Author Topic: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?  (Read 3301 times)

Offline Folly529

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« on: May 18, 2007, 12:18:43 AM »
Ben knows about Jin and suspects Kate . . . did I miss another confirmed pregnancy?

Even if Juliet knew about Kate, I haven't seen her confirm to anyone.

Only other explanation I have is that they would want to 'take' Juliet, too . . . and it still doesn't mean that three tents would be targetted.

Why wouldn't Jack et al just mark one tent?

Offline CastawayCayley

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4855
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #1 on: May 18, 2007, 12:24:18 AM »
well for one thing, divide and conquer. Split them up and blow up the small groups gets more dead others than maybe just a few from a large group. Also, its Sun that's pregnant. Jin is the guy.

Offline JMart

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1664
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #2 on: May 18, 2007, 12:24:56 AM »
first of all its sun who is pregnant






then, of course theres rose and libby (yes libby.. hurley tapped that ****)

Offline CastawayCayley

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4855
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #3 on: May 18, 2007, 12:29:31 AM »
Did she mark Libby's grave? The Others will be there all night digging her up to kidnap her. That ought to slow them down...

Offline Folly529

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #4 on: May 18, 2007, 12:52:01 AM »
Whoops - can y'all tell that I'm bad with names!

Offline PrincessLeia

  • Dharma VIP
  • *******
  • Posts: 19233
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2007, 12:54:54 AM »
well for one thing, divide and conquer. Split them up and blow up the small groups gets more dead others than maybe just a few from a large group. Also, its Sun that's pregnant. Jin is the guy.
Right.  @ this point, it's irrelevant who is/ isn't preggers.  They marked the tents that they want them to go to for the dynamite to be effective.

Offline lostatsea

  • Red Shirt
  • **
  • Posts: 283
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2007, 12:24:37 AM »
Could Rose be preggers? Cured of Cancer and pregnant now.

How long has the two groups been together? Tail section and losties? Would there be enough time to tell yet if she were?

Could we have another Nikki/Paulo come forward from the red shirts? 3 years is a long time to explain the rescue, something has to give here.

Offline JBRam

  • Island Native
  • *
  • Posts: 30614
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #7 on: May 23, 2007, 01:36:22 AM »
well for one thing, divide and conquer. Split them up and blow up the small groups gets more dead others than maybe just a few from a large group. Also, its Sun that's pregnant. Jin is the guy.
Right.  @ this point, it's irrelevant who is/ isn't preggers.  They marked the tents that they want them to go to for the dynamite to be effective.
Exactly. Besides, Ben isn't going. His less-than-intelligent buddies/henchmen are going instead.

Offline matahari

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #8 on: May 23, 2007, 01:52:42 PM »
1-Sun
2-Kate
3-Claire-or misc. red shirt

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2007, 04:24:53 PM »
Rose is pregnant

Offline matahari

  • Survivor
  • ***
  • Posts: 756
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #10 on: May 23, 2007, 05:17:50 PM »

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #11 on: May 23, 2007, 05:37:35 PM »
Five times the sperm count.... Don't use the Dharma condoms!

Oh ya, Rose is pregnant.

The show is based on surprises.  So, if you can figure out what would surprise you, then you can figure out the show.

For instance,  Naomi is looked upon as a rescuer....I don't believe that she is.  Hurley was looked upon as an introverted fat kid....he's worth 150 million. 

Do it for every character.  They have always been exactly opposite of what you would expect...

Oh ya, Rose is pregnant.

Offline thlaylirah

  • OTHERS 
  • DHARMA Scientist
  • *****
  • Posts: 9534
  • Wicked Rabbit
    • View Profile
I guess we'll just have to adjust

Offline CastawayCayley

  • DHARMA Work Man (or Woman)
  • *****
  • Posts: 4855
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #13 on: May 23, 2007, 06:38:24 PM »
Sperm count is irrelevant, if Rose has gone through menopause there are no eggs to fertilize. The over 50 and 60 year olds having babies that you may see on the news, generally speaking, have used donor eggs.

Offline puff6962

  • In the Loop
  • ****
  • Posts: 1074
    • View Profile
Re: Why mark three tents when only Jin is pregnant?
« Reply #14 on: May 23, 2007, 06:46:29 PM »
1993 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 52
Oldest Father 83

1995 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 51
Oldest Father 76

1996 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 54
Oldest Father 87

1999 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 52
Oldest Father 75

2001 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 54
Oldest Father 83

2002 ILLINOIS SELECTED VITAL STATISTICS
Oldest Mother 53
Oldest Father 87


and, from across the sea....

Welsh farm owner, Elizabeth Buttle, has become Britain's oldest natural mother at the age of 60. Or has she? Jeremy Laurance,

health editor, looks at the tangled circumstances of an extraordinary birth.

Elizabeth Buttle has had a baby boy 35 years after her only other child, a daughter, was born in 1962. The new arrival, named Joseph, has astonished experts but it is still unclear whether it will put his mother in the record books. The baby was delivered by Caesarean section last November at the West Wales General Hospital, Carmarthen, but details only emerged on Wednesday. Doctors had feared the child would be at risk of a chromosomal abnormality such as Downs syndrome, which is higher in older mothers, but he was born healthy. Mrs Buttle attributed her achievement to the "clean country air" and expressed a desire to be left to get on with running her farms, of which she owns several around Cwmann, near Lampeter. The father of the boy, Peter Rawstron, also appeared shy of publicity after it emerged that he had left his wife to live with Mrs Buttle. There was confusion, too, over Mrs Buttle's age which was variously reported as 54 and 60. Medical experts said that while a natural birth to a woman of 54 would be exceptional, at 60 it would be miraculous. If confirmed, it would exceed by five years the previous British record held by Kathleen Campbell, who was 55 when she had a her son, Joby, in 1987 in Nottingham. The confusion appears to have arisen from a discrepancy between Mrs Buttle's hospital medical record, which gives her age as 54, and her birth certificate which gives her date of birth as 10 February 1937, making her 61 next month. Checks by the Press Association at the Family Records Centre in London revealed an Elizabeth Espley, Mrs Buttle's maiden name, was born early in 1937 in the Chester area and there were no further births registered in the same name before late 1945. Mrs Buttle, who has been married twice and whose second husband died 10 years ago, said she was delighted to have a new son. "He is my little miracle and he makes me feel like a young woman again. I feel perfectly well and I don't know what the fuss is about. There were no complications and the hospital staff were absolutely marvellous." Mrs Rawstron, wife of the boy's father, who still sees her husband every day as they run the family agricultural business together, said: "He's been foolish to say the least. I'm very unhappy about the whole situation. Most babies are a cause for celebration but this one is not."