Artist Peter Loh thinks another revision to his drawing is in order based on Vincent Chow’s new sketch, above. Also Peter feels some explanations from his point of view are worthy of registering, regarding the Johor Hominid drawings he has submitted. This seems only fair, so here’s his say:

Vincent is a great artist too, eh? Here’s my earlier drawing with some changes based on his drawing. Now, I’d like to voice some of my frustrations when making my sketches.

Before I sent you the last drawing (the original version of the drawing below), I had wanted to change the nose (to almost exactly what Vincent has drawn). In fact, I’d always suspected that the nose was more ape-like (or gorilla-like) but if you’d look back at all the descriptions by Vincent, there was no mention of this, except that the nose was "upturned" or "upside down", which was why I drew them the way I did.

I regret not trusting my instincts. What makes me suspicious is why couldn’t it simply be described as "ape-like" which is what it is? Isn’t it easier to make a comparison with the nose of a known primate than to describe it in a new way?

Another discrepency is this: Vincent described to me that the eyebrows were thick and bushy. Do you see that in his drawing?

So what do you make of this?

Peter Loh’s latest revision of the Johor Hominid, based upon the new information contained in Vincent Chow’s tracing.

The above and following images demonstrate the range of what three people have considered to be the visual data from apparently one photograph. Won’t it be better to just see the photo, at this point in time?

Click on image for full-size version

Update: Wed, 12 Jul 2006

A proposal to Vincent Chow

Dear Vincent,

I hope I’m not asking too much here. With all due respect, I couldn’t get a very clear description of your hominid when we met sometime back. As a wise man once said, a picture is worth a thousand words. While I did voice my frustrations in the earlier post, I know it’s not your fault at all. The person listening (yours truly, in this case) also has a responsibility to provide an accurate interpretation.

So I’d like to make this proposal (you might say I’m a tad presumptuous): Please show me the photos and let me do my version of what I see. I don’t need to trace the photos. Show them to me and I’ll tell the world the truth with my own sketches based on these photos. We could meet up at a place of your choice and you could show them to me alone, or if you don’t mind, we could also get Kenny Fong (SPI) to come along as a witness. I can assure you that we will not take any photos of the photos. You will have nothing to lose but everything to gain from this. After all, a few people at your end have already seen the photos, and if a “third party” could verify that they are real, I believe there wouldn’t be any more doubt of their authenticity, if that’s what you hope to see.

I hope you’ll really give this suggestion some serious consideration, and I’m sure everyone here in this forum will be just as anxious as I am while we wait for your response. I’d also like to take this opportunity to thank you for what you’ve done so far. Great work!

Commentary from Loren Coleman: While this sounds great, I’m sorry to burst Peter Loh’s bubble, but the present situation will not be changed by yet another lone individual seeing the photograph or photographs, in isolation. To say that “there wouldn’t be any more doubt of their authenticity” if Peter Loh is shown them merely goes to further the fact that only a “special few” are being shown these photos. So what if the circle is expanded by one more or even a panel. I reject both ideas, even though one was recenlty my own, and stand pat with calling for the broad-based publication of the photographic images.