That's not always the case - some things can be deduced. We may not always be able to say EXACTLY how or why but we can correctly deduce that a character has been replaced with a duplicate or a "dead" character faked their death.

In the case of Missy, however - there's nothing obvious that gives her ANY identity beyond her claim to be called "Missy" and to be in a "place" she calls "heaven" and for her to be the "boss" of at least one "person" called "Seb".

That means that ALL of the speculation here - mine and everyone else's - is a waste of time - a brilliant, entertaining, harmless, shared, waste of time.

Here's the best part - it's the fact that we do waste time like this that helps define and elevate humans above other animals - we don't spend our entire time eating, breeding and crapping or planning how to do those same things the next day.

Maybe that explains why I reach for my gun every time the lower-order of animals whine about people discussing "theories"

Sounds a lot like some of the other hotel guests during my last holiday in Zakynthos.

I'd agree with that. As we've seen, the Silents are a great idea, as are the Weeping Angels - as long as you don't try to delve into the mechanics too far (Can't kill a stone? What about with a sledgehammer? Why do Angels have eyes at all if they can't risk using them? Them attacking in numbers should be physically impossible.)

Of course it doesn't make sense that a Silent could walk around the White House without arousing attention, until it becomes important that it does arouse attention. Of course the events of the Time War make no sense. But they thematically fit and are interesting mysteries, so most of us let it slide.

Some call it Fridge Logic.

It is frustrating that Steven came up with really interesting big ideas that he couldn't figure out how to tidily wire into later series, so they end up a big disjointed and not slotting nicely together. But on a series-by-series basis, they're very nice.


I would say they are foreshadowed - in the sense that when we find out the answer, the clues will make sense, rather than the sense that the clues can be put together to find the answer. They always have to invent something brand new to avoid the possibility of being guessed.

I'd never heard the phrase "fridge logic" before, and I am chuffed to see it originated by one of my heroes, Alfred Hitchcock. It's something that I often encounter when I watch an Agatha Christie and then, 3hrs later when I am lying in bed, I suddenly think "now hold on a minute ..."

"Fridge logic". I like that.

They're not "made of stone" like a statue- that's another of those linguistic shortcuts that describe the APPARENT "effect" but is not intended to be 100% factual. They are living creatures that are described as "quantum locked" - which suggests that they are "on" or "off" at a subatomic level and aren't even behaving as matter - they have a dual particle/wave-like nature. You would have to hit it whilst it wasn't "frozen" - which is rather difficult.

And since when have Angel's been unable to use their eyes - they are affected by BEING seen, not by seeing.

And attacking in numbers is not very common amongst predators - so why assume it's the Angel's normal hunting behaviour (In fact, the very fact that they rely entirely on stealth points to them being primarily solitary hunters). For all you know, the Angels had never previously needed to gather together in large numbers - that may have been entirely down to the cracks causing havoc with their normal way of life.

And why assume that that they someone managed to evolve without developing a way to feed? It's not a big stretch to suggest that they are simply aware of other Angels and able to avoid being seen in their normal environment - even if that doesn't always work as well when they are elsewhere or faced with a disappearing police box.

Hate to say it but the reason they made no sense to you was that you made a number of assumptions about the nature of Angels with nothing to support them. You can't blame the writers if YOUR ideas don't work.

And a classic "fridge logic" moment appeared prominently in Doctor Who - in the line "Where did she get the milk?" Interesting that Moffat was THAT aware of the way people miss obvious things cos they don't "feel" complicated.

Ah, well, it's not my place to stop you speculating. But it's rare in Doctor Who to have an ongoing story arc/mystery that get's resolved in a way that neatly fits all the pieces together in a satisfying way.

I just can't credit your mind control theory as there's no evidence of them able to do that, sorry! The fact they are all from the future themselves, anyway, means that trying to separate any of it from pre-Flesh Amy and post-Flesh Amy is nigh on impossible. There is just no way of determining which part of time the Silents are from, as Renfrew had been seeing them pre-Flesh Amy, and was affected by them, and any post-Flesh Amy Silents originated from the future, the same as all the pre-Flesh Amy Silents...

I get that to explain certain unknowns you've had to come up with the mind control theory. But Occam's Razor suggests that's a step too far for me.

The quantum locking refers to the trigger, not the material. And I didn't say that they're unable to use their eyes, but it's a major liability even having eyes. What's the point of having the perfect defence system if you can permanently trap yourself in it by seeing something shiny?


I'm not arguing that it's not something Angels would do, they're generally solitary predators, I'm arguing that it just physically wouldn't have worked. They'd be locking each other right left and centre and make no progress.

Still, I think that proves my point. If you have to invent things like 'the cracks might be causing havoc with their way of life' then that's way beyond the intentions of the writers. They don't expect you to analyse it that much and to take the themes as they are presented.

I'm not sure if this was the same one, but sometime that series there was a scene in the TARDIS when Amy had her back to the Doctor, seemed to be looking at something then looked away and carried on normally. Someone mentioned it at the time (or a bit later) and when you look for it it knowing about the silence it makes sense.

I did mention that at the time. I think a few of us did!

Some were just saying it was her inability to act... A view with which I do not agree!

Hey. I'm a Moffat fan but I think its giving Moffat too much credit to even say he had the vaguest idea what the silence actually was going to be at that time. Hence why he tried to make it fit subsequently and it didn't really work.

Completely with you on that. He had good ideas that work individually but didn't tie up together well. I'm glad he has a clean slate for this series.

Can you be sure it's a clean slate? How do you know that Missy & Danny Pink aren't somehow bound up with the final wave of the after-blast of the 2010 explosion, or another residual crack in the universe from that?

I don't. But if that happens, we'll know about it. Just because a slate is clean, doesn't mean it will remain clean. It can still be messed up.

The only thread that we know is definitely involved is the mysterious phone-number-shop-woman. And perhaps Clara's multiple-identity problem. It could be that these are tied up with the Silence, but there's nothing to suggest that yet.

For me this has been the worst series of New Who, the writing is just plain bad.

I and many others feel this one is easily the best there has only being one episode that was average (Robots Of Sherwood) the rest have being good to excellent

Kill The Moon was also pretty awful with the whole moon being an egg rubbish

I didn't mind that and it's not like we can prove 100% the moon is not a space egg

I certainly can't, I think the scientific community could get pretty close though, 98% ?

I do have an issue with the moon egg thing. How could a creature which spends countless years developing inside an egg, which is itself pounded by meteorites to the extent it is covered by craters and scars, which is landed on and scanned by humans cybermen and others. Emerge and immediately lay an egg large enough to contain itself and be of equal mass and density to the previous moon and even be covered with millions of years of craters and moon dust? surely nature would follow a few rules. The new creature would lay an egg smaller than itself, lighter untill the "chick" develops over aeons and most impotantly smooth?

Again we have no idea how a space dragon would lay it's eggs or how it would work?

We don't have to use our rules for this if we had to go by everything that was possible by our standards we wouldn't have a show a TARDIS should be impossible by what we know how do we know like the TARDIS the dragon is not bigger on the inside to carry the egg ?

BIB:
The craters and other "wear and tear" are the egg's protective camouflage, like the spots on young deer.

The problem with the Moffat era is Moffat.

Since I don't have cable, I haven't seen any of the new episodes (except Deep Breath because it was in the theater) and nothing that I have read on the forum is making me die to see them.

It laid an egg that was obviously, and demonstrably smaller than the one it emerged from.

Me, I love a menage a trois

That would be a three parter trois is French for 3 if I recall correctly