Regarding Scott Norman’s own words (which sadly are now available only from his records or from those who spoke with him; he is missed), about what he saw, in addition to John Kirk’s record we have the following:

http://www.strangeark.com/bfr/articles/scott-norman-sightings.html

Thank you, Loren, for letting us know about this site.

When I read this, last week, I was shocked to learn that the sighting was not in the Southwest Pacific: It was in California. My own state! I then spoke by phone with one of the leaders of this investigation and it was confirmed. No wonder they have kept it so secret: How hard it will be for the landowner to keep people away when it becomes public knowledge that large Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur live here!

But all of this deserves a little more introduction. Carl Baugh was the first American ropen searcher in 1994. Health concerns prevented him from continuing travel to the remote islands of Papua New Guinea, so his expeditions stopped before the turn of the century.

One mistake he seems to have made was in referring to an old European newspaper account of a pterodactyl that was said to have been discovered in a tunnel. That seems to have been a hoax. This discrediting of the newspaper account has become well publicized by critics; what is not as well publicized by critics have been the many late 20th Century and early 21st Century expeditions by Paul Nation, myself, Garth Guessman, David Woetzel, and Matthew Speights. With no exception of which I am aware, none of these expeditions resulted in any American observing anything that
resembled a pterosaur. We were following eyewitness reports of creatures described like pterosaurs. Can a hoax theory explain anything about our investigations in Papua New Guinea? I don’t see how. If any one of us had any desire to perpetrate a hoax, we would have lied about seeing a living pterosaur. Instead, we came back to the States with eyewitness reports: no hoaxes.

Within weeks of the Destination Truth (ropen episode) broadcast in the U.S., several living-pterosaur investigators began having many distant sightings in a new location. Sometimes the flying creatures were close enough to see a form. Not one of my associates told me anything until I accidentally found some of their correspondance on a web page that they did not realize had been scanned by web spiders. They then confirmed that the sightings were hot. Very hot! One description of the flying lights was like a “Fourth of July” show. That should have clued me into the location: Nobody in the SouthWest Pacific would have so described it.

What I now see as related is this: Within the past few months, I have also received reports of flying lights in other areas of the U.S., including the State of Washington (western). Some of these are not really new; I have just newly realized the relevance.

I met Scott Norman after my expedition to Papua New Guinea; he and Guessman and I had a good talk in my backyard. I does seem strange that he passed away of natural causes at home: He was younger than some of us who have, as he did, traveled to some rather dangerous places (he more than me). His contributions will be remembered and I plan to include something of them in a future edition of my book (or another book).

I find it interesting: You mentioned that my book argues for young
Earth creationism; I have also been criticized by YEC for not
supporting a 6000-year-old earth. I don’t recall writing anything
directly about earth-age except in the appendix (pages 225-227)
where extreme YEC (6000-year-old earth) is questioned, not advocated.

What pages are you referring to regarding a young earth? Perhaps you
are confusing the book’s criticism of universal common ancestry. Is
that it? The General Theory of Evolution is related to belief in a
very ancient earth, it’s true: closey related (but not identical).

There is one sentence in the appendix: “I believe that the earth is
much younger than the billions of years . . .” If that is what you
refer to, yes, that sentence does contradict the idea of billions
of years of the earth’s existence.

The book is mainly related to the title: “Searching for Ropens.”
The arguments against standard models of macro-evolution (GTE) run
throughout the book, but not everyone is offended at that approach.

Thank you, John Kirk, for adding what you know about Scott’s sighting. Scott never contacted me, but I learned a bit from one of his associates.

CamperGuy: Over 90% of the living-pterosaur expeditions (1994 through 2007) have been by Creationists. The greatest sightings have been in mid-2007, but none of the team members have told me many details (not even what country it is). I am now encouraging the 2007-team members to open up and allow all investigators to know about these recent successes. Philosophy and religion can be discussed after detailed photos and videos have proven that these creatures are real.

I became involved in the living-pterosaur investigations in 2003 (producing a short documentary that is now obsolete), and explored Umboi Island in late 2004, a few weeks before the Woetzel-Guessman expedition. The second edition of my book, “Searching for Ropens, Living Pterosuars in Papua New Guinea,” was published last year, just before the most spectacular sightings took place.

We can put the “hoax” question to rest regarding veteran ropen hunters like Paul Nation, Garth Guessman, and David Woetzel: Why would any of us spend so many thousands of dollars (personal funds, mostly) and travel to Papua New Guinea, with the object of proving pterosaur still live, and then admit that we never saw anything that resembled a pterosaur (before 2007)?

Religion, evolution, Creation, and living pterosaurs–how they relate is a deep subject, one that I’ve tried to introduce in my book. Believe me, there’s no room for it here, no room to do it justice.

One point of interest is this: If the creature Scott Norman saw really did not have a long tail, it was not really a ropen: just a Pterodactyloid(!)

Thanks for that update.

I’ve always had trouble with the whole pterosaur-cryptid business. To the usual surviving-reptile problem (no fossils for 60MY, after a rich fossil record throughout the Mesozioc), one must add the seeming improbability of large winged forms surviving the ascent of competitors (raptors) who are present on every continent and every sizable island or archipelago, and who are not only smarter but much better flyers.

At the same time, I can’t discount an eyewitness report of the quality described here.

So I end up thinking “Let’s see what happens next,” which is a scientifically valid viewpoint but not an entirely satisfying one. We all want our answers right away, but Nature doesn’t care about what we want.

Good luck to the hunters.

It was nice to read your article. I had watched John give a slide presentation in the Royal BC Museum about Ogopogo in Lake Okanagan many many years ago. The theme was to analyze some pictures that were proven to be of a beaver, after an 1 million dollar bounty had been announced for clear evidence for the creature.

How incredibly wonderful if a living pterosaur can be proven to exist!