0108 "The Unthinkable Happened" [12/31/06]

gigglingmonk · Post by **gigglingmonk** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:18 am

kristenjane wrote:
Taig wrote:Oh My God! Grounded for New Years This SUX!!!
..... ...... ..... too long to quote.........

PS..I don't think they shpoudl say sh** either or especiall g** dam* it!! it just isn't needed and it can get you in trouble with God. Crappy is just as good (but still a little "iffy". Why is it alsqys so hard to say "Darn it" or "shoot" or even "crimany"?
It is on page 20. if you missed it. But no one has really mentioned it.
But um wow? And I was kind of offended. Even though my name wasnt mentioned but uh are they serious?

I wasn't offended but I was slightly annoyed. Eh, its a personal thing(I'm talking about the whole "it will get you in trouble with god" comment).

robtomorrow · Post by **robtomorrow** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:19 am

kristenjane wrote:
mushab00m wrote:
I think this is probably the creators telling us that Gemma IS alive. They probably wanted to give us an obvious clue so we wouldn't over analyze it.

haha not over analyze something.
We NEVER over analyze....

Is thirty five pages of discussion about a two minute video over analyzing?

minsky · Post by **minsky** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:20 am

spaciegirlreturn wrote:Is everyone gonna be mad if we find out there was no gun shot? Curious.

I won't be. It could all just be our imaginations working overtime again.

mwgraves · Post by **mwgraves** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:25 am

spaciegirlreturn wrote:Is everyone gonna be mad if we find out there was no gun shot? Curious.

no...not me...it was an intense video taking a gunshot away from that won't change the fact it was intense..

if no gunshot one less questin needed to be asked...

if there was a gunshot one more question that needs to be answered...

kristenjane · Post by **kristenjane** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:36 am

robtomorrow wrote:
kristenjane wrote:
mushab00m wrote:
I think this is probably the creators telling us that Gemma IS alive. They probably wanted to give us an obvious clue so we wouldn't over analyze it.

haha not over analyze something.
We NEVER over analyze....
Is thirty five pages of discussion about a two minute video over analyzing?

haha NEVERRR
*note sarcasm in both posts.

aideen · Post by **aideen** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:40 am

mwgraves wrote:
aideen wrote:I wish the camera work had been a bit better though.
I think thay was done on purpose so we all sit here 34 pages + into this thread trying to figure out what the hell is going on!!

Yeah, I know, i mentioned that I knew they did it deliberately, but I still think they could have kept us in the dark without making it so irritating. Don't worry, it's just me saying I found this video the hardest to watch out of all 108

kristenjane · Post by **kristenjane** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:40 am

gigglingmonk wrote:
kristenjane wrote:
Taig wrote:Oh My God! Grounded for New Years This SUX!!!
..... ...... ..... too long to quote.........

PS..I don't think they shpoudl say sh** either or especiall g** dam* it!! it just isn't needed and it can get you in trouble with God. Crappy is just as good (but still a little "iffy". Why is it alsqys so hard to say "Darn it" or "shoot" or even "crimany"?
It is on page 20. if you missed it. But no one has really mentioned it.
But um wow? And I was kind of offended. Even though my name wasnt mentioned but uh are they serious?
I wasn't offended but I was slightly annoyed. Eh, its a personal thing(I'm talking about the whole "it will get you in trouble with god" comment).

I wasnt referring to that part. I meant what I didnt put in the quote. Sorry to mislead.
I totally understand the last paragraph. People feel differently. But what else was said was offensive to me. I was shocked when I read what was said about Hispanics. Okay cool, feel that way and be naive, but to post it on a forum where there are many different views, people and cultures... it just wasnt intelligent. Plus, it wasnt relevant at all.

Maybe I am just touchy tonight.

autumneternal · Post by **autumneternal** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:41 am

kristenjane wrote:
robtomorrow wrote:
kristenjane wrote:
mushab00m wrote:
I think this is probably the creators telling us that Gemma IS alive. They probably wanted to give us an obvious clue so we wouldn't over analyze it.

haha not over analyze something.
We NEVER over analyze....
Is thirty five pages of discussion about a two minute video over analyzing?

haha NEVERRR
*note sarcasm in both posts.

I can't help but wonder...is it not better to overanalyze than underanalyze? At least then you can take steps backwards instead of having to do more work.

(And, yes, I did note the sarcasm, but I think it's a valid question.)

kristenjane · Post by **kristenjane** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:42 am

autumneternal wrote:
I can't help but wonder...is it not better to overanalyze than underanalyze? At least then you can take steps backwards instead of having to do more work.

(And, yes, I did note the sarcasm, but I think it's a valid question.)

It is much better to over analyze. I love it! That is why I now basically live on this site. I love reading all the new theories!

///edit
I guess it would just be called analyzing wouldnt it?

autumneternal · Post by **autumneternal** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:44 am

kristenjane wrote:
gigglingmonk wrote:
kristenjane wrote:
Taig wrote:Oh My God! Grounded for New Years This SUX!!!
..... ...... ..... too long to quote.........

PS..I don't think they shpoudl say sh** either or especiall g** dam* it!! it just isn't needed and it can get you in trouble with God. Crappy is just as good (but still a little "iffy". Why is it alsqys so hard to say "Darn it" or "shoot" or even "crimany"?
It is on page 20. if you missed it. But no one has really mentioned it.
But um wow? And I was kind of offended. Even though my name wasnt mentioned but uh are they serious?
I wasn't offended but I was slightly annoyed. Eh, its a personal thing(I'm talking about the whole "it will get you in trouble with god" comment).

I wasnt referring to that part. I meant what I didnt put in the quote. Sorry to mislead.
I totally understand the last paragraph. People feel differently. But what else was said was offensive to me. I was shocked when I read what was said about Hispanics. Okay cool, feel that way and be naive, but to post it on a forum where there are many different views, people and cultures... it just wasnt intelligent. Plus, it wasnt relevant at all.

Maybe I am just touchy tonight.

I think that maybe the poster in question is perhaps young and naive. That doesn't excuse any offensive comments, but, depending on their age, I don't think they can be held 100% accountable for what they say. If the poster isn't young and naive, then they simply have no nettiquette when it comes to forums and they should probably watch a little longer and learn how things work.

autumneternal · Post by **autumneternal** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:46 am

kristenjane wrote:
autumneternal wrote:
I can't help but wonder...is it not better to overanalyze than underanalyze? At least then you can take steps backwards instead of having to do more work.

(And, yes, I did note the sarcasm, but I think it's a valid question.)
It is much better to over analyze. I love it! That is why I now basically live on this site. I love reading all the new theories!

///edit
I guess it would just be called analyzing wouldnt it?

I think your edit is probably right. The perfectionist in me says I'd rather overdo something than underdo it though, (except when it comes to cooking, then there is no over- or underdoing allowed).

kristenjane · Post by **kristenjane** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:48 am

Way Off topic real quick, very sorry:
autumneternal I like your signature : D

Back on topic:
spaciegirlreturn I would be highly amused. I hope that isnt the case.

autumneternal · Post by **autumneternal** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:57 am

kristenjane wrote:
spaciegirlreturn wrote: Is everyone gonna be mad if we find out there was no gun shot? Curious.
Back on topic:
spaciegirlreturn I would be highly amused. I hope that isnt the case.

I hear what could be considered a gunshot, but I also think that maybe people are hearing what they want to hear because they want some really intense drama. I guess no one will know for sure until the next video. Cliffhangers....gotta love 'em!

kristenjane wrote:Way Off topic real quick, very sorry:
autumneternal I like your signature : D

**edited to fix quotes

krmurr87 · Post by **krmurr87** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 12:58 am

why did she scream noooo after the noise then if it wasn't a gun shot

autumneternal · Post by **autumneternal** » Tue Jan 02, 2007 1:03 am

krmurr87 wrote:why did she scream noooo after the noise then if it wasn't a gun shot

Pure speculation, but maybe she had second thoughts about leaving her father behind? Not to mention, not everyone heard her actually scream an intelligible "Noooo!" I thought I did the first time I watched it, but, upone reviewing, it just sounded like a general scream, (of course, that begs the question, why did she scream at all?)

My personal best guess at this point is that it WAS a gunshot, but either we're talking blanks or a tranquilizer gun.