Cryptomundo » Malaysian Bigfoot = Surviving Homo Erectus?

Malaysian Bigfoot = Surviving Homo Erectus?

Posted by: Craig Woolheater on May 4th, 2006

The following information was sent to Cryptomundo by Peter Loh from Singapore.

As promised, I’m back with a report on the news conference I attended this afternoon and what I found out from my interview with Mr. Vincent Chow.

Before I begin, I must warn you that what you are about to hear is so incredible that it would take lots of faith to believe, and I’m not surprised if I’d be bombarded with skeptical responses from many of you. At any rate, I’m just reporting what I’ve seen and heard…

Mr. Chow, IMHO, is a man who comes across as a very learned and experienced 59 yr-old guy who exudes an air of confidence that could only have come from a man who knows exactly what he’s talking about and is dead sure that he has solid evidence. I could tell that this self-confessed "nature man" is also passionate about wildlife and conservation- he has a deep respect for nature. In short, he seemed to me, while we chatted, to be a straight-forward, nature-loving person who didn’t beat about the bush when questions were thrown at him. He spoke with such authority and sincerity that I was convinced that this man was serious and very likely telling the truth.

Here’s the statement he made that either makes him a very confident man or a very insane one. Shortly after he arrived at the conference, he announced this: A book will be launched sometime soon (in June, he told me), revealing all they know about the Malaysian Mawas from their 11 years of study of the animal. And -get this- they have clear close-up photographs of male, female and juvenile animals!… Now, when I asked Vincent if he had seen the creatures himself, he said he had seen the photographs that could not have been faked. They were real animals, with even genitalia visible. Mr Chow also said the photos were so clear that he could see the wrinkles on their faces. The point to note here is that Mr Chow believes this to be surviving members of Homo erectus. When I asked him if they were anything close to Gigantopithecus, he said that they were a very distinct form. Here’s his description of the male animal:

Head: Protruding brow with thick and bushy eyebrows.
Sloping forehead.
Ears large, as in some monkeys.
Distance between nose and lips about 2.5 times that of a man.
Nose flat, somewhat like a gorilla’s, nostrils very prominent.
Eyes are human-like but bloodshot and protruding out of their sockets, giving them a "sinister" look. (According to Vincent, they looked very intimidating).
Facial hair - almost none.

Body: Broad shouldered, barrel-chested, very well-built.
Adults up to 8, 9 or 10 ft. Juveniles up to 5 ft.
Large adults walk with a slight hunch due to height and weight.
Not as hairy as one would imagine (eg. orangutan) or the American Bigfoot (Vincent believes, due to different climate and environment, the Asian species has adapted).
Most hair at back of head and shoulders.
Hair on body only about 3 inches (he indicated with his forefinger and thumb).
Juveniles have very dark hair, almost black. Adults have lighter, reddish brown hair. As they grow older, the coloration lightens.

When a member of the press reminded Vincent that the Sultan of Johor was skeptical about these creatures’ existence, he explained that the Sultan changed his mind right after he saw the photographic evidence. These photos were supposedly taken by an elderly man who has been observing these creatures for years. "He took them with telephoto lenses," said Vincent.

The book is now in the works and, apparently, there are three co-authors involved, one being a reporter from a well-known paper (I shouldn’t reveal here). The photos will also be published in that book. So…what now?…

Malaysian Bigfoot Footprint Cast

One of the photos I took -the famous footprint cast.

Vincent mentioned an orang asli sighting in which a "mawas" was seen floating on its back, moving downstream in a river. This was brought up when I asked him if they were afraid of the water since some articles had mentioned their fear of the rain getting into their nostrils. Apparently, the creatures have acquired this technique of swimming so that their faces do not touch the water!

Another thing mentioned was their diet of tropical fruits and fish. It seems that one could easily attract a "mawas" if fish was fried in the jungle…

The fruiting season from June to July would be a great time to catch sight of these creatures…

Vincent Chow

Mr. Chow explaining his theory on Homo erectus migration while SPI’s Kenny assisted…

Is this how it looks like?…

Mawas Sketch

My sketch of the Malaysian Bigfoot based on Vincent Chow’s descriptions.

Living specimens of Homo erectus? Not that far-fetched, according to Vincent…

DNA analysis of hair sent to the US showed they were human. This could mean they are genetically very close to us. I also asked Mr Chow if the creatures looked anything like Patty and if he thought the Patterson footage was a hoax. To that, he simply said he didn’t want to put down others to gain credibility. But, if you asked me, I’d say he definitely has something which will astound the world of science!

May 2006 © Copyright Peter Loh

All photos, sketches and text used with written consent of Peter Loh.

To access all past postings on Cryptomundo on this subject, click on Malaysian Bigfoot.

Peter will be sending us updates from Malaysia.

Peter’s Singapore wildlife photos

Peter’s Artwork

This entry was posted on Thursday, May 4th, 2006 at 7:02 am and is filed under Artifacts, Bigfoot, Bigfoot Report, Breaking News, Cryptotourism, Cryptozoology, Evidence, Eyewitness Accounts, Folklore, Forensic Science, Malaysian Bigfoot, Media Appearances, Sasquatch. You can follow responses via our RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is not allowed.

Spread the Word!

del.icio.us Digg Furl Reddit StumbleUpon Help

Similar Phenomena:

37 Responses to “Malaysian Bigfoot = Surviving Homo Erectus?”

btl responds: May 4th, 2006 at 8:30 am
All I can say is wow. That’s a book I’ll definately buy, and I hope that cryptomundo follows up on this (and I’m sure they will, because they rock). This is something I think that could totally revolutionize the general public’s view of cryptozoology.
greywolf responds: May 4th, 2006 at 9:05 am
Why not publish the story and photos to show proof and then publish a book for the money……I hope this is real but if it is real then why not publish it for all to see?????
Cutch responds: May 4th, 2006 at 9:10 am
Looking forward to this publication as well… anyone think that sketch looks a little like the 1933 Willis O’Brian version of King Kong?
YarriWarrior responds: May 4th, 2006 at 10:01 am
I hate waiting!!!!!! I feel like a kid, counting the days until Christmas. I hope this saga(no pun intended)bares fruit when it is said and done. Maybe it will! Yarri
ZenBug responds: May 4th, 2006 at 10:36 am
“…Photographs that could not have been faked.”
*rolls eyes*
Peter Loh responds: May 4th, 2006 at 11:03 am
Good observation, Cutch! I love that old Willis O’Brian version! Yes, come to think of it, it does look a little like that old plasticine Kong! However, that was far from my mind when I made that sketch Actually, I sort of regret that I didn’t check with Vincent Chow if that’s an accurate rendering. I might try making another sketch of the creature’s face…a close-up version perhaps.
Jeremy_Wells responds: May 4th, 2006 at 11:07 am
well, I suppose we shall see the photographic proof for ourselves, once the book comes out, but ZenBug’s *eye roll* (while not unwarranted) brings me back to that old kill/no kill controversy.
Photographic evidence, especially in the age of digital manipulation where expensive hardware isn’t necessary, just isn’t enough.
Even if we come down firmly on the “no kill” side of things, we must admit that we won’t have real “proof” until we have a physical specimen… you know the old “a bird in the hand beats two in the bush” syndrome.
Peter Loh responds: May 4th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Well, ZenBug, I’d admit that, in this day and age, I’m not sure you’d be able to tell if it’s a very well-rendered CG picture (stuff that’s made in Hollywood) or a photograph of a real animal in a real environment. However, having said that, I’m of the opinion that, unless one has the means to produce such an image (which I doubt, what with the current design softwares available to the general public) or manages to engage the expert services of a very good special effects team, there’s just no way he or she can pull off something like this.
Peter Loh responds: May 4th, 2006 at 11:33 am
Note also that, in order to engage the expertise of a special effects team, one would have to part with a large sum of money and ensure that none of the members of the team would let the cat out of the bag!…quite a feat!
ZenBug responds: May 4th, 2006 at 12:21 pm
Well, as I’ve referenced before, The Alien Autopsy footage is a perfect example of this kind of thing. That film amazed a lot of people, and now it’s proven to be a hoax. Experts said either it’s real, or it’s one of the best hoaxes ever made, as if to imply that either way it’s incredible. But now here we are: It’s a hoax and most people have forgotten about it.

…And that was an example of special effects experts being involved and keeping their mouths shut…For ten years at least.

By the way, all software is available to the general public. I’m not in the film industry, but no fewer than two of my close friends are 3D animators working for major film studios, so I don’t think that accessing these resources is as difficult as you believe.

And bear in mind that these are photos, not video, so they only have to be convincing for one frame. Case in point: This bathroom looks pretty damn real to me, but it isn’t.
bill green responds: May 4th, 2006 at 12:25 pm
hi craig loren and everyone good afternoon WOW… great new update about the malaysia sasquatch mystery etc. im looking forward to seeing this new book about the malaysia sasquatch creatures sounds very interesting. please keep me posted and informed ok. bill
ZenBug responds: May 4th, 2006 at 12:38 pm
…Sorry, this bathroom.
gridbug responds: May 4th, 2006 at 1:13 pm
As exciting as this news is, we need to remember that we now live in an age of easily-manufactured reality, as evidenced by Hollywood FX magic and as underscored by America’s current political climate. Until we see an actual specimen (dead or alive, in person or via a bulletproof no-fakery forum) we still have nothing substantial to go on. I’m positively hopeful that this situation will pan out (and from the sounds of it, it seems very promising) but we can’t celebrate until we (and they, meaning the skeptics and nay-sayers) have positive, concrete proof. Can’t be too soon, too!
Peter Loh responds: May 4th, 2006 at 2:22 pm
Well, ZenBug, while I see your point (and that is one good rendering!), I must say I’m sure it’d take much more than that to convince someone like Vincent Chow. He might have watched Peter Jackson’s King Kong too. Granted that there are very good Special FX artists out there and that software is available to the general public (thanks for telling me), and it’s possible some rich dude paid off some of these artists to carry out the greatest scam of the century…etc, etc…but I think there are other factors to consider. I think Chow respects the elderly guy who took the photos. I can’t explain these things, but I feel Chow has his reasons to totally trust this guy. I mean, I’m sure Chow is aware of Special FX CG renderings and all that stuff, and yet he chooses to believe…there must be something that made him so sure that he’d go public with this, at the risk of being ridiculed. Well, if in the end, Chow is proven to be a charlatan, I will admit I have been totally duped by him!…But what if he’s proven right?…it’s up to you…
Limbit responds: May 4th, 2006 at 2:29 pm
Sounds like a poisoned apple to me. How do animals that fear water hunt for fish? Even if it is only water in the nose, it doesn’t sound very convincing to me that such a creature would prefer to hunt aquatic prey. Just a thaught.
Peter Loh responds: May 4th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
I believe they don’t fear water per se, but rain, reason being that they have unturned nostrils. I mentioned in my report that one of them was seen floating on its back in a river.
M Valdemar responds: May 4th, 2006 at 3:08 pm
“How do animals that fear water hunt for fish?”

The trick is to wait by the water’s edge until the fish approaches the surface, and then scoop the fish up into the air so it lands on the bank behind you.

That’s how cats do it.
sidjf responds: May 4th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
Two questions:

1) The average height for skeletal remains of Home erectus is about 6 feet. How is this rectified with claims that this animal is 8, 9, or 10 feet tall?

2) It seems that a find of this magnitude, if real, would be being reported in journals, not on the internet and in an upcoming book. Does that lower the believability rate for anyone other than me?
greatanarch responds: May 4th, 2006 at 5:57 pm
The DNA from hair samples ’showed they were human’. Does this mean they were actually human, or simply more human than any known ape? Any ideas on who did the DNA analysis?
Limbit responds: May 4th, 2006 at 8:38 pm
I would be inclined to believe that most scientific journals would shun the idea of supporting this type of research. But I would agree with you in that the way this case is being handled seems a bit sketchy. For one, it could be a very likely reality that the reason pictures have not been published online is that they could be easily identified as fakes, and in turn no one would buy a book full of fake pictures. Research takes money and time, both of which people would hope to be reimbursed for. Afterall, that is what the pharmaceutical companies are constantly accused of…false (or incomplete) results. And what is the deal with this unknown hermit-like figure with incredible (probably expensive, although I wouldn’t know) equipment taking the pictures that seem to be a (not “the”) defining backbone in this case? I hope I’m wrong, but pictures of real naked monkeys posed as bipedal primates have been proven to be little more that local fauna out of perspective before. Let’s not jump full-board this ship until we know she’s solid.
Scarfe responds: May 4th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
“Mr. Chow, IMHO, is a man who comes across as a very learned and experienced 59 yr-old guy who exudes an air of confidence that could only have come from a man who knows exactly what he’s talking about and is dead sure that he has solid evidence”

Obviously this person has never met a carnival barker or grifter.

I’ll remain a skeptic until I see the photos. You’d think if these photos existed they would have been leaked by now.
youcantryreachingme responds: May 4th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Jeremy_Wells (7) and gridbug (13) - actually that’s not correct. We can have non-photographic proof of a new species without killing one. This happens all the time; scientists suspect an organism as being a new creature, obtain a tissue sample, perform DNA work on the sample and draw a conclusion on whether it’s a new species.

If so, then they may receive approval to collect a number of specimens in order to define the identification key and select a type specimen.

No photos or kills required for proof of a new species.

But greatanarch (19) brings us back to the point - DNA analysis apparently has been performed, and this ain’t no cryptid - just a group of humans.

Perhaps they have werewolf syndrome?
Kainan responds: May 4th, 2006 at 9:52 pm
HOMO ERECTUS?! Why Homo erectus? I’m by no means an anthropologist, but I do have a strong interest in human evolution and have made a fair effort to educate myself on the subject. Aside from the cranium, the anatomy of H. erectus and H. sapiens are virtually identical and there is evidence in the fossil record from Asia and Australia that suggests they may actually be different stages in the transition of a single human species over time and geography. If a Homo erectus individual was alive today you might think they were rather homely, but you wouldn’t confuse them as anything but human. Of all the potential candidates, known or unknown, among hominids or hominoids, for the identity of the giant hairy creatures in Malaysia, H. erectus would be the LEAST likely in my opinion. Actually, I would make the same argument for any species currently classified in the genus Homo.

I’m open to the creatures’ existence and I hope they’re there, but those footprints are a pathetic joke.
DirtMonkey responds: May 4th, 2006 at 11:32 pm
That footprint cast looks like a blowup of a chicken foot.
larzker responds: May 5th, 2006 at 4:42 am
More and more artists are using 3D programs and also learning how to sculpt in order to create realistic creatures, cars or whatever. Photoshop is primitive in comparison to 3D programs like Maya in competent artist’s hands. There are many artists that could put together a picture that could fool people. Here’s a pic an artist did independently, not for a movie but for practice:

If it was slightly blurry and in the distance it could fool people.

This will be great if it pans out though. If anywhere in the world this could be possible I’d think it would be around Malaysia and Indonesia.
lamarkable responds: May 5th, 2006 at 9:23 am
If these spectulative theories, let alone the evidence, are verifiable that we have a closely related human species living among us, it causes me both astonishment and grave concern, given the potentially unethical exploitation of this species that could occur. Perhaps this is as good a test as any to determine how evolved we are when it comes to our own effective behavior toward other species.
Jeremy_Wells responds: May 5th, 2006 at 12:01 pm
#22
I never said one HAD to kill to prove (or that one should.)
I only said that you will not PROVE the existence of these creatures to a SKEPTIC until you have a physical specimen, dead or alive, in hand.
Photos, hair samples, scat, footprints, none of these have worked so far.
I stand by my statement that the only irrefutable proof is a physical specimen.
lamarkable responds: May 5th, 2006 at 2:38 pm
Has anyone noticed the sketch looks like Homer Simpson? Now thats a thought thats frightning.
Mike Smith responds: May 5th, 2006 at 6:00 pm
If this is true then the study of Bigfoot soon may not seem so funny to main steam science. Craig, please when this book hits the market let us know. I will get this one.
gridbug responds: May 5th, 2006 at 6:16 pm
I’m sure I’m not alone in wondering why, if this is the earth-shattering evidence that the crypto community has been aching for for decades, is this coming out in a book and not in a massive press release type event? The emergence of concrete, irrefutable evidence of these creatures will turn the world of science (and religion!) upside down… for something that profound to be revealed in a book just seems damn odd… and more than just a little disheartening.

Any updates on this situation? All eyes are on this site.
lamarkable responds: May 5th, 2006 at 9:10 pm
In a world encompassed by technological sciences, a photo is only a photo, a sketch is only a sketch. I agree that a book for profit is a wee bit barnum for my tastes. If there is such a creature, my sympathies are with that creature when exposed to the folly of his human comedy in pursuit of it.
peterbernard responds: May 6th, 2006 at 6:34 am
I agree with a number of the posters here that any photo can be faked now by anyone. 3DSMax is one relatively cheap program that anyone can run on Windows XP but it’s used to make visuals for feature films. Also, costuming and special effects makeup are more advanced than ever before. You wouldn’t need to spend much money or time to create convincing monster pix. A monster MOVIE might take some effort, but even that is doable now at home. For instance, you can animate a character then shoot a moving background– even a shakey handheld background– and insert the animated character into the background with the computer compensating so it looks as though it’s actually there in the shakey camera shot– perfect from every angle. You can do this with 3DSMax7 on your home computer.

On top of that place the conflicting rumors, the Barnum-like atmosphere, and Coleman insisting that it is a definite find and that it IS homo erectus, and now everything smells like ammonia and the room is spinning. There is a rumor of photos, and our beloved cryptozoologist not only jumps to the conclusion that they represent pictures of an actual species, but he identifies the species by name! I’m reminded of Bill Frist diagnosing Terri Schiavo from the floor of Congress. That diagnosis didn’t pan out too well, in case you haven’t been following the (non-crypto) news. I feel like if I pay the extra admission price to see the “living mermaid,” I’m going to be ushered into a tent with the carcass of a monkey stitched onto the carcass of a fish.
Kathy Strain responds: May 6th, 2006 at 12:37 pm
The footprint casts do not match what anthropologists agree a Homo Erectus foot would look like. In fact, the casts look like fakes to me.

If there are photographs, leaking their existence was intended to only up their value for resale to (likely) an American news company, willing to pay top dollar for photos of bigfoot and/or our closest relative. Something tells me these photos, if they exist, will be less than convincing.
EML responds: May 6th, 2006 at 6:45 pm
Do not despair cryptomundos. With hoaxes and misdirections on the upswing, we must be getting too close for comfort to the real deal.
feldspar helmet responds: May 8th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
Perhaps we should wait to actually see the pictures before we decide whether or not they are faked. We can take it as given that it’s possible to fake images. We’ll have to see how these ones pan out. We can hope.
The footprint, on the other hand, was physically present to be photographed. As much as it would be nice to say that it was convincing I, for one, just can’t. Others have pointed out it doesn’t match Homo Erectus. I would add that it doesn’t look like a footprint that has had weight rolled from the back to the front of it, as in a stepping motion. It looks like it was pressed straight down into the material that the cast was taken from. I remain hopeful that future releases and the release of the book will allow us to see more convincing information about this possible indigenous ape or ape-like creature.
troggo responds: May 15th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Sorry but I find it very shallow and unprofessional of Loren and Craig to sensationalise and celebrate this “news”. The Malaysian footprints that have been shown thus far have been rediculously blown out of proportion as they were obviously FAKE. Anyhow I look foward to the release of said “photos” and hope in the future such researchers struggling to be taken seriously dive more cautiosly into muddy waters.
Craig Woolheater responds: May 15th, 2006 at 12:23 pm
Shallow and unprofessional, really troggo? If Loren and I hadn’t ’sensationalised and celebrated this “news”‘, you most likely wouldn’t be aware of the “photos” to look forward to the release.

I hardly think that we are sensationalising or celebrating anything here. We are merely relaying the news out of Malaysia, giving additional information, illustrations and such that aren’t available from the mainstream Malaysian press and adding commentary, plus historical lore from the area.

If you don’t want to read it, no one is holding a gun to your head. Make a choice to ignore.

There are other people that enjoy getting the latest news here on Cryptomundo.

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|

Spread the Word!

37 Responses to “Malaysian Bigfoot = Surviving Homo Erectus?”

Leave your comments

Main Page

Join The Search

Mystery Pages

Login

Advertisement

Syndication

Donate Today

The Beyond

Advertisement

microsoft window 2000 professional oem software

microsoft office 2003 oem,

cheap software downloads,

The Logo Creator MEGA pak 3.6;

microsoft window 2000 professional oem software

software oem cd line business;

iCorrect EditLab Pro 4.52,

software discount oem?

adobe cs2 photo shop total training

oem software bundle

"Buy cheap PhotoShop CS 2"

microsoft office 2003 oem,

microsoft window 2000 professional oem software

oem software bundle

software oem cd line business;

inkjet definition oem software

adobe cs2 photo shop total training

"locate software oem files"

iCorrect EditLab Pro 4.52,

adobe any cs2 from photo photo shop shop upgrade version

"how to activate reget deluxe"

microsoft office 2003 oem,

"locate software oem files"

software discount oem?

adobe cs2 photo shop total training