• Re: Genesis of the Humans

    From Blueshirt@blueshirt@indigo.news to rec.arts.drwho on Fri Jul 4 19:33:55 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    solar penguin wrote:

    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:


    There's only one Genesis that counts... and it featured Tom
    Baker and some Daleks.

    Strange how they did ‘Genesis’ and Revelation’ of the Daleks,
    but not any of the other books of the Bible. There are lots
    that might work:

    Exodus of the Daleks

    Numbers of the Daleks

    Judges of the Daleks

    Kings of the Daleks

    Proverbs of the Daleks

    Lamentations of the Daleks

    Chronicles of the Daleks

    Acts of the Daleks

    and of course

    Second Epistle to the Corinthians of the Daleks

    You forgot;

    Wisdom of the Daleks.

    If we're gonna do it... we might as well do it right! ;-)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Blueshirt@blueshirt@indigo.news to rec.arts.drwho on Fri Jul 4 19:53:04 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    Daniel70 wrote:

    On 4/07/2025 11:37 pm, solar penguin wrote:
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

    There's only one Genesis that counts... and it featured Tom
    Baker and some Daleks.

    Strange how they did ‘Genesis’ and Revelation’ of the
    Daleks, but not any of the other books of the Bible. There
    are lots that might work:

    Exodus of the Daleks

    Where would they go??

    Well... according to legend Skaro was blown up by the Hand of
    Omega... so there had to have been some sort of exodus... or
    Daleks would have nowhere to live would they?

    I reckon "Exodus of the Daleks" could be a 'missing' story just
    waiting for somebody to write it...

    But not John Peel!
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Fri Jul 4 23:47:01 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <xn0p7wksbdbz988000@post.eweka.nl>,
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
    solar penguin wrote:

    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:


    There's only one Genesis that counts... and it featured Tom
    Baker and some Daleks.

    Strange how they did ‘Genesis’ and Revelation’ of the Daleks,
    but not any of the other books of the Bible. There are lots
    that might work:

    Exodus of the Daleks

    Numbers of the Daleks

    Judges of the Daleks

    Kings of the Daleks

    Proverbs of the Daleks

    Lamentations of the Daleks

    Chronicles of the Daleks

    Acts of the Daleks

    and of course

    Second Epistle to the Corinthians of the Daleks

    You forgot;

    Wisdom of the Daleks.

    If we're gonna do it... we might as well do it right! ;-)

    Songs of the Daleks.
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Fri Jul 4 23:47:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <xn0p7wl80dclxf1003@post.eweka.nl>,
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
    Daniel70 wrote:

    On 4/07/2025 11:37 pm, solar penguin wrote:
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:

    There's only one Genesis that counts... and it featured Tom
    Baker and some Daleks.

    Strange how they did ‘Genesis’ and Revelation’ of the
    Daleks, but not any of the other books of the Bible. There
    are lots that might work:

    Exodus of the Daleks

    Where would they go??

    Well... according to legend Skaro was blown up by the Hand of
    Omega... so there had to have been some sort of exodus... or
    Daleks would have nowhere to live would they?

    I reckon "Exodus of the Daleks" could be a 'missing' story just
    waiting for somebody to write it...

    But not John Peel!

    Try Terry Nation.
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Doctor@agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 01:36:47 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    On 27/06/2025 21:56, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    The Bible doesn't say rib, it says SIDE. Eve was made from the side of >>>> Adam because Adam was parted in two to make Eve. Originally Adam and Eve >>>> were one. Read Aristophanes' speech in Plato's Symposium which makes the >>>> origin of the Bible story clear especially when Socrates cites the
    original source.


    Even if Plato and/or Aristophanes knew about the Genesis story,
    it doesn’t make their fanfic part of the Biblical canon.


    The Bible was written AFTER Plato's Symposium took place.

    That depends what you mean by “The Bible”. It isn’t one book
    but a collection of many books written at different times and
    based on different sources which in turn drew from different
    traditions.

    There isn’t one single date when it was written.


    Well obviously the Books of Maccabees were written much later than The Symposium given that they take place over 200 years later.

    The real question is when was the first book of the Bible that was
    written written.

    Most people have the silly idea that Genesis was written first but maybe
    it was written last and Maccabees was written before it.

    The story
    already existed in Athens in 416 BC before Genesis was even composed.

    That might be possible. Genesis is based on three sources: the
    E source(Elohist), J source (Jahwist) and P source (Priestly).
    And they all drew on earlier traditions and stories.


    We know one of the sources was the story of the old woman that Socrates
    knew about and accused Aristophanes of plagiarising and there are other sources which are common to Plato's Timaeus. What you are referring to
    are not sources but alternate narratives. There's the main narrative of Genesis which is the most detailed and has Noah around at the time of
    the Flood and then there's an alternate version of Genesis which misses
    out most of the details of creation and glosses all over Adam and Eve
    while at the same time giving a shorter list of generations to the time
    of Noah and missing out all of dates of begetting and not even
    mentioning Noah at all but replacing him with 3 other individuals,
    Jobel, Jubal, and Thobel. After the Food and generations to Abraham it's
    just one narrative. The only variation is The Book of Jasher which is
    not part of the Bible. Jasher looks like its drawing upon Roman period
    sources of the same history and trying to fit in extra details into
    Genesis such as Moses being Governor of Cush. Form Jasher it's clear to
    see that they've taken well know Egyptian inscriptions even today and
    doctored them to fit the existing narrative of the Pentateuch.

    It’s possible one of them might’ve taken something from the same traditional story that Plato and friends used.

    But that still doesn’t mean that Plato’s version of the story is Biblical canon. Genesis also drew on Mesopotamian creation myths like the
    Enuma Elish. But that doesn’t make the Mesopotamian versions of
    those myths canon. Why should Plato be any different?


    Plato's version is taken from Phoenician texts (the ancient Greeks
    didn't have a clue about Mesopotamia) and that's where the Biblical
    version comes from too. Some of the Phoenician texts might have been
    based on Mesopotamian sources such as Gilgamesh for Noah's Ark, but the
    Greeks also use the story of the Ark in the story of the Deukalion
    Flood. Even Josephus and Eusebius identified Noah, Ogygus, Deukalion,
    and Jannus as being the same person.

    Clearly there was a standard Egyptian history from which Manetho's
    account, that of Diodorus, that of Herodotus, that of the Bible, and
    that of Jasher all come from.

    There was similarly a standard history of Syria-Palestine where the
    biblical events set there all derive from. This may have been the
    histories of Sanchuniathon from which the Judges figures
    Jerrubaal/Gideon and Abimelech come from and the Phoenician history of Menander translated into Greek.

    There was also the history of the Hittites, Hurrians, and Mittani which
    is the probable source for the descendants of Shem (Shuttarna I) to
    Nahor (Naharin) all the way to Jacob. It could also be the source of the
    story of Adam and Eve given that Eden is Adana in Turkey and given the
    snake and ornamental garden motives is probably Gobekli Tepe.

    Ham is probably based on Khamose from Egyptian history.

    Japhet is clearly a corruption of Iapetus and Javan is Ion or Jannus and
    this is clearly based on chronologies and kings lists that were used by
    the Romans and also quoted by Nennius and in the Irish Book of
    Invasions. The Roman chronologies come from The Phrygia by Thymaetes as
    can be seen in Diodorus histories which demonstrates that this is the
    source of Ktesias Chaldanian and European histories and the source of Psedo-Berosus and Annius de Viterbe and this the source of The Travels
    of Noah Into Europe. The Irish Book of Invasions (including the kings of Scotland (literally Scythia/Scotia), and the Swedish, Nordic, and
    British kings before Brutus given by Nennius are probably using the same Scythian sources used by Herodotus.

    For the kingdoms of Israel and Judea there is inscriptional evidence for.


    And it definitely doesn’t make it biological fact.


    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during regeneration.


    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.


    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as reality in order to be believed.
    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it stands for." --William Shatner
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 02:44:43 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <1049s2v$13q9g$2@dont-email.me>,
    The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    On 27/06/2025 21:56, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    The Bible doesn't say rib, it says SIDE. Eve was made from the side of >>>>> Adam because Adam was parted in two to make Eve. Originally Adam and Eve >>>>> were one. Read Aristophanes' speech in Plato's Symposium which makes the >>>>> origin of the Bible story clear especially when Socrates cites the
    original source.


    Even if Plato and/or Aristophanes knew about the Genesis story,
    it doesn’t make their fanfic part of the Biblical canon.


    The Bible was written AFTER Plato's Symposium took place.

    That depends what you mean by “The Bible”. It isn’t one book
    but a collection of many books written at different times and
    based on different sources which in turn drew from different
    traditions.

    There isn’t one single date when it was written.


    Well obviously the Books of Maccabees were written much later than The >Symposium given that they take place over 200 years later.

    The real question is when was the first book of the Bible that was
    written written.

    Most people have the silly idea that Genesis was written first but maybe
    it was written last and Maccabees was written before it.

    The story
    already existed in Athens in 416 BC before Genesis was even composed.

    That might be possible. Genesis is based on three sources: the
    E source(Elohist), J source (Jahwist) and P source (Priestly).
    And they all drew on earlier traditions and stories.


    We know one of the sources was the story of the old woman that Socrates
    knew about and accused Aristophanes of plagiarising and there are other >sources which are common to Plato's Timaeus. What you are referring to
    are not sources but alternate narratives. There's the main narrative of >Genesis which is the most detailed and has Noah around at the time of
    the Flood and then there's an alternate version of Genesis which misses
    out most of the details of creation and glosses all over Adam and Eve
    while at the same time giving a shorter list of generations to the time
    of Noah and missing out all of dates of begetting and not even
    mentioning Noah at all but replacing him with 3 other individuals,
    Jobel, Jubal, and Thobel. After the Food and generations to Abraham it's >just one narrative. The only variation is The Book of Jasher which is
    not part of the Bible. Jasher looks like its drawing upon Roman period >sources of the same history and trying to fit in extra details into
    Genesis such as Moses being Governor of Cush. Form Jasher it's clear to
    see that they've taken well know Egyptian inscriptions even today and >doctored them to fit the existing narrative of the Pentateuch.

    It’s possible one of them might’ve taken something from the same
    traditional story that Plato and friends used.

    But that still doesn’t mean that Plato’s version of the story is Biblical
    canon. Genesis also drew on Mesopotamian creation myths like the
    Enuma Elish. But that doesn’t make the Mesopotamian versions of
    those myths canon. Why should Plato be any different?


    Plato's version is taken from Phoenician texts (the ancient Greeks
    didn't have a clue about Mesopotamia) and that's where the Biblical
    version comes from too. Some of the Phoenician texts might have been
    based on Mesopotamian sources such as Gilgamesh for Noah's Ark, but the >Greeks also use the story of the Ark in the story of the Deukalion
    Flood. Even Josephus and Eusebius identified Noah, Ogygus, Deukalion,
    and Jannus as being the same person.

    Clearly there was a standard Egyptian history from which Manetho's
    account, that of Diodorus, that of Herodotus, that of the Bible, and
    that of Jasher all come from.

    There was similarly a standard history of Syria-Palestine where the
    biblical events set there all derive from. This may have been the
    histories of Sanchuniathon from which the Judges figures
    Jerrubaal/Gideon and Abimelech come from and the Phoenician history of >Menander translated into Greek.

    There was also the history of the Hittites, Hurrians, and Mittani which
    is the probable source for the descendants of Shem (Shuttarna I) to
    Nahor (Naharin) all the way to Jacob. It could also be the source of the >story of Adam and Eve given that Eden is Adana in Turkey and given the
    snake and ornamental garden motives is probably Gobekli Tepe.

    Ham is probably based on Khamose from Egyptian history.

    Japhet is clearly a corruption of Iapetus and Javan is Ion or Jannus and >this is clearly based on chronologies and kings lists that were used by
    the Romans and also quoted by Nennius and in the Irish Book of
    Invasions. The Roman chronologies come from The Phrygia by Thymaetes as
    can be seen in Diodorus histories which demonstrates that this is the
    source of Ktesias Chaldanian and European histories and the source of >Psedo-Berosus and Annius de Viterbe and this the source of The Travels
    of Noah Into Europe. The Irish Book of Invasions (including the kings of >Scotland (literally Scythia/Scotia), and the Swedish, Nordic, and
    British kings before Brutus given by Nennius are probably using the same >Scythian sources used by Herodotus.

    For the kingdoms of Israel and Judea there is inscriptional evidence for.


    Interesting.

    Chronicles and Genesis.


    And it definitely doesn’t make it biological fact.


    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during regeneration.


    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.


    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change gender during >regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as reality in order to be >believed.


    Correct!

    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Blueshirt@blueshirt@indigo.news to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 11:36:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on it counts for
    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but
    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 13:47:11 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <xn0p7xmpf44uvp000@post.eweka.nl>,
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on it counts for
    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but
    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.

    No figure the logic or evolution vs creation.
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Doctor@agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 15:31:42 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon hatching
    into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of it's mass and then
    with only 10% of its mass remaining in the broken shell it all came back together within seconds and looked and weight exactly the same as it did before.

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!


    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be cannon.

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.
    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that piece of degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.
    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it stands for." --William Shatner
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Blueshirt@blueshirt@indigo.news to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 15:40:31 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant
    as reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their
    gender whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on
    it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon
    hatching into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of
    it's mass and then with only 10% of its mass remaining in the
    broken shell it all came back together within seconds and
    looked and weight exactly the same as it did before.

    You really didn't like that episode, did you?!

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be
    cannon.

    It can, by you or anyone. As there is no official BBC Doctor Who
    canon so you can include or exclude anything you like. (I do.)

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    I'll stick with stupid idea.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so
    it is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now
    become part of "Doctor Who" lore.

    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that
    piece of degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.

    <rolls eyes>

    Just when I thought you were starting to takes things
    seriously...

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 14:58:41 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <104bd0f$1he86$1@dont-email.me>,
    The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon hatching
    into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of it's mass and then >with only 10% of its mass remaining in the broken shell it all came back >together within seconds and looked and weight exactly the same as it did >before.

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!


    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be cannon.

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.
    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that piece of >degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.


    And CC!!!

    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 14:59:46 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <xn0p7xt6ocxpi5003@post.eweka.nl>,
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant
    as reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their
    gender whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on
    it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon
    hatching into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of
    it's mass and then with only 10% of its mass remaining in the
    broken shell it all came back together within seconds and
    looked and weight exactly the same as it did before.

    You really didn't like that episode, did you?!

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be
    cannon.

    It can, by you or anyone. As there is no official BBC Doctor Who
    canon so you can include or exclude anything you like. (I do.)

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    I'll stick with stupid idea.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so
    it is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now
    become part of "Doctor Who" lore.

    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that
    piece of degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.

    <rolls eyes>

    Just when I thought you were starting to takes things
    seriously...


    Stiring the pot I see.
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The True Doctor@agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 21:00:18 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    On 05/07/2025 15:40, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant
    as reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their
    gender whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on
    it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon
    hatching into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of
    it's mass and then with only 10% of its mass remaining in the
    broken shell it all came back together within seconds and
    looked and weight exactly the same as it did before.

    You really didn't like that episode, did you?!

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be
    cannon.


    I meant "...can not be considered to be canon."

    It can, by you or anyone. As there is no official BBC Doctor Who
    canon so you can include or exclude anything you like. (I do.)

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    I'll stick with stupid idea.


    It's not canon.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so
    it is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now
    become part of "Doctor Who" lore.

    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that
    piece of degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.

    <rolls eyes>

    Just when I thought you were starting to takes things
    seriously...

    It is not canon.
    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it stands for." --William Shatner
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Blueshirt@blueshirt@indigo.news to rec.arts.drwho on Sat Jul 5 20:23:57 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 15:40, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to
    be cannon.

    I meant "...can not be considered to be canon."

    I knew what you meant! After all, it's only about the 47th
    time you have gone on about "Kill The Moon" ... and some of
    the seasons that came after it... my memory is not bad enough
    yet to forget.

    I am not Daniel, I ignore typos!
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Your Name@YourName@YourISP.com to rec.arts.drwho on Sun Jul 6 10:27:28 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    On 2025-07-05 10:36:42 +0000, Blueshirt said:

    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen...

    Only because the idiot RTD purposely did it to jump on the Politically
    Correct bandagon (as well as appeasing BBC "equality" checklists), so
    he lazily hijacked an existing character rather than actually do
    something creative like make a brand new character.

    RTD Wanted Doctor Who to Move Away from “Very Straight,
    Masculine, and Testosterone-y” Sci-Fi
    Reflecting on his recent work with Doctor Who, showrunner
    Russell T Davies revealed that one of his driving goals
    since taking the reins again was to steer the show away
    from what he called “very straight, very masculine, very
    testosterone-y” science fiction.

    <https://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/doctor-who-rtd-testosterone-scifi-105852.htm>




    so your opinion on it counts for nothing as it has already happened.
    We can't unsee it now!

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but
    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sun Jul 6 01:45:36 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <104c08j$1lmko$3@dont-email.me>,
    The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
    On 05/07/2025 15:40, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 11:36, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant
    as reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their
    gender whilst regenerating on-screen... so your opinion on
    it counts for

    No we have not. That was deranged fan fiction like the moon
    hatching into a giant space dragon which flew away with 90% of
    it's mass and then with only 10% of its mass remaining in the
    broken shell it all came back together within seconds and
    looked and weight exactly the same as it did before.

    You really didn't like that episode, did you?!

    nothing as it has already happened. We can't unsee it now!

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to be
    cannon.


    I meant "...can not be considered to be canon."

    It can, by you or anyone. As there is no official BBC Doctor Who
    canon so you can include or exclude anything you like. (I do.)

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but

    Totally deranged fan fiction.

    I'll stick with stupid idea.


    It's not canon.

    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so
    it is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now
    become part of "Doctor Who" lore.

    No it has not. Doctor Who had already ended by the time that
    piece of degeneration fan fiction was written by RTD on LSD.

    <rolls eyes>

    Just when I thought you were starting to takes things
    seriously...

    It is not canon.

    The timeless child is not canon.

    --
    The True Doctor https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCngrZwoS0n21IRcXpKO79Lw

    "To be woke is to be uninformed which is exactly the opposite of what it >stands for." --William Shatner
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sun Jul 6 01:46:19 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <xn0p7y29glw8zp5005@post.eweka.nl>,
    Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 05/07/2025 15:40, Blueshirt wrote:
    The True Doctor wrote:

    Everything from Kill The Moon onwards can be considered to
    be cannon.

    I meant "...can not be considered to be canon."

    I knew what you meant! After all, it's only about the 47th
    time you have gone on about "Kill The Moon" ... and some of
    the seasons that came after it... my memory is not bad enough
    yet to forget.

    I am not Daniel, I ignore typos!

    Good man.
    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From doctor@doctor@doctor.nl2k.ab.ca (The Doctor) to rec.arts.drwho on Sun Jul 6 01:49:00 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.drwho

    In article <104c8sf$1nto0$1@dont-email.me>,
    Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
    On 2025-07-05 10:36:42 +0000, Blueshirt said:

    The True Doctor wrote:

    On 28/06/2025 00:21, solar penguin wrote:

    The True loon lectured:

    And neither is a Time Lord changing gender during
    regeneration.

    Nobody ever claimed Time Lords were any kind of fact. We’re
    all aware they’re fictional.

    That doesn't change the fact that Time Lords can't change
    gender during regeneration. Fiction has to be as constant as
    reality in order to be believed.

    That opinion is fine if that's what you believe, but it can't
    be a fact as we have already seen Time Lords change their gender
    whilst regenerating on-screen...

    Only because the idiot RTD purposely did it to jump on the Politically >Correct bandagon (as well as appeasing BBC "equality" checklists), so
    he lazily hijacked an existing character rather than actually do
    something creative like make a brand new character.

    RTD Wanted Doctor Who to Move Away from “Very Straight,
    Masculine, and Testosterone-y” Sci-Fi
    Reflecting on his recent work with Doctor Who, showrunner
    Russell T Davies revealed that one of his driving goals
    since taking the reins again was to steer the show away
    from what he called “very straight, very masculine, very
    testosterone-y” science fiction.

    <https://www.doctorwhotv.co.uk/doctor-who-rtd-testosterone-scifi-105852.htm>



    :-(



    so your opinion on it counts for nothing as it has already happened.
    We can't unsee it now!

    A bit like bi-generation... I think it was a stupid idea but
    it's happened and been seen to happen in "The Giggle"... so it
    is what it is. Believable fiction or not it has now become part
    of "Doctor Who" lore.


    --
    Member - Liberal International This is doctor@nk.ca Ici doctor@nk.ca
    Yahweh, King & country!Never Satan President Republic!Beware AntiChrist rising! Look at Psalms 14 and 53 on Atheism ;
    All I want to hear from JEsus Christ is WEll done Good and Faithful servant
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2