Comments on: Naked Wild Man of Dighton

By: mandors

mandors — Tue, 17 Apr 2012 14:18:36 +0000

Here is a neat link I found for a "Strange New England Website". If people think there is cognitive dissonance associated with cryptids, it's nothing compared the "professional opinions" about ancient sights in New England. EVERYTHING is dismissed by academics as a "root cellar" or Native American in origin. The first argument never addresses why or how"Goodman Proctor" would have used several ton blocks just to protect his rutabagas. The latter ignores that local Native American peoples did not build in large stones. In terms of the Bridgewater Triangle, many of the area's Bigfoot sightings have occurred in or near Hockomock, though none of them are very good. There is also Dighton rock itself, a fascinating anomaly.

By: SquatchDoc83

SquatchDoc83 — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 23:26:12 +0000

Loren:
Thanks for the interesting article. The link of the Dighton wildman to viking visitors is an interesting one. There are a number of sites in eastern/southeastern Massachusetts tied to other settlers such as the Monk Caves of Franklin County which some stories tie to settlement by Irish monks and the Westford Knight, and carving of a 14th century knight that some connect to visits by the Knights Templar. Do you know of any Fortean sightings linked to these?

By: DWA

DWA — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 20:21:41 +0000

Desertdweller:

Um, er, there are, let’s see, places that I

1) would never apply sunscreen and

2) could not imagine the severity of the consequences if I didn’t.

By: Desertdweller

Desertdweller — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 18:49:34 +0000

I have a friend who enjoys hiking nude in the desert. He prefers sunny, hot days to do this.

When I asked him why, his answer was that the snakes will not come out in the desert sun. True, but be careful about resting in the shade!

By: DWA

DWA — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:13:59 +0000

Loren: no question. I mean, remember what I’ve said here, over and over:

Scientists should NEVER scoff.

Which means that no one should.

Nothing unproven is properly described as loopy or woo-woo. We just may not have the scientific tools yet.

“Unproven” works for me.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 14:12:39 +0000

Ah, DWA, yes, but…

The triangle was there before the ghost hunter-type maps were created.

The data did not come about because of maps like this.

The accounts were there before I coined the name.

I am not happy about the “paranormal content” or nature of this map, either, but I wanted to show, through a clear graph, the extend of the triangle this morning.

Shout out to artists at Cryptomundo reading this: Please draw me a clear, geographically correct map with all the cryptids in the Bridgewater Triangle being represented!

By: DWA

DWA — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 13:07:17 +0000

I’m not going to say that I think everything paranormal is loopy or anything.

But one reads about some of the “ghostly occurrences” in the Triangle, and one wonders whether one’s receptivity to imagery like that couldn’t be heightened by just hearing about it and then going there.

I guess as with all things paranormal one can do no more than say, not proven, nor provable, yet.

I once drove down the Ghost Road of east Texas (Google it) between midnight and two a.m. Moon up. Couldn’t have been a spoooooooooookier night to be there. Even got out at a power line crossing to do some bigfoot howls. (Hoarse for weeks.)

Nuttin’.

Maybe I’m just not one of those folk that see ghosts.