PawCRYPTID BOARDDocument the weird. Investigate the unknown.New
New Post
Sign inSign in

Down the rabbit hole

Bigfoot · Ennis, Texas · 1964

2 documents · 2 independent accounts

2 documents tell this story. They trace back to 2 independent accounts.

The route

  1. One encounter the reported sighting this case is about
  2. 2 documents that tell it, as we collected them
  3. 2 independent accounts behind those documents

Copies are not confirmations: thirty papers printing one story is still one account.

Rabbit hole: Bigfoot · Ennis, Texas · 19642 documents tell this story. They trace back to 2 independent accounts. Each independent account is one row; time runs left to right. The earliest document we hold in each account is ringed. A full list follows the picture.Account 1 of 21 documentAccount 2 of 21 documentSeparate accountTIME (when each document was published) →Jun 28, 1999UndatedEarliest found · Tall creature seen by witness · BFRO report, Jun 28, 1999EARLIEST FOUNDTall creature seen by witnessUndated · 2 fishermen encounter the "Chambers Creek Monster". · NAWAC report, undatedUNDATED2 fishermen encounter the "Ch…BFRO reportNAWAC reportsame text (reprint)Earliest found

Each shape is one document; open it to go to where we found it. The same graph as a list is below.

Why these records are connected

  • Why these documents are one case. The case matcher joined them because:
    • Tall creature seen by witness & 2 fishermen encounter the "Chambers Creek Monster".: a person reviewed them and joined them

Every document, as a list

  1. Account 1 1 document
  2. Account 2 (Separate account) 1 document

How to read this

  • Time runs left to right by publication date. Very long empty stretches are cut short (the axis shows how many years were skipped); undated documents sit in their own column.
  • One row per independent account. A reprint, re-upload or cross-post carries the same text, so it stays in its account's row and never counts as a second witness.
  • Earliest found (ringed) is the earliest document we hold for that account. It is not proof of the first telling: an earlier one may exist that we haven't collected.
  • Arrows run from a document to a source it names. A dashed shape is a source a document cites that we haven't found yet; its link searches a public archive for it, and a hit there is a lead, not a confirmation.

About the numbers

  • Only documents we've collected are counted; retellings elsewhere on the web aren't counted yet.
  • Documents are matched by shared text and by the sources they name, by plain rules with no model in the loop. A match can be wrong; tell us.

The deepest rabbit holes →

Where next

Every rabbit hole → · How we tell copies from independent accounts