Why do people go for the most complicated explanation? Even if the clear one doesn't make a lot of sense, they aren't trying to be confusing for the sake of confusing.

The "big reveal" at the end of this episode (complete with discordant music) was that Kate's son's name was Aaron. The only reason this would be a "reveal" is if he was Claire's baby. If Kate was pregnant via Sawyer and had the kid and named him Aaron...that's meaningless to the audience as a "reveal", since nothing they showed backed this up.

Plus they flat out said that Kate wasn't good with babies while she was holding Aaron. So the fact that she took him off the island is even more of a "reveal". Seriously, it's so clear that to think otherwise is to give the show more credit than it deserves.

I did immediately think that Claire must have been killed in the "war" and Kate got Aaron off the island. We'll see if that pans out.

And for the record, I think the person in the coffin is someone we haven't met. Drawing out the "reveal" of a character we've already met doesn't make sense. It would have been far more effective as a tease to reveal that Ben or Michael was in the coffin at the end of last season. Would have made us all go "WTF" until they explained it.

I agree that it's silly to think aaron is kate's biological kid. The timeline doesn't make any sense. We know that they get off the island fairly soon. There's no way Kate gets pregnant, has a kid off the island, and goes through a trial 2-3 years later. That's what you are suggesting when you say it's Kate's biological kid. The Kate flash-forward has to take place before any of the other flash-forwards we've seen so far because of the press hounding her at the trial. My guess is that it's mid-late 2006, which would make aaron 2 years old.

I am starting to see some clearance at the end of the tunnel. Maybe this has been discussed before but insurance companies for the airline dont want survivors and the show will divert into the corporate corruption arena. The survivors are targets for murder by lackies for the insurance companies and will send people to kill the remaining survivors to avoid insurance claims and then just explain the murders as some sort of "Lord of the Flies" theory.

Still doesnt explain the black cloud monster on the island nor Jacob.

Guess the purgatory theory is dead and gone.

I disagree. It's someone we've met. And they don't want to reveal it yet because the flash-forward story is still developing. It makes complete sense to draw it out as long as they can.

It is someone we've met before Season 4. I'm pretty sure they stated this after the finale last year, at Comic-Con and so forth. From a storytelling perspective Ben makes the most sense.

In the now-canon mobisode episode with Jack, which came out right before this season started, Ben tells Jack if he leaves the island he'll never be able to come back. The setting was in Ben's house before Jack was going to leave in the submarine. Now consider Jack never listened to Ben on the island, even beating him up, and now he needs Ben to get back to the island. The focus of the freighter story has always been Jack v.s. Ben.

Finally, ask yourself, "How does Jack get back to the island in a later season?" If Ben is shown as being in the casket this season then we have a huge question mark around the events of the last two seasons of the show.

If it is Ben in the casket (which is my guess as well), then the question is did he kill himself like the obituary stated, or was he killed and they made it look like a suicide? If he did actually kill himself, things must have gotten AWFULLY dire, because he seems like the last person that would ever kill himself.

I'd guess he was killed. This leaves Jack and company to take over his work and maybe try to find (and subsequently hide, again) the island.

relatives of the deceased and any survivors can probably sue the airline. Someone dead is probably worth more then someone who survived.

Are you telling me that just because 5 other plane crash survivors corroborate Kate's story about Aaron being her son, that's it, everyone will believe her including child services who will only care about the child? Even if it was her biological kid, they might take it away because of her past.

How is this show not connected to reality? Even Sawyer said to Kate, "I guess you don't know how the world works." In regards to her past.

The reveal at the end could easily be part of a double reveal. First they 'shock' us with the kid then the name. Here's how it could play out for the second reveal. Claire dies and Kate ends up taking care of Aaron on the island. They become attached. Then Aaron dies and the 6 make the deal to come home. Kate (who was already pregnant and lied about it) gives birth at home and names the child Aaron.

Kate's always wanted to have the perfect family. Who knows, maybe she can't get pregnant and she did whatever she had to do to get Aaron from Claire on the island and that's why Jack can't see him. Maybe she killed Claire.

Someone over on lostpedia noted this interesting detail:

Shawn Doyle also plays a polygamist on Big Love. Could this be a hint that the "island" is really a commune in Utah?

Not unless he has the same name as a Lost character ....

But...why? Isn't it just as plausible (and less convoluted) that Claire was one of the people they claimed survived, she gave birth, then died and Kate adopted Aaron? Did they ever say that he was to her biological child?

I just don't understand this obsession to make things that are very simple needlessly complicated. Even "Lost" usually makes sense when things are finally explained. This whole alternate scenario is simply ridiculous.

Let me tell you something - if your entire LOST theory falls on the actions of child services then you are already doomed.

I don't know about California, but Washington State taxpayers are constantly being sued for millions of dollars because of the incompetence of CPS and other similiar state agencies.

Again, there's no way Kate is allowed to adopted any child.

What show are you watching that this is simple storytelling? This show makes Twin Peaks looks linear.

The theories are there. Let's just let this play out.

The story isn't simple, but it isn't complicated for the sake of complicated. They made a huge deal about how Kate wasn't good with Aaron, then we flash-forward to find out that Kate now has a son post-rescue named...AARON!

It's as simple as it can be.

can we please stop about the child not being claire's son aaron. It is aaron, that's why kate called the kid aaron. it's aaron. how many aaron's are on the show. Uno. One. I can't believe the number of people that can't understand that. where the hell did eric come from? even at low volume it sounded like aaron.

so when is claire going to die???

What's REALLY on your mind? :)

fixed. kate however deserves the worst.

One thing to consider. Would it not be plainly evident to a doctor that Kate had never given birth?

All she is doing is passing Aaron off as her son, not as her biological son.

That's why her lawyer wanted him there. He wanted the jury to hear about her character, not necessarily as a mother, but as someone who would raise another person's child as her own. That's like 100x better from a legal standpoint when arguing for character.

people who think Kate's baby is someone other than Claire's are really lost. (pun intended)

Surprised they didn't also mention Elizabeth Mitchell was in the movie as well.

On the stand, Jack says there were 8 survivors of the crash but 2 died. So, I inferred from this that Claire would be one of the survivors who died.