Lost - Time Loop Theory

[Dukerati]

This theory is making the rounds and honestly, it blew my mind. I have a couple problems with it of course but on the whole, I find it extremely persuasive. Can someone debunk it or come up with something better? Otherwise, this is the theory I am sticking with!

Note: This is thousands and thousands of words long so you should clear some time up before reading:) The Q/A, Rebuttals, and Forums are also must-reads.

http://timelooptheory.com/the_timeline.htm

[DukeDevil]

Damn you for giving me even more to procrastinate with today.


Now to start reading...

[DukeDevil]

I don't know if anyone noticed this, and it's from way back (I'm rewatching season 1 on DVD) but the "spanish" comic book that walt reads is in English at times...what's up with that?

[blublood]

My gut feeling is that this can't possibly be right. For one thing, notice how many words and pages were used just to get these convoluted ideas across to us. "Lost" the TV show doesn't have that luxury - they have to get things across to us clearly in 43 minutes or fans become frustrated and angry. Granted, they do have an entire season to work with also, but we don't want to watch 10 minutes of explanations on an episode of Lost; we want to watch Locke, Jack and Co. kick butt and take names.

Also, at least some of the "evidence" that this person presents is just flat-out wrong. For instance: "Note that in season 3, Ben makes a comment to Richard 'Remember when we used to celebrate birthdays?'"

That's not what Ben said. He said, "It's my birthday. You remember birthdays, don't you, Richard?" to which Richard responds with an enigmatic smile. Like most things on Lost, that statement is open to a lot of interpretation, hinging on exactly what is meant by the word "remember."

Also, I can't come up with a link at the moment, but I believe that the producers have said repeatedly that there are no parallel timelines or parallel realities in Lost. This, of course, brings up the question of exactly how they plan to explain the Orchid video because it sure looked like the same rabbit popped up in two different places, but we shall see.

[Dukerati]

Valid points blu. The author of the theory addresses these by asserting that the producers of Lost have three more seasons to get this explanation across and may do so piecemail. As for the parallel timelines business, the author does mention that the producers stated that there was no "time-travel" in a Season 1 podcast but chalked that up to the producers not knowing where the show was going yet. I bought that excuse because it makes sense that the producers did not have the end game in mind at the end of the first season...

[Exiled_Devil]

"what you've just read is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having read it"

This person is trying to fit data points in to an idea that he has, rather than trying to examine the data to come up with an idea. Besides the fact that the producers have outright declared that there is no alternate timeline shenanigans, the theory presented involves super-invincible polar bears and time-transmitting telephones. C'mon. Not only that, but it doesn't even address the results of Faraday's experiment with the rocket - the only real evidence of physical 'time travel' in the show. Sorry, but this guy has no grounding to his theory.

[JasonEvans]

I think we already had a discussion of this... (checks the handy search function)...

Yup, right here, (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6968) starting with post #18.

--Jason "I think the theory has been generally debunked -- parts of it may have some value but lots of it do not work" Evans