Johor Mawas Photo Analysis
Posted by: Loren Coleman on May 15th, 2006
With reference to yesterday’s blog, “Rival Group Claims ‘Johor Bigfoot’ Are Escaped Orangutans,”, here today for critique are the photographs and sketches that the API, SPI, Vincent Chow, and others feel are supportive of their theories. An even dozen different images are given for your insights.
First, you can see for the API analysis of this issue, they have used Cryptomundo’s Peter Loh drawing of the head of a Johor Mawas and positioned it next to a photograph of the head of an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus). Their contention is that the Loh blue-tinted Mawas resembles the Indonesian mawas, the orangutan.
Of course, one of the major problems with the API theory is the upright nature of the reported Johor Mawas or Bigfoot, as shown here, from a local’s drawing of the often-encountered hairy bipedal hominoid.
The above sketch must be compared to the API’s photographs of the non-released members of the orangutan colony that were given by the late Sultan of Johor some 30 years ago to the Perth Zoo, at the same time other orangutans were allegedly released into the Johor jungles. These photographs are of contemporary members of the colony that would be about the same age as some members of the escapee survivors, if they exist.
On the following map, the red areas are Malaysian and the black ones are Indonesian. Peninsular Malaysia (i.e. where the State of Johor is located) is not known to have any orangutans (called mawas in Indonesia), as only Sumatra and Borneo have orangutans. The Malaysian Johor Bigfoot, Orang Lenggor, or Mawas are felt to be escaped orangutans by the API, but not by Dr. Vincent Chow and the SPI. The map more clearly shows the political divisions between the countries and the island versus mainland nature of the known orangutan existence versus the “Bigfoot” sightings.
Click on image for full-size version
Dr. Vincent Chow’s theory, of course, compares what he has seen in the unpublished photographs of the Johor Bigfoot, as shown in this drawing (and the one at the bottom of the page) by Peter Loh, with the reconstruction of Homo erectus, which have been found in fossil form throughout South Asia. The “Peking Man” and “Java Ape Man” – two early popularized names of Homo erectus – carry the strong association between Asia and the erectus hominids.
Another piece of evidence that may or may not have some impact is the footprint cast found in Johor. Does it have anything to say about the animal that made it? Is it from an ape? Is it a hoax? A natural depression in the ground extended by an animal stepping in a hole? Or an overlapping combination of two rhino tracks?
As news reporter Jan McGirk of The Independent has pondered, does this Johor track resemble the Bili Ape cryptid footprint cast found from Africa? Or does comparing it firmly put to rest the cryptid anthropoid nature of the Johor Mawas?
Above, in 2003, Shelly Williams displays for the media the cast of a track of the unknown ape, the so-called Bili Ape, found in Democratic Republic of Congo.
Are we, once again, left with more questions than answers?
About Loren Coleman
Loren Coleman is one of the world’s leading cryptozoologists, some say “the” leading living cryptozoologist. Certainly, he is acknowledged as the current living American researcher and writer who has most popularized cryptozoology in the late 20th and early 21st centuries.
Starting his fieldwork and investigations in 1960, after traveling and trekking extensively in pursuit of cryptozoological mysteries, Coleman began writing to share his experiences in 1969. An honorary member of Ivan T. Sanderson’s Society for the Investigation of the Unexplained in the 1970s, Coleman has been bestowed with similar honorary memberships of the North Idaho College Cryptozoology Club in 1983, and in subsequent years, that of the British Columbia Scientific Cryptozoology Club, CryptoSafari International, and other international organizations. He was also a Life Member and Benefactor of the International Society of Cryptozoology (now-defunct).
Loren Coleman’s daily blog, as a member of the Cryptomundo Team, served as an ongoing avenue of communication for the ever-growing body of cryptozoo news from 2005 through 2013. He returned as an infrequent contributor beginning Halloween week of 2015.
Coleman is the founder in 2003, and current director of the International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Maine.
If i remember right, and often i dont! Is it not the case that Orangutans have 2 main facial forms, one with large face pads, i think Sumartran and one with out presumably from Borneo. (Both have been observed using tools). Could this be a 3rd morph of the same species or subspecies.
Ok we all know what an Orangutan looks like also known as the “Old Man of the Forest”, They can be Bi-pedal for a short distance but they are better suited to the trees..Now the drawings show a bi-pedal ape/man looking creature that walks upright. very little comparison in appearance..?????
My money says: if it’s an orang, you’re gonna know.
The orang pendek drawing I saw recently in National Geographic was reminiscent of an orangutan. But no way would I confuse it with one.
And tossing Homo erectus into the mix…man, where is this going?
I think it’s gonna be shown to be a deer. 😀
I don’t know if it’s a good idea or not, but I’m giving Chow the benefit of the doubt that he knows the difference between orangutans and bipedal hominids. To state the obvious, this entire topic would be earier to discuss if we had the “photographs”. The one thing that does stand out to me is the difference between the Malaysian footprints and that of the North American Bigfoot footprints. If in fact those Malaysian casts were made by what Mr Chow has seen in these photos, it makes me think “they” are more ape than bipedal hominids. But who knows, maybe both parties are right. Why couldn’t those escapes/released orangutans be there, leaving footprints, and existing at the same time, a group of bipedal unknown hominids. It’s a big, mostly unexplored place from what I’ve been reading, so who knows.
Orangutans may walk upright; but because of the natural shape of the bones in their legs they do so with a shifting, side-to-side sway. More like literally shifting their weight from one foot to another. I’ve never seen one stand erect as seen in these drawings; but I HAVE seen drunk fat guys who walk like Orangutans. For short distances, at least. Until they find the urinal.
And I think orangutans have much shorter legs in proportion to their body. If these mawas were seen walking upright with the look of “a sturdy man”, as Chow put it, there’s no way they could have looked like orangutans walking erect.
About the face comparison – look at my drawing and that picture of the orangutan…the obvious difference is the profile of the mouth. Now, I questioned Chow about this detail and he told me that the profile of the creature’s mouth was almost flat and humanoid, not protruding as much as that of an ape (I know even this varies among the different species of apes, but we get the general idea what he meant).
All I can say, Peter, is that I’d never confuse any of your drawings with an orangutan. If you’re drawing what Chow’s describing….well, and if what Chow’s describing is what actually was seen, and the photos substantiate that…
…man, crypto’s an exhausting field. Somebody just discover a new monkey or something! 😀
Yes, DWA, it is an exhausting field all right!
You know, I recall another thing that Chow mentioned. See that drawing made by the anonymous “local”? I asked Chow if it looked anything like that and he shook his head. I mean, he was quick to say that the drawing wasn’t a good representation of the actual thing. See how human-like the face is? Could this local have seen the creature from such a great distance that the face was indiscernible and he just conveniently “filled in the blanks”? Because, according to Chow, the face in the photos was nothing like that.
Now, looking at that photo of the orangutan resting its chin on its crossed arms (above), I can’t help but notice that the hair on its head and its beard are vaguely similar to those of the creature drawn by the local. However, just one look at the legs in that drawing is enough to kill the orangutan hypothesis.
Hee hee! Yep, the key here is to stay on tenterhooks while not getting sucked in TOO far.
And why not, as a previous poster tossed in, the possibility of both a mainland orang population and…something else….? As I once read in National Geographic, this region is “rich in cats and primates.”
Maybe richer than we thought.
But let’s not get sucked in too far.
Yet.
Hey, Pete. A few more speculative drawings, man! Just do it! 😉
Stay tuned 😉
Chow is the only person to be shown the photographs. Is Chow the only one to have met/seen the people who supplied him the photos? If so, how do we even know that the people who have taken & shown him the photographs exist?
All is speculation until we see the photos.
Heck, even, maybe, after we do.
And so will it ever be in the world of cryptozoology. Confirmation, remember, can be its own form of letdown. “Man, I was hoping it would look like….man, I was hoping it was a meat eater….man, I was hoping it was bigger….”
All you can do is enjoy it. Right? I’m more concerned with not getting my hopes too down than I am with not gettting them too up!
Right, Pete? 😉
If the casted footprints are from the Mawas they aren’t anything like Orangutan feet. I don’t buy the “overlapping rhino prints” theory, at least for the cast shown above.
DWA-
What issue of National Geographic had the Orang Pendek drawings? Are you sure you aren’t confusing them with the “Flores Hobbit” drawings?
In my opinion, Orangutans do not have as pronounced browridges as the alleged Mawas. When looking at the facial sketch of the Mawas, the first thing I notice is the large, protruding browridge.
Also, how does the Orangutan hypothesis explain the excessive height of the Mawas?
“What issue of National Geographic had the Orang Pendek drawings? Are you sure you aren’t confusing them with the “Flores Hobbit” drawings?”
Nope, Orang Pendek, absolutely no question. It was one of the mini-articles in the front of the issue (the “hobbit” got a full feature article).
I think it was an issue early this year. I want to say March. Heeeey…a former girlfriend works at Nat Geo. Stand by one…
Mari: descriptions of the Mawas don’t seem to jibe with either the orang or Homo erectus, another species being tossed about as the possible culprit. And yeah, size is one of the main reasons why. Seems, in fact, to be the main reason.
Either it’s none of the above and something really new, or somebody’s conventions are gonna get somewhat blown to bits.
Assuming, of course, that there’s any fire where all this smoke is coming from.
shovethenos: confirmation from the ex- GF on the O.P. article in Nat Geo:
——————
Yep, March 2006! It’s a small one-page thing.
Angela
——————–
There you are. The illustration was a b/w drawing, pretty good detail, I remember.
(God she was a beauty. She even proposed marriage. What was I thinking….?) 😀
Actually, barring the size, the shape of the ‘feet’ suggested by the casts *does* somewhat resemble the Orangutan’s foot.
I might also add that a male Sumatran Orangutan can grow surprisingly large; there is pronounced sexual dimorphism in the species. Even at a max height of 4.5 feet, the male is huge, his hands & head plus massively long reach can deceive the eye into seeing something more massive.
However, I agree that if Orangutans are the source of the local witness reports, they are very distorted sightings indeed.
The latter should not be ruled out, however. Fortean studies are dotted with analyses of such folkloric mass-imaginings, many quite analogous to something as obtuse as a single sighting of a misplaced ape leading to the widespread belief in tribes of hairy wildmen living in the woods. Or of mechanical apes attacking people asleep in Bombay. Spring-heeled Jacks in London. Mad-Gassers all over. Etc.
Why don’t Mr Chow just produce the photos? Surely it will promote his book better.
All this, beating about the bush, is getting more and more suspicious.
There was meant to have been photos. Now its speculative drawings on the photos.
Its the same old story repeating itself; Eye witness accounts that contradict each other, footprints that could be from the creature and now artists impressions.
Ian (19) – please see earlier posts on Cryptomundo for this question… I think for now the discussion on this post has done well to not fall back into that discussion! 😀
A few general comments. Oliver was mentioned here recently. I believe it is still quite unexplained as to why he so easily walks bipedally. It is not inconceivable that there is an ape species whose prime locomotion is bipedal.
Secondly, look at humans. The diversity in physical appearance is huge. And such diversity is not limited to humans (obviously). I don’t see why our present cryptid cannot be a new morph of the orangutan. The distribution map almost begs the theory.
Loren, to answer your question “Are we, once again, left with more questions than answers?”, I respond “yes!!”
In the meantime, I’m with you DWA (3) – it’s a deer 😉
(and to explicitly avoid confusion for any newcomers to the discussion, there has been an ongoing debate about a potential bigfoot photo in various other threads here; many conclude it’s a deer, and many do not!)
Chris.
Now this is the kind of stuff that is going to sell some books right here. Until we get a look at the photos who knows. But the one CLEAR thing is Mr. Chow SHOULD know the difference between an orang and a BF. Any more on the guy who has the photos going to another country??
Actually API Charles has floated the theory of orangutan way before any news about the late Sultan’s colony broke out based on interviews with local eye witness and field trips . At that time, as no known orangutans was known to be found in Peninusular Malaysia, I was surmising about sun bears while Vincent Chow was toying with nest building Gigantopithetus theory.
I am sure Charles would share more of his research soon here on how he derive his orangutan theory despite his interviews of the eye witness account of big standing giant apes and snaggle tooth ghost (hantu jarang gigi)that can break tall branches.
As for the “Human Erectus” theory, it will boil down to one ex guerilla’s sightings in the Malaysian jungles and his 14 photographs of the colony. Since he has now gone to Thailand to escape harassement, it will be left to the Johor Wildlife Protection Society and Vincent to correctly interpret his sightings and photos and what he told them. Vincent is a well respected researcher and genuine Nature lover, I really hope he is not mistaken/misled by the photos.
As to the earlier comments on orangutans, there are some reports that seem to indicate they can grow to 1.8 m and weigh 120 kg. They are definitely strong, much stronger than man although they are not aggressive.
Also, although they are semi solitary, they will form small colony if food is abundant. These are reports that I have read, I have yet to verify with primatologists.
hi loren coleman & craig woolheater john kirk & rick noll i realy like all these updates about these creatures in johor forests and informative replys that people giving in here. im realy looking forward to seeing more informative opinions about malaysia sasquatch creatures. i wonder how the malaysia sasquatch creatures deal with weather conditions where they prowl. what kind of food resources do they eat. thanks bill 🙂
DWA-
Thanks for the info, I’ll check it out.
Chymo-
I have to disagree with you on the cast above and orangutan feet being similar.
Here’s a link to a drawing of various primate feet.
Orangutan feet are very hand-like. The tips of the toes are very slim. The first toe is opposable and projects from the foot less than halfway up the length of the foot.
The cast on the other hand is much different. (although it could be a distant evolutionary cousin) The four toes seem to be short, stout, and human-like. The first toe is somewhat separated, but it seems to project out from the foot only a short distance behind the other toes.
Is anyone else concerned that if this fellow took the alleged photo’s quite a while back and is now not around Johor, then any kind of verification as to where, when, and what is in the picures will be very very difficult indeed!!
A photograher who cannot be reached who took photographs that cannot be seen.This photographer, uprooted himself and presumably, his livelihood due to harassment(s) that have not occurred but that he anticipates.One book becomes two, two become three, three become..based on what essentially, at this point, is a well documented rumour. The elusive smoking gun. Sound like another topic? i predict very easily, that this situation will spawn little more than ardent truth seekers and died in the wool skeptics in the center ring pouring from the empty into the void.
I certainly appreciate the intellectual nature of our commentors, especially when you go all Gurdjieff on us and talk about “pouring from the empty into the void.”
We shall see what we shall see. Patience and passion.
I’m very optimistic.
It’s starting to look now like these and other Relict Big Guys out there will always avoid us and our darting, collaring, DNA-gathering, caging, exhibiting, poking, prodding, can’t leave well enough alone ways.
Ooops….was I supposed to say that? Sorry. Slip of the tongue. As you were, as you were…
Personally I would say its more puzzlement, postulation and perplexity with some possible petite potential at present Loren 🙂
The young woman measuring her hand against the Johor cast is sketchily identfied in the caption as “a girl” . She is Adeek, a researcher with the Kuala Lumpur “Seekers” group, who joined the SPI and the Mandt Brothers on expedition. Since you identify others by name, thought you might like hers.
With all due respect to the individuals involved, we cannot have a meaningful photographic analysis because no photographs are available to ay inependent laboriatory, university or media source to analyze. We do not, as an indepnedently verified fact, know that any photographs exist.
Regards,
Matt Bille
Spot on about verifiability.
The (independently verifiable) facts about this case are that there are allegations and speculations.
Nothing more, nothing less.
OK – here’s the dig. Let’s wrap our recent Menehune article in Hawaii up with the hobbits of Indonesia. Now venture north for our Orang Pendek and/or Mawas. Scoot a little further north and you’re on mainland Asia mixing it with the Alma, of which Zana was one.
Sounds crazy? Well except for the Hawaiian link, you can read about it here.
Mind you, the same website – though not necessarily the same author – refers to Loren as female, here:
“Most scientists, such as Loren Coleman, suggest Bigfoot could be a version of Pongids (great apes) such as the Dryopithecinae, a species that was successful in both temperate and subtropical areas. In her book Mysterious America Coleman suggested the could have arrived from Asia during the Pleistocene era.”
An interesting oversight on behalf of a group which has “carefully examined statistical methods, DNA testing, biological collection, computer modeling, imprint identification, scaling, vocal analysis, eye witness accounts, and expert opinions in search of evidence”.
But then it could be a typo.
I’m sure long term readers have already discussed both articles I’ve just linked; forgive me while I find my feet. Big ones.
Chris.