Letters published!

[daibhidc]

I've had three letters about (or at least referencing) Doctor Who published in magazines in the last week!

There was one in DWM about the Dalek language, one in SFX responding to a letter saying Primeval is more scienfically valid than DW and therefore better (it's not) and one in Radio Times responding to letters saying Outcasts is Serious and Worthy sf, and thefore better than DW (it's not either).

Didn't get my letter to New Scientist published though. And no, it wasn't about Doctor Who...

Comments

[capriuni.livejournal.com]

Congratulations! And I totally agree with you about Science =/= "valid" storytelling.

What was your letter to New Scientist about?

[daibhid-c.livejournal.com]

It was questioning their model of quantum theory - basically saying I was sure the scientists knew what they were talking about, but the NS explanation seemed to have simplified it to the point where it didn't explain what the scientists were saying.

[julesjones]

Clearly, you must write a letter to New Scientist referencing Doctor Who...

(And congratulations. :-)

[john_amend_all]

That post really ought to be accompanied by a quote icon from The Saviours. Sadly, my drawing skills were only up to this:



(It doesn't help that, thematically, the quote demands the use of Times New Roman: not a particularly good font for icons).