Johor Eyes: “Sex Appeal” or “Garfield’s”?
Posted by: Loren Coleman on August 2nd, 2006
The matter of Sean Ang’s recent drawing discussed here on Monday is the subject of an article in the New Straits Times for Thursday, August 3, 2006, entitled “Sexual Gaze of Johor’s Bigfoot.”
The paper is reporting on a new twist and extension of visual interpretations of the new drawing of the “eyes.” The New Straits Times is noting that Sean Ang says there is a sexual meaning to the eyes he has drawn alleged based on a photo of an alleged photograph of these alleged Malaysian unknown hominoids.
In specific segments of the article, it is mentioned that Sean Ang:
…claims that the sclera (the white of the eye) surrounding the iris, which is meant for enhancing gaze signal in communication, showed that the creature had some kind of basic language.
Quoting Ang, in part:
“Based on the eyes, I predict that the Johor Hominids could have some kind of basic language that requires them to gaze at other individuals for a prolonged time.”
Ang, a palaeo-anthropologist, said the drooping eyelids of the female hominid could also be a feature to boost its sex appeal.
“The eyes are unusual as they are a bit bulky, like Garfield’s eyes, minus the eyelashes.
I am one of the first to be open to looking deeper into the behavior of unknown hominoids, and have been misunderstood for my challenge to the field to discuss the record of sexual activity among all unknown primates, as is routinely done in scholary treatments of the great apes. The resulting conflicts experienced about this are detailed in my chapter “Sex and the Single Sasquatch” in Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America. But that was a call for action based on hundreds of years of ignored reports, not looking at a drawing and making leaps of logic from there.
Perhaps the media has not been fair to Sean Ang. But why do so much interpreting and then talk to the press about it without pressing on to develop and present the evidence of the actual photos or the actual animals? Is it just me or is this getting a little silly? Now the Malaysian media is printing wild speculations assumed from a drawing? Perhaps Sean Ang has stared too long at his own drawings?
+++++
For a complete rundown on all the August 4th breaking news on the “Johor Hominid” hoax discovery, please see:
More Johor Fallout: Peter Loh Reacts.
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.
Definte sex appeal! Go Johor hominid!
Like I said before, shouldn’t we be waiting to actually find them and either study them as jane goodal (don’t exactly know her last name’s spelling) did with the gorillas, or capture them. People wonder why I am usually concidered a skeptic when mainstream science is concerned, this is why. Ang’s action is exactly what most scientists do today. No study, nothing to really back them up and they make major statements that they probably hope never will be able to check one way or the other, making them the “expert” on the matter at hand.
Could it be that Garfield’s looking at Nermal in a new light?
Sorry, sorry … It’s late and I couldn’t help myself.
Er….Nermal is a boy cat. =|
As has been stated numerous times, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Johor has offered NO evidence. NONE. Not a whit. If you claim to have photographs, show them. Don’t make people wait inordinate periods of time and finally show them. This only leads people to think you had a special effects team come in and make a realistic set of photos for you. If and when they do send them, or allow them to be seen, I think they should be gone over with a fine toothed comb. JMHO
To say that MOST scientists do this is a gross mistatement of profound proportions. The only area of science where this could be said to be a growing problem is in pharmaceutical research, as increasingly the studies are being funded and conducted entirely by corporate concerns.
What is far more disturbing is the fact that over 90% of Americans are scientifically illiterate, unable to comprehend the average science article in the New York Times.
Mynames…
I’d say that in theoretical physics (string theory anyone?) and in astronomy to a lesser degree, this happens too.
Someone without the mathematical background to test it themselves is supposed to take findings about the age of the universe (based on the red shift in light) on faith in the word of the scientist. I consider myself well educated and I’m not ashamed to admit I’m totally lost when staring at one of the “proofs” scribbled on a blackboard in the background as an expert on Nova tells me that this is how he thinks the universe began.
When it comes to pharmaceuticals, well… big-business backed snake oil for that “restless leg syndrome” anyone?
Yep, I’d say we’re starting to get more than a little silly here.
Still, if anyone has a home phone number for the Johor hominid, put it up here. I’m feeling the Seven-Year Itch.
Sheesh.
How many words does it take to say: pictures? What pictures?
Oh. And of course keep it coming. The laughs (and groans) are part of the crypto game, I’d hope we all agree.
Mnynames Says:
August 3rd, 2006 at 7:48 am
To say that MOST scientists do this is a gross mistatement of profound proportions. The only area of science where this could be said to be a growing problem is in pharmaceutical research, as increasingly the studies are being funded and conducted entirely by corporate concerns.
What is far more disturbing is the fact that over 90% of Americans are scientifically illiterate, unable to comprehend the average science article in the New York Times.
Who can blame them? I’m scientifically literate, and *I* can’t understand the NYT articles! They just report the current science dogma…
Jeremy_Wells Says:
Mynames…
I’d say that in theoretical physics (string theory anyone?) and in astronomy to a lesser degree, this happens too.
Someone without the mathematical background to test it themselves is supposed to take findings about the age of the universe (based on the red shift in light) on faith in the word of the scientist. I consider myself well educated and I’m not ashamed to admit I’m totally lost when staring at one of the “proofs” scribbled on a blackboard in the background as an expert on Nova tells me that this is how he thinks the universe began.
When it comes to pharmaceuticals, well… big-business backed snake oil for that “restless leg syndrome” anyone?
I happen to suffer from RLS, and I totally agree with you… I have only found any relief at ALL from homeopathy.
Been getting silly for a while now.
IF Sean has no steady girlfriend it sounds like he needs one — quick.
Presumption never gets anything but egg in ones face. And it is beginning to look like some people are about to start asking to come out of the frying pan
Oh Nermal was a baby last I heard
No Proof, no excuses for this what so ever. Lets stop all reporting until we get the pic’s. I wish anyway.
Of course. Analizing a drawing of a picture you have never seen is a futile effort, to say the least. Until some real evidence is produced (and I think Ang does not have any), wasting time with his claims is pointless.