Strange Encounters

Strange Encounters presents...
The Cryptozoologist...
On the trail of Bigfoot and other mysterious creatures.
An interview with Loren Coleman

Many are intrigued by the unknown, ghosts, UFO's, unexplained mysteries like the Loch Ness Monster, and the elusive creatures known in the United States, Canada, and elsewhere, as Bigfoot, Sasquatch or Yeti.

It is with great pleasure that I have this opportunity to interview a man who knows quite a bit about these and other mystery creatures, Loren Coleman, cryptozoologist, field researcher, lecturer, and author of many books on the subject of cryptozoology, including "BIGFOOT!: The True Story of Apes in America" (NY: Paraview Pocket-Simon and Schuster, 2003).

You may not agree that there are hairy man-ape creatures roaming around in the densely wooded, remote wilderness of North America, but many think there are. In this interview we will hear from a man who has spent more than 40 years researching, examining evidence and gathering data that supports the possibility of the existence of undiscovered animals that exist in the woods, forests and lakes around us.

Without further ado:

SE: First, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to speak with us. While this interview will not be very lengthy, I hope it can shed more light on the mystery of Bigfoot, and cryptozoology in general, for visitors to Strange Encounters.

LC: Good to be here.

SE: When, and why, did you first become interested in the quest for unknown animals?

LC: At 12, in 1960, I was reading the books of Charles Fort, which gave me an "open-mind" and "question authority" attitude when I saw a Japanese movie about the Yeti, entitled "Half Human." I went to school and asked my teachers what they knew about the Abominable Snowmen. The answers I got were very unsatisfactory, so I began reading and researching all I could on Yeti, Bigfoot, Sasquatch, lake monsters, and more. It has become a livelong pursuit, passion, and part of my life.

When television stations started interviewing me in the 1960s about my fieldwork, I was still a teenager, and quite taken aback that this would interest the media. I got my first article published, when I was 21. I was excited when that late 1969 magazine contribution ("Mystery Animals in Illinois") was published, as I was glad I could add some new information to the field of cryptozoology on such a broad scale. I never imagined that beginning, one in which I was merely discussing the findings from the field, would be the precursor to all my chronicles of cryptozoology. Before the days of the internet, seeing each new article come out was great, and I loved connecting with readers via letters. During the 1960s, I had about 400 correspondents. Today, I get 500 emails PER day. Life has changed, but I still try to keep in touch with other researchers and my readers through direct communications via emails as well as the columns and articles.

SE: In your opinion, what kind of creatures might be living in the remote wilderness of our country. Do you believe evidence suggests the possibility of some form of primate?

LC: I accept that a pattern of evidence suggests that unknown primates exist in North America. ("Belief" is really more about religion, not science.) I have spent over four decades researching this quest, and I took several years to write many books on my views on this subject, including:

BIGFOOT!: The True Story of Apes in America
(NY: Paraview Pocket-Simon and Schuster, 2003)

The Field Guide to Bigfoot, Yeti and Other Mystery Primates Worldwide
(NY: Harper Collins, 1999)

Tom Slick: True Life Encounters in Cryptozoology
(Fresno: Craven Street/Linden, 2002)

SE: Regarding the Patterson/Gimlin film footage of an alleged Sasquatch. Do you believe this film depicts an actual animal, or is there a chance it is a well executed hoax?

LC: Here, again, it is not about "belief," in my mind. In my Bigfoot!, I talk about how between 1998-2002, several claims have surfaced that the film is a hoax. I am not convinced by any of those claims or recent ones. The footage appears to show a real animal, but I remain openminded on both sides of the issue.

SE: I see your point regarding "belief". What is the most compelling evidence you have found, or seen, through your years of research and field work, that indicates Bigfoot is a real animal?

LC: It is the combination of evidence - footprints, dermal evidence, Native traditions, unusual sounds, eyewitness accounts, fossil candidates, and tangible items (hair, Skookum cast, droppings).

SE: There have been reports of creatures with long reddish hair, short black hair, and black and silvery hair. In some reports there is a great difference in observed facial characteristics as well. Could there be a wide variety of unknown, hairy, two-legged animals in the wilderness?

LC: Yes, there are regional, gender, and species differences. I spend much of my time, in my columns and books, establishing the lines between these types.

SE: If there are a wide variety of some unknown animal, how can they keep so well hidden?

LC: Because people are more interested in humans. Animals are intelligent and remain out of the way of Homo sapiens because they wish to survive.

SE: Aside from Bigfoot you have also done research on other mysterious creatures. Can you tell us which you are most familiar with?

LC: Yes, I have tracked Mystery Cats, searched for Loch Monsters, and looked for evidence of Thunderbirds. I have been all over the country (see

Mysterious America: The Revised Edition
(NY: Paraview, 2001)

The Field Guide to Lake Monsters, Sea Serpents and Other Mystery Denizens of the Deep
(NY: Tarcher-Penguin, 2003)

I am familiar with a wide variety of cryptids:

Cryptozoology A to Z: The Encyclopedia of Loch Monsters, Sasquatch, Chupacabras, and Other Authentic Mysteries of Nature
(NY: Simon and Schuster, 1999)

SE: Most people interested in the mystery of the Loch Ness monster have seen the famous "flipper" and "neck and head" underwater images. Do you believe this is convincing evidence of a large unknown creature dwelling in the depths of the Loch?

LC: You use the word "believe" too much (laughs). I think there are indicators that we should be curious about what is going on in Loch Ness.

SE: Sorry, I believe it's a force of habit (chuckle). I'll have to remember to curb my use of that word in future discussions. In your opinion, could the Loch Ness Monster be a prehistoric creature, a plesiosaur perhaps?

LC: I see no evidence of a family of giant prehistoric reptiles. More likely, we are dealing with a form of unknown mammal.

SE: Is it true that plesiosaur vertebrae have been found on the shore of Loch Ness, and do you think these findings have any connection to the alleged "humped" creature(s) living in the Loch?

LC: That "discovery" was a hoax.

SE: Now, onto one of my favorites, though I'm still not sure why, Mothman. I read the original Mothman Prophecies book many years ago, and was surprised to see a modern film version produced in 2002. The film has generated a renewed interest in the subject, are there any efforts now being made to find out what actually happened there in the first place?

LC: I was very involved with the publicity for that movie. John Keel's health prevented him from doing radio interviews, and so Sony/Screen Gems ask me to do about 300 radio interviews.

They also encouraged me to finish up my book examining this for the 21st century, and you will find my updates on the investigation in that book:

Mothman and Other Curious Encounters
(NY: Paraview, 2002)

SE: The film seemed to convey a more psychological phenomenon, possibly supernatural. Do you believe this is the case, or do you think that mothman belongs side by side with Bigfoot and other unknown creatures in the field of cryptozoology?

LC: The fictional film was based on the true events of the initial Mothman encounters, but the movie was a psychological cinema. I used the forum of my book to speak to why I think Mothman is part of cryptozoology. Basically, the original reports were of big birds, and "Mothman" was a newspaper's invention.

These reports are of birds, and Keel made them into occult accounts.

SE: If mothman is indeed a real creature, what do you figure it to be.

LC: A giant owl.

SE: While I have your ear I'd like to ask you a few quick questions regarding other "monsters". 1 - Does the chupacabra belong in cryptozoology?

LC: Yes. See my Mothman book for my fully developed argument on this.

SE: 2 - I read a novel called "Meg," in which a megalodon (ancient ancestor of modern great white sharks) survived extinction by dwelling in the cold depths of the Mariana Trench in the Pacific, near Japan. In your professional opinion, what are the chances of such survival of a species? Is it possible that we'll someday discover a massive shark living in the depths of the ocean?

LC: Highly unlikely, as we would have seen worldwide giant shark attacks on entire seal and people populations off of Japan, Australia, California, etc.

SE: True. Though a giant shark like the megalodon would be a neat sight, its existence would be hardly passive. Sharks eat a lot, a huge one would eat more.

Thank you for your time Loren, I'm sure in the future I'll have more questions, so we could possibly do this again sometime.

LC: You're welcome.

That concludes our interview with Loren Coleman here at Strange Encounters. Thanks again to Loren for joining us!

Loren Coleman is a Cryptozoologist, Author and Media Consultant.
Learn more about cryptozoology and his research at: www.lorencoleman.com or Cryptomundo.com