Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [torchwood] Digest Number 1254

Expand Messages
  • Mark Hadlund
    Perhaps if there was time, but Steven was the only kid there and that s why he was chosen to be sacrificed. Mark ... From: Robyn Hall
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 13, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Perhaps if there was time, but Steven was the only kid there and that's why he was chosen to be sacrificed.

      Mark

      --- On Sat, 9/12/09, Robyn Hall <jacksback44@...> wrote:

      From: Robyn Hall <jacksback44@...>
      Subject: Re: [torchwood] Digest Number 1254
      To: torchwood@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Saturday, September 12, 2009, 3:59 PM






       





      The 456 provided the choice: Give us all of your children, or we will

      destroy your entire species. It appears that the 456 live in a

      black-and-white world. Either this or that.... If they take only 10

      percent of the children, they will not be destroying our whole species and

      what they threaten will not mean anything. We don't care, but they might.



      Richard, you make sense, and I guess the 456 did show a willingness to

      compromise. However, I wouldn't trust absolutely anything they said. If

      they followed through on their original threat, no one in the species would

      be around to know whether the 456 compromised or not.



      Couldn't a child other than Jack's grandchild have been chosen? Why did

      Jack choose that child?



      Now who's rambling on?? Me!!



      Robbie



      On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:11 AM, <whomiga@missingpiec e.com> wrote:



      > > 2c. Re: Watching COE again

      > > Posted by: "Thomas N. Beck" tomfodw@mac. com tomfodw

      > > Date: Wed Sep 9, 2009 1:26 pm ((PDT))

      > >

      > > How do they do that? And, if they can do that, why don't they do that

      > now?

      > > Why make us give them only 10% of our children, why not just take all of

      > > them?

      >

      > It is easier for them to leave some children on Earth to become adults and

      > have more children for them to take later. (Eventually the Adults left on

      > Earth would be unable to have more children if they just took all the

      > children each time)

      >



      > If they took all the children, they would have to leave some of the

      > children they took unchanged (used?) so they could make more children.

      > They would have to handle all the logistics of keeping the unused children

      > around so they could have more - and it looks like they might have a range

      > of ages that they can use (Not too old, not too young) so they would have

      > to feed the children up to the age they could use them rather than just

      > letting the adults on Earth pay for that before they come back to take the

      > next group.

      >

      > (Does that make sense, or was I rambling on?)

      >

      > Richard

      >

      >

      >



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]































      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.