This morning I was interviewed by the Canadian television show host Richard Syrett. The questions included the subject of how modern pterosaurs have remained hidden from general knowledge for so long and how they have survived until the present.
Science writer Brian Switek, in an August, 2010, post for the online Smithsonian Magazine, titled his remarks “Don’t Get Strung Along by the Ropen Myth.” He may have gotten unanimous approval for pointing out that a photo of a frigate bird is not evidence for living pterosaurs, but he got a stern rebuke for mentioning the word “hucksters” for those who search for cryptids many had assumed have been extinct for millions of years, especially those who have searched in Papua New Guinea for the ropen. The rebuke was from the cryptozoology author Jonathan Whitcomb.
Ropen Ideas Shot Down by a Smithsonian Blogger
Brian Switek was correct in one point: The news reporter Terrence Aym fell into a serious blunder in referring to an image of a common Frigate Bird as if it were a ropen or pterosaur. (But Switek’s blunders are so serious that I will not even link to his blog post.)
In Whitcomb’s book Live Pterosaurs in America, the “Mesozoic Objection” in regard to the extinction of pterosaurs is criticized as follows:
What about the “Mesozoic” objection? One critic declares that a lack of “post-Mesozoic remains” (no fossils in “less-ancient” rock strata) proves a pterosaur could not live in modern times. But a subtle form of circular reasoning lies buried within this declaration about fossil rocks.
When a creature thought to have lived only in the Mesozoic time period is found in an undated stratum, what happens? That stratum is then labeled “Mesozoic.” So if a pterosaur fossil can cause it to be “ancient,” what can be reasonably concluded about an apparent lack of any pterosaur fossils in rocks not labeled “ancient?” Not a lack of modern pterosaurs. Standard-model labeling of strata relies a great deal on the axiom of ancient extinctions of certain organisms, and axioms are assumptions, not proven facts.
Pterosaur Extinction and Brian Switek
Switek seems to have entirely failed to comprehend what is entailed here. If the discovery of a modern living Coelacanth could have opened up the way for dating some Coelacanth fossils as being after the Mesozoic, the discovery of a modern living pterosaur could open up the way for dating some pterosaur fossils as also being more recent. This perspective was probably entirely overlooked by Switek.
Advertisement
Third edition of the non-fiction cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in America, by Jonathan David Whitcomb, gives you details unavailable in online blogs: many eyewitness sighting reports in many states of the U.S.A.
From a review of the second edition (Amazon.com):
“This is an updated review of the book and I am changing my rating to 5 stars. This book has been on my shelf for almost a year now. I pick it up every now and then and a part of me becomes more impressed by the book every time. Yes, the skeptics will laugh at it, but I am a skeptic to. Admittedly, my main interest in the subject is based in romanticism. However, it is apparent that these pterosaur stories will not go away.” (book review by Stevie, Oct 23, 2011, second edition of the book)
Although I have not yet personally encountered a living pterosaur (as of March 2, 2012—I still hope), I have on occasion encountered a hoax. For example, I once investigated a teenager who had reported a flying pterodactyl that was carrying a family pet in its mouth, and I found evidence that the teenager was perpetrating a hoax in that report. If hoaxes are possible with reports, why do I publicize so many accounts of living pterosaurs? (For a detailed answer, read my books.) One reason is that a significant portion of the reports I receive show no sign of any hoax, and a portion of those show strong evidence against any hoax. But the accumulation of credible reports reveals the truth: In spite of a few practical jokes (even if more than a few), the overall evidence points to some living pterosaurs.
Practical jokes combined with misidentifications account for most of the non-pterosaur reports of apparent pterosaurs. Dreams combined with insanity account for less, with less than 5% of the reports I have received. But the vast majority of the emails and phone calls that I receive show no sign of any of those four distractions, and that, over the past eight years, has made the case for living pterosaurs, for the probability that all of those many credible reports are non-pterosaurs is so slight that it is not worth considering.
Critics and skeptics, including even a couple of paleontologists, have failed to consider simple probability in evaluating the important reports. (In fact, they also fail to consider those reports themselves, preferring to shoot down old stories that appear to have been jokes.) What is an important report, and how does it relate to simple probability? Forget all obvious hoaxes; darkness by itself never enlightens. Modify the clever proclamation of Sherlock Holmes: “When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” In the real world, real detectives rarely have the opportunity to distinguish, with proven certainty, between the impossible and the highly improbable. I say, “When non-pterosaur explanations appear unlikely, consider a living pterosaur.”
When all “four distractions” appear unlikely in a particular sighting, I usually publicize that report, for it was probably an encounter with a modern living pterosaur. But the probability of one or more species of living pterosaurs—that increases with the accumulation of credible reports, according to simple probability. Even the position of vocal critics is worn down by the continuous rain of more-credible reports, like the millionaire who would increase his chances of winning a lottery by purchasing a million tickets; even if the most celebrated sightings are only barely-possible pterosaurs, accumulation increases that possibility: Hodgkinson-1944 plus Carson-1965 plus Hennessy -1971 plus Kuhn-1971 plus Wooten-1989 plus others.
Getting back to the hoax possibility, it is practically eliminated when an eyewitness has endured years of skepticism or even ridicule, with nothing to gain by holding onto a live-pterosaur report. Examples abound: Duane Hodgkinson’s sighting in New Guinea, Eskin Kuhn’s sighting in Cuba, an Australian couple’s sighting in Perth, Susan Wooten’s sighting in South Carolina, and others less publicized. We now need to admit the obvious: When hoaxes, misidentifications, dreams, and insanity have been eliminated, what is left, strange as that may seem to critics, is a living pterosaur.
A Hoax Does Not Explain Pterosaur Sightings
When Hennessy reported his experience, in 2006, he was a professional psychologist. I believe that he still is. But why would he agree to have his real name be used in cryptozoology literature, if he was playing a hoax? It would likely come back to haunt him in his profession.
Glen Kuban and Pterosaur Extinction
“Do nothing to refute mainstream geology” are the words of Glen Kuban. This phrase, however, is a clue that he is actually protecting a philosophy, for science, by its nature, is expected to bring about changes in opinion about what weused to think: changes.
Refutation of the Pterosaur Hoax Idea
Interviewing eyewitnesses of apparent living pterosaurs [for eight years] I know that a hoax (or a number of hoaxes) could not have produced the answers they have given me. While writing my book (“Live Pterosaurs in America . . . ), I saw that the data accumulated from descriptions of apparent pterosaurs in the United States showed characteristics not to be expected from a hoax or hoaxes.
The pterodactyls did not attack me (Jonathan Whitcomb). It was just a few commentators on a cryptozoology.com forum thread who initiated the attack. But it was a rather vicious attack, with one of the assailants using the name “ape man.” The question may appear simple on the surface: Am I (Jonathan Whitcomb) a “pterodactyl” expert? Without somebody making that assumption and titling the forum thread with that phrase, I would not have been attacked; but I survived and hold no grudges. I hold onto hope that the commentator was wrong who said that I make “Don Quixote look like a paradigm of sanity.”
So what does all this boil down to? If all pterosaurs (AKA pterodactyls) are extinct, nobody whose experiences are confined to eyewitnesses can be an expert, even if he writes books on the subject, like Whitcomb has done. But if even just one of the eyewitnesses has actually seen a modern pterosaur, then Whitcomb is an expert, having interviewed perhaps more eyewitnesses than any other cryptozoologist. Of course with all that said, the existence of modern pterosaurs does not necessarily mean that all of his ideas are correct.
Attack the Interviewer or Attack Ignorance?
I suggest that we all examine the eyewitness reports rather than attack those who interview eyewitnesses. I suggest people avoid attacking investigators even when I myself am not the victim of the attacks. 
Nonfiction cryptozoology book on reports of apparent pterosaurs flying in the United States of America (whether or not the author, Jonathan Whitc0mb, is a “pterodactyl expert,” let each reader decide)
It has long been known that some people in Africa and Papua New Guinea have been attacked by flying creatures that have been described like pterosaurs. Many of the eyewitnesses, from around the world, have seen the creatures and some of the wingspan estimates have topped twenty feet. In Canada, Gerald McIsaac has investigated reports of attacks from the nocturnal “devil bird,” and the number of reports makes it questionable that all of them would be hoaxes. If that were not enough, other investigators, in the United States, have spent years searching for living pterosaurs, and eyewitness reports from the 48 contiguous states have continued to accumulate.
Pterodactyl Attacks and Human Deaths
Chapter Eight, “Highway of Tears,” in Bird From Hell [nonfiction book by Gerald McIsaac] reveals, “Amnesty International estimates that since 1969, thirty-two women and girls, most of them Aboriginal, have disappeared along that highway.” [northern British Columbia] Nobody denies that some women and girls in this part of Canada are victims of abuse at home and that some of them hitchhike on this highway, making themselves vulnerable at night. But the general human population, at least the Native Americans, keep indoors at night to avoid the “devil bird,” and some eyewitnesses of that flying creature have been attacked by a flying creature, when those persons have stayed outside after sunset.
Whitcomb has received many emails and occasional phone calls from ordinary persons who have seen extraordinary animals: apparent pterosaurs. On August 18, 2008, he received a phone call from a man in England, a plane pilot who recently had a near-collision with a large creature flying 6500 feet above the sea, 150 miles from Bali, Indonesia . . .
Although cryptozoologists have not previously thought of Gerald McIsaac as a pterosaur expert, his recent nonfiction book makes it clear that his has actively searched for the pterosaur-like flying creature that is called “devil bird” in this part of British Columbia. Modern-pterosaur experts and researchers should be interested in the progress of McIsaac’s searching and researching, for there is still much to be discovered in this wonderful world.
The two men first assumed that it was a bird flying inland from the west, at low altitude over the city of San Diego, California. This was at about 8:00 p.m., on November 4, 2011. As it got closer, things became stranger: The flying creature was huge and had a long tail. Stranger still, it stopped nearly over the men’s heads and hovered while another apparent pterosaur joined up with the first one. The two of them flew away to the east.
One of the eyewitnesses reported to me, by emails and a phone conversation, more details, although he did not often use the word “bird.” The tail was long and straight. Each wing was 10-15 feet long (making a wingspan about 20-30 feet long). Where color was discernable, on the belly, it was somewhat golden brown.
The problem with notifying the news media, in this case, was that just three months previously somebody had played a practical joke. A statue in northern San Diego County was found to have a model “pterodactyl” fixed onto the top. This was carried in the news, becoming well-known in the San Diego area. What news reporter would thereafter give serious consideration to a report of two giant pterodactyls flying over the middle of San Diego?
Buy your own copy of this cryptozoology book on Amazon.com
