Nonprofit to be Organized for Modern-Pterosaur Research

Animal Discovery logo

Animal Discovery is in the early stage of preparation to be a nonprofit in Utah, U.S.A., as of April 18, 2021, when the initial board of directors was selected. It may become the first nonprofit anywhere that specializes in research into reports of apparent non-extinct pterosaurs.

hillside with a sketch of a ropen pterodactyl flying

One of its first objectives will likely be to help fund an expedition team in Papua New Guinea, a group of natives led by Rex Yapi.

The initial board members will be:

  • Jonathan Whitcomb (founder)
  • Peter Beach (biologist and explorer)
  • Shari Hunsaker (organization and communication specialist)

The geographic scope of this new nonprofit will be international, with the first non-English languages being French, Spanish, German, Hungarian, Polish, and Japanese.

An unusual makeup of the organization will be its board of representatives, which will be made up of the following types of volunteers:

  1. One area (using English)
  2. One language*, worldwide (*not English)
  3. One language* in one area (*not English)

###

.

Non-Ropen pterosaur videotaped by Peter Beach

Not only did they see an apparent living pterosaur in daylight, but the biologist Peter Beach *recorded video footage of the flying creature, although the video quality is poor.

.

Pterodactyls in Newspapers

In this Livestream Youtube video, Jonathan Whitcomb presents excerpts from several American newspaper articles about sightings of modern pterosaurs: Press Telegram in Long Beach, California; Los Angeles Herald (Calif); and the Wenatchee World (north-central Washington state).

This video, on the Youtube channel Protect Animal Life, also features a bit on an article in one of the largest newspapers in the United States: the Houston Chronicle. It relates to a strange interpretation of the mysterious Marfa Lights of western Texas.

.

Two kinds of pterodactyls in Papua New Guinea

A few days ago, I got an online message from a lady who is originally from New Zealand but has lived part of her life in Papua New Guinea. Her husband was raised in the Southern Highlands Province, without contact with Westerners for some time, and knows about the two kinds of modern pterosaurs. Here is part of the wife’s account of what her husband knows about these flying creatures . . .

.

The nonfiction book The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur

Scientists use the word ‘pterosaur’ for a group of flying creatures that they know about because of fossils. Most people . . . use another word: ‘pterodactyl.’ That is not scientific, but most people are not scientists.

.

Celebrity saw a modern pterodactyl

In a podcast with Andrew  Schulz, late in August of 2020, Charlamagne Tha God said the following (quoting part of what he said) “I saw a pterodactyl”.

.

Non-Ropen Pterosaur Sighting in Papua New Guinea

Two Americans returned home to the Portland area of Oregon on Saturday, April 18, 2015, after having searched for a living pterosaur on New Britain Island  in Papua New Guinea for several weeks. Not only did they see an apparent living pterosaur in daylight, but the biologist Peter Beach *recorded video footage of the flying creature, although the video quality is poor. This was the eleventh pterosaur expedition in which Americans were heavily involved in Papua New Guinea over the past twenty-two years, and it was the first such expedition in which an American visitor witnessed an apparent modern pterosaur in daylight. Many Westerners would call this kind of flying creature a “pterodactyl” or a “dinosaur bird”.

* (In the first report, right after they returned to the USA, it was incorrectly assumed that no photo or video was obtained; it was soon learned that video was obtained but of very poor quality.)

Pterdanodon-like pterosaur

Pteranodon-like Pterodactyloid pterosaur

Not a Ropen but a Possible Pterodactyloid

At the time of the sighting, one or more natives caught the attention of the two Americans as the large creature flew overhead. One of the Americans had forgotten where he had put his camera, and the other tried to videotape the apparent Pterodactyloid pterosaur but in the excitement missed pointing the camera in precisely the right direction, which was to some extent towards the sun. (Neither American is a professional wildlife photographer.) Yet both men did see the form and features of the flying creature, and both of them got the impression that is was a pterosaur, and a limited amount of video footage was recorded of the flying creature.

It appeared to be short-tailed, however, and so it was unlike the long-tailed ropen that appears to be more common in Papua New Guinea. Is this Pterodactyloid-type also bioluminescent? We don’t yet know, for the new sighting, during this expedition in March and April of 2015, was in daylight.

Although the sighting was hardly a scientific proof of the existence of modern pterosaurs, we can learn from the experience. Let’s begin by going over who these men are: Peter Beach and Milt Marcy.

Two pterosaur searchers in Washington state

Milt Marcy (left) and Peter Beach, by the Yakima River, state of Washington

Dinosaur Search in Africa

According to Wikipedia:

In January 2006, the Milt Marcy Expedition traveled to the Dja river in Cameroon, near the Congolese border. It consisted of Milt Marcy, Peter Beach, Rob Mullin and Pierre Sima. They spoke to witnesses that claimed to have observed a Mokèlé-mbèmbé only two days before, but they did not discover the animal themselves. However, they did return with what they believe to be a plaster cast of a Mokèlé-mbèmbé footprint.

That was one of many expeditions in central Africa, over many years, by various Western explorers, in search of a non-extinct Sauropod dinosaur. A few of those American dinosaur “hunters” have also searched for living pterosaurs, including David Woetzel.

I specialize in modern pterosaurs, not modern dinosaurs, but I did interview Marcy and Beach in August of 2014, on the banks of the Yakima River in Washington state.

Bioluminescent Pterosaurs in Northwestern USA

Glowing nocturnal flying creatures in Washington state may appear irrelevant to sightings of apparent pterosaurs in Papua New Guinea, but Milt Marcy and Peter Beach have searched for them in both locations. We can learn at least one thing from that.

I found these two men quite credible, as I interviewed them in August of 2014, by the river where they had witnessed strange flying lights at night. They admitted that they were unable to see anything like a pterosaur in daylight, and almost all of their night sightings were only of the flying lights.

Some weeks after our interview, Marcy and Beach witnessed similar flying lights but over a different river in that northwestern area of the USA. Again they saw no form or features of a pterosaur. That brings up an important point.

Honesty in Searching for Living Dinosaurs and Pterosaurs

Is it possible that Milt Marcy and Peter Beach were dishonest when they returned from their African expedition in 2006, when they admitted that they had seen nothing like any dinosaur? How easy for a liar to make up a story, if a dishonest man were to go to some remote area of the planet where his lie could hide in the dark! How unbelievable that two men would try to deceive the world into believing in modern dinosaurs, when those two would spend their own money on an expedition and afterwards admit that they had seen nothing like a dinosaur!

Why did those two men tell me nothing about any sighting of an apparent pterosaur that they had seen in daylight at a river in the northwestern USA? They had no such sighting and were honest.

So why would Mr. Marcy tell me about an apparent pterosaur he had observed early in 2015 in Papua New Guinea, admitting that he was not 100% sure it was a pterosaur? He was still being honest.

And why would Mr. Beach hesitate when I asked him how sure he was that he had observed a pterosaur with Mr. Marcy in Papua New Guinea? He was trying to think of something else that it could have been. He was thinking of different birds and bats that may have presented the appearance of what he had seen that day with his friend Milt. He was being honest.

Peter Beach was once a biology professor at a small college. He is well aware that a human with a bias can observe something and misidentify it because of that bias. I give him credit for being careful about assuming that he and Milt must have seen a pterosaur. Both of these men have shown us honesty in their investigations.

So was it a Pterosaur?

I have spoken with both of them by phone this past week. I feel that the three of us agree that it is more than 50% likely that it was a living pterosaur they had observed in Papua New Guinea. So where does that leave us?

At the end of 2012, I compiled data from 128 of the more-credible sighting reports that I had received over many years. Each one of those 128 appeared to me to have been more than 50% likely to have been from an encounter with a living pterosaur. What does that mean? To those who understand probability, it means that if my assessment of each of those 128 reports was anywhere near the mark, it is practically impossible for all of those reports to have come from non-pterosaurs: Not all pterosaurs are extinct.

Who am I do declare myself objective enough to make such a proclamation? I have spent the past eleven years researching and searching for living pterosaurs, although most of the searching was for truth within eyewitness reports rather than for the creatures themselves. I appear to have written more on this subject than all other cryptozoologists in the world combined, in nonfiction books and web pages and blog posts, which does not in itself prove the validity of my ideas, proving only that I am serious. In 2004, I returned from an expedition in Papua New Guinea, admitting that I had seen nothing like a pterosaur. In 2013, I finished examining 14,333 game-camera photos of a location where such a flying creature had been reported, and I admitted seeing nothing like a pterosaur. By early 2015, I had received eyewitness reports from five continents of this planet, not rumors or second-hand reports but the words of the witnesses, from those persons themselves. As of April 24, 2015, I have never myself seen anything like a living pterosaur. In other words I am honest. To the point, honesty is the first step and the biggest step to objectiveness.

###

.

Pterosaur Sighting in Papua New Guinea Early in 2015

Peter Beach and Milt Marcy, both of the Portland area of Oregon, led an expedition in Papua New Guinea, in March and April of 2015, searching for a living pterosaur that previous American explorers had failed to see clearly. This time Americans did see, in daylight, the form and features of an apparent pterosaur.

Investigators of Reports of Living Pterosaurs

Garth Guessman, David Woetzel, Paul Nation, Jonathan Whitcomb—each of these four American men has explored in Papua New Guinea, searching for a living pterosaur.

Flying Pterosaur Creature

The problem is not in the eyewitnesses but in the indoctrination, over generations, that all species of dinosaurs and pterosaurs must have become extinct millions of years ago. That’s the problem.

Sightings of Flying Creatures

[In] July of 2010, My wife and I were sitting outside when motion from above the tree tops to our left caught my attention; it’s very hard to explain how I felt at that moment. We were looking at two extremely large birds flying together and heading north . . . I can only guess to be 15-20′ wing spans and the motion of their wings as they flew was very slow.

Can Ropens Hide in Caves?

Last month, I learned about multi-eyewitness sightings of flying lights in the northwestern United States, lights that the observers believe are bioluminescent pterosaurs, possibly ropens. Its seems these lights fly over at least two rivers in this part of the country and near one particular river the lights enter and exit nearby caves.

Bioluminescent Pterosaurs in Washington State

The flying creatures are nocturnal, not usually seen there in daylight . . . I emphasize that sightings of apparent living pterosaurs are throughout the states of Washington and Oregon . . . We were unable to get a picture but we saw many . . . flashing lights. I would have assumed that [they] were fireflies but we [don’t] have them in Washington.

.

Live Pterosaurs in America - third edition

Probably the best-selling nonfiction book on modern “pterodactyls” – Live Pterosaurs in America (third edition) by the cryptozoologist Jonathan David Whitcomb

From the Amazon page:

Reports of huge flying “pterodactyls” in American skies have floated around the internet for years; but before about 2005, details were scarce. . . .  Universal pterosaur extinction has been an assumption; some pterosaur species are still living. The author, one of those American explorers who interviewed natives in Papua New Guinea, has been interviewing American eyewitnesses since 2004.

.

Sock Puppets and Jonathan Whitcomb

Eskin Kuhn sketched Gitmo Pterosaur he saw

According to the paleontologist Donald Prothero and the biology professor P. Z. Myers, I Jonathan Whitcomb have used sock puppetry in online publications promoting the idea that modern pterosaurs are living. Each has written a post about me, with each post proclaiming that I have admitted using sock puppets. Both statements in each post are false, yet some of my proper use of two pseudonyms may resemble improper usage, so this needs to be explained in detail.

Norman Huntington and Nathaniel Coleman

Soon after my expedition on Umboi Island, in 2004, I found a web site highly critical of the living pterosaur investigations. In fact, the URL included the words stupid, dinosaur, and lies. In the original posting, both my first and last names were misspelled: “John Whittcomb.” Keep in mind that this was in 2005.

So what did it say about me, Jonathan Whitcomb? It said I had led creationists on an expedition in Africa and that I had been sponsored by Carl Baugh. All three statements were false; I had never led any creationists on any expedition, never set foot anywhere in Africa, never been sponsored by Carl Baugh. It would have been purely comical except for what followed on other sites.

Insinuations and direct statements about dishonesty followed. It came to the point where one skeptic suggested people should take statements by Paul Nation with a “grain of salt” because he was associated with Jonathan Whitcomb.

By about that time, I had begun writing nonfiction book about eyewitness sightings of apparent pterosaurs, especially in Papua New Guinea and in Australia. My main purpose was not in making a profit but in telling the truth to the world, the truth about details in the many sighting reports that I received from around the world.

To publicize details about the encounters with apparent pterosaurs, I needed some way to emphasize those reports without my name getting in the way. I began using two pseudonyms on a limited number of my many blogs: Nathaniel Coleman and Norman Huntington. Neither of those names were ever used as if they were happy purchasers of my books. They were used to emphasize the logic of a modern-pterosaur interpretation of many sighting reports and critical details in those eyewitness accounts.

When using my regular name, Jonathan Whitcomb, I sometimes admit personal weaknesses, most notably in the problems I faced in my expedition in 2004, problems sometimes caused by my lack of planning or inexperience in exploring on a tropical island. When using one of the two pen names, I sometimes mentioned a weakness or potential bias in the reasoning or writings of “Jonathan Whitcomb.” That’s not deceptive but honest, for I am human like everybody else. I did not use any pseudonym or sock puppet to heap empty praise on “Jonathan Whitcomb,” for that would have been dishonest.

What are sock puppets?

According to Wikipedia:

A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception. . . . [It] originally referred to a false identity assumed by a member of an Internet community who spoke to, or about, themselves while pretending to be another person. The term now includes other misleading uses of online identities, such as those created to praise, defend or support a person or organization, or to circumvent a suspension or ban from a website. A significant difference between the use of a pseudonym and the creation of a sockpuppet is that the sockpuppet poses as an independent third-party unaffiliated with the puppeteer. Many online communities attempt to block sockpuppets.

Dr. Prothero’s post went much further than suggesting that I might have been guilty of using sock puppets. He said, “it’s a classic case of a typically modern internet phenomenon, sock puppetry.” I suggest my usage of those two names was more like the opposite. Consider the following ways of improper online writing, sock puppetry:

  1. Endorsing a self-written book as if from a common reader
  2. Praising oneself
  3. Sneaking around a suspension or ban

I suggest a “classic case” of sock puppetry would include at least two of the above, if not all three, when the person involved was an author. Yet none of the above three applies to my use of the names Nathaniel Coleman and Norman Huntington. Where does Dr. Prothero get the his definition of “a classic case?”

Honesty or deception in the first expedition of 2004

The point of this controversy about modern living pterosaurs is in honesty or dishonesty. In particular, have I, Jonathan Whitcomb, been deceptive or have I tried to bring the truth out into the open? Consider my expedition on Umboi Island in 2004.

Nobody disputes the fact I was on that tropical island, wanting to find evidence that a species of pterosaur was still living. Yet I returned home to the USA admitting that I had seen nothing that could be interpreted as a living pterosaur. The nocturnal ropen had kept out of my sight. A liar would have reported a sighting of a glowing pterosaur, making it appear like his expedition had been a success. I was honest and told the truth.

For some reason, Dr. Prothero says nothing about the fact that I had been on Umboi Island, looking for the ropen. Why did he say nothing about that? Is it because any mention of that expedition could have defeated his purpose in how he wanted to portray me? Since I was obviously being honest about my 2004 expedition, why not consider the possibility that I have been honest in my online publications since then?

Conclusions on sock puppets and pseudonyms

Did I make a mistake in using those two pen names. From the narrow point of view of the moment, it certainly looks like I should never have used any name except Jonathan Whitcomb, yet time will tell the whole story. I am content to see how history will play out.

The critical point, however seems to have been entirely overlooked by Donald Prothero: Eyewitness-testimony details prove the case for modern living pterosaurs, and his post “Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets” does not even mention the word eyewitness. Who really has something to hide, Dr. Prothero?

.

###

.

Dr. Prothero and modern pterosaurs

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.

Hoax Criticism and Pterosaur Wingspans

Estimated pterosaur wingspans, analyzed in recent statistics of eyewitness reports, show what would be expected of a variety of pterosaur species of different sizes, observed under various conditions by eyewitnesses having various abilities in estimating sizes. In other words, the sighting reports support the honesty of eyewitnesses, in general.

.

4th edition of Whitcomb's "Searching for Ropens and Finding God"

Nonfiction, 360 pages, worldwide sightings of modern pterosaurs

.

Cover of the third edition of "Live Pterosaurs in America" by Whitcomb

Pure cryptozoology, 154 pages, live pterosaurs in the USA

.

image_pdfimage_print