Lost - Season Three


Recommended Posts

He puts his hand to the window then pushes away kind of struggling for a bit then stops moving.

He was supposed to die. He accepted his death and they did the death scene quite well IMO.

Yeah he crosses himself then stops moving...

That is not possible. You have to be physically incapable (including having no energy) of swimming to drown by convincing yourself.

Btw, that is possible. I've studied cases (law student) where people have drown themselves in buckets to commit suicide, it can be done if you have the mental conviction (I have no idea how much mental conviction is required having never tried).

That is not possible. You have to be physically incapable (including having no energy) of swimming to drown by convincing yourself.
I disagree, I think if I wanted to drown myself I could. I'm not going to try just to prove a point, but I think it is possible. Mind over matter.
I am only basing my opinion on

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5402342.stm

"between 1983 and 2000, there were 568 plane crashes. Out of the collective 53,487 people onboard, 51,207 survived."

Notice that it's also on US flights only. As evidenced by that article, however, it is possible to survive plane crashes, but of the 568 crashes, how many were from a commercial airliner or in a remotely similar case to the crash on Lost?

Here's a list of notable crashes. I did a search for the word boeing since I didn't want to include small aircrafts. Just the big boys. But I'm not plane expert, so some of the boeing planes could be small ones too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_notab...ercial_aircraft

In 2000, 670 people died, but none were US flights. In 1999, a plane skid off the run way, which killed 11 people. Hardly notable as a significant crash like on Lost. Point being, it was a major crash (Lost), and you have a large number of survivors when a crash like that typically has none or very few (3-10 out of 200 or less). There were obviously other factors in play for them to survive, much less come out walking and not limping.

I can accept it, so long as they don't say, they simply survived :)

I was going to bring that up but my reply was already long enough.

Err, I remembered incorrectly:

Myth: The brace position was actually designed by the airline industry to kill people, rather than save them, during an airplane crash (in order to save money by paying off wrongful death suits rather than continuous injury compensations).

Busted.

The brace position protected the test subject (Buster) from serious and possibly fatal injuries. When the test subject was not braced he received far more serious injuries. At the end of the test the MythBusters-team risked their lives, but everyone survived the drop. There is a greater chance of dying due to smoke inhalation or immolation from burning debris ?€” due to being immobilized by injury or being pinned down by debris. There is a grain of truth to this myth, however; it was learned through research that the amount of money paid by airlines in wrongful death suits is lower than the amount of money paid for injury compensation.

http://www.answers.com/topic/mythbusters-season-2

I was thinking about the one where they tested this "myth".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAT_Yugoslav_Flight_364

Realistically that many people couldn't have survived much less walk away with a few bumps and bruises without some kind of external force at work. ;)

I was thinking about the one where they tested this "myth".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAT_Yugoslav_Flight_364

Realistically that many people couldn't have survived much less walk away with a few bumps and bruises without some kind of external force at work. ;)

Wow, that's quite a miracle for her to have survived from 33,000 feet inside the tail section. I can't even imagine that :|

What I mentioned earlier was the episode where they tested the brace position. They dropped just a few few and walked away going, "Uugggnnnn." So to fall from 1,000, much less 33,000 feet... :|

I was thinking about the one where they tested this "myth".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAT_Yugoslav_Flight_364

Realistically that many people couldn't have survived much less walk away with a few bumps and bruises without some kind of external force at work. ;)

Wow :|

For the last time. Charlie did not die because he failed in his attempts to survive. Charlie died because he chose to fulfill Desmond's vision. As far as Charlie was concerned, if he did not die, then (for whatever reason) Claire and Aaron would not be rescued. He died to save them

Get over it.

I don't care if Charlie lived, died or gave birth to live kittens while knitting a sweater made from yak hair; the physics were shown totally incorrectly. First, they never would have been able to close the door in the time follwing the blast, as the moon pool's pressure would have been instantly gone. Second, no amount of pressure in the ocean can fill the space that should have existed as an air pocket at the top of the control room Charlie was in.

They did it wrong. Get over it.

I don't care if Charlie lived, died or gave birth to live kittens while knitting a sweater made from yak hair; the physics were shown totally incorrectly. First, they never would have been able to close the door in the time follwing the blast, as the moon pool's pressure would have been instantly gone. Second, no amount of pressure in the ocean can fill the space that should have existed as an air pocket at the top of the control room Charlie was in.

They did it wrong. Get over it.

You know that brings up something I had not thought of. As soon as that window was busted, the rush of water coming up from the pool would have been immediate and extremely powerful as the air pocket was forced OUT of the blast hole. No way in hell would water have begun to flow inward at all.

You know that brings up something I had not thought of. As soon as that window was busted, the rush of water coming up from the pool would have been immediate and extremely powerful as the air pocket was forced OUT of the blast hole. No way in hell would water have begun to flow inward at all.

Exactly. As it did in Deep Blue Sea.

I don't care if Charlie lived, died or gave birth to live kittens while knitting a sweater made from yak hair; the physics were shown totally incorrectly. First, they never would have been able to close the door in the time follwing the blast, as the moon pool's pressure would have been instantly gone. Second, no amount of pressure in the ocean can fill the space that should have existed as an air pocket at the top of the control room Charlie was in.

They did it wrong. Get over it.

Err, Charlie locked the door before the window was busted.

Also, if the top of the room had an opening, then there would've been an opening for the water to escape, ja? If so, then maybe you got it wrong. However, we simply do not know because we haven't seen the ceiling of that room.

Edited by Mathachew

You guys are forgetting one key element, You guys are assuming that there is no other outlet for air. In most cases, they would not make a room that small with no ventilation. It is obviously not an air chamber as the computer stuff is in there. If the door was air tight- there WOULD be ventilation that would let air escape. End of discussion.

We're not talking about small planes. We're talking about large Boeing planes, like the 777 that can carry over 300 people, the one they flew on in Lost. Look up how many people have survived plane crashes. Judging from the list I looked at, and the number of survivors, the ratio is extremely small, with all dying in most cases. Even when a plan is able to land, people have died. One incident had a plane make an emergency landing in a field, where 11 of 134 people survived the landing. Hitting water is really no different than hitting ground when it is from a high altitude. Jump from a 200ft bridge into the water and let me know if you survive the smack; you could possibly get out of it if you toothpick your way into the water, you know, body completely straight, feet first, head last, but it's likely that you would be knocked out from the impact.

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961 was hijacked on November 23, 1996 en route from Addis Ababa to Nairobi, by three Ethiopians seeking political asylum. The plane crashed in the Indian Ocean near Comoros after running out of fuel, killing 123 of the 175 passengers and crew on board.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

The aircraft was Boeing B767-260ER, the plane had crash landed on water and 52 had survived. Almost same as the number of survivors in LOST.

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961 was hijacked on November 23, 1996 en route from Addis Ababa to Nairobi, by three Ethiopians seeking political asylum. The plane crashed in the Indian Ocean near Comoros after running out of fuel, killing 123 of the 175 passengers and crew on board.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

The aircraft was Boeing B767-260ER, the plane had crash landed on water and 52 had survived. Almost same as the number of survivors in LOST.

I remember that, if you look at the photo you see that the plance was not at a high altitude when it hit the water and the pilots were trying to land it on the surface of the water. So, this was a case of a botched landing more than a free fall from the sky at 1000 ft. I can't believe we are actually debating the scientific merits of LOST. If we do that, we are in for a long Summer...

Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961 was hijacked on November 23, 1996 en route from Addis Ababa to Nairobi, by three Ethiopians seeking political asylum. The plane crashed in the Indian Ocean near Comoros after running out of fuel, killing 123 of the 175 passengers and crew on board.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_961

The aircraft was Boeing B767-260ER, the plane had crash landed on water and 52 had survived. Almost same as the number of survivors in LOST.

It also didn't split in half in mid-air.

Aaaaaaanyways, I think you're missing my point. I'm done talking about plane crashes. Back to Lost.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Well I've done a grand total of nothing, and it now clocks between 2010mhz and 1995mhz (stock is 1710mhz) and hovers around 80c, warmer than it used to, but tolerable clocks seem to have returned. Thanks for all the advice on this thread. Will review the evidence and make a choice.
    • Audacious 4.6.1 by Razvan Serea Audacious is a lightweight, open-source audio player that emphasizes simplicity, performance, and sound quality. Designed for Linux, Windows, and macOS, it supports a wide range of audio formats, internet radio streaming, and playlist management. Users can customize the interface with Winamp-style skins or modern themes, making it flexible for different preferences. Audacious also includes an equalizer, advanced audio effects, and a plugin system for extending functionality. Its low resource usage makes it especially suitable for older computers or users who value efficiency without sacrificing playback quality. Audacious key features: High audio quality – delivers clean, gapless playback with minimal distortion. Wide format support – plays MP3, FLAC, Ogg Vorbis, AAC, WAV, WMA, and more. Internet radio streaming – supports Shoutcast, Icecast, and other online streams. Winamp skin support – classic, nostalgic look for users who prefer the old-school style. Modern GTK-based interface – clean, simple UI with a more modern feel. Customizable themes – change appearance through skins and themes. Advanced playlist management – organize, save, and edit playlists with ease. Equalizer – fine-tune audio output with a built-in graphical equalizer. Audio effects – built-in DSP options like crossfade, replay gain, and more. Plugin system – extend functionality with additional components. File metadata support – displays and organizes music based on tags. Drag-and-drop support – quickly add songs or playlists. Global hotkey support – control playback without switching windows. Bit-perfect output modes – bypass system mixers for pure audio output. ReplayGain support – normalizes track loudness automatically. Cue sheet support – play entire albums from a single audio file with .cue. MPRIS2 integration – integrates with Linux desktop environments for media controls. Advanced resampling options – adjust playback quality with different resampler settings. Gapless playback – seamless transition between tracks encoded properly. Crossfade plugin – blend one song into the next smoothly. Last.fm scrobbling plugin – track listening history online. Remote control support – control Audacious via command-line or scripts. Lyrics plugin – display song lyrics if available. Alarm / timer plugin – start or stop playback at set times. SOX resampler plugin – high-quality resampling for audiophiles. Spectrum analyzer / visualization plugins – visual feedback while playing music. Headphone crossfeed effect – simulates speaker listening for headphones. Customizable buffer size – tweak latency and playback smoothness. Audacious 4.6.1 changelog: Use XDG cache dir to store temporary files (#1817) Accept embedded lyrics in more cases (#1818) Bump .so and plugin ABI versions retrospectively (#1819) Include Georgian translation (#1820) Fix build on systems using musl instead of glibc (#1823) Download: Audacious 4.6.1 | 48.2 MB (Open Source) Download: Portable Audacious 4.6.1 | 69.8 MB View: Audacious Website | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • I really wonder if this has to do with the built in VPN or "private DNS" of browsers that trip up legal requirements like cookie consent and Cloudflare (to avoid all the botnet attacks we get). And BTW some botnets still manage to get past Cloudflare, we are constantly having to tweak it to block malicious traffic that ultimately cause a DDoS.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      505
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      197
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      142
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      89
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      80
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!