Men in Bigfoot Research, Sean Forker

Question: Please tell the readers about yourself. What you would like people to know about you.

Sean Forker: My name is Sean Forker, I am 20 years old, married, with 2 kids and a cat. We live in the picturesque Susquehanna Valley, in Central Pennsylvania.… and I am a Squatch-a-holic. Ok, Seriously. I am interested in one thing when it comes to research. THE TRUTH. I listen to all sides of the spectrum, but I truly feel in my heart of hearts that this is a flesh and blood animal.

I love to have fun, and I am a jokester. I think we all need to have a sense of humor, since 96.8 percent of the population on this planet thinks we are nuts anyhow.

Some people think I am a very private person, but this is not the case. I talk regularly to people on this subject. When it comes to forums… I only post when I have something to say of importance. So its not a matter of being a closet case as it is being a listener. (I have been on Bigfoot Forums for over a year, and I have 250 posts.)

Ok… for all those who have fallen asleep… WAKE UP!!! I do The ‘X’ Zone Radio show with Rob McConnell usually monthly. That can be heard at www.xzone-radio.com . Click on Listen Live when I am on… since everyone else is boring. (JUST KIDDING!) I talk about Bigfoot and answer questions. Its a lot of fun, and I hope people learn from our segment. I am all about education on this creature.

Sorry for the rant… I hate talking about myself.

Question: How long have you been active in the field of Bigfoot research?

Sean Forker: I have been field active since I was 13 years old. I anecdotally call that field research, because at that time, I didn’t know what the hell I was doing. In late 2004, I discovered the PA Bigfoot Society, joined in 2005, and have been an active member since. Going back a moment; I really started serious field research at age 17, baiting local areas with apples. I read a lot of the older books, and become absolutely fascinated since the age of 10. Short Answer: 7 years.

Question: What has been your primary focus, in this field of study? Please explain.

Sean Forker: My biggest focus to date has been trying to educate the unknowing public. For years they have mislead by the media, and “expert” skeptics that the common consensus among the public is that the Sasquatch is a mythological, fairy tale- like creature. I present the current evidence as accurate as possible; and let people decide for themselves. Does this creature exist? Perhaps. But that is a right reserved for the self, and cannot be based on one half of the truth.

When we finally get the American Bigfoot Society webpage up, in the way I have envisioned it, I hope it to be a massive online reference; that will be a continual work in progress.

Question: Are you active in any Organized Groups, or are you Independent? Or both?

Sean Forker: My affiliations include: Alliance of Independent Bigfoot Researchers, PA Bigfoot Society, Squatchdetective.com, and the American Bigfoot Society. Because of time constraints, I have been very independent, but with time freeing up, I hope to become more involved with these great groups.

Question: What do you think about the growing numbers of women becoming active in this field?

Sean Forker: I personally feel that it’s great! For about the last 40 years, women have been in a minority. It is time, though PAST DUE, for a change. Women I believe are more perceptive then men, and also more levelheaded. It’s that eye for detail in my opinion that makes women great researchers. Bobbie Short comes to mind as the one who deserves great accolades; for her treks across the globe and collection of data. She should be the template for not just women, but all researchers.

Question: Have you had to deal with any resistance to your being in this field of research, due to your age?

Sean Forker: Being 20 years old, I think by far makes me one of the youngest active field researchers out there. Not many people want to hear what a kid has to say. I owe a big thanks to my mentor in this field, Eric Altman, who took me under his wing. He showed me reason, and made me the researcher I am today.

Question: Can you give any advice to women who are considering entering this research, but are hesitant?

Sean Forker: This applies to BOTH Genders:

If you are hesitant, you probably aren’t that interested. This isn’t one of those fields you can just put one foot in. Be brave, and jump in. Be up to date with the findings in this field. The more you know the better off you’ll be. Most importantly, stand up for your convictions. What you believe is just as important as what others think. Once you do that, you have my respect.

Question: How did you become involved in the search for this undocumented North American Primate?

Sean Forker: When I was ten years old, I read my dad’s copy of “Sasquatch: The Apes Among us” by John Green. That book inspired me to get involved. I soon read all I could about this mystery primate.

I think this was a desire I was born with, since my father and grandfather both enjoyed this topic and the discussion surrounding it. I took it to the next level by getting into the field. In 2005, I got my first affiliation with a REAL group, the Pennsylvania Bigfoot Society. I have investigated reports for them, and have gotten more active in the field. In 2006, I was accepted into the AIBR (Alliance of Independent Bigfoot Researchers), something I am most proud of. It’s the mystery of this all that still keeps me involved.

Question: Have you had a sighting? If so please explain.

Sean Forker: I have yet to have a sighting with one of these creatures. I did have an experience in June of 2006, a sensory and emotional overload in the woods in an area that has MAJOR history of sightings in Pennsylvania. I feel that I came close to something, but until I know what is was… I will never say for sure.

Question: Does not having a sighting ever discourage you? If so, why? If not, Why?

Sean Forker: If anything, it makes me more determined to prove they exists. The hardest person I have had to convince is myself, and I am still not sure that it does.

Question: Do you ever get into the field?

Sean Forker: I get into the field as often as possible. The frequency varies on my work schedule, but usually two weekends a month.

Question: Do you take witness statements?

Sean Forker: Yes. I am an active researcher in Pennsylvania; I am the Investigator for 6 counties. I take witness statements whenever I am asked to take a sighting. My Technique is simple. I listen to their story, and have them retell it several times. I take all the information, look for discrepancies. If there are too many, I begin to ask about them. I never ask questions that may swoon them to believe that they have seen a Bigfoot. I think that leading happens too often, and really weakens the foundation of witness reports. Teresa Hall gave me an awesome template and I use that faithfully.

Question: Most researchers have one Report that "Stands Out" in their minds, is there a report that still "stands out" for you?

Sean Forker: I think the most interesting report/ story that I have heard is the 1941 Ruby Creek Story. Read it at: www.bigfootencounters.com . Click On: The Classics

Question: What do you think is the most important question to ask a witness?

Sean Forker: Could this have been mistaken for any other animal? (Besides if they where drinking… LOL!)

Question: Do you have any advice for a new researcher?

Sean Forker: BE HONEST. BE OBJECTIVE. READ… READ… READ!!!!! And before you start making claims, be sure you have evidence to back it up. And Have it ready. If you are very new… find yourself a mentor. Someone that will help keep you in check with reality. That last part has been the most helpful to me.

Women in Bigfoot Research, Bobbie Short

*Random Photos of California Landscape*

Where to begin. To describe Bobbie Short as a Bigfoot Researcher, just doesnt cut it. Ms. Short has investigated this mystery in our own country and outside of it. She has searched high and low for any and all information she could find, then she started a website many know as Bigfoot Encounters. Many consider Bigfoot Encounters a "go to site", for good reason. Bobbie Short has compiled some of the best reports and information in the search for this undocumented animal.

When I sent Bobbie Short an email requesting an interview, I expected her to decline - she does not grant many interviews. So, you can imagine my shock when she said yes. Ms. Short was very honest and forthcoming with her thoughts and how she thinks, in relation to this research. While you may not agree with everything she says - at least she has the guts to say it. She may not care what I think about her, but I will say I respect her, and am very proud and honored, to add her name to the list of those I have interviewed to date.

Bobbie Short is a woman to be reckoned with in this field of research, and a woman I hope to one day meet and have a conversation with. I get the feeling if your skin is not thick, you should not start a debate with Ms. Short - as she is a very smart woman, and can hold her own against anyone in this. I admire women who stick to their guns and say what they think, especially when they just might know what they are talking about, and Bobbie Short is a woman of just that description.

I would like to thank Bobbie Short, for taking the time to answer all of my questions and being so honest. I do hope to continue this short conversation again in the future.

Women in Bigfoot Research, Bobbie Short

Question: Please tell the readers about yourself.

Bobbie Short: Only that I'm Bobbie Short, currently living in California formerly lived in Colorado and Texas. Contrary to the opinion of some, I am not a product out of the Pacific Northwest.

Question: How long have you been active in the field of Bigfoot research?

Bobbie Short: Since 1985

Question: What has been your primary focus, in this field of study? Please explain.

Bobbie Short: In the beginning, I just wanted answers or some plausible explanation as to what the Sasquatch was, I wanted honest answers without bias. Interestingly what I kept getting in the early days was a lot of laughter, ridicule and biased opinions without much supportive evidence for those early theories. Eventually, after a great deal of time in the archival dungeons that was our newspaper capabilities before the Internet, I began to piece together the Sasquatch mystery.

You could say my focus was to understand what this life form is that people kept seeing, that left footprints and swift images but stayed outside the boundaries of science. I was bent on reading & collecting everything I could get my hands on, books, newspaper and magazine articles, interviews, databases, you name it, if it was relevant, I consumed it. More often than not, it was a worthless waste of time but I often found little gems of truth in the worst of publications that seemed to help fit the forming picture. Slowly, plausible answers came.

Follow up question: Do you still see the same amount "laughter and ridicule" today as you did when you first became interested in this subject?

Bobbie Short: To some extent yes, certain personalities you can't tell them anything. They simply don't want to hear it. There really isn't anything I can do about those people, I don't spend a great deal of time thinking about those characters.

Follow up question: Where do you stand in the debate on Capture vs. Kill? Do you think researchers should attempt to do either one if possible? And, what do you see as the ramification of an actual Life Capture?

Bobbie Short: Nobody understands better than I that science requires a body before they will believe. But there has to be a better way. I guess I am hopeful that one will die of natural causes and be found for science or that one will become so tame to allow blood to be drawn.

Capture doesn't work for me, and neither does the kill method. If I thought this was some wild beast, then I might reconsider, but I think to shoot one, I feel is murder. There has to be a better way and maybe I'm being a bit foolish and blindly optimistic but I'm always hopeful.

Question: Are you active in any Organized Groups, or are you Independent? Or Both?

Bobbie Short: I've always been an independent researcher; I've never been much of a "joiner." I was a part of a couple of organizations at one time, very briefly, but I didn't understand the need for secrecy and signed non-disclosure contracts, nor did I understand the atmosphere of the leadership, so I quickly left. Working alone works best for me.

Question: What do you think about the growing numbers of women becoming active in this field?

Bobbie Short: Oh well, I think it's great and it's about time. I would always be supportive and encourage other women.

Question: Have you had to deal with any resistance to your being in this field of research, due to your gender?

Bobbie Short: Oh, I'm sure, but if there was non-acceptance, I didn't notice much.

There were several incidents when men made it clear I didn't know what I was talking about and this was generally from men who weren't field savvy; who have never seen that which they speak and write so eloquently about and mostly from those who hadn't done their homework.

Question: What advice would you give to a female researcher who may be experiencing this?

Bobbie Short: I wouldn't pretend to give her advice, but if she has done her homework with an open mind and knows her craft, then I would say "stand tall."There will always be the less informed who will chide and ridicule you. As long as you know your craft, in the long run, you'll be okay.

Question: Can you give any advice to women who are considering entering this research, but are hesitant.

Bobbie Short: Depends on what they are hesitant about. I think you have to have an all-consuming drive to find answers by yourself without much help from the establishment. If the self-motivation is there, a woman is capable. ..so my advice would be to "get it on." Some men find it difficult to visualize a woman trekking the wilderness alone or with one other person, or for that matter on horseback.

Some of us were born to it. And you'll notice that most relationships formed have been between a Sasquatch and a woman, we're less threatening. I would tell them we all have a starting point, let Birute Galdikas, (orangs) Jane Goodall (chimps) and Diane Fossey's work with gorillas be a source of encouragement, not that I think we're looking for an unclassified ape. I most certainly do not.

Follow up question: Do you think the techniques employed by the late Diane Fossey and Jane Goodall can be used effectively in this field of research?

Bobbie Short: No I don't. We're not looking for a mystery ape. The women I cited were looking for an ape. I think these women encountered the same sort of ridicule and difficulties that we do in our search but they overcame those problems and went on to other great successes.

Follow up question: If you do not think this is an "Unclassified Ape" what do you think it is?

Bobby Short: It simply cannot be an ape. Apes are quadrupeds, the Sasquatch walks upright. You can't have it both ways. The ape has a divergent big toe, the Sasquatch does not. Again, you can't have it both ways. It's one or the other. It's probably something in the genus Homo. I don't know just what, or how human it is, but I know it doesn't look like an ape in person and it doesn't express much in the way of ape traits other than its hairyness. In person, they look incredibly human but with a muscular build adapted for their survival in the terrain they must negotiate.

There again, we go back to the hundreds of year old oral history of the Indians who have said all along the Sasquatch are a people who have been cast out of society because of the war-like tendencies.

Question: How did you become involved in the search for this undocumented North American Primate?

Bobbie Short: I never intended to be "involved." Truly, it just happened, I guess because I'm always around asking questions, probing and prodding. I am much less involved currently than I've ever been, I don't read the lists and newsletters as much as I used too, there are other priorities I've discovered.

Question: Have you had a sighting? If so please explain.

Bobbie Short: Yes, the sighting is what started the curious route that has been my yellow brick road. It happened when I was backpacking in northern California in 1985 with some friends. In the wee early hours of a morning's first light I got out of the tent to relieve myself and noticed peripheral movement coming from my right side. I rose up to fasten my Levis and here comes this hair-covered something, or so I thought, from downhill on my right up through a small field of ferns to pass to my left. It was female, either old or unkempt, disheveled looking. It looked sick, had a huge scar on the left shoulder that looked as if it hadn't healed properly. This thing looked my way, knew I was there but never broke its stride.

The moment was so totally bizarre that I thought someone was trying to pull off a joke or something. This thing was close enough to see details but details of what I wasn't sure of for ten years that followed. I had no preconceived notions about monsters or such life forms so it wasn't scary it was just plain odd.
Question: Does not having a sighting ever discourage you? If so, why? If not, Why?


Bobbie Short: I seriously doubt I would have this much interest, had I not literally bumped into the thing by happenstance.

Question: Do you ever get into the field?

Bobbie Short: I used to get out a great deal more than I do now, now that I've come to some basic realizations, I'm not sure what the point would be other than to be in the woods, which is a great source of relaxation for me.

Follow up question: What "realizations" have you come to?

Bobbie Short: If you've seen the Sasquatch, it doesn't take much to realize this isn't an ape. No ape has ever evolved to walk upright and too, North America has no fossil record of apes, napes or mystery apes of any kind.

Apes are quadrupeds, the Sasquatch is bipedal. You can't have it both ways. It's either one or the other....it has become abundantly clear that the Sasquatch will eventually be classified in the genus Homo someday. That's my opinion on the subject. I would, of course, like to understand how the Sasquatch survives; know more about them socially and details about them, but I'm happy for the moment. I know my belief pattern isn't widely accepted. That's okay, if the 'ape hypothesis' works for science right now, I think that's great, at least they're thinking about the problem and working towards resolving the mystery. That's encouraging!

Question: Do you take witness statements?

Bobbie Short: Yes, I do, and interviews with informants and witnesses.

Question: Most researchers have one Report that "Stands Out" in their minds, is there a report that still "stands out" for you?

Bobbie Short: No, not really, not just one report. I'm most impressed with the early day accounts and those oral history reports Native Americans have shared with me. Those were impressive, but I found humor in the Keno Hill story, the man was a crack-up. There isn't just one that was all that impressive, except perhaps the John W. Burns Chehalis stories or the Frank Dan account. I can't shake those details...

Follow up question: Do you think current researchers could learn from the stories of the Native Americans?

Bobbie Short: Oh absolutely. I would hope that researchers soaks themselves in the legends and oral history handed down by the First Nation Canadians and Native Americans. Every detail is so important, the little details form a bigger picture of what we're dealing with and too, they were here before the white man was, at a time when there were far more Sasquatches. The Native traditions and stories surrounding the Sasquatch are very important.

Question: What do you think is the most important question to ask a witness?

Bobbie Short: It isn't so much what I ask as it is witness body language, I like reading people's mannerisms, it speaks to a great many issues.

I prefer the witness who looks me straight in the eye, and tells it like it is coupled with those that have evidence to offer. All questions are important as long as they are not framed in verbiage that leads the witness. Let the witness use the adjectives don't lead the witness or make suggestions.

Question: What you would like people to know about you.

Bobbie Short: I'm not nearly as interesting as the Sasquatch is, I'm not at all comfortable talking about me, you'll have to ask pointed questions to get answers. That's an easier task for me.

Question: Do you have any advice for a new researcher?

Bobbie Short: Not really, other than to read, read, read and get yourself into the field and acquaint yourself with how the wilderness works.

Question: Have you had the opportunity to do research outside this country? If so, where and can you discuss your more memorable experiences?

Bobbie Short: Yes, I've spent time in the Pacific Rim countries; at the time I found it productive but in hindsight, I'm not sure what I learned was all that earth-shattering. The heat index and the biting insects and snakes sort of put a damper on the enjoyment side of trekking in those third world countries. Just knowing if something happened, I wasn't afforded the medical luxuries afforded to the same in the United States.

I'd like to go again to China, spend more time in Shennongjia Forest, unfortunately they've closed the area to visitors to allow for regrowth and in the interest of nature conservation. There are some strange creatures in there, some all white but not albino creatures, things that a zoologist would love. Another area of interest to me is the wild man or "bear man" of Jiulong Mountain in Suichang County, Zhejiang Province China. Maybe some day down the road I'll spend some quality time in China.


Question: Malaysia, what is your opinion of the claims of Bigfoot, and a book to be published with photos?

Bobbie Short: One has to understand the culture to a large degree to comprehend the clamor over what I was told was a track poured by an inexperienced member of that research team. Dr. Joe Watanabi wrote saying it was a rogue elephant track and that was the sum of that excitement, coupled with a lack of interest in tourism, they thought it was something to pursue.

The river people and native tribesmen who work the jungles are seeing something certainly, but the descriptions contradict. Dr. Sean Ang, one of Kuala Lumpur's leading scientists recently suggested Homo erectus.... I'm not sure what he based that opinion on, but it's interesting and surely encouraging.

Follow up question: What is it about the Malaysian culture that could have created this issue?

Bobbie Short: Generally they aren't the most scientific people, much of their culture is embedded in folklore, religious belief and social customs. They are, I found...excitable, easily led and deeply superstitious about such things as hairy giants in their culture.

Question: What is your opinion on Habituation ? Good idea, bad idea?

Bobbie Short: You'll have to define "habituation" for me.

Follow up question: My definition of habituation is what I hear described as "put food out for this animal, make it feel comfortable in your backyard, become friends with this animal, and develop a relationship". Do you think that's a good idea?

Bobbie Short: ...I seriously don't believe that it has ever happened outside of the Tennessee account and I am convinced that did happen. There are details there I can't ignore. I understand that there is a tendency for field people to put food out and a corresponding belief that it's a Sasquatch taking it, but unless you actually see the squatch take it, it's probably a raccoon or a badger, something like that. I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, there isn't much in the way of data to form an opinion.

I don't know as it would hurt anything if you were resigned to do it all the time. But offering food only once in a while would seemingly be cruel. Wouldn't they become accustomed to it and forget how to take care of themselves? I haven't seen any field reports that speak to any successful habituation, so I really don't know what to make of this new trend.


Question: You have a fantastic website, for many its a "go to" for information, can you tell the readers when you started it and why?

Bobbie Short: Bigfoot Encounters has been a labor of love for eleven years. The first pages went up back in the mid 1990's, or as soon as there was a local ISP that could carry the load. At the time it went up, there was only one other on the web, that was Henry Franzoni's website. Kyle Mizokami had some great information on his early-day website as did many others. Some of the early pages I put up were really dumb!! Actually some pages still are dumb, but I was inspired to upload information free for public consumption as I found it or as it came to me, so that others could be equipped with the same information. Anymore, there is no reason not to be informed, not with all the free information provided.

Question: What changes over the years, have you noticed in Bigfoot Research? Good? Bad?


Bobbie Short: The biggest thing I've noticed is the coming and going of websites and interested people. Most tend to lose interest after a few years, and others enjoy a moment in research and are never heard from again. The most rewarding thing has been the sharing of information and text from ancient articles that people send to me. There is a gem in almost all of them that is supportive of the effort.

The most rewarding change has been the move away from the "bizarre" and the exodus away from the UFO related ideas. It used to be in the old days, the only place to read about hirsute hominids was in a UFO or like magazine. That trend is dying a fast death and I'm glad to see it go.

Now if we can just move research away from cryptozoology and those damn mystery apes, chupacabras, the moth man and Spring-Hill Jack, I'll be a happy camper.


To read articles and information written by Bobbie Short, you can visit her website at:
Bigfoot Encounters.com

Interview with Kathy Moskowitz Strain

While I enjoyed adding the Biography information of Kathy Moskowitz Strain to my blog, I realized - I wanted to ask her more questions, She graciously agreed to answer them.

Please read and get to know Kathy Moskowitz Strain, she is a wonderful woman and her love of this research is clear when she answers these questions.


Interview with Kathy Moskowitz Strain

1. How did you become involved with this research?

Answer: When I was a little girl, I saw Legend of Boggy Creek. I knew then what I wanted to do, but I didn't understand that not everyone believed Bigfoot was real. I asked my teacher in 6th grade what I needed to do to study Bigfoot, and she said that anthropology was probably where they would study him. So that is what I did!2. When did you first start interviewing Native Americans to record their stories about this animal?

Answer: In 1990, I started working as an archaeologist for the Sequoia National Forest. The Tule River Indian Reservation was adjacent to the forest and I worked closely with the elders on several projects. The subject of Bigfoot came up one day while I was on the reservation and the elders were very open about their beliefs. I asked if I could write what they told me down, and they agreed. Over the years, I gained the trust of many elders and tribal members who shared their beliefs with me and I put some on paper and some in my heart.

3. How receptive were they to you?

Answer: I think the fact that I truly believed what they said (it probably showed in my eyes) and that I'm part Native myself, helped them want to tell me their beliefs. They wanted to share that information to make sure it was written down and passed on.4. What is your favorite Native American Story about this animal?

Answer: I love the Yokuts story of how man came to be created and walk on two feet. We really should be more grateful to Hairy Man, or we'd be walking on all fours, like how coyote wanted.

5. Do you continue to gather more of these stories?

Answer: Yes. I have gathered stories from all over California, Alaska, the South, and a few from Oregon and Washington.6. Why do you feel these stories are important?

Answer: Not only were Native people the first here, but they've been here the longest. If Bigfoot is a real creature, there should be record on him in Native artwork and stories. And there is, all over this great country. Why? If Bigfoot is imaginary, why do all the stories describe a similar creature? Why is his behavior consistent? There are more than a thousand tribes in the United States, each with a different language or dialect. It is unreasonable to think that "Bigfoot" started as a story somewhere and spread across the entire U.S. (and Alaska and Canada). These stories are also clearly very old (especially when you consider the age of the Hairy Man pictographs). To think that this is a white invention that spread like wildfire though the Native communities at contact is also unreasonable.

7. How long did you study the "Hairy Man" pictographs?

Answer: I became interested in the Hairy Man pictographs in 1986, when my Anthropology teacher from my junior college took me there and shared her thoughts on the issue. In 1990, when I worked with the elders, it was very clear to me that the connection between the pictographs and the stories were deeply rooted and intertwined.
8. Your opinion of these pictographs? Do they tell us anything about Bigfoot?

Answer: The pictographs are of a family of "Hairy Men". The main painting of Hairy Man is 8 feet tall and 5 feet wide. He's shaggy and has five fingers. The Yokuts have a story that Hairy Man helped create man and all the animals who where there painted their pictures on the wall for man to remember...so the Yokuts did. The painting is of a Bigfoot, known to the Yokuts on the Tule River Indian Reservation, as Hairy Man or Mayak Datat. Along with the stories, the painting tells us that how Natives viewed Bigfoot is exactly as reports describe him today.

9. What is your goal in the search for Bigfoot?

Answer: To prove Bigfoot is real and get the species protected.10. Do you have an area you research?

Answer: Yes, I pretty much stay in my own backyard. In 2001, there was some unusual activity very near where I was living at the time. Since it was winter and the area was just below the snow line and had water and food, it opened my eyes that research could and should be conducted where you know the area well. To do the best research possible, you need to know the land, the plants, the animals, what is out of place, who visits the area (like recreationalists), when snow falls (maybe that is why that tree is down), etc. You can't do that if you have to drive hours to the location.11. Have you found tracks?If so, what is that feeling like?

Answer: Yes. It feels both overwhelming (when you realize just how BIG these creatures are) and fantastic that you are helping to solve the mystery.

12. Do you think we are getting close to documenting this animal?

Answer: I think we are closer than we have ever been because we have several very professional groups and individuals seeking to answer this question in a scientific manner.

Lets be honest

Posted on the JohorHominid Website:

Down but not out, the Search continues..

Dear Visitors,

First of all, johorhominid.org would like to thank all of you for assisting us in the identification of the hoax photograph. The respective winner of the Award will be contacted via email.

Given that the current evidence for the existence of a hominid is weaker, we are currently closing down this site temporarily pending the investigation of the alleged hominid/hominoid cave and skull. Initially the focus is on lobbying the JWPS on the release of the photograph.

Now that we have completed the mission, Vincent Chow will focus more on the fieldwork and exploration. Please email us if you wish to be updated about the expeditions via the SMS technology.

Email to sms_listing@johorhominid.org

Something is still out there..

The Founders johorhominid.org

This short little statement, posted where this website once was, really tells me quite a bit. First of all it tells me Mr. Chow was more involved with this website than I previously thought... So, that makes me wonder.. What is Mr. Chow's education and background? A quick google search tells me Mr. Vincent Chow is a palaeoanthropologist. Now, what is the definition of a paleoanthropologist?

1. A type of anthropologist who studies early humans by excavating and looking at fossilized human skeletal remains.

2. One who studies prehistoric human cultures.

3. Paeloanthropology is the branch of physical anthropology that focuses on the study of human evolution.

Now, I would not be bothered with this, had it not been for the commentary by the Johor website, chastising researchers for being too hard, and asking or demanding answers. With the background and education Mr. Chow has, why did he not spot this hoax? Will I hear that Mr. Chow and Sean Ang never saw the full photos themselves? I find that highly unlikely - as Mr. Ang sketched these pictures we now know are a hoax - in the full version. So, that leaves me with only two conclusions, either they both knew right away and published the photos anyway in the cropped version - praying no one would figure it out, because they were tired of the hard questions. Or, with their backgrounds they too were hoaxed very badly.

I would invite Mr. Chow or Sean Ang to email me - and answer these questions. How does a paleoanthropoloist not know what Australopithecus is?? 12 hours into this, it was solved - how much research did you put in before sketching this picture? This picture has been your arguement for the existance of the "Malaysia Bigfoot" for a long time now - do you have any other pictures?

Tell me why I am wrong - and why I should not be upset with either one of you? Convince me you are not trying to hoax the world - and create tourism.

I and many I know, expect more than just someones word,

That something is the truth. Honestly (although I will be shocked to hear either of you admit this) you only published the cropped photos because you felt pressure from this community - this had nothing to do with exposing a potential hoax. Im pretty sure you had access to the same information, as the people who exposed these pictures. The Bigfoot community and Cryptozoology community expect more, and thank the lord they do.

Both Sean Ang, and Mr. Chow are invited to email me, melissah326@sbcglobal.net

And try to explain this, I will publish your email in full. Oh, and I will not be purchasing any "Book" until my questions are satisfied. You have many questions you should answer, and a short "oops" statement is not going to make this ok. If I do not recieve a response, I may in fact call for a BOYCOTT of your "book".

I do however, notice you plan to make good on your "reward" -- but I honestly do not see you have much of a choice.

A Leg?

Bigfoot Leg or The Leg of Unknown Origin?

Courtesy of: Cryptomundo.com

Often I sit back and ask myself, do the TB's of bigfoot research really think we are this stupid??

Answer: Yes, they really do.

Craig Woolheater discusses an issue brought up on the website owned by T.B. concering a leg. Pay attention folks -- there will be a quiz.

Well, read it for yourself......

Photo alleged to be of Bigfoot's eyes proved to be a hoax
New Strait Times Article:

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Sat...icle/index_html

R. Sittamparam - 05 Aug 2006

JOHOR BARU, SAT.: Local Bigfoot website, johorhominid.org, today thanked a French hominologist who helped them prove that photographs of Bigfoot provided to them by a group was a hoax.

One of the website founders, Sean Ang, said Jean luc Drevillon had yesterday responded to the website's posting of a clip of the eye from an alleged female Bigfoot picture and revealed the actual source of the photographs.

Ang said Drevillon had identified that the eye photograph was from Australopithecus images in a book on a French television documentary, "L `Odyssee de l'espece", released in 2001.

He added: "At first we thought the Bigfoot photographs were convincing. However, after we posted a sketch of the eye, we could smell something fishy. The online community was not convinced. This was worrying. So, we thought it was time to post the real photo to settle the issue once and for all."

Ang said the website's co-founder, bio-diversity researcher Vincent Chow, managed to convince the group in possession of the hoax photographs to allow the posting of the eye photo.

"We also announced in our website cash prizes for anyone who could match the posted eye photograph. Our technique worked and in less than 12 hours, the verdict was out that the photograph was a hoax."

Ang thanked the online community including Jason Pritchett of the United States and Lorenzo Rossi from www.criptozoo.com among many others for providing help in proving the photograph a hoax.

Chow meanwhile said with the hoax photographs out of the way, the website will now concentrate on the many sightings and evidence compiled on the Johor Bigfoot so far.

End of Article.



And your opinion is??

More on the Johor Controversy

This just out. When will the Johor site be back up and running?? Read this article to find out.

The StarOnline

Johor Hominid Photos... or are they?

I decided to stay clear of the Johor Hominid situation a while back. I posted my initial opinion of the situation, then moved on. It seems however there is breaking news.

Apparently an Italian Website Criptozoo.com shared some very interesting news with the world.

Recently cropped pictures were posted of the alleged Johor Hominid eyes on the Johorhominid website, they even went so far as to say "she has a loving gaze" (which creeped out many researchers I know, including myself).

They then went on to say - if anyone could prove these pictures were a hoax -- you would win a monetary prize, roughly $327.00, and a trip to Malaysia. I must admit - they almost had me last night. I stared at this photo for quite sometime, but something just didn't seem right to me. I kept asking myself, why only post part of the face? If the scientists involved really are tired of the criticism to the point where they would even put out a partial picture, why not just show the whole "animal".

There is a good reason for that. Here is the truth in color.



Maybe it is true, maybe a picture does say a thousand words..... It certainly spells out $327.00. :)

If there is any truth to this whole issue, we wont know for quite sometime. As I read the Johorhominid website, I noticed an appeal by the site owner - for the bigfoot community and others who post on their site, to be fair about these photos, and to be fair with the researchers in Johor, because if we were, we just might get more information in the future.

Here is a note to that website owner/Administrator with Johorhominid.org. Put up or shut up. The time has come. You have played with the serious researchers in this field for far too long. You ask us to be fair with you, and your site is posting photos that are obviously not what you claim they are, and when that is discovered, you take the site down for "Maintenance"??

Here is an idea for you.

While your performing "Maintenance", be sure to remove those photos too. I personally find the commentary by that website administrator/owner to be quite insulting. Were these photos approved as you say they were by Mr. Chow and the researchers of this project? Or was this your own little bit of fun? I think that is something you seriously need to address.

In my opinion this is about the almighty dollar, and Tourism.

The research by the owner of criptozoo should be applauded. I wish I could read Italian - because if I could, he would have a new visitor daily.

There are many men and women who take this research seriously - and until "those in the know" in Johor make all the information available - in full, without the mis-information, I will not be visiting their website again.

UPDATE TO THIS ARTICLE: I have learned that the person responsible for the discovery of the actual photos and exposing the hoax was Jean-Luc Drevillon. The website Criptozoo published the information discoverd by Jean-Luc Drevillon.

I salute you both - and say thank you for doing such good work, and telling the public.

Hoaxes like this should not be allowed to continue!!! Good Work :)