Naish – Pterosaur Eyewitness

August 31, 2011August 31, 2011

Flying Fox Fruit Bat

Even recent criciticms (for example, by the paleontologist Darren Naish) of living-pterosaur research sometimes includes the insinuation of misidentification regarding bats, especially the fruit bat called “flying fox.” A typical sighting of a large long-tailed pterosaur, however, differs greatly from a sighting of a Flying Fox fruit bat. For one thing, at least some critics fail to realize how many sightings of apparent pterosaurs are in locations where this Megabat does not live.

Georgia Pterosaur (from the cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in America)

The lady . . . had been trying to find someone who might help her verify the existence of the strange animals that she had seen twice in the past few weeks. . . . Her first sighting was at 7 a.m., the second, 9 a.m., with both mornings overcast. . . .

Fifteen miles of her commute is on a two-lane 55-mph road through woods alternating with pastures . . . on August 27, 2008. She had woken up early and could not get back to sleep, so she left her house at 6:45 a.m., with the sky still overcast from the last remnants of [a] storm. . . . She had driven less than ten miles, just leaving an area of pasture, entering an area of thick woods . . . when an animal suddenly flew from the right, just over the front of her car. Although alone, she yelled, “What the — what — what is that?” She was stunned.

. . . It was the tail; she looked up at a “very long” tail that had a strange shape at the end. . . . a thick almost-heart-shape at the end of the tail . . . “Dive-bombing my car,” is how she described the flight path, as it crossed the highway in front of and slightly above her. “Curved, like a hammer,” is how she described the head, which had a crest that she thought was “solid, not feathery at all.” . . . a smoothly curved head crest.

Obviously what the lady saw near Winder, Georgia, in the summer of 2008, was no Flying Fox fruit bat, even if that species of Megabat lived in Georgia, which it does not. So what about sightings in Papua New Guinea, where those bats live in great numbers?

Hodgkinson-Hennessy Ropen

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. . . .

. . . 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.

Both Duane Hodgkinson and Brian Hennessy were struck by the long pterosaur tail . . . in a manner of speaking, and Hodgkinson was close enough to make an estimate of tail-length: “at least ten or fifteen feet.” It was obviously not any Flying Fox fruit bat.

Eskin Kuhn Pterosaur Sighting

Her sighting [Patty Carson] confirms the credibility of the eyewitness Eskin Kuhn, who long ago reported his 1971 encounter. But Patty saw a similar creature in 1965 . . .

Kuhn sketched what he had seen, soon after his sighting (obviously no fruit bat):

March 2, 2011June 1, 2011

Misidentification

Regarding the sightings by Hodgkinson and Hennessy, misidentification of a Frigate bird or a Flying Fox fruit bat seems practically impossible; those two flying creatures were anything but birds or bats. But critics have also used the word “misidentified” (or “misidentify”) for reports of living pterosaurs in the United States.

Before getting into details about that kind of supposed misidentification, what about Marfa Lights? The common rebuff, “car headlights,” comes from either ignorance of careful observations and scientific work on CE-III mystery lights around Marfa, Texas, or from just plain careless thinking. When that type of light flys around southwest Texas, and it is examined carefully (through photographs or video from cameras set up by the scientist James Bunnell), it is found to be very unlike any car headlights, even when the night-mirage phenomena is taken into account.

About Marfa Lights, I see two ways to relate the word “misidentification.” Many visitors at the Marfa Lights Viewing Park see car headlights and assume they see “Marfa Lights,” and critics of the idea that anything strange exists near Marfa, Texas, think that any reference to any strange light there must be misidentified car headlights. The critics are also guilty of misidentification.

Misidentification or Live Pterosaurs?

In that post, Hodgkinson and Hennessy make the case for a living pterosaur, with little, if any, chance for misidentification.

So what do critics mention about eyewitnesses? They mostly mention theoretical sightings or two or three that are more than a hundred years old. What a problem! Critics often ignore critical witnesses, those whose credibility has attracted cryptozoologists who interview them. So why do critics mostly ignore those important eyewitnesses? What other explanation but the obvious? They do not have any reasonable reply to the testimonies of Duane Hodgkinson and Brian Hennessy . . .

Pterosaurs Alive Today

Darren Naish has said that “sightings of pterosaur-like animals that have been reported appear to be a combination of hoaxes and misidentification of large birds and bats.” On that web page, however, he said nothing about Hodgkinson or Hennessy or any of the other eyewitnesses who have enlivened the living-pterosaur investigations since the 1990’s. His evaluation is nothing like a scientific examination; it is more like the simplistic verbage of common politics, with “a combination of” signaling to the more-wise reader that Naish has nothing particular to prove his point about the nonexistence of modern living pterosaurs.

The New Zealand Flying Slasher

Across the New Zealand, North Islands farmland and countryside, there have been for almost a century tales from farmers and hunters, of a horrid winged beast, with long sharp fangs lining its narrow, beak-like jaws. Its eyes gleam in the night, where it can be seen flying overhead, shillouted in the moon. Farmers despise it because it tears chunks from their cattle in the nightime. It is called The Flying Slasher.

One commenter remarked, “The ‘pterosaur’ of NZ is probably a megabats (like flying fox etc).” One of the problems with that conjecture is that the Flying Fox fruit bat eats fruit, not chunks of flesh from cattle.

Another commenter remarked, “I have a feeling it may be the hast eagle that was once thought to be extinct.” The problem with that conjecture is that the post refers to “a very dangerous flying reptile, with . . . abnormally long, razor-like teeth.” The Haast’s Eagle was a feathered bird, not a reptile, and it had no teeth. Whether extinct or not, the Haast’s Eagle really was an eagle, not a reptile with teeth.

From the Introduction in the cryptozoology book Live Pterosaurs in America (second edition):

“Those who’ve been shocked at the sight of a flying creature that “should” be extinct—those eyewitnesses, more numerous than most Americans would guess, need no longer be afraid that everyone will think them crazy, and no longer need they feel alone. Those of us who’ve listened to the American eyewitnesses, we who have interviewed them, we now believe. So, if you will, consider the experiences of these ordinary persons (I’ve interviewed most of them myself) and accept whatever enlightenment you may.”

April 7, 2010July 6, 2010

What is the Mesozoic Objection?

The palaeontologist Darren Naish wrote a web page disparaging the idea that any pterosaur could be presently living. The dinosaur expert said ” . . . the fact that there are no indications from the fossil record that pterosaurs survived beyond the end of the Cretaceous . . .” What does that mean? The Cretaceous, according to standard-model geology (which itself is disputed by many living-pterosaur investigators), is the most recent part of the Mesozoic era, ending 65 million years ago. But “survived beyond” is the key point of interest, and major problems have been buried beneath layers of apparent reason; let’s dig them up these layers of the “Mesozoic objection.”

Many living-pterosaur critics make the same oversight as Darren Naish, for this typical response appears, on the surface, to be scientific: “No pterosaur fossil has been found above the Mesozoic.” The problem lies in the unstated assumption that fossils can be used to determine what kinds of organisms can be presently living. Whatever strengths and weaknesses may lie in layers of reasoning in the world of standard-model geology, that geology was never constructed to explain what organisms can or cannot live presently. An attempt to use that geology as a foundation for what can live now—that would cause all fossils to be crushed into useless powder by the weight of all the many forms of life we now see on this earth.

Does fossil evidence of a microbe prove that no microbe of that general type could be presently living? No. Does fossil evidence of a fish prove that no fish of that general type could be presently living? No. Does fossil evidence of a pterosaur prove that no pterosaur of that general type could be presently living? No. The idea of universal extinctions of dinosaurs and pterosaurs—that is an idea drilled into us by indoctrination, whenever any mention is made of a dinosaur or pterosaur. And in a society that harbors an unending indoctrination of universal pterosaur-extinctions, the breadth of ignorance caused by that indoctrination cannot be used as scientific evidence for pterosaur extinction. It matters not how many indoctrinated professors believe in the fantasy.

More Resources:

Extinction and Fossils

Mesozoic Objection and live pterosaurs