Do you have an idea for a new wiki? Please share it with us here
Take the Dharma Wants You test, all about Lostpedia, here

From Lostpedia

Title

Ok Yes! Let's delete it then in a couple of days when Something Nice Back Home airs we can make it again.

That's called efficiency! And this is called sarcasm!

This public service announcement was brought to you by Peterricca 13:07, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

No need to be domineering and unfriendly. Read the spoiler policy. This shows up in recent changes. It's a SPOILER. So yes, it's necessary to wait a week, or we may as well add all the spoilers to the 4x10 page, including the plot points, just because it'd be "efficient" instead of re-adding them a week later. It's not about efficiency, it's about CONSISTENCY. This is POLICY we're talking about. -- Sam  T  C  18:18, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

In my personal opinion, the title of an episode is in no way a spoiler. I know that my opinion doesn't matter with regard to the LP:SP, but seriously. This page doesn't reveal any vital info about the episode. If I was an anti-spoiler person, and I saw "Cabin Fever" in the recent changes page, I don't think that would spoil anything for me. Maybe if this page had a long synopsis about the upcoming episode it would be a spoiler, but it just states the title. --CTS 18:25, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

Titles are a spoiler. "Cabin Fever" shows that something will happen at Jacob's cabin. Think of "What Kate Did" (which denoted that we'd find out what Kate's crime was), etc. And there are many anti-spoiler people who feel the title is a spoiler. See here. They have a quite large following of fans (50 or so) who feel that the title is a spoiler. -- Sam  T  C  18:30, 29 April 2008 (PDT)

Can you be more specific with the link? I just get a bunch of clips when I go there, I can't seem to find the list of fans who feel that titles are spoilers. (Incidently, I'm of the opinion that the most spoiler-ish Lost title of all time has to be Jin Has a Temper-Tantrum On the Golf Course :P). Jimbo the tubby 01:19, 2 May 2008 (PDT)

I also don't consider titles to be spoilers either. In the LP IRC chat we have the name of the upcoming episode as part of the title of the chat. It's not a spoiler until someone says what it spoils, I'd say. "Cabin Fever" might have nothing to do with Jacob's cabin and rather, is all about the freighter. Or neither. We won't know until after the episode. Hence: not a spoiler. danhm 15:40, 4 May 2008 (PDT)

"Something Nice Back Home" has aired, so there's no point in this being deleted. Jimbo the tubby 22:58, 1 May 2008 (PDT)

True. But this should not happen in the future.-- Sam  T  C  14:12, 4 May 2008 (PDT)

ABC releases the name of the next episode the day after the new one airs? And...in the promo immediately following "Something Nice Back Home", it showed that the next episode would involve Jacob's cabin...this is a very trivial argument, the title of the show is not a spoiler. Did "Eggtown" mean anything to you?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iameko (talk • contribs) .

Why titles are spoilers:
Because the community decided they are. All the policies were opened up for review recently and were adjusted to reflect community opinion. As far as Lostpedia is concerned, episode titles (apart from the immediately upcoming episode) are spoilers. Work with it. If you want to get the policy changed, go to Lostpedia talk:Spoiler policy and make your arguements there.--TechNic|talk|conts 11:53, 5 May 2008 (PDT)

I think that everytime an argument about titles shows up, a sysop should replace it with the "Why titles are spoilers" explanation and closely watch the page. I'm not sure I agree with the community's conclusion, but, if I'm gonna to play, I'm gonna to play by the rules. Except for the explanation, every post in this section, including this one, should be deleted.--Jim 07:36, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Keamy's arm

What did Omar strap to Keamy's arm? Was it a bomb or something like that?--Theslate 20:10, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought that it was a bomb too. But, why would he strap it to himself? That wouldn't make much sense since he doesn't plan on dying on the Island. dposse 20:45, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

It looked too small to be a bomb, though those can be made very small nowadays... It appeared to be more like a pager or some kind of transmitter, perhaps to trigger an explosive elsewhere? Keamy just doesn't seem like the type who would sacrifice himself for something, what with him being a mercenary.--Jdunmer1018 20:47, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Sensor to blow the bomb if his heart stops? --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 20:48, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Perhaps it is something to protect him - because we he was having the stand-off with the Captain in front of the Helicopter, he shot the Captain, but I though the Captain also shot back, and the Captain was pointing his gun at Keamy from a fairly close range, yet Keamy was shown unharmed...(Far out sci-fi theory, I know, but...) --Qwerty7412369 22:22, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Come on, guys. It was a dead man's switch detonator for all the explosives they were hauling to the Island. If it doesn't detect a pulse on Keamy, kaboom. This is not so much a theory as simple deduction. Robert K S (talk) 22:25, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

On second thought, maybe it has something to do with the Secondary Protocol Keamy pulled out of the safe and "where Ben's going..." like, say, a teleportation trip to Tunisia...--Qwerty7412369 22:33, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

• According to similarity of the logo displayed upon the Secondary Protocol file and the "Ben's Parka" logo one could suppose that the device is to protect (or smthing) Keamy from the upcoming teleportation of the Island by the powers of the Orchid station.--Zerg 07:38, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I think it'a protective device to use against the black smoke in case it attacks again.

If that were the case, why would it make a difference to Captain Gault? He seemed to think that because of whatever it is, the captain would not shoot him. Something to protect him from the monster would be no reason to keep the captain from killing him.--HaloOfTheSun 03:28, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Dead Man's Switch, definitely. I think that was the point of Keamy showing it to Gault as a way of deterring Gault from killing him. Jacob's Lather 03:51, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Wait, could it be some kind of defense against the Monster, like the sonic fence? Keamy doesn't want to get attacked by Smoky again since he, and nearly his entire group, died during the Monster's release. dposse 04:42, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I recon it might be both... Seeing now he knows that Ben 'May' have the power to call 'Smokey' to his aid, He's strapped himself with a Dead-man switch to stop Ben from calling it again to kill him...because the bombs with kill everything on the island--Daimin 04:56, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• "why would it make a difference to Captain Gault?" Um, because killing Keamy, activating the switch, and blowing up the end of the ship with all those explosives would sink the freighter? -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:22, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

LoTDI-- You're absolutely right, but I believe that quote was actually in response to the suggestion it was a device to protect Keamy from the smoke monster. Jacob's Lather 09:33, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• Looks pretty complicated to simply be a dead-man's switch, something like that would hardly need any controls or buttons at all, maybe just an on/off switch. This thing has multiple buttons, a dial, and what looks like a display screen. Whatever it is, it's probably a lot more complicated and amazing than just an explosives trigger. Sithboy 09:31, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
  • I agree. That device connects to his entire body. If it was just detecting a heartbeat it might need a less complicated setup. --DeepForestGreen 12:01, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
• The strap going around Keamy's chest looks to have a bulge in the middle of his chest, there's a word for that bit of bone but I can't recall it. Either way, that strap on its own would be mysterious in itself, so I guess they wanted us to see said strap. Whilst I have no idea if that's the pro-location to monitor a heartbeat, it sure beats his bicep (or whatever the muscle underneath is called, have a feeling its not the tricep...). All this medical terminology! :< Either way, i'm on the "It's a Dead Mans Switch" bandwagon, because it also fits awesomely with why the Captain wouldn't want to shoot him.--Gredge 12:28, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I'd definitely go with the Dead Man's Switch theory. Don't think it would make too much sense, but could it be that it blows up the *freighter* if Keamy dies? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rg (talk • contribs) 2008-05-10T10:10:07.

• According to DarkUfo, the actual item used is a metronome with modifications. Obviously, he's not keeping time on the music, of course. I'll add this to the trivia section, though. -- Sam  T  C  14:26, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I think that if you try to shoot Keamy, it sorta bounces back onto you.Whatwhatwayandy 14:39, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

• Initially I thought some kind of "dead mans" trigger or bomb... But who says it has to be what he implies it is? He simply had to show the captain something he's never seen as if it will protect him, and the captain would be confused/distracted. Tin 04:09, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Trivia

"This is the first episode since "D.O.C." to feature conventional pre-crash flashbacks of an Oceanic 815 survivor. " What about "Ji Yeon" while it was a flashback/flashforward twist, it did feature a conventional pre-crash flashback on an Oceanic 815 survivor (Jin). Can anyone think of a better way to word this? --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 20:48, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

• And these flashbacks weren't all that standard anyway. It felt like they were just filling holes in his story. Kajillion 23:49, 8 May 2008 (PDT)
• Why is Greatest Hits deemed to not be "conventional pre-crash flashbacks"? -- Chuq 04:06, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
• Because it was showing us the events Charlie was directly thinking of when he was compiling his 'Greatest Hits' list for Claire, not a traditional Flashback showing us either important events in the character's life or events that parallel the character's current actions or feelings on the Island. --JDMCMAMC 07:01, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
  • That seems like an arbitraty distinction.--Nevermore 10:19, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
    • What is not arbitrary is that each flashback in "Greatest Hits" tells a story within itself; they are not scenes from only one storyline. bloodcandy
• Because some of the flashes were post-crash. Froglars 11:17, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
• Yeah, that's interesting. Good catch. -- Sam  T  C  14:25, 10 May 2008 (PDT)
• Can't we just say that it was the first episode since D.O.C. that featured solely (someone might find a better word though) pre-crash flashbacks of a survivor?--     c      blacxthornE      t     15:57, 10 May 2008 (PDT)
• Several other episodes have had post-crash flashbacks, and a couple have even had both. I, too, think this view of Greatest Hits as unconventional is arbitrary and illogical. -- Ao-bōzu 青坊主 * Talk * Contributions
• I would also add that this is the second episode to ever feature the birth of a character, the first to ever feature the birth of a survivor from 815 and the second in which each flashback features a very diferent moment in that character's timeline while still mantaining the same storyline (the first would be "Special"; "Par Avion" only advances a substantial amount of time in the last flashback). bloodcandy
• Are we getting wrapped around the axle when we write about whether a flashback included this or included that? Omitted this or omitted that? Isn't what happened in a flashback more important?--Jim 16:13, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

I'd agree, you can invent as many distinctions as you want for any episode if you add enough qualifiers. --Minderbinder 11:13, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

General

"Everyday" song is by Buddy Holly who died in an airplane crash in 1959. Platypus 10:34, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

A new Dharma logo?

If you watch the second pan of a body at the mass grave you will see a dharma patch. But this one has a totally black center and nothing else. Kind of like the Pearl but the opposite. Here's the pic:

--The Cartographer 20:56, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Looks to me like the logo has been eroded. ESachs 22:17, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Do all of the uniforms have to have a logo? perhaps it was just a generic DHARMA patch. No logo, not new logo.Thelordnyax 23:05, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Why not a generic patch? There must have been some DHARMAites who were not assigned to a specific station.--Jim 18:01, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Could it be the Temple? --Halcohol 01:29, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Look at the logo people. It is a SOLID black center. No little square edges like the Temple, and no erosion. Which if were the case wouldn't the whole patch have eroded as well? The only thing in front of it is a thin twig. --The Cartographer 08:54, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Mayhew

In Trivia it says "Star Wars: Lapidus mentions Mayhew has died, a reference to Peter Mayhew who played Chewbacca. (Movies and TV)". I'm all for this if it's actually a reference, particularly since Chewbacca DID die in the Expanded Universe, but Mayhew isn't taht uncommon a name. Was this intended to be reference? Seems kind of like a stretch.Thelordnyax 23:11, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

• Mayhew was the name of the grunt who was thrown by the smoke monster --TheTruffleShuffle 01:00, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• • Agreed. It's possible that the writers had Peter Mayhew in mind when they named the character, but it seems unlikely that it's a deliberate reference that should be cited. Respectfully suggesting removal. Jacob's Lather 03:48, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• • Mayhew is the 3858th most common name in USA for the 1990 census. More common than Keamy, Lapidus, or Goodspeed. I think it was just a last name, picked at random.

"Hello there!" - another SW reference

Look, I am a huge Star Wars fan myself, but I'm asking you people not to make referenses out of nowhere! While "I have a bad feeling about this" is indeed a confirmed Star Wars reference(Meet Kevin Jonson-Enhanced), "Hello there!" is just another common way to greet a pesron - I heard that line many times in many movies other than Star Wars. I'm going to remove it soon. Malachi 12:55, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I completely agree, that is not a SW reference. --CTS 12:57, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Abaddon and Alpert

Who's he working for? Seems like it's not Widmore since he picked the science crew that went on the freighter, and Miles and Frank seem to be "good guys". Alpert: He doesn't seem to age...? or he's time-travelling? Thelordnyax 23:21, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

Remember that Abaddon clearly stages to Naomi "There were NO survivors". (I think this leads to believe his intentions were not good). Regardin to alpert, even if he times travel he's suppose to get older. In the Man behind the Curtain, Ben tells Alpert "You do remember birthdays, right richard?". I think he doesn't get older for a reason.

I don't think Abaddon is a good guy. Remember, Alpert wanted Locke to be a scientist and was mad at him when he chose the knife. Abaddon however tried to convince Locke to go on a walkabout only with a knife. I think this is important. BeŻet 08:04, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I wouldn't rule Abbadon out as a good guy so quick. When he hired Naomi, he may have wanted her military expertise to foil Keamy and his men. Maybe he works for Penny who is trying to undermine her father's plans. In which case Naomi wasn't lying when she said she worked for Penny, even though Penny didn't know anything about the boat. Flashsideways 11:03, 9 May 2008 (PDT) Naming him after the Angel of the Abyss certainly doesn't lend to him being a good guy --Enzovalenzetti 11:31, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I don't know if we can yet judge their actions as good and bad yet. But Abaddon does seem to be somewhat sinister. I wonder if these two are competing forces, pro-Island and anti-Island? They both seem not to age (I think this makes the most sense for Richard because of his apperance to Ben as a child). They both seem to be on opposite sides, as far as Abaddon and Widmore and Alpert and Ben/The Others. These two definitely have had an impact on who is on the island, and how they got there. I think Abaddon could want to profit, or utilize the island in someway, whereas Alpert is trying to protect it from outsiders (Dharma Initiative etc.). One main flaw in this theory is why Abaddon encouraged John's walkabout when John appears to be the next leader (for better or worse).

--HowardTCo 18:56, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Is Abaddon sinister or just ruthless?--Jim 12:43, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Mystery Tales

Yes, this was a real comic book. This brings back another old theme that had not been seen for a while. Is anyone out there able to track down a copy & describe its contents? -- Llywrch 23:51, 8 May 2008 (PDT)

A copy of the cover image [1] is available from the Grand Comics Database Project. (New and unsure of copyright!)--Kate2 09:57, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I've never edited a wiki before - ever! So my apoligies if this is an incorrect way of doing it. But that comic was published in April of 1956. You can find it on mycomicshop.com. The description is as follows:

"Mystery Tales (1952 Atlas) #40 Atlas: Apr 1956 Original cover price: $0.10 "The Hidden Land," "A Warning Voice" (art by Vic Carrabotta), "Crossroads of Destiny," "Sammy's Secret," "The Silent Stranger," "March Has 32 Days," and a two-page text story, "The Travelers." " mxmarks 2:30, 9 May 2008

Summaries

Can somebody finish up the "In the jungle" and "On the Kahana" sections of the summary? I don't have a copy of the episode yet and I don't have the best memory. They've only been about a third done for the past few hours.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  00:47, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• I did a little bit on the jungle section... I'll get the Kahana part tomorrow morning if it still needs to be done.--Halcohol 01:59, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

The file inside the safe?

Did anyone else notice that the file Keamy pulls out of the safe and calls the "Secondary protocol" Has the same Dharma logo as Ben's Parker in his flash-forward?... That means the whatever the logo represents (Orchid?) the people on the boat may know a lot more about it then Ben thinks. --Daimin 02:22, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

It does look very similar and has the same centre piece thing, though the lines around the outside have different variations on Ben's Parka logo. --Mcruzier 20:47, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Yeah it's the same logo except for the hexagrams. But the hexagrams on the protocol book are correct, so it's likely the patch's hexagram anomalies were just a prop error. --Jackdavinci 07:22, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

So, does anyone know what this logo represents? Do we know? Or is it a new logo? --Salvora 11:59, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought the consensus was that this is the Orchid logo, a station that Darlton have promised we will see before the end of the season. The little thing in the very center does resemble a profile of an orchid.Krelnik 14:22, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Sisyphus Reference

In the scene where goodspeed is seen cutting down a tree, only to have the tree appear uncut - before it was revealed that this was a dream, my initial thought was not that this was punishment for Goodspeed (what did he do wrong) - but merely, an allusion to possible time fluctuations on the island. Why would Goodspeed be punished with a sisyphus type punishment? --LOSTinDC 06:29, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Yeah the first thing I thought of was the book (Invention of Morel?) we saw in an earlier book that's about an island where holographic recordings of the occupants are stuck in a time loop. --Jackdavinci 07:20, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

THe first thing I thought was "hologram." It's more likely that it was intended to be a recorded loop than a "Sisyphus" punishment. I'm not sure the (dubious) similarity to the myth of Sisyphus is worth a mention in the references. --bq 00:13, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Sorry, but I don't believe that Goodspeed was a recorded hologram - else the show would have to answer some difficult questions like "Who recorded the hologram?" "When?" "How did they know what to have the hologram say to Locke?" and so forth... Also, remeber that the interaction between Goodspeed and Locke wound up occuring in Locke's dream, so its unlikely that it was a hologram. And we know that there are strange beings both on and off the island who seem to be "spirits" or "psychic beings" or whatever you want to call them - specifically giant-Walt, Christian Shepard, Jacob, Yemi, and so forth - all of whom can interact with the survivors on a personal, face-to-face level as opposed to a generic, mechanical interaction. They call characters by name, they answer direct questions, they seem to be able to interact withthe physical world (at times) and as we've seen in the flash-forwards they are not limited to the island! (Ghost-Charley visits Hurley in the gas station and at the mental institution and Ghost-Christian visits Jack at his office) So there's something more going on here than simply saying that these are just recorded holograms stuck in loops that keep poping up. I mean, Goodspeed may be doing the same actions, but he is not saying the same things each time he cuts down the tree. And for me, that's the key - his actions. Goodspeed is spending his afterlife (he said he died years ago - hence "afterlife") doing the same activity, cutting down a tree, over-and-over-and-over again. Each time he completes his task, it begins again, seemingly forever. We don't know if this is some form of punishment (it may be, it may not) but I don't see how that matters. The core of the myth is about spending ones eternity repeating the same arduous task. Thus the scene between Goodspeed and Locke references this myth - it may not be the only reference in the scene, it may not be the best reference in the scene, but the reference is there... Thanks --Qwerty7412369 01:28, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

So now the unanswered question is: "Why is Locke's dreams a location that ghosts/spirits/beings whatever spend an eternity?" Come on. This is ridiculous - if the only reason there is a sisyphus reference because he is doing the same action over and over, then we should also mention the hologram based on the book the Invention of Morel (which has been explicitly referenced before). Or we should note that because the tree keeps re-appearing that its possible that they are referencing the fact that time and space have some funny properties on the island. Any and all of these should be included if we include the sisyphus reference. The entire point of the sisyphus story is that he is punished in his afterlife - neither punishment nor the afterlife is represented by John's dream. --LOSTinDC 09:10, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Hey, if you want to add a reference to the "Invention of Morel" (and I see someone has) or that it is referencing space-time loops, I won't say "this is ridiculous" as you have, because its not - all these could be references. Again the Sisyphus reference may not be the only reference in the scene, it may not be the best reference in the scene, but the reference is there. And until J.J. Abrams and crew publishes an "Official Lost Reference Guide" then we won't be 100% sure what, if any, of these and all other references are significant and which are ones where we are just reading a bit too much into the scenes. But yes, to your point, because you have a dead character (again, Goodspeed explicitly stated that he had died years ago - past-tense - thus his appearence is referenceing some sort of existance after-life) who is repeating the same physically arduous task over and over again, then you have the essence of the myth of Sisyphus. And your question is a straw-man - I never said these ghosts only exist in Locke's dream - in fact I explicitly stated that these ghosts appear to multiple characters, both on and off the island, in dreams and while awake. So there you go... Thanks --Qwerty7412369 16:42, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

All that I think is ridiculous is the somewhat tenuous connection between the so-called "references" and the episodes that have been showing up lately. I think there should be some common guidelines for what constitutes a reference, not that it has to be explicit in the episode - otherwise we end up with someone cataloging every instance of the color red in an episode (which someone recently did). You obviously feel passionate enough about the sisyphus reference here (I do think it should be removed from the body of Goodspeed's article) and that's fine - I'm not even suggesting deletion, I was just raising the issue of is this really a reference to sisyphus. I didn't mean to offend you, and apologize if I did. --LOSTinDC 17:59, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

No offence taken - this is just a spirited debate. And someone has removed the reference from the body of the Goodspeed article and upon reflecion I agree that that was not the place for it. If some reasonable guidelines are made for the reference sections of Lostpedia I will happily abide by them; but till then we'll just muddle through! Thanks --Qwerty7412369 19:28, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

I like friendly argument. There's a portal off the main page for Themes. It has subs for both Occurrences and Recurring Themes. Sisyphus begins as an occurrence and, maybe, moves to recurring. I also don't it hurts to write, "See the argument at __________."--Jim 06:10, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

• There's a big difference between Goodspeed and Sisyphus that I'm surprised hasn't been brought forward yet. Sisyphus, because of his hubris was punished to "eternal frustration" in having to roll the boulder up the hill only to have it roll back down. Goodspeed on the other hand is taking much pleasure in his work, building a home for him and his wife, relieved to "get away from the D.I." IMO, from the moment I saw the ep the first time I was on-board with the allusion to the book "Invention of Morel," and think that this is not referencing Sisyphus. I mean, we have to pause and think to ourselves, do we denote every possible reference we can find? Or intended references through this elaborate story-telling? (and I realize that sometimes it's hard to tell the difference, as the writers don't print out a list of "references" every week, hahaha).--Overworkedirish 01:49, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Fair point - except, the French philosopher, Albert Camus, argued in his famous essay "The Myth of Sisyphus" that Sisyphus could find happiness in his task - to quote Camus, "The struggle itself...is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." And I agree that there must be some boundries between what constitutes a noteworthy reference, and what does not, the only problem is, that boundry is open to a range of interpertations - to your point, how do you know which references are "intended" and which are not? Thanks --Qwerty7412369 14:41, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Helicopter, etc.

• Maybe someone knows helicopters well enough to answer this here - how did Frank drop the phone without Keamy seeing it? Is there some opening near the pilot other than the main door? Also just wanted to say "fate is a fickle bitch" was an awesome ben quote. Makes me wish we hadn't nixed the episode quotes idea. --Jackdavinci 07:25, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Also, I think Jack came to the wrong conclusion. I think that Frank wanted the people on the Island know where Keamy is so they could run away from him, not follow him. BeŻet 08:08, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Don't know a lot about helicopters but I did notice that there weren't any doors on the cockpit and Frank set the pack near his feet. He could have just kicked the pack out and unless Keamy was intently staring at his feet he wouldn't have noticed a thing.--Andie 09:25, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Why wouldn't Keamy have noticed the bonfires and stuff from the beach? Or maybe he did, and he plans on going there when he lands to kill everybody. Flashsideways 11:05, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Just watched it again, it appears that the pack gets thrown out the window directly to Frank's right, but how he is able to do that without Keamy noticing is beyond me.--Halcohol 11:14, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I'm not an aircraft expert either, but I think it's quite common for aircraft with non-pressurised cabins to have opening windows up front. In fact, if you go back to episode 3 of this season, you see the pilot pull the door shut with a large open window (top at about eye level, bottom is about 30-40cm lower). I wouldn't be too hard in a noisy chopper to throw a pack out off your lap without people in the back noticing, especially if you're talking (or purposely arguing) to them about landing conditions, etc. Tin 04:29, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

The Bell "Huey" does have cockpit doors and the doors have windows[2]. I don't know if there is a noticeable difference in noise level between window opened/closed. The Huey was never accused of being quiet.--Jim 07:49, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought the bird was moving pretty fast when it crossed the beach. The fires might not have been that easy to see.--Jim 17:45, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

The pilot of two-pilot, fixed-wing aircraft sits on the left. The pilot of two-pilot, rotary-wing aircraft (i.e. helicopter) sits on the right. (I have never figured out why, but maybe some chopper pilot will tell us.) That seat configuration would make it much easier to drop a package out the window of the right cockpit door.--Jim 17:45, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

Daniel's morse code

In this episode, they translate the morse code as saying the Doc's throat was slit. Didn't the message just say "what happened to the doctor?".--Jackdavinci 07:52, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Yes, I wanted to point out the same thing. Also, it is impossible that Daniel sent some more info to Omar since he lost signal (episode 10). BeŻet 08:02, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought it was a follow-up message, what happened to the doctor/doctor is fine/throat was slit ---- LOSTonthisdarnisland 09:20, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

The Items

Should the theories about the items be moved to that page's "Theories" tab? Seems to me that this page should be about the test and the results, not about the specific items (i.e. what is in the glass vile?). Seems those theories would be better served on the Richard Alpert's objects page. Mr. Squinty 09:20, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Brothers?

OK, so BEN's mother's name is Emily, and LOCKE'S mothers name is Emily?!?!?! Any connection here? She has one baby (father unknown) prematurely after being hit by a car, then later has another (father Roger "Work Man" Linus) in the woods of Oregon and dies in childbirth. I see no problem with it being different actresses each time, even Swoosie Kurtz, happens on TV all the time, but I think this is compelling evidence to sugges the possibility that Locke and Ben are half-brothers! Talk about a Mindf***! Sithboy 09:26, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

First of all we know Locke's father is Anthony Cooper. Secondly, I don't think they'd take different actresses just to screw with us, if they wanted this possibility to be open they would show either Emily Linus or Locke at all. I mean we only got to see them at different ages and all that, but Emily Linus = blonde and Locke = brunette. I think it's a nice idea but no way is that possible. I think.. ^^ Jared 09:36, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Nice possibility, Sithboy, but there's one important piece of information that makes your speculation impossible: Locke's mother was alive in 1995 ("Deus ex machina"), where Ben's mother died in the 1960s while giving birth to him ("The Man Behind the Curtain"). Yet the same name for both women is only the beginning of a number of similarities between Locke's & Ben's lives; the show's creators are making a point here. -- Llywrch 09:44, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

It's my view that the creators of LOST deliberately make things coincide just to keep us wondering about them. I think they are just coincidences, and that they have no answers or explanations for them, I think they use these coincidences only to make the audience wonder about them and keep the interest and the intrigue.--Salvora 11:38, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Thanks, Jared, duh, I knew Locke's father was Cooper, don't know where my brain was. As for his mother being alive in 1995, maybe that wasn't actually his mother after all, but part of Anthony Cooper's con to get Locke's kidney. I think the brothers theory is still a possibility, worth keeping in mind rather than rejecting out of hand. On a side note, last night's episode was absolutely JAWDROPPING, just another shining example of a fantastic season. Keep up the great work, guys! Sithboy 09:49, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I first thought Anthony Cooper not being John's bio dad would be possible but he needed a fitting kidney and the best way to get one is probably to get one from one's son. anyway even if i dont think the brothers thing is possible, i think the mother's name thing is important because it shows the similarities of Locke and Ben. There aren't brothers but they both are special and John's obviously supposed to take Ben's place. Jared 10:07, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Indeed; they are not actual, literal brothers, but they may be brothers is a parallel lives kinda sense. It is interesting to note that only Ben and Locke have ever had flashabcks of them as babies.!!!!C.m. 12:49, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Locke's father was said to be about twice Emily's Age (=30) when Locke was born. Locke's now 48 years old, which would make Cooper 78 when last seen. Continuity Error, or possibly a hint that he's not his father after all?

Or Emily's mother was exaggerating, or Cooper looks good for his age.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  14:33, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

When Emily's mother says "he's twice your age" Emily replies "So what", confirming the statement. The age discrepancy might not be as insignificant after all --Tom 14:29, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

When Emily responds to her mother, she is NOT reporting the results of finishing a math problem. Emily's mother has used this argument before and Emily is tired of it.--Jim 15:11, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I'm still not convinced. Let's face the facts: We know Locke's father is significantly older than Emily, probably about twice her age when Locke was born. The exact figure doesn't matter here. When Emily's mother talks to the nurse about adoption, Richard - who fits into the category as to twice Emily's age - appears in the hospital. What for? And how does he know Locke's there in the first place? Emily's mother denies he's the father but still she seems to have recognized him. If he actually was the father, she wouldn't have confirmed that either, because she was just now trying to take the adoption thing into her own hands. I'm just saying I don't see how Cooper can fit in at this point --Tom 03:40, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

I fixed the quote from when Ben congratulates Locke on manipulating Hurley, it was actually "I'm not you", as opposed to "I'm not like you". At the time it made me wonder whether they are somehow the same person, but there's a lot that doesn't make sense with that. Probably just another reference at how parallel they seem to be in many ways, but I thought I'd mention it. Man-man 05:00, 11 May 2008 (PDT) I thought the same thing. I disagree with the fact that Richard is Locke's father. Emily's mom seemed to know who "he" was when she asked Emily where she was going. For a fact, she didn't know who Richard was when he was standing by the door. Well, I don't know. It's a possibility, why would Richard instantly be there?Whatwhatwayandy 14:32, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Remove UQ

• I propose to remove UQ: Why was Keamy so upset that Ben "knew his name?" Isn't the answer obvious? Because Keamy thought that there was someone infiltrated in the Kahana, passing information to the other side.--Salvora 10:14, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
• I agree, having a traitor on board is upsetting enough, but Ben seems to have the ability to pull up massive amounts of detailed information about people, knowing that he has your name means you're in big trouble. Sithboy 11:22, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
  • Thanks, I have removed it now. Should people disagree, let's discuss it here?--Salvora 11:31, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I imagine it's a bit scary to have Ben know things about you, even if you're Keamy. Ben's powers are great; his reach far.C.m. 12:58, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Or maybe it's something less mysterious. Keamy might have done something that got the attention of the authorities in Uganda; after all, rape & murder are crimes in every country. As long as his identity & location is not public, he doesn't have to worry about spending several years in a complementary room at the crossbars hotel -- or worse. Then again, every time I think it might be something simple like that, the PTB at Lost come up with a cheesy complication over the matter. (As if being a mercenary in Africa who has attracted the attention of Human Rights Watch isn't enough to complicate one's business model.) -- Llywrch 20:16, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

The knife

I have no idea why, but the knife placed by Richard as a test for Locke looks very familiar to me. I immediately thought "where have I seen that before?" and yet still can't place it. Anyone have any ideas? It's not in the knife article... I want to say someone found it somewhere, like the caves or something... --Pedxing 10:43, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• Do you mean you have seen this very same knife before in the series? I have no recollection of it.--Salvora 10:45, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
  • Maybe you are the special one and not Locke if you have a crypto-memory of the knife!--Frenkmelk 11:34, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
    • I felt the same way when i first saw the knife, Pedxing. dposse 11:58, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
      • If I recall right, it looks mucho like the knife Bootstrap Bill Turner gives his son in The Pirates of the Carribean trilogy. Aside from that, Locke did have that briefcase of knives in Season 1. But i'm 99% sure when I recognized the knife I was thinking of Bill Turner's knife. Now mock me for remembering that :< --Gredge 12:13, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
• I recall a knife in some epi that was not like the other spiffy knives. The closest I can think of _may_ be the one Ben handed Locke to kill his father with at the pillar. But it may be some other epi... the reason I recall is that the knife seemed kind of old and plain with a wood handle (Not Ana-Lucia's US Army knife). (Edit: Then maybe I'm thinking of Bootstrap's knife after all) LOL --J.nc 12:24, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Perhaps it belongs to you???C.m. 12:58, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

There's a pretty good picture of Naomi with a knife sticking out of her back near the bottom of her article.--Jim 17:56, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• • • • • The knife that Locke killed Naomi with was a SOG sealpup, it has already been id'd in the wiki somewhere. This one was really primitive looking.

--Frenkmelk 23:47, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• • • • • • I wonder if it was in the Hydra Station Video, i'll see if i can find it... --Hexhunter 17:49, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

   Nope, no old knives in that video, did notice that the Font is particuarly similiar to the one used for the Thief series of games though, hhmmm, :) --Hexhunter 17:58, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Zodiac

I changed the link to the Zodiac website so that it goes to the main page. Sayid asks for a "Zodiac raft" which is a specific thing. The small boat he boards that we have a picture of him steering on the main page is not a Zodiac raft. It is a ship's tender that MAY be made by the Zodiac brand. Sayid could have made a mistake in calling it a Zodiac raft, or he may have an inflatable Zodiac raft on board the tender. Either way, I didnt think it was appropriate to link to a specific Zodiac product that we have never seen on the show. It also didn't seem appropriate to call the tender Sayid was taking a Zodiac without seeing the brand logo, so I changed the photo caption (but not the file name). Wikistoriographer 10:48, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

A lot of things get called by brand names when they're really something else. We could get really wrapped up by having to refer to "the zodiac-like outboard-powered tender." Keep it simple.--Jim 17:51, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I think you misunderstand me. Im not interested in a semantics issue, we can call what Sayid was on a Zodiac (it probably is that brand anyway). My problem was the former link which linked to a TOTALLY different thing than what Sayid boarded. If we see that craft (the one from the former link) in the future, I promise to restore the link Wikistoriographer 20:56, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Noted. I zeroed in on the Zodiac/non-Zodiac part of your argument, rather than the link part. I can see restoring a link if the "floating object"<g> is significant to the rest of the story.--Jim 06:23, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Alpert and Locke

What's the deal that Locke didn't recognize Alpert in "The Brig" when Alpert gives Locke Sawyer's file to read (he says, "I don't think we've been formally introduced. I'm Richard Alpert.")? Locke met him when he was a kid! Can we just chalk it up to the fact that Locke was too young to remember, or is this a real question? Flashsideways 11:10, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• If Alpert thought Locke recognized him and did not want to deal with that yet, saying, "I don't think...," is a good way to throw Locke's thought process off track.--Jim 08:02, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

• Keep in mind, Richard said "I don't think we've been formally introduced." Locke's foster mother said "this nice gentleman" and Richard just says "I'm Richard" - no "Alpert."--Overworkedirish 08:16, 13 May 2008 (PDT)
• Noted; I was unclear. Make that "...recognized his face and..."--Jim 08:45, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

I would think that it was just because he was too young to remember. I know if I met someone today that I had met once before as a teenager, it's unlikely that I would remember them, especially if they didn't age the way you'd expect someone too. It did seem like the teenage Locke gave his teacher a funny look when the name Richard Alpert was mentioned, maybe it rang a bell from when he was a small boy, but there was no solid recollection. Sithboy 11:20, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought that the boy Locke looked like 5-6 years old. People's ability to keep memories from a young age vary immensely. I don't have many recollections of people I met briefly at that age. Perhaps if I see them again, I might at most think they are familiar, but that's about it. I think there is no mystery or question here: I think he was too young to remember. --Salvora 11:35, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

No, I think Locke's memory was wiped clean somehow. I don't think Locke would normally forget a face. He's Locke after all. EXCEPTIONALLY intelligent.C.m. 12:58, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I think that John was too young to remember and that he met Richard about 40/50 years later and it's impossible to guess that the man who came to his house when he was a kid could look exactly the same. (pardon for my English) Enzo 2309 16:07, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Locke was a child and only saw the guy for about five minutes. There's no way he would remember that 40 years later. Realistically, would anyone remember every person they ever briefly met in their childhood? --Minderbinder 09:09, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

I seem to remember younger Locke being told his name is just Richard. And then teenage Locke only being told Mr. Alpert would like you to come to science camp. Am I mistaken? Springfinger 17:08, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I noticed the exact same thing. Most likely, but less interesting, is that it is only a blooper. The least likely, but far more intriguing, is the theory that Locke may have encountered Richard some time between the two flashbacks, in which he mentions his full name. Now, as I wrote this, I started thinking of a discussion earlier in this page: The fact that Locke didn't recognize Richard on "The Brig", and some people arguing that he was too young to remember. Well, in fact, he obviously seems to remember Alpert's name at age 16, eleven years after his supposed first encounter with him (assuming it is, after all, just a blooper). If he would hold onto that memory for eleven years, why not another twenty or so?--Ainulindale 16:32, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

From where did you get that he did remember his name? There's no indication at all. What blooper? There's no blooper... He was not only too young at the age of 5, but probably had many more visits from possible adoptive parents and such. And at the age of 16, Alpert's name was mentioned only once. And it wasn't an important person, the important thing was the event itself. He didn't say "Dr. Alpert is your father", he just said "Dr. Alpert wants you to go to the science camp". I don't think I would remember some guy's name that was mentioned once in some conversation a month ago. Why would I? At that point, that is the least important piece of information: All he would remember from that at most would be that some doctor noticed him and offered the science camp thing. But at Locke's age, that memory could even evolve into something like "The principle called me one day and told me that I should go to some science camp", omitting that there was ever a doctor at all.--     c      blacxthornE      t     17:38, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

He looks far too surprised (if I recall correctly, though I may be wrong) the moment the name "Alpert" is mentioned, he turns his head towards the man whose name I can't remember very quickly. That's a clear sign. As has been said, how much people remember from an early age is varies inmensely from person to person. I have very clear memories from certain events that happened when I was 5. Plus, Locke seems the type of person to have a very good long-term memory. I'll admit blooper is not the right word. Perhaps it's a continuity error, I don't know. Forgive my lack of knowledge of the correct terminology (and any mistakes in my non-native English). EDIT: Ok, now I checked the episode again. I'm certain that while the professor is talking, Locke simply looks down, sadly and pays almost no attention. The moment he says "Alpert" his head turns, his eyes open and he is very attentive.--Ainulindale 12:50, 18 May 2008 (PDT)

• I'll reiterate what I said above, 5 days ago: Locke at age 5 was only introduced to Richard as "RICHARD" - no Alpert. So name recognition is not a factor - he never knew Richard's last name, and Locke at 16 only heard of Richard as "DR. ALPERT" - no Richard. There's no possibility for correlation.--Overworkedirish 16:19, 18 May 2008 (PDT)

That's what I've been saying. To sum up my longer paragraphs above: He turns his head as if he recognized the name "Alpert", although he has never heard of it.--Ainulindale 20:21, 31 May 2008 (PDT)

I think the reason John Locks grandmother recognized Richard Alpert is because Richard is the person that had ran over her daughter in his car. She probably thought it was unusual to see Richard in the hospital a few weeks later.

Really? Why would Richard almost kill the unborn chosen one and his mother?. And I doubt she would feel it unusual to see him; he'd likely be genuinely sorry but she'd probably be furious with him. Springfinger 01:20, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Picture request

Does anyone have a screencap of Claire in Jacob's cabin? I couldn't place my finger on it when I watched the episode but something looked odd about her, I'm hoping that staring at a screencap could help me figure it out.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  12:40, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I don't think there was anything physically different about her at all, so I don't think a screencap would help you much, but she was certainly acting strange; there was a kind of drugged, dazed, apathetic quality about her, and you know something ain't right just by the fact that 1) she's in Jacob's cabin, and 2) she abandoned Aaron and doesn't seem to give a ____ about it.!!C.m. 12:58, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Still wouldn't mind the screencap.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  12:59, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I felt that her blase, apathetic attitude probably came from the likely fact that, now that's she's spent some time with Ghost Dad, she's probably been clued in to many of the island's mysteries, which probably gave her a certain sense of peace, after all the months of fearful living. She probably agrees with Christian that Aaron is where he should be, and everything has been explained for her. I thought she had a very "knowing" look about her. Sithboy 14:01, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I like this line of thinking. She's been granted all-access to the secrets of the Island... and who knows how long she'll be there or how her story is connected to Christian and Jack's. I added the requested picture, as well. --Halcohol 14:37, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought she looked different too... Somehow more Aussie than usual, perhaps due to the relaxed "she'll be right" attitude change. I concluded it was a change of "feeling" not appearance. Tin 04:39, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Look again, she looks fat. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kasajian (talk • contribs) 2008-05-13T08:25:43.

Doc Ray

It's a question in the "Unanswered questions" part of this article about why Ray was alive on the boat but dead on the Island. But is'nt this question answered? I think Faraday have made it clear that it's a time difference between the outside world and on the Island. I would say that this question is realy about why it is a time difference rather then the effects of it. What do you think? --Gere 01:24, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Ok, not really. In the Constant it was confirmed that the island and the outside world travel at the same speed. Daniel explained this also on The Constant, going to and from the island there are "problems", time fluctuations. Let's imagine theres a bubble of electromagnetism around the island, It's not really like that but it's the simpler way to explain it... Depending on what bearing you enter or leave, it's how much you "time-travel". The bearings 305 and 325, given several times in the show, to Michael, to Frank, etc, are the ones that you can get off the island safely without traveling forward or backwards in time. The body of the doctor arrived earlier because when he crossed this "bubble" traveled back in time, that's why he was in two places at the same time. And as also explained in the constant, there is only one reality, there is no paradox, you can't change the past, things happen in one specific way: If you travel back in time let's say 2 years, you won't change anything, you have already made that choice 2 yeras ago when you arrived from the future (Breaking the Back to the Future rule, but supporting Twelve Monkeys)

• • I fully agree with the above remarks. Maybe it's not a bubble of electromagnetism, but it definitely is a barrier of some kind. I think of it as a Looking Glass, one which distorts not only perception, but time as well. The freighter has been parked right next to it, and everyone's going crazy, because their perceptions are being skewed by the Looking Glass. The Looking Glass sent Faraday's missile forward in time and the doctor's corpse backwards in time. If you need anymore proof that there is no time difference, just look at the 2004 calendar in the engine room of the Kahana, and compare it to the timeline on this wiki. --bq 00:23, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Locke's Ages

The credits list the actors playing young Locke and teen Locke as playing "Locke (Age 5)" and "Locke (Age 16)" - I'm assuming this is cannon and can be put into the articles and timeline? --LOSTinDC 13:27, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

I don't see why not.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  14:30, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

Christian Shephard

I think this was the first time that we saw the dead Christian Shepard wearing different clothes, is this right? Any significance?--Salvora 13:38, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• It looked like the same clothes he was wearing when he was holding aaron. Did anyone watch the mobisodes? I've only read the synopsis of them. I'm wondering if the one where Christian appears with Vincent right after the crash has him in the suit Jack sees him in or the cabana(?) wear he has on in the cabin.
  • He's wearing his normal blue suit and white sneakers in the mobisode.Krelnik 14:33, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
    • The only time in the mobisodes he's wearing something else is in "The Watch" which is a flashback before his death. --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 14:40, 9 May 2008 (PDT)
    • He appears to be wearing the same suit he has just removed the jacket, which there was a pinstripe long sleeve shirt. --Faraday is god 02:47, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I believe he is wearing new shoes in the cabin, they looks like hiking boots. This may be a new wardrobe entirely, i would love to see some screen caps of cabin Shepard and perhaps island Shepard from that 1st season episode and see what they look like. I think this new Shepard is a brand new manifestation.--Enzovalenzetti 05:47, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

"Manifestation"? "Dead" Christian Shepherd? What about the possibility that a) Christian never died at all, or b) he did die, but the Island brought him back to life. Why did no one ever find Christian's body?--bq 00:27, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

I think that all dead people on the island can "magically" come back, sorta, to life. (If the island wants.) Christian's body was left on the ground, so, he could easily be half dead. Christian mentioned to Locke that Claire couldn't be with Aaron. Now, we think Claire may be dead. (Probably died in her sleep.) When Jack went to see Hurley, he received a note that said, "You're not supposed to raise him." Could it be that Jack's dead? Same with all of the Oceanic Six?Whatwhatwayandy 14:37, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

I would think he'd be wearing no shoes, old-school Others-style. The way his farm-like shirt is buttoned right to the top really makes it seem like they were stressing his change in clothing. Wikistoriographer 20:58, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

removing two questions.

"*Why is Ben no longer the "chosen" one?

• How did Doc Ray's body wash up on the island before he had been killed off the island?"

• 1. Ben answered that in the episode. Ben came down with a sickness while Locke was healed.
• 1. Ben is no longer the chosen one because he went against Jacob's wishes. He mis-represented Jacob's wishes to the others for his own benefits (ie.keeping people on the island) and perhaps other examples we have yet to see. This angered Jacob and Jacob created the infertility issue and Ben's tumor in retaliation. When John arrived on the island Jacob saw another lonely, daddy issue riddled man whom he could make his personal servant, especially after giving him his legs back and healing his gunshot wound. This is supported by the fact that everytime Locke's faith fades he is punished (taking back his ability to walk, making him mute). Ben is the false-prophet of the island who used manipulation to govern, Locke is the opposite as shown in cabin fever when he deals with Hugo. Locke will always put the island before anything including himself as opposed to Ben who uses the island for his own benefit. Loce is a better dog.
• 2. The Doctor's body did not go on the exact bearing of 305. Remember what Daniel Faraday said? Anything not going on that bearing will be subject to the Island's properties. Damon and Carlton both alluded to this fact after The Constant aired. dposse 21:32, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

1: That's a consequence of Ben's no longer being the chosen one, not the reason for it. 2: Doesn't explain how he washes up *before* he's killed, at least not definitively.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  21:48, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• 1. I'll grant you that.
• 2. The boat is a day ahead of the Island, isn't it? I mean, we even state that in the infobox on this very page! On the Island, it's Day 98 while it's Day 99 on the boat. The Doctor's body traveled on a wrong bearing and got caught up in the Island's properties. Do not forget the Payload Experiment that Faraday performed. dposse 22:01, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

If the the boat is a day ahead of the Island then how can Ray be dead on the Island but not on the boat? Since time is further on the boat, then the doctor being dead in day 98 of the Island, makes no sense considering that he's alive on day 99 *after* we've seen him dead. I think that's enough to warrant a UQ.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  22:07, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

• Its not that hard to comprehend, they are at different times, this has been stated in The Constant, its like asking Asking the Question "How is the island a day behind?" Its due to the extreme electro magnetism surrounding the island creating a time flux causing a difference in time, we can't be certain on the exact time due to the body not arriving on the exact 305 bearing. --Faraday is god 02:56, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Jimbo, the Doctor showing up on the beach a day before he died is bordering on the line of being a predestination paradox. Look at it not from the point of view of the Island, but of the boat. The doctor got his throat slit, fell into the water, and came ashore a day before he was supposed to die. The losties found him and sent a message to the boat...which they recieved hours before he died (which you saw in the episode). All of this is fully explained by Daniel Faraday by the Payload experiment. Time moves differently coming to and from the Island. It doesn't take a college degree to see that. dposse 06:57, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I reworded the question. The time distruptions caused Rays body to arrive before his death. The real question is, what are these distruptions. --Gluphokquen Gunih ▲ 18:22, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Until time disruptions are confirmed on the episode (at the moment, they are only implied) I don't think we should be asking what causes them. The point I was trying to make was that it seems that at one point time on the Island was behind the freighter ("The Economist") but now it looks like time on the Island is after time on the freighter. Beyond that, the question of Ray's "pre-death" is specifically raised by the episode, and belongs in the UQ section. I like the predestination paradox answer, but until we know more, it's only a theory.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  01:03, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

Implied? Are you kidding? How the hell are they implied when we not only saw them in two seperate episodes (The Economist and The Constant), but Damon and Carlton stated on a podcast that there is a time delay between the Island and the Outside world? Have you never watched or read another piece of science fiction before? Time paradoxes like these are extremely common in science fiction. Name any show, Doctor Who, Star Trek, Stargate SG1 and Stargate Atlantis, ect...they all have this paradox. We know for a fact that there is a time delay between the outside world and the Island. We saw it, the writers have confirmed it, what more could you want? The question "How is Ray's body able to wash ashore before he was killed on the freighter?" is not valid because we know how that happens: it's caused by the time delay of the Island. Daniel Faraday stated it in one of the episodes, if you do not follow the bearing of 305, you will get caught up in the Island's properties. The question "What causes the time fluctuations that allowed for Ray's body to wash ashore before he was killed on the freighter?" is a whole lot better since it's asking a bigger question which is this: What has happened to the Island that causes freaky shit to happen? I think that's way more valid then the old question. dposse 10:41, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

First of all, please don't get personal: just because other shows have done stuff doesn't mean that Lost is doing the same thing. The fact remains that in one episode we see the time fluxuations work one way (freighter time before Island time), and in another episode we see it work another way (Island time before freighter time). This is the question raised by the episode, and it is raised specifically by showing us that Ray is still alive. That's why this question is still valid.  Jimbo the Tubby  talk  contributions  16:21, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

Synopsis error

It's late here and I'm about to head to bed, but the description of dialogue at the DI body dump is wrong. Ben does make comments about the purge, claiming he didn't kill them and that the Others' leader (who that may be is currently an unanswered question to boot!) did. He and Hurley exchanged comments about whether Ben is/was the leader of the Others. Jinxmchue 21:50, 9 May 2008 (PDT)

"Why did Emily's mother..."

"Why did Emily's mother seem distressed upon seeing Richard at the hospital?"

There's probably just enough ambiguity here for it to qualify as an unanswered question, but it seemed fairly obvious to me that the sight of a besuited, creepy-looking guy who appeared from nowhere smiling at her (albeit unwanted) grandson was a bit unnerving. DublinDilettante 05:38, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Because Richard is really Locke's father? :O Seriously, I'd have to go with the "weird man staring through the window" theory, myself. -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 03:28, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

I'm going to agree with the creepy suit man thing too. I'd seem shocked at that too. He actually reminded me of GMan from the HalfLife series of games... Just appearing in the Window and looking, not actually speaking until much later. It's sort of un-nerving in those games too. Tin 04:44, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

About the bloopers

• It can be seen that the audio of Abaddon telling Locke that he is lucky to be alive finishes before the video. A little silent snippet of Abaddon saying the end of the line can be seen when the camera moves to show Abaddon's face.
• On Abaddon's line, "I found out what I was made of, who I was," there is an audible audio processing error on the last part of the line, and also on the beginning of Locke's response.

Can someone tell me who added these and why? I watched the scene numerous times, and found no such error. I think whoever added this watched it on a video that had some kind of glitch. Feedback please?--     c      blacxthornE      t     06:42, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Yep, I'm with you, there's no such error. Should be removed. Jared 06:49, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I just rewatched the episode through Comcast On Demand, and I definitely noticed an audio change at the end of Abaddon's line and slightly at the beginning of Locke's answer. I thought it was intentional the first time I heard it, as it makes "who I was" sound quite sinister. Because the change continues into Locke's line, however, I do think it was an error. Olessi 19:13, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

"Destiny is a fickle bitch..."

This is a paradox -- how can destiny by "fickle"? By definition, destiny is unchangeable. Perhaps Ben is referring to the fact that we can't predict our own destinies. Or perhaps it was a writer's slip. The writing in Lost and other TV shows definitely seems to be a bit rushed since the strike... Any other ideas? --Litany42 07:48, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

This seemed fairly obvious to me... Fate "chose" Ben to be special and he's taken it for granted, but now fate has chosen "Locke" to be the special one instead, and this pisses off Ben. Ben clearly thinks that fate only directs people for as long as they are useful to it's purpose, and then it's discards them when it doesn't need them anymore. --Jackdavinci 08:48, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I think that's a good point. Ben is sometimes very immature like in "the other woman". That's why he even seems to be in a snit by fate. Ben was always a step ahead but in this episode he seems to be vacantly.

It's irony. The idea that destiny can change is paradoxical, to some extent, but it has happened to Ben, and he doesn't like it. And just because destiny is unchangeable doesn't mean that there aren't other points along the curve. You can be destined to be the next heavyweight champion of the world, but that doesn't mean you'll always be the heavyweight champion. Someone will probably take your place eventually. RanxeroxVox 09:12, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

When does anyone say Locke built a model island???

I have rewatched that scene 20 times, Locke asks how do they even know me and his teacher says they must have seen your display at Costa Mesa. Where is it that there is any mention of an island? I came here the morning after the episode was on and that was already there, and it hasn't yet been removed. As soon as i read that I was blown away because that would be crazy but it never happened. It is perplexing to think of how many people read that summary and just assumed it was right, because all of them have this lie in their heads now about Locke building The Island. I want to know why that is still in the summary and more importantly why no one mentions it once in this discussion or even in the theories section, because there is nothing in that scene or the rest of the episode that states anything about Locke having prior knowledge of The Island and there is no chance that there is any mention of any island in that scene with the teahcer. It seems like that part of the summary is entirely fabricated. Even still someone should have noticed this massive error, because Locke building a model island simply did not happen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lockedidntbuildanisland (talk • contribs) 2008-05-10T10:04:46.

• Granted we never got to see the science fair, or his model, but umm yeah...The teacher guy does say something about "they must have sent a representative to the exhibition at Costa Mesa, you know your model of an island". Wording might not be perfect, but he sure does say that. Seen it once on TV now (and i caught it then) and i rewatched it(and took note of it) again on abc.com. What are you watching the episode on/from? Were certain pieces cut depending on location? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattw1027 (talk • contribs) 2008-05-15T17:18:06.
  • Eek maybe it was "volcano" instead of "island". Im sorry i should rewatch again before i had posted this. But regardless, he does mention the representative seeing the model. I remember also that it really stood out to me as a great coincidence (fate). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mattw1027 (talk • contribs) 2008-05-15T17:20:22.
    • In the Cabin Fever transcript, the word is "display."--Jim 15:28, 15 May 2008 (PDT)
      • Right you are, thank you. I was just picking through that looking for it. Seems it does say display and nothing about an island or a volcano. Thats a shame. Makes me wonder why my ears perked up and i got all excited. Twice too. Heh, well I gotta rewatch it and see. Matt 16:13, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

UQ: item acquisition

Could the fact that Richard asks Locke which items belong to him already mean that the items have to be acquired somehow? When he leaves he says John "wasn't quite ready" (yet?). Richard leaves disappointed, but Locke's status as the chosen one is apparently never questioned as he grows older. Does it lie in his own hands to fulfill his destined role? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tom Lebowski (talk • contribs) 2008-05-10T10:51:48.

What the hell is up with the writers?

First id like to say im new to editing and im too lazy too read any policies about things I should and shouldnt do so correct me if I do something wrong please.

And now id like to say whats up with the writers I mean it was an alright episode but the only flashback that was really nessecary was the last one with Abbadon to be honest I dont give a shit about how Locke was a loner in high school or if he was going to a special school although it was nice to see Richard again.

Also seriously "moving the island" that is one of the biggest the biggest peices of shit the writers have come up with so far they might as well have said "taking all the surviors off the island by floating Hurley and using him as a boat" I think the writers have forgotten back in Season 1 when Locke was an adventurer, hunting boar and throwing knives why couldnt we see more scenes like that.

• John Locke has crossed a line since the days when he was the Losties' hunter. We will come to find that his last knife throw was into Naomi's back. He is now the leader of the Others, although he may not yet appreciate that.--Jim 06:08, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

Although on a more positive note (I try to be positive when things are looking gloomy) there were some good things about the episode: Killing the Doctor and the Captain (Never liked them anyway), Keamy going mental, Christian and Claire in the cabin, Abbadon.

--4815162342execute 10:30, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I don't agree about the childhood/teenage flashbacks being unnecessary. It shows us that Richard kept track of Lock's whole life. Richard obviously tried to focus Locke's interest to science. This also connects the series storyline to the ARG because of the "mittelos" science camp. "Moving the island", you probably shouldn't take this literally. Though the idea of using Hurley as a boat is quite funny. I really liked the whole episode. The story telling took up speed. I think the writers are currently on the right "bearing" however i'm curious about how the season respectively series will reach a plausible and worthy end.--Flateric 11:25, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

Yeah, I agree that "We have to move the island" was really cheesy and sounded pathetic, maybe "We have to hide the island" would sound more okay. BeŻet 10:41, 11 May 2008 (PDT)

I thought it was cool. And we don't yet know the specifics of how one moves the island. Most likely it's something involving science/pseudoscience/magic and not physically moving the island. I don't think it's that outlandish considering we already know the island is located in an area that has unique time/space properties. The notion that the island can move makes perfect sense, and fits in with what we know already, especially things like people leaving the island and then not being able to find it again. --Minderbinder 09:19, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

I agree. If you look back, you'll realize that LOST is full of storyline that could sound "cheesy" or far-fetched (remember the button-that-must-be-pushed-or-else-the-Universe-explodes). The reason why LOST is great is that the writers take risks. And at least until now, they always managed to make it believable and interesting. It's funny how some fans hurry to their computer just after the episode ends and say : "yeah, that's so unbelivable, they definitely jumped that shark there". We don't even know what they mean by "moving the Island". Remember, Darlton used to be nerdy fantasy fans like us, they know how we think, and they know how to surprise and manipulate us.--Lauridsen77 10:28, 13 May 2008 (PDT)

Yeah I see what you all mean but even a show like Lost has its limits and maybe it will turn out alright in the end but compared to other episodes of Lost and especially Lockes episodes which are usually great, this is one of the worse ones. --4815162342execute 01:15, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

This show (and any good story) is all about upping the ante from one moment to the next. For LOST, it was "We crashed," then "Woah, there is something mysterious about this island," then "Woah, there is a smoke monster on the island!" then "Wait a minute, there is a HATCH!" then "Woah, there is a button that keeps the world from ending!" then "Wow, there was a whole organization living on this island, and they had a LOT of hatches!" then "There is STILL a group living on the island, and they have a little town!" then "Wait a minute, there are TWO islands!!?" (Which, now that I think about it, that twist never really went anywhere...what's up with that?) Anyway, you get the drift. Lately it's just been ramping up more and more, slowly revealing, little by little, just how fantastic the Island and its powers are. I have no problem with "moving the Island," because it is appropriately larger than life and incredible to say that. Of course, if it turns out the island has a bunch of inboard motors that all fire up and push it out of the way, THAT would be a let down. As it is, I'm pretty sure it will be moved in time and not space, but either way I'm happy to leave it in the hands of the writers. I trust them. They've been keeping me slack-jawed and wide-eyed for four seasons so far. If you don't have an appreciation for the fantastic...uh, then why are you still watching the show? (And don't say 'for Jate!') Jacob's Lather 03:50, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

I've not followed the various discussions and hypothoses about how the barrier works, so shoot me down in flames if this contradicts anything already regarded as canon, but it strikes me that it's possible for the island's apparent location to be different from it's physical location, either in time, space (i.e. location on earth), or both, and it is simply being 'projected' into the here-now (or nearly-now) that we currently see it. What we perceive as the barrier, and it's various properties, is a side-effect of the projection process, causeing weird effects at the edges! 'Moving the island' could, in this case, be as simple as twiddling a few dials to shift the location of the projected image, rather than anything physical being required. --Irrelevant 00:24, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

Interesting thought. I don't really follow how the barriers are related, but the idea that the island as we know it is merely a projection (perhaps from another dimension or something) is intriguing. But, technically, this post belongs on the "theories" page. Talk pages are for discussing the episodes--although the line between discussion and theorizing can get really, REALLY blurry. Jacob's Lather 06:20, 15 May 2008 (PDT)

Keamy killing Doc Ray

When Jack and everybody see the helicopter flying over is this supposed to be before or after they found Doc Ray's body because if not then surely the body would not reach the island before the helicopter even if Keamy shot Doc Ray first! Scott t 10:36, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

You're missing the point. It's not a matter of speed, it's a matter of time. When they asked about the doctor, the freighter people said that he was okay. He was alive on the freighter. When he was killed, his body somehow went back in time to reach the Island before he was killed.--     c      blacxthornE      t     10:54, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

This has already been discussed above in the paragraphs "Doc Ray" and "removing two questions". I want to add that the time paradox might be non-linear. Everybody tries to calculate the time differences that should occur. Maybe the writers intention isn't this technical.--Flateric 11:08, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

The whole thing with Ray's body can't be chalked up to mere distortions in the space-time continuum around the Island. There's a problematic violation of causality here. To see why, imagine if the Morse code message sent by Daniel Faraday wasn't just a question about what happened to the doctor but rather a command to kill the doctor, or something that could be intepreted that way. Then:

1. Ray washes up on beach, causing
2. Message sent to Kahana, causing
3. Ray to be killed, dumped overboard, causing
4. Ray to wash up on beach, causing...

You can see that this is a time loop. The only other times we've seen such violations of causality in the show before were in Desmond's time travel episodes. Robert K S (talk) 11:39, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

I don't see a time loop evident in this scene. I believe there is too much ambiguity for us to decide that it is one thing or another at this point. A time loop doesn't explain the doctor being alive on the boat and dead on the island. A temporal displacement within the time loop would, but it makes the time loop unnecessary.--DeepForestGreen 06:40, 12 May 2008 (PDT)

How does the message cause Ray to be killed? Keamy doesn't kill Ray because of the message.--     c      blacxthornE      t     12:32, 10 May 2008 (PDT)

So why does the helicopter end on the island afterwards? Is it because they followed the bearing? I thought if you didnt follow the bearing you couldn't find the island? Or have I missed some important part telling me exactly what