By nonfiction author Jonathan Whitcomb

The following, at least in part, will probably be included in my upcoming book One LDS Perspective on Evolution [update on March of 2021: This has been postponed]:

Real science is not what’s in a box having a label including the word “science.” It’s how you look into a box. It’s like a particular pair of reading glasses. They usually help you see better while searching through boxes with labels having words like “biology” and “astronomy,” but that doesn’t mean you can’t wear them while searching through a cryptozoology box.

A box labeled “biology” may invite you to put on your real-science reading glasses, and that label may suggest that some people might have worn those glasses while packing that box, but real science is in how we look at things.

Should we ever take off our real-science reading glasses? Of course, especially while enjoying a lovely landscape by looking out a window. We can use those glasses to clean the windowpane, as long as we remember to remove those reading glasses afterwards, to enjoy the outdoor scenery.

Cryptozoology and Science

Glen Kuban has written much in criticizing my investigation of reports of living pterosaurs. To be brief, he seems to be trying to convince people that the work my associates and I have undertaken is not scientific. David Woetzel and I, however, have written scientific papers on living pterosaurs, published in a peer-reviewed journal:

• “The Fiery Flying Serpent” – by Woetzel
• “Reports of Living Pterosaurs in the Southwest Pacific” – by Whitcomb

From two scientific papers on modern pterosaurs (Whitcomb and Woetzel)

Kuban, on the other hand, appears to have never written any scientific paper (published in a peer-reviewed journal) on living pterosaurs (LP’s), at least not as of the end of 2018. I now respond to him, since he has brought up the subject of science and cryptozoology, and since he has extensively criticized my writings on LP’s.

A few years after the publication of my scientific paper on extant pterosaurs, I did a study of data that I had accumulated from eyewitness sightings. By early in 2013, I had compiled the data from sighting reports I had received through the end of 2012. The great majority of those 128 reports were from communications between me and the eyewitnesses, in other words first-hand accounts.

Using simple math, I found three independent characteristics of the data, each of them counting seriously against any possibility that hoaxes had any major impact in those 128 reported sightings:

• How sure eyewitnesses were of lack of feathers
• Wingspan estimates
• Long tails of the flying creatures

.

From page 300 of the book Searching for Ropens and Finding God (nonfiction)

I was not imagining what might have happened 65 million years ago. I simply looked at the present, using mathematics to try to learn how plausible it might be for hoaxes to have played any major part in the 128 reports. I discovered that three characteristics proved that hoaxes could not explain the overall sightings.

The Scientist Lord Kelvin

The first British scientist to be elevated to the House of Lords, the mathematical physicist and engineer Lord Kelvin once said the following:

“When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind.”

I suggest that writers who would ridicule those supporting living-pterosaur investigations think twice. Real science can thrive when scientists use math to make discoveries, and that is what I’ve done in this little-known branch of cryptozoology.

###

.

Living pterosaurs in a scientific paper

. . . be aware that much of my scientific paper is about two expeditions on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, in 2004. I led the first expedition, with my native interpreter Luke Paina; David Woetzel and Garth Guessman were assisted, a few weeks later, by the native interpreter Jacob Kepas.

.

Glen Kuban and Living Pterosaurs

I will not take the time to counter everything negative that Kuban says about me and my writings. I do not have a thousand hours or so that would be necessary to spend on it. I’ll just say that much of it is mostly false, some of it is almost entirely false, and a smaller portion of it is 100% false.

.

Scientific Paper on Modern Pterosaurs

I also include here a few details about some of my cryptozoology books, for the scientific paper is only 13 pages long, and my books have much more information. In addition, the books are more-recently published and contain more-recent sighting reports.

.

Those who search for living pterosaurs

These explorers including, but are not limited to, Jonathan Whitcomb, Garth Guessman, David Woetzel, and Paul Nation.

.

Flying creatures like pterodactyls

Eyewitness reports of living pterosaurs worldwide

.

By the cryptozoology author Jonathan Whitcomb

Introduction

My “Reports of Living Pterosaurs in the Southwest Pacific” was published in the Winter-2009 issue of the Creation Research Society Quarterly (Volume 45, #3). I now refer to the last four pages of this scientific paper, with links to images of those pages.

But first be aware that much of my scientific paper is about two expeditions on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, in 2004. I led the first expedition, with my native interpreter Luke Paina; David Woetzel and Garth Guessman were assisted, a few weeks later, by the native interpreter Jacob Kepas.

After those two expeditions on that tropical island, I concluded that the ropen of Umboi is a living pterosaur, similar in general shape to a Sordes pilosus but much larger than fossils of that kind of Rhamphorhynchoid. In addition, the ropen has a long horn-like head crest.

Page 209 of this Journal of Science

This refers briefly to the sighting by native Jonathan Ragu on the coast of Umboi Island. Much on this page, however, is about the possibility that the ropen is a modern living Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur.

Page 210, with this Scientific Paper (11th page of the article itself)

It examines the two interpretations, one by Whitcomb and the other by Woetzel, for what kind of Rhamphorhynchoid the ropen may be: “Dimorphodon or Sordes?” This page also examines eyewitness reliability, and this subject continues into the next page.

Page 211 of this issue of Creation Research Society Quarterly

One section on this page is “Investigator Reliability.” Here’s how it begins:

A few critics have suggested that living-pterosaur investigators are dishonest . . . but to date have offered no evidence. From 1994 through early 2007, eight American creationists have traveled to PNG in eight expeditions (one to three Americans per expedition). These expeditions involved personal financial sacrifice. . . .

Page 212 (or the 13th page of this scientific paper on living pterosaurs)

Here are the surnames of persons mentioned at the end of the article:

• Goertzen
• Kuban
• Naish
• Paiva
• Silcock
• Wellnhofer
• Whitcomb
• Woetzel

###

.

Scientific Paper on Extant Pterosaurs

Almost ten years ago, my scientific paper was published in the Creation Research Society Quarterly: “Reports of Living Pterosaurs in the Southwest Pacific.” It was in the Winter issue of 2009 . . . [refers to three pages from that journal of science]

.

Bulverism and religion

A biology professor in Minnesota wrote a blog post, the other week, blasting my research and investigations into sighting reports of apparent pterosaurs (AKA pterodactyls). Most of his declarations about my intentions, however, were false. His mistake about my purposes in writing that page on lds-nonfiction-dot-com, however, was interesting to me; I was actually writing to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who might enjoy reading my most recent book, Searching for Ropens and Finding God . . .

.

Science and living pterosaurs

Skeptics have often suggested two explanations for sightings of pterosaurs: hoaxes and misidentifications. Let’s use scientific reasoning by examining the most recent results of data compilations and analysis, for information obtained from eyewitnesses, in particular regarding the possibility of major hoax involvement.

.

Bulverism and the ropen

“Ropen” deleted on Wikipedia (English)

The “ropen” page on Wikipedia, at one time, had many paragraphs, delighting some cryptozoologists but annoying some skeptics. One biology professor in Minnesota, in particular, detested the many web pages he saw that supported belief in modern living pterosaurs, including the long-tailed ropen. . . . Some critics of modern-pterosaur investigations find fault with imagined motivations of me and my associates, using that bulverism to avoid the real issue of whether or not all species of pterosaurs became extinct.

.

Science and the ropen of Papua New Guinea

The ropen is a long-tailed flying cryptid described as pterosaur-like and reported by eyewitnesses around the world, especially in North America and in the southwest Pacific (including Australia). The word “ropen” comes from Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, where in the local language of Kovai it refers to a large nocturnal flying creature that briefly, on occasion on some nights, glows brightly.

.

Are all pterosaurs extinct?

Many species of pterosaurs have lived on this planet at some time in the past. What evidence is there that all of those species have become extinct? NONE!

.

***************************************************************************

Nonfiction book on living pterosaurs (for children)

The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur

This is a press release on this paperback book about non-extinct “pterodactyls.”

.

To report a sighting of a possible pterosaur, contact Whitcomb.

.

Top of the first page of the scientific paper by Whitcomb

.

By the investigative journalist Jonathan Whitcomb

My new nonfiction is for middle-grade children and many (but not all) teenagers: The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur. This is a short cryptozoology book, not about religion but about eyewitness sightings of apparent living pterosaurs. It invites you to seek the truth behind what people around the world report observing.

I highly recommend my new book to young LDS readers, yet it really is for English-speaking people of all faiths. I hope that readers will send in comments, either through something like Amazon customer reviews or through my contact page.

I gave this book a general age recommendation for readers: eight to fourteen years old. The most-delighted readers are more likely to be 10-12 year-olds, however. I expect a greater number of them will find the book both rewarding and easy to understand.

Here are some of the benefits I believe are available to young readers of The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur:

1. This book does not indoctrinate the reader into what must be believed; it invites the reader to consider what people report observing.
2. It does not ridicule the obvious interpretation of what people have seen; it compares one sighting with others, inviting the reader to use critical thinking.
3. It does not rely on the imagination of professors regarding what may have happened (or did not happen) millions of years ago; it tells the reader what is seen today.

Here’s the URL for this “dinosaur” book for children and teens on Amazon.

.

The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur (short nonfiction)

Is This for LDS Readers?

Although this short nonfiction was not written with LDS youth in mind, I feel confident that many of them can find my new cryptozoology book delightful.

###

.

New ‘Dinosaur’ Book for Young Readers

The non-fiction paperback The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur introduces a new field of cryptozoology to kids and teens who are about eight to fourteen years old.

.

Promoting Pterodactyls and the ‘Mormon Religion’

A biology professor in Minnesota wrote a blog post, the other week, blasting my research and investigations into sighting reports of apparent pterosaurs (AKA pterodactyls). Most of his declarations about my intentions, however, were false. His mistake about my purposes in writing that page on lds-nonfiction-dot-com, however, was interesting to me; I was actually writing to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who might enjoy reading my most recent book, Searching for Ropens and Finding God (every person deserves to know the truth). That’s why the page is on lds-nonfiction, instead of something like “Christian Nonfiction-Book Readers” or something like that. . . .

.

The Girl who saw a Flying Dinosaur

The new non-fiction plus several other books about modern pterosaurs

.

Non-extinct pterodactyls

Modern pterodactyls in the United States

By the author of four nonfiction books on living pterosaurs: Jonathan D. Whitcomb

Fireworks to be Avoided

Last month I spent half an hour with two friends, Juan and Manuel, as we stood in a vacant lot in Draper, Utah, at night, staring at the sky. The man living in the house near where I had parked my car came out to ask us, in a friendly tone, if we were watching the fireworks. (In the Salt Lake Valley, we have fireworks twice in July: Independence Day and Pioneer Day.)

I answered with a friendly tone, telling him that we had permission, from the property owner, to be there. I came to the point but slowly. Most parents feel uncomfortable when their children report three men standing outside the bedroom window at night and those men then explain that they’re only watching the sky to see if a large pterodactyl flies overhead. I felt it best to begin by telling him that a nocturnal predator had been reported in the area. He had no reason to doubt that, as I carried a camera and was standing not far from his kids’ bedroom window.

Twelve hours earlier, my wife and I had introduced Juan and Manuel to the property owner, the grandmother who lives next door to the vacant lot (and next door to the small house with children). Her daughter and grandson had seen the flying creature earlier in 2017, and her son had seen it a few weeks earlier than that. In fact, that brother and uncle to the other two eyewitnesses had seen the glowing “pterodactyl” three times in one night, and he reported to me and my wife that he knew of a friend of the family who had apparently seen the same flying creature, at about the same time he had, but near the mountains, around southeastern Sandy, Utah. That makes four eyewitnesses in that area of the Salt Lake Valley, with five sightings.

Nevertheless, I needed to approach the subject carefully, as I explained to the father why my two friends and I were standing in that vacant lot that night. I could not tell him that he might be the only person in his neighborhood who had not seen a giant pterodactyl flying overhead.

.

Creek: Draper, Utah, near where three persons saw a pterosaur in 2017

.

Standing with a camera, near the bedroom window of the man’s children, however, I needed to give more details about the apparent nocturnal predator. Within a few minutes, I would learn that the man had reason to believe me: Earlier that year, something had broken into his chicken cage and killed two of the birds, not far from where we stood.

Yet I still needed to approach cautiously the point of what kind of creature it might be. I mentioned the name of the eyewitness who was the son of the property owner, pointing in the direction of where that man lives, and the father recognized the name. I would soon learn that the man I was talking with, outside that bedroom window that night, was a biologist: He would recognize the word pterosaur.

I generally don’t expect anyone to promptly adopt my belief in modern pterosaurs, unless I’m interviewing an eyewitness of an apparent living pterosaur; I do expect people to come to know that I believe in those flying creatures. The father I spoke with on that night, outside that bedroom window, however, raised no objection to my being there. He told me he was a biologist, and I handed him a complementary copy of my book Searching for Ropens and Finding God. It all ended well, except that I failed to see the flying creature that night. Yet, like in all the other searches I had conducted over the past fourteen years, I was able to encounter the most fascinating kind of life on the planet: a human.

###

.

Nonfiction Books by Mormons

Brother Whitcomb is perhaps the only LDS cryptozoologist to search for living pterosaurs and interview eyewitnesses of these amazing flying creatures . . .

.

Mormon Author

Greg McKeown has spoken to some of the most successful companies in the world, including Apple, Google and Facebook. He is the author of a New York Times Best-Seller. He recently appeared on “The Steve Harvey Show.” He’s also a Mormon bishop.

.

Living Pterosaurs

• “Big Bird” in Draper, Utah
• Living Pterosaurs and Skepticism
• A Reply to an Attack Against the Pterosaur Photograph
• Scott Norman and the “Pterodactyl” Photograph
• Book About the Pteranodon Photograph
• More Evidence for the “Civil War Pterodactyl Photo”
• . . .

.

Flying creature of the night

You have seen a flying creature unlike any bird or bat. It’s more like a pterosaur but alive, a “flying dinosaur.” What do you do?

.

An old photograph has been bouncing around the internet for quite some time, with many persons giving it a careless glance but very few indeed examining it closely and with an open mind. In the first few months of 2017, however, that changed.

The “pterodactyl” photo called “Ptp”

Beware of confusing this with a known hoax. Ptp is not the same photo that was created to promote the Haxan Films television show Freakylinks, around the year 2000. Compare the two of them side by side:

See for yourself: hoax versus original photo (click on them)

The older photograph, that was used as a model for the newer fake-photo, has been verified as authentic by two scientists, including the physicist Clifford Paiva, from California. Skeptical remarks about the soldiers have been answered and those careless criticisms have been exposed in the new nonfiction book Modern Pterosaurs.

The Flood of Noah and extant pterosaurs

Religion is related to the “Pteranodon” photograph that is now called “Ptp,” but those skeptical comments from critics who assume extreme bias in all Christian supporters of living-pterosaur investigations—those critical comments are incorrect. Paiva and I have looked carefully at this photo, with an open mind about various possibilities of hoaxing. Ptp has survived the close scrutiny extremely well.

How does an extant pterosaur in the 19th century relate to the Flood of Genesis? If it were only one species of extremely rare pterosaur, one photo by itself would give quite limited support for a literal Flood of Noah, but there’s much more. More than two types of these featherless flying creatures still live on our wonderful planet, and although they appear to be nocturnal (or at least mostly so), their overall existence is not very rare or confined to only one remote area.

Eyewitness reports come from at least five continents, confirming that pterosaurs are seen by countless persons worldwide. The most common type resembles what would be expected of an extant Rhamphorhynchoid pterosaur: It has a long tail with a flange at the end of the tail. The type seen in Ptp, however, is not as common: an apparent Pteranodon or at least a similar Pterodactyloid.

How does that support the literal interpretation of the Flood of Genesis? Although the great majority of pterosaur species appear to be extinct, both major types are still flying overhead at night, in many areas of the world. Although they are uncommon, extant representatives support the concept that the fossils are not nearly as old as many persons have assumed. They have not evolved feathers, nor have enormous changes in anatomy taken place. Since so many recent extinctions have been seen to have come from human interference, we can easily imagine that at least some pterosaur species met a similar fate. The existence of both major types of pterosaur supports a literal Flood of Noah.

###

copyright 2017 Jonathan Whitcomb

.

Dinosaur Extinction

Consider the following direct evidence for the authenticity of the “pterodactyl photograph” and its significance. Earlier this year (2017), the physicist Cliff Paiva and I independently examined belt buckles on those soldiers in Ptp. We both came to the same conclusion: The soldier that appears to be standing in front of the animal is indeed closer to the camera than the other soldiers.

.

Civil War Pteranodon photo

. . . a scientist (Clifford Paiva, a physicist) has found a number of evidences for the authenticity of the image of the apparent Pteranodon in the older Ptp photo.

.

Civil War pterosaur photo

Do not Confuse two Photographs

.

Pterodactyl in a Civil War photograph

Years ago, a scientist in California began noticing details in a photograph, clues that the image of an apparent modern pterosaur was genuine. On January 14, 2017, I spoke with Clifford Paiva (a physicist) by phone. We agreed that the photo (now labeled “Ptp”) has a genuine photographic image of a modern pterosaur.

.

This past summer, I wrote about a biology professor in Minnesota who criticized me for what he declared were my bad motivations. His post was not like a scientific article, not even slightly like a peer-reviewed paper in a journal of science; it appeared more like a dirty political attack. But I don’t recall ever hearing any American politician refer to the writings of his opponent with the word “turds,” and this biology professor was referring to my online publications in general, not to a collection of animal feces.

More recently, I was surprised that an American paleontologist, Donald Prothero, had written a similar post, mostly about me, with special emphasis on the word deception. He even wrote, “Whitcomb admitted the deception.” I do not accuse Dr. Prothero of telling a lie, but I respond to his words against me. I was not trying to deceive anyone.

In his comments at the bottom of his post, Prothero reveals that he had read the post by that biology professor in Minnesota. I suggest he put too much confidence in those non-scientific declarations. Let’s now consider the basic accusation against me, that I have used deception in my online publications. I maintain that I was being honest.

“Sock puppets” or proper pseudonyms?

I’ve already written much, on other posts, about my temporary use of two pen names. They were not “sock puppets” but used on a minority of my blogs for a legitimate purpose. Years earlier, a few skeptics had accused me of dishonest, making it difficult for some readers to consider the eyewitness reports that I was publishing. To make the truth known to more online readers, I began using two pseudonyms. That allowed anyone to learn about the worldwide reports of apparent pterosaurs, without any reader rejecting them because of my name. At the same time, I continued to use my regular name, Jonathan Whitcomb, on most of my blogs and in most of my posts.

What about being honest in portraying how many people support the idea that one or more modern pterosaurs are still living? In his post “Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets,” Dr. Prothero says, “Virtually all discussion of the ropen comes from a single individual, Jonathan Whitcomb!” A few words later he uses the word deception. Let’s look deeper.

How many people promote belief in the ropen?

If Donald Prothero had said that my web pages dominate those of any other single writer, when “ropen” is used with a search engine, then he probably would have been correct. But he says nothing about Garth Guessman or David Woetzel, two of my associates. Those two cryptozoologists have given lectures with plenty of “discussion” on the ropen. They have written material online, over the years, and I don’t recall ever reading any of it that appeared to have come from any of my writings. In fact, you’d be hard pressed to find many mention of “Jonathan Whitcomb” on any of their web pages, for they are independent searchers and researchers, with only limited and occasional help from me.

If I had used two pen names to fool people into thinking several people were promoting the concept of a non-extinct pterosaur, when it was only me, I would have been acting dishonestly. Reality is far different.

Two Americans and one Australian, at least, are almost entirely unheard of. They have been either anonymous or unheralded in publications. I have communicated with two of them but will not reveal their names. Consider now how they relate to the possibility that I may not have been completely honest in the use of two pen names.

What could be greater evidence of a belief than this: traveling from a developed country to a remote island in Papua New Guinea to search for something most Westerners believe does not exist? Three men have done this without fanfare or great publicity online.

I knew of them while using two pen names online, so how could I have tried to deceive people into thinking more people were deeply involved than were actually involved? If I had been trying to deceive readers by dishonestly magnifying the number of those who passionately believe in modern pterosaurs, I would have had to use at least four pen names, instead of two. Remember, three men have searched for the ropen in Papua New Guinea with hardly a trace of their names being publicized.

“Fake Pterosaurs and Sock Puppets” and other posts by other critics appear to attempt to discredit me through accusations about dishonesty and impropriety. Dr. Prothero appears to want to isolate me as almost the sole source for the idea that the ropen is a real creature that is a modern pterosaur. I suggest paleontologists would do better writing about fossils.

###

Donald Prothero and “Fake” Pterosaurs

I’ll not say much about the sock puppet accusations here; I’ve written much on it already. For those who go to that link in question, it may become obvious that I was not trying to deceive anybody concerning reports of modern living pterosaurs, including the flying creature called ropen; for those who read only that post by Prothero, however, it can seem like I’ve tried to deceive people about the ropen and that I did so almost single-handedly.

Honesty in Ropen Searching

A different kind of attack has been launched, as an American paleontologist has dismissed the ropen as a “fake” pterosaur and dismissed me, Jonathan Whitcomb, as one who practices deception. He also ridicules my belief in the Garden of Eden and in the Flood of Genesis.

Honesty in Reports of Modern Pterosaurs

A deceiver intends to lead someone away from truth; intention is a critical ingredient of the poison. Nobody can accidentally deceive anyone, as in carelessly typing on a keyboard and hitting “Tr” instead of “R,” resulting in a sentence about “Troy” instead of “Roy.” Someone can be mislead by a mistake like that; one cannot be deceived by that.

.

Did I promote the “Mormon Religion” by publishing my web page “Searching for Ropens and Finding God?” I would be delighted if a reader not yet a member of my church investigated the LDS faith after reading that page, yet that was not on my mind when I wrote it. This needs explaining.

A biology professor in Minnesota wrote a blog post, the other week, blasting my research and investigations into sighting reports of apparent pterosaurs (AKA pterodactyls). Most of his declarations about my intentions, however, were false. His mistake about my purposes in writing that page on lds-nonfiction-dot-com, however, was interesting to me; I was actually writing to members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who might enjoy reading my most recent book, Searching for Ropens and Finding God (every person deserves to know the truth). That’s why the page is on lds-nonfiction, instead of something like “Christian Nonfiction-Book Readers” or something like that. I was simply targeting members of my own church.

I suggest blog writers stick to issues rather than pin imagined motivations onto the names of those with whom they disagree. Bulverism may be getting worse, since C. S. Lewis invented that name. Since the biology professor in Minnesota was trying to discourage readers from considering my writings, using bulverism, I’ll quote, on the subject of bulverism, from the third edition of Searching for Ropens and Finding God:

The Smithsonian post suggests that Jim Blume and David Woetzel are themselves a problem, as they attempt to persuade people that dinosaurs and pterosaurs are still living. Switek says they’re creationist explorers, which nobody denies, but that labeling implies we should doubt modern pterosaurs could exist. Be aware: most eyewitnesses are non-creationists, a fact unknown to many skeptics. (Thus many eyewitnesses are shocked at what they see.) Let’s avoid even a hint of bulverism, examining ideas for their own strengths and weaknesses. Keep to the subject, the concept that one or more species of pterosaur may be still living. [page 295]

C. S. Lewis gave us “bulverism,” lamenting the decline of human reasoning. He defined the word in the mid-twentieth century: “The modern method is to assume without discussion that he [someone whose opinion you dislike] is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he became so silly.” How much better to talk about the subject at hand! [page 326]

###

Evidence for Pterosaurs and Honesty

For modern living pterosaurs, however, we have BOTH physical evidence and eyewitness evidence. The difficulty some persons have with it, however, is that reported eyewitness encounters with living pterosaurs dominate the physical evidence, in both quantity and quality. So if you quickly scan a few sentences on one or two web pages, on modern pterosaurs, you’ll see only one or two sighting accounts, probably eyewitness evidence, not physical.

Live Pterodactyl

In daylight, seven native boys or teenagers climbed up to a crater lake, around 1994, on Umboi Island, Papua New Guinea, with no worry about the legendary ropen. Why fear the ropen, for the flying creature comes out at night, rarely in daylight; but this day was different.

Strange Flying Creatures and Bulverism

“Bulverism” C. S. Lewis labeled the slick ploy of avoiding reasoning on a subject by pointing out the reason ones opponent is so silly. Do some criticisms of living-pterosaur investigations qualify as bulverism? I believe so.

.

Nonfiction spiritual/true-life-adventure/cryptozoology book by Whitcomb

Searching for Ropens and Finding God

This cross-genre book is becoming known as “the Bible of modern pterosaurs.”

The Amazon page quotes the nonfiction book Searching for Ropens and Finding God:

Three Christians—one middle-aged LDS-Mormon high priest and two Protestant young earth creationists—explored Umboi Island in two separate expeditions in 2004, interviewing eyewitnesses of a glowing animal of the night: the elusive nocturnal ropen. [from the back cover]

That page does not mention that the author is that latter-day saint. The book itself mentions my membership in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, in the first chapter, although little is said about it except the following:

My confidence with humans came from serving in Louisiana and Mississippi for two years as a volunteer missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (I myself was a convert at age twenty-two). [page 15]

So is this book LDS nonfiction? Much of it covers research and expeditions by my Christian associates and me, emphasizing how people of various belief systems need to be open minded to the work of those of different faiths:

This is not propaganda for any human philosophy, yet I extoll the accomplishments of those Young Earth Creationists who have been my associates for many years. I suggest we allow ourselves to find literal truth in the Bible, regardless of whatever passages we had assumed were mainly symbolic. For those who think that pill too bitter, at least avoid ridiculing those labeled “creationist.”

SFRFG I wrote for persons of many faiths (not including atheists, who can be offended). With that said, parts of it can be more easily appreciated by LDS readers. Living true to one’s testimony of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ—that is not mentioned explicitly in the book, yet I hope it is understood by LDS readers. During the past eleven years, I don’t recall any temptation to compromise my convictions, although I have often associated with Christians of other faiths.

Religious Bias

Latter-day saint readers should well understand the following:

What went wrong? They had already made arrangements for a party of two Americans to fly to Umboi; in addition, Woetzel didn’t want to change plans by adding an explorer he had never met: At that time, to him I was a stranger, an unknown Mormon Californian. Left out of the expedition, I was dejected.

I ended up leading the first expedition of 2004, and Woetzel led the second. Since then, we have cooperated a number of times, in promoting the truth about eyewitness testimonies of apparent living pterosaurs. (To the best of my knowledge, only two scientific papers have been written on this subject and published in a peer-reviewed journal: one by Woetzel and one my me.) As it turned out, the two separate expeditions we led in 2004 were the best way of investigating sightings by natives on Umboi Island. Although we all failed to photograph or videotape a ropen, our differing interview techniques succeeded in complementing each other. In addition, most of the interviews were non-overlapping, with their eyewitnesses being mostly different from my own.

So, is this an LDS nonfiction or not? Yes, read the book and decide for yourself.

LDS Nonfiction Author

LDS author Jonathan David Whitcomb wrote the revised and enlarged third edition of the book Searching for Ropens and Finding God.

.

Third edition of Searching for Ropens

.

The new title for the third edition of my first nonfiction book will be Searching for Ropens and Finding God. This explains cryptozoological investigations of worldwide sightings of apparent modern pterosaurs. Expect many new paragraphs and even new chapters. Here is a sample of what LDS should find strangely familiar, a highly modified portion of Chapter 29 of Second Nephi in the Book of Mormon.

Many of the paleontologists will say, “A live pterosaur?! A live pterosaur?! We have got pterosaur fossils and there cannot be any more live pterosaurs.”

O fools, they shall have pterosaur fossils; and they shall come from among those animals that died during the ancient Flood written of in Genesis. And what thanks do paleontologists give to God for the preservation of basic animal types on the Ark of Noah, written of in the Bible?

Really, for paleontologists who believe in the Bible, what do they mean? Do they remember the labors of those who built the Ark and their diligence to God in bringing forth many basic forms of animal life to all the earth?

O you Bible-believing paleontologists, have you remembered the Ark of Noah, God’s ancient work to save basic animal types? Not the scientists who reject the Bible. They have denounced the Flood of Genesis and hated the scriptures and have not sought to discover live pterosaurs but only fossils. God will hold them accountable, but he remembers those who recognize his hand in preserving life.

Fools shall say, “Pterosaur fossils, we have got pterosaur fossils, and we need no more live pterosaurs.” How did you obtain fossils except from living creatures?

Don’t you know that there have been more pterosaur species than one? Don’t you know that God put all of them on the earth and that he remembers to preserve those that still live on various islands and in other places? God rules in heaven and on earth, and he brings forth various species from the basic life forms that he had preserved on the Ark.

Why murmur or why marvel that, among discoveries of new species, some discoveries should be of basic types assumed long extinct? Don’t you know that the discovery of two or more basic types, such as living Coelacanths and living pterosaurs, is evidence that God preserves basic animal types?

God remembers one basic life form as well as another, preserving Coelacanths and pterosaurs. When people come to know that these two are still living, they will have two testimonies that God is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

Don’t look for the above in the first two editions of Searching for Ropens; it’s not there. The third edition should be published before Thanksgiving . . . I hope. [Update: It was published April 18, 2014, a major revision of this nonfiction book.]

###

Back cover of Searching for Ropens and Finding God

From the title page of this nonfiction book:

This flies high above a common true-life adventure, revealing the early stages of what may become the most unsettling scientific discovery since Copernicus and Galileo. It soars above disputes about religion, revealing why an official discovery of an extraordinary animal was delayed for so long. Above all, this explores human experiences—of eyewitnesses and those who interviewed them. People have become connected by common encounters: Persons of various faiths, with various levels of education, from various countries and cultures, have seen a living pterosaur.

.

With apologies to Emily Dickinson, I post my humble little mutation of a poem:

Humor intended, of course

I title this “Not everybody embraces a live pterodactyl.”

I believe that these bioluminescent nocturnal flying predators eat more than just bats and birds. I also believe it’s better that Western society gets to know about these wonderful creatures, although it may be “better not to know” them through close contact.

To learn about this apparent modern pterosaur, see Ropen

Here is the non-image text of my poem:

• Ropen, the thing without feathers,
• That sleeps inside a hole,
• And eats the bats and perching birds,
• And never stops at all . . .
• Is it better not to know?

The original poem by Emily Dickinson begins, “Hope is the thing with feathers, That perches in the soul . . .”

.