I agree… we don’t have to be able to change the past to have an awesome television program! But this has been an epic debate going on here for the past couple of weeks… Think of the conversation between Miles and Hurley last night and magnify it 10 times…
speaks, before you go running around and beating on your chest like Tarzan, you may want to refer to some of the posts of late and the discussions which ensued from them!
You are speaking as if this is a foregone conclusion, (a no-brainer), and it is NOT.
There are plenty of people who subscribe to the elements of ‘change’, being ever present. You will know this as fact, once Desmond Hume comes along and makes a few corrections!
First I apologize for breaking the message board treaty.
Secondly, everyone is posting “theories” here. I couldn’t find the section entitled “Foregone Conclusions” so I posted in the “theories” section.
Lastly, apparenlty you know something about the plot that none of the rest of us do… since I “WILL know this as a fact, once Desmond Hume comes along and makes a few corrections”.
This is what I like to call…the obvious.
It is obvious that the physicist of the island says “What happened happened.”.
It is obvious that the title of last nights episode is the same.
It is also obvious…that it is being explained by someone who didnt even know what was happening 3 years ago (Miles), when the island started timetraveling, and is basing his idea on the babble of the same physicist who has been wrong, over and over, and that watched the love of his life, dissapear in front of his eyes after learning it was his fault that she died.
Its obvious that they want us, especially now, to believe change is not possible.
And it is obvious that change has NOT occured in the past at this point.
But it is also ovious that the 2 people that I feel have the ability to cause change, are not with the Losties in that time period yet…Desmond and Locke.
And it is also obvious, that the most obvious answer, is normally not the correct one on Lost.
Hmmm…why put so much effort and stock into promoting ‘change’, only do say there wont be any.
Maybe the idea is to change the future?
Of course, you dont change the future, you create it because it hasnt happened yet, so that would not actually be change…it would be storytelling, and wasting time with tons of clues on ‘change’. At this point in time, everything says ‘NO CHANGE’…so yes, Im sure there will be no twist to that, they will allow all of the past references and clues on Lost to go by, and become mere memories. They will wash away the idea of changeing the past, and we wont remember anything of it because this is just one big island flashback, Lostie flashforeward giving us the history of the island, with no way to change what has occured before.
Because we all know…”what happened happened…”…Miles Straum says so.
We’ve heard a lot of “I know” talk from the other side. Once you get past all of that they’re really a quite loveable bunch.
This discussion is not going to go away. I say “whatever happened, happened” they say Daniel was wrong. Richard responds to Hurleys argument for change by saying “Ben won’t remember any of this” and they say Richard wasn’t being literal. We’ll just have to wait and see how things pan out…
speaks, there is no message board treaty, and no section for Foregone Conclusions either.
I was not attempting to be snide with you at all, so there is no need for you to make that assumption! There are more than enough people on the site who subscribe to the same thoughts I do.
It is a hotly debated topic on this site, and I am only pointing out that you have phrased your theory, (your words) as if it is a foregone conclusion.
This is the journey the Losties need to take in order to play their role in the future. Is it story telling? YES! Of course it is! It’s a television show… They could say “there were these guys and they saved the world” or they can show us how it happened… it’s compelling because it happened by crashing on an island, traveling back in time, going through all this drama, meeting all these interesting people, hippy scientists all over the place, hippy scientists die, a guy with eyeliner on ducks behind a wall and steals the innocence of a young boy (God that’s wrong)…
It’s compelling without cheating by changing the past.
I’ll take my words as a foregone conclusion…I really dont care who believes me at this point.
I willl gladly play the role of blind prophet, and go on the basic premise that I just know it will, as highbrow said.
Not that I have all the proof the other side has, you know, Hawking and Faraday saying so, oh…and Miles, cant forget about Miles. He is the key to Lost. He is much more important than Hurley. He will probably play a bigger part in the storyline than Hurely ever would.
There is probably not going to be change because Miles said so. He is an expert on this. He is trapped thirty years in the past, he fully knows how the science on Lost, and is CLEARLY the one we should listen to for a description on what is going on.
Maybe next, Jack can start telling everyone how to have a good relationship, and Hurley will put out a workout video. Then we can say, yeah thats correct, because these are subjects these characters know what they are talking about.
Andwaiting and seeing is obviously the only option…did Miles tell us that, or did we just figure that out on our own…?
speaks, i was once allied with yours and highbrow’s views, but i am converted. i’m tired of the producers/writes shoving it down our throats that nothing can change. and that little conversation with miles and hurley had to be aimed at us keyboard blogging warriors. they really want to convince us viewers that nothing will change or can change – why? because the exact opposition is going to happen.
Miles was acting as us “WHH” thoerist have been saying. Hurley was acting as the proxy for the other side. In the end it was Richard who provided the evidence for Miles, not Miles argument. Hurley and Miles argued, Richard supported Miles. You don’t believe Richard now? If there is one guy on the show who really knows what’s going on, it’s Richard.
mmm i think if change will happen, it wont happen until the last or almost last episode of the series. the past will unravel revealing our losties causing major events we have been told of or hinted at.
But change non the less….the science of Lost changes in the last episode, change occurs, and evrything is Ok…
Eko, I must know, is this advertisement for pro, or anti change.
Do mean changing the past…or the…future, however you would change something that hasnt occured yet?
i think its anti-change until desmond comes along and does something crazy drastic. IF change is possible. which i dont think it really is….i need to learn to speak more linearly. of to my elocution lessons. ciao
Desmond has a part to play, sure… I don’t think that’s debatable..
How large of a part? Can he see the future? Or, is the Desmond WE see not current Desmond. Maybe the “visions” he gets are just memories that are being created by the ACTUAL current time Desmond. Does that make any sense?
How does he see Charlie die by a blinking light, if they are just memories…and if they are memories, than he had to experience this before, making it his past..
That’s what I mean… Desmond came back to the island being able to have “visions” of what was going to happen..
Desmond is there when Charlie dies. At that exact moment when it happened…. he created the memory of it happened… the “flash” or “vision” could be the introduction of a new memory that wasn’t previously there.
So, maybe he’s not seeing forward… he’s just gaining the new memories of something that he had not experienced yet. Am I getting too crazy here? 🙂
If its in introduction to a vision that wasnt previously there, what had to have happened?
How could something be there from his past, that wasnt there before?
Its not visions…its the future…its an experience….it is happening to Desmond..
Its not as if he is having wild dreams, he is actually seeing this, its timetravel.
He is not special because he has gifts from the gods…his mind is out of control and jumping through time.
We assume you cannot ‘jump’ to the future, because they have not told us this is possible, but that is exactly what Desmond is doing during the ‘flashes’ during the looking glass.
My only point (though not articulated well) was that Desmond left the island on a boat. He came back on a boat… What if the Desmond that came back wasn’t from the same “time” than the one that left?
These “visions” are of actual events. He could either a) be receiving these visions as “memory bank additions” if you will or b) he’s already lived through all of those things and the “flashes” weren’t flash forwards… they are flashbacks…
in which this would be his past, regardless, right?
Just trying to understand…
So either they are memor additions from something in the past that has changed, and affected his line of thought…or…
He has already been through all this, the flashes werent flash forewards, but flashbacks…meaning when he saw Charlie die…not almost die, but die, he intervened, and changed the past?
Its just like Dejavu… We’ve all thought… “I know I have experienced this exact situation before”. However, for Desmond maybe he really had. His “visions” are “flashbacks” to something HE already experienced, but that is brand new for everyone else.
Its like the movie Groundhog Day.. No matter what happened Bill Murray couldn’t get past that day. He killed himself, he did all kinds of stuff… but the end result was the same.
Sure maybe the first go ’round Charlie died a different way, but ultimately he DID die… regardless of how it happened.
If I’m needing to get from New York to Chicago I might take a plane… well, let’s say my flight gets cancelled. So instead I want to take a bus… well, the bus breaks down. So I rent a car and get to Chicago in that way. Though it prolonged it, the end result was the same. I got there.
Desmond didn’t change the past! There is no evidence that he did and no evidence that he can. Doesmond does two things.
1) Desmonds mind can travel to the past and occupy is body at some time previous to wherever he is now. We’ve seen this happen to him and it is confirmed. He cannot change the past per Hawking who we have no reason to disbelieve. She knows what Desmond is doing and that should be enough for us to believe that she is “in the know”.
2) Desmond receives visions of possible future events. I call them possible because he can prevent them. This is where course correction comes in. Desmond sees that Charlie is going to die but he stops it. The univers steps in and makes sure Charlie dies. Desmond gets a vision and stops it. It happens again until the universe wins. Course correction is taking place. This is only significant from Desmond’s point of view. To any other observer things are just happening.
Desmond is being manipulated by some force. Maybe Jacob, who knows? But his influence is limited to the present and the future.
Now say you travel to the future through concience timetravel, and take a plane. You get there, nothing goes wrong.
Now when you get back to the present, your scenario repeats, but you end up driving.
During your drive there is an accident and someone almost dies…you save them…even if just enough for them to say goodbye to a loved one and get hit by a bus tomorrow.
In your timetravel experience, you flew, so how would this not be change?
You have to remember, Desmond isnt just driving across country. He is seeing himself fly…then driving across country and making a difference in someones life.
That is why it is change.
i’m jumping in and sitting on the fence with the whole change the past mess of crap.
what does “Sawyer and Kate had no memory of it because it had not happened for them yet. Even though this action happened in the past, Sawyer and Kate had not been through it yet because they experienced it in present time.” mean?
Can someone expain why it’s not the present for the people in the 70’s? Isn’t it? i’m so confused…..
Yes highbrow, these are signifigant. I just dont know why you cannot accept whhat Desmond did as timetravel…it wasnt just a vision…It will not be until you and anyone else accept that, that you will see the correct view of this.
If it was just a vision, things wouldnt come true…if it was possible future events, then he wouldnt see the same light in his ‘crazy dream’ that was actually there.
There is no faith in this line of thinking, there is no understanding that what Desmond did, was more than just have a dream…he experienced these future events, making them his past…because you cannot remember something that did not happen…and changed them.
Dude, seriously? When the heck did desmond actually travel to the future? I said Desmond gets visions of possible future events. That is a far cry from time travel into the future.
Maybe you should consider the possibility that you’re the one not seeing the correct view of this? We can’t have a debate if your argument against my theory is that I’m wrong.
Based on what we have seen Desmond has never physically travelled into the future. Desmond has never exibited the ability to manipulate the visions he’s having while he’s “experiencing” them.
What theory?
I havent seen a theory by you on this subject, just telling anyone who says that change is possible, that they are wrong because we havent seen it yet…when in fact we have.
desmond doesnt HAVE to PHYSICALLY travel into the future.
That is the concept behind the constant. He is special and can communicate through himself at any point thathe is living or will live.
That is why in the constant, when he jumps back to the past, his past self jumps to its future…on the freighter.
Did Desmonds past self not do that?
Did his past concienceness not jump to the future in the episode the constant?
I will not consider the possibility that I the one not seeing the correct view of this.
Because I am correct…change occured, no matter how miniscule…it happened, you ahve just said so yourself, in the other post about Hawking.
Which on that other post, I have told you that it was change to Des and Charlie, and you yourself said it changed to Hawking.
What we have seen, is Mrs Hawking take a younger Desmond for a walk, and contradict herself by saying nothing can change, while having a conversation with Desmond, that did not occur the first time.
That is not the same thing. I will not post another response to you on this issue. Apparently you think your name is Carlton or Damon. No possibility that you’re wrong? Why do you bother here?
What is not the same thing?
The fact that Mrs Hawking and Desmond had a conversation when Desmond timetravelled to the past, that did not take place in the original past?
What is so different…because it is on a smaller scale?
And this…
“Apparently you think your name is Carlton or Damon”…
is childish and unexpected from you.
You resort to bowing out because I have shown you something you cannot explain…So tell me Jack, why do you bother?
I gave you an example you cannot dispute, ala the Hawking/Des conversation….and you say its different, whats different?
What makes this conversation soooo special?
I have given an example of change that you yourself have admited to occuring, and you have no rebuttal against.
Im sure now that I say this, you will find something along the lines of…”it didnt actually change anything…”
Change is change, it has happened before, and will happen again…You want to call me a producer, or tell me you wont respond…ask me why Im here, maybe quantum leap is more on your level “Sam”.
I bother here to show people what they are forgetting about. To show that there is more to this than whatever happened happened, that there is more to Lost than what is given on the lines, its what is between them that matters. You dont agree, cant come up with a defense other than what I have just said regarding the Des/Hawknig conversation…Yeah, I wouldnt resond either…
Because I did dispute it! You haven’t told me anything that isn’t disputable. Desmond went into the past and had a conversation with Hawking. That always happened. The guy with red shoes died. Hawking saw that it would happen and did nothing to stop it. She could have tried but things would have happened anyway. From her point of view what was possible was averted. It never happened.
How is it childish of me to point out that you cannot debate with someone who prefaces his argument with “no matter what you say, I’m right”?
Here is the one and only truth that can be said with absolute certainty. None of us knows anything for sure. None. Some or even all of us are wrong. There is a difference between being sure of your ideas and knowing you’re right. I am sure of my ideas but I might be wrong. You might be wrong too. If you already know all the twists and turns that Lost will take between now and the end of season six then I don’t know why you debate here.
I concur… We need to work together. Debate is good, but it needs to be beneficial, not counter-productive.
I personally will concede to one point. Change can occur. At this point the only proof is very small scale change. Des changed how Charlie would die. He didn’t listen to Hawking… she told him that if she had saved the man with red shoes he would have been hit by a taxi the next day, and if she had warned him about that he would have broken his neck in the shower. She explained that the universe has a way of “course correcting” as explained on other posts.
So SOME change can occur… but the ultimate result (so far) has remained the same.
I told you why I debate
“I bother here to show people what they are forgetting about. To show that there is more to this than whatever happened happened, that there is more to Lost than what is given on the lines, its what is between them that matters.”
To say that the conversation between Desmond and Hawking occured the first time is rediculus. To say that she took him for a walk and explained that he has to go to the island and push the button, is wrong. That is what I am saying. You addmited it was different to Hawking.
I am saying it was different to Des as well, because it was.
He didnt have this conversation with Hawking the first time.
Hey.Hey…You two don’t go ontopofoldsmokey on us. Just jokin.
I had a Brother in Law who I was visiting Christmas Vaction of 07. He doesn’t go to any sites and just watches the show each week. He told me then to watch out for Des and that he would be a difference maker. I wasn’t sure then, But since then I think he and A.E.S. and the rest are on to something.
Now Highbrow you argue this point as well as any Ive read around the Web. And I know you will keep that torch burning till the end so you go boy!
I will ask you this and you don’t have to respond of course. But if as you say “Des can only affect the present to the future and not the past”. Well if Des get’s to the Island and they do travel back can he affect the future then.
If change occured, and can occur, even on a small scale, then ‘What happened happened’ is not correct, You CAN change the past, and leaves the door wide open for more change upon Desmonds return…
exactly, exactly that was the whole point of my other theory. If ANY change has occurred no matter how small like Desmond’s conversation with Hawking then Whatever happened did not always happen.
Of course I meant traveled back in time on the Island could Des then affect future events. If you have been asked this sorry I have stayed out of this discussion. And keep your little armor on.
You don’t know everything there is to know about this show. Neither do I. Neither does anyone save a few who write the episodes. The other people on this site are here at least in part to show you and I and all the others whatever we’re forgetting.
I dont get why that is so hard to understand NMB…it is actual proof…you cant prove that change didnt occur…only that it did.
You can say it didnt occur, you can argue it, but you cannot prove it.
The Des/Hawking conversation proves it.
1)By the conversation occuring to begin with.
2)From what she said. If you save the man in the red shoes today, he gets hi by a bus tomorrow, but it is still change.
Does the man still die, yes…BUT NOT IN THE SAME WAY!
change, change, change. If the man does something heroic, or groundbreaking in the 1day that he lives extra for, it is major change…such as Charlie in the looking glass.
Im not trying to bully, or anything like that.
Im trying to give a specific example of change occuring.
Then watch non believers argue over something they have both seen and addmitted to, even if it at the time, was only different to one, or two people…still different, still change…
good point with Charlie. Desmond could have let him die before. It wasn’t just delaying the inevitable, but delaying long enough so Charlie could do something important and make a difference
No no smoke, you dont have to exit (and what did I tell you about apologizing to me, not necessary)…I am done.
If I cannot convince people with what I have just said, then seeing it on the show (if even that) may be the only way.
Dabs, welcome…I need a break from this, take over will you? Glad to see you here, good luck, I feel I have said everything sooo many times that give my reasons, that have occured that it is a lost cause.
No no and no. It’s not. It’s how things happened. If you sat across the street and watched them talk and watched the guy die, that’s what happened. If Hawking saved him you’d see that and everything he did after that until he died. You wouldn’t at any point say “Oh, she saved that guy but he was supposed to die”. It would just be what happened. As the observer you did not live all those events after the guy died just to have them all changed because he suddenly lived. It only happened the one way.
What if the change was major to the observer? Say in 1996 Desmond saves the guy. The jumping started in 2005 so everything between 1996 and 2005 should be changed, right? Well, what if Des saw a vision of the guy dying and saved him? He
AES, that is how I felt a couple of days ago, and still do!
You have been very effective in your attempts, but I have no desire to convince the unconvincable any longer.
Enough theories and intelligent debate have taken place on this site alone, that there should be little doubt left in anybodies mind, and I am prepared to leave people to it.
I am more excited about the elements of change we were discussing last night, and the other theories posted on the site, that tend not to address the same subject matter!
Bailey1227, the only way I can try and explain this is that on the line of time that each individual has, the losties are at the end of their present line, like being on the end of a string… the end of their string, however, intersects with the middle of the dharma people’s string/timeline… so what is present (end of the string) for our losties is the past (middle of the string) for the dharma people.
Whatever. Sorry I worded things wrong. Doesn’t matter. I know my position on this issue is right just as much as you know yours is right. I’m moving on.
we have never seen the conversation between hawking and desmond before. it is the only time and the only way we see it. why can’t it be the only way it ever happened?
and lets say its a new conversation. lets say that the convo didnt happen before. what did it change? nothing. it itself might be change, but changes nothing. it is not a cause because it has no effect. so who cares if you change a couple words u said in the past, or the route you took to get to the store… if NOTHING CHANGES because of it. the world runs just as it would.
i dont think you can change the past, but i think you can “bend” how it gets there……faraday banging on the hatch and des answering etc, the outcomes will be the same eventually…..but maybe less deaths. If people are born when they SHOULDNT theyre the others…….if people die when they shouldnt, theyre seen……but cant be touched (jacks dad)
i think ben knows he was shot by sayid, in fact i believe sayid CREATED ben the way he is.
Whats puzzling is, if he really wanted to kill ben, why didnt he make sure? hes killed dozens FOR ben (hence thats why he no longer feels anything when he kills), made sure they were dead……but he never made sure ben was……maybe sayid wasnt trying to kill him, but knew why he had to create him
So what we are saying is that no matter what happens in the show, it has always played out like that, there is no way to change it. It is destiny. I don’t believe it. If a 6 series american TV show (albiet extremely watchable and intriguing TV show) shows us a story about a plan crashing and all the events that lead to that plane crashing n the future I d be gobsmacked. Just doesn’t make sense. there has to be Drama. I am taking the whathappened..happened statement to mean that events cannot be changed but the road to how they happen can be altered. I am sure everyine is aware of the butterfly effect – not the cack Ashton Kutcher movie but the physics term and the ripples and repercussions changes in time have. I believe, as many do that the island has been taken over by Dharma to try to find a way to course correct events in the future. The future of 2004 and only through our losties traveling back to 1977 and completing a stint in Dharma are we going to see how that effects what we would regard to be the future of that time. Each time period must have events which help to shape the future and each future is relevant to the time it develops from. If they are different phases of time nothing would be affected because it is the future of a dfferent past. This ain t back to future. In my head this makes sense and unfortunatley articulating it on paper is not my strongest point.
well bailey you are stepping right into the middle of the crossfire of our argument. you can’t change things because they would be affecting all the dharma people’s past. unless you are pro-change of course (sounds like obama to me!)
If I’m allowed to step in on the conversation, let me just say this:
AES, for the casual viewer (and I was just a casual viewer up until season 4 when I got more invested in the show and started looking for theories online), it would be much more confusing if the ‘Whatever happened, happened’ theory is proven to be wrong. Then all the time the show has dedicated to explain the “rules” has been completely irrelevant. So we’re not supposed to believe Daniel, Miles, Richard, Hawking?… Are we just supposed to believe whoever *might* come along and say ‘forget everything you think you know, everything’s changing afterall’?
Yes, it’s interesting to formulate theories around changing timelines, but I know a lot of people who just simply watch LOST and are expecting to have the events we’ve seen in previous seasons pay off. The show has estabilished that only Desmond has some power to change things, meaning things that *might* happen, but haven’t yet. As highbrow said ‘possible future events’, since through his visions he has knowledge to what CAN happen, not what WILL happen. The changes that have happened, happened to his timeline, we have no proof that delaying Charlie’s death wasn’t “part of the plan” and supposed to happen all along. Charlie’s timeline and life was, probably, supposed to go the way it went.
Of course change exists on the show, they explained that through Desmond, but everything else, I believe, is supposed to be carried out the way it always has been. Whatever happened, happened for everyone else other than Desmond on the show.
I agree and share, more or less, the same point of view as highbrow, although I don’t have the arguments or the capability to explain it as clearly as he does.
It made perfect sense, in my opinion, when highbrow said that in Des’s visions, he wasn’t having an effect on anything or anyone, he only acted, in the present, as a result of what he knew that could happen. He didn’t change the past. He reacted to his “premonitions”.
Argument’s over, I know, I just wanted to say this because I know a lot of people that wouldn’t understand the show at all, and probably would give up on it, if it took the ‘everything’s changing’ route, since it would contradict everything they have been telling us on the show. And I’m sure, there is a large percentage of Americans over there that are, too, just casual viewers, so the writters can’t complicate the show too much or else they’ll lose that part of their audience.
Sorry if this comment was a bit annoying. lol
I don’t claim to know the truth to LOST, just meant to state why the ‘WH, H’ theory makes sense to me.
bah. this is stupid confusing. So we’re saying that you can’t change your present, if it’s in another persons past? But someone whose present is in someone elses past can die in that other persons past. even though that didn’t happen in their past the first time around?
I will not change the Dharma peoples past because their past will generate a different future not the one he losties come from. It will not mean that their 2004 doesnt exist just means that the current 1977 will have a new different future if things in the past change.
AES, I hope that somewhere, the writers read your thoughts and that maybe if there is a place for ‘shout outs’ come the end of the series, that you get a shout out as one of the most devoted to their cause of wrestling through the issues. We know they love telling both sides of the story and you have picked up on more than enough of the issues that seem to be presented in their major themes. They should thank you for keeping people thoughtfully engaged in what is going to happen.
I love reading these debates.
I have one thing to say about Miles/Hurley. I don’t know if the ENTIRE reason that Miles was stopped in his tracks when it comes to the question of “why doesn’t Ben remember Sayid as the guy who shot him” tie directly into whatever Alpert is doing to the kid.
It could be argued (or perhaps accounted for as an ADDITIONAL reason) that Ben DID recognize Sayid, and recognize some of the other 815ers, but simply put, uh, Ben has a tendency towards manipulative lying?!? So I was waiting for the moment of Hurley going, “DUDE…that Ben has been lying all along! No wonder we’re in such a mess. It’s because HE lied, man!”
From the first scene he lied, its what he does…he lies.
Its how he gets everything we have seen thusfar. The one or two times he did tell the truth, which I cannot even account for at the moment, would be overlooked anyway…because he always lies…
I have been waiting for a “wolf” to appear on the show now for quite sometime…It will present itself eventually.
you can change the past but are too frightened too rock the boat.ever heard the phrase”if i could go back and do it all again i would’nt change a thing”people aint stupid they know what there doing.
Reckon the Hurley/Miles conversation could have been included and concluded in this episode so that we can get this change/no change debate tied up, and to free us up for the next big mystery?
It seems to me they can’t present something obviously enough for theoriesonlost.com-ers to believe it.
Oooooo. I have a bone to throw. How do you know Desmond wasn’t just having the same kind of island-magic inspired visions that Charlie was having when he “saw” Charlie dying? Also, the interesting thing about these whole time travel debates we have NOT addressed is the nature of the future. While I do believe the past is set into stone, the future has not happened yet. We only have two examples of “future travel”. One being Faraday’s rat… which I think is a paradox since the rat doesn’t actually learn the maze, it just suddenly “knows” it. The other is Desmond’s visions… which also present a paradox in that Desmond “stopped” and “allowed” room for Charlie’s death, but it wasn’t until Charlie himself took charge of his destiny that he died. This would also seem to indicate that even though Desmond BELIEVES he has the power to change the future, he is powerless to change the future of others, only they have power over their own destinies.
Speaks,
You have friends here… you can trust me. I’m on your side on this issue. But the others… the others are coming for you… you’ve been warned.
LOL… What have I stepped into?
Why does there have to be more to the time travel than this? Seriously…
Aren’t there enough unanswered questions out there without having to worry about this? 🙂
I agree… we don’t have to be able to change the past to have an awesome television program! But this has been an epic debate going on here for the past couple of weeks… Think of the conversation between Miles and Hurley last night and magnify it 10 times…
It is crazy to think about… but you just have to think each situation all of the way through…
speaks, before you go running around and beating on your chest like Tarzan, you may want to refer to some of the posts of late and the discussions which ensued from them!
You are speaking as if this is a foregone conclusion, (a no-brainer), and it is NOT.
There are plenty of people who subscribe to the elements of ‘change’, being ever present. You will know this as fact, once Desmond Hume comes along and makes a few corrections!
First I apologize for breaking the message board treaty.
Secondly, everyone is posting “theories” here. I couldn’t find the section entitled “Foregone Conclusions” so I posted in the “theories” section.
Lastly, apparenlty you know something about the plot that none of the rest of us do… since I “WILL know this as a fact, once Desmond Hume comes along and makes a few corrections”.
This is what I like to call…the obvious.
It is obvious that the physicist of the island says “What happened happened.”.
It is obvious that the title of last nights episode is the same.
It is also obvious…that it is being explained by someone who didnt even know what was happening 3 years ago (Miles), when the island started timetraveling, and is basing his idea on the babble of the same physicist who has been wrong, over and over, and that watched the love of his life, dissapear in front of his eyes after learning it was his fault that she died.
Its obvious that they want us, especially now, to believe change is not possible.
And it is obvious that change has NOT occured in the past at this point.
But it is also ovious that the 2 people that I feel have the ability to cause change, are not with the Losties in that time period yet…Desmond and Locke.
And it is also obvious, that the most obvious answer, is normally not the correct one on Lost.
Hmmm…why put so much effort and stock into promoting ‘change’, only do say there wont be any.
Maybe the idea is to change the future?
Of course, you dont change the future, you create it because it hasnt happened yet, so that would not actually be change…it would be storytelling, and wasting time with tons of clues on ‘change’. At this point in time, everything says ‘NO CHANGE’…so yes, Im sure there will be no twist to that, they will allow all of the past references and clues on Lost to go by, and become mere memories. They will wash away the idea of changeing the past, and we wont remember anything of it because this is just one big island flashback, Lostie flashforeward giving us the history of the island, with no way to change what has occured before.
Because we all know…”what happened happened…”…Miles Straum says so.
We’ve heard a lot of “I know” talk from the other side. Once you get past all of that they’re really a quite loveable bunch.
This discussion is not going to go away. I say “whatever happened, happened” they say Daniel was wrong. Richard responds to Hurleys argument for change by saying “Ben won’t remember any of this” and they say Richard wasn’t being literal. We’ll just have to wait and see how things pan out…
speaks, there is no message board treaty, and no section for Foregone Conclusions either.
I was not attempting to be snide with you at all, so there is no need for you to make that assumption! There are more than enough people on the site who subscribe to the same thoughts I do.
It is a hotly debated topic on this site, and I am only pointing out that you have phrased your theory, (your words) as if it is a foregone conclusion.
No harm and no foul!
This is the journey the Losties need to take in order to play their role in the future. Is it story telling? YES! Of course it is! It’s a television show… They could say “there were these guys and they saved the world” or they can show us how it happened… it’s compelling because it happened by crashing on an island, traveling back in time, going through all this drama, meeting all these interesting people, hippy scientists all over the place, hippy scientists die, a guy with eyeliner on ducks behind a wall and steals the innocence of a young boy (God that’s wrong)…
It’s compelling without cheating by changing the past.
I’ll take my words as a foregone conclusion…I really dont care who believes me at this point.
I willl gladly play the role of blind prophet, and go on the basic premise that I just know it will, as highbrow said.
Not that I have all the proof the other side has, you know, Hawking and Faraday saying so, oh…and Miles, cant forget about Miles. He is the key to Lost. He is much more important than Hurley. He will probably play a bigger part in the storyline than Hurely ever would.
There is probably not going to be change because Miles said so. He is an expert on this. He is trapped thirty years in the past, he fully knows how the science on Lost, and is CLEARLY the one we should listen to for a description on what is going on.
Maybe next, Jack can start telling everyone how to have a good relationship, and Hurley will put out a workout video. Then we can say, yeah thats correct, because these are subjects these characters know what they are talking about.
Andwaiting and seeing is obviously the only option…did Miles tell us that, or did we just figure that out on our own…?
speaks, i was once allied with yours and highbrow’s views, but i am converted. i’m tired of the producers/writes shoving it down our throats that nothing can change. and that little conversation with miles and hurley had to be aimed at us keyboard blogging warriors. they really want to convince us viewers that nothing will change or can change – why? because the exact opposition is going to happen.
opposition=opposite
type to fast, i wish i could go back in the past and correct my grammar 🙂
“guy with eyeliner on ducks behind a wall and steals the innocence of a young boy”…lol, oh thats good, lol
Miles was acting as us “WHH” thoerist have been saying. Hurley was acting as the proxy for the other side. In the end it was Richard who provided the evidence for Miles, not Miles argument. Hurley and Miles argued, Richard supported Miles. You don’t believe Richard now? If there is one guy on the show who really knows what’s going on, it’s Richard.
mmm i think if change will happen, it wont happen until the last or almost last episode of the series. the past will unravel revealing our losties causing major events we have been told of or hinted at.
What did Richard say? ABout the memory? lol..
It’s all good dabiatchishere… I knew you weren’t being rude. You’ll have to excuse me.. I have a very sarcastic sense of humor.
I love the site and the debate is what keeps it fun. Keep slugging it out! 🙂
But change non the less….the science of Lost changes in the last episode, change occurs, and evrything is Ok…
Eko, I must know, is this advertisement for pro, or anti change.
Do mean changing the past…or the…future, however you would change something that hasnt occured yet?
Glad to have you here with a sense of humor Speaks, it is necessary for survival, lol, now wipe that smile off your face, and yell at me ;]
i think its anti-change until desmond comes along and does something crazy drastic. IF change is possible. which i dont think it really is….i need to learn to speak more linearly. of to my elocution lessons. ciao
Ok… Um.. You are um.. wrong! There! Take that!
Zing!
What does it matter if Desmond is there, why Desmond?
How could he help to change the past?
Desmond has a part to play, sure… I don’t think that’s debatable..
How large of a part? Can he see the future? Or, is the Desmond WE see not current Desmond. Maybe the “visions” he gets are just memories that are being created by the ACTUAL current time Desmond. Does that make any sense?
How does he see Charlie die by a blinking light, if they are just memories…and if they are memories, than he had to experience this before, making it his past..
That’s what I mean… Desmond came back to the island being able to have “visions” of what was going to happen..
Desmond is there when Charlie dies. At that exact moment when it happened…. he created the memory of it happened… the “flash” or “vision” could be the introduction of a new memory that wasn’t previously there.
So, maybe he’s not seeing forward… he’s just gaining the new memories of something that he had not experienced yet. Am I getting too crazy here? 🙂
If its in introduction to a vision that wasnt previously there, what had to have happened?
How could something be there from his past, that wasnt there before?
And…yes…but its ok, we are all crazy…
Its not visions…its the future…its an experience….it is happening to Desmond..
Its not as if he is having wild dreams, he is actually seeing this, its timetravel.
He is not special because he has gifts from the gods…his mind is out of control and jumping through time.
We assume you cannot ‘jump’ to the future, because they have not told us this is possible, but that is exactly what Desmond is doing during the ‘flashes’ during the looking glass.
My only point (though not articulated well) was that Desmond left the island on a boat. He came back on a boat… What if the Desmond that came back wasn’t from the same “time” than the one that left?
These “visions” are of actual events. He could either a) be receiving these visions as “memory bank additions” if you will or b) he’s already lived through all of those things and the “flashes” weren’t flash forwards… they are flashbacks…
in which this would be his past, regardless, right?
Just trying to understand…
So either they are memor additions from something in the past that has changed, and affected his line of thought…or…
He has already been through all this, the flashes werent flash forewards, but flashbacks…meaning when he saw Charlie die…not almost die, but die, he intervened, and changed the past?
To piggyback off my last comment…
Think of it this way.
Its just like Dejavu… We’ve all thought… “I know I have experienced this exact situation before”. However, for Desmond maybe he really had. His “visions” are “flashbacks” to something HE already experienced, but that is brand new for everyone else.
But he didn’t change the past…
Its like the movie Groundhog Day.. No matter what happened Bill Murray couldn’t get past that day. He killed himself, he did all kinds of stuff… but the end result was the same.
Sure maybe the first go ’round Charlie died a different way, but ultimately he DID die… regardless of how it happened.
If I’m needing to get from New York to Chicago I might take a plane… well, let’s say my flight gets cancelled. So instead I want to take a bus… well, the bus breaks down. So I rent a car and get to Chicago in that way. Though it prolonged it, the end result was the same. I got there.
Desmond didn’t change the past! There is no evidence that he did and no evidence that he can. Doesmond does two things.
1) Desmonds mind can travel to the past and occupy is body at some time previous to wherever he is now. We’ve seen this happen to him and it is confirmed. He cannot change the past per Hawking who we have no reason to disbelieve. She knows what Desmond is doing and that should be enough for us to believe that she is “in the know”.
2) Desmond receives visions of possible future events. I call them possible because he can prevent them. This is where course correction comes in. Desmond sees that Charlie is going to die but he stops it. The univers steps in and makes sure Charlie dies. Desmond gets a vision and stops it. It happens again until the universe wins. Course correction is taking place. This is only significant from Desmond’s point of view. To any other observer things are just happening.
Desmond is being manipulated by some force. Maybe Jacob, who knows? But his influence is limited to the present and the future.
Now say you travel to the future through concience timetravel, and take a plane. You get there, nothing goes wrong.
Now when you get back to the present, your scenario repeats, but you end up driving.
During your drive there is an accident and someone almost dies…you save them…even if just enough for them to say goodbye to a loved one and get hit by a bus tomorrow.
In your timetravel experience, you flew, so how would this not be change?
You have to remember, Desmond isnt just driving across country. He is seeing himself fly…then driving across country and making a difference in someones life.
That is why it is change.
i’m jumping in and sitting on the fence with the whole change the past mess of crap.
what does “Sawyer and Kate had no memory of it because it had not happened for them yet. Even though this action happened in the past, Sawyer and Kate had not been through it yet because they experienced it in present time.” mean?
Can someone expain why it’s not the present for the people in the 70’s? Isn’t it? i’m so confused…..
I have a headache. If you guys need me I’ll be over by the theory about what Hurleys making for breakfast tomorrow.
Yes highbrow, these are signifigant. I just dont know why you cannot accept whhat Desmond did as timetravel…it wasnt just a vision…It will not be until you and anyone else accept that, that you will see the correct view of this.
If it was just a vision, things wouldnt come true…if it was possible future events, then he wouldnt see the same light in his ‘crazy dream’ that was actually there.
There is no faith in this line of thinking, there is no understanding that what Desmond did, was more than just have a dream…he experienced these future events, making them his past…because you cannot remember something that did not happen…and changed them.
Dude, seriously? When the heck did desmond actually travel to the future? I said Desmond gets visions of possible future events. That is a far cry from time travel into the future.
The blinking light? That was the one vision Desmond had that he didn’t change!
Maybe you should consider the possibility that you’re the one not seeing the correct view of this? We can’t have a debate if your argument against my theory is that I’m wrong.
Based on what we have seen Desmond has never physically travelled into the future. Desmond has never exibited the ability to manipulate the visions he’s having while he’s “experiencing” them.
What theory?
I havent seen a theory by you on this subject, just telling anyone who says that change is possible, that they are wrong because we havent seen it yet…when in fact we have.
desmond doesnt HAVE to PHYSICALLY travel into the future.
That is the concept behind the constant. He is special and can communicate through himself at any point thathe is living or will live.
That is why in the constant, when he jumps back to the past, his past self jumps to its future…on the freighter.
Did Desmonds past self not do that?
Did his past concienceness not jump to the future in the episode the constant?
His present conciousness travelled back into the past then returned.
We haven’t seen Desmond travelling into the future. You’re confusing his visions with his mind travelling in time. Different things.
What you’re saying we have “in fact” seen is speculation on your part.
I will not consider the possibility that I the one not seeing the correct view of this.
Because I am correct…change occured, no matter how miniscule…it happened, you ahve just said so yourself, in the other post about Hawking.
Which on that other post, I have told you that it was change to Des and Charlie, and you yourself said it changed to Hawking.
What we have seen, is Mrs Hawking take a younger Desmond for a walk, and contradict herself by saying nothing can change, while having a conversation with Desmond, that did not occur the first time.
That is not the same thing. I will not post another response to you on this issue. Apparently you think your name is Carlton or Damon. No possibility that you’re wrong? Why do you bother here?
What is not the same thing?
The fact that Mrs Hawking and Desmond had a conversation when Desmond timetravelled to the past, that did not take place in the original past?
What is so different…because it is on a smaller scale?
And this…
“Apparently you think your name is Carlton or Damon”…
is childish and unexpected from you.
You resort to bowing out because I have shown you something you cannot explain…So tell me Jack, why do you bother?
I gave you an example you cannot dispute, ala the Hawking/Des conversation….and you say its different, whats different?
What makes this conversation soooo special?
I have given an example of change that you yourself have admited to occuring, and you have no rebuttal against.
Im sure now that I say this, you will find something along the lines of…”it didnt actually change anything…”
Change is change, it has happened before, and will happen again…You want to call me a producer, or tell me you wont respond…ask me why Im here, maybe quantum leap is more on your level “Sam”.
I bother here to show people what they are forgetting about. To show that there is more to this than whatever happened happened, that there is more to Lost than what is given on the lines, its what is between them that matters. You dont agree, cant come up with a defense other than what I have just said regarding the Des/Hawknig conversation…Yeah, I wouldnt resond either…
whoa, whoa everybody take a chill pill for a second… come on guys
Because I did dispute it! You haven’t told me anything that isn’t disputable. Desmond went into the past and had a conversation with Hawking. That always happened. The guy with red shoes died. Hawking saw that it would happen and did nothing to stop it. She could have tried but things would have happened anyway. From her point of view what was possible was averted. It never happened.
How is it childish of me to point out that you cannot debate with someone who prefaces his argument with “no matter what you say, I’m right”?
Here is the one and only truth that can be said with absolute certainty. None of us knows anything for sure. None. Some or even all of us are wrong. There is a difference between being sure of your ideas and knowing you’re right. I am sure of my ideas but I might be wrong. You might be wrong too. If you already know all the twists and turns that Lost will take between now and the end of season six then I don’t know why you debate here.
I concur… We need to work together. Debate is good, but it needs to be beneficial, not counter-productive.
I personally will concede to one point. Change can occur. At this point the only proof is very small scale change. Des changed how Charlie would die. He didn’t listen to Hawking… she told him that if she had saved the man with red shoes he would have been hit by a taxi the next day, and if she had warned him about that he would have broken his neck in the shower. She explained that the universe has a way of “course correcting” as explained on other posts.
So SOME change can occur… but the ultimate result (so far) has remained the same.
I told you why I debate
“I bother here to show people what they are forgetting about. To show that there is more to this than whatever happened happened, that there is more to Lost than what is given on the lines, its what is between them that matters.”
To say that the conversation between Desmond and Hawking occured the first time is rediculus. To say that she took him for a walk and explained that he has to go to the island and push the button, is wrong. That is what I am saying. You addmited it was different to Hawking.
I am saying it was different to Des as well, because it was.
He didnt have this conversation with Hawking the first time.
Hey.Hey…You two don’t go ontopofoldsmokey on us. Just jokin.
I had a Brother in Law who I was visiting Christmas Vaction of 07. He doesn’t go to any sites and just watches the show each week. He told me then to watch out for Des and that he would be a difference maker. I wasn’t sure then, But since then I think he and A.E.S. and the rest are on to something.
Now Highbrow you argue this point as well as any Ive read around the Web. And I know you will keep that torch burning till the end so you go boy!
I will ask you this and you don’t have to respond of course. But if as you say “Des can only affect the present to the future and not the past”. Well if Des get’s to the Island and they do travel back can he affect the future then.
If change occured, and can occur, even on a small scale, then ‘What happened happened’ is not correct, You CAN change the past, and leaves the door wide open for more change upon Desmonds return…
exactly, exactly that was the whole point of my other theory. If ANY change has occurred no matter how small like Desmond’s conversation with Hawking then Whatever happened did not always happen.
Of course I meant traveled back in time on the Island could Des then affect future events. If you have been asked this sorry I have stayed out of this discussion. And keep your little armor on.
You don’t know everything there is to know about this show. Neither do I. Neither does anyone save a few who write the episodes. The other people on this site are here at least in part to show you and I and all the others whatever we’re forgetting.
I dont get why that is so hard to understand NMB…it is actual proof…you cant prove that change didnt occur…only that it did.
You can say it didnt occur, you can argue it, but you cannot prove it.
The Des/Hawking conversation proves it.
1)By the conversation occuring to begin with.
2)From what she said. If you save the man in the red shoes today, he gets hi by a bus tomorrow, but it is still change.
oh we lost him. Big bully A.E.S..LOL
Does the man still die, yes…BUT NOT IN THE SAME WAY!
change, change, change. If the man does something heroic, or groundbreaking in the 1day that he lives extra for, it is major change…such as Charlie in the looking glass.
Im not trying to bully, or anything like that.
Im trying to give a specific example of change occuring.
Then watch non believers argue over something they have both seen and addmitted to, even if it at the time, was only different to one, or two people…still different, still change…
good point with Charlie. Desmond could have let him die before. It wasn’t just delaying the inevitable, but delaying long enough so Charlie could do something important and make a difference
AES, Why is the song, ‘wind beneath my wings’ running through my head?
Oops, I know!
I know your not bulling just trying to calm things down a little sorry I will exit let you finish.
No no smoke, you dont have to exit (and what did I tell you about apologizing to me, not necessary)…I am done.
If I cannot convince people with what I have just said, then seeing it on the show (if even that) may be the only way.
Dabs, welcome…I need a break from this, take over will you? Glad to see you here, good luck, I feel I have said everything sooo many times that give my reasons, that have occured that it is a lost cause.
No no and no. It’s not. It’s how things happened. If you sat across the street and watched them talk and watched the guy die, that’s what happened. If Hawking saved him you’d see that and everything he did after that until he died. You wouldn’t at any point say “Oh, she saved that guy but he was supposed to die”. It would just be what happened. As the observer you did not live all those events after the guy died just to have them all changed because he suddenly lived. It only happened the one way.
What if the change was major to the observer? Say in 1996 Desmond saves the guy. The jumping started in 2005 so everything between 1996 and 2005 should be changed, right? Well, what if Des saw a vision of the guy dying and saved him? He
AES, that is how I felt a couple of days ago, and still do!
You have been very effective in your attempts, but I have no desire to convince the unconvincable any longer.
Enough theories and intelligent debate have taken place on this site alone, that there should be little doubt left in anybodies mind, and I am prepared to leave people to it.
I am more excited about the elements of change we were discussing last night, and the other theories posted on the site, that tend not to address the same subject matter!
I’m not giving up, I am moving on!
The times, they are a changing! lol
I said that for Hawking reality was different from her vision. AES is putting words in my mouth.
Way to carry that Flag A.E.S. and gotcha. uot for the day!
Aes is doing no such thing…here is what was said….
ME: Right
i still don’t understand why the 70’s is the present time for kate and saywer and crew, but not for dharma people. Isn’t the 70’s their present too??
Bailey1227, the only way I can try and explain this is that on the line of time that each individual has, the losties are at the end of their present line, like being on the end of a string… the end of their string, however, intersects with the middle of the dharma people’s string/timeline… so what is present (end of the string) for our losties is the past (middle of the string) for the dharma people.
Hope that helps!
Whatever. Sorry I worded things wrong. Doesn’t matter. I know my position on this issue is right just as much as you know yours is right. I’m moving on.
we have never seen the conversation between hawking and desmond before. it is the only time and the only way we see it. why can’t it be the only way it ever happened?
and lets say its a new conversation. lets say that the convo didnt happen before. what did it change? nothing. it itself might be change, but changes nothing. it is not a cause because it has no effect. so who cares if you change a couple words u said in the past, or the route you took to get to the store… if NOTHING CHANGES because of it. the world runs just as it would.
sorry, didnt know we were moving on, ive been out. u can disregard my comments if u want
i dont think you can change the past, but i think you can “bend” how it gets there……faraday banging on the hatch and des answering etc, the outcomes will be the same eventually…..but maybe less deaths. If people are born when they SHOULDNT theyre the others…….if people die when they shouldnt, theyre seen……but cant be touched (jacks dad)
i think ben knows he was shot by sayid, in fact i believe sayid CREATED ben the way he is.
Whats puzzling is, if he really wanted to kill ben, why didnt he make sure? hes killed dozens FOR ben (hence thats why he no longer feels anything when he kills), made sure they were dead……but he never made sure ben was……maybe sayid wasnt trying to kill him, but knew why he had to create him
if you watch more recent doctor who episodes (turn left, great example), it makes sense………think butterfly effect
So what we are saying is that no matter what happens in the show, it has always played out like that, there is no way to change it. It is destiny. I don’t believe it. If a 6 series american TV show (albiet extremely watchable and intriguing TV show) shows us a story about a plan crashing and all the events that lead to that plane crashing n the future I d be gobsmacked. Just doesn’t make sense. there has to be Drama. I am taking the whathappened..happened statement to mean that events cannot be changed but the road to how they happen can be altered. I am sure everyine is aware of the butterfly effect – not the cack Ashton Kutcher movie but the physics term and the ripples and repercussions changes in time have. I believe, as many do that the island has been taken over by Dharma to try to find a way to course correct events in the future. The future of 2004 and only through our losties traveling back to 1977 and completing a stint in Dharma are we going to see how that effects what we would regard to be the future of that time. Each time period must have events which help to shape the future and each future is relevant to the time it develops from. If they are different phases of time nothing would be affected because it is the future of a dfferent past. This ain t back to future. In my head this makes sense and unfortunatley articulating it on paper is not my strongest point.
NMB- thanks for trying to break it down for me 🙂 it helped alot.
Does that mean that only the losties can change things, because it’s their present, but the 70’s peeps can’t, because it’s their past?
well bailey you are stepping right into the middle of the crossfire of our argument. you can’t change things because they would be affecting all the dharma people’s past. unless you are pro-change of course (sounds like obama to me!)
Keep your change off my body!
If I’m allowed to step in on the conversation, let me just say this:
AES, for the casual viewer (and I was just a casual viewer up until season 4 when I got more invested in the show and started looking for theories online), it would be much more confusing if the ‘Whatever happened, happened’ theory is proven to be wrong. Then all the time the show has dedicated to explain the “rules” has been completely irrelevant. So we’re not supposed to believe Daniel, Miles, Richard, Hawking?… Are we just supposed to believe whoever *might* come along and say ‘forget everything you think you know, everything’s changing afterall’?
Yes, it’s interesting to formulate theories around changing timelines, but I know a lot of people who just simply watch LOST and are expecting to have the events we’ve seen in previous seasons pay off. The show has estabilished that only Desmond has some power to change things, meaning things that *might* happen, but haven’t yet. As highbrow said ‘possible future events’, since through his visions he has knowledge to what CAN happen, not what WILL happen. The changes that have happened, happened to his timeline, we have no proof that delaying Charlie’s death wasn’t “part of the plan” and supposed to happen all along. Charlie’s timeline and life was, probably, supposed to go the way it went.
Of course change exists on the show, they explained that through Desmond, but everything else, I believe, is supposed to be carried out the way it always has been. Whatever happened, happened for everyone else other than Desmond on the show.
I agree and share, more or less, the same point of view as highbrow, although I don’t have the arguments or the capability to explain it as clearly as he does.
It made perfect sense, in my opinion, when highbrow said that in Des’s visions, he wasn’t having an effect on anything or anyone, he only acted, in the present, as a result of what he knew that could happen. He didn’t change the past. He reacted to his “premonitions”.
Argument’s over, I know, I just wanted to say this because I know a lot of people that wouldn’t understand the show at all, and probably would give up on it, if it took the ‘everything’s changing’ route, since it would contradict everything they have been telling us on the show. And I’m sure, there is a large percentage of Americans over there that are, too, just casual viewers, so the writters can’t complicate the show too much or else they’ll lose that part of their audience.
Sorry if this comment was a bit annoying. lol
I don’t claim to know the truth to LOST, just meant to state why the ‘WH, H’ theory makes sense to me.
bah. this is stupid confusing. So we’re saying that you can’t change your present, if it’s in another persons past? But someone whose present is in someone elses past can die in that other persons past. even though that didn’t happen in their past the first time around?
*head explodes*
I will not change the Dharma peoples past because their past will generate a different future not the one he losties come from. It will not mean that their 2004 doesnt exist just means that the current 1977 will have a new different future if things in the past change.
ok thanks 🙂
AES, I hope that somewhere, the writers read your thoughts and that maybe if there is a place for ‘shout outs’ come the end of the series, that you get a shout out as one of the most devoted to their cause of wrestling through the issues. We know they love telling both sides of the story and you have picked up on more than enough of the issues that seem to be presented in their major themes. They should thank you for keeping people thoughtfully engaged in what is going to happen.
I love reading these debates.
I have one thing to say about Miles/Hurley. I don’t know if the ENTIRE reason that Miles was stopped in his tracks when it comes to the question of “why doesn’t Ben remember Sayid as the guy who shot him” tie directly into whatever Alpert is doing to the kid.
It could be argued (or perhaps accounted for as an ADDITIONAL reason) that Ben DID recognize Sayid, and recognize some of the other 815ers, but simply put, uh, Ben has a tendency towards manipulative lying?!? So I was waiting for the moment of Hurley going, “DUDE…that Ben has been lying all along! No wonder we’re in such a mess. It’s because HE lied, man!”
From the first scene he lied, its what he does…he lies.
Its how he gets everything we have seen thusfar. The one or two times he did tell the truth, which I cannot even account for at the moment, would be overlooked anyway…because he always lies…
I have been waiting for a “wolf” to appear on the show now for quite sometime…It will present itself eventually.
you can change the past but are too frightened too rock the boat.ever heard the phrase”if i could go back and do it all again i would’nt change a thing”people aint stupid they know what there doing.
Reckon the Hurley/Miles conversation could have been included and concluded in this episode so that we can get this change/no change debate tied up, and to free us up for the next big mystery?
It seems to me they can’t present something obviously enough for theoriesonlost.com-ers to believe it.
Oooooo. I have a bone to throw. How do you know Desmond wasn’t just having the same kind of island-magic inspired visions that Charlie was having when he “saw” Charlie dying? Also, the interesting thing about these whole time travel debates we have NOT addressed is the nature of the future. While I do believe the past is set into stone, the future has not happened yet. We only have two examples of “future travel”. One being Faraday’s rat… which I think is a paradox since the rat doesn’t actually learn the maze, it just suddenly “knows” it. The other is Desmond’s visions… which also present a paradox in that Desmond “stopped” and “allowed” room for Charlie’s death, but it wasn’t until Charlie himself took charge of his destiny that he died. This would also seem to indicate that even though Desmond BELIEVES he has the power to change the future, he is powerless to change the future of others, only they have power over their own destinies.