My counter to that is: Do you not think that Peter Harness and Steven Moffat knew that giant spiders as germs and a a baby that immediately hatches an egg the size of the egg it hatched from is not literally plausible?
I don't think they cared one way or other. They aren't choices, they're mistakes or concepts that they either don't care enough to make work, or think we won't give a shit about enough to care about. It's at best lazy writing, and at worst down right insulting to the audience.
As far as characters, the entire problem this season (Hell the last couple of seasons frankly) is that none of the characters have A CHARACTER, they have like 6. And the writers just sort of bounce around between them whenever it suits whatever particular story point they need to hit. Okay Clara trusts the Doctor here because...because we need her to trust the Doctor here great. And Clara hates the Doctor here because... we need her to hate the Doctor here." (And no, just because a character is consistently inconsistently written, doesn't mean they are consistently written. Unless a major plot point of the series is that all of of the characters are Tyler Durden. ")
It's just sloppy writing that shows a complete and utter disregard for the fans, the characters and the show in general.
EDIT:
Actually let me ask you this. What would have actually changed about this episode, on a thematic or character level, if the science had been good (or at least on the better side of what Doctor Who is known for)? Would it had have ruined it? Would it have made it a less bold choice? Is there anything about this episode that would have suffered by including that extra little bit of scientific thought?
Or on the flip-side, can you give me a reason that the science being awful and wrong is actually helping the episode? Is there any reason why it's absolutely vital to the this episode that the science be so mind numbingly, face palmingly wrong, outside of it being a bold choice?
