Crypto Billionaires Dying: A Coincidence or a Conspiracy?

Jessy August 19, 2023

0 70 5 minutes read

The cryptocurrency industry has been shaken by the recent deaths of several prominent figures who made their fortunes in the digital currency markets. In just over a month, five crypto billionaires and millionaires have died under mysterious or unexplained circumstances, raising questions and speculations about the possible causes and connections behind their passing.

Some of the deceased include:

Nikolai Mushegian, 29, the co-founder of the crypto lending platform MakerDAO and the decentralized stablecoin Dai. He drowned in Puerto Rico on October 31, 2022
Javier Biosca, 44, the founder and CEO of Algorithmics, a crypto investment firm that allegedly scammed thousands of investors out of millions of euros. He was found dead in Spain on November 22, 2022
Tiantian Kullander, 30, the co-founder of Amber Group, a Hong Kong-based digital asset company that reached a $3 billion valuation earlier this year. He died in his sleep on November 23, 2022
Vyacheslav Taran, 48, the founder and CEO of EXMO, a UK-based crypto exchange that operates in Europe, Asia, and Latin America. He died of a heart attack in Ukraine on December 1, 2022
Park Mo, 36, the founder and CEO of Chain Partners, a South Korean crypto company that operates several platforms and services. He died of a brain hemorrhage in Seoul on December 8, 2022

These deaths have sparked various theories and rumors among the crypto community and the general public, ranging from natural causes to foul play to conspiracy. Some of the common themes and questions that have emerged are:

Are these deaths related to each other or to some hidden agenda?
Are these deaths part of a larger pattern or trend of crypto billionaires dying or disappearing?
Are these deaths orchestrated by some powerful or hostile forces that are against the crypto industry or its leaders?
Are these deaths staged or faked by the deceased themselves or by someone else for some ulterior motive?

The Evidence

While there is no conclusive evidence to prove or disprove any of these theories or questions, there are some facts and clues that can be used to support or challenge them. Some of the evidence are:

The official causes of death: According to the official reports and statements from the authorities and the families of the deceased, most of them died of natural causes or accidents. However, some of them have not been confirmed by autopsies or independent investigations. Moreover, some of them have been disputed or doubted by some experts or witnesses who claim to have seen signs of foul play or inconsistencies.
The circumstances of death: According to the media reports and accounts from the associates and friends of the deceased, most of them died unexpectedly and suddenly without any prior warning or indication. However, some of them have been reported to have had health issues or personal problems before their death. Moreover, some of them have been involved in controversies or scandals that may have put them at risk or under pressure.
The timing of death: According to the historical records and data from the crypto industry, most of them died during a period of high volatility and uncertainty in the crypto market. However, some of them have died during a period of growth and success in their businesses. Moreover, some of them have died around significant dates or events that may have had an impact on their lives or careers.
The location of death: According to the geographical information and analysis from the crypto industry, most of them died in countries or regions that are considered as crypto-friendly or crypto-hubs. However, some of them have died in countries or regions that are considered as crypto-hostile or crypto-regulated. Moreover, some of them have died in places that are known for their crime rates or corruption levels.

The Analysis

Based on the evidence presented above, it is difficult to draw any definitive conclusions about the deaths of these crypto billionaires. There are many possible explanations and scenarios that can account for their deaths individually or collectively. However, based on the available information and logic, some hypotheses can be formulated and evaluated based on their plausibility and probability. Some of these hypotheses are:

Hypothesis 1: These deaths are coincidental and unrelated to each other or to any external factor. They are simply the result of natural causes or accidents that can happen to anyone at any time.
- Plausibility: This hypothesis is plausible as it does not require any assumption or speculation beyond what is already known or proven. It is consistent with the official causes of death and does not contradict any evidence.
- Probability: This hypothesis is probable as it follows the principle of Occam’s razor , which states that the simplest explanation is usually the most likely one. It also follows the law of large numbers , which states that rare events are bound to happen given enough trials or opportunities.
Hypothesis 2: These deaths are connected and related to each other or to some external factor. They are the result of foul play or conspiracy that targets the crypto industry or its leaders for some ulterior motive.
- Plausibility: This hypothesis is plausible as it can account for some of the anomalies or inconsistencies in the evidence. It can also appeal to some of the common themes or patterns that emerge from the deaths. It can also draw from some of the historical or current examples of similar cases or situations.
- Probability: This hypothesis is improbable as it requires a lot of assumption or speculation that is not supported by sufficient or conclusive evidence. It also violates the principle of parsimony , which states that unnecessary or excessive entities or causes should not be multiplied. It also violates the law of small numbers , which states that coincidences are more likely to occur in small samples or groups than in large ones.
Hypothesis 3: These deaths are staged or faked by the deceased themselves or by someone else for some ulterior motive. They are the result of deception or manipulation that aims to achieve some personal or professional gain or advantage.
- Plausibility: This hypothesis is plausible as it can explain some of the discrepancies or doubts in the evidence. It can also exploit some of the loopholes or weaknesses in the verification or investigation process. It can also benefit from some of the incentives or opportunities that exist in the crypto industry or market.
- Probability: This hypothesis is improbable as it involves a lot of risk or complexity that is not justified by the expected reward or outcome. It also contradicts some of the facts or testimonies that confirm the death or identity of the deceased. It also conflicts with some of the values or principles that guide the crypto industry or community.

Conclusion

The deaths of these crypto billionaires have generated a lot of interest and speculation among the crypto community and the general public. While there is no definitive answer to the questions and theories that surround their deaths, there are some facts and clues that can be used to evaluate and compare different hypotheses and scenarios. Based on the available information and logic, it seems more likely that these deaths are coincidental and unrelated to each other or to any external factor, rather than connected and related to each other or to some external factor, or staged or faked by the deceased themselves or by someone else. However, this conclusion is not conclusive and may change as new information or evidence emerges in the future.