Science of Doctor Who? What Science?

tvscoop.tv

Some people are of the belief that all fiction needs to portray factual science.  I'm  in agreement with Doctor Who, to the right; "Eh?"

I do have this blog to explain science in works of fiction.  But there are times, and all of Doctor Who are those times, that you ignore science and enjoy yourself. That's why I have been staying away from shows like this and Star Trek.  Even my post on the shrink ray from Despicable Me was as a "what if," a "how could this be possible."

Quite honestly, nothing in the show makes sense.  It's just fun.  So, when I came across this article, I couldn't help but chuckle.

For those of you who don't want to read it the headline reads "Doctor Who's science is 'pixel thin' says Terry Pratchett," to give you an idea of where the article is headed.  Pratchett has issues with how the Doctor solves mysteries.  He claims that the doctor just all of a sudden knows the answer, or knew it before and didn't say anything.  He said, "Doctor Who replaces this with speed, fast talking and what appears to be that wonderful element 'makeitupasyougalongeum.'" 

Even though Pratchett has issues with how the show is done, he is like me in realizing that it's about having fun.  He even stated that he'll continue to watch it, since he finds it to be "very very entertaining, with its heart in the right place, even if its head is often in orbit around Jupiter."

So, people, when something is fun go with it.  Even in Angels & Demons, when I cringed with revulsion at how the antimatter was portrayed, I still enjoyed the story.  Because that's what it is, a story.