Killarney Park

DyldeBrill · 22-02-2010 8:25pm #1

Just out of curiosity, as I know there are quite a few people here from around this area, that could maybe share some more indepth info on this place to me.

My Sister had been walking through this park coming close to dark with her boyfriend.Joggers were out running, everything seemed pretty busy.Before she knew it, dusk had fallen and everything became pretty dark.Eventually as time went on, my sister stopped, she does not know quite where she had stopped because she was frigtened by what she saw.

It was hard to get a propper description of it out of her.She said she had seen a huge figure in the distance coming quite close to her, and that it looked like it had hooves.Now when we all heard this we lauged and obviously thought it was a horse that may have got loose in the park, or maybe it was even one of the rangers.She stopped us and said it was definitely no horse.Her boyfriend added to this by saying it could not have been a horse, they were certain on this and even though it was dark they were able to make out that much.It was somewhat upright, is what they said.

Now I would have just laughed this off and even writing this I kind of feel like I'm describing something out of Narnia, but I have never seen two more frightened people when returning back to the hotel.They ran of course, they ran and ran until they were out of that park.

Sorry if this is a bit hard to understand but maybe someone here has experienced something like this and I just thought it would be interesting to know.

-Dylan

Ruth KPS · 22-02-2010 9:23pm

Hey Dylan,

Ruth here from Killarney Paranormal Society.

We have had a similar report as to what you have just written, beleive it or not...

Last September we investigated a portion of the Park, and found strange goings on.. but nothing concrete.. and certainly nothing on camera or seen by us..

But just to let you know, no, you are not going mad... it has been seen before.

We did a good portion of the park however, its impossible to investigate the whole thing its so large.

Is there any way they know what part of the park they were in? Near the castle? Or other landmarks in there....

Ruth

DyldeBrill · 22-02-2010 9:29pm

Well from what she says, it was near the cathedral end.I guess its good news to hear this responce at least the pair of them know they are not going mad.I will try get more details up as soon as I talk to her.

Ruth KPS · 22-02-2010 10:39pm

Ah ya, I know the part of the park she is talking about...ask her if it was near the big house (known as Knockreer House)... she may not have seen that though if it got dark.

DyldeBrill · 22-02-2010 11:37pm

hmmm she does know of it but can't remember if it was there.It happened all so fast for her.We are going down there again soon enough and hopefully we will come across something.Really is quite strange to be honest.Can't get my head around to what it actually may be.What have the others who have experienced it said?

Ruth KPS · 23-02-2010 12:18am

They couldn't say much, just that it was a darkish colour and like a horse but not a horse if that makes any sense.

a-k-47 · 23-02-2010 1:06am

thats freaky two similar descriptions. How tall approx did they say the figure was?..was it coming at speed?

Ruth KPS · 23-02-2010 3:41am

I wasnt told of any height or anything like that...and when this person saw it...it wasnt moving at all....Just still.

pookie82 · 23-02-2010 10:52am

When you say "like a horse" do you mean on four legs or was it definitely on two? Sounds bloody freaky if it were walking upright!!!

DyldeBrill · 23-02-2010 6:09pm

pookie82 wrote: »

When you say "like a horse" do you mean on four legs or was it definitely on two? Sounds bloody freaky if it were walking upright!!!

I'd love to know.In the scare of the event they just turned and ran.They initially thought it was a horse, but as it got a bit closer and when realising that it wasn't a horse they made a run for it.

I'll be going to Killarney soon, so I think I'll have to try find somrthing out for myself.

Ruth KPS · 23-02-2010 6:55pm

When your in Killarney, if you need any help from us, just give us a shout!

DyldeBrill · 23-02-2010 7:00pm

I'll hold you to that.We are going down for the Irish open, so closer to that time I'll get in touch.Thanks again for your help

Mr. Incognito · 23-02-2010 7:00pm

Sorry- I'm from Killarney, I don't frequent this forum but I saw Muckross Park on the home page and thought that it was the hotel she was talking about so clicked through.

Like a horse but not a horse.

Are you aware there are hundreds of deer in the Park?

Two breeds, Japanese Sika and Red deer- so much so that we have a cull every once in a while.

I'm guessing if it was dusk, it was a stag. They bound around and are most active at dusk and dawn.

Nothing sinister I'm afraid. I grew up running around that Park and have seen deer a heck of a lot of the time.

Edit- Ruth - are you really from Killarney?- deer should be obvious to anyone that is. You know the part of the Park? How could you. It's hundreds of acres all crisscrossed by Roads. If there were a lot of Joggers it does sound like the domain but equally could have been Muckross or Ross Castle.

DyldeBrill · 23-02-2010 7:05pm

^that could be well it you know.My sisters boyfriend however would have said that and would have noticed it.But a deer it may have been, I really don't know, I'll have to get them to describe it better for you all.

i'll say it to her anyway

Mr. Incognito · 23-02-2010 7:15pm

Well Stag are well used to people there, and they bound around at breakneck speed from time to time and they can get quite big, plus antlers. They'd look a bit sinister in poor light if you weren't aware they are knocking about

Ruth KPS · 23-02-2010 7:32pm

The woman I was speaking to walks in this park daily....she is 100% it was not a stag

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 2:44pm

Hey Dylan,

Ruth here from Killarney Paranormal Society.

We have had a similar report as to what you have just written, beleive it or not...

Last September we investigated a portion of the Park, and found strange goings on.. but nothing concrete.. and certainly nothing on camera or seen by us..

But just to let you know, no, you are not going mad... it has been seen before.

We did a good portion of the park however, its impossible to investigate the whole thing its so large.

I wasnt told of any height or anything like that...and when this person saw it...it wasnt moving at all....Just still.

Hold on, I'm quite confused here. You found strange going's on, but saw nothing and then your account of something similar has now become a second hand account, and yet you can discount something that someone else saw 100%??

Maybe it's the fact I'm a solicitor but second hand accounts, legally, cannot be relied upon. It's heresay. Maybe I'm being pedantic because of what I'm used to in my professional career but the old adage believe nothing that you hear and half of what you see may apply.

You seem to be impying that you can substantiate that what someone else saw, who by the way is not the OP and at best is a second hand account with another second hand account? Can you see how this adds up to, :"my friend saw X, Oh My friend saw X too!!!" without any recourse to another simple plausible explanation?

I'd love to hear about the unseen, undocumented "strange goings on" that you experienced on my doorstep. In fact I'd love to come out the next time the Killarney Paranormal Society go on a walk through the park to experience it myself.

The Killarney National Park is just that, a National Park. It has deer, and badgers and foxes and people and all manner of creatures crawling all over it. Heck it could have been a jaunting cart seeing as it was dark and there were hooves. I do get a slight twinge of amusement though to think of two people who have scared themselves enough to go running from the National Park.

Now, Like I said I don't frequent this forum so if people come here to tell ghost stories and entertain themselves for a bit of fun and like to freak each other out and that's the run of the forum then me wading in here bursting the balloon so to speak may be a bit unwelcome but I really can't take an account of this nature second hand seriously when it is in my town and I have a personal interest.

Ruth KPS · 24-02-2010 4:10pm

Your opinion is accepted.. everyone is entitled ot their own opinion..

The strange goings on, that we found had absolutly nothing to do with the story in question.. that is due to things we found on an investigation down by the Ross Catle side of the park.

Yes what I am going by is second hand information.. but that's what Paranormal Investigators do.. they get reports from people which is second hand information and go and investigate and try and debunk things or find logical explanations for what has been going on.

I am not saying that there is some big monster in the park... I am stating to the OP that another person has reported to us, a similar story. Therefore, it may be more credable (think thats spelt wrong!) that something may or may not be there.

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 4:29pm

Fair enough- I have no experience of what paranormal investigators do.

Can you tell me what you found on your investigation?

they get reports from people which is second hand information and go and investigate and try and debunk things or find logical explanations for what has been going on.

I find this at odds with your posting. Instead, the natural first instinct of someone like myself who has no experience of the paranormal is stag. Yours is "we've had something similar", when in fact you've had a second hand account of something. i.e you tended to attribute the sighting to the supernatural as opposed to the natural. Should your mindset not be the other way round?

I am stating to the OP that another person has reported to us, a similar story. Therefore, it may be more credable (think thats spelt wrong!) that something may or may not be there.

That is not a logical train of thought. You have an rational explanation for one thing and a second hand account of another. i.e you are adding two and two to make twelve. If you have a genuine unexplainable phenomenon and a second substantiated unexplainable phenomenon then yes, something may be there. However two accounts of people, one unfamiliar with the park and hense ignorant of the fact there are deer there and one, familiar who saw something unsimilar (you say it was not moving) then you can't even use these second hand accounts to substantiate each other as they saw unrelated things.

Ruth KPS · 24-02-2010 4:52pm

I took an interest in this thread as I live in Killarney and am very familiar with the park.. a woman came to us a few months ago stating that she had a very scary experiance in the park and she was genuinly scared, when she told us the story, she could not tell us much as she ran away.. I am not saying that she didn't see a stag. This is a question which I asked her...

She says that she is 100% sure she did not see a stag.

So that is what we have to go on... now we have found a similar story.. OP's story... all we have to go on are these 2 accounts, so we need to listen to everything they say.. then go and try to find the logical reasons..of what they saw if there is anything to be found..

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 5:09pm

What??

So a woman told you a similar story, but did not tell you much and ran away? And she said 100% that it was not a stag, but you say you asked her at the time even though it never occurred to you to ask the OP was it a stag perhaps? This is all starting to look a bit shady Ruth. Do you by any chance charge people to go on these investigations? i.e do you have a vested interest in promoting the idea that something might be out there? I'm not attacking you, I'm just wondering is there any reason you are avoiding the issues raised above in my post.

You did not address my points above. On the facts of it we have stories that have nothing in common with each other at all. Would you not agree?

The first point would to be establish what was said before you go surely as to establish what you are looking for perhaps?

And out witnesses are a woman who ran away and tourists who ran away before being asked any probing questions. You seem to be eager to head away on a witchhunt (pardon the pun) without even knowing what it is you are supposed to be looking for/ investigating etc.

Now once again, I have no knowledge of this- perhaps some other paranormal investigator on the forum could update me on the procedures for investigating these accounts? Do you collate second hand information and head off with a flashlight and a camera charging people for the "experience"?

I don't see you applying any logic here Ruth, or answering any questions.

Do you charge people that accompany you on these investigations or is it a group of like minded individuals engaged in a hobby?

What do you say you discovered by Ross Castle?

Do you see any similarities between an unsubstantiated account of "something with hooves" and "something that was still".

DyldeBrill · 24-02-2010 5:17pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Hold on, I'm quite confused here. You found strange going's on, but saw nothing and then your account of something similar has now become a second hand account, and yet you can discount something that someone else saw 100%??

Maybe it's the fact I'm a solicitor but second hand accounts, legally, cannot be relied upon. It's heresay. Maybe I'm being pedantic because of what I'm used to in my professional career but the old adage believe nothing that you hear and half of what you see may apply.

You seem to be impying that you can substantiate that what someone else saw, who by the way is not the OP and at best is a second hand account with another second hand account? Can you see how this adds up to, :"my friend saw X, Oh My friend saw X too!!!" without any recourse to another simple plausible explanation?

I'd love to hear about the unseen, undocumented "strange goings on" that you experienced on my doorstep. In fact I'd love to come out the next time the Killarney Paranormal Society go on a walk through the park to experience it myself.

The Killarney National Park is just that, a National Park. It has deer, and badgers and foxes and people and all manner of creatures crawling all over it. Heck it could have been a jaunting cart seeing as it was dark and there were hooves. I do get a slight twinge of amusement though to think of two people who have scared themselves enough to go running from the National Park.

Now, Like I said I don't frequent this forum so if people come here to tell ghost stories and entertain themselves for a bit of fun and like to freak each other out and that's the run of the forum then me wading in here bursting the balloon so to speak may be a bit unwelcome but I really can't take an account of this nature second hand seriously when it is in my town and I have a personal interest.

Well I have to say you sound exactly like a soliciter haha, my father is a soliciter and I have to say i found it very interesting reading your replies.I myself am spreading on 2nd hand info here as it was not me who it happened to.It would be a lot better coming from my sister who I have to get on here to give the clear cut story.

I just find in interesting in the way that you cannot except any sort of reply from Ruth here.I don't find anything strange about what she said and here last reply seems pretty clear!Now I have never encountered any strange paranormal activity, but I am open to the opinion that there is something out there.Your attitude towards it all is that it is complete nonsense and I completly respect your opinion if thats the case, but I personally find your responces some what rude in a way.Disecting her replies, which there is really no need to do.

wrote:

Now, Like I said I don't frequent this forum so if people come here to tell ghost stories and entertain themselves for a bit of fun and like to freak each other out and that's the run of the forum then me wading in here bursting the balloon so to speak may be a bit unwelcome but I really can't take an account of this nature second hand seriously when it is in my town and I have a personal interest.

Now I'm sure people come here with some fun and harmless stories, but don't knock the folks that come here looking maybe looking for help or even to de-bunk the actual situation that may worry from them.Again I got the feeling that the stories on here are all nonsense.

this is just my personal opinion on the matter.I thank you for responding to my initial post and you could be right, it may be a stag but I also respect Ruth and where she is coming from and I thank her also.

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 5:28pm

Hi OP,

Thanks for getting back to me.

My attitude is not that it is all nonsense- in fact there are many cases of documented phenomenon that cannot be explained.

I'm just say that this from Ruth:

but that's what Paranormal Investigators do.. they get reports from people which is second hand information and go and investigate and try and debunk things or find logical explanations for what has been going on.

is completely at odds with her postings. Her first instinct was not the logical approach which would be to outline what it could possibly be but rather to discount what it could possibly be when she in fact was not the one that saw it. Think of it like startrek, her phaser is set to "unexplained", where as mine is set to "cynical".

Her last reply is anything but clear. A woman told her something fleetingly and then ran away. Hense the witness cannot be identified or questioned and Ruth's word on the matter is therefore gospel according to the woman that ran away.

I would love if you could point out this thread to your sister so that she may come here and give a first hand account.

The reason I am dissecting Ruth's replies is that she has contradicted herself and changed her story. If you percieve that as rudeness then I apologise to you and to Ruth. I'm just trying to see where she is coming from. Something I am finding it difficult to do at the moment.

DyldeBrill · 24-02-2010 5:36pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Hi OP,

Thanks for getting back to me.

My attitude is not that it is all nonsense- in fact there are many cases of documented phenomenon that cannot be explained.

I'm just say that this from Ruth:

is completely at odds with her postings. Her first instinct was not the logical approach which would be to outline what it could possibly be but rather to discount what it could possibly be when she in fact was not the one that saw it. Think of it like startrek, her phaser is set to "unexplained", where as mine is set to "cynical".

Her last reply is anything but clear. A woman told her something fleetingly and then ran away. Hense the witness cannot be identified or questioned and Ruth's word on the matter is therefore gospel according to the woman that ran away.

I would love if you could point out this thread to your sister so that she may come here and give a first hand account.

The reason I am dissecting Ruth's replies is that she has contradicted herself and changed her story. If you percieve that as rudeness then I apologise to you and to Ruth. I'm just trying to see where she is coming from. Something I am finding it difficult to do at the moment.

Maybe rude was too strong a word to be honest and I do see where your coming from in your last post.Nothing wrong with wanting a concrete answer.

I'll have to get my sister and her boyfriend to post up a mor accurate detailed responce.

Ruth KPS · 24-02-2010 6:15pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

What??

Do you by any chance charge people to go on these investigations? i.e do you have a vested interest in promoting the idea that something might be out there? I'm not attacking you, I'm just wondering is there any reason you are avoiding the issues raised above in my post.

You did not address my points above. On the facts of it we have stories that have nothing in common with each other at all. Would you not agree?

The first point would to be establish what was said before you go surely as to establish what you are looking for perhaps?

And out witnesses are a woman who ran away and tourists who ran away before being asked any probing questions. You seem to be eager to head away on a witchhunt (pardon the pun) without even knowing what it is you are supposed to be looking for/ investigating etc.

Now once again, I have no knowledge of this- perhaps some other paranormal investigator on the forum could update me on the procedures for investigating these accounts? Do you collate second hand information and head off with a flashlight and a camera charging people for the "experience"?

Do you charge people that accompany you on these investigations or is it a group of like minded individuals engaged in a hobby?

What do you say you discovered by Ross Castle?

QUOTE]

1. No we do not charge anybody any money to come along with us, some investigations we do bring people along, some we don't, each case is different. If there is a charge to anyone it goes directly to the client not us. Some locations charge and some dont, the ones that do, the money goes to them, we are a 100% completly non profit organisation.

2. I'm not avoiding any questions, you are asking so many I'm finding it difficult to answer them all.

3. At the moment if we were to go and investigate it, which we may not, we wouldn't go blindly into the park. We treat it like any other case, interview any witnesses that may have come to us with reports, interview the people in charge of the park, interview people who work in the park regularly, and also a family that I know very well live in the area near where OP's friends seem to have been at the time of their "sighting" so they would also be interviewed.

There would be research done into the history of the park and history of the certain area's that people have sighted whatever it is.

4. I have not published our findings from the Park at the Ross Castle on boards as we don't make our findings overlly public..now if you would like to discuss the report from that investigation with me, that is possible but it will not happen over boards.

5. Now I don't see how clearer I can make it other then that.

6. If you have any other questions.. put them to me and I will answer them, however at the moment I do feel any answer I put to you you may not listen to.

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 6:47pm

There are a number of inconsistencies there.

Firstly I note that you have referred to "it" again. Twice in your last post and in your previous posts. That presupposes there is an "it". That is also evidence of bias that "it" exists over natural phenomenon. That is not evidence of someone that is keeping an open mind but someone that is prejudiced before any investigation has started. Heck there could be an "it" but there is no evidence to even point that way, once again we have two fleeting second hand accounts that seem to differ in what they are describing.

Secondly the OP has not said where this in the Park, a park which covers hundreds of acres and has at least two dozen entrances that I know of and probably many more that I don't and yet you seem to know and have friends in the area? Heck I live beside the park myself. I hope you're not counting me.

Thirdly you refuse to disclose what you discovered publically on previous investigation by Ross Castle. I have a feeling that it is because there are probably a number of inconsistencies in that story also. As it is your own first hand account, by all means PM me, I'd love to know and I will keep it undisclosed if that is what you wish. I would however like a detailed account so that you are clear in what you are alleging and if I feel there is a reasonable explanation for what you saw/ heard/ etc I'll certainly make that clear.

Your approach to your proposed investigation seems sound if a little OTT for what was most likely a stag. Surely Interviewing the individuals first hand would be the most likely approach and the investigation tailored after that to suit what was needed to actually investigate.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree until the first hand account comes to the thread to comment. Right now I'm coming down on stag on the OP and I'd actually discount your fleeting lady out of hand as from you it is a third hand account and totally unreliable, both in content, fact and credibility.

I'm glad to hear that it is a hobby and that you would not be biased towards a certain perspective that co-incidently would line your pockets because it discounts a vested interest.

I look forward to your PM and that's it from me until the OP's sister decides to comment, if at all.

Ruth KPS · 24-02-2010 7:09pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

There are a number of inconsistencies there.

Firstly I note that you have referred to "it" again. Twice in your last post and in your previous posts. That presupposes there is an "it". That is also evidence of bias that "it" exists over natural phenomenon. That is not evidence of someone that is keeping an open mind but someone that is prejudiced before any investigation has started. Heck there could be an "it" but there is no evidence to even point that way, once again we have two fleeting second hand accounts that seem to differ in what they are describing.

Secondly the OP has not said where this in the Park, a park which covers hundreds of acres and has at least two dozen entrances that I know of and probably many more that I don't and yet you seem to know and have friends in the area? Heck I live beside the park myself. I hope you're not counting me.

Thirdly you refuse to disclose what you discovered publically on previous investigation by Ross Castle. I have a feeling that it is because there are probably a number of inconsistencies in that story also. As it is your own first hand account, by all means PM me, I'd love to know and I will keep it undisclosed if that is what you wish. I would however like a detailed account so that you are clear in what you are alleging and if I feel there is a reasonable explanation for what you saw/ heard/ etc I'll certainly make that clear.

Your approach to your proposed investigation seems sound if a little OTT for what was most likely a stag. Surely Interviewing the individuals first hand would be the most likely approach and the investigation tailored after that to suit what was needed to actually investigate.

QUOTE]

1. I said "It" because "It" could mean anything... a stag, something paranormal etc, I stated "It" due to the fact that I don't know what it is..

2. The OP said it was near the cathedral end... the end off Port Road.. I do know family that live just beyond Knockreer House, so if that happened to be near the area, I would ask them a few questions. If it was deeper into the park I probably would not..

3. Our approach to an investigation is not OTT, all groups who do this, interview clients, people and research the area.. that is how you gain insight into the area and information.

4. I never ever refuse to disclose information on a case, only if the client asks us to keep it confidential. In our Ross Castle case the information can be realised but not over boards. That is a group decision... we keep them to ourselves unless someone would like to know...

I would however like a detailed account so that you are clear in what you are alleging and if I feel there is a reasonable explanation for what you saw/ heard/ etc I'll certainly make that clear.

To be fair and I do not mean this with any disrespect whatsoever and I dont mean it in a rude way.. whether you feel it is a reasonable explanation for what we saw/ heard/ etc doesnt matter to us.... I have been doing this for quite a while.. I know what I am doing so we know whether something that happens on an investigation is credible or not, we dont need to be told so.

Mr. Incognito · 24-02-2010 8:48pm

I know what I am doing

I highly doubt it judging on the content of your posts. Inability to answer simple questions and refusal to debate or produce credible witnesses. I think it is a matter of overactive imaginations to be honest hence the need to hide behind anonomous "clients" and witnesses that simply do not exist. I have a feeling that if you released your "group decision" info I could most likely drive a truck through it.

The OP said it was near the cathedral end... the end off Port Road

It is pointless continuing this further to be honest as you have even invented where this account has taken place even though the OP never mentioned it. Try and reread the thread. People that add to the facts to suit a patently flawed argument, well it's not the same argument that you started with. That area is known as the domain and I am the one that mentioned it not the OP.

Anyway OP, please as your sister to come and contribute to the debate.

Ruth best of luck with the paranormal society. I'm sure you and your friends will have many happy outings scaring each other with fairytales and things that go bump in the night. Each to their own as they saw and I'm sure it is a vigourous and enjoyable pursuit. If you do find anything that you can release without the anonimity of your clients or can produce witnesses that haven't run away after they recount these details I'll be happy to engage in further debate with you as to what exactly "it" is.

Good evening.

Ruth KPS · 24-02-2010 9:43pm

It is pointless continuing this further to be honest as you have even invented where this account has taken place even though the OP never mentioned it.Try and reread the thread. People that add to the facts to suit a patently flawed argument, well it's not the same argument that you started with. That area is known as the domain and I am the one that mentioned it not the OP

If you read the 3rd thread which is the OP's second post If im correct, he states, that it happened at the cathedral end... he thinks. Therefore If am correct, I havnt made that up. So adding facts, I think not.

Ruth best of luck with the paranormal society. I'm sure you and your friends will have many happy outings scaring each other with fairytales and things that go bump in the night. Each to their own as they saw and I'm sure it is a vigourous and enjoyable pursuit. If you do find anything that you can release without the anonimity of your clients or can produce witnesses that haven't run away after they recount these details I'll be happy to engage in further debate with you as to what exactly "it" is.

To be honest, coming from someone who has never been on an investigation and coming from someone who has no idea what happens on an investigation, that means nothing to us. These "imaginary" clients that you speak of.. you do realise on almost every investigation you deal with clients.. maybe you need to do some research into what Paranormal Investigators do...

The witness did not run away after she recounted her details to us, she ran away after she saw whatever it is she saw..

Also I will have you know KPS have done some fantastic investigations around Ireland and are as good as any group out there.

When you stop commenting on something you know nothing about then maybe I will discuss things with you further, however until then, discussion closed.

Good night.

kylith · 25-02-2010 12:37pm

“dusk had fallen and everything became pretty dark”
So, it was dark out

“a huge figure in the distance coming quite close to her”
It was either in the distance or coming quite close to her, which was it?

“They ran of course, they ran and ran until they were out of that park.”
So they didn’t stop to get a good look at it?

To recap: it was dark, they saw something “like a horse” in the distance, and they ran away before they got a proper look at it? How can they be so confident it wasn’t a horse, or a deer, or two guys dressed as a pantomime cow, or a cardboard cut out, or some guy dressed as Herne the Hunter on his way home from some Medieval Fair?

Our second second hand account says that it’s “like a horse, but not a horse”*, but that person too glimpsed something, and immediately ran away so that, in your own words “she could not tell us much”.

I have to say that I’m with Mr. Incognito: if you hear hoof beats think ‘horses’ (or indeed, ‘deer’), not ‘zebras’. And until we, at least, get a first hand account of what went on.

*does anyone else hear “like a Golf, but not a Golf, but similar”?

ceadaoin. · 25-02-2010 3:08pm

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Her last reply is anything but clear. A woman told her something fleetingly and then ran away. Hense the witness cannot be identified or questioned and Ruth's word on the matter is therefore gospel according to the woman that ran away.

I would love if you could point out this thread to your sister so that she may come here and give a first hand account.

The reason I am dissecting Ruth's replies is that she has contradicted herself and changed her story. If you percieve that as rudeness then I apologise to you and to Ruth. I'm just trying to see where she is coming from. Something I am finding it difficult to do at the moment.

I think it is fairly clear that Ruth is saying she questioned the woman in detail but as she had run away at the time of the incident, there was not much information she could give. She is not saying that she only spoke to the woman fleetingly. She has also stated that woman (who walks in the park daily) was '100% sure' it wasn't a stag.

I think it is very interesting that there have been 2 independent sightings of something very similar in the same area although obviously that doesn't neccessarily make it paranormal.

pookie82 · 25-02-2010 3:32pm

ceadaoin. wrote: »

I think it is very interesting that there have been 2 independent sightings of something very similar in the same area although obviously that doesn't neccessarily make it paranormal.

I agree. Especially since in the OP here there were two people present who seem to have both witnessed the same thing and were both frightened enough to run. I'm not saying it was some sort of hybrid paranormal entity but I'd like to know what's provoking such a reaction in people.

I'm also more than a little amazed at the attitudes in this thread. I'd generally be skeptical to say the least, but I wouldn't advocate a sustained and rude attack on the persons in question who are just trying to convey what they saw/heard of.

It pretty much defeats the purpose of having a forum for people to dicuss their experiences if they're targeted by skeptics who lace into them and completely have a go for two pages. Comments such as this:

I'm sure you and your friends will have many happy outings scaring each other with fairytales and things that go bump in the night.

are just unnecessary IMO.

Unless there's an undercurrent here I'm missing.

Ruth KPS · 25-02-2010 3:35pm

There's absolutly no undercurrant as far as I know...

kylith · 25-02-2010 3:58pm

pookie82 wrote: »

It pretty much defeats the purpose of having a forum for people to dicuss their experiences if they're targeted by skeptics who lace into them and completely have a go for two pages.

I didn't see any 'lacing into'. I saw Mr. Incognito looking for proof. That's what this forum is for; debating. If you're going to make claims of the existance of the paranormal you'd better have more than "well, they said it kinda looked like a horse, but that it wasn't a horse..." to back you up. I can never understand why some people who believe in this stuff expect all conversations to go:
"I saw this"
"I don't believe you"
"Well someone else saw something like it too, but didn't get a good look, so that proves that there's something there"
"Ah, you've convinced me!"

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof; as the saying goes.

Something deer-shaped, seen in a park known to be full of deer, in the dark, by people who didn't stick around long enough to make sure it wasn't a deer, is most likely a deer. It's called Occam's Razor: the simplest solution is probably the correct one.

Ruth KPS · 25-02-2010 4:11pm

Very true,

My point in replying was to let OP know his friends arnt going mad as there was another report,

I know that park like the back of my hand, and it more then likely was a deer as they roam around freely.

The report I got, she was sure it wasn't but that doesn't mean it 100% wasn't a deer if that makes sense.

It is the most logical explanation.

You always have to put Logic before Paranormal when investigating.

ie Try find the logical explanation first, then if you can't, then decide whether it's paranormal or not.

I mentioned that the lady said it wasn't a deer and got a backlash from it...that was her opinion, not mine.

kylith · 25-02-2010 4:22pm

Ruth KPS wrote: »

Very true,

My point in replying was to let OP know his friends arnt going mad as there was another report,

I know that that's what you meant, but it was kind of phrased in such a way that it could be read as you endorsing it as some kind of púca, since you didn't offer any other explanation for it.

Ruth KPS wrote: »

I mentioned that the lady said it wasn't a deer and got a backlash from it...that was her opinion, not mine.

Well, get her on here and we'll interrogate her instead!

Ruth KPS · 25-02-2010 4:25pm

Oh ok, I see that now... lol thanks for pointing it out to me..

Deal, you bring the duck tape, she'll talk eventually lol

pookie82 · 25-02-2010 4:36pm

kylith wrote: »

I didn't see any 'lacing into'. I saw Mr. Incognito looking for proof.

I don't have a problem with looking for proof. I thought he could have been a little less rude about it. See my above quote of his snide comments. Completely unneessary IMO.

If you're going to make claims of the existance of the paranormal you'd better have more than "well, they said it kinda looked like a horse, but that it wasn't a horse..." to back you up.

No one is pretending to have proof of the paranormal, they're just sharing experiences. If someone had solid proof this forum would be pointless.

I can never understand why some people who believe in this stuff expect all conversations to go:
"I saw this"
"I don't believe you"
"Well someone else saw something like it too, but didn't get a good look, so that proves that there's something there" "Ah, you've convinced me!"

Where did anyone claim solid proof because of a couple of eye witness statements? I thought it was interesting, that's it. Can you show me where someone claimed solid proof?

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof; as the saying goes.

I don't disagree. But again, I saw no one claiming proof of anything, just sharing similar admittedly unexplained phenomenon.

DyldeBrill · 25-02-2010 5:39pm

kylith wrote: »

“dusk had fallen and everything became pretty dark”
So, it was dark out

“a huge figure in the distance coming quite close to her”
It was either in the distance or coming quite close to her, which was it?

“They ran of course, they ran and ran until they were out of that park.”
So they didn’t stop to get a good look at it?

To recap: it was dark, they saw something “like a horse” in the distance, and they ran away before they got a proper look at it? How can they be so confident it wasn’t a horse, or a deer, or two guys dressed as a pantomime cow, or a cardboard cut out, or some guy dressed as Herne the Hunter on his way home from some Medieval Fair?

Our second second hand account says that it’s “like a horse, but not a horse”*, but that person too glimpsed something, and immediately ran away so that, in your own words “she could not tell us much”.

I have to say that I’m with Mr. Incognito: if you hear hoof beats think ‘horses’ (or indeed, ‘deer’), not ‘zebras’. And until we, at least, get a first hand account of what went on.

*does anyone else hear “like a Golf, but not a Golf, but similar”?

Well it is hard under the circumstances that I wasn't there so I did my best to describe it.I never claimed it was anything paranormal but from what my sister and her boyfriend had told me, I thought it would be interesting so share with the forum.

I also said that my sisters boyfriend had got a better look at it and I have been talking to him recently.He described something slightly different.I just think its pure ignorant when you come here share your story of an ACTUAL event be it paranormal or not, and people reply with smart arsed comments.

Your comment was useless and non constructive.I don't know why I bothered answering your pathetic responce when pure ignorance is clearly eveident.I also claimed that nothing paranormal has never happened to me, i'm just here out of curiosity.

This "extraordinary" could well be a cow, stag, or horse, but it was the fact that they thought otherwise.Maybe people on here would have had a bit more info to de-bunk it.