Missing worker at Los Alamos National Laboratory found dead in remote forest

21–22 of 22 posts

Re: Missing worker at Los Alamos National Laboratory found dead in remote forest

#21

Post by contingencies » Wed, Jun 03, 2026, 5:06 PM UTC

enoch_r wrote: post #14

contingencies wrote: post #2

Previously: Anthony “Tony” Chavez, William Neil McCasland, Steven Garcia, Monica Jacinton Reza, Nuno Loureiro, Carl Grillmair, Jason Thomas, Frank Maiwald, Michael David Hicks. About five or six follow the 'went with nothing or just a handgun to the woods [or lake] and never came back' pattern. Those which fit that pattern are all 2025/2026.

Exactly what pool of people are we drawing from here? How big is our denominator? - Anthony Chavez was a foreman supervising construction at Los Alamos. Retired in 2017. - Melissa Casias (from this article) was an administrative assistant at Los Alamos. - Steven Garcia was a "property custodian at KCNSC." - Jason Thomas was associate directory of chemical biology at Novartis (pharma company) on cancer treatment. - Mc…

The 2025/2026 subset is a bit more interesting than the full set. Also, only in America would 'walking off with a handgun and disappearing' be considered normal. But yes, no proof of foul play.

Re: Missing worker at Los Alamos National Laboratory found dead in remote forest

#22

Post by cyanydeez » Wed, Jun 03, 2026, 10:06 PM UTC

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #19

enoch_r wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspiracy theorists don't understand base rates and denominators. They make a list of deaths of people who seem vaguely STEM/"government secret" adjacent and forget to think about what their denominator is. Implicitly, it's "all employees (at all levels) of government labs, plus associate-director-and-up employees at STEM companies, plus all academics working in STEM fields, plus anyone who was formerly in one of th…

I don't know if you accidentally replied to my comment or not, but my comment was a question. I asked what's the implication? You replied here with a long text that seems to continue implying that something nefarious is going on, without specifying what the implication is (which is what I asked).

you have to have paid attention to a bunch of other news articles and their conspiracy theory dirivatives. This isn't a new item of any significant note unless you're into conspiracy theories.

You got the response you did because it sounds identical to naive-pivot conspiracy theorists who just 'ask questions' to try and expound upon the conspiracy theory.

Post reply on HN