating with that and how it was tying a thread to the original series.

Once again, a successful linkage to the original series. So, moving from the courtroom setting, and I agree with you, a courtroom setting where you have the opportunity to, in a dry and arguably dispassionate language, talk about the conflict and tension in the law between The law, morality, ethics is a perfect, it’s a courtroom drama exists and courtroom drama has existed for a long time in theater.

Um, it is a crucible for drama. It is the perfect environment in which you can have two people brought forward to boldly state what they believe and show the conflict between them. This episode does it on two levels. You have the surface level, which is the courtroom itself, and the drama there. I like the subtlety of the, effectively, the JAG officer, the Judge Advocate General, who is a Vulcan shown in scenes silent through a majority of the episode.

Yeah, he barely speaks. And he is And he is driving this case through his associate who is Captain Batel, who is Pike’s on and off again relationship. And he is clearly the power behind this. Mo this movement to undo Una Chin-Riley and we are given a hint of what it’s fully about leading to Captain Pike.

It starts to become evident that he is looking past Una Chin-Riley and he is looking toward Captain Pike as a potential threat. by whatever logical analysis he’s gotten to it. The more subtle storyline, the one that’s underneath that, is about conflict between friends and conflicts that run so deep that you don’t see them.

You can only read them through the tea leaves. We see that between number one and her attorney. As we see the, the dynamic there, uh, constantly refer to, are we going to talk about it? No, we’re not going to. And then it turns out to be the heart of the defense case. We also see it in La’an, who is trying to do an investigation to figure out where did the leak come from that let Starfleet know that number one was Illyrian.

And she is fearful that it was her own personal logs. That were somehow obtained that caused this leak. We also see it demonstrated as kind of the key. And I, and I hat tip to this show. This show does a remarkable job of having a moment during the beginning, the first third of the show where the writer kind of sneakily whispers to the audience, here’s the key to unlock.

This story, we’re given a scene in which two Vulcans are talking and we are told, yeah, you on the surface might think this is a dry, dispassionate moment, but in reality, there is hot blooded turmoil rolling underneath. That is effectively the metaphor for the entire episode. Courtrooms may look like and behave as if they are dry, dispassionate, and objective, but the reality is that underneath the surface, there’s strong motions and emotions underneath the surface that are driving all of this, both from the prosecution and from the defense.

Somebody who’s defending themselves, looking for any means of escape is going to be the obvious place of emotion. But we discount the fact that driving prosecution can also be equally strongly held emotions. So we have a process in a courtroom setting, which is to straighten the tie and present everything as if this is just the facts, but in reality, it’s never just the facts.

It is pulling all these undercurrents with it and bringing them right to the surface to talk about them in ways that we normally don’t. So we’re seeing it again and again and again. What did you think? And I’ve referenced now La’an. In her pursuit, I’ve referenced the relationship between Una Chin-Riley and her lawyer, and I’ve referenced the simple key, which was the scene between Spock and the JAG officer.

Which, if any of these three, do you want to visit and talk about a little bit?

All of them. Um, I’d want to start with La’an, because one of the things about La’an, her drive to find, am I the person that got her caught in this pickle? Um, there was a scene on the bridge with her and Uhura. Where she is trying to get Uhura to basically scan through all the personal logs to find out if anybody leaked this to see if it was her or not.

And what I loved about this scene is like what you just brought up. Conflict between friends. Here’s two friends. And Uhura A junior officer stands up to her and says, I’m not going to do that. This is illegal order. And if I do it, it’s going to come back and haunt you. And I love that Uhura makes this very logic, passioned plea saying, this is not going to help Una.

This is going to hurt Una if we do this. We have to follow the rules. I love that she made this very impassioned plea about why it’s important to follow the rules. And that’s the whole point of the entire episode. When to bend them, when to break them, when to follow them. And Uhura makes the perfect argument for why this case is where you follow the rules.

I thought Can I jump onto

that real quick? Yeah. This episode is also about when to forgive. Yes. And that scene also is demonstrating that because when Uhura says to La’an, I know you’re driven by the fact that she is your mentor. You are mine. Yes. And the unspoken in all of that is La’an is saying, she was my mentor, but I felt hurt and betrayed by something she did.

But I forgave her and now I work to defend her and Uhura in this moment is saying you are doing something I don’t respect or agree with and yet I am willing to forgive you by saying to you no and you should stop. It is like the construction of this episode from top to bottom. I found myself as I was watching it like there’s not a loose screw.

Anywhere. It is, it is so perfectly tightened. It is so perfectly rendered. I found myself absolutely dumbfounded by how, how tight it was. So to move to the sequence, which was there for obvious human humor relief, uh, this is a, the Vulcans, a passionate episode. So we end up with a scene in which the Vulcan conversation between Spock and the JAG officer is intended for comedic relief.

And we get. We get the, the pilot of the Enterprise mockingly providing dialogue for the two Vulcans who are sitting at a table at a little bit of a distance. And she is clearly like, Vulcan’s gonna Vulcan. So they’re just good buddy buddies with their everything is logical and everything works together.

And we’re all friends because we like logic. And she is mocking them from that perspective, clearly thinking that Spock’s relationship to various members of the crew is overridden by a logic. There is a kind of McCoy like foil. in her character, which I think is necessary to the show. You need to have a family unit needs to still have space for disagreement in order for there to be drama.

Uh, so if everybody aboard the Enterprise was all immediately like, we all completely understand each other and always agree, it would be like, Oh, that’s kind of boring. Um, so we’re given that moment. And Babs Olusmokun, once again, the heart of the enterprise, yeah, for me, it’s just like he’s the beating heart of the crew.

He is, he’s the one who can stand there and say like, I can be the one who kind of understands the undercurrents of everybody else in the room. And I can kind of patiently stand in the background and teach all of you one at a time what it means to love and understand one another. I love him. And he says.

Oh, you gotta learn to read Vulcans. Because the two of them hate each other.

The best part about the entire scene though, Sean, of course, the comic relief, when Spock comes over and just says, I’m sorry you had to witness

that,

and then walks away and the two of them are just dying with laughter at the table because it was like, you couldn’t tell.

But I do, I do love, I love the Doctor so much because he is so wise. He is, he drops those moments where he is kind of like take somebody under his wing and he was like, no. Actually, it’s kind of this. I love the way he just laid it out there. And it was fun to see this sarcastic, fake dialogue, which in itself was amusing.

And then to continue that back and forth with the doctor describing what he was saying. And it, it’s like, it’s like the power of montage, how you can take a picture of a woman crying and then you, you put it next to a baby and it looks like she’s happy for this baby. And then you can take that same picture of the woman crying and put it next to a house on fire.

And it looks like. Now she’s horrified, but it’s the same exact shot. So it’s like, to me, that this was kind of like the power of montage of like, where it’s like, you’re seeing it through the pilot’s eyes of this, just mocking it. And then it’s the same conversation through the doctor’s eyes. And you start to kind of see, there does seem to be kind of like a little bit of a tension between the two of them.

So I thought it was really interesting the way they did, they played with that too. It was, it was, it was a lot of fun.

I want to move now to the places where the show doesn’t strip away the honorable nature of the individuals, but belies things beneath the surface that kind of hint at the imperfection of humanity. And I’m talking mainly about the presentation of Admiral April. And his testimony, in which he talks glowingly about Una Chin Riley, about how proud he was to be her sponsor, about what it meant to him to do all of that, and then when questioned about whether he would do any of that if it were Known to him what she was, and he supports the structures of the rule of law, while then being painted as hypocritical in being able to break what is referred to for only the second time in the series as the Prime Directive.

The Prime Directive, the number one rule everybody in Starfleet is supposed to obey. And a number of instances in which now Admiral April broke that rule in the name of what was considered the greater good are laid out in front of us. And we are presented with a moment in which we are supposed to question whether this heroic honorable man is in fact prejudiced.

And is the law a prejudicial law? So, Matt, how did you feel about April going into the scene? How did you feel about him leaving the scene? And how did you feel about this moment being kind of the magnifying glass on the rule itself to say this restriction? Is prejudicial. This is why I love

Star Trek, Sean, because I didn’t feel differently about him.

I didn’t feel, he didn’t feel like lesser of a man or admiral or leader to me than he did going in. I like his character and I still liked his character coming out of this. It’s all about, all of this is about a matter of perspective, and so from his perspective, he was seeing that rule and understanding its place of why it was there and he wouldn’t have broken it.

Um, which is crystal clear. And then also, why he bent the first, the most precious rule of Starfleet, why he bent that rule, uh, the Prime Directive, it’s, you can just, from the descriptions of what happened on those planets, you can understand why he did it. And you can understand that at times you have to bend that rule.

And we know that from Kirk, we know that from Picard, we know that from every Star Trek show that it’s got to be situational. Um, so it’s kind of like, what’s the greater good? And it’s all a matter of perspective. And so because of that, you can’t fault him for standing by the rule against Illyrians and modifications the way he did, which is part of the reason why I didn’t fault him because it’s, it’s a, it’s a fault in the system.

It’s a fault in the way things are set up, um, so with more time and experience, his position on that would probably change. But again, he’s been a good Starfleet officer, following the rules, following the law, and he understands where it should happen and where it shouldn’t happen. So it’s, it’s, it, for me, I thought the case against him was pretty damning.

Like when they kind of just, she just drew out the whole point of why is it okay to bend this rule, but not this. And you can make a very clear distinction that it should be bent in her case, so why aren’t you bending it? Um, it was a very, I thought it was a really well done conversation because it made me as a viewer, I’m sure you, you might feel the same way, question things without disliking him.

It does an interesting job of putting in front of you as a viewer, the reality that laws are meant to be lived. Yes. And that that is lost in the black and whiteness of, oh, you’re Illyrian, out. There’s, there’s a thing about it that is to say, if you’re Illyrian, out, what is the fairness of that? What is the role of that?

What is the purpose of that? And that is the digging into it because an unlived law, like we have rules on the law books to this day, like it’s illegal to own a pig in Manhattan, like things like that. Um, when does that come up? When does, like, when does a rule that is archaic Stop being a law when stop when it stops being applied Like the simplicity of if nobody brings you to court for that thing, then what is it doing?

Law is about living and So I think that this does a great job of demonstrating not only how is being Questioned from an ethical perspective, but from a living perspective. What is an individual like Una Chin-Riley supposed to do? When the law, as applied, destroyed her family’s experiences, destroyed the safety of her people, turned it into a ghetto situation.

Well, when you’re hearing the Admiral talk about it, at the moment in this episode, at the moment in the episode that that happened, all the prime directive things that he bent, he was saving thousands of people, maybe even millions of people in doing what he was doing. Very clear thing. And the reason he said, even knowing how good she is today, I wouldn’t have changed my mind then, is because it’s a single person.

She’s a person. She lied. She lied. She did a bad thing. She lied. She hid something that wasn’t supposed to be hidden. And so there you go. It’s, it’s pretty straightforward. It’s not about saving millions. It’s just this one person lied to me and that’s enough to like write her off. But later in the episode, when the arguments start coming up about how many lives has she saved because she was in Starfleet.

And then the tree that branches out from that, uh, like La’an, she wouldn’t have been in Starfleet if it wasn’t for Una. And how many lives has La’an saved? And so you start to get this branching tree coming out, like the fact she’s in Starfleet has probably saved tens of thousands, if not millions of lives.

So then you could kind of go back to the Admiral again, if you wanted to, and say, do you still stand by that line of thinking? By bending the rules for her, you actually saved potentially tens of thousands of people, maybe even millions. So, it’s one of those matter of perspective I was bringing up before.

So, at that moment in the episode, it seemed cut and dry to him, but it’s like, over the course of it, you could see he might have had a change of heart at some point when the arguments continued.

Yeah. I also want to visit the finale of the episode in the mode of the legal argument being made is not to defend Una Chin-Riley.

She is what she is. It is not to dissolve the law in the form of, oh, we’ve changed our minds and we’re removing this law from the books. Ding! It is painting the argument of, this was an asylum seeker. That was provided refuge and I love that culmination of that argument because it does a number of things.

It’s very to kill a mockingbird, you know, the legal drama about systemic racism effectively and the case is lost, but the case. This is one in the hearts of the audience, because the realities of systemic racism are put fully in front of everybody. That is what is presented. So, in this case, within the narrative, you have a lawyer making the argument, this was a case of an asylum seeker.

This was the case of an Illyrian being given asylum to prevent harm to her from those who would do her harm. And by winning the case, she’s now put on the map that Illyrians are a persecuted group. And that’s an important first step to undoing The Law that she is railing against. So she doesn’t go into the courtroom to defeat the law.

She goes into the courtroom to present an argument about the group that is impacted by the law. And I think that is a great turning point for the episode.

Yeah, I was going to say that was the part that I also enjoyed about the lawyer’s storyline is that in the beginning, the first half, it looks like she’s got an axe to grind.

And she’s not going to really defend Una as Una. She’s trying to go after the system. And it turns out she actually was shaping things to actually protect Una, but she had to lay the foundation to be able to build on top of. And so I do, I did love how at the end there was that turning point, that twist.

with how she questioned Una, why she brought Una up on the stand when originally she wasn’t going to do it, and how she got Una to admit all of these things that were required for the Starfleet rules to allow for asylum. It was like a really nice, fun reveal for us as a viewer, and it was also nice to see it That kind of, I don’t know, she’s playing like she’s playing chess when me as a viewer I was playing checkers as she’s kind of like putting the whole thing together.

It was fun to watch that unfold.

Yeah. I also appreciated that as that was happening, the camera at one point went to. Marie, the captain who is the prosecuting attorney, and she is smiling because she realizes before we, the audience member, do, she knows where the argument is going. She sees like, this is an asylum argument.

So brilliant.

I’m curious if you picked up on this, or if it’s just me reading, reading into it wrong. The Vulcan JAG officer, he almost looked like he had a Vulcan smirk on his face. During that sequence too, because they showed him several times, and the look on his face, the way I interpreted it was, he almost looked like, oh.

Well done. It was almost like this look on his face of like, bravo, nicely done. I agree.

I said that too. Yeah. It was like, it was him in that moment of you’ve created a logical argument that I cannot undo and he appreciated the beauty of the logical argument on that one thing, the conclusion that would come out of it.

So it was a nice moment in that regard as well. So Matt, before we move on, is there anything else about this episode that you wanted to talk about? Anything else that you thought stood out to you?

No, I, for me, for Strange New Worlds, I thought this was an extremely well written show. It was a very enjoyable one.

I like this kind of drama, the courtroom drama, I enjoyed it. So for me, top to bottom, I just enjoyed this one.

And do you have anything you wanted to share with our viewers and listeners before we head off? What do you have coming up on your main channel?

Oh, there’s a bunch of stuff. I have a video coming up on, of all things, Sean.

A water heater, so strap yourself in for that one, but also

I have videos about emerging tech. Oh

yeah, heat pump water heaters. Um, it’s kind of just simple genius of how they work. Uh, but then I have a video coming, uh, exploring where are all the Tesla solar roofs that are coming up. Cause like that stuff, that product was shown.

Five, six years ago, and aren’t many houses out there with it. And so I actually have a friend of the show that has it. So I visited his home and I’m doing a comparison between my house, why I did what I did, why he did what he did. And we kind of, kind of compare the two together. It’s kind of a fun one. So stay

tuned for those.

Sounds good. So next time, we’re going to be talking about Season 2, Episode 3, Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow. Let us know in the comments what you think this episode will be about. Wrong answers only. And as for me, if you’re interested in my work, my writing, uh, check out seanferrell. com. You can also look for my books wherever your books are sold.

My books are available everywhere. That includes everything from bookstores to your local library. And thank you so much for your interest in finding out more about it. If you’d like to more directly support us, you can go to trekintime. show, click on the Become a Supporter button. It allows you to throw some coins at our heads, and then we get down to the business of making the show.

It also automatically makes you an Ensign, which means you are subscribed to our spinoff show, Out of Time, in which we talk about things that don’t fit within the confines of this program. So we talk about other sci fi, fantasy, horror, whatever it is that’s catching our eye. All of that really does help support the show.

Thank you so much, everybody, for taking the time to watch or listen, and we’ll talk to you next time.