Just as a vague idea - I'm not proposing a theory before the usual nasties crawl all over the thread spewing poison...

The "wedding night" idea was just an idea that came up to possibly explain how the baby's DNA could have that extra bit - it wasn't stated as "It could only be..." and it was the only time the Doctor has mentioned or discussed any event as being "in this reality".

If the erasing from history isn't complete and total, which it clearly isn't, it's possible that the DNA asn't actually altered by hte Time Vortex (which according to the Doctor has never happened before).

We know that the Pandorica restored Amy to life because it took a DNA reading when Amelia touched it. Think back to "Dalek" - he was revived by Rose's DNA but he also absorbed part of her - he became a hybrid in some ways.

The Doctor had been inside the Pandorica before Amy so - what if the Pandorica added some of his DNA (from skin cells perhaps) into the mix when "repairing" Amy? She could be a Time Lord hybrid herself and Melody's odd DNA was simply passed on from her mother. Amy could be Amy+

Regarding traveling to pre-Big Bang 2 - the Doctor described it as another reality. In that one, the universe totally collapsed so it shouldn't be possible - but we've seen the Doctor travel to "impossible" universes before and explain it as just requiring massive amounts of power and being risky.

I like your points actually, making me think on it!

But characters have crossed universes before, so I don't think Pre Big Bang or Post Big Bang matters-since River being in either Universe before she was physically conceived is essentially the same problem?

I like the idea that she is a fixed point in time.

Also, having thought about Amy, didn't the Doctor say that she had literally grown up sleeping in the same room as the crack and mention all the stuff (naff memory sorry) she must have had in her head as a result?

So perhaps in a way that Melody was conceived and altered due to exposure of sorts to the Time Vortex, Amy was "forged" by her exposure to the crack from such an early age?

To be brutal, it's come up so many times I've had plenty of opportunities to refine the wording!

The duck pond thing was a metaphor - it wasn't implying that the ducks had literally been removed from reality. A visitor to a village like Leadworth would recognise such a thing as a duck pond, even though it makes no sense to call it a pond for ducks, seeing as there have never been any ducks. The reason for it being a duck pond has never existed, and yet it is still a duck pond.

Had ducks - the species - been erased or just the ducks at Leadworth?

None of them had been erased. They just were no longer living on that particular pond.

Nope, no ducks erased. There just weren't any ducks.

You are thinking about time running in a linear fashion and in this instance SM is doing a reverse, non-linear paradox. The reason for the crack? Well the conception of River Song was on that date, so one would hazard a guess that's the reason for the crack.

Doc reset the universe but didn't really fix the fracture in time - there are two time streams - one where River exists and one where she doesn't - hence the strange scanning of the pregnant Pond (however, this might be down to her being a ganger too - SM hasn't yet explained why the readings were off).

But what we are looking at here in the Whoniverse is predertimination. The Doc HAD to meet Amy after meeting River initially, because if he didn't meet Amy there would be no River. Then the paradox gets worse because River has helped saved the day on a number of occasions and saved her own timeline - perhaps this is why she contacts the Doc - to save her timeline because she is destined for greater things.

The good man she kills - well it has to be the Doc. Her in the spacesuit as a kid kills the Doc - real Doc or ganger Doc? Well you guess...

Is this why she is imprisoned in the Stormcage? No, she's imprisoned for her own safety and not because of any crime she's done. That's why they aren't too hard on her when she escapes. She is the boss.

I really wasn't thinking anything about that - just wondered if there'd ever been a particular explanation from the cast or DW team for Amelia not being erased when her parents were and asked here because I don't have everything recorded and couldn't check for myself.

I'd searched the forum before posting and had only found guesses and opinions - butterflyy gave the information I was looking for - an explanation from the writer himself.

I don't mean to sound offensive - I hope I'm not - but we really shouldn't need everything spelled out by the writers outside of the logic of the show. If it can be worked out by the evidence on the show itself (which it was), then we don't need a definitive Word of God - it was written in to the show itself...

No worries seb - I agree that some things don't need to be explained in a fantasy series. It's just that some things are explained in detail and I had no way of knowing if this was one of them.

Ahh... I see the distinction now - it was less that you needed it explained, more that you wanted to know if it was explicitly explained in-episode! Okay, I got it.

So as an explanation you accept, "It must have happened, because it happened"?

You got it Seb

It's bizarre. I get accused of having too much imagination for one post and then get accused of having none for another - by the same people.

I'm going to call it "The MInky Paradox"

Didn't say I accept or reject it - I just wanted to know if it existed.

Yeah, I know. I was just pointing out that his explanation wasn't an explanation at all!

It's fun to play around and try to explain the science behind the events, and attempt to ferret out why something can be when we know it can't, but there is something to keep in mind about the whole show. Right from the beginning, back in the sixties, it was established that they were never going to let actual science ruin a good story. If the science works, fine, but if it doesn't then the story is more important.

Don't get too hung up on trying to make sense of it all. If you enjoyed it then it did what it was meant to do. In the end, the correct answer is that this thing happened because that's what the writer wanted to happen.

I know - I just wasn't saying whether or not I consider the paradox resolved by Moffat's explanation

No-one is getting "hung-up" about anything. I just asked a really simple, reasonable question - was this particular subject one that had been explained?

A couple of people answered the question as it was asked and the rest have been speculating about why I asked it.

Technically, a couple of people misunderstood the question...

I dunno - some people and their whacky theories about simple things like like questions on a forum. Can't you just accept that some things just are without having them explained to you in detail

I just went back to recheck Flesh and Stone. In light of recent events there is another interpretation that might apply here. The cleric told the Doctor that River had killed a good man, considered a hero by many. River admitted that she had killed a man and said that he was the best man she had ever known.

Well, of course, the first thought is that she must mean the Doctor, but we now know that she is Amy's daughter, and Rory's. This season they have gone to great lengths to change Rory from the kind of nerdy comedy relief guy and make him out to be the self-assured, braver-than-brave heroic Last Centurion. A good man, a hero to many, and what daughter would not think of daddy as "the best man I've ever known"?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong, but if I'm right I haven't seen this possibility posted anywhere else, so I claim it as mine.

Hey guy, no need to get your feathers ruffled. I made a general statement, not directed at anybody. If you choose to believe it is all about you, well...

It's actually been suggested many times in many threads but...

It doesn't matter if someone thought of it before you - if you came up with it on your own, it's your idea and if it turns out to be right you can still give yourself a pat on the back.

Look up "irony" in the dictonary.

I didn't name names and yet you reply, quoting me directly and say " If you choose to believe it is all about you..."