Elimination of Hoax-Explanation (U.S. sightings)
Future
editions of SFR, however, will be
unchanged in supporting literal Biblical
interpretations of the Divine origin of life
and the Flood
of Noah. That book will
always be spiritual-religious-inspirational,
while the new book will promote the concept
of living pterosaurs,
with only limited
references to the spiritual purposes of the
majority of living-pterosaur investigators.
****************************
Elimination
of a Hoax-Explanation for Reports
of Apparent Living Pterosaurs in the United States
While writing my new book (scheduled for publication
around
early June, 2009), I analyzed data collected
from the many interviews of U.S. eyewitnesses. Each
of the reports of apparent living
pterosaurs (for sightings
in the United States) is individually unlikely to be a hoax.
But my personal opinions on the credibility
of eyewit-
nesses may be questioned by those who doubt my
objectivity. Nevertheless, we now have the combined
data from many reports,
and collective data can be
analyzed objectively.
And I did find collective evidence against a hoax-
explanation; in fact, the
idea that hoaxes (either
complex-conspiracy or random-individual) played any
significant part in the eyewitness reports--that has
now been disproven by this data.
Of the 27 reports, 12 had no estimate for wingspan;
this is consistent with genuine sightings,
but not for
hoaxes. But more significant were the 15 estimates
(from 4-27 feet): The preponderance of these wingspan-
estimates vastly
differed from what would come from
hoaxes. But it's consistent with the hypothesis that
a number of species of pterosaurs, rare and
generally
nocturnal, live, at least for part of the year, in the
United States.
Since this data (15 estimates) cannot easily be
used
by a hoaxer to discredit these investigations, I am
releasing details now. More information will be in the
new book.
If hoaxes
played an important part in gathering data from
eyewitnesses (or supposed eyewitnesses), two areas
would be predicted to dominate the
wingspan estimates:
less than six feet (in keeping with the Rhamphorhynchoid
fossils) or greater than fifteen feet (in keeping with
the
reports of giant ropens). But eyewitness estimates show
a clear dominance in the range of 8-13 feet (40% of the
estimates), concentrating
at 9 feet.
No combination of hoaxes can reasonably be imagined
that would cause a preponderance of wingspan estimates
at 8-13 feet.
Since the great majority of reports were of
long-tailed pterosaur-like creatures (82% of those who
noticed the presence of absence of
a tail reported a long
tail), it obviously suggests Rhamphorhynchoids. But
during the past few years when I've been interviewing
American
eyewitnesses, there have been only two commonly-
held ideas about Rhamphorhynchoids: standard-model ideas
from fossils records (wingspans
mostly less than 7 ft.)
and web pages about giant ropens in Papua New Guinea
(wingspans usually reported to be over 20 ft.).
This
means that no hoaxes had any significant bearing on
the overall results of the data. Where does this lead?
Since many of the reports
involve large featherless flying
creatures, the obvious conclusion is that many eyewitnesses
firmly believe that they have seen such
creatures. What
is left for investigators to conclude? If insanity and
misidentification can be eliminated as likely explanations,
then
what else could they have seen but living pterosaurs?
This does not prove that none of the reports is a hoax;
it proves that
the overall data (many reports) were not
significantly influenced by any hoax or number of hoaxes.
My own examinations of each
report, individually, verifies
the credibility of the eyewitnesses, to varying degrees. I
do not often divulge details about how I judge
individual
credibility, however, for a future hoaxer might someday
obtain that knowledge and use it to create a hoax.
But I will
reveal one thing about individual credibility.
When I make a long-distance phone call to another state,
it verifies the person is
in that state. I can then make a
superficial judgment on the person's voice, the manner
of speaking. And by answering questions over
the phone,
a hoaxer would be confronted by questions without having
time to prepare a believable lie. Answering questions on
the phone
is no problem for an honest eyewitness; but for
a hoaxer it would be an uncomfortable encounter.
In addition, my own experience,
over several years, leads
me to believe that a person who would contrive any story
(about a live pterosaur) would try the hoax on the
general
public rather than on cryptozoologists who specialize in
reports of living pterosaurs. Bigfoot hoaxers may have been
common at
various times, but pterosaur hoaxers (other
than those putting up unbelievable 3-D animation videos on
Youtube) are uncommon, at least
through the end of 2008.
****************************
New Web Sites (including non-English pages)
German language:
Augenzeuge
Gideon Koro
"Das buch 'Searching for Ropens' erzählt über einen Mann,
Gideon Koro, der einen ropen sah."
Hungarian
language:
****************************
See
the archive of a previous
newsletter (012)
(about "Lines of Influence," Near-collision over
Indonesia, and Georgia sightings)
****************************
Archives
Contents of the first eight issues of this newsletter
****************************
Thank you for your interest in living pterosaurs.
Please
forward this email to anyone who might be interested.
And please send me email addresses of those who might
be interested in living-pterosaur
reports. Thank you.
I need email addresses of others who might like to
receive these newsletters.
Jonathan Whitcomb
###