Questions swirl when an institution publicly denies statements that were never made, as with NASA’s debunking of alleged Michio Kaku quotes about 3I/ATLAS. Such actions can seem puzzling—why address or refute claims that have no clear source or record? This pattern fits a broader theme discussed in depth: the use of narrative management and information control by major agencies. Skeptics point to similar instances, where authorities preemptively “debunk” rumors or misattributions, arguing it serves to reinforce their official position and discourage independent inquiry. The tactic can be interpreted as a way to shape public perception, drown out alternative voices, and preemptively address skepticism before it gains traction. It also highlights the tendency of institutions to tightly control discourse around contentious or ambiguous topics, especially those that might challenge the established narrative or expose inconsistencies. For a deeper understanding of how and why such maneuvers are deployed—and what they reveal about the broader landscape of information warfare—listeners are encouraged to dive into the full conversations and analyses featured in the episodes.