Comments on: “Flying Dinosaurs”

By: CryptoInformant

CryptoInformant — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 19:15:17 +0000

That’s right, because many species leave no imprint on the fossil record because fossilization is basically “luck of the draw.” This leads to the existance of “ghost lineages” like the coelacanth, making the anti-living dino argument of “They went extinct” fairly lame, because, unless we can monitor every square inch of the earth at the same time 24/7, we can’t prove they aren’t still alive.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 03:15:58 +0000

Eyewitness descriptions have no relationship to “what” a cryptid might really be. In other words, the fantastic notion that one says they see a pterosaur does not mean that a person has actually viewed a pterosaur.

People see pterodactyls as the source of leathery-winged weirdie encounters because they are conditioned to expect “flying dinos” from the movies.

Furthermore, eyewitness credibility with measures of things seen in the sky is lacking. The wingspan of the flying fox (Pteropus sp.) is 6.5 feet, but might appear to be twice or more that wide by a scared eyewitness.

Also, of course, all that exists in nature has not as yet been found in the fossil record.

By: Ken Gerhard

Ken Gerhard — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 01:02:30 +0000

That is indeed a compelling theory. However, in going over eyewitness descriptions of Big Bird, the words “pterosaur or pterodactyl” come up quite frequently, at least a dozen times. The word “bat” is rarely used by witnesses, unless they are attempting to describe the wings. Also, there are no bats in the fossil record that anywhere appoach the fifteen to twenty-foot wingspan that is usually reported.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:47:56 +0000

The most compelling theory for the “Big Bird” sightings of Texas was that they were of a large bat, perhaps even a cryptid bat.

By: Ken Gerhard

Ken Gerhard — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 22:09:42 +0000

I am currently wrapping up a book about the Big Bird of Texas, which was described by many as being a “flying dinosaur”. In it, I’ve included many new and unpublished accounts of living pterosaurs. If anyone has heard of a modern sighting or has anything else to share in this vein, I would be very interested to hear about it.

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 02:07:20 +0000

Yep, that’s why “flying dinosaurs” is a phrase placed in quotation marks.

And it is a double-barreled pun, too, with all the talk of Thunderbirds (as opposed to quails) here.

Enjoy.

By: CryptoInformant

CryptoInformant — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 02:01:59 +0000

The only flying dinosaurs are BIRDS! “Pterodactyls”, more properly known as pterosaurs, are NOT DINOSAURS!

Sheesh