In article <xn0okrr5zazyqtq001@post.eweka.nl>,
Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>The True Doctor wrote:
>
>> On 19/04/2024 22:05, Blueshirt wrote:
>> >
>> > How do we know that the Doctor wasn't already given a new
>> > cycle of regenerations by the Time Lords on Gallifrey and
>> > William Hartnell is the 'first' Doctor of that new cycle?
>> > Meaning there was previous incarnations of that character
>> > unseen?
>>
>> From the Deadly Assassin, The Invasion of Time, The Arc of
>> Infinity, and The Five Doctors we and the Doctor know his
>> entire history from his biolog and from the Matrix. He only
>> had 12 regenerations and no previous cycles, as is also
>> confirmed in The Keeper of Traken and Mawdrin Undead. The Five
>> Doctor's and The Deadly Assassin categorically rule out any
>> possibility of new cycles without bringing about the
>> destruction of Gallifrey as Berusa or the Master only needed
>> to become President to allocate them to themselves. No Game of
>> Rassilon, no Sash of Rassilon, nothing more than issuing an
>> executive order. No such technology existed. New cycles only
>> became possible during the Time War. The Doctor had complete
>> unimpeded access to the Matrix as President in The Invasion of
>> Time and would have known his entire past. There is no
>> Timeless Child and not regeneration before Hartnell, the first
>> and original Doctor.
>
>Memory wipe, amnesia, Time Lords telling lies, people using
>nefarious actions to tamper with the Matrix... (etc.) It's
>fiction, it can be written any way they want it to be written.
>
>Playing Devil's Advocate, if nobody came before William
>Hartnell's Doctor, then what 'number' is Doctor Ruth (aka the
>Fugitive Doctor) then? Doctor 13b? Doctor -1? Doctor 16? (etc.)
>We saw her on the TV in an episode of Doctor Who, complete with
>a TARDIS, so therefore she has to exist somewhere in the
>Doctor's timeline...
>
>Well, unless somebody steps out of a shower...
>

Still the paradoxes goes on!

>> > May 11th 2024 will prove otherwise!
>>
>> May 11th 2024 is the Eurovision final. There's no Doctor Who
>> on that day since Doctor Who ended in 2017. Carry On Doctor is
>> no substitute.
>
>You won't be reviewing any episodes of Doctor Who here later on
>that evening so? That's good. We can have a peaceful evening.

Oh?!
--
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 ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote:

> In article <xn0okrmdyathb1p002@post.eweka.nl>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
> > The Doctor wrote:
> >>
> >> This is the REAL 14th Doctor, not the 15th Doctor!
> >
> > Stop Dave! Don't upset Aggy. He still thinks there's a limit
> > of twelve on the Doctor's regenerations, as he saw it
> > mentioned in an episode of Doctor Who nearly half a century
> > ago! Telling him there's a 14th or 15th Doctor will have him
> > frothing at the mouth...
> >
> > He's probably not even recovered from the bi-generation stuff
> > yet!
>
> Are you trying to funny BS?

Oh here comes the group idiot to add absolutely nothing to the
discussion... or any discussion here in fact.

But he just has to post anyway!

On 19/04/2024 22:50, Blueshirt wrote:
> The True Doctor wrote:
>
>> On 19/04/2024 22:05, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>
>>> How do we know that the Doctor wasn't already given a new
>>> cycle of regenerations by the Time Lords on Gallifrey and
>>> William Hartnell is the 'first' Doctor of that new cycle?
>>> Meaning there was previous incarnations of that character
>>> unseen?
>>
>> From the Deadly Assassin, The Invasion of Time, The Arc of
>> Infinity, and The Five Doctors we and the Doctor know his
>> entire history from his biolog and from the Matrix. He only
>> had 12 regenerations and no previous cycles, as is also
>> confirmed in The Keeper of Traken and Mawdrin Undead. The Five
>> Doctor's and The Deadly Assassin categorically rule out any
>> possibility of new cycles without bringing about the
>> destruction of Gallifrey as Berusa or the Master only needed
>> to become President to allocate them to themselves. No Game of
>> Rassilon, no Sash of Rassilon, nothing more than issuing an
>> executive order. No such technology existed. New cycles only
>> became possible during the Time War. The Doctor had complete
>> unimpeded access to the Matrix as President in The Invasion of
>> Time and would have known his entire past. There is no
>> Timeless Child and not regeneration before Hartnell, the first
>> and original Doctor.
>
> Memory wipe, amnesia, Time Lords telling lies, people using
> nefarious actions to tamper with the Matrix... (etc.) It's
> fiction, it can be written any way they want it to be written.
>

Not it can't. Do you actually have any clue how to write?

Coming up with totally ridiculous conspiracy theories in order to
re-write a character's entire origin story and past is unacceptable in
literature.

I remember a discussion here where John Peel's 8th Doctor novel War of
the Daleks did not go down well because it retconned every story from
Destiny of the Daleks onwards (and even Power of the Daleks) via a
totally ridiculous conspiracy theory in order to make out Skaro was
never destroyed by the Hand of Omega. I'm not going to go into exact
details of the plot but reading it was one of the reasons why I joined
this group, and the consternation of it was almost unanimous, everyone
but John Peel himself. Most people did not regard it as being canon even
among the novels.

The Timeless Child monster is over a million times worse.

> Playing Devil's Advocate, if nobody came before William
> Hartnell's Doctor, then what 'number' is Doctor Ruth (aka the
> Fugitive Doctor) then? Doctor 13b? Doctor -1? Doctor 16? (etc.)

She isn't the Doctor, never was and never will be, and neither are
Whittaker, Tennant MkII, and Gatwa. Nothing after The Fall of the Doctor
is real.

> We saw her on the TV in an episode of Doctor Who, complete with
> a TARDIS, so therefore she has to exist somewhere in the
> Doctor's timeline...

No she doesn't.

>
> Well, unless somebody steps out of a shower...
>

Exactly. We are still waiting.

>>> May 11th 2024 will prove otherwise!
>>
>> May 11th 2024 is the Eurovision final. There's no Doctor Who
>> on that day since Doctor Who ended in 2017. Carry On Doctor is
>> no substitute.
>
> You won't be reviewing any episodes of Doctor Who here later on
> that evening so? That's good. We can have a peaceful evening.

I will be reviewing them after they come out on iPlayer. I'm not going
to waste my time watching them before the Eurovision final which is long
enough as it is.

--
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

In article <uvv54h$39qs9$2@dont-email.me>,
The True Doctor <agamemnon@hello.to.NO_SPAM> wrote:
>On 19/04/2024 22:50, Blueshirt wrote:
>> The True Doctor wrote:
>>
>>> On 19/04/2024 22:05, Blueshirt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> How do we know that the Doctor wasn't already given a new
>>>> cycle of regenerations by the Time Lords on Gallifrey and
>>>> William Hartnell is the 'first' Doctor of that new cycle?
>>>> Meaning there was previous incarnations of that character
>>>> unseen?
>>>
>>> From the Deadly Assassin, The Invasion of Time, The Arc of
>>> Infinity, and The Five Doctors we and the Doctor know his
>>> entire history from his biolog and from the Matrix. He only
>>> had 12 regenerations and no previous cycles, as is also
>>> confirmed in The Keeper of Traken and Mawdrin Undead. The Five
>>> Doctor's and The Deadly Assassin categorically rule out any
>>> possibility of new cycles without bringing about the
>>> destruction of Gallifrey as Berusa or the Master only needed
>>> to become President to allocate them to themselves. No Game of
>>> Rassilon, no Sash of Rassilon, nothing more than issuing an
>>> executive order. No such technology existed. New cycles only
>>> became possible during the Time War. The Doctor had complete
>>> unimpeded access to the Matrix as President in The Invasion of
>>> Time and would have known his entire past. There is no
>>> Timeless Child and not regeneration before Hartnell, the first
>>> and original Doctor.
>>
>> Memory wipe, amnesia, Time Lords telling lies, people using
>> nefarious actions to tamper with the Matrix... (etc.) It's
>> fiction, it can be written any way they want it to be written.
>>
>
>Not it can't. Do you actually have any clue how to write?
>
>Coming up with totally ridiculous conspiracy theories in order to
>re-write a character's entire origin story and past is unacceptable in
>literature.
>
>I remember a discussion here where John Peel's 8th Doctor novel War of
>the Daleks did not go down well because it retconned every story from
>Destiny of the Daleks onwards (and even Power of the Daleks) via a
>totally ridiculous conspiracy theory in order to make out Skaro was
>never destroyed by the Hand of Omega. I'm not going to go into exact
>details of the plot but reading it was one of the reasons why I joined
>this group, and the consternation of it was almost unanimous, everyone
>but John Peel himself. Most people did not regard it as being canon even
>among the novels.
>
>The Timeless Child monster is over a million times worse.
>
>> Playing Devil's Advocate, if nobody came before William
>> Hartnell's Doctor, then what 'number' is Doctor Ruth (aka the
>> Fugitive Doctor) then? Doctor 13b? Doctor -1? Doctor 16? (etc.)
>
>She isn't the Doctor, never was and never will be, and neither are
>Whittaker, Tennant MkII, and Gatwa. Nothing after The Fall of the Doctor
>is real.
>
>> We saw her on the TV in an episode of Doctor Who, complete with
>> a TARDIS, so therefore she has to exist somewhere in the
>> Doctor's timeline...
>
>No she doesn't.
>
>>
>> Well, unless somebody steps out of a shower...
>>
>
>Exactly. We are still waiting.
>
>>>> May 11th 2024 will prove otherwise!
>>>
>>> May 11th 2024 is the Eurovision final. There's no Doctor Who
>>> on that day since Doctor Who ended in 2017. Carry On Doctor is
>>> no substitute.
>>
>> You won't be reviewing any episodes of Doctor Who here later on
>> that evening so? That's good. We can have a peaceful evening.
>
>I will be reviewing them after they come out on iPlayer. I'm not going
>to waste my time watching them before the Eurovision final which is long
>enough as it is.
>

Hear! Hear!!

>--
>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 ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown

The Doctor wrote on 20/4/24 8:07 am:
> In article <xn0okrmnaaturw5004@post.eweka.nl>,
> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>> The Doctor wrote:
>>> In article <xn0okrdq5ahnxg7000@post.eweka.nl>,
>>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>> The True Doctor wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Considering that Gatwa's Christmas Day special was the
>>>>> lowest rating Christmas Day special in history as well as
>>>>> the lowest rating solo introductory episode.
>>>>
>>>> You are obsessed with ratings, it is not 1989 anymore. The
>>>> new season of Doctor Who will air on a major international
>>>> streaming platform, as well as the BBC iPlayer, many hours
>>>> before it gets broadcast on a traditional television channel
>>>> (BBC1). What good are traditional television ratings then?
>>>
>>> And the real numbers are?
>>
>> The real numbers will be that hundreds, or thousands, of people
>> who will have watched the first two episodes of the new season of
>> Doctor Who online around twenty hours before they are broadcast
>> on BBC1 and can get ratings!!!
>>
>> What are the YouTubers that fixate about the ratings going to do
>> now for content? They will surely have their reaction videos up
>> on their channels before anyone even sees the episodes on
>> traditional television!
>
> Yes! You need to source your numbers accordingly!
>
UMMM! YOU, asswipe, and Aggy are the only ones, here-abouts, who worry
about ratings, asswipe!!
--
Daniel

In article <v00cqg$3livm$1@dont-email.me>,
Daniel70 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>The Doctor wrote on 20/4/24 8:07 am:
>> In article <xn0okrmnaaturw5004@post.eweka.nl>,
>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>> The Doctor wrote:
>>>> In article <xn0okrdq5ahnxg7000@post.eweka.nl>,
>>>> Blueshirt <blueshirt@indigo.news> wrote:
>>>>> The True Doctor wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Considering that Gatwa's Christmas Day special was the
>>>>>> lowest rating Christmas Day special in history as well as
>>>>>> the lowest rating solo introductory episode.
>>>>>
>>>>> You are obsessed with ratings, it is not 1989 anymore. The
>>>>> new season of Doctor Who will air on a major international
>>>>> streaming platform, as well as the BBC iPlayer, many hours
>>>>> before it gets broadcast on a traditional television channel
>>>>> (BBC1). What good are traditional television ratings then?
>>>>
>>>> And the real numbers are?
>>>
>>> The real numbers will be that hundreds, or thousands, of people
>>> who will have watched the first two episodes of the new season of
>>> Doctor Who online around twenty hours before they are broadcast
>>> on BBC1 and can get ratings!!!
>>>
>>> What are the YouTubers that fixate about the ratings going to do
>>> now for content? They will surely have their reaction videos up
>>> on their channels before anyone even sees the episodes on
>>> traditional television!
>>
>> Yes! You need to source your numbers accordingly!
>>
>UMMM! YOU, a%e, and Aggy are the only ones, here-abouts, who worry
>about ratings, a%e!!

No stats for you red-beard?

>--
>Daniel

--
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 ; unsubscribe from Google Groups to be seen
What worth the power of law that won't stop lawlessness? -unknown