The Doctor wrote:

> River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being exposed
> to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
>
> The Timeless Child is contradicted!

How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has to be the
other way around, if anything.

So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you rambling on with
an agenda, then it would be more like the Timeless Child contradicts
River Song's ability to regenerate.

But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th Doctor doesn't
exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!

On Sunday, July 30, 2023 at 3:04:41 PM UTC-7, Blueshirt wrote:
> The Doctor wrote:
>
> > River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being exposed
> > to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
> >
> > The Timeless Child is contradicted!
> How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has to be the
> other way around, if anything.
>
> So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you rambling on with
> an agenda, then it would be more like the Timeless Child contradicts
> River Song's ability to regenerate.
>
> But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th Doctor doesn't
> exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!

So you apparently have the corner on objective reality?

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <nnd$1db40e71$1552892b@837c68007bd65128>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >
> >> River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being exposed
> >> to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
> >>
> >> The Timeless Child is contradicted!
> >
> > How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has to be the
> > other way around, if anything.
> >
> > So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you rambling on
> > with an agenda, then it would be more like the Timeless Child
> > contradicts River Song's ability to regenerate.
> >
> > But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th Doctor
> > doesn't exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!
>
> The real 13th Doctor looks like the 10th Doctor.
>
> Logical and consitent to the thread.

That is neither logical or consistent.

You infamously do neither in most of your posts here which is why you are
known as the group clown!

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <nnd$32da6e93$77ce8166@8bb9596997694f20>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >
> >> In article <nnd$1db40e71$1552892b@837c68007bd65128>,
> >> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> >> > The Doctor wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being exposed
> >> >> to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
> >> >>
> >> >> The Timeless Child is contradicted!
> >> >
> >> > How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has to be
> >> > the other way around, if anything.
> >> >
> >> > So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you rambling on
> >> > with an agenda, then it would be more like the Timeless Child
> >> > contradicts River Song's ability to regenerate.
> >> >
> >> > But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th Doctor
> >> > doesn't exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!
> >>
> >> The real 13th Doctor looks like the 10th Doctor.
> >>
> >> Logical and consitent to the thread.
> >
> > That is neither logical or consistent.
> >
> > You infamously do neither in most of your posts here which is why you
> > are known as the group clown!
>
> Said the zany clown BS.
What a comeback! That's really told me. It's completely irrelevant to
what I posted though of course.

> So then how did River Song get her regnerative powers?

Did you watch the episodes? If you did, you'd know. Why ask questions of
others when you answer none yourself.

My point was, an earlier event generally can't contradict latter events.
As the latter event hasn't happened when the earlier even occurs. What
comes later can contradict - and maybe override - the earlier happening.
So the Timeless Child era is the latest era of Doctor Who that we have,
and stands de facto as current until forthcoming events overwrite parts
of that era. That is how Doctor Who has worked since 1963.

You are just on you anti-Timeless child crusade while the rest of us
we've moved on and are looking forward to the new episodes. You being you
are just looking back and spouting gibberish that nobody cares about.

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <nnd$39f5389f$1f9f0ccc@5b3afd8442088f10>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> >
> > You are just on you anti-Timeless child crusade while the rest of us
> > have moved on and are looking forward to the new episodes. You being
> > you are just looking back and spouting gibberish that nobody cares
> > about.
>
> Because The Timeless Child is anti-DoctorWho!
>
> River Song contradicts the Timeless Child!

<Face palm>

You really are one stupid and ignorant man.

The Doctor wrote on 31/7/23 9:58 pm:
> In article <nnd$32da6e93$77ce8166@8bb9596997694f20>, Blueshirt
> <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <nnd$1db40e71$1552892b@837c68007bd65128>, Blueshirt
>>> <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being
>>>>> exposed to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Timeless Child is contradicted!
>>>>
>>>> How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has to
>>>> be the other way around, if anything.
>>>>
>>>> So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you rambling
>>>> on with an agenda, then it would be more like the Timeless
>>>> Child contradicts River Song's ability to regenerate.
>>>>
>>>> But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th
>>>> Doctor doesn't exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!
>>>
>>> The real 13th Doctor looks like the 10th Doctor.
>>>
>>> Logical and consitent to the thread.
>>
>> That is neither logical or consistent.
>>
>> You infamously do neither in most of your posts here which is why
>> you are known as the group clown!
>
> Said the zany clown BS.
>
> So then how did River Song get her regnerative powers?
>
It just occurred to me, asswipe ...... how did 'The Time Lords' come
into existance in the first place, asswipe??

The generation/production of 'River Song' would tend to indicate that if
an (ordinary) couple of Beings (Amy and Rory, in this particular case)
have SEX with-in The TARDIS, and the outcome of those Unions MIGHT have
re-generation capabilities.

So, maybe, just maybe, the Original TimeLady (whatever her name was)
took some plain, old, ordinary, Galifreanans for a ride in her TARDIS
(showing off), and several of those couples of Galifreanans got down and
dirty in the multitude of Bedrooms with-in The TARDIS and the babies
produced by those unions got effected by The Time Stream and had
Regeneration capabilities.

Multiple Time Lords and Ladies resulting!! All of whom might be able to
regenerate indefinitely .... or until killed by some method!!
--
Daniel

tsbr...@gmail.com wrote on 1/8/23 11:03 pm:
> On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 5:49:08 AM UTC-7, Daniel65 wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote on 31/7/23 9:58 pm:
>>> In article <nnd$32da6e93$77ce8166@8bb9596997694f20>, Blueshirt
>>> <blue...@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>> In article <nnd$1db40e71$1552892b@837c68007bd65128>,
>>>>> Blueshirt <blue...@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> River Song's ability to regenerate is due to her being
>>>>>>> exposed to the time atoms of the TARDIS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Timeless Child is contradicted!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How can an earlier event contradict a latter event? It has
>>>>>> to be the other way around, if anything.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So IF there was a contradiction, and it's not just you
>>>>>> rambling on with an agenda, then it would be more like the
>>>>>> Timeless Child contradicts River Song's ability to
>>>>>> regenerate.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But why do you care anyway? You like to pretend the 13th
>>>>>> Doctor doesn't exist. So either she exists or she doesn't!
>>>>>
>>>>> The real 13th Doctor looks like the 10th Doctor.
>>>>>
>>>>> Logical and consitent to the thread.
>>>>
>>>> That is neither logical or consistent.
>>>>
>>>> You infamously do neither in most of your posts here which is
>>>> why you are known as the group clown!
>>>
>>> Said the zany clown BS.
>>>
>>> So then how did River Song get her regnerative powers?
>>>
>> It just occurred to me, asswipe ...... how did 'The Time Lords'
>> come into existance in the first place, asswipe??
>>
>> The generation/production of 'River Song' would tend to indicate
>> that if an (ordinary) couple of Beings (Amy and Rory, in this
>> particular case) have SEX with-in The TARDIS, and the outcome of
>> those Unions MIGHT have re-generation capabilities.
>>
>> So, maybe, just maybe, the Original TimeLady (whatever her name
>> was) took some plain, old, ordinary, Galifreanans for a ride in her
>> TARDIS (showing off), and several of those couples of Galifreanans
>> got down and dirty in the multitude of Bedrooms with-in The TARDIS
>> and the babies produced by those unions got effected by The Time
>> Stream and had Regeneration capabilities.
>>
>> Multiple Time Lords and Ladies resulting!! All of whom might be
>> able to regenerate indefinitely .... or until killed by some
>> method!!
>
> So you agree with Yads that River Song contradicts the Master's
> Timeless Child story about Tecteun finding a regenerative child,
> reverse engineering her regeneration abilities, and engineering them
> into the genomes of other Gallifreyans?
>
No!! Bugger!! The 'regenerative child' *IS* The Doctor. I'll have to
re-think this!! ;-(
--
Daniel

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <uab0j6$3lq8a$1@dont-email.me>,
> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
> > tsbr...@gmail.com wrote on 1/8/23 11:03 pm:
> >>
> >> So you agree with Yads that River Song contradicts the Master's
> >> Timeless Child story about Tecteun finding a regenerative child,
> >> reverse engineering her regeneration abilities, and engineering them
> >> into the genomes of other Gallifreyans?
> >>
> > No!! Bugger!! The 'regenerative child' IS The Doctor. I'll have to
> > re-think this!! ;-(
>
> Got caught.

That's not getting caught, discussions are about discussing things and
people can get things wrong. Especially with Doctor Who and all that
complicated timey-wimey stuff.

You however don't discuss much in the way of Doctor Who these days, yet
still get most things wrong!!!

Daniel65 wrote:

> tsbr...@gmail.com wrote on 1/8/23 11:03 pm:
> >
> > So you agree with Yads that River Song contradicts the Master's
> > Timeless Child story about Tecteun finding a regenerative child,
> > reverse engineering her regeneration abilities, and engineering them
> > into the genomes of other Gallifreyans?
> >
> No!! Bugger!! The 'regenerative child' IS The Doctor. I'll have to
> re-think this!! ;-(

Rather you than me! I go dizzy just thinking about a lot of the stuff from
the last few years.