MYSTERIOUS AUSTRALIA

Vol. 1, Issue No 1

November, 2010.

INSIDE:
Welcome to the Mysterious Australia Newsletter. New Light on the Yowie Mystery. A Menagerie of Monsters. Spanish Explorers at Wattamolla Beach 245 Years Before Cook!

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

Blue Mountains UFO Research Club. The Club meetings are held on the third Saturday of the month, at the Gilroy residence, 12 Kamillaroi Road, South Katoomba, from 1pm onwards. We are situated on the corner of Kamillaroi Road and Ficus Street, and as we always say, park in Ficus Street where there is safer parking.

Rex and Heather Gilroy, Australias top UFO and Unexplained Mysteries Research team. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2004.

WELCOME TO THE MYSTERIOUS AUSTRALIA NEWSLETTER..

Formerly known as the Temple of Nim it has been decided to make a name change that everyone can understand. I originally chose Temple of Nim after Nim, the Sun-God of the lost megalithic civilisation that arose in Australia tens of thousands of years ago, and although I have written extensively on this subject and published the first of a number of [forthcoming] books bout this mysterious people and their advanced Stone-Age civilisation I feel that, as there remain many people as yet unaware of old Uru, that a name change for our monthly newsletter dealing with archaeological, historical and cryptozoological matters, was necessary. Mysterious Australia was the name of the Gilroys first book, and as it contained phenomena of all kinds so shall this newsletter under its new name continue to do so. Heather and I therefore hope you will enjoy this first issue of our newsletter under its new name, and many contributions from readers/members of Blue Mountains UFO Research Club are always welcome. These contributions can be on any Unexplained subjects and any UFO material will be placed in our Clubs UFO newsletter. Big changes in our club are under way as new members are joining in, so that changes to this newsletter have come at an appropriate time. -0-

NEW LIGHT ON THE YOWIE MYSTERY.

By Rex Gilroy Copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

In previous articles in this newsletter and also in my books concerning the Yowie mystery, I have demonstrated that there is more than one race of primitive, pre-Aboriginal race of Stone-Age hominin inhabiting this continent into the time of early Aboriginal arrival by 50,000 years ago. I have also shown that the term Hairy Man was applied overall to every non-Aboriginal [ie Australoid] race with which they shared Australia. The hairy term however did not imply that they were covered in hair but wore marsupial hide garments [as did the Aborigines]. These beings were also tool-makers. The Gilroys book The Yowie Mystery Living fossils from the Dreamtime [URU Publications 2007] which is largely concerned with the anatomy and physiology of Australias relict hominins, presents overwhelming evidence that the Yowie, or Hairy Man was largely based upon three forms of Homo erectus, our immediate ancestor, these being Homo erectus proper, a giant form of at least 3.6 metres tall and a 1 metre tall pygmy form. These beings were not excessively hairy according to Aborigines and nothing at all like the cartoonish gorillalike illustrations of hoaxers and sensation-seeking journalists. An example of the Homo erectus identity of the hairy people is preserved in Murray River Aboriginal tradition, which speaks of hairy men raiding their camps and stealing lubras, taking them back to their own campfires and mating with them. These Yowies were obviously not the primate-looking beasties of popular journalism. Indeed, even when provided with common-sense articles by me on the Homo erectus identity of these primitive hominins, backed up not only by fossil skull and ancient stone tool evidence, as well as recently-manufactured stone tools recovered in the wild, newspaper journalists too often refused to publish
2

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

this uncomfortable information, preferring to go on printing the usual sensationalist nonsense. The truth does not interest them when sensationalism sells newspapers and we suppose that it keeps them in their jobs! Homo erectus was undoubtedly the identity of the marsupial hide clad, tool-making Yowie, and I base my findings upon the fossil skull-types and tools [past and present] gathered by me in a lifetimes field research. However, recent findings based upon skull-types already in my possession have led me to re-identify what I formerly identified as proto-Homo erectus as an Australian form of the otherwise African based Australopithecus robustus. Pending further evidence I have give this form [based upon six skulls] the name Australopithecus australis gilroyii. Furthermore, as each of these skull-types, all mineralised and of immense age [having been recovered from early Pleistocene deposits extending back around 1.5 to 2 million years BP], were recovered from regions where our early Aboriginal tribespeople claimed there existed another, obviously more primitive race of hirsute beings who lived upon herbivorous/insectivorous food, or else threw rocks to bring down prey which they ate raw, it seems to me that we are dealing with a race of beings which fit the Australopithecine appearance. Thus, I am now prepared to believe that groups of Australopithecines had migrated out of Africa, and over a vast period of time had reached Asia, and thence via what was then a southeast Asian landshelf linking the Asian mainland with Australia, eventually entered this continent over 2 million years ago. Whether there was more than a single species involved here remains to be seen, although the mineralised skull and skull endocasts in my possession point to a form of Australopithecus robustus, a race now thought to have been a maker of crude stone, even bone tools. Crudely flaked eoliths have been recovered in the vicinity of fossil remains of A. robustus in Africa. However, to date only scraps of fossil hominin remains recovered in China, India and Java, largely teeth and jaw fragments, which some scientists have suggested might be of Australopithecine origin have been forthcoming, so that without perhaps outright fossil skull-types at least for scientists to study , the presence of Australopithecines beyond Africa remains for now officially unestablished. Yet just because such evidence has not yet been recovered from countries between Africa and Australia does not imply that it does not exist, and could very well turn up eventually, thus backing up my pioneer Australian Australopithecine skull-types. The over-hairy apish creatures of ancient Aboriginal tradition were described by a people who had no knowledge of primates of any kind, and my fossil skulls now give credence to these ancient traditions. Thus, while we can easily dismiss the cartoonish version of the hairy ape-like Yowies of ignorant journalism, we now possess fossil evidence that a race of often longish-haired ape-like, man-like creatures did, or perhaps still do, exist, in remote regions of Australia. Aboriginal claims that these over-hairy Yowies have dark hair and darkish skins, and that they inhabit [or once did] the more mountainous forested regions of Australia, chiefly those in the eastern part of the continent, is in keeping with what has been proven by African-based palaeoanthropologists and those scientists concerned with climatic conditions of geological times. For example, forests were essential to those earliest Australopithecines who subsisted on an herbivorous/insectivorous diet, such regions being rich in berries, nuts, certain edible plants, leaves etc. Our Australian Australopithecus robustus would have been a distant evolved variation of his African ancestor, but having developed crude stone [ie eolithic] tools he was obviously adapted to meat-eating and would have hunted beyond the forest environment for game in groups or singularly. Because of the incidence of sunlight and radiation at high elevations A [robustus] Australis probably had dark hair and facial skin as would any other possible Australopithecine form that reached this continent, or even evolved here from an earlier Australopithecine species. The dark skin would protect these beings against UV rays. Because external ear size in primates in part reflects ability to dissipate head heat, given a low nutrient diet probably had a low metabolism. At present these is no scientific evidence in existence demonstrating the length and density of A. robustus body hair. If the proposed Australian Australopithecus [robustus] australis groups that adapted to a more open environment once they began hunting marsupials such as kangaroos, etc then excessive body hair covering would have gradually been lost. Body hair reduction and loss is not a feature unique to modern humans because other mammals have also lost their hair as a response to body heat control and/or to avoid external parasites such as fleas, ticks and lice. The possibility that A. australis, like his cousins beyond Australia would probably have slept huddled up in groups to keep warm on cold nights may have required a certain amount of hair loss in order to reduce the rate of parasite transmission.
3

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

That two forms of distinct human ancestors, collectively confused with the Yowie, or hairy man are still with us, inhabiting the more remote mountainous forest regions, chiefly in eastern Australia is not acceptable to conservative scientists, although the more open-minded relict hominologist and Cryptozoologist can readily accept this proposition knowing the virtually inaccessible terrain concerned, isolated recesses where any creatures either long-thought extinct and unknown to science could quite easily escape modern human detection. The Gilroys Yowie files contain several thousand accounts gathered since Rex Gilroy first began researching the hairy people back in 1957. Having just turned 67 years old, I am happy to see that my lifelong investigation has not only succeeded in positively identifying these beings by uncovering the fossil foundations of the entire mystery, but also broken new ground in finally identifying the mysterious ape-like race which, like Homo erectus, was known Australia-wide under many Aboriginal names. We therefore welcome a living Australopithecine offshoot to the Australian relict hominin list. -0-

Palaeontological discoveries in Africa of Australopithecus robustus has enabled scientific artists to reconstruct what this race might have looked like in the flesh. A. robustus stood about 1.5 to perhaps 1.8 metres tall, weighing about 10 stone and had a gorilla-size brain. Females were shorter and slighter. The proposed Australian form would have fitted the above basic description.

Although a meat-eater, Australopithecus robustus also enjoyed an herbivorous diet. It is possible that another, non-tool-making herbivorous/insectivorous Australopithecine relative also reached Australia. The African scene being played out here could easily have been Australia in late Pliocene, early Pleistocene times. Both illustrations courtesy LIFE, Early man by F. Clark Howell.

An Australopithecine overlooks his African domain 2 million years ago. Growing evidence gathered by Rex Gilroy leads him to suggest that these distant ancestors of ourselves migrated beyond Africa to enter Asia, and eventually Australia. Sketch by M Wilson, 1950. The Quest for Man by Vanne Goodall, Phaidon Press Ltd., London. 1975.

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

The Katoomba, NSW Australopithecus australis skull [left] compared with an African Australopithecus robustus example. The basic features of the Australian skull compared with the A. robustus specimen lead Rex Gilroy to the conclusion that Australopithecines made the cross-continents trek into Australia well over 2 million years ago. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

This TIME-Life publication illustration of an African male and female Australopithecus couple could be used to describe the Australian Australopithecine-type Yowies [ie hairy people] described in ancient Aboriginal traditions, as well as early European settlers/present day eyewitness claims. The physical appearance of these beings differs from that of the living Homo erectus Yowie tool-making, fire-making hominins reported from over a wide area of Australia.

A MENAGERIE OF MONSTERS.
by Rex Gilroy. Copyright Rex Gilroy 2010 [taken

from Out of the Dreamtime The Search for Australias Unknown Animals. URU Publications 2006.]

The Australian coastline, and our east coastal waters in particular, appears to be literally seething with monsters of one sort or another; more than enough, it would appear, to frighten many people from swimming at the local beach! Happily this is not the case, for these creatures are, after all in the minority compared with all the great many other sea creatures more commonly met with. Even so, we have yet to examine reports of giant sea snakes, and the ever-mysterious longnecks, the plesiosaur-type [what else can they be?] marine creatures that have long been believed by many to exist in the
5

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

depths of the Hawkesbury River and elsewhere around the coasts of Australia and our island neighbours. These beasties we shall meet in Part Five - Reptilian Nightmares. My wife Heather and I have searched far and wide in Australia and also in New Zealand over a 30 year period, gathering information on all manner of mystery marine creatures, in the course of which we have interviewed bushwalkers, fishermen and trawler captains in south and north coastal NSW and Queensland, as well as in New Zealand; or else we have received countless phone calls and letters by eyewitnesses who believe they have seen more than one kind of mystery sea creature. Some of these mystery creatures happen to be giant octopuses and squids. These marine monsters belong to the class Cephalopoda, which comprises the tetrabranchs which have two pairs of gills, and the dibranchs which have only one pair. Both groups are easily distinguishable, as the only extant members of the tetrabranchs are the genus Nautilus, which are unique in having a handsome spiral shell. All the recent species belong to the dibranchs, some of which have a shell, but it is small and hidden inside the body. The nautilus has about 100 tentacles which are short and smooth, unlike the sucker-covered arms of the other cephalopods. The dibranchs fall into three groups; the octopuses, the cuttlefish and the squids. The body of the octopus is a more or less spherical sac to which the head is closely connected. It has eight arms which are all about the same length, each armed with a double row of suckers, except on the eledones, or Musk-octopuses. The squids and cuttlefishes are constructed differently to the octopus. The head is situated at the end of a narrower neck, with the body being elongated with a horizontal fin which runs all round the body in the cuttle fish, but which consists of two lobes on the sides of the squids. These lobes are very flexible, acting somewhat like a propeller. Like the octopus, cuttlefish and squids have eight arms. They also have two long tentacles which swell into a flattened spoon-shape at the end, these being covered with close rows of suckers. The cuttlefish are able to retract these tentacles and shoot them out to spear their prey. The squids wave their tentacles about like antennae. These creatures have evolved their individual physical differences to suit their different habits and ways of life. The octopus has evolved a physical structure suited for crawling about on shallow and deeper sea floors, whereas the more tapering body and fins of the squid has evolved for a life of swimming in the open sea. The octopus inhabits a lair where it awaits its prey, whereas the squid pursues its food at high speed through the water. They are powerful enough to propel themselves so strongly that their streamlined body acts like an artillery shell, often allowing them to leap from the water, either onto land, or more often onto the decks of ships. The cuttlefish is a less slender creature than the squid and not as good a swimmer. It occupies a habitat that stands half-way between the octopus and squid. It does not inhabit a hole, but it rarely rises above the sea floor, where it lies half buried in the sand, able to appear almost invisible due to its mimicry, harpooning any creature that passes by. Octopuses range in size from Octopus arborescens, which is less than 50mm in span from arm tip to arm tip, to O. hongkongensis, which has a span of 9.8m. They are found worldwide in temperate and tropical seas, although some can be found at the surface of the open sea and some species can live at depths of 4,500m. They feed upon crabs, snails, fish and other marine animals. Although armed with sharp beak and poison glands [usually not harmful to humans], the octopus will usually flee to its burrow when a predator threatens. Its chief defence is to release a cloud of ink, which not only acts as a decoy to distract its enemy, but also paralyse the attackers sense of smell. As just pointed out, the largest [official] span of these creatures is the 9.8m of O. hongkongensis. However, far larger specimens have been reported worldwide, particularly off the Australian coast. A huge octopus of about 36ft span [ie about 11m], was found on an isolated beach near Harrington, on the NSW mid north coast by fishermen after a storm in 1935, but nobody bothered to report the find to anyone in authority until some months later, by which time the remains had long since been washed away. Further up the cost, off Urunga, in 1953 a fishing trawler passed a dead octopus that showed signs of having been savaged by a shark. The men on board estimated one arm of the creature visible in the water to be about 39ft [about 11.9m]. In 1980 I received word from a skin diver, Mr Rob Clover, who at the time was exploring the Great Barrier Reef off Bowen, Far North Queensland, that he and two other divers had spotted a huge, greyish-coloured octopus in shallows, whose arms, although moving about, had they been spread out tip to tip, would have been at least 40ft] 12.2m] in span! Theodore Barnett, the fish authority quoted in the previous chapter, was deep-sea fishing in mid-April 1979 off Greenwell Point NSW. At a point 30 miles offshore, he caught something heavy in his line which offered no resistance. When he reeled it in he discovered it to be a huge section of an octopus arm about 20
6

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

inches [56cm] thick! How large was the creature it had belonged to? As the section of limb [about 90cm length] was rotting he threw it overboard. We turn now to similar reports of giant squids. Marine biologists recognise the giant squid, Architeuthis princeps, as reaching up to 15m in length making it officially the largest invertebrate. Loligo pealii, at 30cm length, is the common squid of the Atlantic coast, while Loligo opalescens, is the common squid of the Pacific. There are, however, like the mysterious giant octopuses, more than one squid of gigantic size not recognised by conservative university marine biologists, but frequently reported seen worldwide. This author is concerned with those reports from Australasian waters. For example, during 1973, Richard Hicks, a sailor on H.M.A.S. Melbourne, sighted a giant squid of about 40ft [about 12.2m] length, during a voyage up the NSW far south coast. Other crewmen must also have spotted the huge creature as the ship passed quite close to it. About this time Torres Strait islanders old tales of a many legged sea-monster were attracting my interest, a monster they said, which reached something like 200ft in length! More than one whale has been found off the Queensland coast, if not elsewhere around the continent over the years, which bore the marks of squid discs up to 44cm in diameter, which could suggest a gargantuan squid of the above length inhabits our coastline! New Zealand has had its fair share of giant squid sightings. At Waimarama on South Island one such creature was washed up on the shore in 1871. When measured from the end of the tail to the root of the arms it was found to be 10ft 5inches [about 3.18m] length. The bodys circumference was more than 10ft and the arms were about 5ft 6inches [1.68m] in length. The local Maoris identified the dead monster with the Taniwha, a name applied to more than one mysterious water monster in these islands. In 1887 a Mr T.W. Kirk, who was responsible for recording many large squid sightings around New Zealand, was brought the beak and pharynx of one such giant by a fisherman, who informed him that the total length of the squid to which these body parts belonged was 62ft. However, Kirk soon found that the animal was in fact 57ft long and that 49ft of this was tentacle. And what of giant squid encounters hereabouts in modern times? During my first visit to New Zealand with Heather in July 1980, I collected vague reports from Hawkes Bay, North Island and in Cook Strait. These were accounts of fishing trawler crews that had occurred during the 1960s and 1970s, but in 1979, I was informed [during a lecture I delivered at Tauranga], that two local divers had been laughed at, following their claim to have met up with a monstrous squid easily 50ft in length [ie about 15.24m], while diving off one of the islands in the Bay of Plenty. ***** We now return to Australia to investigate three very different types of sea monsters. One day during 1959, Mr Alf Collier was water skiing over Swan Lake at Sussex Inlet, on the NSW south coast, in 3m of water at 35 mph, when he thought he had just skied over a submerged aeroplane. Alf described what happened next to me during an interview with him in November 1979: I asked the motor boat driver to take me back over the spot again where I had seen the strange object, but when he took me back over the spot the aeroplane was gone. It was about 25-30ft [7.62-9.14m] in wingspan, greeny in colour, and the wings could have suggested some giant form of manta ray. Whatever it was, it was no ordinary creature common to these parts. Suffice it to say the beast was an unknown monster of the deep which had strayed into unfamiliar waters, he said. ***** And then there is the Monster of Ballina Lagoon... Ballina, which lies north of Evans Head, on the far north coast of NSW, has been the scene of many eerie encounters with this monster going back generations, so that we are obviously dealing with more than one animal. The following information comes from Mr Vincent Chapman, who saw the creature in the abovementioned lagoon in 1965. He describes it as a hairy dark honey-brown furred animal, somewhat like a huge bear in appearance. Mr Chapman related the following in an interview on Monday 8th May 2000: I saw the creature in 1965 when I was 33 years old. I was with my wife Beryl and our children, sitting on a sandy beach on this particular day on the lagoons edge, when, some distance away, out in the lagoon, a huge creature rose up out of the water to a height of at least 12ft [3.66m]; a huge head, with its back to us, and shoulders a good 6ft broad. The head was furcovered [at least from behind] as was the back. It then submerged below the surface and we didnt see it again.
7

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

Mr Chapman added that many people who have seen this monster have described it as a very broadshouldered beast with arms [ie flippers] out of the water. Whenever a boat approached it, the mysterious marine creature quickly sank beneath the surface. The identity of this creature is a mystery in itself. Some people believe it to be the Sea Bear, a species extinct some thirty million years. Or is it some form of hitherto unknown giant seal - perhaps this is more likely, he said. From the authors own investigation the following reports have been gathered... During 1999 a number of surfers on the lagoon beach spotted a large, dark-furred, humped creature surface and lie drifting on the waves for about 2 minutes, before sliding under the water. One night in August 1978, a Mr Norm Footman and his wife Bernice, while walking on the beach, spotted ahead of them, a 6ft tall, dark hump-like thing lying on the sand well above the shoreline. We were about 100 yards away when we first saw it in the moonlight, and at first thought the object was a boat or something similar. Then as we came closer, we realised there was movement - a head could be seen, and flippers moving - as the dark shape, at least 30ft in length, turned on the sand and, as we stood startled 50ft away, began a hasty seal-like movement toward the water, and starting a loud seal-like bark as it did so. It looked in our direction, and although the face was in the dark we are certain it was a monstrous seal, said Norm. In 1970 a yacht full of people was passing offshore from Ballina, when two passengers, Carrol and Geoff Kramer, spotted a monstrous blacky-brown, furry thing, suddenly appear on the surface some distance away between the vessel and the shoreline. It was about 30 to 40ft in length on the surface, Carrol said. The others were alerted and everyone saw it. It then began moving and a large dog-like head appeared, bobbing up and down in the waves as it approached our yacht. The head was something like 2ft across. The creature looked like a seal, but of an enormous size. The other girls screamed as it approached us. Then it just submerged and we did not see it again, she informed me. In 1988 at Sandgate, on the coast north of Brisbane, Queensland, a monstrous seal-like hairy creature rose out of the water before two frightened fishermen. The area was mangrove-covered on the waterfront, and the fishermen were in a small motorboat offshore with Moreton Island across the way in the distance. The creature quickly submerged, but the men were adamant that it resembled a monstrous seal, whose head and upper body momentarily rose 15ft [4.57m] above the water, waving its two front flippers which were very large, as they observed. From all available descriptions, the Ballina Monster appears to be some unknown giant species of seal from another age, which has managed to survive largely unknown and unseen in the eastern Australian coastal waters. ***** Our third and last monster is a globster.... During mid-July 1960 Tasmanias coast was hit by the worst storm ever recorded there. A few weeks later, in August, Mr Ben Fenton, a property owner of Temma on the north-west coast, was mustering cattle near a beach 2 miles north of the Interview River, together with two drovers, Jack Boote and Ray Anthony. It was here on the beach that they saw, and closely examined, a large, roughly circular body, that of some dead sea creature quite unknown to them, and which was covered with short soft fur. The men only spoke of their find casually to a few friends, as they feared wide-scale ridicule from the community. Mr Fenton continued to revisit the beach from time to time, during which he observed that the body had been removed by the action of rough seas and re-deposited further along the beach. By this means the mystery corpse was gradually moved further along the coast, each time becoming either partially or completely buried in the sand. It eventually reached a point 14 miles up the coast south of Sandy Cape. News of the mystery corpse gradually filtered into Hobart, the states capital, and eventually reached Mr G.C. Cramp, a local naturalist and businessman, who in turn put the matter before a number of Hobart Museum officials in February 1962, and it was agreed by all that someone should undertake a proper study of the mystery creature. Mr Cramp subsequently organised and financed an aerial search for it in early March. Having located the furry mass, a ground party, led by Mr B.C. Mollison, a member of the staff of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation [CSIRO] at Hobart, set out on March 8th. Mr Mollison was described by the press as a zoological student and not a science graduate but experienced in some forms of zoology. He was accompanied by Max Bennett, also of the CSIRO, L.E. Wall, and J.A. Lewis, vice president and treasurer respectively of the Tasmanian Field Naturalists Club. The party had a hard time reaching the site, as they came up against flooded rivers, and due to the denseness of the coastal
8

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

wilderness, they were forced to trudge many miles through loose sand along the beach to reach the monster [as the Hobart Press labelled it]. The press as usual was scant on details, but later reported that Mr Mollison had returned from his second trip to inspect the monster on March 11th.This statement was of little significance although the incredible series of subsidiary events that followed upon his return is at the same time both interesting and amazing; and amazing for the sheer incompetence demonstrated by supposed scientific experts! First there is the description of the monstrous mass that Mr Mollison apparently presented to the Hobart Museum, and whose, reconstruction of the creature was published in the city press, accompanied by the categorical statement that these impressions of the sea monster were drawn by a museum expert. Allowing for the usual incompetent reporting of the media, there remain some very important points that have never been made clear. For one thing, did Mollison really provide the creatures description attributed to him? As an unqualified, virtual amateur zoologist [but no disgrace in that! RG], it seems unlikely that Government Museum scientists would accept the report of an amateur and are more likely to have had one drawn up by a qualified scientist. And, would these scientists have provided the media with such a crude throw-away sketch of the mystery marine giant? From the authors own experience, wherein his own description of the Yowie was deliberately distorted into a virtual cartoon character, by tongue-in-cheek sensation-seeking journalists years ago, I believe that we can place the sketches origin on the table of a newspaper artist! The report of the creatures description appears the work of a scientist, rather than that of a more down-to-earth amateur, and Mollison was of course not a fully-qualified scientist. He was only quoted as making very mild statements of a purely conjectural nature; ie One tends always to reject the fact that an animal is unknown. One is always seeking some explanation, and you try to add up everything, but this one does not add up yet or again There are only two possibilities - that the animal is unknown, or that it is the remnant of a known animal. He also stated that, while they were at the site, Mr Boote had marked out what he considered the original outline and the party dug down on these marks and found decayed flesh. This suggests that the description originally came from Jack Boote. Mollison finally concluded that the animal was not a giant ray but probably a ray-like animal. Scientists were soon speculating upon the identity of the mysterious beach blob, coming up with the usual explanations such as, part of a beached whale, or a shark, even that it might be a giant squid, even perhaps a giant ray. Then on March 19th Senator John Gorton, future Prime Minister, but at that time Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia, responsible for the work of the CSIRO, stated in Parliament in a written report that: In laymans language, and allowing for scientific caution, this report means that your monster is a large lump of decomposing blubber, probably torn off a whale. Gortons report, based upon the [cover-up] explanation of the scientists, did nothing to officially bury the matter. For one thing, Mollison had stated that the creature was not a whale. He also stated that he had retrieved samples of tissue to prove it. Even while he was making this statement, the scientists were, as reported in a March 12th 1962 press release declaring that so far no zoologist has looked at it and denying that any tissue samples had been brought back for study. This appears strange in view of the fact that Mollisons samples were at that time being analysed in Sydney and were fully reported upon by CSIRO scientists. Finally, after questions had been raised in Parliament, and negotiations concluded between the CSIRO, Royal Australian Navy and Museum officials, a scientific team departed from Hobart for the northwest coast, where they rented a helicopter and flew to the site. The group comprised of Mr A.M. Olsen, Marine Biologist and Senior Research Officer of the Fisheries Division of the CSIRO in Hobart. Mr J.H. Calaby, Senior Mammalogist of the Wildlife Division of the CSIRO in Canberra, Dr. E.R. Guiler, Senior Lecturer in Zoology at the University of Tasmania, and two technicians. They picked up Dr.W.Bryden, Director of the Tasmanian Museum, Hobart in the field. Although they announced that they would spend two weeks at the site, they actually left after just 24 hours and were back in Hobart by March 18th. Once there, in great secrecy, they prepared the report that John Gorton, [who was at that time also in charge of Naval Affairs for the Federal Government], was to read in Parliament. The report prepared by these experts, after their 24 hour length rush job examination stated: The exposed portion of the material was 6ft long and 2ft wide.
9

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

It projected a few inches above the sand surface. Test holes were dug into the sand around the periphery for several feet to determine the dimensions of the object. As no solid matter was found in the test holes, we dug around the solid material, passed a rope beneath, and turned it over, thus removing it from the excavation. When laid out flat, the material was 8 feet long, 3 ft wide, and 10 inches thick at the thickest portion, and from half an inch to four inches through. There were a number of irregularly shaped flaps, the juxtaposition of which may have given the impression of clefts, and perhaps the flaps themselves gave an appearance of lobes. The appearance of the material on its exposed surface was different from that of the buried portions. In fact, the material is homogeneous in that it consists throughout of tough, fibrous material loaded with fatty or oily substances. The material has a strong, rancid smell, resembling the higher fatty acids. The weight of the object was estimated at a few hundred pounds. The mass was cut through transversely in several places, and particular attention was paid to the flaps. The material did not contain any bones, spines or other hard structures. The hair-like material of the exposed surfaces was merely a consequence of desiccation and leaching of fat-filled fibrous material. Within the body of the material were casual canals, circular in cross section and half an inch to three quarters of an inch in diameter. After examining the solid material, further investigation was made around the site in an attempt to determine the original dimensions of the object. A few inches below the present sand surface was a layer of sand of variable thickness, which has been stained by organic matter, and had the same strong, rancid smell as the solid matter. This matter extends 8 feet beyond the limit of the solid material in a northerly direction, but to the south and landward sides was only present under the solid material and did not extend beyond its boundaries. On the seaward side this organic layer extended about 18 feet but we did not consider this distance significant since it follows the natural slope of the beach. Further investigation was made below the black sand but no solid material was found. The difference between the size as originally reported and the present dimensions doubtless is due to decomposition and shrinkage. In view of the fact that this material has been stranded for a long time and is much decomposed, it is not possible to specifically identify it from this preliminary investigation.
10

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

Samples have been taken for laboratory comparison by appropriate authorities. In conclusion, we wish to express our gratitude to the many people whose help and cooperation made this investigation possible. This rotting blob on the beach, or globster as some locals were calling it, was in fact not the only instance of such a creature having been washed up on the Tasmanian west coast; as some residents of isolated beachfront areas have pointed out that mystery hairy monsters have been found by people on and off hereabouts since pioneering days in the 19th century. In fact, five such creatures had been found over the last 30 years and been overlooked by the authorities and media alike. There was also one important question not answered in the quoted scientific report. Namely, was the mystery globster ever covered with hair of any kind or fur? Only mammals possess true hair. This is distinguishable from hair-like structures such as bristles, and no known mammal, or any part of an aquatic mammal of the size of this globster is covered with hair. One whale species is known to possess six bristles on its chin and the young of the Grey Whale has rows of sparse bristles along the back of its head and forebody, therefore the globster, whatever it was, was certainly no portion of a whale. A reporter who reached the site after the departure of the scientists later wrote: Near a large excavation were two bulky pieces of flesh, each a few feet in diameter, and a smaller piece. At that time the excavation would be no more than a few feet deep. Either this, or another journalist later unearthed some interesting information concerning the scientific manner in which two large portions of flesh had been removed. This had been accomplished by suspending them outside the helicopter due to the stench of the rotting remains. He spoke of the veil of secrecy cast over the scientists work on the beach, and subsequent method of storage of the specimen material afterwards at Zeehan. It appears that the specimens were removed from the airstrip to the yard of the Central Hotel, in the Hydro-Electric Commission utility truck under much secrecy. Once in the hotel grounds they were off-loaded in the yard and the trucks tray backed over them. The specimens, which had nearly filled the tray, were then left there on the ground until loaded onto another truck for the trip to Hobart on Saturday 17th March. Journalists must have wondered how these scientists could possibly issue a full, final report on this tissue material by the evening of the following day. After all, it took the truck all of Saturday to reach Hobart, and we have been led to believe that the entire resources of the CSIRO had been making futile attempts to identify the tissue samples for almost a week! It appears obvious that, either they made the identification on the beach, or else they had the blob identified all along! So, was the mystery creature ever 20ft in diameter as first described? Or was it merely a mass of rotting whale blubber about 10 feet in length as some people suggest? Did it ever possess hair or fur, or did it only give the appearance of this? And why the official cover-up? The whole affair undoubtedly stinks to high heaven. And those incompetent bumbling scientists who examined and removed tissue samples from the blob on the beach couldnt even agree on that! A group of competent amateur zoologists would have done a better job of identifying this blob on the beach. Other blobs have been found on Tasmanias north-west coast since the 1960 incident, yet for some reason they were not investigated by any scientists. No doubt there will be more blobs washed ashore in the future to keep this mystery alive. --0
This impression of the Globster appeared in the Hobart Mercury newspaper in March 1962. Drawn by D.C.Mollinson.

11

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

A photograph of the actual Globster carcase inspected by the CSIRO scientific team. Note removed section taken for study. Photo Hobart Mercury, Tasmania, March 1962,

Copyright Rex Gilroy 2006.

The 1960 Globster discovery was not the first of its kind on Tasmanias north-west coast. There are earlier stories among the locals of similar huge, smelly blobs having been washed up on the coast, and there have been others found hereabouts since the 1960 Ben Fenton Globster discovery. This sketch was copied by Rex Gilroy from an original, done by a farmer who found one of this size [note human figure size comparison] on an isolated north-west coast beach about 1989. Sketch copyright Rex Gilroy 2006.

Old seafarers tales dating from Viking times in Atlantic waters, describe a monstrous squid they called the Kraken, which was said to be able to wreck sailing ships. In 1961 near Broome, WA, people watched from the shore of an inlet as a gigantic squid grabbed, and pulled under, a small yacht moored offshore. [It was unoccupied at the time]. In 1954 native pearlers leapt from their pearling lugger off Long Island, Torres Strait, when a giant squid the size of a house suddenly emerged from the water and with its long tentacles began attacking the wooden vessel, smashing the mast and sail, leaving the vessel badly damaged before vanishing back into the water! Natives of Fergusson Island, DEntrecasteaux Group, speak of tribesmen and women having been taken by gigantic squids in the past, when the monsters attacked large canoes filled with people. Sketch from Monsters of the Sea -Legendary and Authentic, by John Gibson. T. Nelson and Sons, London 1890 . 12

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

In 1920 a diver is believed to have been taken by a gigantic squid while working from a pearling lugger off the coast off Thursday Island in Torres Strait. There had been claims of sightings of such a creature by islanders for some months before this incident, and stories of squids of monstrous sizes are still told by Torres Strait Islanders. Sketch copyright Rex Gilroy 2006.

Copyright Rex Gilroy 2006.

Octopi range in size from species less than 50mm in span from arm tip to arm tip to others up to 9.8m. Even larger species are suspected to await scientific recognition. A monstrous octopus of up to 50ft span [15m] was claimed seen by two skindivers while exploring the Great Barrier Reef off Mackay in September 1978. Picture from Monsters of the Sea Legendary and Authentic by John Gibson, T. Nelson and Sons, London 1890.

Octopus honkongensis, which is found worldwide in temperate and tropical waters, such as along the Australian coast, reaches 9.8 metres in length. Larger species unknown to science are suspected to exist in Australian coastal waters. Photo Strange Phenomena Magazine.

13

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

The largest known species of Manta, Manta biroatris, reaches a span of 7m. It is found in tropical and subtropical waters. These creatures weigh up to 2 tonnes. They have been seen off Australias east coast. However, there have been claims from New Guinea waters as well as the Gulf of Carpentaria and the coastal waters of Far North Queensland for many years, of rays exceeding the above span. These include skin divers encounters off Bowen and Fraser Island [Qld] and trawler fishermen and skin divers reports from off Wollongong, Shoalhaven Bight off Nowra, and Sussex Inlet Wreck Bay, with rays of between 40 and 50ft [12.19-15.24m]! Photo Strange Phenomena Magazine.

Australian Fur Seal, Archocephalus forsteri, found along the south coast in eastern Australia to the Bass Strait Islands and Tasmania. It is also found along New Zealands South Island. At approximately 200-500cm length and around 300-350kg weight, it is nowhere near the 30ft length [9.14m], seal-like monster claimed seen on more than one occasion in Ballina Lagoon, on the far northern New South Wales coast. Could such a monstrous species have eluded the attention of marine scientists? Illustration from Strange Phenomena Magazine.

SPANISH EXPLORERS AT WATTAMOLLA BEACH 245 YEARS BEFORE COOK!

by Rex Gilroy. Copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

In past newsletters I have written of evidence recovered along Australias east coast, proving that mariners from Holy Spain made many landfalls here, and came close to establishing permanent colonies. Ancient Latin shorthand inscriptions reveal more than one declaration of claim for this land, by captains unaware that other Spanish captains had beaten them sometimes many years before! Communications being what they were in those times, it is no surprise that even Spanish historians today cannot say with any certainty which of their 16th century explorers might have been the first to lay claim to the mysterious Great South Land. As previous articles by me reveal, Greg Foster and I have uncovered a number of inscriptions revealing an unknown sizeable Spanish colony had been established in Sydney Harbour and its backwaters, with about a kilometre of Parramatta River shoreline containing Spanish Latin inscriptions dating to the 1520s and 1530s, with others in the Gladesville district. Why this colony failed remains a mystery. Now a new discovery has come to light upon shoreline rocks in the Wattamolla Beach area of the Royal National Park in Sydneys south.
14

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

I had not returned to this beach since being taken there as a child in 1955 with my parents by neighbours. I was friendly with their son and he showed me the beach. Here on a sandbar I recall us playing with toy boats at the waters edge. Little could I have known that many years down the tack, on a nostalgic visit I would stumble upon an ancient set of engravings made by Spanish seafarers who landed in this very bay long before the arrival of Captain James Cook in 1770. It was on Thursday 28th October 2010 that Heather and I, together with our friend Geoff Holland of Brisbane, drove to this reserve for a picnic. After showing Geoff the beach, we went exploring the cliffs. Straying off the beaten track as usual, I came across a large sandstone rock surrounded by scrub bearing faded carvings. Chalking them in I was surprised to see the outline of an ancient vessel, a galleas [a ship steered by a sweep like an ancient Greek trireme], four strokes in a line within its outline, other letterings engraved in old European style, and archaic numbers forming the years 1525. Having drawn and measured the carvings I photographed the inscription then washed the chalk from it to prevent anyone else finding this inscription and perhaps vandalising it, then we hurried back to Heather at the picnic ground to show her the drawings. After lunch Geoff decided to remain with Heather while I went off to explore the clifftops overlooking the ocean. I bush-bashed and rock-hopped for about a couple of kilometres in the space of about an hour, before I had the urge to climb onto a very large sandstone rock formation overlooking the ocean. Here to my surprise I found myself looking down at my feet at another ancient, obvious Spanish Latin shorthand inscription. Like the other find, the sea air and elements had taken their toll, and it was necessary once more to chalk in the letterings, which besides the outline of a galleon, included a name Ontega. The letters GPT on one line to the right of the ship, and beneath these the image of a Cross within a circle, a symbol of intended conquest by Spain, to the right of which were the letterings NT. Above the ship were the letters MI, to the left of which were the numbers 1525, beneath which was another Cross. I quickly drew, measured and photographed the inscription which, like the other find also had to be chalked in, then the chalk washed off and I left, as the afternoon was drawing on and I had to return to Heather and Geoff before the sun set, which was getting low, I got back to base within 40 minutes having found an easier route to return by. As we drove out of the Park I played around with the translation problem. ***** The first inscription found by myself and Geoff revealed a date 11th April 1525. The galleas featured with the letterings was s small craft used mainly for coastal exploration and mapping. After a day or so I finally completed the translation: Here on the 11th April 1525 with a galleas and four ships in this bay [Captain] Basil by the Sign of the Cross claims this land [for Holy Spain]. The second inscription was obviously engraved on the orders of one Captain Ontega. The final translation reading: Ontega, Captain of the St. Marie by the Sign of the Cross, arrived here in 1525. Both inscriptions were from a single landfall at Wattamolla Bay and the vessels must have carried a sizeable number of men. They had to have visited Botany Bay not far up the coast to their north, and surely also Sydney harbour. I am certain that the rocks of the Wattamolla area still hide more inscriptions and could there be remains of at least temporary settlement still hidden somewhere in the scrubland hereabouts? Only further fieldwork will hopefully uncover such evidence, but what has just been described is certain evidence that Conquistadores,, who probably reached our east coast from a base in South America, left their markers on rocks facing the ocean, rocks which stood with their tell-tale inscriptions as an unwitting Captain James Cook sailed past that very bay en-route to his landfall in Botany Bay, where other Spanish Latin inscriptions were found, near the Georges River mouth in 1936. It seems ironic that while he here laid claim to Australia, Spanish explorers had already held a similar ceremony generations before him! The unknown Spanish discovery of Australia is a fascinating subject and it is one that I shall return to in this newsletter as we uncover further ancient rock inscriptions that speak of the lost deeds of brave
15

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

mariners dispatched to these shores by Kings of Spain in those early times of European cross-ocean exploration. -0-

Wattamolla Bay, where Spanish ships and their crews made a landfall on April 11th, 1525. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

Rex Gilroy stands on a beach he had not seen since 1955. Behind him lies dense coastal scrub hiding the second of the two ancient Spanish Latin shorthand inscriptions. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

The first inscription which was discovered by Rex and Geoff Holland. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

16

Mysterious Australia Newsletter November, 2010.

On this huge sandstone clifftop rock Rex found the second inscription. Carved on the edge, it made photography an awkward exercise! Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

The second inscription, carved upon an oval section of the rocks edge. To obtain good photos of the carvings Rex had to take them from the opposite direction. Photo copyright Rex Gilroy 2010.

Please Note

Our previous meeting was a huge success and we look forward to seeing you at our next one.
Our next meeting will be our CLUBS CHRISTMAS PARTY and will be held on Saturday 18th December, 2010 same time, same place 12 Kamillaroi Road, Katoomba. So until our next meeting Watch the Skies! Rex and Heather

17