Umboi Island – Pterosaur Eyewitness

November 25, 2014

Donald Prothero and “Fake Pterosaurs”

Another paleontologist has stepped outside his field of expertise and railed against my writings about modern pterosaurs: Donald Prothero, who specializes in mammalian paleontology, according to Wikipedia. His November 24, 2014, post is titled “Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets” on skeptic.com. I avoid linking to libelous pages, and this one includes “Whitcomb admitted the deception in July, 2014” and links to one of my posts. Strange to tell, but that post of mine explains why I was NOT being dishonest in using pen names. Here’s the link: Jonathan Whitcomb pen names. It gives me some hope that Prothero was making an honest mistake, when he included that link; nevertheless, his post appears sure to lead his readers astray from the truth, not only about my motivations but about investigations of living-pterosaur sighting reports in general. I must respond.

I’ll not say much about the sock puppet accusations here; I’ve written much on it already. For those who go to that link in question, it may become obvious that I was not trying to deceive anybody concerning reports of modern living pterosaurs, including the flying creature called ropen; for those who read only that post by Prothero, however, it can seem like I’ve tried to deceive people about the ropen and that I did so almost single-handedly. Let us look deeper.

Do “virtually all” writings about the ropen come from just one person: Jonathan Whitcomb?

My blog posts and web pages outnumber those of anyone else on the subject of modern “pterodactyls” or primitive flying creatures that have been assumed to have been long extinct; that need not suggest that I have been dishonest. Skeptics include at least three of the best-known paleontologists in the world; that need not suggest my investigation over the past eleven years has been in vain. Look at some details.

Notice, if you read that post by Dr. Prothero, the absence of the following words:

Umboi
expedition
exploration
eyewitness

Now notice the absence of the following names of explorers, on his post:

Paul Nation
Garth Guessman
David Woetzel
Jacob Kepas
James Blume

“Whitcomb” is found twelve times on his post. If only it were saying only nice things about people. Oh well, I’m getting used to it.

What does Donald Prothero think I have been writing about for eleven years? Most of my web page publications have been in blog-post format, and those posts number well over a thousand. Yet to anyone who wants to look deeper, it will become obvious why Google has not penalized my pages about eyewitness accounts of these flying creatures: My posts are not spam-repetition of previously published pages. Their quoting of other pages is limited, as is this post by Prothero (“Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets”).

A paleontologist has stepped outside his area of expertise in yet another way, declaring that my online writings are a “classic case” of “sock puppetry” online. Nonsense! The majority of my posts have been under my name of Jonathan Whitcomb (or Jon Whitcomb), NOT any pen name. And by the way, for a spammer to use many alias would hardly hide repetitive content from detection by a search engine system like Google. It seems Prothero is again outside his field of knowledge, making another assumption without any deep investigation beforehand. (I’ll leave sock puppetry for another post, but I used two pen names because I was falsely accused of dishonesty, NOT to be dishonest. Readers really needed to be enlightened by eyewitness reports, without being distracted by my name.)

Expeditions in Papua New Guinea

I was surprised at the way Prothero referred to the Destination Truth and Monsterquest episodes that related to the ropen of Papua New Guinea. He declares that those two television show episodes were “based on the obsessions of one individual.” Really?! I was consulted by the pre-production researchers of both Destination Truth and Monsterquest before their expeditions in the southwest Pacific, it is true. But many persons have been involved in interviews in Papua New Guinea, before my own 2004 expedition in that remote area of the planet.

Again Mr. Prothero appears to have stepped outside his area of expertise. I would not have expected him to deeply investigate how those two production teams decided to include the ropen in their shows, yet one paleontologist has taken a big leap of faith, and a blind leap apparently, in assuming that I, Jonathan Whitcomb, as a lone individual, inspired those television producers to pay for teams to be sent to Papua New Guinea. Some of my web pages may have caught their attention but the power of persuasion was in the eyewitness testimonies.

Other paleontologists, including Darren Naish, have at least dipped their toes into the ocean of eyewitness sighting reports, before rejecting everything that chilled them. Dr. Prothero seems to pretend that the ocean does not even exist, at least in this post “Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets.” Dr. Prothero, burying ones head in a fossil bed in the middle of North America does not make the Pacific Ocean disappear.

Eyewitnesses are the point

For those who read his post about me, I would ask, “Where do I get new material for writing countless web pages about apparent living pterosaurs?” I promise I do not just repeat myself endlessly. I continue to get emails from eyewitnesses of flying creatures that appear to have been living pterosaurs. I now have reports from eyewitnesses from four continents and from islands in the Pacific. No need for much repetition. I write about new sighting reports and compare them to older accounts.

Now please notice the following names of eyewitnesses, persons from various places and with various backgrounds and religious beliefs. Each of these names is found in the fourth edition of my nonfiction book Searching for Ropens and Finding God. Not all of them believe in modern pterosaurs, but most of them do, having seen them. (Some of these persons witnessed a flying light at night, rather than the form of an apparent pterosaur.)

Blume, James
Bunnel, James
Carson, Patty
Cheesman, Evelyn
Conrad, Venice
Cooper, Sherry
Cottingham, Steven
Eunice of Umboi Island
Fabian of Salamaua
Gates, Joshua
Gima, William
Grotty, Rob
Guessman, Garth
Hennessy, Brian
Hodgkinson, Duane
Jonah Jim
Kau, Mark
Kepas, Jacob
Koro, Gideon
Koro, Wesley
Kuhn, Eskin
Laura in Arkansas
Leonard of Opai
Marcy, Milt
Meixner, Kevin
Moke, David
Nation, Paul
Nolo, Dickson
Norman, Scott
Paina, Luke
Paradise, Sandra
Quiroz, Lydia
Ragu, Jonathan
Rhodriquez, Devin
Schroder, David
Stew (in Mexico)
Watters, Professor Steven
Woetzel, David
Wooten, Susan
Zacharia of Owongai Village

The above is not a complete listing, in my book, of all the eyewitnesses of possible pterosaurs, but it should suffice.

Why not listen to the eyewitnesses? They are the point of all these investigations in cryptozoology, including the work of my associates, Paul Nation, Cliff Paiva, Garth Guessman, David Woetzel, Jacob Kepas, and others. I testify that I have not been alone in this work, and the eyewitnesses deserve to be heard.

Eunice, an eyewitness on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea

Garth Guessman and Duane Hodgkinson, both eyewitnesses of one or more living pterosaurs

David Woetzel, another cryptozoologist-eyewitness of living pterosaurs

Jonathan Whitcomb, nonfiction writer and author who believes many of the eyewitnesses

###

Is there no new evidence for modern pterosaurs?

Ricky Kearns and family members witnessed a large flying creature at night, and it had wings that were glowing. This was in Point Pleasant, although Ricky mentioned to me that what he saw did not look like what the Mothman is reported to look like. Nevertheless, there may be a relationship with some sightings of what has been labeled “Mothman.”

Modern pterosaurs, AKA “flying dinosaurs”

Look up “pterosaur” in a dictionary and one of the first words you’ll see is “extinct.” Many Americans call them “pterodactyls” or “flying dinosaurs.” Few Americans have admitted believing that those “prehistoric” flying creatures could still be living, few indeed, until recently.

Flying creature of the night

So who do you call? I hope you’ll contact me, Jonathan Whitcomb. As far as I know, I am the only person on earth who has devoted anything like a full-time effort, over years, to interview eyewitnesses of apparent living pterosaurs or ropens, promoting the idea that these flying creatures are not extinct but very much alive.

Live Pterosaur Media – press releases

A physicist [Clifford Paiva], who examined video footage of two strange lights that explorers think are bioluminescent pterosaurs, declares that the glow is not from meteors, lanterns, campfires or an airplane.

A quest for discovering modern pterosaurs

March 15, 2012March 17, 2012

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.) I set aside, for the moment, the numerous errors in Aym’s Salem-News article, for the major errors in Switek’s Smithsonian post, although fewer in number, are more detrimental to the progress of human knowledge and understanding. I now refer to the August 16, 2010, blog post on the Smithsonian Magazine site: “Don’t Get Strung Along by the Ropen Myth,” by Brian Switek.

He mentions no human names, in the first two paragraphs of his post, but tells us of his disappointment in his youth when rumors of living dinosaurs did not result in any scientific discovery. He mentions no decade for those cryptozoological expeditions, and he tells us nothing about why he came to label those unnamed persons negatively or why recent explorers should also be thought of in a negative sense. Brian Switek said:

“Like many self-appointed authorities on the Unknown, the chief advocates of living dinosaurs turned out to be hucksters, overly-credulous wildlife enthusiasts, or young-earth creationists . . .”

If there is no doubt that those earlier advocates were hucksters, why not mention their names? I submit that this labeling of unnamed persons “hucksters” is inappropriate, implying that the persons soon to be named are in that same category. It also brings up the idea that Mr. Switek is not the most objective writer to evaluate the work of James Blume and David Woetzel, to say the least.

Missionary Jim Blume interviews native in Papua New Guinea

James Blume has been a Baptist missionary, for decades, in Papua New Guinea. Contrary to an implication in Aym’s article, referenced by Switek, Blume is not usually considered an “explorer,” at least he would not likely call himself that; he has, however, assisted American explorers on many occasions. He has also spoken with many natives, regarding traditions and sightings of the ropen or apparent pterosaurs or large flying creatures.

David Woetzel, American explorer in Cameroon, Africa, searching for a living dinosaur

David Woetzel (apparently misspelled once in Aym’s article: “Davie Woetzel”) is an explorer, by all accounts, and unquestionably a Young Earth Creationist. Switek mentions this religious belief as if it discredits everything done by explorers, but he fails to mention that Woetzel’s beliefs are similar to Sir Isaac Newton’s. Nobody insinuates that Newton was a huckster.

Pterosaur Bioluminescence

Switek’s post on the Smithsonian blog mentions Woetzel’s idea of pterosaur bioluminescence as one of a number of “anecdotes.” What Switek fails to mention are details about where the idea of bioluminescence comes from regarding the ropen sightings. He could have done much better if he had done more research, with a more open mind about the possibility that those with a different religious belief system his his own may nevertheless make important contributions to human knowledge, even if those religious persons do not have as distinguished a name as “Newton.”

My own expedition on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, late in 2004, preceded Woetzel’s expedition by several weeks. I was qualified to interview natives there, being a forensic videographer, experienced in videotaping while interviewing an eyewitness. I also knew a little of the Tok Pisin language, although I mostly relied on interpreters for both Tok Pisin and the local Kovai tongue. Many native islanders were eyewitnesses of the ropen light, and I had almost unlimited access to accounts of the flying light. I also had, after returning to the United States, many months to analyze the data from those interviews, before writing my nonfiction cryptozoology book Searching for Ropens (now in its second edition).

The second expedition of 2004 included the Americans David Woetzel and Garth Guessman. I have used the label “light expedition” for both of the 2004 investigations on Umboi Island, for few explorers were involved, with limited supplies and limited time. But the preparations were substantial, for all three of us, and our efforts were intense, and the assistance from a number of local villagers made a major difference. Both expeditions were successful.

Why does Mr. Switek use the word “anecdote” to include the idea that modern pterosaurs in Papua New Guinea are bioluminescent? He uses that word in the same sentence as the name “Woetzel,” referring to David Woetzel, but I wonder if Switek did any reading of anything beyond Aym’s faulty newspaper article. I have watched several segments of the videos Woetzel and Guessman recorded. There may be some moments when “anecdote” might apply, but those moments are limited.

Woetzel had his own sighting of what seems to have been a “ropen” light, as it flew behind the mountains surrounding Lake Pung. His recounting that sighting experience in his scientific paper (published in a peer-reviewed journal of science) is hardly worthy of the word “anecdote.” Contrary to what was reported in the newspaper article by Mr. Aym, that explorer videotaped neither any ropen light nor any form of a pterosaur. The significance? Having searching for weeks for a living pterosaur without seeing any form or shape of one, and having promoted the idea of modern living “pterodactyls” (as some call them), Woetzel can hardly be accused of lies. If he had any inclination to lie, he would have reported something resembling a pterosaur, not just an undefined light. Having reported an unmeteoric flying light, we need to consider the possibility that it was some kind of bioluminescence.

If Mr. Switek objects to reading reports from those with different religious beliefs from his own, what about the British biologist Evelyn Cheesman? She wrote about the flying lights that she observed near Mondo, New Guinea, (early 1930’s) in her book The Two Roads of Papua. I have never read anything by her or about her that would indicate her religious beliefs were different from Mr. Switek’s present religious beliefs. I suggest Switek read what Cheesman has written about those strange flying lights.

I agree with Brian Switek: Serious problems made the newspaper article in the Salem-News an embarrasment; but that does not discredit the valid research and investigations by many men, over many years, who have in common that their accomplishments have been admired by a reported who was careless in writing about the subject.

More Reactions to “Don’t Get Strung Along by the ‘Ropen’ Myth”

Smithsonian Attacks Ropen Myth

[Switek wrote:] “even if a long-tailed pterosaur were found it would do nothing to undercut the science of evolution.” In other words, whatever happens, Switek’s philosophy is correct. I think that reasoning, if it could be called reasoning, is too convenient, revealing that it is a philosophy that is being protected, not science. True scientific reasoning does not include “whatever the outcome, whatever the evidence, my idea must be correct.”

Ropen Dismissed by Smithsonian

With all those negative comments towards those he disagrees with, I wonder if Mr. Switek has ever heard of the word “bulverism.” In the same paragraph, he also mentions, “young-earth creationists intent on somehow disproving evolution by finding creatures thought to have been long extinct.” But the conflict between extreme origin philosophies is too deep for him to adequately cover in his post.

Smithsonian Officials Appear Guilty

The writer with the Smithsonian, Brian Switek, in a blog post with that institution, severely criticized the opinion that there may be a living pterosaur.

Live Pterosaurs in America, third edition, will take you on a whirlwind tour of eyewitness sightings of modern pterosaurs in many of the contiguous states of the U.S.A., for this nonfiction book is the result of years of research and interviews in cryptozoology.

January 26, 2012January 28, 2012

Pterodactyl Attacks and Human Deaths

I rarely mention jaws that snap or claws that scratch. I write more on featherless features of long-tailed creatures, emphasizing both non-bird and non-bat evidence from eyewitnesses, and I warn against a weakness in Western mentality, pleading for self-inoculation against the intellectual danger of bulverism. Laying aside those points, I’ve recently read the cryptozoology book Bird From Hell, not the best or second-best living-pterosaur nonfiction but it warns us of a more down-to-earth danger. It’s now time to mention what often captivates readers: teeth with an appetite to bite.

I hope that no pterosaur was responsible for any of the human deaths in British Columbia, Canada, along the 500-mile stretch of highway from Prince George to Prince Rupert, but I also hope that all attacks from irresponsible humans, against innocent human victims, will cease, and that this world will become a paradise in which death itself will cease. Notwithstanding all our hopes for the future, however, we now face a present danger, a warning from Gerald McIsaac, author of Bird From Hell, who believes that “most of the hitchhikers [on this highway at night] who disappear have been killed by this animal. It is also my opinion that many of the people who have disappeared have not been reported.”

Chapter Eight, “Highway of Tears,” in Bird From Hell reveals, “Amnesty International estimates that since 1969, thirty-two women and girls, most of them Aboriginal, have disappeared along that highway.” 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 in one area of northern British Columbia, keep indoors at night to avoid the “devil bird,” and some eyewitnesses of that flying creature have been attacked by an animal with wings, when those persons have stayed outside after sunset.

Of course it is possible that aboriginals are superstitious and that all the missing persons, over the decades, who have walked that long highway at night were attacked by human rapists and murderers; that seems possible on the surface. But animalistic humans do not fit all the reported encounters at night in British Columbia, according to the book Bird From Hell.

What about the dead horse mentioned in that book? Much of its body was found by a tree. Of course ordinary non-human predators could be responsible, or so it seems. But why were parts of its body in the top of that tree, with some of the branches broken?

What about the girl in Kwadacha (northern British Columbia)? She was outside one dark night, when it seemed that “one of the boys” was spying on her. She was big for her age, and decided to teach him a lesson by charging him. At the end of the charge, she came to a stop. It was not one of the boys . . . She was facing a creature that she later called the “devil bird.” It released a “cloud of smoke” and flew away. Whatever the species of that flying creature, pterosaur, whatever, it was not one of the boys or one of the animalistic humans who have attacked girls on the Highway of Tears.

I don’t believe everything that I’ve read in Bird From Hell, but other cryptozoology books mention “pterodactyl attacks,” even when a different name is used for the flying creature. Take one account in the pioneering nonfiction On the Track of Unknown Animals, by Bernard Heuvelmans:

Coming straight at me only a few feet above the water was a black thing the size of an eagle. . . . its lower jaw hung open and bore a semicircle of pointed white teeth set about their own width apart from each other. . . . And just before it became too dark to see, it came again, hurtling back down the river, its teeth chattering, the air “shss-shssing” as it was cleft by the great, black, dracula-like wings. . . . the brute made straight for George. He ducked.

Those are the words of the well-known biologist-explorer Ivan T. Sanderson (1911-1973). Within minutes, a large flying creature had dived straight at a human twice; I would call that behavior “attacking.”

I have read other reports of early-to-mid twentieth-century attacks, in Africa, from pterosaur-like flying creatures; but in late-2004 I did more than read: I led a small expedition on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, where I interviewed an old villager who encountered a strange flying creature. Micheal told me that he had witnessed, in 1949, the glowing ropen one night, when it dug up and carried away a human body that had just been buried in a grave in Gomlongon Village. I would not call that behavior “attacking,” for the man was already dead, but it was extremely rude to the family and friends of the deceased. If I were a resident of Umboi Island, I would not allow my children to wander too far, alone at night. And if I were a resident of northern British Columbia, I would avoid a long walk at night.