3 ms·
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 severa
by jdw64 6mo ago
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, and the same timeframe, it’s hard to justify treating these cases as connected. The scope is too wide and the professions too varied. It feels like people are constructing conspiracy theories out of weak patterns because those narratives are more stimulating.
If we applied the same logic, we could take annual industrial accident deaths in the U.S. and claim they’re part of some coordinated assassination plan by capitalists. That obviously doesn’t make sense. (Although, to be fair, one could argue that industrial accidents reflect structural issues tied to capital, but that’s a different kind of argument entirely.)
What I’m really trying to say is that this kind of article feels like a product of the internet’s incentive structure — framing loosely related events as something suspicious in order to attract clicks and attention.
- OutOfHere 6mo agoThey 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.
- jdw64 6mo agoFrom 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?
- OutOfHere 6mo ago[flagged]
- jdw64 6mo agoFirst, 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.
- odyssey7 6mo agoI think this is an interesting pattern, but I see your point. The network effects of ~people a degree removed from direct nuclear research~ gets big.
- notahacker 6mo agoPeople a degree removed from direct nuclear research or something vaguely linked to aerospace or studying faraway planets like these guys is about 90% of the people I've encountered in a work capacity. And I can assure you my knowledge is absolutely worthless to spies or other nefarious entities, and the same applies to most of the others :)
- b9apratus 6mo ago[flagged]