Forum:"Children of Earth" takes place in late 2009: confirm/deny?

Index → Reference desk → "Children of Earth" takes place in late 2009: confirm/deny?

Spoilers are strongly policed here.
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.

evidence for September 2009

freeze-framing a newspaper headline in "Day Two" shows a date of "September 2009". (the paper looks like a daily, but it has a blank in front of the September.) any solid evidence that the story doesn't take place then? (other than the usual assumption that the two spin-off shows take place a year from today.) the Radio Four Torchwood radio plays explicitly take place in 2009. they don't say which month, though.) --Stardizzy2 21:40, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

It occurring in 2009 doesn't seem to cause any issues. It just means 2009 is a pretty bad year for Earth all things considered.

So the only thing for the placement in 2010 category is the (relatively established) fact that the Earth based TV stories occur a year ahead of 'now'? --Tangerineduel 15:17, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

On screen evidence would overrule the "year ahead" theory. --Raukodraug 18:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Journey's End is set in 2009, and SJA S2 is set after Journey's End, which can still mean that Children of Earth is set in 2009. As I said it's just a bad year for Earth. The only way to be definite about this is to prove it with in-universe references. Children of Earth has obviously a few references to it being in 2009. Journey's End occurs in May, so it doesn't stop Children of Earth occurring in September. (Also please remember to sign your forum posts) --Tangerineduel 13:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

• OK, I know the "one year later" theory has been explained to me at least twice so far, but I really do feel that the point need to be made here that... Doctor Who is a story about time travel.

As for the specific issue of when this story occurs...

1. While the events of Aliens of London are set in 2006
2. And while we know the episodes that occur after that, and that also occur on Earth, occur at points in time after Aliens of London

Unless there are on screen references, there is really no reason to believe that the timeframe in which the episodes aired has anything to do with when things occurred on Earth.

A perfect case in point would be at the end of Season 2... We see Jackie interact with Elton during Love & Monsters. There are no mention of ghosts or any other strange occurrences. Two weeks later Army of Ghosts airs, and we are led to believe that the ghost shifts have been occurring for quite some time, if for no other reason than people are used to the ghosts and no longer panicking (which is what they normally do when weird things start happening). Now, either The Doctor, Rose, Jackie, and LINDA were completely missing the ghosts, or a heck of a lot more time passed between those episodes. If significantly more time did pass... well that could potentially throw everything off.

In the end, when it comes right down to it, all we really have to go on are on-screen, in-universe references. Theories are nice, and can really help when on-screen, in-universe references are lacking, but theories should never take precedence.

And if the date was placed in error by a prop maker... it still serves as the best in-universe reference we have, and thus takes precedence... at least until contradictory, in-universe evidence comes along. --Raukodraug 06:18, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Evidence for September 2010

• Remember Aliens of London? The Doc drops off Rose in 2006 instead of 2005 (this is on-screen evidence for the one year ahead strategy, applying to CoE), so as a precedent every present time episode has been set one year ahead of transmission date, plus it is also in chronological order, with Journey's End set in May 2009, SJA at some point between May 2009 and April 2010 when Planet of the Dead is set. So Children of Earth must be set in September 2010, with the newspaper in 2009 being due to a continuity error, probably by someone who makes the props for Torchwood who put a random date on. MercM

It seems like it's set in 2010. Why? Because Journey's End is set in 2009. SJA series 2 is set after Journey's end. TWCoE is set in 2010.

Simply, it's set in the summer of 2010.

As Raukodraug has said it appeared on screen (perceived error or not) it's still in-universe on screen evidence, until obviously some in-universe proof comes along to challenge this.

Precedents are not proof, (how do you know by the way it was an error by someone making the props?). "It seems like" is not proof (in-universe proof can come from TV, comic, novel, short story, audio etc, anything recognised in our canon policy). --Tangerineduel 16:11, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• The newspaper is a continuity error, it claimed to be on a Wednesday, so Day Five would be Saturday, yet children were shown to be in school. So the newspaper is a continuity error, making it's evidence null and void. MercM

Not necessarily. As has been pointed out, if the government ordered the children to school on Saturday, a lot of families would probably send them. Alternatively, even if the day of the week is misprinted on the paper, that doesn't mean everything about the paper must be discounted, too. On-screen evidence is hard to refute. Spreee 20:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)Spreee

Again how do you know it's a continuity error? You view it as a continuity error. Prove that it was an error by the props department, cite a source. You would also need to cite a source that Rhys' dialogue is also a continuity error, being that 44 years ago is pretty exact date. (Both sources will need to be someone connected to the production) --Tangerineduel 10:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There is also the possibility that the Whoniverse is slightly different to ours, while most of what happens in this universe and the Whoniverse are the same (Moon landings, World War 2), there are some discrepancies (Brian Green is Prime Minister rather than Gordon Brown) There is the possibility that in the Whoniverse, kids go to school on Satudays and have Sundays and Mondays off instead. I know, sounds stupid doesn't it. -- Matthew R Dunn 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)