25 Responses to “Gilroy Associate Announces Tracks”

1. MattBille responds: April 29th, 2008 at 9:25 am

   a “few years back” Rex Gilroy “discovered a small scrub Moa track(s) [sic] up-to 20 in leaf-mould..of which two were cast.”

   OK, where are those casts? Where is the report on them? What independent scientists have been contacted to provide opinions? These are fair questions - no attack meant.

2. eireman responds: April 29th, 2008 at 9:34 am

   Agreed, MattBille. It’s basic scientific procedure to have your discoveries verified independently.

   As for the “attacks”

   “the person who owns the site is a cryptozoologist himself - and even asked for a free copy of his Rex’s crypto book) even allowed posters to demean and insinuate that they wouldn’t trust anything Rex discovered”

   “even ALLOWED posters…”?? Sounds like the problem isn’t with you, Loren, or the site itself. Sounds like this guy is miffed because people stated their opinions in the comments forum. Would anything less than unmitigated praise have been sufficient to appease him?

   I agree with you, Loren, when you say that had he been less sensitive to outside criticism and more focused on the work … C’est la vie, right?

3. shumway10973 responds: April 29th, 2008 at 10:08 am

   ausiepath9 is either Rex or it sounds to me to be someone he may want to put a restraining order against. This person is obsessed with Rex. There is nothing wrong with people voicing their opinions about such things. There has been a pattern in the crypto world that we recognize–when people make claims without showing their “evidence” things are fishy. I would be overjoyed if/when he finds the Moas, but until then this kinda smells like the Johor big foot incident, “We have pictures! Here is a sketch of the picture…Okay, here’s the picture…Ooops, we didn’t know…” (that is just a summary of the Johor incident). If Rex is just as sensitive as ausiepath9, then he may want to look into another career. Cryptozoology is a major target/magnet for criticism, even from within. After all it is a science, therefore we need to review the evidence, and not just go by our deepest desires and beliefs that these different creatures actually do exist.

4. planettom responds: April 29th, 2008 at 11:48 am

   I’m not familiar with the Gilroy quest; but it does sound like to me that ausiepath9 needs to take a step back and a deep breath, and then learn the definition of a “blog” and the definition of “cricital appraisal”.

5. red_pill_junkie responds: April 29th, 2008 at 12:30 pm

   I agree, I read the 10 comments made by Cryptomundians and only one talked about Gilroy himself, the others remained either skeptical or hopeful; in other words, the typical Cryptomundo response.

   I honestly think ausiepath9’s rant was uncalled for. But I think he should be the one to explain what he feels was an unfair attack against Gilroy. This is after all a free and open forum, right?

6. whiteriverfisherman responds: April 29th, 2008 at 12:51 pm

   Sounds to me like ausipath9 needs to take a couple of deep breaths, getting bent over constructive criticism and plain old honest opinion is just down right childish. I went back and read the entire blog entry and the comments and I found nothing that would be considered demeaning to Mr. Gilroy.

   The people that leave comments on this web site are very knowledgeable and intelligent folks (excluding yours truly of course) and do not to stoop to the level ausipath9 seems to have. Good luck in your endeavors ausipath9, good luck indeed.

   Oh yeah I almost forgot, what evidence?

7. CamperGuy responds: April 29th, 2008 at 1:08 pm

   Read the previous linked posts.

   Opinions were expressed. This site is criticised because of one perceived negative opinion ? Rather excessive.

   Please note the Ausiepath9 critic obviously read the posts and chose not to refute the opinion or present information to show error in the opinion.

   This site is populated with inciteful, intelligent and thoughtful posters whose opinions which are shared with civility. Singular agreement is not necessary. I have seen posters diagree on one blog and be in agreement on another. In the blogging world this is as good as it gets.

   I do not feel that Cryptomundo or Loren needs to be defended since the opinion of Ausiepath9 is unfounded and unwarranted but since silence can be perceived as approval I chose to post.

8. sausage1 responds: April 29th, 2008 at 1:25 pm

   Loren, in anything of yours I’ve ever read you have always tried to be objective and respectful, even when you obviously disagree with findings or procedure.

9. planettom responds: April 29th, 2008 at 8:19 pm

   My post above should read in the last sentence “critical appraisal”, not “cricital”. See, I can even acknowledge my own mistakes and I’m not afraid to admit it on a blog.

10. a_mangy_human responds: April 29th, 2008 at 9:07 pm

    Welcome to the world of cryptozoology! lol

    Seriously if you’re going to be in this field better be ready for criticism and if you cant take the heat get out of the kitchen! I know! I’ve personally already gone through it on a smaller scale and needed to overcome it, all in a certain time period of course, as they say time heals all wounds. The more one gets involved and gets to know other cryptozoologist or so called experts in this field, the more one sees the world of cryptozoology is just like everything else, high school all over again! I can only hope Rex keeps his chin up and keeps on searching whether the feedback is positive or negative.

11. yetimead responds: April 30th, 2008 at 6:33 am

    The in-fighting in the crypto community is unreal. Over the years there appears to be 2 camps that have taken one side or another.

    Rex Gilroy is berated by those who say that giant lizards cannot exist & yet expouse a theory that the Yowie, Australia’s bigfoot is a true, living, breathing animal without any scientific proof or fossil record to support it.

    Megalania actually existed.

    No wonder the mainstream scientific community doesn’t take us seriously.

    Unless cryptozoologists change their attitude in their persistence that every unknown creature can be explained as a living dinosaur, then the science will fade into obscurity.

    Has anyone wondered why there has been no new definitive crypto book that has been published within the last 10 years that concentrates on taking the subject forward, 99% of the books go over regurgitated old reports that bring nothing new.

    What should be happening is applying, investigating & matching old reports with current scientific thinking to prove that cryptozoolgy has a positive role to play in today’s world.

    The colossal squid that is currently being examined by a team of scientists is suppose to be a juvenile, as this squid doesn’t seem to suffer the same buoyancy problems as Architeuthis, then this may give weight to this squid attacking boats in the past.

    There is also the MonsterQuest evidence of a giant squid 60′+ videoed in the sea of Cortez which would be a 1st for either Architeuthis or the colossal squid. Unless it is a giant version of the Humboldt squid.

12. CryptoHaus_Press responds: April 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm

    What should be happening is applying, investigating & matching old reports with current scientific thinking to prove that cryptozoolgy has a poistive role to play in todays world.

    well said and agreed.

    but then, that would mean setting aside the personality wars in favor of doing the dirty, in-the-field, scientifically tedious job of analysis vs. opinion and facts vs. factoids in context, right?

    oh well, it was a good idea…

13. DWA responds: April 30th, 2008 at 9:41 pm

    When some people are attacked, they get all emotional and act as if they or their pet Sojourner After Truth are on an island surrounded by sharks.

    When others are attacked, they calmly trot out more evidence.

    Guess which ones I pay attention to?

14. Cropper responds: May 1st, 2008 at 7:24 am

    The conflict and disagreements that arise within cryptozoology are no different - and certainly no worse - than the conflicts that arise in any branch of mainstream science. Read any of the recent news items relating to the Flores hobbit controversy to see that our field is not unique!

    In Australia, Rex Gilroy certainly polarises the cryptozoological community; he has his strong supporters and vocal detractors. He certainly feels persecuted - his last self-published book (’The Yowie Mystery’) contains page upon page of (thinly veiled) barbs targeted at just about every other yowie researcher in the country. Interestingly, while other books on the yowie mystery (Malcolm Smiths, mine and Tony Healy’s) mention and acknowledge other active local researchers, Rex’s books only ever seem to mention…Rex!

    And to yetimead, I’d add that I have serious doubts that the giant lizard stories are a legitimate Australian cryptids. I’ve been in the field in Australia for 30 years and I’ve never come across an old report or modern witness in any of my travels. Makes you think!

15. yetimead responds: May 1st, 2008 at 9:32 am

    I agree that it is very difficult to believe that Megalania is alive, well & running through the Australian bush.

    My point is that instead of arguing about these creatures we should be carrying out investigations to see whether creatures currently exist that could match these reports.

    For example;

    Chinese Wildman - the orangutan’s distribution was spread over vast tracts of asia in the not too distant past & is a strong possibilty that unknown pockets of these creatures could have survived to the present day in China.

    Why does the crypto community insist that this creature is Gigantopithecus blacki when we don’t even know if it was bidpedal, yes, if it was then may fit the some eye witness reports, if not, should it be ruled out.

    Unfortunately the politics of the cryptozoological community have to force the identification of Gigantopithecus blacki on the rest of the community as it is a current favourite for the identification of Bigfoot & it is certainly a big money spinner!

    Other eye witness reports for the wildman include witnesses describing it as big, round bellied with red hair which describes an orang.

    Bigfoot - I’m sorry but the Patterson film looked a fake back in the 70s, isn’t it interesting that he actively went looking for it & managed to find one, producing the only bit of tangible evidence to show up in years.

    Motion detectors, infra red cameras have produced nothing since - willing something to exist I’m afraid just doesn’t cut it with the mainstream science community.

16. a_mangy_human responds: May 1st, 2008 at 9:56 am

    hell yeah yetimead!!!

    “Why does the crypto community insist that this creature is Gigantopithecus blacki when we don’t even know if it was bidpedal”

    And all this based on a few teeth and jaw bones! LMAO

    I totally agree with you on that Gianganto theory and hate the fact that people just seem to agree with it without knowing much about Gianganto!

    Regarding the PG footage! I used to 100% believe the footage was legit but now I’m no longer sure?!? I can only say that the vocalizations I’ve experienced (would be hard for a human to do) and the hand print and feet prints I’ve come across (unless done by a human to fool me, which would be really tricky aswell due to the dermal ridges and depth of the prints in the type of earth they were done in, it whatever it was had to weigh a whole lot) seems to me that the PG footage is a fake! As you’ve mentionned he went looking for it and after 40 years and all our current technology we cant even come close! If I hadnt experienced my own experience I would right off this whole phenomenon as being a hoax!

17. sschaper responds: May 1st, 2008 at 11:09 am

    As long as his forearm? Is a mid-scale tyrannasaurid running about New Zealand?

18. stormwalkernz1 responds: June 9th, 2008 at 3:59 am

    My apologies for not responding to this earlierI have been plagued by ill health lately so have not been unable to do much.

    Rex’s associate got in touch with me to say that Rex did make some pretty fantastic finds while he was here in New Zealand.
    I have however seen nothing about these finds in any of the local media nor has any evidence of them been presented to me for examination by photographs or otherwise.
    I do admit I was informed that the Gilroy’s tried to contact me while they were here in New Zealand, regrettably they were unable to do so as I was tied up with a family crisis at the time.

    I’m therefore unable to comment on what Rex did or did not find.

    It would certainly be wonderful, and I think most people would agree, if there were Moa in the Hawkes Bay area.

    I am forced to ask myself however if Rex has found this proof why has he not notified the appropriate authorities, being the Department of conservation to arrange for some protection of the area and the birds. That would be the appropriate channels to go through.

    I must also ask if the evidence is so solid why has it not been examined by specialists in the field and DOC who would in this situation mount a search of the area with appropriate skilled conservation staff.

    In a lot of ways I respect Rex’s work, and dedication, all that can be asked is that this proof be put before professionals who if there is anything there will guarantee its conservation and continuation.

    Tony Lucas
    NZ cryptozoologist

19. ausiepath9 responds: August 8th, 2008 at 3:07 am

    As for the fresh tracks, there were many. The link is here.

    I have nothing against this site-against Loren Coleman or anyone else in here.

    If it did seem that way then I am apologising now to Loren for the misunderstanding and the way I typed what I did.

    I hope that clears that up.

20. ausiepath9 responds: August 8th, 2008 at 10:19 pm

    I would like to clarify a few points.

    First; before Rex & Heather departed to New Zealand, there was a barrage of news reports in New Zealand.

    Some of these were from scientists, local park rangers and even a quote (which turned out to be false) from the Dinosaur lady-Joan Wiffen, affectionately known as “the Dragon Lady”.

    QUOTE:Palaeontologist Joan Wiffen, 85, of Havelock North, who made the first discovery of dinosaur bones in New Zealand, said it would be a sensation if the Gilroys found living moa, but she would not be holding her breath. It was more likely they were enjoying ” a bit of a dream”.
    END QUOTE

    The above never happened. Rex and Heather actually met and stayed and filmed Joan at her home and she did not say that quote!

    People ask why didn’t they show them to the local scientists and rangers.

    QUOTE:”Associate professor of zoology at Otago University, David Wharton, dismissed the claims, saying there would have been more sightings if they were still alive.

    “I would have thought he would have more luck finding them in Fiordland, where there are fewer people. I think people would have noticed them before now if they were in the Ureweras. It doesn’t sound very likely to me.”
    END QUOTE

    QUOTE”Craig Foss MP-Elected Member of the New Zealand Parliament. -These Aussies have just got to be extracting the urine. The only Moa’s and Mowers in the Bay are in the museum or are used for cutting grass.END QUOTE

    QUOTE:Wairoa Land Search and Rescue and Urewera veteran Dave Withers says, however, that with large teams of volunteers covering huge areas of the forest park in searches and training each year he would have heard if some sign of the assumed-extinct birds had been found.

    “I’ve never heard of them,” he said.

    “With the amount of ground our guys cover, 40 to 60 people, they spread out and cover the ground - surely if they were about in this area I would have heard.”

    He said there was “the odd wallaby” in the park, and larger-than-average feral cats, but he was not aware of reports of mystery tracks.END QUOTE.

    This was some of what was being written at the time, yet when Rex tried to have articles written showing the casts and the latest expedition in New Zealand weeks after the return to Australia-only one or two newspaper would write about it (no photo’s though).

    I have waited for months for any New Zealand Australian newspaper to show the latest casts. Nothing but silence.

    It is not lack of trying on the Gilroy’s part it is just no-one wants to look at them, although they were quite happy earlier in the year to give their opinion-usually downplayed the prospects.

    Rex has always written about all his discoveries. He has offered any scientist to come and take casts/molds/photographs of anything he has discovered. We put up on the web sites information, we try to contact newspapers and radio etc..to talk about the latest discoveries.

    If the scientist’s and park rangers were so interested in this they would not have been so silent since. All it takes is a simple phone call or email to contact Rex and they can ask him all they want..

    I think we should be asking why have none of the rangers, scientists or newspapers quoted in numerous online articles bothered to follow up the story?

    Rex wants the Moa protected (as he does the yowie in Australia) he doesn’t want hunters etc..tramping there trying to shoot them.

    ausiepath9

21. ausiepath9 responds: August 8th, 2008 at 11:34 pm

    OK, where are those casts? Where is the report on them? What independent scientists have been contacted to provide opinions? These are fair questions - no attack meant.

    On the web site-written in monthly newsletters and magazines, sent out to major newspapers and Tv and radio. Rex has tried to have them looked at. When you say independent scientists, there is such a thing??Independent of whom?>?

    If you read the text from these scientists they state there is nothing therefore he has nothing simple as that. I don’t know what it is like in America but here in Australia and in New Zealand scientists just are not interested.

    Read any book on the moa they all start or end with
    “EXTINCT”.!These scientists will not retract that statement no mater how good the evidence.

    These track show very good detail which any scientist would instantly see is the real deal.

    If you are anyone know of any scientist willing to view them feel free to pass there name on. I won’t be holding my breath. Rex has a 2 Million yr old Moa skull too but even that is not looked at, so what chance of casts of tracks??

22. ausiepath9 responds: August 8th, 2008 at 11:40 pm

    At the top of this page is states:Rex Gilroy’s earlier Karumba, Australia, track find.

    It is bi-pedal reptile that is from the top end of Australia, known to the Aborigine/Koori, of which rock art survives. There were more tracks, only this was castable.

23. nzcryptozoologist responds: August 9th, 2008 at 1:58 am

    Just to correct you on one of the above statements Joan Wiffen did indeed make such a statement according to the Dominion Newspaper dated January 09 2008 under the article title ” Urewera moa “probably emu” so this does cast some doubt on the validity of that statement, though we do know however that the media also love to put words into other peoples mouths.
    This may not have been what she said but this is obviouly the meaning they have taken from the conversation.
    As to the media not wanting to know I think they had enough of the emu debate last time and one thing the New Zealand media hates to do is rehash old stories.
    Im sure if the scientific circles and media were taking this seriously they would be all over this by now as they did with the initial reports of he Canterbury panther.
    regretbly as we have seen all to often in this field of research wolf has been cried so often that no one now wants to know.

24. nzcryptozoologist responds: August 9th, 2008 at 2:25 am

    I would like to correct you on one thing The quote you mention re Joan Wiffen was indeed published in the Domion newspaper on january 9 2008.
    As we are all aware the newpapers often take their own opinion from interviews but as this was quoted in the article it must have been said as misquoting can cause a reporter alot of problems.
    I think you will find the New Zealand media had enough milage out of the emu debate and that is why they dont want to know, they hate to rehash old stories. If the media and New Zealand scientific community were taking this seriously im sure they would be thoughly investigating it as they did with the Canterbury Panther incident. It all comes down to others opinions of credability.

25. ausiepath9 responds: August 19th, 2009 at 1:25 am

    Joan Wiffen did not state that at all. Rex has her on video at her home-after she invited them there, stating this fact to him and Heather. The reporter decided it would make a good story against Rex. She denied saying it. She even gave Rex a few bones to take to his museum. Reporters constantly do this. If the person interviewed doesn’t say what the reporter states they just write it anyway. It happens here all the time. I can quote as many reports just like that report here which the person here didn’t say what was reported either.

    and

    Tony Lucas stated:I am forced to ask myself however if Rex has found this proof why has he not notified the appropriate authorities, being the Department of conservation to arrange for some protection of the area and the birds. That would be the appropriate channels to go through.

    Tony; the birds are actually in a National Park, they are already protected by New Zealand laws and regulations. Did you read what they actually said about Rex Tony??

    Who would share these discoveries with these people who state they have searched all of New Zealand, every single inch and no MOA exists, must look or make them look a bit silly to find these giant Moa right under their noses where they claim they do treks yearly etc..

    The cast and track photos show that they are not doing their job, as these birds still exist under their noses. reminds me of the Wollemi pines, dinosaur trees found in Australia. Scientists were actually in the same ravines for 25 years doing tree/fern research. One scientist asked why after all that time he didn’t notice something so ancient and important said; “I didn’t think to look up”. So here we have an ancient species not known to science right under scientists noses as the Moa is. Maori’s know of their whereabouts, as they do other so called extinct creatures which still survive.

    The casts speak for themselves. The show a living creature. The casts and tracks show more than one as well…Possibly three or even more. The detail in the cast showing muscles and even a deformity shows it to be living.

    Tony I emailed them (National Parks) and they said that they just don’t believe they exist and do not go looking for them for that reason. I could send them photos of the casts but they just aren’t interested. They are when a newspaper asks them but in reality think it is a waste of time. If all this was a waste of time many of you in here would not be into what you are into and research., that right Loren??

Leave your comments

You must be logged in to post a comment.

|Top | Content|