First Griffith Park Sighting

The March 3rd sighting was rare in this sense: Three apparent pterosaurs were observed. Up until the end of 2012, the data from 128 of the more credible reports showed only about 1% of the relevant sightings were of more than two flying creatures seen at a time.

The anonymous eyewitness chose the Sordes Pilosus silhouette image (#13) from among 35 images of pterosaurs, bats, and birds, but she said that the head of the “dragons” she had observed were larger than what was shown on the survey page of image #13.

Second Griffith Park Sighting

Devin Rhodriquez told me, in her first email, “I’m almost positive what I saw fly over the freeway in Los Angeles WAS NOT a bird of any kind.” From the same survey page of 35 images, she chose six pterosaurs (no bat or bird in her choices), one of which was the Sordes Pilosus.

Differences in the two Sightings in Los Angeles

The first one was of three long-tailed non-birds, according to the eyewitness; the second, one non-bird with a head crest and a definite lack of feathers. I believe that both sightings were of the California Ropen, a long-tailed pterosaur. The differences were partially from the two persons concentrating on different features. For example, the second eyewitness (Rhodriquez) was concentrating on the head and did not notice whether or not the “pterosaur” had a tail.

Lakewood, California, Sighting of June 19, 2012

The eyewitness of the June 19th Lakewood ropen estimated the tail length at four feet, at least. She volunteered the following:

. . . he had that triagle [triangle] on his tail, like a dragon.

Tail end, sketched by the eyewitness (Lakewood, CA, mid-2012)

The game camera still works, but not yet with a photo of a ropen

The game camera has recorded many images, day and night, of a particular perspective at the back of the backyard in Lakewood, California. It has been recording for about 11 months now. But we do not yet have an image that looks like it could have been from recording a ropen or pterosaur.

Other Evidence From Lakewood

I recently learned of a confirming eyewitness for that same backyard in Lakewood. A close relative told another family member that she had also seen a large strange flying creature in that same backyard, but two years earlier, in 2010. She had said nothing to anybody, for it would have sounded too strange. She spoke up when she learned about the sighting of June 19, 2012.

Another person, the husband of the 2012-eyewitness, heard a strange noise in that same backyard (soon after the 2012 sighting). His wife listened to his recreation of that sound and confirmed that it was similar to what she had heard just before she saw the “huge dragon pteradactal.”

.

Pterosaurs East of Griffith Park

Two pterosaur sightings in Los Angeles, in 2013, have caused a stir, being ten weeks apart and the second one being just a mile and a half south of the first one.

Recent Pterosaur Sightings Near Griffith Park, Los Angeles

It was south of Los Feliz (at the I-5), in Los Angeles, just a mile and a half south of where another eyewitness observed three “dragons” flying over the same freeway, two months earlier. That stretch of highway runs very close to the Los Angeles River channel.

Dragons Flying Over Los Angeles

Twice in the first five months of 2013 has an eyewitness reported something like a pterosaur or dragon flying over Los Angeles, both times over the I-5 between Griffith Park and Glendale. Those two sightings were less than two miles apart, near the Los Angeles River, if not directly over it.

.

But the problems with that misidentified-bird conjecture are enormous. In fact, a careful examination of details is so damaging to the woodpecker interpretation that I will not even mention that skeptic’s name in this post; I have no desire to appear to insult any person.

So many skeptics have allowed themselves to be blinded! When referring to the sighting of an apparent pterosaur southeast of Griffith Park (May 13, 2013), one skeptic said, “This sounds like possibly another series of sightings of an outsized woodpecker similar to the Ivory-billed woodpecker.” But that remark appears to be a hasty response, without reference to the critical sighting of three “dragons” just ten weeks earlier and just a mile and a half to the north.

Since the skeptic said “series of sightings,” we will take this encounter in context, examining details in other sighting reports in California. But first consider this May 13th encounter and see if a woodpecker is responsible.

Pterosaur Sighting by Devin Rhodriquez, May 13, 2013

Compare these images chosen by Devin Rhodriquez to a large sketch of the Imperial Woodpecker wing shown further below:

The above six silhouettes were chosen from about three dozen images of birds, bats, and pterosaurs. That is the same survey page that was used by Garth Guessman and David Woetzel, in their Umboi Island ropen expedition in 2004 (a few weeks after my own expedition there). Please take note: In that expedition, only two natives, of those natives on Umboi Island who had been given the survey, had a clear view of the shape of the ropen: Jonathan Ragu and Jonah Jim. Both of them chose #13, the Sordes Pilosus, a long-tailed pterosaur.

This #13 is one of the images chosen by the American eyewitness Devin Rhodriquez (May 13, 2013, sighting near Griffith Park). Each of these six silhouettes is of a pterosaur; no bird image was chosen by this eyewitness.

Now let’s compare this encounter with the one ten weeks earlier, only about 1.5 miles to the north, also near Griffith Park. By the way, I choose these reports to be considered together because both eyewitnesses contacted me by email within weeks of each other and the locations were so close.

March 3, 2013, Pterosaur Sighting

Two months before Rhodriquez’s sighting of a “pterosaur,” another lady was driving on the I-5 Freeway in Los Angeles, also in a northbound lane. She observed three “dragons” gliding or soaring over that freeway, just east of Griffith Park and also near the Los Angeles River. The ratio of  head, body, and tail length “was certainly not that of a bird. Their wings were long, angular and pointed and their tails had triangular points.”

That eyewitness was given the same survey form, and she said, “I would say #13 except their heads were bigger.” The Sordes Pilosus was one of the six chosen by Rhodriquez and by the two eyewitnesses on Umboi Island. Is it a coincidence that all of those eyewitnesses chose that long-tailed pterosaur as having a similar wing-shape to what they had seen? No. Could everybody be observing woodpeckers that look like long-tailed pterosaurs? No. Where is even one sighting report of an apparent pterosaur that turned out to have been from a woodpecker?

It’s also no coincidence that so many Southern California pterosaur sightings are near storm channels or near the Los Angeles River (which is actually a giant storm channel). The creatures are nocturnal but on occasion a disturbance in daylight will awaken one of them, causing a daylight flight, resulting in a sighting.

Humans see poorly in the dark sky of night, so the many nocturnal flyovers go mostly unseen or unnoticed, especially when the creatures are flying at night through storm channels. And those flying creatures might indeed become extinct if they were foolish enough to avoid those channels where rats and possums and other yummy animals could be easily captured.

The March 3rd sighting, near Griffith Park, was almost at night: 6:10 a.m., but there was plenty of light for the eyewitness to see the strange appearance of three large long-tailed non-woodpeckers gliding over the freeway—without wing flapping.

June 19, 2012, Pterosaur Sighting: Lakewood, California

An earlier sighting in Los Angeles County, northeast of Long Beach—this might be partially what caused the skeptic to mention perching, but he gives few details about what he is referring to regarding perching. I have tied this Lakewood sighting to the two encounters near Griffith Park, so I assume the skeptic took notice of that.

The lady was observing the creature in her backyard as she was standing less than eighteen feet below it, as it perched on a telephone cable over a storm channel. The lady said that the creature ”had [a triangle] on his tail, like a dragon.” She thought the tail was at least four feet long, maybe five feet. Keep in mind that the end of that tail was only about eighteen feet from the end of the lady’s nose, before the creature flew away from its perch. That was no woodpecker.

Irving, California, Pterosaur Sighting

Take the above in context with another encounter, this one southeast of Los Angeles County. The eyewitness told me that the creature he saw flying not far above the road on which he was driving was the same length as the width of that road. That means the apparent ropen was thirty feet long, for I later measured the width of that road myself, pacing it off with my own feet. No woodpecker, extinct or still living, ever attained a length of 30 feet, not even in the imagination of a skeptic.

When did the skeptic in question ever mention the estimated sizes of what eyewitnesses have reported to me? I don’t recall reading any of his comments in which he mentioned size, perhaps because of the sighting close to the University of California at Irvine in the summer of 2007. No woodpecker could have been misidentified with a size estimate like that. In addition, the eyewitness described the tail as about half that length, or about 15 feet. That was no woodpecker.

Perching Pterosaurs and Non-Perching Woodpeckers

Immediately after mentioning the woodpecker interpretation of pterosaur sightings in California, the skeptic said, “The creature which is reported as a pterosaur perches upright, which no kind of a pterosaur could do.” Well, that old generalization no longer applies, for we now know that one type of pterosaur could indeed perch upright, and that long-tailed variety just happens to be . . . yes, the same general type observed perching upright on a telephone line in Lakewood, California, on June 19, 2012: the long-tailed variety.

I believe woodpeckers are not perching birds, unless I have seriously mistaken what I have been reading lately about birds. I suggest the skeptic has failed to look deeply enough into this subject, but I accept correction if I have misunderstood woodpeckers.

In other words, the kind of bird the skeptic offers to us cannot perch but the Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur observed perching last year in Lakewood is the type of pterosaur that could perch, according to fossils that show the opposing toe-digit on the foot. If that were not damaging enough to the proclamations of that skeptic, the main context of his blog post is regarding a sighting southeast of Griffith Park, on May 13, 2013, in which the creature was gliding or soaring over a freeway, not perching.

Woodpeckers in California

None of the eyewitnesses that I have interviewed, over the past ten years, to the best of my recollection, described the coloring of what they had seen as anything at all similar to the Imperial Woodpecker or the Ivory Billed Woodpecker. It seems to me that the skeptic who has suggested woodpeckers has ignored critical details that eliminate that bird and has distorted, in his own imagination, the head-crest concept.

.

Wing of the Imperial Woodpecker

.

The Imperial Woodpecker

.

Ivory Billed Woodpecker

.

“Pterodactyl” drawn by the eyewitness Eskin C. Kuhn (Gitmo Pterosaur of Cuba)

.

Sketch by the eyewitness Patty Carson (another Gitmo Pterosaur of Cuba)

.

Dragons Around Griffith Park in Los Angeles

Both observations involved a lady alone in a vehicle in a northbound lane of the Interstate-5 Freeway between Griffith Park and Glendale. Both eyewitnesses sent me an email soon after a sighting. Both believed no bird misidentification was involved.

Dragon Pterosaurs in Southern California

The eyewitness of the “Griffith Park dragons” first thought she was observing three non-living things flying over her car (she was driving north on the I-5 at about 6:10 a.m. on a Sunday). She assumed it was some kind of stunt, perhaps with kites, for the three “dragons” looked nothing like birds. When she saw the tails move slightly, she realized that they were alive.

.

The Van Meter Visitor explores a number of paranormal possibilities for a large winged creature, described by one eyewitness as “half human and half animal,” with “great bat-like wings.” I am grateful that somebody published what this book contains, after doing thorough research on what happened in this little town 110 years ago. The literary quality, however, I found wanting and more like from a sincere effort from talented hard-working researchers than from talented writers.

The Van Meter Visitor – by Lewis, Voss, and Nelson

From Chapter Seven (where the major action begins):

Clearly this was not a light the doctor recognized. He instantly knew no one was seeking his help for a medical emergency or simply stopping by at an odd hour peeking in to see if he was awake—this was different. Wasting no time, and feeling the empowering effects of adrenaline mixed with what must have been annoyance for whomever awoke him, he ran outside the building to confront his conundrum. The ground still wet from the passing showers and the air filled with the familiar smell of freshly fallen leaves, he was challenged with something or other that seemed beyond his years of experience.

###

.

Live Pterosaurs in America – third edition – by Jonathan David Whitcomb

.

From a review of the first edition:

This seems to be the author’s second book on the subject, and this one is worth the effort. He has focused on the accounts of witnesses who saw something, and that adds credibility. The writing is easy to read and he adds comments and analysis to make it all more useful. Mostly, the author lets the sightings speak for themselves, which is good. A worthwhile book. [November 26, 2010, review by Red Rabbit, Amazon Verified Purchase]

From a review of the second edition:

I thought this book was extremely well researched and written in an engaging style. I could hardly put it down. One thing that really impressed me in all the presentations of eye-witness accounts was the absolute lack of dogmatism. The author never tells the reader what he MUST believe, or how he OUGHT TO interpret the date. Instead, he points out eye-opening trends among the data, asks some thought-provoking questions, then leaves it to the reader to decide for himself. [February 27, 2013, review by Lisa Roark, Amazon Verified Purchase]

From a review of the third edition:

This book is one of the best books that I have ever read! It reminds us to have an open mind and that the things we have all been taught as fact ….may not be fact at all. [March 21, 2013, review by Laura, Amazon Verified Purchase]

Buy the third edition, the up-to-date improved version of this nonfiction cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in America.

.

North^

Eastern side of Griffith Park (Silver Lake Reservoir is on lower right)

.

In the above satellite image, the I-5 runs right next to the Los Angeles River channel, on the east side of Griffith Park. They run about north-south here, with the large hills and golf course of Griffith Park visible clearly. Another freeway runs east-west near the northern boundary of the park, near the top of the photo. By the way, this area is just north of Dodger Stadium (baseball).

Before getting into the more recent sighting (May 13th), consider the three “dragons” observed nearby, on March 3rd.

.

March 3rd sighting location (three “dragons”)

.

The red arrow, above, shows the direction of flight for the three creatures that the eyewitness called “dragons.”

First Griffith Park Sighting of Early 2013

I name this anonymous lady “CGP.” At about 6:10 a.m., on March 3, 2013, the sky was well lit, although the sun had not quite come up. As CGP was driving north on the I-5, at around the Colorado interchange (just south of State Route 134 freeway), she saw three “dragons” and later reported to me:

“They appeared to be several feet long, with a head:body:tail ratio that was certainly not that of a bird. Their wings were long, angular and pointed and their tails had triangular points. . . . They were flying southeast in a triangular formation.”

I later drew an arrow pointing south (see the satellite map above) because of the following words of CGP:

“All three were flying straight at me, opposite the flow of traffic, along the freeway. I guess they were going slightly more in the direction of Griffith Park than Glendale, but they flew directly over my car (or I drove under them).”

.

May 13th sighting location (one “pterosaur”)

.

Second Griffith Park Sighting of Early 2013

The eyewitness of a “pterosaur” sighting on May 13th has agreed for her name to be revealed: Devin Rhodriquez. The traffic on the northbound I-5 at about 4:00 p.m. was congested, about 30 m.p.h., when Devin saw the creature. She told me (standard capitalization corrections):

“I’m almost positive what I saw fly over the freeway in Los Angeles WAS NOT a bird of any kind. [It] matches the exact descriptions of a pterosaur except for the tail. I didn’t actually look for a tail [She did not notice its presence or absence]. I was too in shock by the head crest and the wings. I’d love to find out if what I saw could be a pterosaur.”

I realize that some skeptic may object to the lack of observational powers of the eyewitness, regarding a tail of lack thereof. But this kind of imperfection in observation is actually quite common, a natural human tendency to focus on a detail to the blindness of surrounding details. I have received pterosaur sighting reports from other eyewitnesses, reports that make it clear that the person had not memory of the presence or absence of a tail. And psychologists are well aware of this human weakness in vision.

Consider what Devin did notice:

“I did see its head crest and the membranous charcoal gray/teal undertone skin. No feathers, & the wings were pointed and never flapped. It glided through the air with its wings in an arched position.”

Comparing the two Sightings

The creatures were flying in very different directions in these two sightings, and the times of day varied greatly as well: The first was at 6:10 a.m. the second, 4:00 p.m. The two eyewitnesses noticed different details: The first saw long thin tails on three “dragons;” the second, a head crest and a lack of feathers.

What did the flying creatures have in common? The sightings were only a mile and a half apart, separated in time by ten weeks. Both eyewitnesses were driving north on the I-5 freeway, just east of Griffith Park in Los Angeles. All the creatures were soaring or gliding over that freeway.

The color descriptions caught my attention. CGP said, “They appeared light in color—white, gray or light green.” Devin said the “pterosaur” had ”membranous charcoal gray/teal undertone skin.” Technically, teal is a medium-dark bluish green, but the different times of day (with very different colors of light from the sky) might be sufficient to connect that darker blue-green with the lighter green, provided we remember that eyewitness perception may cause the same object to be described slightly differently in color. In addition, both eyewitnesses used the word “gray” in their color descriptions. I know that “white” seems too far off when compared with “charcoal,” but we also need to be aware that the two eyewitnesses may not have noticed the exact same parts of the flying creatures’ bodies when they were impressed with color. Overall, the color descriptions neither greatly support nor repudiate the idea that these two sightings involved the same species. With all that said, we may have a case of three light-colored males and one darker colored female.

Both eyewitnesses assured me that they were observing non-birds. CGP said, “a head:body:tail ratio that was certainly not that of a bird.” Devin said, “I’m almost positive what I saw fly over the freeway in Los Angeles WAS NOT a bird of any kind.”

I suggest these four flying creatures are all California Ropens, and that they sometimes fly along the Los Angeles River at night. Many eyewitnesses have noticed them, with various degrees of comprehension but only a tiny fraction of those people have contacted any cryptozoologist.

###

.

Dragon Pterosaurs in Southern California

The eyewitness of the “Griffith Park dragons” first thought she was observing three non-living things flying over her car [March 3, 2013 sighting] . . .She assumed it was some kind of stunt, perhaps with kites, for the three “dragons” looked nothing like birds. When she saw the tails move slightly, she realized that they were alive.

.

Paul Nation accompanied Baugh and missionary James Blume in the 1994 expedition but not the one in 1996. He sent me his video footage in the fall of 2003, and I edited the videos into a mini-documentary that we called “Searching for Ropen.” But those original videos did more for me that provide material for a mini-documentary: They inspired me to go on my own expedition in 2004, searching for living pterosaurs.

The following are brief summaries of some of the early interviews (mostly 1994).

Tree-Trunk Hugging Ropen

Two native men were interviewed briefly, possibly by Baugh himself (through an interpreter) with videotaping by Paul Nation, perhaps. The two men reported how they had strung up some game meat and later encountered a ropen that they believed had followed the smell. The creature held itself upright on a tree trunk and looked down at the men by turning or twisting its head or upper body.

Native shows how the ropen was upright, holding onto a tree trunk

.

Another videotaped interview (probably also from the 1994 expedition) involved a native man who was shown an illustration of a pterosaur. The man said that they see those creatures and that they catch fish and live in caves.

Native tells interviewer that the creatures catch fish

.

Attempted Grave Robbery in 1993

Carl Baugh interviewed a young family regarding a sighting on the northwest coast of Umboi Island. The husband, a school teacher, interpreted for his wife. She was part of a funeral procession, in 1993, around the northwest coast of Umboi, when a flying creature with a glowing tail approached the body. The mourners chased the creature away, but the memory would not leave.

.

School teacher interprets for his wife, who saw the glowing ropen one night

.

First Videotaped Interview, in 1994, of Gideon Koro

Gideon was just a teenager in 1994, when he was first interviewed in front of a video camcorder. He was nervous talking about the giant ropen, for it had been only a few months or so since the terrifying encounter. The Baptist missionary from the mainland, Jim Blume, and a native interpreter questioned the boy about what he had seen.

The creature was skinny and its size was “house to house.” Some time after I had watched the original video footage, I came to realize what he probably meant: The flying creature was as long as the distance from one nearby village hut to the next hut.

When I myself interviewed Gideon, face to face in 2004, he told me that the length of the tail was seven meters. He was positive, in my interview with him, that the ropen had no feathers.

Gideon Koro was interviewed on Umboi Island in 1994

.

Ropen Expedition of 1996

I don’t know if anyone has any video footage from the 1996 expedition. Carl Baugh and Jim Blume may have visited more than one island in Papua New Guinea that year. They had one sighting of an apparent ropen as it was glowing at night; it was not flying but sitting above a beach, on the coast of a small island.

.

###

.

Wife of a school teacher saw a glowing ropen

“Eunice, a school teacher’s wife, described to Carl Baugh an  attempted grave robbery. One night, in April of 1993, near the  northwest coast of Umboi Island, after a large funeral procession  arrived at the burial location, a creature with a glowing red tail came  from the sea. . . .”

.

Lake Pung Ropen Sighting

The following is taken from the May 14, 2013, version of the editing of the second chapter. It involves Gideon Koro’s first videotaped interview on Umboi Island:

Gideon’s testimony overshadowed the others. He was one of seven boys who saw a giant ropen, around 1994, flying over a crater lake; the boys ran down off the mountain, terrified. Within few months, Gideon answered questions in front of a video camcorder, nervously. He described the ropen as skinny, and the size as “house to house” (referring to nearby huts). One of the two interviewers, Baptist missionary Jim Blume, interpreted: “about twenty feet.” But he misunderstood.

The number of creatures then became confused with size. As Jim Blume was interpreting and estimating the wingspan, it sounded like Gideon mentioned additional “smaller ones.” The interpreters then questioned him about “how many” (meaning the number of creatures), and Gideon answered, “ten or twenty.”

I would discover, after interviewing Gideon myself in 2004, that he did not mean that there were ten or twenty ropens; he was probably adjusting, during the first interview, his size-estimate for the one ropen he encountered. But I would conclude, in 2007, that the median of ten and twenty—fifteen—was the approximate overall length or wingspan of that ropen, in meters, consistent with his estimate of wing-size during my interview with Gideon in 2004: seven meters.

We need to understand that Gideon thinks in meters rather than feet. When the subject was the size of the ropen observed by those seven boys, Jim Blume said “twenty.” Gideon then said something that was interpreted as “smaller ones.” What he meant, I believe, is this: The length or wingspan (probably similar in size) could have been smaller than twenty meters, less than sixty-six feet.

By the way, my memory of villages on Umboi Island may be instructive. I believe many of the huts are in the neighborhood of fifteen meters apart, which is what I believe Gideon meant when he estimated the size of the ropen with the words “house-to-house.” The interpreter may have thought about house length.

.

Publication of Searching for Ropens and Finding God

I hope this third edition will be completed and published by the end of summer.

###

.

A related book but in pure cryptozoology genre:

Live Pterosaurs in America, third edition, by Jonathan David Whitcomb

This book about modern living pterosaurs is available now, in contrast to Searching for Ropens and Finding God (which will not be published until around September of 2013). From the middle of the introduction, we read:

If this book does nothing more than comfort the eyewitnesses of strange creatures, I would be grateful; but there’s much more. We need to understand why we believe what we believe. When I first began researching these eyewitness sightings, years ago, I mentioned a word to a kindergartner: “pterosaurs;” he said, “A comet.” Years later, while writing this book, I mentioned my work to a second-grader; she said, “Who will buy your book? Crazy people?” I think better of you. And I think, because of what she and many others have told me, that we must understand indoctrination, for it influences our beliefs; the extent of that influence discomforts me.

Purchase your own copy of Live Pterosaurs in America — available now.

Why do so many sightings involve giant pterosaurs?

That’s a better question, for the giant ones are indeed rare. What do I mean? Put yourself in the following situation, and let’s say that you are unaware of reports of living pterosaurs. Walk out your front door to your car as something flies over your house. Whatever that something is, let us say it’s over a hundred feet high and between the size of a sparrow and a crow. Would you look up to see what kind of bird it is? Why bother?

Now keep everything the same except the size: The flying creature has a wingspan of twenty feet. Even at 150 feet above your house, it could very well catch the corner of your eye and perhaps change your life, as you turn your head. Our subconscious has a way of telling us when something is odd.

The point? Modern pterosaurs with wingspans greater than large birds catch the attention of eyewitnesses, even though those larger ones are nocturnal and relatively rare. When one of them takes off into the air in daylight, for whatever reason, how easy we can take notice! That shocking appearance might also increase an eyewitness’s desire to report the sighting to me, increasing the number of giant flying creatures in my reports.

If we could take a census of all modern pterosaurs, of all species now living, I would not be shocked to learn that less than 1% of them have wingspans over twenty feet. Take that in the context of the late-2012 analysis of the 128 most credible sighting reports: Of those estimating wingspans, 26% of the estimates were over twenty feet. But I would guess the actual number of animals (of that size) at much closer to 1% of the total population.

.

Kuhn saw two pterosaurs in Cuba, in 1971

.

Pterosaur Sightings and Photos

Direct eyewitness testimony of a pterosaur sighting is essential, even if we have to wait many years for photographic evidence.

Was it a Giant Prehistoric Bird?

. . . why is that word  used by some eyewitnesses: “bird?” That word comes to mind because birds commonly fly overhead, during the daylight when we notice things in the sky, far more commonly than we notice bats.

Live Pterosaurs and Science

What can we conclude from the evenness of the data on wingspan estimates? No significant number of hoaxes were involved, for expectations regarding pterosaur size would have made one or two peaks; there is no significant peak anywhere that would suggest such a thing.

.

Bioluminescent Flying Creatures in Washington State

From the third edition of my book Live Pterosaurs in America:

Late in 2007, I received an email from Peter Beach, a biology professor . . .

“I went on a short trip to the Yakima River this summer . . . because there was a [sighting]. We were unable to get a picture but we saw many . . . flashing lights. I would have assumed that [they] were fireflies but we [don’t] have them in Washington. One of the flashes took off from a big tree overhanging the river and made a kind of flashing coma turn. Many flashes were parallel to the river. . . .

. . . “Prime hunting grounds for fish-eating birds. Only these things fish at night with bioluminescence. At first I thought I was just seeing shooting stars, but they were all parallel to the river and close to the horizon. Next I noticed that when the cloud cover came in, I could still see the flashes. They were under the cloud cover. Whatever they are, I suggest that they are at least unknown to science, night flying, bioluminescent, flying creatures about the size of an eagle or big hawk . . .”

In August of 2008, I received another email from the professor:

“During the short expedition I led with the O’Donnells, mid-July [an expedition more recent than the one mentioned above], we saw three hours of bioluminescent ‘shooting stars.’ The last hour was the most interesting in that there were two light blasts about 200 ft. apart, about 50-100 ft., above the river. The blasts were followed by screeches from about a dozen or so agitated nighthawks in the general area. I think the Rhamphorhynchoids, if that is what they were, were feeding on the nighthawks as the nighthawks were feeding on the flying insects.”

.

Origin of Universal-Pterosaur-Extinction Axiom

Many scientists take this axiom for granted, but pterosaur extinction, regarding every species, is clearly a basic assumption, not a proven fact. In the ebook Live Pterosaurs in Australia and in Papua New Guinea, I wrote:

The first discovery of a pterosaur fossil by a Western scientist, in 1784, was decades before Charles Darwin began writing about his ideas on extinctions and evolution. Before Darwin, Western scientists had assumed that all species of pterosaurs were extinct for a simple reason: Those who discovered the fossils had no experience with any similar animal that was living.

Since 1784, universal-pterosaur-extinction has been taken for granted, as the years turned into decades, throughout the nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century. The breadth of this assumption expanded, from generations of regurgitated proclamations, but the depth has always been shallow, with no real evidence of any kind.

I know that some paleontologist will point to fossils as if their specimens prove the extinction of all species of pterosaurs that ever lived upon the earth. Nonsense! Not only are new species or organisms being discovered in fossils but new species are also being discovered in living creatures. Regarding pterosaurs, nobody, not even a paleontologist with a university diploma, can reasonably display their fossils as if that display were proof of extinction for species for countless species for which we have no fossils.

.

Statistics on Credible Pterosaur Sightings

Long tails dominate. Of those eyewitnesses who specified tail length or the presence or absence of a long tail, 95% reported a long tail. This alone discredits any skeptic’s insinuation that the sightings are mostly hoaxes, for few, if any, hoaxers would report a long-tailed pterosaur. Films and television have given us images of pterosaurs without long tails, with few exceptions. Hoaxers would not likely report something contrary to what is commonly seen in film or on television.

Overall statistics for wingspan estimates also count against any major hoax involvement. For those eyewitnesses who made estimates of wingspan, 31% (23 out of 74) reported sizes greater than seven feet but less than fifteen feet. If many hoaxes were involved, this range (7-15 feet, non-inclusive) would have been much less . . . [7-15 feet is much too big for Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs but too small for a hoaxer to use to shock anybody or to convince many persons that a non-bird was reported.]

. . . Of all the sighting reports compiled into the database by the end of 2012, those in which eyewitnesses were sure of the lack of any feathers was 21% but those eyewitnesses who thought it only probable (that there were no feathers) was 25%. . . . If hoaxes played a major role in the sighting reports, an insistence on lack of feathers would dominate. This is the opposite of what the overall data shows for this characteristic. Eyewitnesses who are positive about featherlessness are outnumbered by those who are not positive about it. . . .

From these three factors, we see that no hoax or hoaxes played any significant role in the 128 reports analyzed.

.

Live Pterosaurs and Science

This goes into details about scientific analysis of wingspan estimates.

.

###

Nonfiction cryptozoology book; paperback; third edition

How are sightings in the United States related to those in the southwest Pacific? How do some apparent nocturnal pterosaurs pertain to bats, and how are bats irrelevant? How could modern living pterosaurs have escaped scientific notice? These mysteries have slept in the dark, beyond the knowledge of almost all Americans, even beyond our wildest dreams (although the reality of some pterosaurs is a living nightmare to some bats). These mysteries have slept . . . until now. [From the Title page of Live Pterosaurs in America, third edition]

.

• Giant prehistoric bird
• Huge bird without feathers
• Large dinosaur bird
• Big Thunderbird

If some reports of large flying creatures come from sightings of modern pterosaurs—I proclaim, in a number of blogs and books, that they do—why is that word  used by some eyewitnesses: “bird?” That word comes to mind because birds commonly fly overhead, during the daylight when we notice things in the sky, far more commonly than we notice bats. “Bird” flies out of one’s mouth naturally, for it’s not so shocking to hear. But how unnatural-sounding to tell a friend, “I just saw a giant pterodactyl fly over my backyard!” Your friend might ask what you’ve been putting into your mouth.

.

Be Open-Minded with Pterosaur Sighting Reports

When somebody sees a living pterosaur, the eyewitness is almost always totally unprepared. Often people will report to me the shock of an encounter, which can be an extreme cultural shock. Questioning ones own sanity is common. Trying to imagine a trick of the light (or some other misidentification possibility) is also common. In a pterosaur sighting, the person had no desire to see a modern version of what was assumed extinct, almost without exception in Western countries. (In a third-world country, an eyewitness may simply be shocked at being so unlucky: encountering a monster that he already believed in.) Hardly anybody, in any country, ever looks up to the sky hoping to see something that might prove personal insanity.

We need to be careful not to assume that personal beliefs or perspective contributed much to the descriptions that are given to us. I receive sighting reports from around the world; eyewitnesses of differing cultures and beliefs and religions report similar details, often including a long tail with a structure at the tail-end (a “diamond” or something suggesting a Rhamphorhynchoid tail vane). Words may vary but the basic meanings of those words make a pterosaur interpretation obvious.

By the way, most of the sighting reports that I have received over the past few years have been from the United States.

.

Examples of Descriptions in Pterosaur Sighting Reports

Received early in 2011:

My friend told me that she was walking with her cousin, when she looked up, she saw a very large “bird” that was circling above them and slowly descending. She turned to her cousin and asked, “Do you see that? Or am I seeing things?” Her cousin responded, “Yea, I see it. What the heck is it?” As it got closer, she could only describe it as a Pterodactyl.

Namibia, Africa, 2011

I saw a large bird gliding, moving its wings very, very slowly, very much as we see raptors or eagles do when they circle in the air scanning the land for prey. I paid attention to the wings as it would allow for identification – but this bird did not have any feathers, at least not any spread primary feathers (as eagles often show). It looked more like a large bat with distinctly brightly coloured (yellow-brown, orange?) protrusions, where birds have carpal joints (like some ‘spur-winged birds’).

Arkansas, 2012

I saw a pre-historic bird here in central Arkansas back this past spring. As I was driving over a small bridge with a creek underneath it flew up from under the bridge beside my truck and flew up above my truck and out and over a field. . . . [It] had no feathers and it was grey skinned with pink undertones.

.

What do all three of the above report-excerpts have in common? Each has the word “bird” and each includes either an indication of lack of feathers or the word “pterodactyl.” In other words, eyewitnesses often use the word “bird” in a general sense, not meaning a feathered flying creature.

.

Hornbill Birds and a Live Pterosaur

In a recent post, “Ropens, Pterosaurian Sightings And Manta Rays,” a skeptic of the possibility of living pterosaurs gave half a sentence to the subject of Hornbill birds as the cause of sighting reports of live pterosaurs (misidentification conjecture).

Pterosaur Sightings and Photos

Despite the canoe-like wings, photo #3 is the most credible of these three, by far, believe it or not. My intention, however, is not to force this into an all-or-nothing, sure-thing-or-fake, judgment.

.

.

.

“More religion than investigation”?

Perhaps 1% of the book mentions two missionaries (one in Africa and another in Papua New Guinea) and a few creationist explorers and how the Biblical creationist perspective made it easier for them to search for living pterosaurs. But that 1% of the book gives no details about any religious beliefs nor does it promote any religion of those men. Their involvement is just a matter of record.

Live Pterosaurs in Australia and in Papua New Guinea (LPAPNG) does give many details about sightings of apparent pterosaurs and expeditions to search for the flying creatures and interview eyewitnesses. It also investigates why it is so difficult for Australians to report their encounters. Why doubt that LPAPNG is a cryptozoology book or believe it is “more religion than investigation?” Perhaps WS allows only skeptical investigators to count and considers creationist investigators to be incapable of any genuine investigation. But why does WS not give any details or explain what is meant by the title “More religion than investigation?”

“One or two Intriguing Reports”?

Of the many pterosaur sighting reports investigated in this Kindle book, four of them are labeled “key” sightings. Each of those four is given a chapter of its own:

• “The Finschhafen Pterodactyl”
• “The Bougainville Creature”
• “The Lake Pung Encounter”
• “The Perth Creature”

Consider WS’s declaration: “The book really consists of one or two intriguing reports . . .” Without the word “intriguing,” that statement is patently false. With the word, WS is declaring his opinion or his personal interest in a small portion of the sighting reports. But WS’s statement can be misleading, for no mention is made about the many sighting reports investigated in the book, the many reports that he personally does not find intriguing.

Just Vague Lights?

WS mentioned “some vague sightings of lights in the night sky” but drops the subject. Consider what WS failed mentioning:

Jonah Jim saw the creature in 2001, between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m., as it flew about 500-550 feet overhead, in the general direction of Lake Pung. The tail was glowing blue.

He estimated the size: The wingspan was six or seven meters and the tail length was three meters or a little less. . . .

Jonah Jim was shown the same pages of silhouettes shown to Jonathan Ragu. From among those thirty-four images, he chose #13, the Sordes Pilosus, the same Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur chosen by Ragu.

That nine-foot-long tail that was glowing blue, flying toward Lake Pung, about 500-550 feet high, connected to an apparent Sordes Pilosus Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur having a wingspan of about twenty feet—that does not sound vague to me. Why fail to mention that light?

“Antiscience Rhetoric”?

WS said that much of the book contains ”the author’s antiscience rhetoric.” If that were the case, it would be easy to find some of it to quote. Let’s examine some of what the book actually contains:

The first discovery of a pterosaur fossil by a Western scientist, in 1784, was decades before Charles Darwin began writing about his ideas on extinctions and evolution. Before Darwin, Western scientists had assumed that all species of pterosaurs were extinct for a simple reason: Those who discovered the fossils had no experience with any similar animal that was living.

Also important, probably no scientist at that time had considered that a few species of pterosaurs might still be alive, rarely seen because they’re both uncommon and nocturnal. Today, some cryptozoologists believe that one or more of their species are indeed uncommon and nocturnal—and still alive. [from early in the first chapter]

Does the above sound like “antiscience rhetoric?” What’s wrong with considering the possibility that a few scientists in the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century might not be 100% correct about universal pterosaur extinction?

For “ancient” creatures assumed extinct, post-Darwin scientists were incapable of accepting anything short of an official scientific discovery. But nothing happened. How could living pterosaurs remain hidden, considering all the various scientific discoveries in the twentieth century? It was simple. The uncommon nocturnal flying creatures found it easy to remain hidden: Nobody was looking for them. [from the middle of the first chapter]

Where is the “antiscience rhetoric” in the above paragraph? What is unscientific about the idea that scientists after Darwin were not looking for living pterosaurs?

By the middle of the twentieth century, school teachings had cemented the ancient-extinction idea into Western culture, so dinosaurs and pterosaurs were portrayed as living only in science fiction and dragons only in fantasy. [further into chapter one]

Do you notice any “antiscience rhetoric” in the above sentence? I see nothing unscientific in the statement.

Assumptions About Extinctions

It seems to me that WS became upset that my book appeared threatening to the credibility of generations of assumptions about extinctions. I suggest we take an open mind to the definition of “science” rather than think it equates with such a narrow point of view as the universal extinction of all species of pterosaurs.

###

More Religion than Investigation?

This dismantles criticisms, by WS, of the cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in Australia and in Papua New Guinea.

.

Non-fiction cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in Australia and in Papua New Guinea

From the end of the book:

What dictionary defines “pterosaur” without the word “extinct?” There lies the first problem, in Western society, for Australians and Americans are raised from young childhood to believe in the extinction of all species of pterosaurs and dinosaurs, without compromise, and what is the explanation? “Science.”