At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared • Hacker News Board

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#21

Post by jasonlotito » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:36 PM UTC

walletdrainer wrote: post #11

Zigurd wrote: post #8

Color me skeptical. Whenever I see this come up in a social media feed it's a UFO influencer. It's leaked out into the legacy news presenters who have great haircuts and no critical thinking skills.

Same legacy news presenters which have a track record of pushing UFO conspiracy theories? CNN was one of the biggest pushers of this hoax: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_drone_sight...

> The FBI now says it “is spearheading the effort to look for connections into the missing and deceased scientists,” adding that it “is working with the Department of Energy, Department of War, and with our state … and local law enforcement partners to find answers.”

> Separately, the Republican-led House Oversight Committee announced Monday it will investigate ...

So, do we not want the news reporting what the government is doing? That's the FBI, DoE, DoD, and the House Oversight Committee putting effort into this.

Like, no, i want this reported, not because there is anything that will come from it, but because we should report one what the government is doing.

Why do you think CNN should NOT report one what the government does?

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#22

Post by jasonlotito » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:39 PM UTC

walletdrainer wrote: post #17

hrldcpr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair to CNN, this article is about an FBI investigation.

It’s sanewashing.

4 separate government agencies are putting time and effort into something.

The headline is accurate. The reporting is accurate.

Should CNN not report what the government is doing?

Or are you confused and assume that the investigation has returned and finding? Or maybe, we should highlight the things the government is doing.

Why do you find what the article is saying sane?

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#23

Post by OutOfHere » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:39 PM UTC

jdw64 wrote: post #20

I think this is a case of flawed human pattern recognition. Even in the article, it lumps everything together as “in recent years,” but over the span of several years, people across a large country can die for all sorts of unrelated reasons. That’s just how basic mortality statistics work. Also, the category “scientists” is far too broad. Unless we’re talking about the same organization, the same field of research, a…

They have a distinct commonality of nuclear research. As such, is the limitation in pattern recognition not yours? If you are overlooking it, you are suppressing it, and are a a part of the conspiracy.

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#24

Post by HauntingPin » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:39 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #19

HauntingPin wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CNN is basically on the same level as Fox News now. I'm not surprised. Here's a more substantial take on the whole thing that doesn't just blindly repeat everything without question: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/2026/04/missing-scientis... You know, what journalism is actually supposed to be like. This BBC article https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyw9rpdl4po also has this tidbit: > "The US Top Secret-cleared…

If you are going to rudely link to a paywalled articles without an unpaywalled link to read each, then people can't be motivated to read them.

I guess being an asshole is just the standard now on HN? How is this attitude acceptable? What did I do to you? I didn't even realize it was paywalled until you mentioned it. But don't let that stop you from being a dick to somebody who's just trying to help fight misinformation. I guess I'll just go fuck myself.

But here, your paywall free link: https://archive.is/KNECz

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#25

Post by jdw64 » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:44 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #23

jdw64 wrote: post #20

I think this is a case of flawed human pattern recognition. Even in the article, it lumps everything together as “in recent years,” but over the span of several years, people across a large country can die for all sorts of unrelated reasons. That’s just how basic mortality statistics work. Also, the category “scientists” is far too broad. Unless we’re talking about the same organization, the same field of research, a…

They have a distinct commonality of nuclear research. As such, is the limitation in pattern recognition not yours? If you are overlooking it, you are suppressing it, and are a a part of the conspiracy.

From what I’ve looked up, the range is actually quite broad from astrophysics to aerospace to administrative roles.

Here are the individuals mentioned:

* Michael David Hicks (JPL, comets/asteroids research) * Frank Maiwald (space research / JPL) * Monica Reza (aerospace engineer, JPL) * Nuno F.G. Loureiro (MIT, nuclear science and fusion) * Carl Grillmair (Caltech astrophysicist) * William Neil McCasland (Air Force, aerospace research) * Melissa Casias (Los Alamos National Laboratory, administrative role) * Anthony Chavez (Los Alamos, construction foreman)

I’m not sure what standard is being used to claim a meaningful connection here. The category seems extremely broad.

And the idea that “if you question it, you’re part of the conspiracy” is pretty convenient reasoning.

Honestly, I’d love to be part of some shadow organization secretly running the United States from behind the scenes — do you think they’re accepting applications?

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#26

Post by mikeyouse » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:46 PM UTC

baq wrote: post #9

Zigurd wrote: post #8

Color me skeptical. Whenever I see this come up in a social media feed it's a UFO influencer. It's leaked out into the legacy news presenters who have great haircuts and no critical thinking skills.

[flagged]

Michael Hastings was on DMT, smoking weed, and having a manic episode. His family was so worried about his erratic behavior that his brother had flown out to try to get him to check into rehab.. His brother met with Michael the day before he died and realized he was going to need more help, so he called his other brother to fly to LA to try to convince Michael to go to rehab or check into an inpatient psych ward. Michael snuck out in the middle of the night while they were waiting for their other brother and crashed his car into a tree.

In his brother's own words, "I really rule out foul play entirely. I might have been suspicious if I hadn't been with him the day before he died. After all, he definitely was investigating and writing about a lot of sensitive subjects. But based on being with him and talking to people who were worried about him in the weeks leading up to his death, and being around him when he had had similar problems when he was younger, I was pretty much convinced that he wasn't in danger from any outside agency."

It's an exceptionally dumb conspiracy theory among many other exceptionally dumb ones.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/michael-hastings-interview_b_...

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#27

Post by OutOfHere » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:48 PM UTC

jdw64 wrote: post #25

OutOfHere wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have a distinct commonality of nuclear research. As such, is the limitation in pattern recognition not yours? If you are overlooking it, you are suppressing it, and are a a part of the conspiracy.

From what I’ve looked up, the range is actually quite broad from astrophysics to aerospace to administrative roles. Here are the individuals mentioned: * Michael David Hicks (JPL, comets/asteroids research) * Frank Maiwald (space research / JPL) * Monica Reza (aerospace engineer, JPL) * Nuno F.G. Loureiro (MIT, nuclear science and fusion) * Carl Grillmair (Caltech astrophysicist) * William Neil McCasland (Air Force,…

[flagged]

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#28

Post by shoubidouwah » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:52 PM UTC

Nice writeup on the whole thing basically being hyped politically with actual nothing behind it https://unherd.com/2026/04/behind-the-disappearing-scientist...

Also ~10 in a year, modal age of established scientists + collaboration with us gov, the background rate is basically that... Basically a conspiracy theory at that point, and not even a good one.

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#29

Post by jdw64 » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:53 PM UTC

OutOfHere wrote: post #27

jdw64 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I’ve looked up, the range is actually quite broad from astrophysics to aerospace to administrative roles. Here are the individuals mentioned: * Michael David Hicks (JPL, comets/asteroids research) * Frank Maiwald (space research / JPL) * Monica Reza (aerospace engineer, JPL) * Nuno F.G. Loureiro (MIT, nuclear science and fusion) * Carl Grillmair (Caltech astrophysicist) * William Neil McCasland (Air Force,…

[flagged]

First, sorry for the earlier sarcasm.

I agree that people in administrative or support roles can still have access to sensitive information and could, in theory, be targets.

But that still defines a very large group. If we include anyone with potential access across different institutions, roles, and locations, then it becomes easy to see patterns in what could simply be unrelated cases.

The key question is whether there is any concrete overlap — same organization, same project, same timeframe, or any shared operational detail. Without that, it feels more like a pattern being inferred after the fact than evidence of a coordinated connection.

More broadly, if we make the category of “possible targets” to wide, it stops meaning much. The default assumption should be that these are unrelated events, unless there’s clear evidence tying them together. Simply saying they could be targets does't really change that.

Re: At least 10 people tied to sensitive US research have died or disappeared

#30

Post by kQq9oHeAz6wLLS » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 1:55 PM UTC

HauntingPin wrote: post #24

OutOfHere wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are going to rudely link to a paywalled articles without an unpaywalled link to read each, then people can't be motivated to read them.

I guess being an asshole is just the standard now on HN? How is this attitude acceptable? What did I do to you? I didn't even realize it was paywalled until you mentioned it. But don't let that stop you from being a dick to somebody who's just trying to help fight misinformation. I guess I'll just go fuck myself. But here, your paywall free link: https://archive.is/KNECz

Unfortunately, this is a sign of the times we live in now. Nobody extends a little grace to others. They assume every act is an intentional slight.

There's no room for mistakes or even differences of opinions, and it's tearing us apart.

Part of it, I think, comes from the anonymous nature of online communications, and little to no ramifications to bad behavior. It's the end result of "I can do whatever I want, the established rules and societal norms don't apply anymore."