I noticed an Amazon review by a reader of the first edition of my Live Pterosaurs in America (published in mid-2009); he published his review on November 14, 2012, just two days ago. I understand how somebody might see an old link to a page on that early edition and purchase a copy without knowing about the third edition, which is much longer (and improved). It costs only pennys more than the first. “Ashtar Command” was not very pleased with the book, and wrote his review apparently still ignorant of the third edition.
He admits being very sceptical about my book, although he does not explain why he purchased a book that he disbelieved from the beginning. He is not an “Amazon verified” purchaser of the book, although I see some evidence that he might have read most of it, perhaps all the book. But I see more evidence that he did not consider details carefully.
Near the end of his review, Ashtar Command says, “. . . it seems to be the only book available exclusively dealing with this (far out) subject. . . .” Where does he get that idea? I have written and published three nonfiction books on living pterosaurs, all of them available on Amazon:
- Searching for Ropens (two editions)
- Live Pterosaurs in America (three editions)
- Live Pterosaurs in Australia and in Papua New Guinea (Kindle ebook)
In addition, I know of two other books (by McIsaac and Gerhard) that have significant content on reports of modern living pterosaurs. The book that Ashtar Command has read is neither the first nor the last book about extant pterosaurs. But I see other problems with his reasoning.
The following deserves a response:
“Others [of the sighting reports of apparent living pterosaurs] have a certain occult feel, as when one eye-witness reported a huge pterosaur in the middle of Suburbia, but nobody else noticed!”
Nothing in any edition of any of my books makes any suggestion that what one eyewitness has experienced could not have been observed by anybody else. What is so strange about this: An eyewitness is shocked to see an apparent living pterosaur and so she does not notice any other person (potential eyewitness) in the vicinity, in the very early morning?
What difference does it make that this skeptic has experienced an “occult” feeling? Some sightings have been with only one eyewitness, of course, but nothing in my writings suggest that nobody else could have been in those areas (at those times) and observed the same things.
I make it clear, in my books, that not all eyewitnesses come forward and report seeing what their culture demands must be impossible. It seems that Ashtar Command is unaware of the magnitude of the indoctrination that has caused him to disbelieve the experiences of many eyewitnesses.
But I see other problems:
“The creatures are biologically impossible.”
Surely he does not mean this in the usual sense, or he would disbelieve that paleontologists have fossils of pterosaurs. He probably means this in context with what he then writes:
“What do they eat? Where do they breed?”
Why focus on pterosaurs? Ask those questions for the Blue whale. Does asking those questions make that whale impossible? How dearly we need clear thinking!
I believe the pterosaur-food question was answered in the first edition of the book, the edition that the skeptic purchased. Since he gives no details, neither will I. The breeding and nesting habits of modern pterosaurs—that’s an interesting subject. I hope to learn about it someday, but asking that question does not make extant pterosaurs impossible.
The next question the skeptic asks is old:
“How come bird-watchers aren’t seeing them?”
Where does Ashtar Command get the idea that no bird watchers have ever observed an extant pterosaur? When he answers that question, I will answer his.
Whitcomb believes that the pterosaurs eat nightjars or bats, but shouldn’t this affect nightjar behaviour?
The Nighthawk is one kind of nightjar bird. It is mentioned in at least one or two editions of Live Pterosaurs in America, regarding the biology professor Peter Beach, who testified that the activities of apparent bioluminescent flying creatures (presumed pterosaurs) AFFECTED THE BEHAVIOR of Nighthawks. Why does this skeptic take the position that my book says the opposite of what it actually says?
This is not the only reader who declares that one of my books says the opposite of what I know it says. I suspect imperfect memory (which we all have) has caused some skeptics to imagine things not actually in the books that they criticize; they disagree with something and then imagine a statement that was not actually written or implied in those books. I am grateful those readers appear to be in the minority.
Outdated first edition (get the third edition instead)
.
Second edition: better, but not the best (see below)
.
Expanded third edition of the nonfiction paperback Live Pterosaurs in America – Purchase this cryptozoology book on Amazon or other online book seller.
.
The reader, apparently, had no idea that newer editions are available, even though Amazon states clearly, “This is the first edition, before the expansions of newer editions.”