• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cryptomundo Incorporated formed

But still.... IT WAS A HOAX ON OR BY THEM IN PART moving on

mrp that is
 
William Parcher said:
Coleman is comparing somebody's criticism of his museum to the Haiti earthquake.


Museum Heckler
Click to expand...

Yes, that was low wasn't it. He totally missed 95% of my POST. The comments are humorous too. Very pedantic, no substance. My point was confirmed.

Anyways, I posted a reply to the original post. I tried to post the link into the comments section but LC vetoed it, sending me an email that said: "You have the option, like everyone else, to submit a comment to the specific blog. However, the exchange for the blog at Cryptomundo will occur at Cryptomundo, not through a link, thank you."

Fair enough but it was long and they certainly would censor it. But, I can't help but assume he wants to promote traffic to his site alone.

The cryptomundo link only gave me a minor hit boost. This tells me that 1. CM visitors aren't interested in contrary views and/or 2. There are not that many CM visitors.
 
HarryHenderson said:
:D Now that's comedy!
Click to expand...

if thats comedy, this is schadenfreude
however naive it sounds today it occurred to me that if you substituted the word 'UFO' for 'Bigfoot' in the dialogues of Bigfoot witnesses, the descriptions sounded or 'felt' eerily similar to the flying saucer and occupant encounters already well-known to UFO aficionados.
Click to expand...
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/peter2.htm
I have discovered a few other words that you can subsitute for UFO and Bigfoot as well. but the forum software keeps turning them into *****

:D:D

bigfoot1-328x460.gif
 
Loren posted this:

[Update: I am disappointed to see Ms. "I Doubt It" felt compelled to post a response in which, like most debunkers and scoftics, she wants me to do all the work and point out all the mistakes in her previous posting. There are many, but let me note one, via a question: How did you miss that a peer-reviewed journal does exist, and that Meldrum and others have published peer-reviewed cryptozoological articles?]

What journal is he talking about? There are none active that I know about. But, he's giving me nice traffic. I never had more than when The Anomalist would send huffy Bigfooters my way. Too bad I don't have a "Donate via PAY PAL" link on my page like he does.
 
idoubtit said:
Loren posted this:

[Update: I am disappointed to see Ms. "I Doubt It" felt compelled to post a response in which, like most debunkers and scoftics, she wants me to do all the work and point out all the mistakes in her previous posting. There are many, but let me note one, via a question: How did you miss that a peer-reviewed journal does exist, and that Meldrum and others have published peer-reviewed cryptozoological articles?]

What journal is he talking about? There are none active that I know about. But, he's giving me nice traffic. I never had more than when The Anomalist would send huffy Bigfooters my way. Too bad I don't have a "Donate via PAY PAL" link on my page like he does.
Click to expand...

idoubtit, I thought your piece on the last ten years of cryptozoology was excellent as well as your response to Coleman's drama queen huffing. You unstable, dark woman trying to collapse the infrastructure of Coleman's precious archive of the science of cryptozoology, you! LOL

Oh, Loren, you silly, silly man with your toy sauropods and Bigfoot statues. Yes, your museum is loads of fun for the whole family. If I was in Maine I would love to come by with some kids and play with the pterodactyls and take a picture with the big life size Bigfoot model. Just spare the fluff like you're sitting on some bastion of scientific discovery. While you're at it, try stop posting zoological developments like as if they are some kind of achievments in cryptozoology. A new spectacled flowerpecker in Borneo is not a cryptid nor found by a cryptozoologist nor has anything to do with Bigfoot or Cadborosaurus foo foo. It was found by a regular biologist doing regular biology work and not some guy who lives with his mom, has 12 books on Bigfoot, a vest with 8 pockets, and a fine fedora.

Your museum is a nice collection of Americana and pop culture. I can see Mothman toys and Thunderbird sculptures, look at thylacine pictures, and buy some books on The Abominable Snowman . What I can not see is any exhibit detailing any cryptozoological contribution to the science of zoology or biology.

Swag is swag...

kitakaze said:
Cryptofool Coleman up to his usual foo foo, desperately trying to validate his crypto-gobbledy-gook so people might be more inclined to buy one of his books and learn more about the 11 species of Bigfoot in North America or donate to the museum (home crypto swag collection).

Sorry, Loren. Cryptozoology is still not a science and never will be. Same goes for your hominology dreck or whatever else you want to stick a pipe in your mouth and say "-ology" after. No schools teach cryptozoology, there are no degrees in it, and no scientists being paid to research it. Not one cryptozoologist, which is a sophisticated way to say "fortean addict", has ever made a single contribution to zoology, biology, or any other of the natural sciences. I would suggest busting open the museum donation piggy bank and seeing if you can take some online zoology courses. Here, I'll lend a hand...

http://www.zoology.msu.edu/online-courses.html
Click to expand...
 
Same goes for your hominology dreck or whatever else you want to stick a pipe in your mouth and say "-ology" after.
Click to expand...

For some reason that makes me think of Ned Flanders.

"High diddly ho there fellow crypt-erinos!"
 
Gribble said:
Try scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_18_1_meldrum.pdf ?
Click to expand...

Ah, yes. The journal that is impossible to get unless you are a member of their elite society. The journal you can not write for unless you meet the society's approval. The journal that wants to "Change the Rules"

From Jahn & Dunn: "If science, by its most basic definition, is to pursue understanding and utilization of these extraordinary processes, it will need to expand its current paradigm to acknowledge and codify a proactive role for the mind in the establishment of physical events, and to accommodate the spectrum of empirically indicated subjective correlates."

What?

Oh, yes. Science as it's currently run with rules and controls and blah-blahs doesn't give us the answers we like so... Change the Rules.

No wonder he didn't post the name. (If that is the one he was thinking of. Tis embarrassing.)
 
I Doubt It.

I read your blog. I forgot how many EPIC FAILS Bigfootry had in the last decade. I also noticed that you made no mention of the Michigan Recording Project-FAIL!!!!11, or the Munns-Report-FAIL!!11!

I guess there are too many to cover.

In response to your question about contrary views: NO, they do not like to read contrary views. Especially when one of their hallowed-few, annointed, CRYPTO/BIGFOOT-EXPERTS are the ones being scrutinized. See: Rick Noll and Skookum, Bill Munns and Munn's Report, Michigan Bigfooters and Michigan Recording Project, Loren Coleman and The Georgia Hoax "Is it real? It certainly looks like the real deal, and with a surprising variety of features.", "Here are some enhancements and other views of the amazing photograph", no, they do not like contrary opinion, and would rather not read it, than confront it.

PARCHER: Did Loren Coleman advocate that the GA Bigfoot was 'the real deal', or 'looks real' at some point? I seem to remember him going all in on it being real, but can't find the quote in Cryptomundo.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. There were a lot; I tried to focus on the popular ones because it was aimed towards those of a more casual interest.

One thing I really noticed through these exchanges I've had with Coleman and the crew at The Anomalist is that they have a habit of reading more into situations than is actually there.

Using science, you learn to address very narrow questions in your experiments. These sham scientists have made huge leaps of logic to connect A to B and added all sorts of flourishes and speculation to make it more exotic and interesting. None of which are justified based on the data they have.

They immediately read into my mental and emotional states and my motives (obviously evil) which I thought was extremely weird! Doesn't this explain so much about how these folks view the world? It's warped.

I just might be the most normal, boring person you don't know. Yet, I'm out to undermine their life's work or something. It's been an interesting exercise in how some people chose to relate to others of different worldviews.
 
Drewbot said:
PARCHER: Did Loren Coleman advocate that the GA Bigfoot was 'the real deal', or 'looks real' at some point? I seem to remember him going all in on it being real, but can't find the quote in Cryptomundo.
Click to expand...

I would be surprised if it is still there, but he did say something to the effect of "there really may be something to this" (not an exact quote).

This was just about the time the subject had pretty much been written off, and created a whole new stir of hope. I seem to remember at least one person saying Coleman's maybe-support was the only reason they gave it a second thought.
 
I have this cryptomundo post saved as a PDF from August 12, 2008. I can post to Dropbox or can email to those interested. Message me if you want it but here is what it says:

Posted by: Loren Coleman on August 12th, 2008
Breaking News: Photos Released ~ Click HERE!
I have just talked with Robert Barrows, R.M. Barrows, Inc., Advertising & Public Relations, Burlingame, California, who informed me the following release has been distributed to news agencies worldwide. It is now in the hands of the media at large, and they will be going with this story. The embargo on the news is lifted. Therefore, here it is for Cryptomundo readers.
I feel, in all honesty, this, indeed, may be the real deal, and I say this carefully after reviewing information that has been shared privately with me. I cannot say more yet. But people will be very surprised. ~ Loren Coleman, Bigfoot! The True Story of Apes in America.
 
Drewbot said:
PARCHER: Did Loren Coleman advocate that the GA Bigfoot was 'the real deal', or 'looks real' at some point? I seem to remember him going all in on it being real, but can't find the quote in Cryptomundo.
Click to expand...


He gave strong indications that he thought it as real. IMO, he chose to call it the "Georgia Gorilla" rather than Bigfoot for two reasons. He could see that the nose looked gorilla-like, and the olden days stories of "wildman monsters" from Georgia often used the term gorilla. Coleman must have thought this is the real creature that they had been talking about for over a hundred years - and by golly it does look like a gorilla.

Soon after the costume was revealed he started doing edits and censoring of his blog. The motive seemed to be to reduce his obvious gullibility and to dull the blades of those who accused him of gullibility.

Some of it is still seen in a blog in which he later inserted the images of the costume. This blog started out without any knowledge of the matching costume. Then things moved quickly after JREF found the costume.

Loren Coleman said:
The body doesn't look exactly like people thought it would, because the Patterson-Gimlin Bigfoot has been the model in our minds. However, this looks as if it is an actual apelike primate. Indeed, the gorilla-like facial features, the alleged lack of canines, and the grinding surfaces shown in the teeth suggest a bulky vegetarian with a mixture of higher primate characteristics.

Will further tests and the proposed live capture of others prove beyond a doubt that Bigfoot is a new species? Stay tuned. And read on.

The decomposition has caused the tongue to stick out from the mouth. (Or at least so it appears.)
Click to expand...
 
Drewbot said:
http://www.webcitation.org/5a2AbUGG2

AtomicMysteryMonster was smart enough to web-cite the article. I went back and found it.
Click to expand...


That blog was edited and converted to Bigfoot Body: Hoax.

The WebCite link shows 131 comments while the replacement blog shows 125. What are the 6 removed/censored comments?

Here's one of them...

swnoel said:
August 12th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Loren, why do I sense that you have the goods on this and your dying to talk?

I know, you promised.

We'll just have to wait, but you can tell me, I promise I wont tell. ;)
Click to expand...
 
In the comments of Loren's little drama queen episode over idoubtit's piece on the last ten years of cryptozoology Fhqwhgads wrote an excellent post that i will repost here partially...

Fhqwhgads @ Cryptomumble said:
2. I do get the impression that, by and large, cryptozoology really is a hobby. Almost no one can truthfully claim to be a “professional cryptozoologist” — most researchers have to work regular jobs to pay the bills. More significantly, many of the people who, for example, go looking for bigfoot seem to have no special training or experience other than hunting (for common animals like deer).

3. If cryptozoology is a science, it appears to be one in its infancy. Cryptozoology does not seem to have a well-defined relationship with other sciences; where does it fit? Is it a subset of ethnozoology, or is it a sister science to ethnozoology? How much biology should a cryptozoologist be expected to know? If you were designing a degree in cryptozoology for a university, what would be the core courses and what would be the electives? Cryptozoology does not appear to be very well-defined in terms of either its subject matter (for instance, does it include mermaids?) or in terms of its methodology.
Click to expand...

Loren Coleman responds...

Loren @ Cryptomumble said:
Fhqwhgads, an acknowledged “Skeptic,” (or perhaps to DWA and others, a scoftic), at least here, writes:

“I do get the impression that, by and large, cryptozoology really is a hobby. Almost no one can truthfully claim to be a “professional cryptozoologist” — most researchers have to work regular jobs to pay the bills. More significantly, many of the people who, for example, go looking for bigfoot seem to have no special training or experience other than hunting (for common animals like deer).”

Well, of course, I an not “almost no one,” I’ll have you know. LOL. Needless to say, I am a professional cryptozoologist and I have the IRS records to indicate so.
Click to expand...

Nice "scoftic" jab. Very subtle.

You are a professional cryptozoologist, Loren? Well how nice for you. That's funny because I thought you were a guy who blogs about Mothman and Bigfoot, frames discoveries of new bugs, frogs, and birds found by zoologists and biologists as cryptozoological achievements, and panders people to by his books on the 11 species of Bigfoot, among other things.

Somebody will have to direct me towards a single animal discovery you've ever made or any contribution whatsoever to the factual knowledge of a previously unknown species of animal.

*crickets*
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom