now now, ladies...what would be the point of this site if we couldn't argue. then there would be no threads. all our posts would be like this:

yup.

yup.

hmm mmm.

amen.

yup.

aw... I was all ready to post my theory on the scene where Kate comes home to Aaron actually happening first, before her trial and how the last thing that happens was actually her arraignment... all in good fun

Oh please, give it a break

__________________
Baby I am tied to a tree in a jungle of mystery. I just got tortured by a damned spinal surgeon and a genuine Iraqi. 'Course I'm serious.

it was a JOKE!

I hate to listen to the producers as well, but the more I think about it, the more that the scenes are NOT out of order, and here's why. Sayid is famous, and if the people 'knew he was coming' they would damn know what he looks like. No way avellino would have even stopped the cart if he'd known it was Sayid.

Most likely Avelino freaked out because he IS involved with the whole shebang, is a person of interest to Ben, and knows what Ben is capable of. Though, I'm not sold that sequences are out of order... I guarantee that little 'law of the producers' will be broken at some point, and they will have an explanation.

I really wish people would stop quoting the podcasts, take what they show you, not what they tell you. I didn't have a podcast for the Bible and i figured that **** out.

come on, everybody. lets sing kumbaiya and do trust falls.

I've got to go along with Cablerunner here, about listening to the podcasts. For one thing they're full of misleading and contradictory information. For another, and MORE IMPORTANTLY, deferring to Lindelof and Cuse is troubling to me and here's why:

Don't you guys enjoy the challenge of figuring it out yourselves? (Obviously I am not talking to everyone here.) Even if it turns out you're wrong, wasn't it more fun to come up with theories on your own than to just bookmark the spoiler sites and podcast transcript sites and then "spill the beans"? Don't you guys think you are smart enough and imaginative enough to contribute ideas whether Cuse and Lindelof "officially" agree with you or not? I think this is a pretty intelligent bunch capable of discussion and disagreement, don't you? To me, Lost is a great puzzle and I don't want to cheat to figure it out. I want to do it myself or with the collaboration of other people who enjoy the challenge as much as I do. Otherwise, I might as well be watching "Everyone Loves Raymond" or "The Hills."

Having taught literature, I often used a critical lens with my students called "Reader Response Theory" to help them find meaning in a text. In this approach the audience decides what's meaningful, NOT THE AUTHOR...or in this case NOT THE PRODUCERS. It's totally valid for anyone to make any claims they want about the meaning of a text BUT ONLY IF the person can link it to the text itself with grounded examples that show a pattern toward his meaning. For example, it's not enough to say "this scene means x" or "no, you're wrong, it doesn't mean x." You HAVE to say "this scene means x because of a,b, and c reasons." Or "No, your theory is incorrect because of a, b, and c reasons" not simply "You're wrong because Cuse and Lindelof say so." Get it? It is a much more charitable approach and allows more discussion on a higher level, and isn't that what Losttalk is for?

So I humbly ask that the next time you're reading theories you disagree with, don't simply discount them because Cuse and Lindelof said yaddayaddayadda. And don't say stuff like "You're just mad that I"m right." That's just a shortcut to thinking! Actually READ the post CAREFULLY AND the supporting examples for the theory. If you can shoot down each of the supporting details, rather than just saying "Cuse and Lindelof say that's not true" then you will have really won the argument because you will have shown that you really pay attention and have more knowledge about the show. That's how a really good conversation works. That, and being able to admit when someone's points made you change your mind.

CPPAH

__________________
"Helen, do you remember that authentic Australian walkabout I told you about?"

Look, I am not pointing fingers at anyone.
I like theories, and think it is a great thing for people to come up with ideas. Even if not everyone agrees with a theory it may spark an idea and lead to new thinking on the subject.
The sad fact is though, most of the time people come up with a "theory" and it isn't based on anything. The theory doesn't have a good foundation based on known facts.

Carlton and Damon are notorious for joking and goofing around when answering fan questions and discussing the show on podcasts. BUT There are also times when they unequivocally give answers.

I am reminded of the purgatory theories that were rampant during the first season of the show. Carlton and Damon finally addressed it and said "nope, sorry guys its not purgatory" But people wouldn't believe them, and actually there are still people saying it is purgatory and they are all dead blah, blah, blah..........

So the thing is yeah if you can't sort out the joking around from the clear undeniable answers they give on the podcasts then yeah you shouldn't listen to them. But I really don't see how you can argue about it.

Now as far as spoilers go. I hate spoilers. I don't even watch the scenes at the end of an episode showing scenes for the next week. But the podcasts don't contain spoilers of any kind. D & C and the rest of the LOsT production crew go through enough trying to prevent spoilers. Why would they spoil their own show??

So lets come up with theories, share ideas, talk and enjoy this awesome website. But when the facts going against a theory outweigh the facts for a theory then grab a piece of humble pie and let it go. OR better yet rethink it and come up with some new facts to support your theory.

__________________

Doctor playing golf. Woo, boy howdy, now I've heard everything. What's next, cop eating a donut?