She's in a different time stream.That makes me wonder what became of Susan, if the Daleks didn't invade Earth in the 22nd century?
The current leading theory is that all of the Dalek's subsequent history was totally changed by Genesis.
The current leading theory is that all of the Dalek's subsequent history was totally changed by Genesis.
Did you do a poll?![]()
It's plain to see that in the first Dalek story set in around the earth year 1,001,964 (Where it was claimed that the daleks evolved from humanioid creatures called "Dals"), that if the creation of the daleks took place some time during I would think earth's dark to middle ages given that their were space faring human slave workers being used in destiny of the daleks to excavate towards where Davros was woken after only many many many centuries after his assasination during Genesis of the daleks, then certainly we have to conclude that the Daleks never ever left Skaro in the most original timeline and that over and over again their history has been played with by a bunch of cowboys.IAN: Doctor, I don't understand this at all. We saw the Daleks destroyed on Skaro. We were there.
DOCTOR: My dear boy, what in Skaro was a million years ahead of us in the future. What we're seeing now is about the middle history of the Daleks.
IAN: I see. They certainly look different, don't they.
Every masterplan the Daleks had, got delayed for a thousand years, every enemy they did fight whom that had fought before in some previous timeline is now a thousand years stronger and wiser or more likely to be lulled or already quite extinct, leaving the Daleks less "familiar" playmates this time around to face a completely different rogues Gallery altogether. Consider the different strategies the Daleks would have had to use if they attacked our Earth a thousand years ago, today, or a thousand years from now?SARAH: The incubator room, were you able to do anything?
DOCTOR: Yes, with a little help from a Dalek. But I'm afraid I've only delayed them for a short time. Perhaps a thousand years.
SARAH: What?
DOCTOR: In the total time scale, no more than that.
That's the words of The Discontinuity Guide, by Paul Cornell, Keith Topping, and Martin Day. (I don't see them credited on those pages, though.)Genesis Of The Daleks completely changed the Dalek timeline.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/dalekhistory1.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/dalekhistory2.shtml
And later:Besides, whatever the Doctor may say at the end of "Genesis," all later Dalek stories assume that history hasn't been changed. The Doctor never regards his memories of early Dalek encounters as unreliable.
And this is perhaps the most straightforward way of looking at things. The Doctor does make a difference, but only a local scale, and from our point of view history still looks more or less the way it did. His history certainly doesn't alter. Nor does the history of Earth, which is far too central to the Daleks' plans to be spared by the Doctor's meddling. It's doubtful that his claim to have held back the Daleks by 'a thousand years' is really meaningful, as the Daleks can surely tunnel their way out of the bunker and re-stock their lab much faster than that. If you like, you can take his words as being figurative rather than literal.
And Parkin even finds a way to reconcile Davros and Genesis of the Daleks with Yarvelling and Genesis of Evil.All told, it looks like the Doctor setting the Daleks back a thousand years in Genesis of the Daleks is part of the timeline we know, not a divergence from it -- again, they still invade Earth in 2157, not 3157.
That's the words of The Discontinuity Guide, by Paul Cornell, Keith Topping, and Martin Day. (I don't see them credited on those pages, though.)Genesis Of The Daleks completely changed the Dalek timeline.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/dalekhistory1.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/doctorwho/classic/episodeguide/dalekhistory2.shtml
Lawrence Miles and Tat Wood argue in About Time that it doesn't:
And later:Besides, whatever the Doctor may say at the end of "Genesis," all later Dalek stories assume that history hasn't been changed. The Doctor never regards his memories of early Dalek encounters as unreliable.
And this is perhaps the most straightforward way of looking at things. The Doctor does make a difference, but only a local scale, and from our point of view history still looks more or less the way it did. His history certainly doesn't alter. Nor does the history of Earth, which is far too central to the Daleks' plans to be spared by the Doctor's meddling. It's doubtful that his claim to have held back the Daleks by 'a thousand years' is really meaningful, as the Daleks can surely tunnel their way out of the bunker and re-stock their lab much faster than that. If you like, you can take his words as being figurative rather than literal.
Lance Parkin's Ahistory draws the same conclusion that Dalek history isn't changed. After addressing the Cornell, Topping, and Day's assertion in the DisCon Guide that history has changed, Parkin writes:
And Parkin even finds a way to reconcile Davros and Genesis of the Daleks with Yarvelling and Genesis of Evil.All told, it looks like the Doctor setting the Daleks back a thousand years in Genesis of the Daleks is part of the timeline we know, not a divergence from it -- again, they still invade Earth in 2157, not 3157.![]()
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.