Anomaly•Registry
AR-0108

The Franklin Expedition

Partially explained
Date 1845 to about 1850. Wrecks found 2014 and 2016.
Location King William Island and the Adelaide Peninsula, Nunavut, Canada. The coordinates are the landing place near Victory Point recorded in the expedition's note of April 1848.
Coordinates 69.6283, -98.6833

Summary

In May 1845 Sir John Franklin sailed from England with 129 men in HMS Erebus and HMS Terror to find a Northwest Passage. None came back, and a note found in 1859 recorded that the ships had been abandoned in April 1848, with Franklin already dead.

The outline of what followed is settled. The crews set out on foot along King William Island and all died, of cold, hunger and disease; at the end some resorted to cannibalism, as Inuit told the explorer John Rae in 1854 and as cut marks on bones have since confirmed. Both ships were found in the 2010s, where Inuit testimony had placed them.

What is not settled is why so many had died before the ships were abandoned, how the ships came to lie so far south of where they were left, and what the last survivors did. Six of the 129 have now been identified by DNA, four of them in 2026.

the 129 men, by what the record says became of them 6 identified by DNA, 2021 to 2026 24 105 dead by 25 April 1848, Franklin among them landed near Victory Point and set out for Back's Fish River. none survived FOUND 3 graves on Beechey Island, 1850 the Victory Point note, 1859 Erebus 2014, Terror 2016 remains along the route NOT FOUND Franklin's burial place the surgeons' sick books a cause for the 24 early deaths how the ships moved south THE OUTLINE IS KNOWN. THE CAUSES ARE ARGUED. lead from the tins, long the favoured cause, is now disputed. the Inuit accounts, doubted in 1854, have held up.
Figure Drawn by Anomaly Registry from the Victory Point record of 25 April 1848, Parks Canada's reports of the wrecks, and the DNA identifications published by Stenton, Fratpietro, Park and colleagues from 2021 to 2026. The bar divides the 129 men by what the record says became of them; the two lists set what has been found against what has not.

What is documented

The expedition. The ships left Greenhithe on the Thames on 19 May 1845 with 134 men. Five were sent home from Greenland, and 129 went on. Franklin commanded from Erebus, whose captain was Commander James Fitzjames; Captain Francis Crozier commanded Terror. The crews of two whalers saw the ships in Baffin Bay in late July 1845, waiting to cross to Lancaster Sound. No European saw them again.

The first winter. The ships went up Wellington Channel, came back down the west side of Cornwallis Island, and wintered in 1845 to 1846 at Beechey Island. Three men died there and were buried: John Torrington on 1 January 1846, John Hartnell on 4 January and William Braine on 3 April. Searchers found their graves in 1850.

The note. In May 1859 Lieutenant William Hobson, of an expedition led by Francis Leopold McClintock and privately funded by Franklin's widow, Jane, found a record in a cairn near Victory Point on the north-west coast of King William Island. It is a printed Admiralty form, now at the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, carrying two handwritten messages.

  • The first, dated 28 May 1847 and signed by Lieutenant Graham Gore and Mate Charles Des Voeux, says the ships had wintered in the ice at 70°05' N, 98°23' W, and ends "All well". It wrongly gives the winter at Beechey Island as 1846 to 1847.
  • The second, written round the margin on 25 April 1848 and signed by Crozier and Fitzjames, says the ships were deserted on 22 April, 5 leagues north-north-west of the cairn, "having been beset since 12th September, 1846". It records that 105 men had landed under Crozier, that "Sir John Franklin died on the 11th June, 1847", and that the deaths so far were "9 officers and 15 men". They would start the next day "for Back's Fish River".

The note is the only known record of the plan to walk south to the Back River. Twenty-four deaths in under three years, nine of them officers, is the first unexplained fact in the case. The surgeons' sick books, which would have recorded the illnesses aboard, have never been found, and where Franklin was buried is not known.

Rae and the Inuit. In April 1854 John Rae, surveying for the Hudson's Bay Company, met Inuit at Pelly Bay who had items from the expedition; he bought some, including a silver plate engraved with Franklin's name. They told him of about forty white men seen travelling south over the ice dragging a boat, and of some thirty bodies found later on the mainland and five on an island north-west of the Back River. Rae reported to the Admiralty that the state of the bodies and the contents of their kettles showed the men had been driven to "the last dread alternative". The Times published his report on 23 October 1854. Charles Dickens answered it in Household Words in "The Lost Arctic Voyagers", beginning on 2 December 1854, rejecting the Inuit testimony.

McClintock's other finds. Besides the note, McClintock's parties found a ship's boat at Erebus Bay with two skeletons in it, and on the south shore of King William Island, about 5 kilometres south-east of Gladman Point, a skeleton lying with papers bearing the name of Harry Peglar, captain of the foretop in Terror. The clothing was a steward's, not a seaman's, and who the man was stayed disputed for 167 years.

The testimony gathered later. The American Charles Francis Hall collected Inuit accounts in the 1860s. They included a ship crushed by ice and sunk, and a second ship found in good order at Utjulik, on the north-west coast of the Adelaide Peninsula, with a dead man aboard; when the Inuit returned it had sunk with its masts showing. In 1991 the researcher David Woodman published a compilation of the testimony, and the Gjoa Haven historian Louie Kamookak spent decades gathering accounts from elders.

The graves opened. In 1984 a team led by the anthropologist Owen Beattie exhumed Torrington. His lungs showed scarring from earlier tuberculosis and signs of recent pneumonia, which the team concluded killed him; his hair and nails held high levels of lead. In 1991 Walter Kowal, Beattie and colleagues reported lead levels in the expedition's remains consistent with lead intoxication, and lead isotope ratios matching the solder of the expedition's food tins. In 1997 Anne Keenleyside and colleagues reported on nearly 400 bones from at least eleven men at a site on King William Island found in 1992: elevated lead, and cut marks on about a quarter of the remains, supporting the Inuit accounts.

The lead question reopened. Three later studies weighed against lead as the decisive cause. In 2016 Keith Millar and colleagues analysed 1,480 cases in the sick books of the naval squadrons sent to search for Franklin, which met similar conditions. They found no clear evidence of lead poisoning despite high exposure, and no grounds to think scurvy significant by the time the ships were abandoned, and proposed that the high toll among Franklin's officers owed more to accidents and injuries. In 2017 Jennie Christensen and colleagues found that Hartnell's lead exposure fell over the course of the voyage and stayed within a normal range, rising in his nails only in his last weeks as lead stored in his bones was released, and that he was severely deficient in zinc. In 2018 Treena Swanston and colleagues imaged lead in bone microstructure and found the crew's exposure similar to that of contemporary Royal Navy personnel from Antigua; their data, they wrote, did not support lead having played "a pivotal role".

The wrecks. On 1 September 2014 Government of Nunavut archaeologists found a davit pintle from a ship, stamped with the British government's broad arrow mark, on a small island. The next day Parks Canada's underwater archaeologists found Erebus by sonar in Wilmot and Crampton Bay, west of the Adelaide Peninsula, in about 11 metres of water; the ship's bell, marked with the broad arrow and the date 1845, confirmed her identity. On 3 September 2016 the Arctic Research Foundation's vessel Martin Bergmann found Terror in Terror Bay, on the south-west coast of King William Island, in about 24 metres. The search there followed a tip from Sammy Kogvik of Gjoa Haven, who remembered a large piece of wood sticking up through the ice on a hunting trip. Parks Canada confirmed the wreck on 18 September. Terror is largely intact, with some hatches and windows closed and glass still in place. Both wrecks lie far to the south of where the note says the ships were deserted. The site is jointly managed by Parks Canada and Inuit.

The identifications. Since 2013 Douglas Stenton, Robert Park and Stephen Fratpietro have compared DNA from the remains with samples from descendants of the crew.

  • 2021: John Gregory, engineer of Erebus, from remains at Erebus Bay.
  • 2024: Captain James Fitzjames of Erebus, from a tooth in a jaw found at Erebus Bay. The jaw bore cut marks consistent with the Inuit account of cannibalism.
  • May 2026: three more men of Erebus from three sites at Erebus Bay: William Orren, able seaman; David Young, boy first class; and John Bridgens, subordinate officers' steward. The same team identified the 1859 skeleton near Gladman Point as Harry Peglar after all, with no match to the descendants of six of the expedition's eight stewards.

Leading explanations

Cold, starvation and disease on the march (the established outline; the weight of each cause is contested). The note, the distribution of remains along the south-west coast of King William Island and the Adelaide Peninsula, and the Inuit testimony all describe men dying in stages as they travelled south, with cannibalism among the last of them. What remains open is what killed the 24 before April 1848, and how weak the 105 already were when they set out.

Lead poisoning from the tinned food (proposed by Beattie and colleagues in the 1980s; now contested). The high lead levels are real, and the isotope match to the tins' solder was published in 1991. The later studies found exposure typical of the Royal Navy of the time, falling rather than rising during the voyage in the one man whose nails were tested, and without clear clinical effect in comparable crews. The current weight of evidence makes lead a possible contributor, not the explanation.

Scurvy, tuberculosis and poor nutrition (contributors, supported in part; not established as decisive). Torrington had tuberculosis scarring and pneumonia, and Hartnell a severe zinc deficiency, which can suppress immunity. Millar and colleagues found scurvy common in the search crews and concluded that the way the lemon juice was prepared, for them and for Franklin's ships, would have weakened it, but found no grounds to think scurvy significant by April 1848.

The ships were re-manned after April 1848 (David Woodman's hypothesis; supported by circumstantial evidence, not established). Woodman argues that the desertion was temporary, and that some men returned to the ships, citing the positions of the wrecks, the Inuit account of a ship in good order at Utjulik with a dead man aboard, and the fact that Terror was found with her propeller in place. It has not been shown how either ship reached the place where she sank.

What the popular version gets wrong

"The expedition vanished without trace." It left three graves at Beechey Island, a written record of its abandonment, boats, relics, and the remains of dozens of men along its route. Inuit met some of the survivors. Both ships have been found. What vanished was the detail: the sick books, Franklin's burial place, and the last months of the last men.

"Lead poisoning from badly soldered tins killed them." This became the standard account after Beattie and John Geiger's Frozen in Time (1987). Lead was present, but the studies of 2016, 2017 and 2018 found levels typical of the Royal Navy of the day, falling during the voyage in the one man tested for it, and no clear evidence of lead poisoning in comparable crews. Lead may have contributed. It is no longer a sufficient explanation.

"British sailors would never have eaten their dead." This was Dickens's case against Rae in 1854, and the Victorian public largely accepted it. Keenleyside and colleagues reported cut marks on about a quarter of the bones from one King William Island site in 1997, and in 2024 the identified jaw of Captain Fitzjames bore them too. The Inuit were right.

"Franklin's men discovered the Northwest Passage." The statue of Franklin in Waterloo Place, London, erected in 1866, credits the crews with "completing the discovery of the North West Passage". The claim rests on the idea that the men who reached the south coast of King William Island had linked waters already known. None survived to report it. The first ship to sail through was Roald Amundsen's Gjøa, between 1903 and 1906.

Current status

Partially explained. Where the expedition went, when the ships were abandoned, how many set out and that all died is established by the expedition's own note, the remains and Inuit testimony. So is the fact that some turned to cannibalism at the end. What is not established is why 24 men, nine of them officers, were dead before April 1848, how the ships came to lie where they were found, and how and when the last survivors died. The questions most likely to be answered next are on the seabed: papers preserved in Erebus or Terror would change the record, as would further DNA identifications, which are continuing.

Sources

  • Crozier, F. R. M., Fitzjames, J., Gore, G. M., and Des Voeux, C. F. (1847 to 1848). The Victory Point record, found by W. R. Hobson in May 1859. National Maritime Museum, Greenwich; transcription in the Canadian Museum of History's "Canadian Mysteries" archive.
  • Rae, J. (1854). Report to the Secretary of the Admiralty on the fate of the Franklin expedition. Published in The Times, 23 October 1854.
  • Dickens, C. (1854). "The Lost Arctic Voyagers." Household Words, vol. 10, no. 245, 2 December 1854, and the following number.
  • Woodman, D. C. (1991). Unravelling the Franklin Mystery: Inuit Testimony. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  • Beattie, O., and Geiger, J. (1987). Frozen in Time: The Fate of the Franklin Expedition. London: Bloomsbury.
  • Kowal, W., Beattie, O. B., Baadsgaard, H., and Krahn, P. M. (1991). "Source identification of lead found in tissues of sailors from the Franklin Arctic Expedition of 1845." Journal of Archaeological Science 18 (2): 193 to 203.
  • Keenleyside, A., Bertulli, M., and Fricke, H. C. (1997). "The Final Days of the Franklin Expedition: New Skeletal Evidence." Arctic 50 (1): 36 to 46.
  • Millar, K., Bowman, A. W., Battersby, W., and Welbury, R. R. (2016). "The health of nine Royal Naval Arctic crews, 1848 to 1854: implications for the lost Franklin Expedition." Polar Record 52 (4): 423 to 441.
  • Christensen, J. R., McBeth, J. M., Sylvain, N. J., Spence, J., and Chan, H. M. (2017). "Hartnell's time machine: 170-year-old nails reveal severe zinc deficiency played a greater role than lead in the demise of the Franklin Expedition." Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 16: 430 to 440.
  • Swanston, T., Varney, T. L., Kozachuk, M., and others (2018). "Franklin expedition lead exposure: New insights from high resolution confocal x-ray fluorescence imaging of skeletal microstructure." PLOS ONE 13: e0202983.
  • Stenton, D. R., Fratpietro, S., Keenleyside, A., and Park, R. W. (2021). "DNA identification of a sailor from the 1845 Franklin northwest passage expedition." Polar Record 57: e14.
  • Stenton, D. R., Fratpietro, S., and Park, R. W. (2024). "Identification of a senior officer from Sir John Franklin's Northwest Passage expedition." Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 59: 104748.
  • Stenton, D. R., Fratpietro, S., Gorsalitz, K., and Park, R. W. (2026). "DNA identifications of three 1845 Franklin expedition sailors from HMS Erebus." Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 72: 105739.
  • Stenton, D. R., Fratpietro, S., Gorsalitz, K., and Park, R. W. (2026). "'Some very hard ground to heave': DNA identification of Harry Peglar, Captain of the Foretop, HMS Terror." Polar Record 62: e17.
  • Parks Canada, Wrecks of HMS Erebus and HMS Terror National Historic Site: "Finding HMS Erebus" and "Finding HMS Terror".
  • Solly, M. (2025). "The Shipwrecks From John Franklin's Doomed Arctic Expedition Were Exactly Where the Inuit Said They Would Be." Smithsonian, 19 May 2025.

Last reviewed: September 2026. Records are provisional. Where the evidence changes, the entry changes. Found an error? Tell us.

Advertise on Anomaly Registry

A documentary archive of 175 investigated cases, read slowly and at length by an audience that arrives on purpose. Below are the current delivery figures and what is available to buy.

Figures are rolling daily averages, current as of September 2026. They are restated as the traffic changes rather than left to age quietly, and we are happy to screen-share the underlying Ad Manager and analytics reporting before an insertion order is signed.

Anomaly Registry is a reference archive rather than a feed. Every one of its 175 records is written to a fixed structure, sourced to contemporaneous documents, inquest files, peer-reviewed literature or credible reporting, and each carries a section setting out precisely what the popular version of the story gets wrong. Cases that were later explained and cases that were comprehensively debunked are kept alongside the unsolved ones, because an archive that keeps only its mysteries is not an archive. That editorial position is the reason people stay.

It also explains the shape of the traffic. A session here runs to more than four pages and close to nine minutes, which is several times what a typical content site sees. Readers arrive looking for one case, find the sources laid out, and follow the cross-references into the next record. For an advertiser, the practical consequence is that a banner on this site is in front of a settled, attentive reader for minutes rather than seconds, and it is seen repeatedly across a single visit without ever being the reason someone leaves.

Three placements are available on every page. The leaderboard sits above the masthead and accepts 728x90, 970x90 and 320x50. The in-article unit sits inside the body of the record, where the reader is already stopped, and accepts 728x90, 300x250 and 336x280. The footer unit closes the page and accepts 728x90, 970x90 and 320x50. There are three slots per page and there will not be a fourth: the inventory is deliberately limited so that each impression is worth more than it would be on a page carrying eight.

What we do not run matters as much as what we do. There are no interstitials, no pop-ups, no auto-playing video, no content-recommendation chumboxes, and nothing that reflows the page after the reader has started reading. Ads are served in reserved space so the layout does not jump. This protects viewability for the advertiser as directly as it protects the reading experience, and it is the reason we can quote the session figures above with a straight face.

The editorial environment is unusually safe for a subject area that is often anything but. This site does not publish conspiracy content, it does not promote pseudoscience, and it does not treat a rumour as a finding. Its entire method is to separate what is documented from what has merely been proposed, and to say plainly when a famous mystery has an unglamorous answer. A brand placed here sits next to sourced, corrected, carefully hedged writing rather than next to speculation dressed as news.

The readership is a general-interest one with a research habit: people who read long-form nonfiction, follow science and history coverage, and check citations. In practice the categories that fit well are books and publishing, documentary and streaming, museums and exhibitions, education and online courses, audio and podcasts, consumer technology, outdoor and travel, and financial services. If your product rewards attention and explanation rather than impulse, this is a good room to be in.

Everything is delivered through Google Ad Manager, so you can buy the way you already buy. Direct-sold campaigns can be trafficked as a guaranteed line item with standard reporting on impressions, viewability and click-through. Programmatic demand can reach the same inventory through the open auction or through a preferred deal or private marketplace at a floor we agree in advance. We accept standard IAB display creative and HTML5, and we can accommodate a reasonable third-party ad server or verification tag.

Category sponsorship is available for advertisers who want something more durable than a rotation. The register is organised into seven categories, and a sponsor can take the whole of one, appearing across every record inside it with an acknowledgement in the page furniture. Sponsorship never buys editorial influence: a sponsor cannot commission a record, cannot review one before publication, cannot have a record altered, and cannot have one removed. That rule is not negotiable and it is the thing that keeps the inventory worth buying.

Some categories are declined outright, and it is fairer to say so up front than to discover it after an insertion order. We do not accept adult content, gambling, payday or high-cost short-term credit, cryptocurrency speculation and token sales, dietary supplements making health claims, political advocacy, psychic or clairvoyant services, or anything that reads as a scare advertisement dressed up as an article. Nothing may be styled to look like a record or like part of the editorial page.

Rates depend on placement, volume, whether the buy is run-of-site or targeted to a category, and how long it runs. There is no rate card on this page because a sensible number depends on what you are trying to do, and quoting one in the abstract usually wastes both parties' time. Tell us the campaign, the flight dates and the budget you are working to, and you will get a straight answer including whether we think the fit is wrong.

To start, write to or use the contact form and mark the message for the advertising desk. Include the flight dates, the placements you want, the creative sizes you have ready and any verification requirements, and we will come back with availability and a quote. Media buyers who want the underlying analytics before committing are welcome to ask; we would rather show the reporting than be taken on trust.

Privacy Policy

This policy explains what information Anomaly Registry collects when you visit this website, why it is collected, how it is used, and what choices you have. It applies to anomalyregistry.com and to any subdomain operated by us. It was last updated on the date shown at the end of this policy, and we will revise it if our practices change.

We have designed this site to collect as little personal information as possible. You do not need an account to read anything here. There is no login, no user profile, and no comment system. In the ordinary course of reading the register, you are not asked to identify yourself, and we do not ask you to.

Like virtually every web server, ours produces access logs. These logs record the internet protocol address of the requesting device, the date and time of the request, the page or file requested, the referring page if one was sent, and the browser user agent string. These logs exist for security, abuse prevention, and diagnosing technical faults. They are retained for a limited period and then discarded. We do not use them to build profiles of individual readers.

If you write to us through the contact form, we receive whatever you choose to put into it: typically a name, an email address, and a message. We use that information for the sole purpose of reading and answering your message. Writing to us does not add you to any list, and we do not sell, rent, or trade contact details with anyone.

There is one optional mailing list, and you only join it by asking. If you submit the subscribe form we store the address you gave, the time you submitted it, the IP address it came from, and the exact wording of the consent you agreed to. We keep that record because Canadian anti-spam law expects us to be able to show when and how you asked to hear from us. The list is used to say that records have been published or materially revised, and for nothing else. Every message carries a way to leave, and asking to be removed by email works just as well.

Corrections are a special case, and worth stating plainly. If you write to point out an error in a record, we may act on that correction and revise the entry. We will not publish your name or your email address in connection with a correction unless you explicitly ask us to be credited.

This site is supported by advertising served through Google Ad Manager. Advertising technology providers may set and read cookies or similar identifiers on your device in order to select advertisements, limit how often you see the same advertisement, and measure performance. These identifiers are set by those third parties, not by us, and the data they collect is governed by their own privacy policies rather than this one.

We do not have access to the personal data that advertising partners collect, and we cannot delete it on your behalf. If you wish to limit interest-based advertising, you can adjust the advertising settings offered by Google, use your browser's cookie controls, or use the industry opt-out tools that are available in your region. Details are set out in our Cookie Policy.

We may use privacy-respecting aggregate analytics to understand which records are being read and how people move through the register. Where we do, we configure it to avoid collecting information that identifies individual readers. Aggregate figures tell us that a case page is popular; they do not tell us who read it.

We do not knowingly collect personal information from children. This site is a documentary archive intended for a general adult and older student readership. If you believe a child has sent us personal information through the contact form, write to us and we will delete it.

Depending on where you live, you may have rights over personal data relating to you, including the right to ask what we hold, to ask for a copy, to ask for correction, and to ask for deletion. Because we hold so little, these requests are usually simple to answer. Write to us and we will respond within the period required by the law that applies to you.

Our servers are located in North America, and information sent to this site is processed there. If you are visiting from elsewhere, your request necessarily crosses borders in order to reach us. By using the site you understand that this transfer takes place.

If we change this policy, the revised version will be posted here with a new date. Material changes will be noted plainly rather than buried. Questions about this policy should be sent through the contact page.

Cookie Policy

A cookie is a small text file that a website asks your browser to store, and that your browser sends back on later requests. Similar technologies, including local storage and pixel tags, do comparable work. This policy explains which of these are used on Anomaly Registry, by whom, and what you can do about them.

The registry itself is a reading site. It does not require a cookie to show you a record. We do not set cookies to track you across the internet, and we do not operate a first-party advertising identifier of our own.

Strictly necessary cookies may be set to keep the site secure and functioning, for example to help mitigate automated abuse of the contact form. These are limited in scope and are not used for advertising or profiling.

Advertising cookies are set by Google Ad Manager and by the advertising technology partners that operate within it. Their purposes include selecting which advertisement to show, capping the number of times a given advertisement is repeated, detecting invalid traffic and click fraud, and measuring whether an advertisement was actually seen.

Some of these advertising cookies support interest-based advertising, in which the advertisement you see is influenced by inferences drawn from browsing activity over time and across sites. Whether this occurs depends on your region, your settings, and the choices you have already made with those providers.

We may use aggregate analytics to count page views and understand which records are read. Where an analytics tool is used, we prefer configurations that do not identify individual readers and that do not follow readers across other websites.

We do not embed social media widgets, share buttons, or tracking pixels from social networks. This is a deliberate choice for an archive of this kind, and it removes an entire category of third-party tracking that most content sites carry.

Your browser gives you direct control over cookies. Every major browser can block third-party cookies, delete existing cookies, and clear stored data on exit. Blocking third-party cookies will not prevent you from reading anything on this site, though it may make the advertising you see less relevant.

You can also manage advertising preferences with Google directly through its advertising settings, and through the industry opt-out mechanisms operated in various regions. Because these are operated by third parties, we cannot make the choice on your behalf.

Where the law in your region requires consent before non-essential cookies are set, a consent notice will be shown and your choice will be respected. Withdrawing consent later is possible through the same mechanism.

Advertising partners may change over time. Rather than publish a list that goes stale, we identify the advertising system in use, which is Google Ad Manager, and direct you to Google's own disclosures for the current set of partners operating within it.

If you have a question about cookies on this site that this policy does not answer, write to us through the contact page and we will answer it.

Anomaly Registry is an independent documentary archive. It is published as a work of reference and public interest reporting, and it is supported by advertising. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any government, university, police service, coroner, scientific institution, or investigative body named in any record.

The register documents real events, including in some cases deaths, criminal investigations, and inquests. Where a record concerns a criminal matter, nothing on this site should be read as an allegation of guilt against any living person. Where an individual has been named in the public record, we report the fact of that naming and its evidentiary standing; we do not accuse.

Records are written from sources. Where a source is a primary document, we say so. Where a claim rests on secondary reporting, we say so. Where sources conflict, we state the conflict rather than quietly choosing a side. Where a widely repeated claim cannot be traced to any source, we say that too, because an untraceable claim is itself a finding.

Every record separates what is documented from what has been proposed. Hypotheses are labelled as hypotheses and attributed to whoever advanced them, together with their standing: peer-reviewed, contested, dismissed, or untested. We do not advance theories of our own.

The registry treats its own entries as provisional. Records carry a review date, and they are revised when the evidence changes. A record you read today may be corrected tomorrow, and that is a feature of the method rather than a defect in it.

Despite this method, errors will occur. If you find one, write to us. Corrections supported by evidence are made promptly, and we would rather be corrected than be consistent.

Scientific and forensic conclusions reported here are the conclusions of the researchers and officials who reached them, not ours. Reporting that a study proposed a mechanism is not an endorsement that the mechanism is correct, and the status assigned to a case reflects the state of the evidence rather than our opinion of it.

Nothing on this site is legal, medical, psychological, financial, or safety advice. Records that touch on medical or psychological matters, including mass psychogenic illness, report the diagnoses reached by clinicians at the time and afterward. They are not a substitute for professional care.

Quotations from sources are used sparingly and for the purposes of reporting, comment, criticism, and review. Copyright in quoted material remains with its owner. If you hold rights in material you believe has been used improperly, contact us and we will address it.

Original text, structure, record numbering, and editorial apparatus on this site are the property of Anomaly Registry. You are welcome to quote briefly and link to us. Wholesale reproduction of records, including reproduction for the purpose of training generative models, is not permitted without written permission.

Outbound links are provided as references. We do not control linked sites and are not responsible for their content, their accuracy, or their handling of your data.

This site is operated from British Columbia, Canada, and these notices are governed by the laws applicable there, without regard to conflict-of-law principles.

Accessibility Statement

Anomaly Registry is built to be usable by as many people as possible, including people who use screen readers, keyboard navigation, magnification, or other assistive technology. We treat accessibility as part of the build rather than as a later remediation.

We aim to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1 at level AA. This is a target we work toward continuously rather than a certification we claim to have completed.

The site is written as semantic HTML. Headings describe the real structure of a record, lists are marked up as lists, and the register is a genuine table with proper header cells, so that a screen reader can announce which column a value belongs to.

Every interactive element is reachable and operable by keyboard alone. Focus is visible at all times, and a skip link at the top of each page lets keyboard and screen reader users jump straight to the register without traversing the navigation.

Status is never conveyed by colour alone. Each status carries its written label in text, so a reader who does not perceive the colour difference between "Unsolved" and "Debunked" still receives the distinction.

Text colours have been chosen to meet or exceed the contrast ratios required at level AA against the page background. The typefaces are set at a comfortable reading size with generous line height, and the layout reflows to a single column on small screens without loss of content or function.

The site contains one animated element, an annotation on the home page. It respects the reduced-motion preference set in your operating system, and when that preference is on, the annotation appears without movement.

Text can be resized up to two hundred percent in the browser without breaking the layout or clipping content. Nothing on this site depends on a specific screen orientation.

Advertising is served by a third party. We control where advertisements are placed and label them as advertisements, but we do not control their internal markup, and their accessibility is ultimately determined by the advertiser.

We are developing an audio version of each record. When it is published, it will be an alternative way to receive the same content, not a replacement for the written entry, and the written entry will remain the authoritative version.

Accessibility work is never finished, and parts of this site will fall short of the standard we have set. If you encounter a barrier, we want to know about it. Please tell us what page you were on, what you were trying to do, and what assistive technology you were using.

Write to us through the contact page. We aim to respond within five business days and to fix genuine barriers promptly.

Terms of Use

These terms govern your use of anomalyregistry.com. By using the site you accept them. If you do not accept them, please do not use the site.

Anomaly Registry is offered as a free documentary reference. There is no account, no subscription, and no paywall, and nothing here is offered as a professional service of any kind.

You may read, quote briefly with attribution, link to, and print records for personal, educational, and research use. This is an archive, and it is meant to be used.

You may not reproduce records wholesale, republish the register or substantial parts of it, or scrape the site systematically. In particular, you may not reproduce this content for the purpose of training generative models. Permission for other uses can be requested through the contact page and is often granted.

Original text, the record numbering system, the status taxonomy, the editorial apparatus, and the design of this site are the property of Anomaly Registry. Third-party material quoted or referenced remains the property of its owners.

We work hard to make records accurate, and we correct them when they are not. Even so, the site is provided as it is, without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including any warranty of accuracy, completeness, or fitness for a particular purpose.

Records are provisional by design. A status can change, an identification can be confirmed or overturned, and a leading explanation can be displaced by a better one. Do not treat any record as a final word, and check the review date.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Anomaly Registry and its operator are not liable for any loss or damage arising from your use of, or reliance on, anything published here.

If you send us a correction, a source, or a suggestion, you grant us permission to use it in the register. You will not be identified in connection with it unless you ask to be credited.

Do not use the contact form to send abuse, threats, spam, or automated submissions. We may block access to anyone who misuses the site or attempts to interfere with its operation.

Outbound links are provided as references and are not endorsements. We are not responsible for the content or conduct of any site we link to.

We may revise these terms. The version published here is the version in force. These terms are governed by the laws of British Columbia, Canada, and any dispute will be heard in the courts of that province.