Pterosaur Eyewitness

The American Duane Hodgkinson and the Australian Brian Hennessy have something in common: They have seen, in daylight, in Papua New Guinea, a huge long-tailed featherless flying creature. In the blog Live Pterosaurs, “Hodgkinson-Hennessy Ropen,” we read:

The cryptid seen in New Guinea, by Duane Hodgkinson in 1944 and by Brian Hennessy in 1971, I have named “Hodgkinson-Hennessy Ropen.” Similarities between the descriptions given to me by these two eyewitnesses struck me as too much for coincidence. . . .

As I mentioned in my scientific paper (in The Creation Research Society Quarterly, Volume 45, Number 3, “Reports of Living Pterosaurs in the Southwest Pacific”), these different lengths of head crest I believe fall within the range of eyewitness error. In other words, the creatures observed by these two men could very well have had the same length of head crest (relative to the size of the head) . . .  it seems likely that the species is the same for the 1944 and 1971 sightings.

I have interviewed both of these eyewitnesses, finding both of them to be highly credible. Nothing in either the substance of their testimonies or in the way they communicated with me gave any hint of any hoax or any reasonable possibility of any misidentification error.

Pterosaurs are sometimes called “dinosaur birds,” even though they are neither dinosaurs nor birds.

What is bulverism? C. S. Lewis had many insights into human nature. He invented the term “bulverism” for a fault he noticed becoming common in the mid-twentieth century: pointing out one or more supposed weaknesses in ones opponent rather than engaging in reasoning on the subject at hand. I believe the popularity of bulverism has continued into the twenty-first century.

Some time ago, the respected cryptozoologist Loren Coleman wrote a blog page about my investigations of reports of apparent living pterosaurs in the United States. Comments poured in, mostly negative towards the possibility that eyewitnesses were seeing actual pterosaurs. Coleman himself ran off topic, with several paragraphs about John C. Whitcomb’s book (I am not closely related to that author, although I happen to have enjoyed reading his book) and then writing:

You will note that in Jonathan Whitcomb’s new publicity campaign, he is downplaying his American Old Testament religious and Young Earth Creationist (YEC) motivations, and, instead, calling himself a “cryptozoologist.” [This Coleman wrote in August of 2009, but my cryptozoological research began in 2003; I didn't notice that I had started any "new publicity campaign." And I have not been a YEC in the strict sense, although I believe in Young Earth Life (there is a difference)]

Loren Coleman (not to be confused with the cryptozoologist Nathaniel Coleman) then says:

“According to Whitcomb, a substantial number are not from hoaxes, insanity, or misidentifications; they are most likely living pterosaurs,” says their press release. Wherein lies the insanity here?

Indeed, Loren, where does insanity lie? When many eyewitnesses testify of things coorelating, and those persons show that they are mentally healthy, where is there any insanity? Setting aside bulverism, what case can be made for pterosaur extinction when so many eyewitnesses testify that pterosaurs still live? If there is any insanity, it must be in those who insist on imagining ancient extinctions. Dogmatic adherence to universal pterosaur extinction may be the only place left where insanity might be relevant. Note, I don’t insist that my opponents must be insane; that would be bulverism. I only ask, “Where is there any insanity?”

Youtube videos, fortunately only a few of them, have shown obvious Frigate Birds while speculating it is a ropen. If an apparent bird is soaring over the ocean or over a beach in daylight and what is flying resembles a Frigate Bird, assume that is what it is. One video is so obvious that it brings up a question: “Why did the person who put up the video not realize the obvious?” The bird has the white throat-chest common for some Frigate Birds and it has the wing-shape of a Frigate Bird.

I am concerned when I see a video of that bird and read comments like these:

“This looks like a ropen, its a type of dinosaur . . . thats sposed to exist still, i dont think this is fake, and its quite the discovery, well done ”

I hate to spoil a happy face but the appearance of that bird on that video differs significantly from the appearance of a ropen of Papua New Guinea.

” . . . you guys obviousely this video is real he can not paste or animate this its imposible because when he zooms back . . .”

The person making that comment is also unfamiliar with the appearance of Frigate Birds.

Enough said.

The web site objectiveministries.org, I have concluded, is an elaborate hoax. I conclude that there is no such educational facility as “Fellowship University,” and there is no such creationist “Richard Paley” affiliated with “objective ministries.” All the supposed plans for an expedition “to locate and bring back to the United States living specimens of pterosaurs or their fertile eggs” are fictional. Although there are a few references to real persons in other associations, most of this site is a huge joke, apparently created to ridicule Christians of a particular kind of beliefs. I have found no reasonable way that the person or persons who created this hoax would themselves believe in what is portrayed on the site.

This should not reflect negatively on my “objectiveness” site (see Objective Ministries NOT), but the name similarity is unfortunate, for some of my pages promote research or investigations into reports of living pterosaurs. Those who look only deep enough to note that outward similarity may assume they are the same or from the same source; they are not. I do not hold a grudge against the person or persons who manufactured this hoax, but it was surely wrong to do that.

How sad that somebody would spend so much time to ridicule those of a particular belief system! And how sad that somebody would create such an elaborate hoax! In places, some statements resemble (at least somewhat) statements on sites that portray the actual beliefs of the writers. If there is a problem with those actual beliefs, why not openly bring up the subject? Why not simply question those statements?

I first noticed the objective ministries site around 2004, and assumed that things like the “Pterosaur Rookery“ and “Project Pterosaur” expedition to Africa were simply naive goals by a serious but unprepared minister. Since looking deeper into this, I conclude that there is no creationist minister named Richard Paley; others have come to the same conclusion.