And with that. Any stormchasers wanna weigh in here? There may be many more of them than way back of beyond birders. And don’t most of them shoot video?

mnynames: Not saying there aren’t commonalities out there. I couldn’t in fact say it authoritatively; I focus much more attention on the sas than on BBs.

It just seems a tougher order for these guys to go unobserved than for the sas, generally speaking. One would also think that with BBs there would be many multiple-witness sightings; those tend to get reported, I’d think, more than single-witness encounters do.

It has been suggested, and seems plausible to me, that if these giant birds exist in small populations, they alone exploit a commensurately gigantic natural system; the stormfronts that are formed as the prevailing winds, jet streams, hadley cells and resident superheated air of the american plains and gulf waters which combine to create world class systems of hurtling turbulent hurling air masses…perfect for them. We can also imagine the bird, with low population, slow reproduction rate, and un-excelled long-distance eyesight, thanks to natural selection, capable of perceiving things at a distance which gives it a distinct advantage over even the most observant ornithologist…and, though I know a number of avid birders, working on their “life list”s, both in the front country and the back country, I don’t know a single one who finds that training their field scopes onto the rising thermals that accompany tornadoes and cyclones. Lighting, hail, frog-stranglin’ rain, wind and noise…of course, what kind of birds would be out there anyhow?

Well…good question.

I agree, it’s odd that no birdwatcher has ever come forward with a Thunderbird sighting (Although a careful search through the records might be able to find one), but how many birders are there that regularly visit this animals purported range, and do so during their perceived migrations? Probably not enough to serve as a “blanket radar” as someone else has said. While I’d still put less money down on Big Birds as a certainty than say, Sasquatch, there just seems to be far too many reports for there not to be some legitimacy to it. And how can you write off a bird big enough to lift a kid off the ground as a run-of-the-mill eagle?

The scoftics seem to think that the bulk of us are looking to fit everything into our cryptid casts, and while you are going to have some that go down that road, I do not think that applies to most who come to this site to discuss this stuff.

I think that’s been said here, but rarely that concisely or that well.

I - like the vast majority of people - will always make every effort to pigieonhole everything I see into the category “things I know exist.” Right now, no cryptid falls into that category. If I see a sasquatch, and tell you I am certain of it, then what I describe to you will damn well be, incontrovertibly, a bipedal ape. And not a guy in a suit, which, remember, DOES fit in the above category.

A couple of years ago, I saw a big bird that I was unable to identify. Eaglehawkvulture type bird, and not far above me, but no signs of any species I knew. It is only reading springeeledjack’s post that I remember that sighting, and of course that I NEVER considered seriously the possibility that it was not a known bird species. (If I had to guess, turkey vulture. Its wings were partially folded in some aerodynamic maneuver or another for the brief period it was in sight, rendering the TV’s distinctive silhouette invisible.) I still don’t know what it was. But I know what it probably was.

In fact, what makes me consider the sasquatch evidence so compelling, and not the evidence for Big Birds, is precisely this: if BBs were out there, many people would -as calash points out - have to be seeing them. That so many, most of whom were disbelievers or firm doubters before they saw one, defy the apparent public scorn for the sasquatch to render detailed encounter reports - leaving no doubt at all what they saw if they are telling the truth - tells me they are seeing something science needs to explain.

That one doesn’t see the same for BBs says, to me, no.

Not saying, Bob K and Multiple, that we can’t get there period. Humans have fouled up more than sufficiently to leave doubts open; smug I ain’t. But personally I wouldn’t put a big pile of chips on that number right now.

Accounts of sightings do not fall into these categories (unless you want to quibble about historical, legends and what not). That is what we have here. There is a difference and my point in bringing this up. Eye witness accounts of sightings of cryptids are not myth and not fictitious stories (counting out the hoaxers and what not), but accounts logged in by witnesses.

It’s important because Radford is trying to relegate the eye witness accounts to no more than story telling or myths recounted of long past.

Now, as for the big birds, I have my troubles with this one as well (though I would love nothing better like a few above), mostly because of the lack of ability to gauge how big something is against the sky–no points of reference. I have seen my share of large sized birds in the sky, and while bigger than the robins, cardinals and crows I usually see (however, some of the crows around here are getting rather large–sheesh), they are not pterosaur or Thunderbird big.

I do, however agree with Bob K’s point about observation: the longer you look at something, the better chance you have of sizing things up to see if you are really seeing something odd and outside your realm of knowledge or just a big turkey vulture soaring along at a good altitude.

And that is where the scoftics ignore that simple train of thought. If you see something odd, unless you are in a hurry, distracted, etc, chances are you are going to look a little longer to see if you can pin the odd thing into a normal category. It is those “odd” cases where things do not fit, where the crypto-eyes shift around to take a better look and see if there is something really going on there.

The scoftics seem to think that the bulk of us are looking to fit everything into our cryptid casts, and while you are going to have some that go down that road, I do not think that applies to most who come to this site to discuss this stuff.