@Gregaus Thanks for the reply! I just checked out your post... I'm not sure if you had the chance to watch my video yet (I know it's a long one, lol), but I actually address this journal entry fairly in-depth in Part I of my theory and explanation. As I point out there, the journal entry has never been confirmed as canon (in fact, Lostpedia even classifies it as having "no canonical merit"). Furthermore, the explanation doesn't hold up under scrutiny for a variety of reasons (most of which I mention in the video).

I don't mean to assume you didn't watch the video, as I do realize you may have just been pointing out the coincidence that you had also covered this topic. But just in case you hadn't had the time to watch it before commenting, I just wanted to assure you I do in fact address the journal entry there.

Thanks again and namaste! :)