Have you all noticed that NBC has essentially thrown in the towel promoting the show? The last 2 episodes have had no promo during the end credits teasing the next episode....this last episode only had a voice over.

Ah I forgot it was about not calling, not murder, my bad.

As for the offense...if I remember my Philosophy/Law combo class correctly...you're technically not required to help someone if they're in trouble (depending on where you are), but if it requires an insignificant effort on your part then I'm guessing people will get pissed, a competent lawyer will question your motives, etc.

Speaking of which, that reminds me of 24 Season 3.

you're only obligated to help someone in peril if you created the situation of peril otherwise legally you're not obligated

They should "straight-to-dvd" the last 9 episodes or something...screw NBC, they have nothing good left anyways. Move Journeyman to FOX so people will watch it!

There aren't any episodes beyond the ones that are going to finish airing this coming week.

And let the promos for Clash of the Choirs with Michael Bolton begin.

"I will never understand people."
"They’re the worst."

Of course that's a quote from a time when NBC was still relevant.

Good points. Especially #3- The Heroes audience is one of the whiniest groups of TV fans known to mankind.
Read any of the threads for Heroes episodes and then tell me I'm wrong.

I would view ANY change in the time-line as a "butterfly effect" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_effect). The fact that a major change like this caused NO changes in the time-line -- notice that every tiny detail of the Christmas party was the same both before and after his jump -- is beyond ridiculous.

There is a conjecture of time travel that deals with a paradox like this which states that the time-line is self-correcting. In other words, if you try to change the time-line, it will somehow correct itself to restore the original, established and presumably pre-ordained time-line. I'm sure the writers have/had every intention of invoking this conjecture as an explanation but IMO it's totally bogus.

We never were really told, but how did the original timeline work out? If Dan hadn't been there to piss off the son, the father wouldn't have made him look like an ass in front of everyone. Son wouldn't have been angry, father would've likely been saved, unless he died "in the saddle" like they alluded to. In that case, the copy girl would've been sleeping with the wrong guy if she was looking for a promotion to reporter. Unless her sexcapades continued with the son after that night...

As was alluded to in the episode where present Dan has to play past Dan the night of the poker game, the producers would have you believe that most of these "corrections" to the past are actually the correct timeline and that it's the timeline before he goes back that is indeed the "screwed up" timeline. Novel idea but a thinking man's show like this had no chance of success with today's braindead reality watching TV consumers.

I just took it, in the poker episode, that when Dan and Livia showed up, it screwed up the original timeline. Future Dan had to fill in at the poker game so that the past timeline wouldn't be screwed up.

If future Dan hadn't been back there, past Dan would have been at the game, Dan and his wife would've gotten together, etc.

But IIRC, in that episode he mentioned he never did remember how he got home that night...

I believe it was because he was hammered drunk. Katie had originally taken him home because the newscaster buddy (that we were introduced to in the present when she was "interviewing" for the station job) had called her to come get him.

So present Dan knew he had to play in the poker game, even though his past self was passed/knocked out. If he hadn't gone back in his place, gotten drunk and lost a lot of money, the friend might not have called Katie. The events had to play out exactly like they did that night.