Re: how we know Locke's past is phony

Well, can you come up with a BETTER explanation?  Or even as good?
We'll put aside the bogus Buddy Holly record by chalking it up to the
"production errors" you doubters are always allowing them.

Suppose Richard Alpert "first" (in sequence of his own experience) met
Locke on the island at about the time we were shown, and suppose he
COULD travel back in time to attend Locke's birth and other life
events.  Why would he?  Why would he take a chance on screwing it up
so that Locke would never get there?  Or, if that was his intention
(messing with the past to abort the present), why wouldn't he have
done something more effective than the things he was seen doing?
Like, just KILL the beast and escape in your time machine, huh?

Seems like your only other alternative would be that Alpert just
doesn't develop the physical accoutrements of aging, and that he was
doing research on extremely resilient newborns.  Hard to figure how
from his base in ****tland he could've found out so quickly about Locke
and gotten to the scene so quickly.  You'd also have to figure that
Locke continued to lead a charmed -- and yet ironically tragic --
life.  Funny how he & Abaddon could both take such an interest in him,
yet fail to give him any PRACTICAL advice that could've saved him much
grief.  Or even do him the courtesy of trans****ting him to the island
like Cooper-Seward rather than putting him thru a plane wreck?

> Seriously, stp back a second and think about how any of what you just
said
> makes a lick of sense. For who's benefit it this? Why dress up people in
> period costumes and have them act out something no one sees that
supposedly
> took place 50 years ago? Why dress an entire streetwith 1950s cars so
that
> one of the actors can be hit, and why fake an entire 1950s hospital?

So there would be "witnesses" who could remember exactly how it
"happened".  Like it was yesterday -- because it nearly was!

Hey, John -- where's your brother?  The one you played games with?
Could he have been left out of the enactments because they didn't want
any of the witnesses to recall John Locke's identical twin?

Robert