image_pdfimage_print

Objective Investigations of Pterosaurs

The live pterosaur investigations have sometimes been criticized, at least by a few critics, as if they lacked objectivity. Well, we’re all human; why not evaluate interviews and eyewitness reports themselves, especially those that are more credible or emphasized as important by the investigators? Avoid bulverism, look to the testimonies.

At the risk of self-approbation, please excuse these examples; I have written more about living pterosaurs than any other writer, so examples are easier to find with my own writings. Consider these and decide for yourself about whether or not I have a special problem with being objective, in particular if my desire to promote the idea of living pterosaurs overshadows reasonable thinking.

Frigate Bird

When one or two Youtube videos of a Frigate Bird became popular (as if evidence for a living pterosaur), I was in the front of objecting to the error. I commented on Youtube and wrote blog pages about those videos. When what looks like a Frigate Bird is seen soaring near a beach in daylight, well, that’s a Frigate Bird.

Strange Thing in a Landscape Photograph

When a new young investigator showed me a photo with something in the sky, I pointed out to the young man that the person taking the photo had noticed nothing unusual when the photo was taken. I felt no hesitancy in deflating that idea of a pterosaur photo, for the image itself does not look like what should be expected of a flying pterosaur.

Sleeping at the Wheel

In the first edition of my book Live Pterosaurs in America (repeated in the second edition, which should be published within the next few weeks), I brought up actual examples of dreams that two persons had after they fell asleep while driving: a giant bat about to collide with the car, in one dream; a herd of dinosaurs crossing the road, in another dream. I know both dreamers; each told me, from their own mouths, of their dreams.

As far as I know, I am the first writer to bring up this possible criticism of literal interpretations of eyewitness encounters with living pterosaurs. I believe it to be potentially one of the stongest possible objections to eyewitness accounts. Yet few of my critics, as far as I am aware (as of late October, 2010) have mentioned this possibility to explain sightings.

So why do I continue to proclaim the validity of eyewitness sightings of living pterosaurs, in the face of this apparent severe criticism? That requires an aside; I’ll be brief. Shocking dreams of strange things like giant bats or dinosaurs, dreams that wake the dreamer—those dreams seem to be contrived especially to awaken the dreamer who is driving (self-preservation through the intelligence of the unconscious mind). The real shock is in awakening to realize one is driving. But those sightings in which a large flying creature, without feathers, flys in front of the windshield of someone’s car (and the drivers later report to me)—those sightings have a notable absence of awakening. And when two eyewitnesses have seen a living pterosaur, it is not because both of the have dreamed the same thing at the same time. Enough said on that.

The point is this: Am I devoid of objectiveness, when I have written like that on those subjects? I don’t think so.

Eyewitness Brian Hennessy

Brian Hennessy, eyewitness of a ropen in Papua New GuineaBrian Hennessy, an Australian who works at a medical university in China, I interviewed by email in 2006 (two years after my expedition in Papua New Guinea). His sighting, on the island of Bougainville in 1971, relates to the sighting by Duane Hodgkinson, in 1944, although the locations are many miles apart.

Hennessy told me, “The creature I saw one early morning . . . was so unusual. I actually heard it before I saw it. A slow flap…flap…[flapping] sound. The air was still, and our truck had stopped on our downward journey from the top of the range to the coast way below. . . . When I looked up, trying to see what was making this sound, I saw a very unusual creature. Firstly, it was very big (wingspan at least 2 metres, probably more … possibly much, much more).” [the distance was difficult to judge and distance is critical when estimating size. JW]

“It certainly looked prehistoric, in that it did not look like any other bird that I have seen before or since. Why prehistoric? Well, maybe my memory has been influenced by the intervening years, but I recall seeing this creature with a longish narrow tail . . . the head was disproportionately large compared to the body (no feathers in sight). The wingspan was large. . . . and not a feather in sight (and that is not to say that there weren’t feathers…maybe I could not discern them).”

His objectiveness becomes obvious when we consider his comments about the featherless appearance, for he admitted the possibility of feathers that he did not see. Nevertheless, the absence of visible feathers suggests that it was no bird. Could this have been a strange large bird with feathers not easily visible? Mr. Hennessy also mentioned something on the back of the head of the creature; he used the word “horn.” That horn and the long tail suggest a ropen or at least a large flying creature similar to the one seen by Hodgkinson.

I am very grateful that he gave us permission to use his name and quote his comments on what he had seen, for it demonstrates the credibility of living-pterosaur investigations. Why? For one thing, the possibility of a hoax is practically nil, because of the lack of any motivation for a hoax and because of the eyewitness’s profession. What about insanity? Ask him to see a psychologist; it’s easy for him to look in a mirror, for Mr. Hennessy is himself a professional psychologist.

More resources:

Pterosaur Hoax Idea Itself Refuted

Giant Pterodactyl of 1944 (sighting by Hodgkinson)