Comments on: Final Whitcomb Statement

By: cloudyboy87

cloudyboy87 — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 04:25:59 +0000

I realize that this is an old post but the subject is very dear to heart since I am both very interested in living dinosaurs, sea reptiles and flying reptiles and I have recently exchanged emails with Mr. Whitcomb. I am a Creationist and I do assert that a living dinosaur, Pterosaur or Plesiosaur would support Creationism and deal a blow to Evolutionary claims. A “living fossil” is something that cannot be explained by Evolutionary science and is in reality, a huge embarrassment to Evolutionists. If they were wrong about say, the Ceolocanth then why not anything else? Like a Pterosaur? Both Creationism and Evolutionism cannot be right, that is why there is debate and conflict. Mr. Whitcomb’s beliefs being tied to his search for living Pterosaurs are well founded by much evidence and I can see exactly why he included the subject in the book. I cannot wait until a living Pterosaur, dinosaur or Plesiosaur is found. It will do much in the way of both Cryptozoology and Creationism.

Thank you and God bless

By: cryptidsrus

cryptidsrus — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 20:31:20 +0000

aRNIe2001:

I should have said “within mine and most people’s here lifetimes…”

That’s what I meant. I’m in great health, actually.

My bad cholesterol is up somewhat, but basically ok…

Just wanted to “clarify.”

By: aRNIe001

aRNIe001 — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 05:01:59 +0000

-cryptidrus-
“I doubt they will be “discovered” within MY lifetime, but one can only hope. ”
Just curious but MY lifetime? you doubt AND hope…are you gona kick the bucket soon? it should be doubt AND Wishful…..
..curious….

By: korollocke

korollocke — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 23:58:25 +0000

I always noticed nothing is real until its observed. I think there could be flying reptiles that look prehistoric out there some where in an isolated area, why not. A world without mystery and wonder would dull.

By: cryptidsrus

cryptidsrus — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:22:17 +0000

Thanks again for the “clarification”, Mr. Whitcomb.

Although I don’t necessarily agree with most of your beliefs, I do believe Pterosaurs exist.

I doubt they will be “discovered” within MY lifetime, but one can only hope.

And I do appreciate you being able to come forward and post here in response to doubts about what you believe.

“Say not the struggle naught availeth..”

By: DWA

DWA — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 20:13:04 +0000

Without getting into creationist/evolutionist (God created the universe, and evolution of organisms is one of the mechanisms, how’s that sound?), I can’t disagree with anything above that follows this:

“Beware of trying to eliminate eyewitness-observation from any part of the meaning of the word “evidence.” Without a human experiencing something, not only is cryptozoology eliminated, but science is eliminated as well.”

And that’s not my opinion. Whitcomb is right, period. LIFE is elimiated without experience, and without our trusting that past trends in our experience will continue, never mind science.

Everything in science – as in life – starts, and ends, with sensory experience. It’s just the verification mechanisms that differ.

By: JMonkey

JMonkey — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:54:06 +0000

I love the way he uses the words “Unsupported claims”. I did not say that the pterosaur did not exist. I would not say that it is a cryptid, since it is known and documented in history. While biology may lay some claim upon the pterosaur, history and paleontolgy have a much stronger case. I believe that until a live pterosaur is killed, caught, or filmed and witnessed by many it will remain ,much like Bigfoot, Chupacabra, Werewolves, the Jersey Demon, and other cryptids even though it is not a cryptid itself.

I am very happy to see that my comments on ways to prove creationism in a simpler way touched a nerve. Sarcasm and denial are very sincere forms of flattery. I am sure that you have all the titles, and degrees that anyone in your field does, and I am sure that you are a very intelligent man, but to step down to sarcasm, and insinuations that others “can’t understand your motives” well that is just a tad bit Narcissistic.

You mentioned that faith was a key to science, and you are indeed correct in that assumption. One must have faith in order to succeed in any field, but I believe that one should assume that although faith is used for research it should not be used for proof. My son believes blindly in the Santa, but that does not make him exists in this part of history. In closing I suppose what I am saying is that proof is the key to successful research. Repeatable results is what you need on a large scal basis. It like Loren says, “if he produces a pterosaur, we’ll cover that.”

By: PhotoExpert

PhotoExpert — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 10:43:56 +0000

J.D. Whitcomb–You’re very welcome, sir! I just hope that others understood the point I was trying to make, as clearly as you and I understand that point.

I hope you continue to follow up with your research. Some may call it luck and others may call it a blessing, but either way, wouldn’t it be great for both the evolutionist camp and the creationist camp, if you found a living pterosaur?

And that was exactly the point I was trying to make with my original post. No one would care about the discover or his personal belief system. The only thing one would be concerned with, is that a cryptid creature was rediscovered. And isn’t that the essence of what cryptozoology is all about?

Keep up the research. You might be blessed with a discovery one day that both camps can rejoice in!