#113 Missing Scientists: The List Keeps Growing… But Does the Pattern Hold?

This episode is brought to you by Cozy Earth — use code THINKFIRST for 20% off.

A growing list of “missing and dead scientists” is making headlines—eight, ten, eleven… now more.

It sounds like a pattern. It feels like a pattern. But is it actually one?

In this episode of Think First, I walk through what’s real, what’s being assumed, and what doesn’t hold up under pressure. From a missing Air Force general to viral claims about UFO whistleblowers, we break down how separate events get pulled into a single narrative—and why that matters.

This isn’t about dismissing the unknown. It’s about asking a better question:
 Are these cases connected… or are they just being presented that way?

Because when the story gets clearer—but the evidence doesn’t—you might not be looking at the truth.

Transcript

Copy Transcript Copied

Jim Detjen 0:02

Alright, quick note before we jump in. So, something new is coming later this summer. It's called Uncharted. And this one's a little different. Because people who know me well, friends, business partners, have been asking me the same thing for a while now. Why don't you just say what you actually think? Not filtered, not structured, not running everything through the Clarity Framework. Just bring on the people you

Uncharted And Subscriber Updates

Jim Detjen 0:29

actually know, some of them you won't hear anywhere else, and have the conversations you'd normally have off-mic. That's Uncharted, where curiosity gets a little dangerous, more raw, more personal, more honest. No scripts, no sponsors, just the conversations you're not supposed to hear. And it's only for subscribers. Now, alongside that, there are opportunities to get involved in what we're building across Think First Uncharted, the Book Distorted, and the full Gaslight 360 platform. That's all live now at gaslight360.com/slash partner. And one more thing. You can unlock the full ThinkFirst archive right now for three bucks. That includes earlier episodes, deeper context pieces, and long-form explorations that aren't part of the public feed anymore. New episodes will still be public. This is just a way to support the work and access the full record. And if you do that, you'll also get free access to Uncharted. Free for life. Because once that launches, it'll be $7.99 a month. So, if you've been listening for a while, now's probably the time. And if you need more time to think about it, you might be proving my point. If you're curious how this episode was built, the full framework lives at gaslight360.com. Alright, no seatbelts required. We don't chase outrage, we examine it. It's less exhausting. Because the story that feels true is often the one that goes unexamined. My job isn't to tell you what to think, it's to help you notice when thinking gets replaced. Before we get into it, this isn't about reacting to the story, it's about understanding what's actually happening, while it's happening. This is my read based on what we know right now.

A Framework For Reading Outrage

Jim Detjen 2:51

And if the facts change, the conclusion should too. Some of these are going to create tension. Some of you will agree, some of you won't. That's part of thinking something through. I'm your host, Jim Detchen. Let's begin. Before I even get into this, three questions I asked myself. Have I seen this pattern before, where a few events get turned into something bigger? Yes. In business and media all the time. What was my first instinct when I saw this story? That's not nothing. It pulled me in. Do I think something real could be happening underneath all this? Possibly. But that doesn't mean this version of the story holds up. Before I give you my take, I want you to hear how this conversation is showing up out in the wild, not as a set of facts, but as a feeling. Because once something starts to feel like a pattern, people stop asking if it is one. Here's Joe Rogan walking through and reacting to the missing scientists story.

SPEAKER_01 4:04

No. Yeah, there's scientists that have gotten whacked andor missing, and a couple of generals as well. That's all connected somehow or another to UFO technology and anti-gravity

How The Missing Scientists Story Spreads

SPEAKER_01 4:17

technology and nuclear scientists. And there's a bunch of stories that I've read about this, and some of them are like, this is like purely exaggerated. And a lot of people are it's just they're taking that this guy committed suicide and he worked on that, and this guy went missing and he worked on that. But it's just coincidence. Right. And then there's other people that go, no, no, no, no. This is there's too many people. So now the White House is commenting on it. So they're doing an investigation on this, which makes me think hopefully, somebody who's really fucking smart has looked at this information and said there's something there. Like what these people were working on was very extraordinary and could disrupt a market, or could be something that could be used in a weapon that would destroy another country. And so the other country sabotages it by killing scientists. That's shit that we would do. Case you're thinking of is Monica Jacinto Reza, 60-year-old aerospace engineer linked to NASA, JPL, and advanced rocket engine materials research. She disappeared on June 22nd, 2025, while hiking in the Angeles National Forest, Los Angeles County, on a well-traveled trail. I know where that place is. I've been to that spot. Reports say she was hiking with at least one friend companion. The friend was roughly 30 feet ahead, turned to check on her, saw her smile, and wave that she was fine, that a short time later looked back again and she was gone. Despite intensive searches, no confirmed trace of her has been found, and her case is now one of the central examples of missing or dead scientist cluster being reviewed by federal agencies. Okay, so what ties the eleven together? Many of recently clearances or indirect access to sensitive government work, often via NASA, the Department of Energy's nuclear labs, the Air Force, or major defense contractors. Their deaths or disappearances occurred between 2022 and early 2026, clustered enough in time to draw political and media attention. The White House has ordered agencies such as FBI NASA, the Department of Energy, and the Department of War to perform link analysis to see if there's any pattern beyond coincidence. So one of them was real weird, where there was like a lady who was hiking and she was with a bunch of friends. Her friend turned around and asked her a question. She talked to her, and then she turned around again and she was gone. And they have no idea what happened. They never found a body. They brought the dogs in. The dogs couldn't find her. Just gone. That's it.

Jim Detjen 6:58

Something about this story doesn't sit right. Not the cases, the way they're being connected. Because every few days, there's another one. Another name. Another headline. Another number. Eight, ten, eleven, now twelve, thirteen, depending on where you look. And somehow, the more the number grows, the more certain the story sounds. Which is strange because the evidence doesn't grow

Why The Pattern Claim Breaks Down

Jim Detjen 7:25

with it. This matters because this is how people stop thinking clearly, not because they're lied to, but because they're given something that feels like a pattern. And once you accept that pattern, you stop evaluating new information. You just start adding to it. I've seen this exact thing in business. A company misses a few quarters. People start saying something's off. And then every bad number, every single one, gets treated like proof, even when it has nothing to do with the original issue. Same dynamic here. Here's how this is being presented. A group of scientists connected to national security, space, nuclear programs are dying or disappearing under suspicious circumstances, and the number keeps growing. There's a tension at the federal level. The FBI is involved, and the implication is clear. This isn't random. This is a pattern. Now, let me say this clearly. That's a separate question. What I'm looking at is whether this specific story holds together. My instinct early on was okay, this might be something. A missing general? That's serious. A contractor disappears in a strange way, you pay attention, and then you see a case like the young engineer, burned car, unclear movements, and you lean in even more. That's how this story works. It pulls you in case by case. But then I slowed down and walked through them one at a time. And that's where it started to come apart. Wait, if this is a coordinated pattern, why are the cases so different? Some are confirmed homicides with suspects, some are hiking disappearances, some look like suicides, some look like accidents. That's not how a system behaves. That's how unrelated events behave. Here's the assumption doing most of the work. If enough unusual things happen, they must be connected. But that only works if they're actually similar. And here, they're not. Let me make this simple. Take any large organization, 10,000 people, over a year you'll see accidents, an illness, maybe a disappearance. Now pull out only the strange cases, put them in a list. That list will feel meaningful, even if it isn't. Which is great for headlines, but not great for accuracy. Now, hold on. I might be missing something here. There are a few cases that don't resolve cleanly. The Air Force General, a couple disappearances. Those are real unknowns. But unknown doesn't mean connected. And there's another case that's been circulating heavily, framed as someone tied to sensitive work, possibly linked to UFO programs, and even described as being on the verge of speaking publicly. But when you check what's actually confirmed, the key pieces fall apart. The role isn't clearly verified. The whistleblower angle isn't established. The timing, the part that makes it feel suspicious, doesn't hold. And the cause of death becomes far more ordinary the closer you get to it. That's telling. Strong claim, weak verification. Alright, quick pause here, because this is one of those topics where you actually need a minute to reset your brain. I'm serious, this is one of those stories where you go from this is interesting, to, wait, what am I actually looking at? Pretty fast. Which is why I'm glad I've got something a little more predictable waiting for me at the end of the day. We just got one of Cozy Earth's blankets, the bubble cuddle blanket. And the first thing you notice is how it looks. It's just a really well-designed, beautiful piece. And then you actually use it, and that's when it really stands out. The weight is just right. Not heavy, not light, just calming.

Cozy Earth Sponsor Message

Jim Detjen 11:45

It's one of those things that actually makes it easier to unwind at the end of the day. So it's one of those rare things that just quietly becomes part of your environment. And I've noticed, when your environment feels right, it actually changes how you wind down, how you think, how you reset, and with easy returns and a lifetime warranty, it's the kind of comfort that's actually worth upgrading to this spring. Look, people who know me know this. If I don't believe in a product or a brand, I'm not putting my name on it. Head to cozyearth.com, use code ThinkFirst for 20% off. That's think first for 20% off. And if you see a post-purchase survey, just mention you heard about Cozy Earth right here on Think First. Because how you live shapes how you think, and how you think shapes everything else. Okay, here's what I think is happening. This is not a coordinated pattern of scientists being targeted. This is a small number of unresolved cases being assembled into a much larger narrative. And once that narrative locks in, every new case gets pulled into it. If I had to bet, this doesn't get proven, it just keeps expanding. And expansion without tighter criteria usually means the signal is getting weaker,

Sequence Versus Verified Pattern

Jim Detjen 13:14

not stronger. I don't buy the idea that this list as it exists right now proves anything beyond itself. Now, look, if new facts come out, shared cause, shared actors, something concrete, then the conclusion changes. It should change. But right now, after reading 47 articles and spending tens of hours of research on my own, that evidence isn't there. This is the part that actually matters. We don't just notice patterns, we need them. Because randomness is uncomfortable. Unrelated events don't give us meaning. Patterns do. So we connect the dots. Sometimes correctly, sometimes too early. And once the story forms, it reinforces itself. The number grows, the language gets stronger, the visuals connect everything. And before long, it feels obvious, even when it isn't. And once something feels obvious, good luck talking someone out of it. At that point, you don't need new evidence. You just need a fresh headline every couple days, which seems to be going very well. Here's what I'm watching going forward. First, do any of these cases actually show shared elements? Same method, same actors, same cause? If not, that matters. Second, does the list keep growing by expanding the definition? Different roles, different countries, different types of events? That's not strengthening a pattern, that's stretching one. Third, does the language keep escalating without new facts? Disturbing, explosive, too coincidental. That's narrative pressure, not evidence. Here's where I land. There are real cases. There are unanswered questions, but there is no verified pattern connecting them. And treating them like there is makes it harder to see what's actually true. Let me leave you with this, because this isn't really about scientists. When you take unrelated events and present them together, they start to feel connected. That's not manipulation, that's how the human brain works. You see it everywhere: markets, politics, sports. A few things happen in a row, and suddenly it's a trend. Sometimes it is, but sometimes it's just a sequence. And that difference matters because if you mistake a sequence for a pattern, you start making decisions based on something that isn't real. So here's the trigger. Next time you see a list, any list, pause. Ask yourself, are these actually connected? Or do they just look connected because they're next to each other? That one question will separate you from most people right now. And honestly, if the headline says another one, that's usually your cue to slow down, not speed up. You don't need all the answers, but you should question the ones you're handed. Until next time, stay skeptical, stay curious, and always think first. And one more thing, if you're listening to this thinking, wait, I've definitely fallen for this before. Yeah. Same. That's actually why I wrote distorted. Not because people are dumb, but because the stories are getting better, cleaner, more connected, more convincing, even when they're built on incomplete pieces. It's not about spotting lies, it's about recognizing when something feels true before

Distorted And Final Mental Check

Jim Detjen 17:16

it's been proven true. And honestly, once you see that pattern, you start noticing it everywhere. Which is great, until you realize how often it happens. So if you want to go deeper into that, that's exactly what distorted is about. And if nothing else, just remember this if the story keeps getting clearer, but the evidence doesn't, you're probably looking at the story, not the truth. Alright. That's it for today.