Delete: I created a category for theories: here. --Peephole 12:58, 24 July 2006 (PDT)

AGREE: This page is messy and difficult to navigate. The intro is adequately covered by Lostpedia's Theory Policy. --Scottkj 20:59, 24 July 2006 (PDT)

Alternately, this page could be expanded to discuss the interpetation of LOST. --Scottkj 22:52, 24 July 2006 (PDT)

What to do when a theory is debunked?

I believe that the "remanants of last humanity" theory was debunked by the most recent episode. Should we let this page continue to grow, or should we remove theories as they've been debunked? XSG 19:07, 26 May 2006 (PDT)

Island is an ongoing social experiment

how can the numbers be unexplained in the context of a social experiment? they act as something otherwise without meaning or use (an neutral stimulus?). they would be useful if putting the numbers in is a kind of conformity experiment (not -unlikely) should it be removed as a con? (Mikey 18:22, 16 May 2006 (PDT))


I am heading towards the Douglas Adam's -esque theory of how the show develops.

Every time someone comes close to the current intent and direction of the show or any of its elements... they change it to something else.

Well probably more accurate is my thought that they feed you so little you invent the connections and reasons and make the leaps that only the mass cluster of minds, that is the internet, can make. Then the producers collate and derive the overall structure of the show from that. So they use us to create the shows mythos and also avoid and change direction on somethings that they started to keep us firing and coming up with new ideas.



Yeah, probably making it up as they go. There's some structure though, they probably have a general season-by-season plan on what's supposed to happen, and then fill the in-betweens with 'whatever-material'. --skks 03:16, 23 March 2006 (PST)

Actually, I'm not even sure that they have a master plan or anything to explain it all nor am I sure they ever will have. In a sense, I don't see the point doing any "macro-theorizing" as it serves no purpose, the writers don't have a global theory that explains everything, why should we? I suppose they can always leave it as a question when the series ends, wouldn't be the first time. This is ofcourse 100% IMHO-material. --skks 12:37, 24 March 2006 (PST)

Actually I think Javi has said that they do know how the series is going to end and all the major things that happen along the way. In the interview I read with him (on the Fuselage, I think) he likened it to a cross-country road trip; you know where you started, where you'll eventually end up, and most of the major sights you want to see along the way. The only question is how much you meander between spots. :) --Jmast7 08:01, 7 April 2006 (PDT)

A lot on the island works with artificially generated fear

I support this theory, one of the Green Lanterns (Walts Comic Book) many enemies is Nekron, the Fear Parasite, who would subject his victims to a mysterious gas which would suddenly make them experience visions of their own deaths.

Kate remembers the crash

In the article under "The Survivors are the last remnants of humanity:Pros", a fan writes, "Nobody has a recollection of the actual crash". This isn't true. In the Pilot, Kate tells Jack that she remembers the whole crash. --Carl

Additionally, the tailenders remember the crash --kaini 09:06, 12 April 2006 (PDT)
Furthermore, oxygen deprevation could account for the lack of memory by most. LOSTonthisdarnisland 00:48, 11 May 2006 (PDT)

The crash wasn't that bad

In the article under "The Survivors are the last remnants of humanity:Pros", a fan writes, "There are a lot of survivors for a crash that bad". That may not be true either since the plane survived without being obliterated, which may be evidence that the plane was brought down and didn't actually crash. See Oceanic Flight 815. --Carl

Well - the crash broke the Plane in at least 3 parts. If you watch the news, crashes like that usually end up with many deaths. So it is quite likely that the crash was either faked or the plane was brought down controlled (in each case we have quite a lot of casualties for something that was supposed to happen). --aurora glacialis 09:55, 7 April 2006 (PDT)

Excellent point, but then I think we're really defining 'bad'. A plane that comes down tens of thousands of feet like that and doesn't kill everyone is pretty good in my book. Heh. Even if it was a planned plane-grab. Perhaps changing the text from "There are a lot of survivors for a crash that bad" to "There are a lot of survivors for a plane crash" is closer to what I'm thinking. I'm certainly not saying it isn't true. --Carl

Except that Kate said in Pilot, Part 1 that she saw everything that happened, and we saw the crash in The Other 48 Days. --Amberjet11 09:34, 22 May 2006 (PDT)

Tempest Theory Comments

Please add comments on the tempest theory here... It is a combination of a few old theories brought together with some of the new information from series 2.--Rufus 03:07, 12 April 2006 (PDT)

As Hurley might say: "Dude! What were you smoking?" -- LOSTonthisdarnisland 03:47, 15 May 2006 (PDT)

Moonraker Theory

I'd like to add this theory, but it isn't as well thought-out for inclusion in the main article yet. IMHO. If at all possible, I'd like to use this area to collect ideas before moving this to the main article. (Also, I'm at work, so I can't spend too much time on this at the moment. Heh.)

This is the basis from Moonraker (film): Draco collects the finest specimens of humanity and plans to park their asses in a space station so he can release a bio-weapon on Earth that will preserve all life, but will kill all human beings. Once the weapon safely wears off, Draco and his 'perfect' people will return to Earth to begin a new utopia.

My theory is based on that. In some way is one of Dharma's goals to get the 'good' people and get them to this secluded island so that "something" may be done to the civilized world? Perhaps 'good' doesn't mean physically or spiritually good, but intelligent? Believing intelligent people 'good' and calling them so, isn't too much of a reach when you consider the incredible hubris the Others have, or at least hubris for their project. They'll kill for it, after all...

  • Desmond may have been in training to be a part of the program. Perhaps he was approached by Dharma and "Racing around the world" is a cover story to tell people who aren't in the know?

Any other ideas? --Carl

The Nordic connection

I'm scratching my head at all these Nordic "connections" in the The-Survivors-are-the-last-remnants-of-humanity-theory. What does Narvik, a "Norwegian" plane, the Nobel peace price and Alfred Nobel got to do with this theory?

And this "The music Sayid and Hurley picked up acutally could be radio signals sent from earth" thing... Isn't it implied in the theory that the islanders DOES live on our mother earth?

Anyway, I just don't get all the Nordic-related bullets; they can't possibly be related to the theory in question! --Jambalaya 11:47, 2 May 2006 (PDT)

New Theory

I read a compelling theory that the Others are Hanso workers who have discovered the secret to immortality (or at least extended life) at a cost: they are infertile and maybe a bit crazy. This would explain why they want children, and "good" people, while killing the bad ones. They wouldn't want "bad" people to be in their eternal utopian society. Also, it would explain the sickness making Rousseau's crew crazy so she killed them. It does not explain the security system, and still has a few details to be hashed out, but I find it to be the most compelling theory.

Where's the pink bunny theory?

I know, ridiculous and farfetched at best, but it really gives closure to the article, a nice ending to illustrate the myriad of possibilities. Pink Bunny, return!!! †††GodEmperorOfHell††† --07:34, 16 May 2006 (PDT)

I demand a theory involving the invisible pink unicorn, blessed be her holy hooves! She is the answer to all of the questions! --skks 08:48, 16 May 2006 (PDT)

Cleaned up

This page was nominated for cleanup. That should just about do it... XSG 19:36, 26 May 2006 (PDT)

How do I add a new Theory?

I have a good theory involving how the Island truly acts on a global scale. How do I post it? Skrip00 18:54, 30 May 2006 (PDT)

A Theory that could explain a lot of facts.

i`m not english native. for this, if you could translate this in a better quality english, i`ll very grateful to you:

The island has knowed in the past by Hanso family (slaves traficants with the Black Rock ship). The island has an unique magnetism characteristics that could be unoperate a compass near of it. Black Rock is the name of the magnetite, the mineral with magnetism properties, and maybe the name of the ship was taken from the real black-rock of the island. The island was utilized like a hiding place, because the imposibility to find it by normal compass. In 70s, Dharma initiative was a real good intentioned scientific experience of meteorology, zoology, magnetism, etc... but financied for Alvar Hanso, who knows by his family the characteristics of the island, and a lof of progress in so many orders, really happened. Maybe financieted with military purpouses (70s and cold war), in the island there were discovererd one thing: the posibility of read the minds, storage this information, and fill with it other mind... and making this with a child is like a born again... for this in the dharma initiative there was a break in the lineup: some people taked the control to his own purpouses, and for for this they want childs: to get a "new life extention" filling with the "mind info" the child mind.. how they could get the info? well... everybody saw how the black smoke has always a relation with the images of the past of the people with it confronts (eko, locke)... This is a part of the zoology experiments, to know the animals of the island and the feelings of its, but now controlled with other purpouses by the others. all the island has a power provided by the magnetism of the black-rock (the mineral) and some kind of electric-potentiation of it with a control-hatch (the swan) and this is the only one station still operational by the others: they need to has one guy in the station pushing the button to avoid the island be founded by outside people. they didn`t do it, because something related to the vaccine (mrs. klugh said they couldn`t go there; and desmond said every time he walk near to the closed door have pain in all the body; anybody has this pain, this could be a iron-properties-vaccine). actually the island (or group of islands, maybe there are two or more) are controlled by people of corrupted ex-dharma employed, to his own use of the scientific advances in life extention. and..... who do you think is "him"? well, of course: Him is a guy with a lot of experience, a lot of years, but a new body: of course he is Walt. And the end of the series, michael will kill him, walt, who is not his son, or at least, is the body of his son, but is other guy.

.......sounds too crazy? any questions?

The Nuclear Theory

This Theory came to me in a dream, so bear with me here.

The Hanso foundation was originally started during the end of the cold war, and was inadvertently shoved into the new nuclear crisis. Seeing the huge profit and gain from a possible new market of nuclear weaponry to countries that did not have significant resources to manufacture their own, Alvar Hanso pushed toward developing these weapons. The Hanso Foundation, wishing to remain apart from the development of these illegal weapons, funded a small scientific community, known as the DHARMA Initiative, to perform experiments that would benefit “some of the Hanso Foundation’s other projects”. The real nature of these experiments was unknown to the DHARMA workers, but each one work toward developing a new, more efficient nuclear weapon. Because of legal issues, the Hanso Foundation used satellite photos to discover a previously uncharted island, therefore enabling them to bypass legal boundaries. Each experiment was kept apart, because any scientist with half a brain could easily take one look at only a few of the station’s projects and realize the overall purpose. This way people at each station had no knowledge of the other station’s activities, keeping the true purpose anonymous. Each station had a very valuable purpose. For example, the Swan studied electromagnetism. In atomic bombs, electromagnetism is needed to control the neutrons that start the fission process. Also, EMPs (Electromagnetic Pulses) are needed to start the blast. The Hanso Foundation created the Pearl to monitor the DHARMA workers, and put Hanso employees in the station, so they would know the reason for the experiments and what each was responsible for. However, the DHARMA workers soon found out the true nature of the experiments and rebelled. The Hanso foundation shut off all travel to and from the island. They then sent in a small military force, hired by Hanso, to remove the rebels before they could alert to outside world of the Hanso foundation’s activities. In an attempt to repel these attackers, the rebels tried to create a atomic bomb from their resources. The attempt was partially successful, ending with a dirty bomb that did repel the attackers, but spread radiation all over the island, causing widespread radiation sickness. The Hanso Foundation was able to sneak in workers to the Swan and Arrow stations, and knowing about the radiation sickness, put quarantine signs on the doors. The rebels, now know to the foundation as hostiles, found and took over the Arrow station, but were unable to capture the swan. The Hanso Foundation also put people with no knowledge of the experiments in the pearl to monitor the rebels. Soon, the rebels had disconnected their cameras, so they could not be monitored. This is where the Losties came in.

Removed the delete template...

Because this is a very good start point. It might be moved to Portal:Fan Theories. but this is a keeper. WHERE THE HELL IS THE PINK BUNNY THEORY?????--†††GodEmperorOfHell††† 21:03, 26 July 2006 (PDT)

Total rewrite

I rewrote the page to discuss interpetation of the show and to introduce a few theories as examples, rather than just (incompletely) list them. THe writing is a little rough at this point and I haven't checked my grammar yet. Also, I doubt this page needs a TOC.

If you think a particular theory should be mentioned, I guess go ahead and write it in, but we don't even an introduction to every theory on this page. Rather, something to introduce the different flavors and then an interested reader can browse through them with the nav box. --Scottkj 12:13, 28 July 2006 (PDT)

Okay, nice, but... why not list the theories in their respective sections (as well) rather than forcing people to check two different places for content? I'm making that change now. XSG 13:14, 28 July 2006 (PDT)

Well, I see how you did this with a template, so I've made the template the primary content and the category of the template is now a link to the Fan Theories page description of what those theories are. I think this works better, now. XSG 13:20, 28 July 2006 (PDT)

Good facelift for the theory page. It would also be nice to see how the readers rate each theory in terms of their credibility. On-site polling systems are of course liable to serious abuse but some sort of plausibility comparison could still increase the popularity of the theory segment. As an alternative, or an addition, to creating a typology for the theories like the present one (realist, ontological, literary, etc.), the theories could be listed according to credibility by vote. --LilWabbit 13:50, 28 July 2006 (PDT)

I think a poll for credibility will result in two categories: credible and not credible. It'd take a bayesian scale with many voters (more than we'll get) in order to fairly compare levels of credibility. Because new information is constantly being provided, credibility can only be fairly gauged for votes made after the most recent revelation has been made. Because of this, I'd like to just stick with the way things are, for now. XSG 14:40, 28 July 2006 (PDT)
Yeah, I'd love to have some indication of credibility, but it's hard to gauge. I wouldn't consider myself much of an expert on the subject, so it's tough to say -- beyond that purgatory was really popular. Also tantalizing is that even if we could measure the most credible theory, it isn't nessasarily the most true theory. If we had a clear indication of credibility, it might influence people to think of it as an indication of truth. Considering that many of the theories on this page have been debunked in some way or another, I think fan theories are more for fun than profit. --Scottkj 21:39, 30 July 2006 (PDT)
Yup, credibility does not equal truth. However, and all the more, a credibility poll is more fun than profit in my book. What could be more fun than a theory rated as the most credible winding up entirely debunked by the new facts that keep unfolding in the upcoming seasons. That is to say, as long as the new facts are not made up along the way (which Matthew Fox in his interview revealed not to be the case for the most part). --LilWabbit 03:55, 31 July 2006 (PDT)

The Seventh Seal Theory

Who has the time and the energy to put this amazing theory on Lostpedia? I'm sorry I haven't but it should be here somewhere, i think. --Jord 16:16, 29 July 2006 (PDT)

Talk about a complicated theory. The oddest bit for me was drawing from the New York power grid. --Scottkj 20:27, 2 August 2006 (PDT)

Featured star placement help

Can someone make the featured star justified on the same line with the title header? It's curently above the omnipresent "Lostpedia in the following languages" box and looks a little goofy. Thanks. --Scottkj 22:32, 30 August 2006 (PDT)

Removal of Parody Theories

Nominations for Deletion

DELETE: We aren't here to create comedy, we are here to log the facts of LOST. If there is a widely accepted fan parody out there then fine, but we aren't here to be the centre of it, creating the content as we see fit. If you want to create parodies, then you can make a site and put them up there (I recommend Google Pages). We are an encyclopedia of LOST, not a comedy site!!! GRRR!!! --plkrtn 11:00, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Keep (for most, not all)I noticed plk went through all the parody theories and nominated for deletion. Here are my thoughts on this. I see his point... but at the same time, I think the Theories category in general produces this question. How much original lostpedia content do we, as editors produce? What is worth keeping as fanon, which originated on lostpedia? I think I am somewhat biased because I made and/or adapted (from other people, other parts of the Lost online community) several of those parody theories, for fun, because I think we as lost fans should have a sense of humor; and also, because I was following the example of "silly" theories already there, like "Pink Bunny". I don't find their place any less valid than "Nine Men" theory, which I've never heard outside of lostpedia. To me, a serious theory deserves existance on lostpedia if it is logical, and a parody theory if it is funny; and both, should be well-written/understandable and fleshed out. However, this is highly subjective, and I think I am biased, especially having started editing this summer... and I would defer judgement to more senior members of the community, who are more familiar with the "culture" of lostpedia, and where they want to take it. I think there is a danger of going overboard with things that we personally think are funny (but others don't), so I understand plk's concerns. --PandoraX 11:03, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I have started a discussion with the other SysOps regarding this, so a senior decision will be made soon enough I would have thought! :) --plkrtn 11:12, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Keep: I understand some are stupid, but if others are widely discussed parodies amongst fans, they should thus stay in my opinion, as we cater for fan-made stuff as well, like nicknames we on the boards give characters. Therefore, some should definitely stay but I agree some like the Star Wars theory are just ridiculous --Nickb123 (Talk) 11:07, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Then we need consensus on which are well known fan theories, and each one should be linked to places like The Fuselage, to be able to determine which stay and which go. We seem to be encouraging more and more being created without any kind of quality control --plkrtn 11:10, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
The problem, I guess with this is that "well known" is tough to quantify, and depends on where you are coming from. For example, there are few who frequent LostTV forums that haven't heard of "Bald Limp Guy", our resident inside joke, but I doubt anyone outside would have... same goes for "Box", which is the inside joke at Lostpedia. I personally think it should be more about quality control (which is subjective)... and should be applied category wide, to all theories within the "Fan Theories" section; either that, or not have the category. It's a tough decision to make. --PandoraX 11:19, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
If your going to vote keep, please put a valid reason else we may as well pay no attention to it. --plkrtn 11:49, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

I just do not understand what relevance to LOST any of these fan created parodies are! And we wonder why we can't get ourselves on Wikipedia! I honestly think if you want to create comedy parodies, there is a place for it... the forums --plkrtn 12:05, 5 September 2006 (PDT)

Well we are a community at the end of the day, we have a laugh with contests and stuff. Parodies are just the fun side we have, we can't keep 100% serious when the premise of Lost itself is quite a laughable one that is always mocked in the press --Nickb123 (Talk) 12:08, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
  • Keep (the few well written ones, lose the rest) - A little self-parody is healthy. It helps us keep our perspective. Too much irrelevant content is a waste. A much bigger threat to this site being taken seriously is when users copy huge chunks of irrelevant material from Wikipedia or other sources and post it here. --Doc 12:47, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
Very much agreed, Doc. I am not sure what exactly the drama is about over lostpedia's inclusion or exclusion from wikipedia, but I think that has to do more with their consistency of including fan wikis. I cannot agree with the idea that lostpedia is "failing" at all. I frequent 6 online communities as an active member, and you cannot turn without hearing unsolicited praise and admiration for lostpedia as being THE source for info, including official or pop culture sources like Entertainment Weekly and Javi himself on The Fuselage. --PandoraX 12:53, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
If the parodies keep building up like they are, we won't be THE source for info anymore! We'll be laughed at --plkrtn 12:55, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
for gods sake its an insignificant part of the site! It doesn't affect our status for information at all, just shows we're not boring all the time and actually have a sense of humour considering we run such an in-depth geeky site! --Nickb123 (Talk) 12:57, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
  • Keep: Theres nothing wrong with funny parody theories, but its the others that are a problem. I say we have a vote on which parodies should be deleted, and which ones should be kept in one, structured page. --Phmall 13:49, 5 September 2006 (PDT)
  • Keep: I think it is a dangerous trend to start deleting content just because we don't like it. I feel as long as a parody theory is thought out, not just a few sentences, and is not malicious or offensive, then it should stay. Also, making it into wikipedia should not be considered the standard to judge popularity. It's the equivalent of a garage band thinking they've "made it" because they get a gig at the popular watering hole. While the whole wikimedia idea is a great one, allowing users the ability edit content allows for constant updating, however there is also a flipside, anyone can edit content, any way they feel like it, which can lead to a lot of misinformation. Honestly, when it comes to research, wikipedia is laughable. It maybe a place to start but it's not the end all, be all resource. Most college professors won't even accept wikipedia as a valid resource for research papers. What makes Lostpedia great is not just the Lost information that is constantly updated and quality checked by the tireless SysOps but also the great sense of community. We can't take this too serious. If we just wanted facts then we could go visit the ABC website. Lostpedia is more than just a collection of Lost trivia. Trust me, if you want to be taken seriously as a resource, having a few goofy parody theories won't damage Lostpedia's credibly as much as publicly bickering over small amounts of content.--scocub
Its not about whether someone likes it or not. Its about quality control. We could have 2000 articles on here, but if 1000 of them end up as parody theories we'd look stupid. A few goofy parodies is fine, but a lot of them lack quality, and a lot of them are just painfully bad. Getting on Wikipedia is all about getting recognition from a large user base, and isn't anything to our "quality" as Wikipedia at times, is a load of crud. I've reorganised the theory parodies so they are clearly marked and attributed, but I do think there are times when some of these articles, The Star Wars one in particular, is an of comedy theories stretched too far, personally. --plkrtn 14:04, 6 September 2006 (PDT)
I am in agreement that Lostpedia shouldn't be clogged with goofy theories however, there are currently over 1350 articles and only 10 of those are parody theories I would venture to say that less than 1% is not a threat to Lostpedia's credibility. I would say that the Theory Policy page section titled "Keep Humor Where it Belongs" is quite clear on the guidelines for parody theories. Adding humor to articles "just to be funny" is not particularly helpful and will most likely be seen as a nuissance or worse, as vandalism. also see all parodies as well as articles on parodies must be marked as a parody. these lines are directly from that section and spell it out plainly. I believe if the general consense is that a parody theory does not meet the established guidelines then it should be a canidate for deletion. Nobody wants a bunch of 3 sentences parodies taking up space. So I agree that Lostpedia is first a resource, but lets make it fun too.--scocub

Relocation of Parodies

Here is a suggestion. This page is supposedly about the interpetation of the show, and whilst satire is loosely a form of interpetation AND artistic commentary, too much exceeds the friendly allowance permittable here. Let's move all of the parody theories to a separate page, integrated into our existing documentation of external (non-Lostpedia) parodies and LOST-related humor. The "parodies" section of the Fan Theories template will be eliminated. Then we'll have a link to new parodies page (under the miscellaneous section) called "Parodies" or something similar so users can still navigate to those pages from here. I would like to resume the serious documentation of LOST theories and this discussion (and the resulting page locks) is becoming a major pain.

My advice regarding the parodies, once moved

Keep, provisionally: It's clear that parody has a legitimate place on Lostpedia, per our theory policy. I would evaluate the quality of each entry on a case-by-case basis and then make reccomendations for deletion, further editing, etc. -- just as is done with the serious theories documented on this page. I would argue that the more literary or sophisticated parodies can be included splendidly. Those with deference to purely random humor are more suspect. --Scottkj 17:51, 9 September 2006 (PDT)


Locking the article page is not helpful to those interested in editing, parody discussion aside. Will a sysop please remove? --Scottkj 23:46, 9 September 2006 (PDT)

Projection Theory

I was looking for information on the following theory, but I can't find anything here... The Island is marked as quarantined. Rousseau noted that everyone in her crew got "sick" - which could be true. So, the Dharma people can't actually visit the island. They have to project themselves to the island. They got more than they bargained for with Walt - he projected himself repeatedly when he wasn't supposed to be doing so. He was always wet - perhaps he was projecting while in the tub or shower. I've seen comments about projection experiments on other chat pages, but nothing here. Kainaw 19:00, 13 September 2006 (PDT)


May I suggest that this page be present somewhere in the Main Page? It's very nice and could work as a "portal" for all theories on Lostpedia.--EvilSmoke 15:40, 20 November 2006 (PST)

I would also like to suggest to include in this page the following links to popular theory pages:

--EvilSmoke 15:44, 20 November 2006 (PST)

  • Yes I would afree with your idea there, so long as the page was expanded slightly, with a little more work though difinitely yes.

Sounds like a good idea. --Princess Dharma (banned) 13:05, 2 February 2007 (PST)

Bohemian Rhapsody

Watching Lost Rhapsody, it struck me that there are several similarities between the song and the storyline. Now, I can't remember the full timeline, so it may not be in the right order, but here are some highlights:

  • "Is this the real life, is this just fantasy" - corresponds to theories that the island is not real
  • "Caught in a landslide" - the rockslide in the caves
  • "Open your eyes" - Eye closeups
  • "Anyway the wind blows" - Arzt talking about wind changing
  • "Mama, just killed a man" etc - various people killing each other throughout series one and two
  • "If I'm not back again this time tomorrow" - Leaving on the raft/Michael going to rescue Walt and being captured
  • "Sends shivers down my spine" - Ben's spinal tumour/Jack's job
  • "Thunderbolt and lightning-very very frightening" - Lightning rod made by Desmond
  • "Spare him his life from this monstrosity" - The monster
  • "Will not let you go" etc - Jack's problem

Well, it made me smile if nothing else.

Vile Verticies

Has anyone else came across this uber-cool theory? I reckon it deserves a place on Lostpedia. Princess Dharma (banned)

I'll explain it to you folks. I asume you've all heard of the Bermuda Triangle. Well it is on of these vile verticies and they are scattered all over the globe. (I'll find a map soon). One is in the arctic where the polar bears must've come from; one is in the atlantic where the Black Rock would've come from; one is right over the sahara where the drug smugglers plane came from and one is near Figi where Flight 815 vanished. This is my favourite theory, it doesn't explain everything but it gives a posible location of the island (in a different dimension) and an origin of many of the odd array of transport on the island. --Princess Dharma (banned),11:31, 2 February 2007 (PST)

I've put up a new page for the Vile Vortices (theory) - please add to nav box -Kivipat19:42, 8 February 2007 (PST)

New theory?

OK, so I've got a new theory I'm still hashing out, but I'm wondering how to create a new page and link it up to Fan Theories, specifically "Realist". Any tips/help? - mr_tee_canada

Just give me the title and I can add it to the Theories table for you. Have a look at some other realist theory pages first to get the feel and structure of them. --Blueeagleislander 21:03, 10 February 2007 (PST)
Hi. Could you add my theory Fictional Lives (Theory) with the title Fictional Lives under Realistic Theories section please aykut 05:02, 27 March 2007 (PDT)
Seems to be classified as psychological to me. --Scottkj 20:53, 27 March 2007 (PDT)
OK, It's not problem for me. But how can I add it under Theories category?
The page is protected, so you'll have to convince a sysop that it's a quality theory. --Scottkj 08:56, 28 March 2007 (PDT)

The Others and the Original Island People: A Mental Backup Theory

some facts: juliet said to jack: "doesn´t matters who we was; the important is who we are"; juliet has two very different attitude: one in his past life, and another in the island; etc..etc. like this there are a lot of facts (i don´t want post a very long entry):

- the others are the original island people, living in the body of the dharma cientifics. what? ok: let me explain:

- the "islanders" had a great own lifestyle, with own gods, believes, etc; and they wasn´t friendly with dharma people, because they destroyed the island with the constructions, the stations, etc.

- then, there was a local "war" between they.

- some dharma experiment was the "security system": it was a cientific-technologic creation that could make a recreation of objects (like walt on the jungle, kate´s horse, birds, etc)

- the smoke is a part of this "thing", but it could read the minds and get information of it (remember eko´s vision thru the smoke; locke)

- a virus infected the local people, and killed lot of them. the dharma people had the own vaccines to avoid the illness

- the local people got the control of the station where the black smoke system was controlled, and USED IT TO MAKE A RE-BIRTH OF THEM IN THE BODY OF SOME DHARMA CIENTIFICS, allowed with the back-up of the all-mind-memories-feelings-entire-lives, maked with the system.


- this "change" of body has some problem: now, all of they are sterile

- they are building again the statue of his own god (the four finger feet statue): this is the construction that kate and sawyer were forced to build; it was destroyed in the "war" with the dharma people

- for this, the dharma people called "hostiles" some group of people; for this they called ex-militars to joined, like kelvin.

Is This A New or Old Theory?

Nietzsche versus Kierkegaard

I recently read this article by Jeff "Doc" Jensen which I must admit went over my head a bit. We've all known for some time that many of the characters in Lost have names which have been attributed to historical philosophers. Most of us have presumed until now that this was done as a sort of tribute on behalf of the writers, but beyond that had no notable significance. Surely these are not the reincarnated souls of these historical figures. John Locke isn't THAT John Locke. Danielle Rousseau isn't even the right gender to be Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Jack Shepherd isn't actually the personification of the Christian savior. It's just a name. It's just a tip of the hat to various belief structures. The writers are acknowledging where humanity has traversed and where the series is starting from, creatively speaking. Jensen seems to be suggesting something deeper; that the writers are literally building a storyscape from the building blocks of philosophical thought, personifying the concepts of great thinkers like Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and others. The thought processes behind Man of Science Man of Faith. I've looked through the list of theories already in this wiki. I can't see that Jensen's ideas or others like it have been traversed before in here. Not even sure how this explains the show, or how to incorporate the pieces Jensen puts together into a working theory. Are these characters not 'real'? I mean obviously they're not real but perhaps even in the sense of the series itself. Were they made up? If you look at stills from Ben's home office, there's reference books for writers. Perhaps Benjamin Linus is the only 'real' flesh and blood individual in context of the series. Maybe he's "The Last Man." All these other people are constructs in his mind, philosophical memes playing out a scenario of his choosing. Or maybe there is no answer - we'll never know if Flash or Superman was faster (Barry Allen WAS faster but it was never canonically resolved in the comics). Some stories simply don't have a suitable ending. Sometimes writers just never conveniently wrap everything up for us. I just fear this is going to go the way of The Prisoner. Great start, but ended not with a bang but a WTF. -- ZachsMind

Television Show (Truman Show)

what if lost was a tv show? i mean if Jacob contrived everything on the island just to mess with people's heads and somewhere out there, people are watching 'lost' on tv? kind of like the truman show but more sadistic. -- platypusrex april 20, 2007 (happy 420!)

Alternate Reality, Locke, and other mysteries...

I'm thinking that the survivors are all in an alternate universe, therefore explaining why Naomi said that the survivors were all dead. So when they crashed, they crashed on the island, but in the real reality they died. Just part of the Island's powers. Either that or the Hanso Foundation has been controlling the media, and projecting that the survivors have died. On to Locke. As we see in The Man Behind the Curtain, Locke was shot in the chest. Well, I think that some of the hostiles/others have been dead for quite sometime now, including Richard Alpert (which would explain why it seems that he does not age) and by Ben shooting Locke, he is making him a part of the hostiles/others. This also would explain why Richard seems to come out of nowhere... Creepy. --Chef855 21:07, 10 May 2007 (PDT)

New Theory

I can't actually add it to the template, but I'll post it here - it's a "realist" take on what happened to Radzinsky, based on already-circulating ideas, but with an explanation for why Kelvin was brought in: Radzinsky Cons Kelvin -HeckYes 19:18, 24 January 2008 (PST)

Island Theory

The island may not be an actual island, rather some sort of mechanical station which was built, or placed in the ocean. We all know that it can be moved, has several stations within it, can heal people, and has a security system. So why is it a built station and not an island? Because of the influence it has on people inhabiting it. As a logical human, I would say seeing dead people makes you delusional - but this is Lost so I think that some sort of telekinetic, artificially intelligent computer named Jacob taps into people's heads to ensure its purity and survival. Also, I heard a question that asked why, when Ben has to blow a hole in the time machine station to find the place to move the island; my theory is that whenever the island is moved, it repairs the parts of itself damaged, sort of like resetting itself, and keeps anything on top of it while in the place it was in; and the island uses wormholes to move around. Also, the island can't be seen or found by people is because it is using some sort of cloaking device which makes it semi-phased out of regular time, which would explain the time difference, and Des' "doing the Time Warp again."

Possible Theory

I was thinking yesterday about a possible theory, now this will not really explain much and is probably just a footnote that could be thrown in somewhere. So, what if the flashbacks were just what the characters remember or want to see? If you have gone anywhere today, like the grocery or the coffee shop, think...can you remember everything about it? You probably can't, but you can remember significant details and kind of just throw some extra stuff in there just to fill in the blanks, this could be the same for characters on Lost. For example, Hurley did not remember seeing Libby at the mental institution because she was a minor detail. Libby remembers Hurley though because...well Hurley is big and noticeable. Also, if you try hard enough to think that something is not there or something is there you can create the illusion that an object, person, whatever is or is not there.
Just thought I would try and throw in my 2 cents. Does that make sense to anyone?--Jinx 17:00, 5 June 2008 (PDT)


For some reason, this page shows up in the list Uncategorized pages, but it is locked. Can somebody categorize it in the right way? --LOST-Hunter61 12:57, January 30, 2010 (UTC)

Moved Goal Posts (theory)

My theory is that starting with the title "Lost", the writers always intended to move the goal posts of where the show was heading. The writers would actively follow the fan's concepts of the final destination of the show and purposely move the goal post to the realm of another theory. This would make Lost a TV show co-evolved with the group of fans. They purposely left clues to support alternate theories to keep the fan base lost and confused. (The fans loved it). Because so many diverse clues and side streets were laid the early science-only theories were mostly doomed to failure (virtual reality is still possible) and more supernatural theories would come to popularity. The supernatural and psychic concepts were also highly popular amongst the fans so they were brought to the fore. This means that a large number of fan theories could eventually end up as right because of the flexibility of the writing and the fact the final was not written on day one. The concept to keep the fan base guessing and lost was the prime directive. Alatari 04:18, May 19, 2010 (UTC)

I need a hand at setting up and tying in a new Moving the Goal Posts (theory) page, please. Alatari 04:18, May 19, 2010 (UTC)


I'd have a go at rewriting this article, but it's currently locked. --- Balk Of Fametalk 16:57, July 8, 2011 (UTC)


I'm going to try rewriting this article from scratch, starting today or tomorrow. Whoever wrote it in its current form did an excellent job of categorizing the dozen of so theories that had their own Lostpedia pages. But those theories have no overall significance, and we have deleted most of them.

The new article will be more of a historical reference page. It will take some content from the debunked theories page, and I actually suggest we merge the two. As I said on that page, "debunked theories," despite its name, isn't about debunked theories, which number in the thousands. It's about acknowledged theories, which I think deserve a mention on any theory article. --- Balk Of Fametalk 07:09, February 9, 2012 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC BY-NC-ND unless otherwise noted.