The Idiot <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
> In article <tlbaav$39ind$1@dont-email.me>,
> The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:
>> The Idiot <doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> In article <tl896k$2vbai$1@dont-email.me>,
>>> The Last Doctor <mike@xenocyte.com> wrote:

>>>> Please note, throughout, I’m not interested in how great or stupid the
>>>> Timeless Child story is. It’s pretty stupid. I’m discussing only
>>>> whether it breaks or contradicts the existing canon.

>>> IT does hence the call for retconning.

>> It doesn’t, as I’ve repeatedly proved to you. Your call for retconning is
>> due to your misogynistic hatred of Jodie as the Doctor, not due to the
>> Timeless Child. You’ve been calling for a retcon since the 13th Doctor was
>> revealed and before you saw a single episode helmed by Chibnall.

> And now that Chibnall has nearly destroyerd the franchise...

Whether he has or hasn’t (he hasn’t) is irrelevant to the fact that your
call for retcon was originally due to your misogynistic hatred of Jodie as
the Doctor, and had nothing to do with Chibnall. And whether he has or
hasn’t (he hasn’t) has no bearing on whether the annoying Timeless Child
retcon breaks or contradicts the existing canon (it doesn’t).

>> No, it’s part of the Timeless Child narrative. It’s one of the complex ways
>> in which it was written in order to evade contradictions. You’re trying to
>> claim that “there is a contradiction because I don’t like the reason given
>> for there being no contradiction”. What is bogus, therefore, is your
>> argument.

> Timeless child narrative NOT the Doctor Who narrativE!

Yes, I was talking about the Timeless Child narrative, not the whole Doctor
Who narrative. What’s your point?

>>>> Perhaps this idea of being half human was planted so that the Doctor could
>>>> explain to themselves why they felt different from all other Gallifreyans?
>>>
>>> Doubtful.
>>
>> Would you rather the Doctor actually be half human?
>> Why is that better than being of an unknown species?

> So how the Gallifrey did artron energy come about?

Eh? What do you think artron energy has do do with whether the Doctor is
half Gallifreyan and half human, or the Doctor is the genetic ancestor of
all modern Gallifreyans?

Artron energy is a byproduct of time travel and has nothing to do with
Gallifrey or the Gallifreyan species, so why bring it up here?

[snip]

>> If you mean “Listen”, I already explained that according to the Timeless
>> Child narrative, after the Division wiped all the Doctor’s previous lives
>> from their memory, they forced a regeneration to early childhood.
>> Everything we have seen in the show can reflect that second childhood,
>> including adoptive or foster parents (who may even be agents for Division)
>> and the Doctor may not even have known.

> The Divioion is bogus!

That’s just a meaningless assertion, Dave. “La La La, I don’t like this so
it doesn’t exist” isn’t really a basis for debate.

>> So where have you seen it categorically stated that Susan lived out her
>> whole life on 22nd - 23rd century Earth? Why couldn’t other members of her
>> family or the Time Lords have located her and brought her home, perhaps
>> elevating her to full Time Lord status allowing her to regenerate?
>>
>> “Certainly” not Susan? It may not be the likeliest answer to “who was the
>> woman?” but it is “certainly” a possible answer.

> Susan was exiled by the Doctor.

You didn’t read what was written, did you, Dave? We all know what the
Doctor did. And she could still have been “the woman” in The End of Time
(but probably wasn’t). See the quoted paragraphs above for how.

>>> Major contradictions!
>>
>> No. Major gaps in understanding caused by the secrecy and manipulations of
>> the Division.

> The division contradicts Gallifrey!

Another meaningless assertion Dave, and in this case a fatuous one. Think
about it. In what way can a secret agency contradict a planet? They aren’t
the same class of entity. Does the FBI contradict granite?

[snip]

>> Evidence-based opinion with a solid body of tedious deranged fan fic, and
>> hundreds of posts by Aggie proving him a clueless hack. But yes, I concede
>> this is inflammatory as the Tool has no awareness of his actual quality of
>> work.
>>
>
> And the evidence sure looks like the Timeless Child contradict Doctor Who!

Three things here:

1) We were discussing the appalling quality of Aggie’s fan fiction, not the
Timeless Child, so your statement is in the wrong place

2) The Timeless Child legend is part of Doctor Who, so it can’t contradict
Doctor Who. You have to pick something specific that it contradicts.

3) What evidence? You never provide any. You need quotes from the show that
the Timeless Child narrative (including its rationalisations for why the
Doctor and most Time Lords don’t know about the Timeless Chid) contradicts.
And you’ve never found even one.

>>>> I’m not familiar with the DC character, but the new story doesn’t change
>>>> the character of the Doctor, it gives them an origin story that was
>>>> previously shrouded in mystery. I don’t think there was any need to remove
>>>> that mystery and replace it with this unpleasant and complex new mystery -
>>>> but it’s been done.
>>>
>>> A new mystery that could be a deranged lie.
>>
>> It could be - but it’s canon until someone changes it. Which is unlikely to
>> happen as it’s easier to ignore than to deal with.

> Easier to retconning out!

No, how is adding yet more complexity in order to retcon something stupid
easier than ignoring it?

>>> What logic are you following?
>>
>> The correct kind for discussing the canon of the TV show - relying only on
>> the evidence of what we have been shown and told on screen.

> Canon means you reject the Timeless Child.

That’s a meaningless comment as written, Dave. The Timeless Child is part
of the canon, so what you wrote there essentially says “canon means you
reject the canon”.

>>>> In any case, the Eye of Harmony isn’t physically on Gallifrey any more than
>>>> it’s physically in the Heart of a TARDIS. What we see are trans dimensional
>>>> gateways to where the Eye of Harmony really is - powering the Vortex.
>>>
>>>
>>> Moreso the Deadly Assassin.
>>
>> Moreso the Deadly Assassin what? We know what the Eye of Harmony is - some
>> form of energetic explosion engineered by manipulating a black hole in ways
>> well beyond our knowledge of physics. Logically such a thing cannot be kept
>> behind a doorway on a planet - so what we see must be a space-time extra
>> dimensional gateway to the Eye. That explanation allows us to accept the
>> Eye in the TARDIS in the TV movie and gives us a perception of how the
>> Vortex can be “in” the TARDIS in Series 1, and what “the Heart of the
>> TARDIS” might be.

> Note the TARDIS did need a refill from the Cardiff rift!

So Boom Town contradicts the canon. We know.

However, the whole exposition was done by Jack and Rose, who may have
misinterpreted what the Doctor told them. For example, suppose the TARDIS
has an engine something like a car, and rift energy is actually recharging
the battery for the starter motor to work, rather than supplying fuel for
motive power?

See? Some contradictions are easy to rationalise away.

>>> The Ravashers, The P'Ting , the tooth monster should all be retconned!
>>
>> The Ravagers are poor but why do they need to be retconned? The P’ting is a
>> perfectly acceptable monster poorly visualised, and no sillier or worse
>> than the Adipose. Tim Shaw (so boring that nobody can remember his real
>> name) is just a weak villain.
>>
>> Of those, only the Ravagers are linked to the Timeless Child and even then
>> only because they were apparently captured by the Jo Martin Doctor and
>> secretly incarcerated by the Division.
>>
>
> The whole era deserves retconning!

So you keep saying. I say the same about the McCoy era. But neither is
going to get retconned, so tough for both of us.

>
>>>> Wrong - all Time Lord regeneration stems from The Timeless Child. All
>>>> Gallifreyans are at least partly of the Doctor’s species, so there’s no
>>>> reason to question the regeneration.
>>>
>>> The Black hole is more plausible.
>>
>> Is it? Why? And, more to the point, where in the show is it ever stated
>> that regeneration has anything to do with black holes? Name at least a
>> story or episode so that I can check. Stupider things have happened in the
>> show.
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>
> So you hate the Deadly assassin MM?

No, I quite like the Deadly Assassin. However, the extremely silly
technobabble about the Master’s plan is referring to a specific
circumstance - forcing a body to regenerate a thirteenth time when it’s
clapped out. It doesn’t say anything about how normal regeneration occurs
or that the Eye is related to it - everyone except the Doctor, who
magically knows the truth and conjures up the Master’s plan out of nowhere,
believes the Eye is a myth.

Note that the Master’s motivation here is contradicted and made pointless
by The Five Doctors. After all that insistence that twelve regenerations is
a complete and total limit, and only blowing up the Eye of Harmony will
break that limit … it turns out that all the Master had to do was ask
nicely and he could have been granted a new cycle of regenerations.

>>>> Dave’s point - in full - was “incomplete cybermen”, a concept that goes
>>>> back to Stratton and Bates in Attack of the Cybermen.
>>>
>>>
>>> No I refer to Chibnall's incomplete Mondasian.
>>
>> I know you meant to refer to Ashad, although as noted above, the entire
>> statement you made was “incomplete Cybermen”. This is, in fact, why I
>> mentioned two incomplete, as in, still half human, cybermen from over 35
>> years ago as the first examples of such.
>>
>
> And still bad! Incomplete Mondasian?
>
> Incomplete other species is understandable!

Mondasians were human, Dave. No different from Bates, Stratton or anyone
else. Mondas was Earth’s twin planet, remember? You’re just sulking over
nothing now.

>>> TTD is better than Chibnall!
>>
>> Opinions differ on this, Dave. Approximately 8 billion people have never
>> heard of Aggie or ever read anything he has written (admittedly the same
>> can be said of Chibnall for more than 9/10 of them).
>>
>> Of the ten or so people on Earth who have had the misfortune to read
>> Aggie’s emissions and have seen works penned by Chibnall, all but two of
>> them would place Aggie far, far lower than Chibnall.
>>
>> The two people out of 8 billion who have the minority opinion are you and
>> Aggie himself.

> You say minority yet when confronted you forget more than 2.

I’ve never been confronted on this, Dave.

Um, who in the whole world other than you or Aggie has ever said Aggie’s
fiction skills are better than Chibnall’s?

It’s you who’s forgetting - I’m not discussing how many people don’t rate
Chibnall. I don’t rate him myself. But by comparison to Aggie, he’s
Shakespeare.

>>>> Nope, that is only true of the Master trying to break the bounds of
>>>> regeneration. Nowhere is it stated that regular regeneration requires any
>>>> such energies.
>>>
>>> The energy comes from the altron energy.
>>
>> You mean “artron” energy. Artron energy accumulates on objects and people
>> who travel through time - it’s one way of detecting time machines and time
>> travellers. And while it has been used as technobabble many times, nowhere
>> in the show is it associated with regeneration. If you want to debate this
>> point, please name at least a story or episode in which you believe it has,
>> so that we can all check.

> That is from the Deadly Assassin IIRC

Nope. “Artron energy” is technobabbled without explanation in the Deadly
Assassin as a form of mental energy used in the Matrix - it is said to be
why the Doctor is breathing when he has just died from the shock of being
in the Matrix (spoiler: he wasn’t dead!), it is said to be what the Doctor
can use to defend himself against his opponent’s mental projection, and it
is Goth’s excuse to the Master for why he failed to kill the Doctor in the
Matrix.

In this instance, it’s associated with neither time travel nor
regeneration- it’s just a buzzword.

>>> And theTime Lords were invented in the War Games!
>>
>> Well done Dave, you’ve managed to state a fact. What does that have to do
>> with my opinion that the fob watch containing the Doctor’s pre-Hartnell
>> lives has been consigned to the dustbin of Doctor Who ideas?

> Relegate the pre-HArtnell to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

Well done Dave. You have successfully repeated what I just said. Have a
jelly baby.

>> --
>> There are some corners of the universe
>> which have bred the most terrible things.
>> Things which act against everything we believe in.
>>
>> They must be /fought/.
>
> All Chibnallites must be fought!

Good luck with that, if you ever find one. Will you stop trying to fight
me, and truth, if you do ever find a “Chibnallite”?

--
There are some corners of the universe
which have bred the most terrible things.
Things which act against everything we believe in.

They must be /fought/.