Ok, not sure where the people got that information about the writers from. Here is an article where they refuse to say whether Aaron is part of the six:

http://www.tvguide.com/news/lost-questions-answered/080304-01

I think I have that T.V Guide. There is a possibility that Aaron "could be" part of Oceanic 6. I guess we are just assuming since we have seen Aaron in a flash forward. You never know with LOST.

Ben could be one of the Oceanic 6, but I doubt he wants to get off the island.

Or Michael or Walt could be number 6.

Dang strike I would love to see the episode of Sawyer getting a haircut. LOL

Was it not Jin buying the panda in the FF? Sure did want a big panda awful bad. Maybe there is a bomb in it.

That Flash Forward Flash back bullshit pissed me off last night!

Pucked Up Fan wrote:

Was it not Jin buying the panda in the FF? Sure did want a big panda awful bad. Maybe there is a bomb in it.

Actually, Jin was buying a panda in a flashback - it was for a government official's new grandchild as a gift from Sun's father's business. They were just totally screwing with us (although they did drop a hint with the Year of the Dragon thing).

That part was confusing because it did look like Jin.

FYI...No repeat of LOST this week at 7pm.

Dharma wrote:

That part was confusing because it did look like Jin.

Ok, now I'm confused by that comment. You do realize that it was Jin that bought the Panda, right?

Sorry about that......I do realized that was Jin who bought the panda. The part I was talking about is the other guy who they had a baby boy and the flashback and flash forward at the same time.

Dharma wrote:

Sorry about that......I do realized that was Jin who bought the panda. The part I was talking about is the other guy who they had a baby boy.

Ok, still confused. I think we both have down what happened, but I'm not quite getting that from your posts.

I think one of us may have something wrong - but here is what I thought took place. The guy that was at the hospital when they said it was a baby boy was Jin. That was still part of the Jin flashback. The baby boy was the Chinese Ambassador's child (or grandchild, can't remember which), and Jin was delivering the panda as a gift from Sun's father's business. He then turned and walked out of the hospital, which is when the nurse asked why he was leaving so soon and he said it was not his baby. Everything connected with the panda happened back in 2000 - based on the toy store owner mentioning it was the Year of the Dragon (which was a pretty good clue actually that Jin was in a flashback and not flashfoward) - and revolved around Jin.

There was the part where the guy walked past the room and Sun thought it was Jin, but that was the only appearance that guy made in the show.

kevgraub wrote:

Dharma wrote: Sorry about that......I do realized that was Jin who bought the panda. The part I was talking about is the other guy who they had a baby boy. Ok, still confused. I think we both have down what happened, but I'm not quite getting that from your posts. I think one of us may have something wrong - but here is what I thought took place. The guy that was at the hospital when they said it was a baby boy was Jin. That was still part of the Jin flashback. The baby boy was the Chinese Ambassador's child (or grandchild, can't remember which), and Jin was delivering the panda as a gift from Sun's father's business. He then turned and walked out of the hospital, which is when the nurse asked why he was leaving so soon and he said it was not his baby. Everything connected with the panda happened back in 2000 - based on the toy store owner mentioning it was the Year of the Dragon (which was a pretty good clue actually that Jin was in a flashback and not flashfoward) - and revolved around Jin. There was the part where the guy walked past the room and Sun thought it was Jin, but that was the only appearance that guy made in the show.

I agree with you about what happened. I was just confused on the flashback/flash forward part of it for awhile but then caught on to what was happening.
There hasn't been many flashbacks lately so wasn't exactly sure what was going on.

Dharma wrote:

I agree with you about what happened. I was just confused on the flashback/flash forward part of it for awhile but then caught on to what was happening. There hasn't been many flashbacks lately so wasn't exactly sure what was going on.

I agree, I did not catch it at all until Jin started talking about the panda being a gift from Paik's business. That's when it hit me that Jin was not taking the panda to Sun. Really, I think the only way to have caught what was going on is if you happened to know that 2000 was the Year of the Dragon.

Kev, check your pm's

A little preview of Thursday's night episode.........

The March 20th episode finds Sayid demanding to know why his former comrade is posing as deckhand Kevin Johnson, a question answered by a series of darkly revelatory flashbacks that involve Michael at home in Manhattan post-island, the music of Mama Cass and a pivotal friendly encounter. Walt pops up only briefly, and four dead characters reappear. Executive producer Carlton Cuse teases, It's safe to say Michael's return to the outside world did not work out in any way he hoped or planned.

Quote:

''Yes, you'll find out a lot about Michael. But you'll ALSO learn why bearded Jack was unable to jump. AND where the Others are holed up. AND, according to those silly promos, apparently someone dies, too.''

Anybody else thinking the person who dies could be Claire?????

Not sure if it is now or later, but I think Claire dies before she gets off the island.

Under Jack's story at Kate's trial about 8 surviving the crash and only 6 making it off the island, I think Claire is one of the two that survived the crash but died on the island (probably during childbirth).

Quote:

I think Claire is one of the two that survived the crash but died on the island (probably during childbirth).

I'm confused by this now....Claire had Aaron in the first season.

Dharma wrote:

Quote: I think Claire is one of the two that survived the crash but died on the island (probably during childbirth). I'm confused by this now....Claire had Aaron in the first season.

I was referring to Jack's testimony during Kate's trial. Remember, he said that there were originally 8 survivors of the crash, but that two of them died before they could be rescued. Not that this is what really happened, but that is apparently the story the 6 are using once they return from the island.

I think that the idea that 2 of the people survived the crash but died before they could be rescued was used to exlplain why Kate brought Aaron back with her. Not sure who the other one is yet. Maybe Jin? Maybe that was used to explain the date of Sun's conception?

I'm not sure if both of the people that Jack said died after the crash are really dead, or just part of those left back on the island.

kevgraub wrote:

Dharma wrote: Quote: I think Claire is one of the two that survived the crash but died on the island (probably during childbirth). I'm confused by this now....Claire had Aaron in the first season. I was referring to Jack's testimony during Kate's trial. Remember, he said that there were originally 8 survivors of the crash, but that two of them died before they could be rescued. Not that this is what really happened, but that is apparently the story the 6 are using once they return from the island. I think that the idea that 2 of the people survived the crash but died before they could be rescued was used to exlplain why Kate brought Aaron back with her. Not sure who the other one is yet. Maybe Jin? Maybe that was used to explain the date of Sun's conception? I'm not sure if both of the people that Jack said died after the crash are really dead, or just part of those left back on the island.

I see.....Because what Jack said at her trial could be something made up because remember Kate saying something about he is starting to believe everything that he is saying. A main character dies every season so it could be Claire that dies tonight or it could just be them messing with us......

Here is their Deathwatch odds.......

SAWYER: 10,000-1 LOL
WHY? Because all outrageously handsome men who cause our wives to swoon must die.
WHY NOT? Because said wives would take up sledgehammers and storm the offices of Lost's producers and threaten Kathy Bates-style horror upon them until they brought Sawyer back to life. And anyway, he probably has a story or two left to tell.


LOCKE: 1,000-1
WHY? His flashback story seems complete. He doesn't seem to figure into the flash-forward future. And [insert your own strained reach in logic here; make sure you use the word seem].
WHY NOT? Actually, I think Locke has more history to unpack and plays a key role in the flash-forward future. Regardless, he's intrinsic to the overall Island-set saga of Lost. When the Island goes, Locke will go with it. I don't think either will be disappearing for exactly 40 more episodes. Besides, I still think he's Jacob.


DESMOND: 50-1
WHY? He might have the time-travel sickness. Are his days numbered?
WHY NOT? The former Hatchman has more secrets to spill. Plus, it would be an ice-cold end to the fan-fave DesPen love story. Moreover — and with all due respect to you Jack-Kate time-loop theorists — he and Penelope are my picks for the Adam and Eve skeletons, so at some point in time he's gotta travel back to the past.
THEN AGAIN... Given how quantum leaping in the Lost-verse is a consciousness projection affair, maybe his death would help facilitate my Adam-Eve time-loop conjecture. Okay, then: 20-1!


ROUSSEAU OR ALEX: 23-2
WHY? The French Lady has been lurking in the background all season instead of slinking off into the jungle as usual after the premiere. The sneak peek clips released to the Web this past week further hint at an imminent freighter folk attack; is Alex's mommy due for a heroic death? Or is it vice versa: Will Alex meet an untimely end, serving as a catalyst for a new chapter in her troubled mother's dark Island life?
WHY NOT? Again, Rousseau is another character with too much valuable intel; if she dies, how would we get it? As for Alex, well, you need to keep her alive to react to the death of my top choice.


CLAIRE: 17-3
WHY? At some point, Baby Aaron has to transfer custody from the Charlie-grieving Aussie momma to Kate. Might her death be the catalyst? Also: a whopping 40 percent of Lost fans think she's the one, according to a deathwatch poll over at darkufo.blogspot.com
WHY NOT? It would be more emotional and dramatic if Lost was setting up a story line in which Kate must find some way to facilitate a mother-and-child reunion in the flash-forward future.



BERNARD OR ROSE: 6-1
WHY? Rose does have cancer; maybe she isn't as healed as she thinks. (If so, does that portend bad news for Locke's legs?) But maybe it's Bernard: In retrospect, that fishing-boat heart-to-heart last week with Jin might have been a setup for his tragic end.
WHY NOT? Because it's rude to kill your elders.



JIN: 5-2
WHY? One interpretation of last's week episode was that at some point in the near future, Jin will bite it...
WHY NOT? ...but another interpretation is that the Oceanic 6 are merely pretending that Jin — and the rest of their castaway friends — are dead, victims of the 9/22/04 crash of Oceanic 815.



KARL: 2-1
WHY: If you're asking ''Who's Karl?'' then you've established one reason why he's a good candidate for goner-dom. For the record, he's the Room 23-tortured boyfriend of Alex. And he seems to be the kind of guy who's bound to blunder into a bullet or machete swipe or deadly jellyfish sting sooner or later.
WHY NOT? Ummm...because he's got blackmail pics of Damon and Carlton?

I still think one of the things that has been missing lately from Lost is the "Holy Crap! Did they really just kill ___________?!?!?" Remember when they shot Shannon? Or when Eko died? Or Ana Lucia, Libby . . . ? Charlie did not really work, because everyone knew he was going to die, so it lacked the shock value that we had when the other ones bit the dust.

I'm guessing tonight will bring some of that back. Not that I necessarily have anyone in particular I want to see killed off - but if it is someone like Carl, I'm going to be pretty disappointed.

kevgraub wrote:

I still think one of the things that has been missing lately from Lost is the "Holy Crap! Did they really just kill ___________?!?!?" Remember when they shot Shannon? Or when Eko died? Or Ana Lucia, Libby . . . ? Charlie did not really work, because everyone knew he was going to die, so it lacked the shock value that we had when the other ones bit the dust. I'm guessing tonight will bring some of that back. Not that I necessarily have anyone in particular I want to see killed off - but if it is someone like Carl, I'm going to be pretty disappointed.

You're right about that. Claire being the one that dies tonight will be too easy. I like spoilers, but knowing everything takes out the excitement.
With tonight being the last episode till April I think we will have a "finale kind of episode" that will keep us talking till then. Like last year flashforward of Kate/Jack and wondering who the "he" was till now. I really hope nobody is killed off. Tonight will be exciting enough finding out what Michael has been up to and why will we only see Walt "briefly". Since it said we will see past people who died maybe that is what they were reffering too insted of someone actually dying.