Reply to Skeptics | Live Pterosaur

March 24, 2010February 22, 2011

1971 sighting by Kuhn

Perosaur Sketch by Eskin Kuhn — Kuhn saw two pterosaurs in Cuba, in 1971

The two obvious pterosaurs observed by Eskin Kuhn during his military duty at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in 1971, were sketched by him soon after the sighting. I have encountered no contradiction in anything that he has said during the past four decades, nothing to discredit his account. I did interview him by phone just a few weeks ago, and I found his response to my surprise phone call truly enlightening: He was highly credible in his manner of speaking and his answers to my unexpected questions. This mature man has not been playing a hoax for four decades, for everything points to an honest reporting of a real experience. In light of many other sightings, by many other eyewitnesses, Mr. Kuhn’s sketch now deserves serious attention.

Long ago he mailed his sketch to National Geographic, but they returned it with a declaration that all pterosaurs have long been extinct. Mr. Kuhn promptly cancelled his magazine subscription to National Geographic. This man is consistent and maintains the truthfulness of his account.

I have found one critic who simply said that this account was a hoax and that he had no patience to pursue the subject nor to write more about it. He did not give any reason for his opinion. But when he was confronted by Eskin Kuhn himself, he then apologized, apparently admitting that he had no foundation for accusing the marine.

Now is the time to compare this sketch with descriptions given by other eyewitenesses. Consider all the testimonies of all those credible observers who have put their reputations on the firing line, regardless of ridicule. Now is the time to support serious scientific investigations into this extraordinary phenomenon: the existence of modern living pterosaurs. Please be heard.

February 22, 2010May 24, 2014

Bird watching sans pterosaurs

pterosaur seen by Aaron Tullock in Texas in about 1995

The Wikipedia post for “kongamato” includes “the area concerned is advertised as a prime birdwatching site,” bringing up the question of why birdwatchers do not report living pterosaurs in Africa. Wikipedia gives no answer, implying that the possibility of a live pterosaur in Africa is therefore doubtful. From Wikipedia’s “birdwatching” page, we learn that many birds “are more readily detected and identified by ear.” That makes sense if many birds are often hidden by vegetation, and they are. The photos on that page make even more sense, for birdwatchers are watching in daylight, when they can see. The point? Many reports of living long-tailed pterosaurs suggest that the creatures fly at night.

But the Wikipedia implication includes no hint of just what “area” is involved. It covers at least hundreds of square miles of remote wilderness, mostly far removed from any organized birdwatching activity. The commenter who inserted the sentence about birdwatching fails to see what is needed here. Hundreds of millions of dollars would need to be raised, to bring every birdwatcher in North America and Great Britain together in Africa; night-vision equipment would need to be used for countless weeks. After all that, if there were no living-pterosaurs reported by any birdwatchers, then the commenter could proclaim that no pterosaurs appeared while they were all beating the bushes.

The implication has another problem. Birdwatchers need to be credible (according to traditional interpretations of “credible”), otherwise nobody will pay attention to their reports. And what credibility rating does Wikipedia give to reports of living pterosaurs? The birdwatchers who receive most attention come from Western countries, and reporting (to Westerners) a living pterosaur in Africa (instead of a Red-billed hornbill) gets you medical attention. Birdwatchers could very well be watching living pterosaurs in Africa, but they are more likely to report what they see to knowledgeable natives, not to fellow birdwatchers.

No “pterosaur” category can be found on any birdwatcher’s report form, and no lack of pterosaur sightings by organized birdwatchers counts against the many reported sightings of living pterosaurs. This Wikipedia implication could just as well be used as if evidence against the existence of bats (or against UFO’s or against Fourth-of-July fireworks displays).

More: “Ropen Light” post has a comment on so-called UFO

###

Searching for Ropens and Finding God

To quote from the book:

I was having a yard sale, so I was in the driveway at 5 a.m. I saw this huge bird with bat wings, at least a 20 ft wing span, flying towards me. I just turned and ran screaming into the house. The shadow it threw covered the driveway. [page 205]

February 17, 2010May 24, 2014

Strange Rhamphorhynchoid

The dominance of long tails and head crests has caused skeptics to insinuate that hoaxers are creating a hodge-podge of pterosaur characteristics, taking attributes from different types of pterosaurs and constructing a hoax thereby. Those skeptics, however, fail to carefully examine the hoax hypothesis, for there are numerous problems with the idea that hoaxes played a significant role in the overall eyewitness testimonies.

At least one species of Rhamphorhynchoid (long-tailed pterosaur) known from fossils, the Scaphognathus crassirostris, did have a head crest. The presence of a head crest on a ropen (or modern long-tailed pterosaur) is hardly a sign of a hoax; how many potential hoaxers would know about that fossil? (And how many natives on remote tropical islands would know about any fossils?) Westerners who might consider a pterosaur hoax would most likely use what is well-known in Western culture: stubby-tailed pterosaurs, like those depicted often in movie and television sci-fi. Potential native hoaxers would talk about flying humans that transform themselves into snakes; honest native eyewitnesses talk about a long-tailed feather-less creature, and only some native eyewitnesses have had a good-enough viewing angle to allow them to see the head crest (Gideon Koro, of Umboi Island, was honest enough to admit that he did not have a good view of the head of the giant ropen that flew over Lake Pung around 1994).

The consistency, in eyewitness descriptions from around the world, of the combination of a long tail and a head crest (in a feather-less flying creature) is evidence for a living creature, not a hoax. And why should a modern pterosaur be very much like most pterosaur fossils? Ridicule from skeptics comes from our adopting the obvious interpretation of those eyewitness descriptions: a modern living pterosaur. “Unlike pterosaur fossils” is not just inaccurate: It is irrelevant.

Apparent Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs were observed in Cuba, in the mid-20th century

February 16, 2010December 8, 2011

Extinction and fossils

A common objection to living-pterosaur research is something like this: “No pterosaur fossil has been found above the Mesozoic.” That objection has serious problems.

Do we believe in living organisms (that they live now) because of recent fossils? No. People believe in presently-living creatures because people have seen them living. The point? People have seen living pterosaurs.

Another problem with the “Mesozoic objection” relates to the assumption that no pterosaurs have lived recently. Circular reasoning is involved here. See: Mesozoic objection.

The third edition of the cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in America, by Jonathan David Whitcomb, was published November 2, 2011, and is now available on Amazon.com. “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.” (Red Rabbit, Nov 22, 2010; review of first edition)