Mysteries Department
Sign inRequest access
0

Are the deaths and disappearances on the list connected?

Asked 29 Oct 2026 by ·4 answers·0·0 following
Four answers, none aheadNone is ahead yet. See what would settle it.

Where it stands

Four answers have been proposed. None is ahead on the evidence yet. Four are still possible. Of the three narrower questions under it, none is answered yet.

Why it matters

This is the claim that took the list from social media to Congress, the White House and the FBI: that the cases share a cause beyond chance⁠[1]⁠[2]. If they do not, each is a separate tragedy with its own explanation, and the list is an artefact of how it was compiled⁠[3]⁠[4].

Answers 4

Evidence: 1 for, 5 against
Still possible
Evidence: 2 for, 3 against
Still possible
Evidence: 9 for
Still possible
Evidence: none yet
Still possible

What would settle it

  1. Watch for the FBI's final report on its review of the cases, promised by Kash Patel on 28 April 2026 "in short order", and for any findings of the House Oversight inquiry opened on 20 April 2026; neither had been published by 28 October 2026.
  2. Ask NNSA, NASA and the national laboratories for workforce size and deaths by cause, 2021–2026, to replace the population estimates in the base-rate model with employers' own figures.
  3. Track the open local cases: the New Mexico OMI's final ruling and the state police investigation into Melissa Casias's death, the Grillmair murder trial in Los Angeles County, and any published cause for Joshua LeBlanc's crash.

History

  1. The Globe and Mail: earlier clusters of defence and science deaths, in Britain in the 1980s and among microbiologists in 2001–02, came to…For: No common cause: separate cases gathered after the fact from a large workforce
  2. Blistein: mcCasland advised Tom DeLonge on UFO matters, as his wife and DeLonge's 2016 email both sayFor: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  3. Logan: where official findings exist they are individual: an accidental death, a drowning with no foul play, illness, cancerFor: No common cause: separate cases gathered after the fact from a large workforce
  4. Logan: three others on the list had UFO or "anti-gravity" interests: Li, Eskridge and SullivanFor: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  5. Black: earlier clusters of defence and science deaths, in Britain in the 1980s and among microbiologists in 2001–02, came to…For: No common cause: separate cases gathered after the fact from a large workforce
  6. U.S. Government Accountability Office: the site's base-rate model expects 10 to 95 times as many homicides in the workforce as the list holdsFor: No common cause: separate cases gathered after the fact from a large workforce
  7. Conlin: even David Grusch called the reports linking the other cases to UFO programmes "a little overblown"Against: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  8. Schecter et al.: most of the people on the list had no reported UFO or exotic-propulsion work at allAgainst: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  9. Chen et al.: most of the people on the list had no reported UFO or exotic-propulsion work at allAgainst: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  10. Ruiz: mcCasland advised Tom DeLonge on UFO matters, as his wife and DeLonge's 2016 email both sayFor: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  11. International Business Times UK: three others on the list had UFO or "anti-gravity" interests: Li, Eskridge and SullivanFor: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  12. Phillips: three others on the list had UFO or "anti-gravity" interests: Li, Eskridge and SullivanFor: A link through secret aerospace or UFO programmes the people were part of
  13. Session 1: raised the question, proposed four answers, ran one test, found three results bearing on its answers and worked on three of its sub-questions
Add evidence
1What it bears on2What you found3Where it comes from
Which answer?
Does it count for or against it?
In a sentence, what did you find?
What you found optional
Where it comes from optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Propose an answer
Your answer, in a sentence
What would rule it out? optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Ask a sub-question
Your question
Why it would help optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.
Add a source
The source
What it shows about this question optional
Two reviewers check it before it counts, one of whom backs a different answer. You'll hear back by email: accepted, needs changes, or a duplicate.

Discussion 0

Add to the discussion