Sunday, January 20, 2013

Cryptozoologist Loren Coleman Speaks about Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA Study

Loren Coleman, left, speaks with host Joshua Foer at the Institute Library in New Haven.
“My standard is: no data, no discovery, and why is she saying ridiculous things like ‘These are angels from heaven’?” -- Loren Coleman on Melba Ketchum DNA Study

In an article by Randall Beach for the New Haven Register, Loren Coleman is asked about his approach to cryptozoology. You can read below as he describes himself as a skeptic and then brings up Melba Ketchum's Bigfoot DNA study:

Coleman stated at the outset: “I am a skeptic.” He demands to see plenty of hard evidence before believing any of the many claims of creature sighters.

“I try to interview the witness first,” he told us. “I try to understand the human element. The creature is important to me. But I’m never blown away by a piece of evidence. I always look for the motive.”

For instance, he investigated the claim by a veterinarian in Texas she had discovered a being that was “part human, part primitive.”

“My standard is: no data, no discovery,” Coleman said. “And why is she saying ridiculous things like ‘These are angels from heaven’?”
The article continues to talk about a few other cryptids but the subject comes back to Bigfoot and Mr. Coleman reveals what started his fascination for Cryptozoology; a Japanese movie about the Yeti.
Coleman said that for every 100 cases of new animal claims, about 80 of them are mistaken identity, one is a hoax and the other 19 are unknown.

“But the media goes crazy about the hoaxes,” he noted.

Coleman said Bigfoot hoaxers are “really evil people.”

“Let’s talk about Bigfoot,” Foer said, and Coleman was off and running.

He noted that when he surveys people who come to his International Cryptozoology Museum in Portland, Me. (the world’s only cryptozoology museum), “nine out of 10 are interested in Bigfoot.”

Coleman thinks he knows the reason: “Of all the cryptids, Bigfoot is the one that looks the most like us.”

Coleman isn’t about to declare Bigfoot is real but he did say, “I think there is something going on out there.”

He said the most “compelling” evidence is the Patterson-Gimlin footage of a hairy figure shot Oct. 20, 1967, in Bluff Creek, Calif. “You can see the mammary glands,” he noted. “And muscle contractions.”

Coleman added: “You see horses reacting to the creature. You have film, you have footprints. We have to be careful about putting all of our eggs in a basket. But if you look at it now, it’s the gold standard of all Bigfoot films.”

Coleman said we needn’t look for Bigfoot in populated regions such as Connecticut. But he noted: “You’ve got the melon heads in Shelton! Groups of unknown creatures in the woods with giant heads. They’re folk art.”

Coleman said, “I’ve been at this 53 years” and yet cryptozoology is still often dismissed as pseudo science. “I’ve long ago given up my defensiveness.”

He got interested in the field when he was a kid. The date was March 20, 1960. He saw a Japanese documentary, “Half Human,” about the Yeti (the Abominable Snowman).
You can read the full article at the New Haven Register 


  1. Has Loren even done any field work since March 20, 1960.

  2. Coleman is a smart enough guy, but by compartmentalizing Ketchum's findings into a single possible result, he does not allow for the larger possibilities of a multi-faceted phenomenon, ie. MORE than one type of creature. This alone makes his admonition about angel DNA moot. Produce some physical evidence of your own, Mr. Coleman, and perhaps your testing will reveal something different.

  3. The problem with Loren is that he has not been able to keep up with the computer age. He was a well respected commodity at one time but the pond is much larger now and his importance in it has diminished. Now he sits back and attacks field researchers and others in the forefront of research.

  4. Mk is in no way in the forefront of research she is nothing but a con artist and hoaxer!

  5. Also,I think the new reality tv shows do not help with Bigfoot research. When you have people looking in a small strip of forest along a well traveled river and near farms...look, Bigfoot is not everywhere! More research which requires time and effort, not "well it's raining now, we've had enough footage shot, let's go in" is needed. While the show inspires more people to hunt for Bigfoot, they do not always show good investigative techniques. It sometimes takes years of study to find a new animal in the wild, but this whole "Everyone anywhere can hunt, a few trees means it's Squatchy" is not helpful and leaves the investigation of Bigfoot open to ridicule. Angel DNA? I mean, how do you even KNOW what "Angel DNA" is?

    1. I'm guessing it has to do with Genesis 6:2 over sons of God mating with daughters of Earth. Genetic studies showed a huge difference between higher primates Y chromosome from homo sapien Y chromosome.

      Thought it was pretty interesting. Still, I'd like to take a peak at MK's genetic result.

  6. 53 year crypto zoologist and doesn't know if BFs are real? Wow, he flunks. Lord.

  7. If I remember right, CryptoMundo was "taken in" by the Georgia Bigfoot-in-a-freezer hoax a few years ago. There was a blog post something like "I have a feeling this could be the real thing!" But that got taken down quickly I recollect.

    1. exactly right. If this is the new Loren, then I'm glad - maybe it took that episode for him to do a 180. It made me upset enough at the time to post a snarky remark at bigfootforums, which is not my normal demeanor at all. He was way too effusive about that debacle before it crashed and burned. I *really* do not think there are unknown primates living in Georgia. Pacific Northwest, sure. Just because they live there doesn't mean they live everywhere. You won't find any Gila monsters in Maine, even if you really want them to be there.

  8. This may help out with the context of some of the quotes:

    1. Thanks for the heads-up! We posted Loren Coleman's clarifications on an updated post

  9. No wonder the media and mainstream science doesn't take Bigfoot research seriously when you have these kind of reactionary attacks by 'true-believers' against Coleman who is actually approaching the subject with common sense.

    1. Common sense is not wanted. Only that evidence which supports what is already believed, or can be forced to fit what is already believed.

      Any facts which question belief are automatically discounted under any number of guises from conspiracy to simple nay saying. My personal favorite is the "Prove its not real" argument.


Let's keep the language clean, keep in mind we have younger fans and we want to make this the best bigfoot website for bigfoot news and bigfoot research.

Please read our terms of use policy.