So Desmond thinks he shot down flight 815!

[hundredand8]

When Desmond says he shot down the plane on 22nd September 2004, we see the printout from the Pearl and it was on screen for long enoug to see that the first six digits do indeed form a date

Remember the printout from "?" This is what it showed:


*image from lost-media.com*

What kind of date would thase first six digits be, then?

Also, as Hooting Heck worked out back then, the last digits are time increasing in steps of 108 minutes exactly. We have never seen anyone enter the numbers exactly when the counter hit 0:00. So the only way to explain that is if the Swan and Pearl re-synchronise themselves (so if the person in the hatch presses the button too early they increase the time to the next 0:00 by the amount and make the seconds tick slower)

[Murgatroyd]

Smacks of a continuity error, doesn't it - they needed the printout to show the dates on the second viewing, which they'd failed to make it do on the first. Yet I can't believe they'd be quite that ill prepared. And yet again, there's the continuity errors forced by attempts to reconcile Desmond's, Jack's and Shannon's stories....

[calon_lan]

Perhaps its just the first 5 digits (41602) meaning the date is 4-16-02, or 16th April 2002

[Indie88]

when he did it the numbers i believe were 092204 , 22/09/04.

But the numbers shown up there make no real sense!

416021, 60/41/21?!?! there is no way to make that make sense!

Maybe it's not supposed to! He *was* just looking for his number...so maybe it was yet another planted piece of 'evidence'? I'm starting to think that things we were thinking were too wierd to be coincidences weren't caused by the other's making them... but something else, although i don't know what.

PS: I know that post makes no sense, especially the last bit!

[calon_lan]

This is the screencap of the numbers, showing them as 92204, or 22/9/04

hope it works, never tried it before!

[hundredand8]

Continuity error? Don't know, this is only two shows before the finale, and they went to the effort of making sure the last digits increase by 108 minutes every time.

I think its more likely this is not a date at all, just a counter for the number of minutes elapsed since who knows when, and that the timer "jumped" after the incident. Which means Desmond is wrong and he did not cause the plane to crash.

But then why would the numbers before the incident correspond to the air date of the first Lost episode, ever?

[hundredand8]

Just had another thought on this.

Suppose they had shown us the printout in "?" with numbers like 151104 at the front.

We would have said "Oh, look, that could be a date, and its about 60 days from the launch of S1 in the US, that can't be conincidence". So some of us would have concluded the crash was on 22nd September 2004. But, you know us, some of us would have said "rubbish, coincidence, these are just numbers" and so on. So it would have actually made the show more enjoyable if they had done it. So they would have done that, don't you think?

But then when Desmond recognised these as dates, that would have settled the argument.

What am I getting at? Well, once again, what I'm getting at is that the crash did not happen on 22nd September 2004, and that Desmond was not responsible.

Look, he managed to type in the numbers long before the timer folded up, how can that relatively small magnetic field cause flight 815 to crash? The white light we saw at the end, OK, that might do the trick. But thats not what happened, is it?

[Indie88]

oh i just realised i took one number too many at it's just 16/4/02...

[hundredand8]

Originally Posted by Indie88,September 28, 2006 10:49 am

oh i just realised i took one number too many at it's just 16/4/02...

Not sure what you are saying there

From the screen grap in "?" the number is 41602122:29

From LTDA the number is 922044:16

So if I got you right, then you think the first 5 numbers in each case are a date. In that case, you are saying the number before the ":" can change the number of digits? OK, why not, its not normally how computers work (they would be more like "04" for 4 minutes and "14" for 14 minutes) but that does not rule it out.

But, if it is hours passed per day (which I think it is) then it would be anything from 0 to 23, which leaves an additional "1" in the screen grap from "?".

Can anyone think of any good reason for the extra "1"?

Because if we can come up with one, that means we have gone back in time!

[Indie88]

Sorry 108 i was a bit muddled and semi-correcting my original post about the date...

But yeah, i noticed that the numbers didn't add up. IE Sometimes there are 6 digits for a date, and sometimes only 5 make sense...

But it must be a date...Right?

[Him]

LTDA printout

bad continuity error imo.

Maybe to throw us all off

[Hello Kitty]

Originally Posted by hundredand8,September 28, 2006 12:23 pm

Because if we can come up with one, that means we have gone back in time!

Not necessarily, cause when locke got that print out it could have been on over a couple of years, so the page he looked at was from 2002 and Desmond skipped ahead to the crash date of 2004

I have no idea what the 1 could be for though

[The_abbott]

Originally Posted by Hello Kitty,September 28, 2006 02:23 pm

Not necessarily, cause when locke got that print out it could have been on over a couple of years, so the page he looked at was from 2002 and Desmond skipped ahead to the crash date of 2004

I have no idea what the 1 could be for though

I think that was just a mistake. I think they are just meant to be dates and times.

[Indie88]

I've just realised, and now i feel like a fool:

Two examples, and the reason why there are 8, or 9 numbers follow:

The reason there is a differnce in numbers is that the time can be 3 or 4 digits, IE 1:52 or 10:52.

1) 922041:52 (8 numbers) - 22/9/04 - 1:52

2) 9220410:52 (9 numbers) - 22/9/04 - 10:52

Lol

[The Wizard]

yes but there is still a mysterious 1 in all of those dates... what could it mean?