OK, so in the episode with Rose's father, Rose pushes him out of the way of the car. this changes history and has catastrophic implications.

But surely everything the Doctor does changes something.

What makes what the Doctor does so often acceptable, and what Rose did unacceptable?

It was down to 2 facts really,

1. There were 2 versions of the Doctor & Rose at that point in time which the Doctor had said would make the time frame dimensionally weak.

2. Rose actually saved someone's life and as the Doctor put it the creatures were there to repair time as "someone was alive who shouldn't have been"

But doesnt the Doctor save the world on occasions? surely that means people are alive who shouldnt have been. about 6 billion!

in that episode rose questions and the doctor says:

'i know what im doing'

another quote he uses is:

'my people would of stopped this, there were laws against this type of thing'


so maybe with the doctor being a timelord he can save/change the past/future and not cause an 'incident'

I suppose its the same as a dentist removing a bad tooth or tying a bit of string around it and pulling on it yourself.
Both get the job done but
The first way is cleanly and professionally done
but the second way could possibly cause an abccess and gum disease so all the other teeth fall out

Perhaps the Doctor, and the Time Lords, is outside of our time/reality and so can interact with it. Perhaps even the Tardis protects its occupants from the time line and any changes made.

On another point. I remember one of the Doctors mentioned a limit to the number of regenerations that can take place; 12 or 13 I think. Do you think they will come up with a good reason for him going past the limit? At the rate they go through Doctors it might only be a couple of years off.

I think Rose makes the same point to the Doctor in this episode, and his response is something like 'yeah, but I know what I'm doing'. Or something.

Although it's never been clearly stated, I think the Doctor knows when he's supposed to be part of events and when he's not supposed to interfere.

There are a couple of clear pointers from the Peter Davison era (Earthshock/end of the dinosaurs and The Visitation/great fire of London).

But the best example is from Pyramids of Mars when the Doctor (Tom Baker) lands in the early part of the 20th century. He realises something is up (alien plot to destroy the earth) but Sarah Jane asks why they don't just return to the present as they know the Earth wasn't destroyed in 1912 (or whenever) as it isn 't part of history.

But the Doctor says they have to get involved, and to show her why he returns them to Sarah's present day earth only to find it completely destroyed - history was changed because the Doctor didn't get involved.

Anyway, they return to the past, defeat the baddy and everything is as it should be.

Which is a big, roundabout way of saying that the Doctor, through his travels - and I suppose his Time Lord 'time sense' or something - simply knows when he should be interferring (when he has become part of events) and when he should leave well alone.

Nicely put.

The Doctor/Rose has a Time Machine the Tardis. If they messed something up and travel to the future earth or same location in the future they would know it changed. Like when they went back to that space station (i forgot the name) 100 years later and noticed Earth was like all quite and dead and the daleks were on the edge of the solar system. The doctor found out he screwed Earth up then.

But it a contentious point though, The Doctor was tried by the Time Lorsd for inteference.

He was but the Time Lords conceded that The Doctor did have a part to play in fighting evil which is why he was just exiled to Earth. The Time Lords were a sanctimonious bunch and were not averse to using The Doctor when it suited them

True. Sanctmonious and hypcritical!

Notice how you refer to the Time Lords in the past tense! Poor old Time Lords!

Did I? Naughty me! They are a sanctimonious bunch!

So they are still about?!

Btw, I wasn't trying to pick you on bad grammar, just thinking about the Time Lords now supposedly being extinct except for the Doctor.

Buggered if I know! There isa lot of speculation after TCI that they might not be as dead as we thought they were but no hard facts to back it up as yet. My own personal opinion is they made too much in series one of The Doctor being the last of the Time Lords. He assumed the Daleks were dead and gone but looked what happened there. I reckon we will find out more during series two.

V good question.

My answer (to keep it nice in my little mind) is that The Doctor forms parts of other people's timelines. Everyone he saves, he was meant to save. I don't recall seeing him going back in time to deliberately save anyone he thought was dead or was accepted as having died.

Rose knew her Dad was dead - that's part of her timeline. She altered that and paid the price.

For example The Doctor didn't change history when Jamie lived in "The Doctor Dances" - the nanogenes had already interfered with that, he just entered the scheme of things and - yes he affected things, but so did Jamie by being there in the first place. We have no evidence of any other outcome in any other timeline - hence no "reapers".

That makes sense to me so I'm sticking to it

I agrree, I think we'll see at least one Time Lord at some point.

Spencer Hawken's name has been seeded quite a bit.

Apparently The Face of Boe has a secret to share with the wanderer who doesn't have a home..perhaps that is connected to the Time Lords.

Don Warrington did indeed play a Time Lord....Rassilon in fact...in one of the Doctor Who audio adventures and he is credited in DWM as playing The President in one of the Cybermen eps.

i presume that there is a "definitive" history of the universe recorder somewhere, and this is where the process of what should and should not happen in any given history is written... for example the doc knew on the gamestation that something wasnt what it was supposed to have been; it had altered from what he percieved to be "accepted history", if that makes any sense.. therefore actions like saving the planet and its entire population are "acceptable" because, as seen in "the end of the world" the planet survives until its ultimate natural(ish) destruction...

Thanks for that, BG

Don played the President of.... ?

He is playing The President in series two. However it doesn't say what he is the President of. Hm.......