|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
24/02/2007 02:23 GMT
|
|
|
why not get someone kill a timelord and replace him and just say you regenerated.  |
|
|
|
Martin
Posts: 839
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
24/02/2007 05:01 GMT
|
|
|
They do seem to be able to recognise each other post regeneration; depending who's writing. |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
27/02/2007 06:05 GMT
|
|
|
how would you feel if you married a model and then after the regeneration she turns out to be wolf. |
|
|
|
bnsmith
Posts: 309
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
28/02/2007 09:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
28/02/2007 12:06 GMT
|
|
|
it would be like marring Romana (1) and waking up with Tegan.  |
|
|
|
*nobody*
Posts:
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
03/03/2007 04:34 GMT
|
|
|
Hey guys,
this thread has just reminded me of something that has been bothering me about Dr Who! In The 5 Doctors we see The Castellan killed by a guard using a ray gun......why didn't The Castellan regenerate???? He's a fully fledged Time Lord - part of the High Council! This does not make sense!  |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
03/03/2007 04:59 GMT
|
|
|
he might have but they would still have taken him away to the cells or maybe they have the technology to kill Time lords other wise there jobs would be rather pointless. |
|
|
|
Tareth
Posts: 191
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
03/03/2007 05:40 GMT
|
|
|
Maybe they used an anti regenerating ray gun  |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
03/03/2007 13:23 GMT
|
|
|
no its a plot killer gun.  |
|
|
|
Tareth
Posts: 191
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
11/03/2007 10:22 GMT
|
|
|
The George Lucas or Steven Speilberg one?  |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
12/03/2007 02:03 GMT
|
|
|
If Its indiana Jones then Both. |
|
|
|
Tareth
Posts: 191
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
12/03/2007 07:54 GMT
|
|
|
You know they're making an Indianna Jones 4.
God forbid.  |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
13/03/2007 03:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Martin
Posts: 839
Participation
   

Admin
offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
13/03/2007 15:56 GMT
|
|
|
This is the question I've been looking for! Terrance Dicks killed the Castellan.
Or, if you prefer, evil President Borusa arranged it. |
|
|
|
terry
Posts: 239
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
13/03/2007 22:51 GMT
|
|
|
Martin :
This sounds like a caste system: Time Lords/Ladys at the top, Gallifreyans at the bottom and Shebogans (named in Deadly Assassin and usually taken to be the guys living in the quarry outside the capitol) outside the system. Taking the Plattism of Looms as canon, does this make Time Lord status hereditary? Can Gallifreyans aspire to the Joneses, or are they trapped down the unfashionable part of the capitol? |
Simple as I am, this aspect never occurred to me. But of course, upon reflection, there HAS to be a "caste" system. Every civilisation we know (admittedly we only know of human civilisations) has a caste system. Wether it be an Aristocracy, Meritocracy or Technocracy,it exists. The defining factor of who is elite or not seems to be the earning potential of the sector, ie; those on top of the shit-heap (please excuse the bad language) have more than those at the bottom,with a sliding scale in between. In human civilisation it is a variable dictated by Market Forces. I see no real reason to presume this would be different in an alien culture since it would also apply loosely to evolutionary theory which, if valid, would constitute a Universal Law. As for Hereditary Status; unless it was an ultra-enlightened society that learned to be absolutely selfless then of course, it Would be hereditary. (If you were a member of the elite would you be happy for your offspring to be sent down the coalmines?) Seems like a question of Evolution vs "Intelligence." |
|
Last modified: 13/03/2007 22:52 GMT by terry
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
15/04/2007 00:25 GMT
|
|
|
Has anyone heard the Dalek Conquest Audiobook. by what I read its is a History of the Daleks. |
|
|
|
terry
Posts: 239
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
17/04/2007 22:07 GMT
|
|
|
The Time Lords were wiped out in the last Great Time War by the Daleks so there must be a way of killing them. But how do the Daleks recognise the Doctor in every incarnation ? |
|
|
|
jestear
Posts: 582
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
17/04/2007 23:11 GMT
|
|
|
The lone dalek didnt reconise him in Series one ep "Dalek".
Maybe the have a record of all the Doctor incarnations. this is possible due to them having time travel. |
|
|
|
terry
Posts: 239
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
19/04/2007 20:31 GMT
|
|
|
I think the lone Dalek had pretty much shut itself down because of the torture, but it soon woke up at the mention of the Doctor. But one of the Daleks at Torchwood/Canary Wharf recognised him in the background of the video screen. Knowing all his regenerational appearances would make sense in light of that. It also suggests they may know his ultimate appearance. |
|
|
|
bnsmith
Posts: 309
Participation
   

offline

|
|
Subject: Re: General SF or Doctor Who?
20/04/2007 02:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|