One of the hazards of being a "skeptic" about paranormal subjects is that those who have had their own personal experiences or investigated a peculiar case like to play "Stump the Skeptic."
"Oh, you are a Skeptic. Well, I have a story for you," and then I get an earful.
How do you explain that?" they conclude, with added self-satisfaction of a story well-told.
I can't. And I'm not going to try to explain it.
Unless it's a well researched case which has published documentation, I can't say anything about it. It's just a story. If I accepted every story I heard at face value every day, I'd be broke and in a mess of trouble. I am not accusing people of lying. I'm saying "I wasn't there. It was not my experience," so I'm not going to speculate about what you saw or what may have happened.
There is nothing to go on when cornered with these stories. I can't fact check or confirm. I can't pull an explanation out of a hat. I have no place to go with them except to say, "Hmm, interesting."
Paranormal books are primarily these types of stories. It's unusual for a case to be well-investigated compared to the thousands of stories that are related from eyewitnesses or referenced from other sources. Too many stories aren't referenced at all. I was recently reading a book on local monsters and some accounts lacked accurate locations. There was no town of that name or there were no details. Useless. That is such poor quality evidence, it might as well be discarded since it is more likely wrong than helpful.
Anecdotes do not necessarily garner strength in numbers -- not for paranormal subjects. A pile of unreliable tales is no better than one unreliable tale. It's all hollow.
When it comes to local ghost and monster tales, the stories just exist and it is unclear where they originated. Such tales are great as local folklore. A problem arises when these anecdotes are elevated to "evidence."
There is an over-reliance on anecdotes in the paranormal community -- for hauntings, cryptozoology and ufology -- as the basis of investigation. A case will start with an observation but if that is ALL that it is, with no physical evidence, no verification and a cold trail left to follow, there is nothing you can do with it but document it.
Had your own experience? Cherish it as your own. I just can't help you and it's a bit rude to put me on the spot. You had the experience. It's up to you to provide evidence to support it, not for me to disprove your claim.