Comments on: Loren Coleman’s Top Ten Reasons For Cryptozoology Hoaxes

By: Hapa

Hapa — Tue, 03 Apr 2012 03:15:12 +0000

Deloy’s ape will be a bone of contention for a long time. Scholars are divided over it. While Mr. Coleman makes a case for it being a hoax, others such as Ruppert Matthews makes the case for it being legit, noting some anatomical differences between the Ateles Spider Monkey (one possible canidate for the creature) and Deloy’s Ape, such as the more rounded oval shape of the latter as opposed to the more triangular shape seen more usually in modern Spider monkeys, greater size (the crates used to confirm Deloy’s over 5 feet height of the beast, though the crates are a controversial subject in and of themselves and are subsequently not reliable as an absolute measurement), and the fact that, though spider monkeys have 36 teeth (as opposed to Deloy’s, which had 32, evidence to some of a hoax), it is not unheard of for spider monkey’s having 34 or 32 teeth, due to their third molars sometimes not growing.

Sightings of giant monkey or monkey-like cryptids (Mono Grande and Didi) do closely match Deloy’s ape and account, and two large fossil monkeys, Caipora and Protopithecus (both of which are around the size of Deloy’s Ape) lived up to the time of man’s appearance in South America (for info on the fossil monkeys, see page 44 of “Evolution: the Human story, by Dr. Alice Roberts (she’s both smart AND cute) and Jeff Meldrum’s Sasquatch, Legend Meets science, page 93. For info on Deloy’s ape, see “Sasquatch: True life encounters with Legendary Ape Men”, pages 146-153, 201. For info on both that is good see Michael Newton’s “Encyclopedia of Cryptozoology, pages 128-129, 132, 308)

By: hoosierhunter2

hoosierhunter2 — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 03:09:53 +0000

I think another reason my be that some people want something so bad to be true that they create a hoax merely to move the discussion forward. Probably not a top ten reason, but I do know of one person who did that (UFO hoax) with the purpose of creating more interest in the subject locally. His hoax was discovered but not because they promoted it for his own benefit, but because he tried hard to keep it in lime light and carelessly made observations that were too detail oriented. That caused some to get suspicious.
He finally confessed, which ruined his credibility, saying that nothing ever seemed to happen where he lived and he wanted people to get interested in the subject and thought that some local sensationalism would get people fired up.

By: Jonathan Poulsen

Jonathan Poulsen — Sun, 01 Apr 2012 21:55:50 +0000

Although later in life Ivan Marx did pull alot of hoaxes, I think it’s safe to say that he started out as a genuine investigator.