Scale of Credibility

A lot of people on this site have taken sides on different issues (faith, time travel, etc.) based on the sayings of different characters in the show (and what else do we have to go on really?)

Could we come up with a scale of credibility as to what sources of information are accurate and what sources are doubtful?

From 1 to 10 for example

Anything Daniel Faraday says on the subject of TIME TRAVEL as it applies to theoretical physics gets a 9 out of 10. As it applies to practical or applied physics it may get a 6 as it is un-proven until it is proven.

Anything coming out of Benjamin Linus’ mouth gets an automatic 0 or 1 until it is proven to be true.

Jack on medecine or pathology (for example the dating of Adam and Eve, or the effects and horrible death as a result of his cutting Sawyer off from antibiotics) may get a 6 or an 8 as it approaches his own area of expertise.

Hurley on food and comic book heroes (I mean come on, would you really side with Charlie over Hurley on the whole Superman vs Flash debate?) 8 or 9 out of 10.

Can you think of other examples?

Share with fellow Losties

Written by


46 yr. old husband and father of two boys (aged 8 and 10). Lives in Montreal, Canada. Works in theatre, film and television.

6 thoughts on “Scale of Credibility

  1. Well Jack is a weird one. Depending on who he is talking to and who/how many people are around, and what he is talking about, I think his credibility can be anywhere from 0-10.

    I’d put the most credible sources as Richard being a 9.5, and Christian as a 9. I’d say Locke is up there as well, but he may bend the truth about what he knows if it is “in the best interest of the island”.

  2. This would work in the real world. On a television show, not so much.

    Take Faraday for example. You could say that he’s an authority on time travel but in season five alone he’s made statements that directly contradict each other. First he said whatever happened, happened then he said the people are variables.

    Jack is on again, off again. He’s a drunk, he’s a hero, he’s a brilliant doctor, trying to change the past by letting a kid die.

    There are just to many alterior motives at play here (some we don’t even know about yet) to really guage the reliability of the information provided by any character. Ben for example. He’s a liar but at the same time he probably knows more about what’s going on than 99% of the other characters we’ve met so far.

  3. The only credible ones as far as I’m concerned are the creepy people who like secrets and never have time to explain anything (like Christian, Richard, Jacob). Everybody else either has no idea what’s going on or lie through thier teeth. And I know you mean that everybody has thier own “expertise” if you will, but if you think about it, Juliet’s field was baby’s and she couldn’t figure out what was going on with the pregnant women on the island. All I’m saying is nothing is what it seems.

Leave a Reply