Author Topic: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]  (Read 10013 times)

Offline CaseyMac

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #30 on: February 10, 2010, 01:46:07 PM »
Cayley, I was trying to read your recap, but I can't get to it... my computer won't link to it.   >:(   (In fact, the front page of Sledgeweb is all messed up for me -- no backgrounds, looks different, etc.  Is anyone else noticing that or is it just me?  My computer has been wonky lately so I wouldn't be surprised if it was me...)

It seems it's just a problem with IE. When I come here on Chrome, everything loads normal.

Offline JMart

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #31 on: February 10, 2010, 02:45:05 PM »
one month?!?!?!? no way ... on sayid's passport it says 2007... so try one month and 3 years off...

i dont think so...


Offline zeekloveslost

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 438
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #32 on: February 10, 2010, 02:50:04 PM »
I wish the show's continuity person was better at their job. This passport says that Sayid was born on April 25, 1972 (although even this looks dumb because the passport asks for the DOB in day/month/year and he writes in 04/25/72.  However, in "One of Them" (s2e14), Sayid tells Ben that he was 23 at the beginning of the Gulf War (1990), which would mean that he was born in 1967.

Whatever, man. What-ever.

Offline zeekloveslost

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 438
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #33 on: February 10, 2010, 03:02:44 PM »
Oh man. I just had a thought, but I'm not sure if this is the place for the discussion. Maybe I should go back to the thread on last week's epsiode.

In Alternate (X) timeline, maybe Sayid was still born in Iraq, but never did serve in their army. Perhaps he moved and became an Iranian citizen (hence the different passport in LA X).  It's not difficult to become an Iranian citizen.  And from what we know of Nadia, it would make sense that she would want to leave Iraq as well.

Offline BadRobot64

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2499
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #34 on: February 10, 2010, 03:22:46 PM »
one month?!?!?!? no way ... on sayid's passport it says 2007... so try one month and 3 years off...

i dont think so...



sorry my bad... i just saw under the picture and thought it was how i and some people write their 7s with the extra line in the middle... but i guess i mistook the way im used to seeing a 7 to his 4... my b

Offline spencer

  • Background Extra
  • *
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #35 on: February 10, 2010, 04:37:08 PM »
I found proof that the sideways timeline is definitely Oct, 22, 2004!
Here's a screencap that you should post of Claire's ultrasound:
http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage.php?pid=134415&fullsize=1

Offline CaseyMac

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
Re: Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #36 on: February 10, 2010, 04:39:54 PM »
I found proof that the sideways timeline is definitely Oct, 22, 2004!
Here's a screencap that you should post of Claire's ultrasound:
http://gallery.lost-media.com/displayimage.php?pid=134415&fullsize=1

Very nice pick up. There is another thread talking about this already.

http://lost.cubit.net/forum/index.php/topic,10245.0.html

My personal take is that it is just another prop error like Sayid's Iranian passport.

Offline MangoBingo

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2010, 04:42:55 PM »
My personal take is that it is just another prop error like Sayid's Iranian passport.

I think they'd be super careful to double-check everything, seeing as they want everything to tie-up.

I fully believe all apparent anomalies are on purpose - and this isn't one of them.

Offline CaseyMac

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1143
    • View Profile
Re: Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2010, 04:45:15 PM »
My personal take is that it is just another prop error like Sayid's Iranian passport.

I think they'd be super careful to double-check everything, seeing as they want everything to tie-up.

I fully believe all apparent anomalies are on purpose - and this isn't one of them.

Frankly, this is a case where I hope you are right, but I'm just leaning in the direction of continuity booboo at this point.

Offline MangoBingo

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1510
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2010, 04:55:56 PM »
In fact, the front page of Sledgeweb is all messed up for me -- no backgrounds, looks different, etc.  Is anyone else noticing that or is it just me?  My computer has been wonky lately so I wouldn't be surprised if it was me...)

It's not just you. I'm using the Opera browser and it's all messed-up for me too.

I think there must be a flaw in a Cascading Style Sheet or something.

Offline lostlady

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1033
    • View Profile
Re: Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #40 on: February 10, 2010, 05:20:23 PM »
On another thread they mentioned that ultrasounds give the due date of the baby on the ultrasound picture. That would make the timeline correct. They crashed in Sept 2004 and she had four weeks left of her pregancy. In the alternate timeline she was in the hospital (Sept 2004) and four weeks away (Ethan said she was 36 weeks) from the date on the ultrasound.

Offline Adriana

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: Proof that the Sideways timeline is Oct, 2004
« Reply #41 on: February 10, 2010, 05:23:07 PM »
I'm looking at this as a continuity error unless somehow proved otherwise.  It just doesn't seem to serve a pertinent purpose.

Offline CastawayCayley

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4855
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #42 on: February 10, 2010, 06:37:58 PM »
Is the date on Sayid's passport the date of travel, or the expiration date?

Cayley, I was trying to read your recap, but I can't get to it... my computer won't link to it.   >:(   (In fact, the front page of Sledgeweb is all messed up for me -- no backgrounds, looks different, etc.  Is anyone else noticing that or is it just me?  My computer has been wonky lately so I wouldn't be surprised if it was me...)
yeah, we're hearing this a lot about it not loading right. I'm using firefox and am not having any trouble. It's not the link itself, tho, it's the front page you think?

Offline vickilynn

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 3880
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #43 on: February 10, 2010, 06:40:57 PM »
Is the date on Sayid's passport the date of travel, or the expiration date?

Cayley, I was trying to read your recap, but I can't get to it... my computer won't link to it.   >:(   (In fact, the front page of Sledgeweb is all messed up for me -- no backgrounds, looks different, etc.  Is anyone else noticing that or is it just me?  My computer has been wonky lately so I wouldn't be surprised if it was me...)
yeah, we're hearing this a lot about it not loading right. I'm using firefox and am not having any trouble. It's not the link itself, tho, it's the front page you think?

I read your recap this morning - which was great by the way - but I tried several times to leave a comment and it just wouldn't take!

Offline lostandfree

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 476
    • View Profile
Re: NEW LAX LANDING 1 MONTH OFF!! [vs. Original Crash ]
« Reply #44 on: February 10, 2010, 07:14:58 PM »
I think it is the due date.  That was my first thought when I opened the thread.