Case files for the declassified, the unexplained, and the unresolved.

A working archive. Every case opened with what's actually known — documents, witnesses, timelines — and closed only where the evidence allows.

Browse the Files

Every case, opened as a file.

Most coverage of mysteries, declassified documents, and conspiracy stories has the same problem: it either dramatizes what's thin, or it dismisses what's documented. AnomalyDesk uses one format across every case, so a reader can tell, in 30 seconds, exactly what the evidence supports and exactly where it runs out.

Each case file moves through the same sections in the same order. What's known is the part with sources behind it — declassified records, court filings, eyewitness depositions, contemporary news, peer-reviewed work. What's claimed is the mainstream or institutional explanation, presented fairly. What's missing is the gap: the questions the evidence doesn't answer, the documents still classified, the testimonies that contradict the record. The evidence is the primary material itself — document scans, photographs, transcripts — linked directly. The timeline puts events in order so a reader can see the sequence the way investigators do.

We don't claim to solve cases that haven't been solved. The point of a working file is to make the state of the evidence legible, not to invent an ending.

Five categories of file.

The archive is organized by the kind of case — not because the categories are airtight (they bleed into each other constantly) but because the evidence works differently in each one.

Recent files.

New cases are added regularly. Older files are revised when new documents are released or fresh evidence surfaces.

Why a desk, not a blog.

A blog publishes opinions. A desk works files. AnomalyDesk is run as a small, independent archive: every case is researched, sourced, and updated when the record changes. We cite primary documents wherever they exist and label confidence honestly — verified, claimed, unverified, disputed — so the reader is never guessing what the evidence supports.

More about the format and the standards