Forest of the Dead - Two children at the end

2 of 2

sebbie3000

19-09-2012

Originally Posted by aisey:
“Brilliant theory, though maybe a bit too out there to be true. Although...maybe the new 'cherub' angles not only send back in time but turn them into children again? Maybe...maybe not.”

They would then also have to turn them into computer programs and send them into space to a huge computer in a library (that may or may not be in the far future).

So very unlikely indeed.

aisey

19-09-2012

Originally Posted by sebbie3000:
“They would then also have to turn them into computer programs and send them into space to a huge computer in a library (that may or may not be in the far future).

So very unlikely indeed.”

Hmmm true. Stoopid idea.

Granny McSmith

19-09-2012

Weren't they generated by CAL (the third child) and nothing to do with River?

sebbie3000

19-09-2012

Originally Posted by Granny McSmith:
“Weren't they generated by CAL (the third child) and nothing to do with River?”

Yep. Nothing!

Whovian1109

19-09-2012

Aren't they brother and sister as well, so if they're Amy and Rory then that is REALLY creepy

Sara_Peplow

19-09-2012

Their names are Ella and Joshua. Donna and Lee thought they were their parents.
River adopts them along with CAL after her "death". Plus Rory had blonde hair as a child seen in LKH. Melody in TIA,and DOTM looks like him being fair too. Then she regenerates into mixed race "Mels" in New York after dying from pneumonia and finally becomes "River Song" in Berlin. She now has curly red hair like Amy and blue eyes like Rory. DNA doesn't lie.

k9fan

19-09-2012

Originally Posted by alienpanda:
“Just watched

there are 3 beds, 3 kids, and also, surely "amy" would be played by little amelia pond?”

Caitlin was brilliant

alphonsus

20-09-2012

Originally Posted by sohoguy:
“Take a look

One's a ginger-haired girl.

The other's a dark-haired boy.

They couldn't be... Could they?

Amy and Rory?!”

Really wouldn't put it past him!

summer_ste

20-09-2012

Originally Posted by MinkytheDog:
“(though that has always been the biggest flaw with fixed-point - they require a chain of events preceding them).”

Good point. Though there are many different routes to one destination.

I think a fixed point in time is something that WILL happen (with the absense of interference). However if for any reason the chain of events leading up to that fixed point is broken, time will simply find a way around it or worst case cenario create a "substitute" fixed point.

johnnysaucepn

20-09-2012

Originally Posted by summer_ste:
“Good point. Though there are many different routes to one destination.

I think a fixed point in time is something that WILL happen (with the absense of interference). However if for any reason the chain of events leading up to that fixed point is broken, time will simply find a way around it or worst case cenario create a "substitute" fixed point.”

I would agree - although the actual restrictions on what a fixed point actually means has been conveniently never been defined, I always picture it like like a board with two nails hammered in and a piece of elastic strung between them. The elastic can be stretched, twisted, attached other points, whatever, as long as it remains connected to points 1 and 2.

Or a big ball of time-wimey stuff, wrapped around a solid core.

2 of 2