Are All Pterosaurs Extinct?

 

Is it really meaningless to the credibility of standard models whether or not all species of pterosaurs are extinct? This is a reply to Glen Kuban’s web page.

Introduction

 

Glen Kuban has created a web page devoted to discrediting the idea that pterosaurs have lived in human times. An in-depth response is found in the appendix of the book Searching for Ropens,  by Jonathan Whitcomb (pub-lished by Wingspan Press, second edition in 2007). In brief, Kuban draws attention to the weakest reasons  for believing  in modern pterosaurs, the weak reports; he also points out  flaws or possible flaws  in some of the words and reasoning of proponents. Two critical points that he ignores are these: the strongest  eyewitness  testimonies and the philosophical  foundations  of the conflict

(why be  open-minded  or close-minded

about the possibility of modern pterosaurs). What critical points!

 

According to Glen Kuban: “While finding a living species of pterosaur would be a monu-mental discovery, it would do nothing to refute mainstream geology.” (web page, early 2007)

 

Reply: “Do nothing” and “refute” are strong expressions, in this case offering a clue about the nature  of what  Mr. Kuban  means by “mainstream geology,” or the real nature of what he thus labels. True scientific progress normally involves refinements in theory; it sometimes even involves the rejection of a theory that turns out poorly when compared with another theory.

 

How might Kuban react to the discoveries of three species of living pterosaurs plus two species of living dinosaurs? Would he modify “do nothing to refute mainstream geology?” What about fifteen species of living pterosaurs and dinosaurs? Whether or not he would modify his  thinking or  the phrasing  of his words would depend on how dogmatically he is holding onto a philosophy that is woven into “mainstream geology.”

 

Both the General Theory of Evolution and standard-model (“mainstream”) geology are based upon the philosophy of Naturalism, which is not to be confused with “natural science.” Naturalism includes the assumption that origins, in the distant past, had nothing to do with any miraculous intervention from any god; “natural science,” on the other hand, requires no opinion on early origins.

 

“Do nothing to refute” seems to be a well-chosen phrase to protect a philosophy, for scientific hypotheses and theories are not legitimized by this kind of phrase; this is inappropriate in science.

Why Believe in Extinction?

 

Since Darwin wrote about his conjectures on the origin of life, dinosaur and pterosaur fossils have been  offered as  evidence for his philo-sophy of universal common ancestry. After all, a microorganism cannot change into a human (over billions of years) without leaving count-less organisms in the distant past; it would be unbelievable.  Dinosaurs  and  pterosaurs appeared to be just what was needed; the fossils were gladly assumed to all be from extinct creatures long gone.

 

According to Searching for Ropens, how-ever, “Since no researcher in Europe [when fossils were first being discovered] had any knowledge of living creatures similar to the fossils, it was  assumed that  they  were  all extinct. The key word is ‘assumed.’. . if only 1% of the population of Western Europe, in the late 18th Century, had experience with living pterosaurs,  the universal-pterosaur-extinction notion would never have gotten started.” (second edition, page 237)

 

Extinction Propaganda

 

Nothing on Mr. Kuban’s web page (as of early June, 2007) mentions any evidence for the extinction of any species of pterosaur. According to the second edition of the book Searching for Ropens (page 234), this web page “seems devoid of evidence for ptero-saur extinction; does he expect us to take his word for it?”

 

Without any scientific evidence to support his case of universal pterosaur extinction, we are left with only one explanation: Mr. Kuban is relying on  generations of  declarations of  extinction. But critics of those declarations suggest  that  these  solemn  obituary-like proclamations are virtual propaganda, if not sometimes actually dogmatic propaganda. The declarations have been indoctrinating millions into assuming that all pterosaurs and dinosaurs became extinct millions of years ago.

 

Does  Mr. Kuban  ignore  the  strongest evidences for living pterosaurs? Judge for yourself. (He is free to modify his web page after this June 13, 2007, reply to his writings.) Consider the following web pages on eye-witness testimonies of living pterosaurs (some of these pages are more than one year old in their original versions):

http://www.objectiveness.com/reply_to_Kuban

A flight instructor, with over 13,000 hours of flight experience, saw, in 1944, a giant “pterodactyl” with a tail that was at least 10-15 feet long.  Duane Hodgkinson  lives  in  Montana.

Paul  Nation,  of Texas, videotaped  two  “indava”  lights  that  investigators believe are giant long-tailed pterosaurs on the mainland of  Papua  New  Guinea.

Gideon Koro, with six other boys (about 1994), saw a giant “ropen” flying over Lake Pung, Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea. Gideon estimated the tail length was “sefan meetuh.” (twenty-two feet)

Brian Hennessy, a psycho-logist who works at a medical university,  saw a creature looking “prehistoric” in Papua New Guinea. It had a long tail but no sign of feathers.

Although Mr. Kuban does not suggest that all sightings of apparent pterosaurs in Papua New Guinea are misidentifications of Flying Fox fruit bats, he says, “It's likely that at least some southern hemisphere sightings of ‘pterosaurs’ are explained by fruit bats.” He then admits, “Of course, no bats are known to be bioluminescent, or that have wing spans of 25 feet.” He then gives no explanation for biolumin-escence or giant size. He also seems to have no explanation for tails between ten feet and twenty-two feet. Since he does not seem to have any explanation, why does he not admit this? Is it because he is so focused on discrediting the idea of living pterosaurs that he ignores the most important evidence: valid and credible evidence that pterosaurs really do live in Papua New Guinea?

 

Examine each eyewitness testimony and then compare the similarities of the descriptions of the flying creatures. The true credibility of the living-pterosaurs idea then will become more clear. And for learning about rare nocturnal creatures in remote areas clarity in thinking about the possibility of living pterosaurs, however rare for Westerners, may be essential.