Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!see1
From: see1@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (ellen keyne seebacher)
Newsgroups: net.tv.drwho
Subject: Doctor eggs
Message-ID: <259@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 30-Mar-85 10:17:46 EST
Article-I.D.: sphinx.259
Posted: Sat Mar 30 10:17:46 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 03:57:49 EST
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 56

Time for a new subject.  The cancellation/indefinite hold bit isn't
any fun.  So, I quote (with permission) from an e-mail discussion:

>> From: sphinx!see1 (ellen keyne seebacher)
>> Subject: Re: V10#97--Who's companions
>>
>> David Campbell, no???
>>
>>   ...interesting question:  Terrance Dicks has Susan bearing three
>> children by him.  Gallifreyan/human interfertility is even harder
>> to swallow than Vulcan/human, but I do have a theory or two aside
>> from T.D.'s general ignorance and Susan's (unlikely) human parent-
>> age.  Wouldn't the ultimate interference by a Time Lord be genetic
>> manipulation?  so that alien species could interbreed?
>>
>>   the possibilities are staggering.


From James C Armstrong's reply:

>Doctor Who, being a show meant for all ages, doesn't discuss potential sexual
>activities.  (For all we know, Time Lords lay eggs!)  A logical conclusion
>however would be some form of convergent evolution between worlds.  A humanoid
>shape must require 46 chromosomes composed of DNA, regardless of where it
>comes up in the universe.  Reproductive techniques must also logically
>follow.  We have seen that lesser species that evolved on different continents
>have been able to inter breed, why not intelligent life between worlds?
>
>Also, as for Time Lord interference in time, a Time Lord exists within
>time, and must therefore affect the course of time.  I submit that inter-
>ference only occurs when a *known* future is changed.  Otherwise, Time Lord 
>actions are just a part of "history."  (Look at "Pyramids of Mars" again:  
>When the Doctor takes Sarah back to UNIT HQ in the future, she sees that the
>Doctor's future actions (in her past) are required for her future to be.)
>When one's knowledge of the future is blind, then the changes cannot be
>changes, but shapings.
>
>On the same lines, in "Mark of the Rani" I must object to the Doctor des-
>cribing a scientist as "changing history" while putting in the disclaimer 
>that he can't do that.  It is obvious that George ***(name forgotten) shaped 
>Peri's future.
>
>James C Armstrong, Jnr.  ihnp4!abnji!nyssa


If anyone wants to get a net discussion going, please do.  Feel free to
pontificate (or flame) about Time Lord reproduction, the theory of time
interference or the physiology of Susan Foreman Campbell's children....


-- 
 ellen keyne seebacher           ...ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!see1
 univ of chicago comp center             (x9.xes@UChicago.Mailnet)   

"I do have a motto.  I'm going to live 
                     until I die, and never get the two confused."