live_tv
Livestream Starting Soon
00
Hours
:
00
Minutes
:
00
Seconds
Up next in 10
Tonight’s reports span more than a century, involving recurring encounters, regional waves, and long-term aftereffects. Rather than offering conclusions, this broadcast challenges the assumption that repetition equals intent and asks what these patterns actually tell us about perception, memory, and the limits of investigation.
In this live investigative episode, I present seven carefully selected reports involving repeated encounters, pattern recognition across time, and experiences that did not resolve cleanly after a single event.
The cases include:
• Multiple personal encounters separated by years or decades
• Family and community clusters
• Historical reports recorded before modern paranormal language existed
• Cloaked or distorted humanoid figures
• Large bipedal entities and regional encounter waves
• A modern incident involving injury, memory disruption, and long-term consequences
Rather than framing these experiences as evidence of intent or intelligence, this discussion focuses on restraint, context, and the danger of assuming meaning where evidence remains incomplete.
This episode is for listeners who value critical thinking, investigative discipline, and honest uncertainty.
If you have experienced something similar, visit Phantoms and Monsters https://phantomsandmonsters.com and share your story.
👤 I'm Lon Strickler, creator of Phantoms & Monsters, and I’ve been a paranormal researcher and intuitive investigator for over 45 years. My work has been featured on numerous television shows, including Ancient Aliens, Paranormal Witness, Monsters and Mysteries in America, and Unsolved Mysteries, as well as on radio shows such as Coast to Coast AM.
Show More Show Less View Video Transcript
0:01
Hey folks, welcome to Phantoms and Monsters Radio. Uh, now most of the people you're about
0:08
to hear from did not set out to have an encounter. In in many cases, the moment they stayed with them was not seeing
0:16
something unusual, but realizing that whatever it was had already been
0:21
present long before they noticed it. Now, this episode documents firsthand
0:27
accounts in which patterns repeat across locations, witnesses, and time. Now,
0:33
some of these cases appear unrelated until the details are placed side by side.
0:40
Now, if you're new here at Fam's Monsters Radio, we focus on witness testimony and recurring behavioral
0:46
patterns rather than speculation. Now follow the show to track these cases as
0:52
they continue to develop.
0:57
Now people make certain assumptions about strange encounters that they are rare, that they are
1:05
isolated, and that they happen once and if you're unlucky enough to experience one, you're
1:12
done. But that assumption does not survive close examination. Now, over the years,
1:19
I've reached thousands or received thousands of reports from witness who has insisted that what they encountered
1:25
did not end when the moment passed. It returned, sometimes years later,
1:31
sometimes miles away, and sometimes in different form entirely,
1:36
but always with the sense of recognition of it, whatever they encountered remembered them. Now, tonight's program
1:43
is not about a single sighting, a single creature, or a single explanation.
1:49
It's about patterns, about witnesses who experience more than one encounter across time, geography, and
1:56
circumstance. People who did not go looking for answers, yet found themselves confronted
2:04
again and again by something that refuses to stay confined to the memory.
2:10
In many of these cases, the witnesses did everything we are told to do. They
2:15
moved on. They stayed quiet. They tried to rationalize. Some dismissed their own experiences for
2:21
years. And yet the encounters repeated sometimes with frightening clarity and sometimes subtly
2:28
and sometimes years apart. That raises an uncomfortable question.
2:35
If these experiences were merely mistakes, misperceptions or imagination,
2:41
why do they recur with such consistency? Why do different witnesses describe
2:47
similar progressions? And why does the second encounter often feel more deliberate than the first?
2:55
Tonight, you'll hear seven reports. I will not embellish them. I will not
3:00
reinterpret them as I read them. And I will not tell you what to believe. What
3:07
matters here is not belief, but recognition. Recognition of recurring elements,
3:13
shared behaviors, and unresolved patterns that emerge when these accounts are placed side by side.
3:20
Because if encounters repeat, then we are no longer dealing with random events. We're dealing with something
3:27
that returns. And the question is not whether it exists. The question is why?
3:37
Now this first case, the following account was shared by a witness who relayed an experience their mother
3:43
described to them. What matters here is not belief or interpretation, but continuality of
3:50
perception and internal consistency across the event. Listen carefully to
3:56
what is described as being seen, felt, and remembered and separate those observations from the conclusions that
4:03
were later drawn. Now, they witness tells me, "Hello, in
4:10
2007, my mother told me that she had been abducted by aliens.
4:16
I was the only person she confided in about her experience because I was the only one who believed her." This is her
4:23
incredible story. Now, at the time, we were living in Wyoming, Michigan. One night around
4:30
midnight, my mother awoke in a state of paralysis.
4:36
She looked over and saw a dozen or so pairs of small beady red eyes. Initially,
4:42
she could only see their eyes. The rest of their bodies were nearly invisible, just discernable enough to distort the
4:48
view behind them. She described how some of the creatures approached her and began poking her with
4:55
their three-fingered hands. One of them breathed in her ear, producing a typ a sound typical what
5:02
movies portray aliens as making. Now, after that, the feeling of
5:08
paralysis lifted, allowing her to get up and walk to the bathroom, hoping it was all just a dream. However, all 12 to 15
5:17
small creatures followed her, trailing from the bathroom to the kitchen and back to her bedroom.
5:23
She noted that they never spoke throughout the episode. Yet, they continued to float behind her, remaining
5:30
semi-transparent as she moved from room to room. Once she returned to her bedroom, she
5:36
noticed a light in the backyard. leaning over to see where the light was
5:42
coming from. That's the last time she remembers until she woke up the next morning.
5:48
She has no rec recollection of falling back to sleep. My mother has struggled
5:54
with insomnia for years and has always found it difficult to fall asleep and stay asleep. Now, throughout the
6:00
incident, she never lost sight of the creatures, but they were gone when she woke up the next day. Now, at the time,
6:08
my sister shared a bed with my mother and was completely undisturbed throughout the whole event.
6:15
My mother has no reason to fabricate such a story. In fact, it has led people
6:20
to view her as if she were crazy. However, after researching the type of small humanoid she encountered, I
6:28
discovered that many other abduction victims have reported similar experiences with semi-transparent
6:33
creatures that have red eyes and are about the size of a small child.
6:39
So, let's define what we just heard without inflating it. This account
6:44
describes a nighttime experience marked by paralysis, the perception of mult
6:49
multiple small semi-transarent figures, tactile sensation, and a clear
6:56
break in memory at the end of the event. Those are the core elements. What matters here is that the experience
7:02
unfolds in stages rather than flashes. The witness reports continuality of
7:09
perception, movement through the home and final loss of awareness.
7:17
That structure is important regardless of interpretation. Now, similar descriptions appear across many
7:23
encounter reports, not only in modern alien abduction narratives, but also in
7:28
the older folkloric and historical accounts involving small indistinct beings observing or observed during
7:36
altered states of consciousness. That overlap prevents provides context,
7:41
not confirmation. Now, at this stage, the report establishes experience, not an
7:47
explanation. It does not demonstrate repeated encounters by the same individual, but
7:53
it does reflect a pattern of imagery and sensation that persist across time and
7:58
cultures. This is the distinction we will keep returning to tonight. Pattern does not
8:05
automatically equal ca cause and familiarity
8:10
does not equal intent. Now, the following account involves a
8:16
primary witness who reports two personal encounters separated by time and distance along with additional
8:23
encounters experienced by close family members in the same general region.
8:29
Now, what we are examining here is not certainty or belief, but whether proximity, repetition, and shared
8:36
geography suggest continuity or coincidence. But attention to locations, distances,
8:44
behavior, and what is directly observed versus what is later concluded.
8:52
Now, the primary witness recalls two personal encounters with a mysterious figure separated by roughly 10 years in
8:59
several miles. The first encounter occurred in June at approximately 400 p.m. A freshly cut gas
9:08
line across the rule roadway with a dirt mound constructed to block vehicle
9:14
access. Sitting at top this mound approximately 50 to 75 yards from the road was a
9:20
prominent black figure with its back turned. The witness described as having
9:25
broad shoulders, a large head, a visible neck, and a posture strongly reminiscent
9:32
of a mountain gorilla. The figure appeared fully grown and motionless.
9:37
Then the second encounter took place years later near a small creek at dusk, roughly 45 minutes before dark.
9:46
While driving along the road, the witness looked toward a break in the trees and observed a massive gray
9:51
Sasquatch standing approximately 12 feet approximately 12 feet tall. The creature
9:58
was positioned sideways only 25 to 30 feet from the road, and its stillness was so complete that without direct eye
10:06
contact, it could have easily been mistaken for a tree. The fur coloration resembled original
10:13
real tree camouflage, primarily gray with darker striping.
10:19
The witness suspected this individual might have been older than the first based on the change in coloration.
10:27
This second sighting occurred approximately 6 milesi from the first location.
10:32
The witness also recounts his father's encounter in 1971 or 72. While driving,
10:38
his father saw a dark-coled bipeedal figure cross the road directly in front of his vehicle.
10:44
The creature stood roughly 10 feet tall and cross the road in two strides. It
10:49
then ran across 100 ft of
11:01
60 ft. By the time the driver reached the crossing point, the figure also had
11:08
already entered the tree line on the opposite side. Now, at the time, Bigfoot was not a
11:14
common topic of discussion, and the witness described confusion as
11:19
seeing a manike figure covered in shaggy hair. Later, others in the area reported
11:25
similar sightings. Approximately a mile and a half from that crossing, a woman living alone
11:32
experienced a close-range encounter. Late at night, she heard what she believed to be raccoons disturbing her
11:38
garbage cans. Armed with a 38 revolver, she opened her back door and immediately
11:43
saw a dark furcovered humanoid near the cans. [sighs] Her porch stood 4 feet off the ground,
11:51
and the being was at eye level with her from a distance of only 8 ft.
11:56
In fear, she fired all five rounds into its chest. The creature yelled and fled
12:01
into the woods, never to be seen again. Nobody was nobody was recovered and no
12:08
scavenger activity is observed in the area afterward.
12:13
A familiar an earlier from uh family incident involved the witness uncle,
12:18
aunt, and sister-in-law and her boyfriend. Now, late at night, after settling in
12:24
for sleep, the uncle heard a noise outside the bedroom window.
12:30
When he approached and looked near the glass, he realized something was looking back at him. He described seeing a
12:36
man-like face at the window before it suddenly turned and ran. Believing
12:42
someone was peeping, he alerted the others. The boyfriend, a large football
12:47
player, chased the figure as it passed the back door. He caught up and attempted to tackle
12:53
from behind, aiming for the shoulders. Instead, his arms closed around the
12:58
creature's haircovered waist. He slid down his leg and fell away as the
13:04
creature continued into the woods. Now, afterward, the uncle inspected the
13:09
area beneath the window and found nothing the figure could have stood on. The window was estimated to be 8 to 9 ft
13:16
off the ground, suggesting that the being was at least that tall, possibly taller if it had not bent over.
13:23
Now, a later unrelated incident involving another uncle provided a
13:29
contrast. He heard a similar noise at his window and found a black bear standing upright
13:35
and peering inside. While frightening, the family noted the apparent differences in behavior of proportions
13:42
and actor may have compared to the earlier encounters. The witness concludes with a firm belief
13:49
that Sasquatch is real and expresses skepticism that these beings are merely
13:55
apes. In his view, they may represent a surviving relative of modern humans or
14:01
Neanderthalss that did not interbreed and vanish. Now, this report presents multiple
14:08
sightings across decades involving different witnesses, similar descriptions in a limited geographic
14:16
area. That immediately raises the questions of pattern, but it does not
14:21
resolve it. What stands out is consistency in size, posture, bipeedal
14:27
movement, and stillness along with repeated descriptions of darker gray fur and rapid locomotion.
14:35
These elements align with long-standing Sasquatch reports across North America.
14:40
Now, at the same time, these encounters are independent events recalled years later and filtered through memory.
14:47
The belief that the same and related beings are involved is understandable, but it remains an in inference uh rather
14:54
than a demonstrable fact. Historically and folklorically large
15:02
man-like forest beings appear in indigenous traditions. Early settler
15:07
accounts and modern eyewitness reports that continuity defines the phenomenon
15:14
culturally not biologically. Now at this stage the account supports regional refer uh recurrence and
15:22
descripted similarity but it does not establish identity, intent or lineage.
15:29
What it provides is another example of how certain environments continue to
15:34
generate the same kind of encounter reports across time and across witnesses.
15:43
Now, the following account comes from a witness described two encounters separated by decades,
15:50
both involving the same unusual visual distortion in sound.
15:55
Now what matters here is not how the experience was labeled at different ages but the continuity of perception across
16:01
time, environment and emotional response. Listen to what was observed when it
16:07
occurred and how recognition emerged years later. Now, the witness states, "This is 100%
16:15
true, and it it's difficult for me to share because every time I try to tell someone about it, I get laughed at and
16:21
accused of just trying to pull their leg. Recently, I came across an article about
16:27
a woman who was hunting and saw an invisible and cloaked creature that she described as resembling the predator
16:33
from the movie of the same name. I read her story and saw the picture she
16:38
took of this predator. But personally, I think the image is just a combination of lens flare from the sun and the close-up
16:45
of her face or something similar. However, I'm not dismissing her story.
16:50
In fact, I can relate to it because I too have had a similar encounter which prompted me to see if anyone else had
16:57
encountered something like a predator in the woods. Now, let me share my encounter. When I was 5 years old, I was
17:05
playing at my the edge of the woods behind my grandmother's house. I played there often and my grandma kept an eye
17:11
on me from the kitchen or living room as the house had huge windows facing the woods.
17:17
She would come out every once in a while to check on me. I was obsessed with digging in the dirt and collecting
17:22
unusual rocks and arrowheads that littered the land where my grandmother lived.
17:29
I should mention that this was the Midwest in Illinois, not too far for the Cahokia mounds, so finding arrowheads
17:37
was quite common. Now, that day, I remember picking a spot to dig. I had been out there for quite a
17:44
while, and I had a pretty decentsized hole going when something caught my eye up in the tree next to me.
17:51
It was hard to explain, but it looked almost like a heat wave coming off the branch. I distinctly remember remember
17:58
it was fall. I was wearing my pink jacket and thought my mom would be upset
18:03
because I had dirt on the sleeves from digging. The ground was also covered with leaves. Now, as I stared at this
18:10
heatwave, I realized it had a human shape. Now, at 5 years old, I wondered
18:15
why there was an invisible man in the tree. I felt scared, but was unsure about what to do. Then, it started
18:22
moving and making a faint clicking sound. That's when I decided I shouldn't be seeing this, so I quickly ran back to
18:30
the house. My grandmother noticed I was shaking and I remember telling her what I had just that I had just seen an
18:36
angel. Now, in my 5-year-old mind, I couldn't think of anything else it could have been. I had never heard of aliens,
18:43
ghosts, or monsters. So, to me, it had to be an angel. Now, fast forward to when I was about 12
18:50
years old. By this time, the encounter was far from my mind. I loved watching action and sci-fi movies. One day, my
18:58
dad rendered a movie called Predator. While watching it with him, I was terrified when the invisible enclosed
19:04
predator first appeared. [clears throat] All the memories from that day of digging in dirt came flooding back. I
19:11
even asked my dad if the predator was real or if he knew of any animal or creature with cloaking ability that did
19:17
he didn't or that I didn't know about. He told me it was all fake. Back then, I
19:23
didn't have access to the internet. So, I once again pushed it out of my mind.
19:29
Fast forward to around 2004. I was an adult with three small children. After recently separating from
19:36
my husband, I moved with my kids to an apartment in a the town next town over.
19:42
Now, these apartments were all single level duplexes and there were five buildings in total. I lived in the last
19:49
apartment of the buildings. Although the flats were considered in town, they were situated on the
19:56
outskirts. Behind the buildings was a deep ditch separated from our backyard by a chain
20:03
link fence. On our side of the fence, there were about six or seven trees.
20:09
Now, if you followed the ditch a short distance, you would reach a small forest that eventually led to the countryside
20:15
with larger forest and farmland beyond. I was a smoker, but didn't smoke in the
20:20
apartment because of the kids, so I often stepped out in the back porch for a cigarette.
20:26
One night, I was up late doing laundry after the kids had gone to bed. I decided to take a smoke break before
20:32
heading to sleep. While on the porch, I began to hear a faint clicking sound.
20:38
Since I had been since I had seen a groundhog in the ditch a few days earlier, I looked there, thinking might
20:45
have been out again. An outside light near the playground
20:51
dimly lit the yard to the right of my porch, but I didn't turn on the porch light.
20:57
I usually didn't if I was just going out for a quick smoke. Now, not seeing any groundhog or
21:04
movement in the ditch, I continued smoking. The faint clicking noise persisted, and
21:09
a slight movement drew my attention to the tree to the left of my porch. There it was, the exact invisible figure I had
21:17
seen when I was five. It was a distorted human shape crouched on a branch with
21:22
one arm wrapped around the tree trunk. I couldn't believe it. My thoughts raced.
21:28
Is this really happening? Is this where is this here to harm me or seeing it all
21:33
those years ago? Now, this account describes two encounters separated by nearly 20 years
21:40
involving the same core elements. a humanoid shape defined by visual distortion rather dense solidity,
21:48
a faint clicking sound or boreal p positioning and immediate fear upon
21:54
recognition. Now, what is notable is not the later association with popular media, but the
22:00
original childhood experience predates culture exposure to cloaked entities.
22:08
The later encounter did not introduce new features. It reinforced the original perception.
22:14
Now, reports of invisible or partially clothe humanoid figures appear sporadically in modern encountered
22:19
literature and more broadly in older accounts of forest beings watchers in the trees are entities perceived as
22:26
distortions of light rather than physical forms. Now, these parallels provide context not explanation.
22:35
Now at this stage the report supports e ex uh continuity uh rather than intent
22:42
or identity. It does not establish what the phenomena is. It only shows that the
22:47
witness recognized the same form under different life conditions decades apart.
22:53
This is the central issue for tonight's discussion. When recognition precedes explanation, the repetition occurs
23:01
without escalation. What does that tell us about the nature of the experience itself?
23:09
Now, before we talk about the following report, if you're enjoying tonight's presentation and want to hear more
23:14
stories like this, don't forget to hit the like button and subscribe to Faners of Monsters Radio. It really helps us to
23:20
reach more people who are searching for answers about the unexplained. And make sure to click the notification bell so
23:26
you won't miss any of our live shows. Now the next case, the following account
23:33
shifts from a single witness to a short-lived regional wave of reports.
23:39
What we are examining here is not an isolated entity, I mean encounter, but how multiple descriptions, media
23:46
coverage, and the geography intersect over a brief period of time. Listen,
23:51
listen for consistency, escalation, and how quickly interpretation enters the
23:56
narrative. Now, in April of 1971,
24:02
residents of Mobile, Alabama suburbs reported sightings of what they called the wolf woman, who was roaming the
24:09
night, the streets at night, particularly on Davis Avenue. Witnesses described the creatures having
24:15
human upper body and a wolf's lower body with long hair flowing like a mane. It
24:21
was said to run on all fours. Now, according to a report in the local
24:27
newspaper, The Mobile Register, one witness described it as a woman and wolf, pretty and hairy.
24:35
Some claim to have been chased and stalked by the wolfwoman, even reporting seeing her wandering around properties.
24:44
The Mobile Register even included an illustration in one of its articles. Although no one was injured, law
24:50
enforcement in the newspaper took the report seriously after receiving up to 50 calls detailing sightings.
24:58
Now, after 10 days of reported encounters, the creature mysteriously disappeared.
25:04
There is always a possibility that these sightings were fabricated. One person might claim to have seen something
25:10
unusual and then hysteria could ensue or attention-seeking individuals might exaggerate the events. However, what
25:18
intrigues me is what the first woman or first person actually saw. To me, seeing
25:24
a wolf woman and distinctly different from spotting a big old mountain lion,
25:30
though it seems unlikely, there is a theory that the wolf woman could have been a feral woman. The case of the Lobo
25:38
wolf girl or of Devil's River is a documented incident of a feral child and
25:44
we know feral kids have existed throughout history. One additional point that stands out is
25:50
the date and the location of the sightings. Mobile is a port city on Alabama's panhandle on the Gulf of
25:56
Mexico not far from Pensacola, Florida. This incident did not occur in the
26:01
rugged back hills of Appalachia. While there may be stereotypes suggested
26:07
suggesting that everyone south of Kentucky is a hillbilly, I seriously doubt that the residents of Mobile in
26:14
1970 fit that description.
26:20
Now, this case involves multiple reports concentrated in the specific area over a
26:25
short duration with descriptions that are similar but not identical. Now, that
26:30
combination raises two competing possibilities. recurrence of the real stimulus or
26:37
amplification through attention and expectation. Now, what stands out is the hybrid
26:43
description. Witnesses did not describe a known animal acting strangely, but a
26:49
ra but rather a figure with mixed human and animal traits with an upright posture combined with quadripedal
26:55
movement. That type of description appears repeatedly in historical encounter waves
27:02
regardless of culture or region. Now, historically and folklorically, wolf-like humanoids appear in European
27:09
wolf werewolf traditions, feral human legends, and modern accounts of upright canines.
27:15
These parallels help define how such experiences are interpreted once they enter the public awareness.
27:22
They do not establish what was actually present on mobile streets.
27:28
Now, from an investigative standpoint, the short lifespan of the sightings, the lack of physical evidence, and the
27:34
absence of injury suggests a phenomena that burned out rather than evolved.
27:39
Where the initial trigger was misidentification, an unusual individual, or something else entirely
27:45
cannot be determined from the record. Now, what this case contributes to tonight's theme is not proof of a
27:52
returning entity, but an example how encounter narratives can propagate
27:57
rapidly once shared, creating a temporary pattern that feels real to
28:03
those involved even when its origin remains unclear.
28:11
Now on the following account is secondhand relayed through a witness recalling a conversation with a
28:17
coworker. Now what we are examining here is not personal observation but how shared
28:23
sightings time period and reported cooperation factors into a broader pattern.
28:30
Listen for what is claimed to have been seen. How many people were reportedly present and were certain it gives way to
28:37
recognition. Hello Mr. Strickler. I'm a big fan. I'm
28:43
reaching out to share something I previously communicated to Linda B
28:49
Linda Molton How through Unfortunately, though unfortunately I didn't follow up with her in the time at the time.
28:56
Now, my mom used to be a switchboard operator at what was once the uh Hotel
29:02
Dixie, later renamed the Hotel Carter, located in Midtown Manhattan.
29:07
[clears throat] I occasionally accompanied her on the weekends when she went to work. And while she worked, I entertained myself
29:14
by reading books, often choosing dinosaurs as my favorite subject.
29:19
Now, during that time, I had a fascinating conversation with a maintenance worker whose name might have
29:24
been Veto or Vincent. I can't remember exactly. He shared a story about riding down a
29:31
highway in Long Beach, New York. Now, as he drove with the beach and water to his right, he looked up and saw what he
29:38
initially thought was a large kite. To its amaze to his amazement, it turned
29:43
out to be a large prehistoric flying reptile, possibly a pterodon.
29:50
What shocked him even more was the other people stopped their cars to observe this creature as well.
29:55
The Pterodon seemed curious about the onlookers hovering in the wind current as they watched. The maintenance worker
30:03
regretted not having a camera while some other drivers did manage to take pictures of the sighting. After a short
30:10
time, the Pterodon lost interest in the observers and glided away, lazily flapping its wings
30:16
two to three times before disappearing from sight. What's truly amazing about this incident
30:23
is that Linda Moltenhau reported another sighting of the same creature a few months to a year later. I also mentioned
30:30
this alleged sighting to Jonathan Woodcom clarifying that although I didn't personally witness it, my
30:37
mother's coworker did and this occurred during the late 1970s.
30:43
So this report is one step removed from direct observation which immediately
30:48
places limits on what can be concluded. The core elements include a large flying
30:55
creature resembling a prehistoric reptile, multiple motorists stopping to observe it and the claim that the
31:01
photographs were taken though none are present here. Now, sightings of large terasaura-like flying creatures have
31:09
appeared intermittently in modern reports, particularly from the mid to late 20th century.
31:14
These accounts often include gliding flight, minimal wing beats, and
31:20
observers initially mistaken the figure for a kite, bird, or aircraft.
31:25
The similarity defines a descriptive pattern, not confirmation. Now, from an investigative standpoint,
31:32
the absence of firsthand testimony, physical evidence, or recovered imagery keeps this account in a category of
31:38
reported observations rather than documented events. The mention of an additional sighting reported elsewhere
31:45
adds interest, but does not independently verify the case. What this report contributes to
31:51
tonight's discussion is an example of how encounter narratives persist through retelling, especially when tied to
31:59
recognizable forms and the belief that others also witness the event.
32:05
It illustrates how repetition across sources can suggest continuity even when direct evidence remains out of reach.
32:19
So the following account dates to the early 20th century and describes a
32:25
series of reports rather than a single encounter. What we are examining here is not modern
32:31
interpretation but how repeated sightings pursuit behavior and escalation were documented long before
32:37
the contemporary crypted language existed. Listen for behavior, movement,
32:43
and how witnesses reacted to the events unfolded over time.
32:49
Now, the first incident occurred in Grayson County, Texas in September 1904.
32:55
A group of hunters observed a strange man exhibiting horselike behavior, which
33:00
was later reported by others in the area. Nearly a year ago,
33:06
a resident living along the riverfront near Preston were stirred by appearance of a peculiar being in human form. When
33:14
discovered by a party of hunters, the figure was on all fours, pawing and
33:20
nighing like a horse. The hunter's attention was first drawn to what they took to be a wing of a
33:27
startled horse in the undergrowth. Now, as they approached, the strange being ran off on its hands and feet.
33:34
However, the hunters quickly caught up, prompting the being to stand up. It then
33:40
sprinted a short distance to the river, plunging a headlong from the high bank into the water and swimming to the other
33:47
side. Upon reaching the opposite bank, it stood up and shook itself like a horse
33:53
just out of a bath and let out what could be described as a horselike laugh before running off into the woods. Now,
34:01
months later, the being was again seen under similar circumstances, this time west of Woodville on the other side or
34:09
the Indian side. Recently, a man from a man was observed
34:14
crawling across the road in plain view of several people people near where the horseman was first seen, but it
34:22
disappeared before he could be pursued. Since last Sunday, residents near
34:27
Cobert, 10 miles east of Preston, have been searching for a strangely behaving man who crawled like a snake. When
34:35
pursued, he jumped to his feet and out outruns even the fastest horses.
34:41
Witnesses who chased him on foot claimed they shot at him from close range, but the bullets appeared to have no effect,
34:47
even if they struck him. As of last evening, children reported seeing the crawling man near the Varnner
34:54
place, 6 milesi from Cobert. A phone message from Cobert this
35:00
afternoon confirmed previous reports from Durant about the excitement in the area and the gathering of several groups
35:05
of pursuit. However, public interest was waned somewhat because some who were
35:11
present with shots were fired reported that peculiar being vanished amid the smoke of the gunpowder despite being an
35:19
open and very close. At the Varner place, he crawled into the
35:24
hen house. A dead chicken was found in the field bitten at the neck with signs indicating that blood had been drawn.
35:33
Though enthusiasm has diminished somewhat, the residents of the Varner neighborhood are preparing for another
35:39
major round this afternoon and tonight.
35:44
Now, this case involves multiple sightings over an extended period reported by several or different
35:49
witnesses with in a confined region. The descriptions emphasize abnormal
35:55
locomotion, rapid speed, apparent resistance to injury, and sudden disappearance.
36:02
What stands out is the behavioral focus. Witnesses consistently describe the figure crawling or moving on all fours,
36:09
abruptly transitioning to upright movement and displaying speed beyond what observers believe to be humanly
36:15
possible. These are observations, not conclusions.
36:21
Historically and folklorically, similar accounts appear in 19th and early 20th century newspapers that often framed as
36:29
wild men. feral humans are unidentified prowess before modern crypted terminology emerged.
36:36
That context shows how some or such encounters are recorded before cultural
36:41
expectations were shaped by later media. Now, from an investigative standpoint,
36:48
the lack of physical capture, contradictory pursuit outcomes, and gradual loss of public interest suggest
36:55
a phenomena that generated alarm through repetition but resisted resolution.
37:01
Whether the case was an unusual individual, exaggeration over time, or something else entirely cannot be
37:07
determined from the ports alone. What this incident contributes to tonight's theme is the early example of
37:14
recurring encounters that create continuity through repetition even when
37:20
identify identity origin in the explanation remain unresolved.
37:28
Now, in this last case, the following account involves a single witness describing a complex experience that
37:36
spans an initial incident, later attempts at verification, and subsequent
37:41
personal and emotional consequences. Now, what we are examining here is not
37:48
interpretation or belief, but continuity across memory, location, physical sensation, and later discovery. Listen
37:55
carefully for what is directly experienced, what is later recalled, and where uncertainty remains.
38:03
Now, in 2008, the witness states, "I encountered two men who flashed me with
38:09
a device while I was parked beside the Clamoth River in Cal, California.
38:15
They pulled up behind my Jeep and pointed the device over the river, then moved alongside my vehicle and flashed
38:22
it at me. I passed out. When I woke up, they were
38:27
on a bridge flashing the device out over the river again. I ended up driving over
38:32
the bridge and back to Crescent City where I checked into a motel.
38:38
My left eye and face were badly burned. I couldn't swallow water or eat food for
38:44
at least 24 hours, and I struggled to sleep. The next day, I drove back to
38:49
Portland, Oregon. I didn't tell many people about the incident even though I had been working on a novel that I
38:56
couldn't finish. A novel centered around a similar paranormal topic.
39:02
In 2018, I returned to try to find the bridge. Now, to my surprise, there was
39:08
no bridge in the area. Eventually, my girlfriend discovered that the bridge had existed there, but it washed out in
39:14
1964. And when I saw pictures of the bridge, I collapsed and my face and my back of my
39:21
head started to tingle. The left side of my face went numb for a few minutes.
39:28
We returned to our hotel and drove back later. A man resembling the two who had
39:33
flashed me was parked in the front of the bridge memorial. I kept driving and
39:38
didn't stop. He followed us in his white van for about two miles before disappearing.
39:44
He must have turned around as the road wound through a curvy forest, making it easy to do so. The man's van vanished
39:52
right near a graveyard. Witnesses, some of whom were wellknown,
39:57
claimed to have seen giant figures walking along the river in the area. However, I never saw any giant beings
40:04
either time I visited. I did speak with several people who
40:09
reported seeing a giant cowboy in the area at dusk. Now, additionally, a local
40:15
Native American who camps on his land nearby claimed to have seen the giant Bigfoot by the river.
40:22
So, in 2014, I underwent hypnosis to recall the events in greater detail. The hypnotist was professionally licensed in
40:29
ultra depth hypnosis. Now, during the session, my memories of the event were just a standard alien
40:36
abduction. The two men and their card did not feature in my hypnotic recollections.
40:42
the the sessions were recorded. Now, I shared the recordings with friends and a
40:47
few times these friends experienced serious misfortune afterwards. The most dramatic incident was when my
40:54
girlfriend got into a near fatal car accident the same night she watched the videos of my my hypnosis sessions.
41:01
The accident occurred on her way home next to a large electrical relay stations dozens of miles from my house
41:07
and occurred at night. In 2018, I shared my story with local
41:12
Native Americans. Now, the wives of the tribal elders from the nearby tribe were very interested and wanted to take me
41:19
out to lunch to hear more, but I had to leave to return to Portland for work.
41:24
Their interest in my story was intense, and I wondered why. Now, after my mom passed away, my
41:30
girlfriend found her diary. In it, my mom had written about visiting a trail close to where my experiences occurred.
41:38
She noted strange sounds during their hike. For her to write that, there must have been more to it. She never
41:44
exaggerated about such matters. I was shocked to find out that my mom
41:49
had visited the same area a few months after my experience in 208.
41:55
I told my dad about it and they made a special trip to the location.
42:01
I questioned their motivations. Was it just the area's beauty or was it something more?
42:07
Now, there is more to the story, but this is enough for now. I'm choosing not to reveal the bridge's location. I still
42:14
might write my experiences into a book. At the time of the 2008 incident, I lived in Portland, Oregon. I had delayed
42:22
writing it all down because I feel fearful each time I start my supernatural instincts tell me to be
42:28
cautious. I avoid any supernatural influences in my life, and I do not want any contact
42:34
with spirits. Moving out of Portland helped. After I put my house up for sale, I discovered
42:40
it had high radon level. So, it's fortunate I moved. I believe radon radon
42:46
can increase supernatural activity. Some may argue that my experiences were hallucinations, but I know they weren't,
42:55
and there were too many witnesses. I have had many girlfriends over the past 13 years with two of them living
43:01
with me. The second one who moved in with me ended up physically abusing me, but I I won't delve into that. It's just
43:09
too painful. I will say that AI on dating platforms like match.com can
43:15
potentially link people in unexpected ways. When I told my girlfriend on the second
43:21
date that I had been gas lit, it seemed to attract her as a I it seemed to
43:27
attract her as a mark. I'm not one for self-pity, which is why I won't go into
43:32
detail about the other girlfriend who lived at the house. She claimed to see ghost and she wanted
43:38
me to move. She was right about that, but she also was very dangerous. I found
43:44
out she was collecting $1,000 per month for mental disability from the state of Oregon. I never figured out she had been
43:51
committed, but I suspect she may have been.
43:56
Now, this account combines a primary incident with long-term after effects including physical symptoms, memory
44:04
gaps, later investigative efforts, and perceived follow-up events. The core
44:09
experience centers on loss of consciousness, injury, disorientation, and difficulty reconciling uh location
44:17
and time. What complicates this report is the
44:23
layering of information for many years. The original event is later reinterpreted through hypnosis, return
44:29
visits, third-party stories, and family discoveries. Each layer adds context,
44:35
but it also distance from the initial observation. Now, historically, sim similar cases
44:41
often merge um often merge personal experience with locationbased lore,
44:47
reported pursuit of surveillance, and subsequent misfortune. These elements are common in long duration encounter
44:54
narratives regardless of the phenomenon proposed. Now, from an investigative standpoint, the absence of independent
45:00
documentation, the reliance on recovered memory, and the accumulation of coincidental or
45:06
emotionally charged events make firm conclusions impossible.
45:11
What can be said is that this witness experienced an event that perceived as real, disruptive, and unresolved, and
45:18
its meaning evolved over time rather than becoming clear. For tonight's theme, this report
45:25
illustrates how a single encounter can echo forward, creating a sense of continuity, not
45:33
through repetition of the event itself, but through lasting impact, reinterpretation,
45:39
and personal consequence.
#Occult & Paranormal