People keep disappearing in areas that are suspiciously close to cave systems—or do they?
It’s a bold claim. According to some internet users, people keep going missing in national parks. Curiously, these disappearances often line up with the country’s underground cave systems. Does this mean that someone, or something, living in the caves is connected to these disappearances?
Facebook creator Kela Holifield recently got the internet talking after pointing out this strange coincidence in a viral Reel. To bolster her idea, she dug up an old cold case.
Missing People And American Caves
According to Holifield, the maps of missing persons cases in the United States line up with those of underground cave systems.
Holifield then recounts the missing persons case of Dennis Martin. According to Holifield, Martin was playing hide and seek with his brother and ran behind a tree. A short time later, Martin was gone.
“Now, searchers start to flood this area. I’m talking park rangers, volunteers, even the Green Berets were called in for this search. It goes down in history as the largest search and rescue mission in national park history,” Holifield starts. “Literally, after weeks and weeks of searching, they found no blood, no footprints, no clothing—not even a scent trace of Dennis.”
Holifield says that, while the FBI opened a case file, it remained “sealed or heavily redacted.”
The FBI opened up a file. But for years it remained sealed or heavily redacted. She also says that subsequent FOIA requests into the case have been blocked.
“Thousands of people have gone missing in the national parks under mysterious circumstances. So I decided to overlay this map with our underground system map and see what happens,” she says, showing the maps. “If the missing people match the caves, and the caves match the corridors, and the corridors match all of RAND’s maps, what is going on underneath our feet? And who’s down there?”
Is It True That Missing Persons Maps Line Up With Maps Of Underground Cave Systems?
Sort of. But mostly not.
To start, neither map was created by Holifield. These two maps have been paired together in memes going back as far as 6 years.
Second, as noted by Snopes and Holifield herself, the map of “missing persons” provided by the user is not actually all missing persons cases. Instead, it’s a list of “mysterious” missing persons cases from national parks provided by an investigator and Bigfoot researcher named David Paulides for his series Missing 411. In fact, much of Holifield’s video is simply repeating claims made by Missing 411 and related sources.
There are numerous issues with using this map as a source. First, Paulides has been repeatedly criticized for his criteria regarding what cases classify as mysterious. For example, critics have accused Paulides of omitting critical information that would point to more normal, less supernatural understandings of why someone may have disappeared. Several stories told by Paulides have also been found to contain major inconsistencies.
Second, there’s a selection bias issue. It’s not exactly surprising that a map showing missing persons cases in national parks lines up (minorly) with cave systems, as many cave systems are located in national parks.
What Happened To Dennis Martin?
In retelling the story of Dennis Martin, Holifield makes it seem as though there’s no way the toddler could have disappeared.
It’s true that no one knows exactly what happened to Martin. That said, experts tend to agree that Martin likely got lost in the wilderness. The reason the massive search was unable to find him was likely due to difficult terrain, a recent rainstorm, and the lack of organization for the search.
In fact, many argue that the size of the search itself was actually detrimental. Crucial evidence could have been destroyed or trampled early on in the investigation. The failure of this search led law enforcement to change how future searches were conducted.
Why were so many FOIA requests rejected? While Holifield seems to be implying a conspiracy, FOIA requests can be rejected for a variety of reasons, including the request not being directed to the correct department and documents containing too much personal information to be shared publicly.
That said, the redacted documents are not hidden. In fact, they’re available for browsing on the U.S. National Park Service website.
Who Was The Man With ‘Something Over Their Shoulder’?
On the surface, this seems like it’s the most compelling evidence. Once one looks into the details, however, this narrative falls apart.
To start, it’s unclear if the original report even mentioned there being an appropriately colored cloth over the mystery man’s shoulder. The initial statement seems to simply say that a man saw another man “acting nervous” around the time of the disappearance. Details about the cloth appear to have been added later, either by Paulides or someone else.
Next, the area where this man was spotted was improbably far from where Martin disappeared.
Finally, and most importantly, the FBI looked into this story and other stories of “suspicious men” at the time of the disappearance. They either did not find the reports credible or found that some of the “suspicious men” were not actually present in the park on the day of the disappearance.
Hopefully, the existence of this case and others like it should not scare people away from national parks. Instead, it can encourage them to follow safety tips while visiting these places. For example, one should know their limits, pack enough equipment and food for their trip, inform others of where they plan to go, and, if they’re navigating with a phone, download an offline map and bring a power bank.
Holifield Responds
In an email to BroBible, Holifield wrote, “My content explores theories, public documents, official reports, and long-standing community conversations. I don’t claim definitive answers — I explore possibilities, patterns, and discrepancies that people already talk about. When it comes to the cave systems and missing persons, it’s difficult to ‘debunk’ a pattern that shows up on multiple independent maps over multiple decades. You can debate interpretations, but the geographic clustering itself exists regardless of who reports on it.”
“Regarding the Dennis Martin case specifically, I respect the official explanations, and I always encourage viewers to read the original reports for themselves. At the same time, this case has remained unresolved for over 50 years, and many of the questions people raise — about the weather, the terrain, eyewitness accounts, redactions, and the search timeline — come from locals, former rangers, and even SAR participants,” she continued. “Discussing those discrepancies is part of public curiosity, not an attempt to replace the official story.”
“My goal is simply to get people engaged with the material, look at sources directly, and think critically about the information we’re given. Even when theories are challenged or debunked, the conversations they spark tend to educate people about wilderness safety, SAR procedures, and the historical context of these cases,” she concluded.