Comments on: Jersey Devil and Ivan T. Sanderson

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 21:06:04 +0000

It is easy to mix up accounts, dates, and towns in this arena, when one is doing such things without looking. The old kangaroo stories and Wisconsin photograph appeared not first with Clark, but in my work, so I knew something was off here. Sorry. I researched those stories and assisted him in obtaining the details and placing them in his books, so I figured this was a memory lapse. There is no 1900s’ photograph from Mays Landing of a kangaroo, and I would like to stop this “rumored remembrance” right now before it gets carried away.

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:56:59 +0000

I also take back my comment about the Giant Monkey theory, upon seeing the Wisconsin photo again. That photo, at least, is vague enough to be interpreted a little more broadly.

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 20:54:47 +0000

Funny you should make reference to the missing Thunderbird photo…OK, I stand corrected, but I wasn’t way off. First off, yes, I was talking about Kangaroos, not ol’ JD. As far as I know, no one’s ever gotten a picture of anything they even claim is a/the Jersey Devil. On page 201 of Clark’s original edition is the 1978 Wisconsin picture…but opposite it is an account from 1900 (So I was off a few years) of a Kangaroo in Mays Landing. Now here’s the odd bit- I would swear that I’ve seen a Kangaroo picture, almost identical to the Wisconsin pic, that was said to have been taken in Mays Landing. I can see it in my mind now, essentially the same composition, with heavy trees and brush in the background appearing very dark, Kangaroo hunched over somewhat with its head staring right at the photographer, although the roo itself was a tad brighter and stood out more clearly from the background. I’m certainly willing to admit, given the evidence, that the text on the one page and the picture from the other combined in my head long ago, and I’ve been carrying the false memory in my head for over a decade. I guess my question now is whether or not something like this could have happened regarding the famous Thunderbird photo? Might there be any books that mention the Tombstone incident accompanied by a somewhat suggestive image? That might explain how so many people claim to have seen it, I suppose. Just a thought.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 19:03:02 +0000

Yikes, mnynames, what are you talking about? Are you trying to start rumors about the “Mysterious Missing Jersey Devil” photo?

Look, please, again in your copy of Unexplained.

Please find and reference the page where there is a photograph of a Jersey Devil from Mays Landing. Please tell us more about such a photo from 1908. It doesn’t exist.

Are you thinking about a photo of a kangaroo from Wisconsin in 1978? Or a drawing of a Jersey Devil from around 1908?

But, no, there never has been a photo of a Jersey Devil in any Jerome Clark book because one does not exist.

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:54:09 +0000

Damn, I also forgot to mention that the photo was supposed to have been taken in Mays Landing, New Jersey, the seat of government for Atlantic County.

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:51:49 +0000

Oh, I suppose a possible 5th category would be a Kangaroo (Oddly enough, there are several reports of Kangaroos in New Jersey, devoid of any folkloric trappings). I also recall that Jerome Clark had a photo of one in his book “Unexplained!”, said to have been taken in 1908, a year before Phenomenal Week and rather far removed from the area the hoaxer was said to operate out of. And yeah, it did look like a Kangaroo, not a monkey, with all respect to the phantom kangaroo-as-giant monkey theory (Which doesn’t, of course, disprove it, just means that maybe both suppositions are valid).

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 17:45:31 +0000

Oh, I agree. I was just looking at a site that collected eyewitness accounts of the Jersey Devil and found it interesting how vague some of the descriptions were. It was like, “I saw the Jersey Devil! No need to describe him, since we all know what he looks like.” Frustrating. Still, there were some interesting nuggets to be found, and one account of finding numerous tracks of various sizes indicates multiple animals, which takes it out of the conventional folklore paradigm. There were also some photos of tracks found after an encounter that look like nothing I’ve seen before- sort of like cloven hooves with a claw in between. Even if they were deer tracks, I find it hard to explain how they wound up on the roof of a house and nowhere else. Overall, the accounts I was looking at could be relatively easily divided into the following categories- 1) Probably a crane or heron, seen by someone who wouldn’t recognize one; 2) Not seen but heard, which could place it as a conventional animal like an owl or wounded rabbit, deer (One of the scariest, most blood-curdling sounds I have ever heard came from a baby rabbit being attacked by a cat); 3) Sasquatch-like being; 4) A profoundly large bird, possibly the Thunderbird; and 5) WTF? Some horrible, demonic chimera with little in common with any conceiveable biological animal.
Perhaps what is really needed is a dedicated investigator with no pre-conceived notions who really does his homework. I think the main complaint I had with the investigators whose site I was viewing was that very little seems to have been done to explain the evidence as anything but what they were told it was. Still, it was nice to see that their personal theory was that it was a cryptid of some sort, as opposed to a demon.

By: One Eyed Cat

One Eyed Cat — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 15:20:08 +0000

Mnynames,
Your points are valid however unlike most other folklore and cyriptid crossover JD is stated to begin in a given year. On another board I read an accout some time ago from a member in that area eho had a strange experience involving the top of a car.
I’m thinking it would be useful to have more reports of what ’strange occurences’ meaans. Locals would be a valuable source to collect stories from if they could describe the incidents in a bit more specific terms and not think the investigator is just interested in the JD

By: Mnynames

Mnynames — Thu, 13 Apr 2006 03:36:09 +0000

One-Eyed Cat- For better or for worse, the Jersey Devil, like the Chupacabra, Mothman, and even Sasquatch, seem to exist in both the realms of folk tale and cryptozoology, making it all the more frustrating to try to figure out just what is going on. As we have seen, folklore, such as the Native American legends of Sasquatch or the native African tales of Mokele Mbembe, can serve as a guide for cryptozoologists, clueing them in to the existence of a phenomenon worth exploring. Personally, I think the Jersey Devil gets pooh-poohed because it comes from the folklore of a seemingly “modern” society (Even though a lot of New Yorkers and Pennsylvanians would probably disagree…that’s OK, as a lot of New Jerseyites think the same about them). Personally, I find both areas fascinating to explore (See my comments on the other Jersey Devil posting for some more folkloric contents).

Prioris- Somehow I think it safe to say that genetic engineering back in 1735 (The origin of the legend) or even 1909 for that matter, did not consist of much more than selective breeding of domestic animals. I also doubt the administration of Theodore Roosevelt had much interest in black ops programs or counter intelligence operations against his own country…although being a New Yorker and a nature lover, he likely knew of the legends. He also knew of some Sasquatch legends as well, and if I recall correctly, may even have heard one growling.

By: prioris

prioris — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:54:29 +0000

It was written

“The stories of sightings seem to have been a combination of planted stories, hoaxes, and imaginations fueled by fear.”

Planted stories are usually government sponsored to discredit the truth. The media has been controlled by the oligarchy that runs this country for a long time.

US counter intelligence hiring people to carry out hoaxes are another way to discredit the truth.

The way a government discredits people when there are too many witnesses and say people are hysterical or their imaginations fueled by fear.

With black operations technology 50, 100 or even more years ahead of what we see in public, it is easy to think that the animal was likely genetically created. If they didn’t create it, you can be sure they sent out some trappers to capture it.

By keeping things like this a “mystery”, they help keep people distracted from the more important things.

There seems to have been enough sightings so it likely does exist or had existed.

In the final analysis, most people rather live in their little compartmentalized bubble so like a mushroom rather be kept in the dark and sprinkled with manure by their government.

It’s like the chupacabra. There is enough eye witnesses to say it exists.