Supporting the old Civil War Pterosaur Photograph

By the living-pterosaur expert Jonathan Whitcomb

A Partial Reply to “Living Pterosaurs (Pterodactyls)?” by Glen Kuban

Last month, I contacted the writer Glen Kuban, informing him of his long-standing mistake in assuming that there was only one Civil-War-soldiers-with-a-dead-pterodactyl photograph. Yesterday, I noticed he had corrected that one mistake, publishing images of both the Ptp photo and the Freakylinks hoax photo together. (See “Ptp: Civil Pterodactyl Photo” on this Cerritos Families blog; it’s dated January 31, 2017.)

Unfortunately, in revising “Living Pterosaurs (Pterodactyls),” Kuban added a long string of paragraphs that attacked the possibility that Ptp might be a genuine photograph. I could write a book in response to his web page of 60+ paragraphs, but we’ll have to settle for a short reply here, concentrating on a few details in some of the new paragraphs.

First, Kuban mentions two controversial photographs and then uses the words, “active promotions by Jonathan Whitcomb and associates.” That could mislead at least some of his readers, for he refers to the Haxan Freakylinks photo and Ptp, but I have always declared that the Freakylinks one is a hoax. In other words, I have never promoted the idea that the Haxan Films photo might be genuine. I don’t accuse him of deliberately trying to mislead anyone, but that wording of that sentence appears to me to be far from ideal.

I don’t mean that Kuban is the main source of confusion on this subject, not at all. In fact, it seems that on separate Freakylinks online pages each of the two photos appears (one on each page). But when we, at least in recent years, say “Freakylinks Civil War pterodactyl hoax photo,” or something similar, we mean the one in which the entire image is out of focus and the supposed animal on the ground looks more like a crumpled up canvass than an animal and the soldier on the left appears too heavyset to button his shirt. That’s the one we call the Freakylinks photo.


comparing two photographs

Only the one on the left (“Ptp”) is a genuine photograph with a real animal


Yet even after Kuban admits his original confusion between the two photos, he refers to Ptp with, “[people have] pointed out the suspiciously blurry and grainy nature of the photo, compared to the sharp focus of most photos from the time.” If Kuban had personally looked closely at the two photographs, he would not have made that mistake. See for yourself by clicking on the above comparison-image: Notice that in Ptp the faces of the soldiers and the head of the animal are in focus (compared with the background), but in the Freakylinks fake photo nothing is in focus. In other words, Kuban is still being careless and is still making errors of fact in his paragraphs in “Living Pterosaurs (Pterodactyls).”

Pteranodon or not Pteranodon, That is the Question

He makes more mistakes, in quick succession. He seems aware that I have recently published many web pages on Ptp, yet he seems to have looked at very few of them or failed to read many of them or forgot what he read or confused it with something somebody else wrote. I have often made it clear that the physicist Clifford Paiva and I have not declared that this animal must be some species of Pteranodon. Yet Kuban writes a long list of things that he thinks makes the image in Ptp different from a Pteranodon. He seems to think that his list should discredit the authenticity of Ptp. Really!

And even his list begins with an error that I think could be cleared up by simply looking closely at a magnified image of the head of the animal. He refers to large teeth and then says that Pteranodons did not have teeth. Look more closely. Those are not teeth but could be an irregularity in the shape of the mouth. Perhaps this was a species of Pteranodon that has not yet been discovered in a fossil.

I could write much about weaknesses in his other points but this will have to do for the present.

In other words, Kuban needs to look more closely at Ptp and read more carefully what I have written about it. By the way, we are still dealing in cryptozoology, at least mostly, for eyewitness accounts have been most useful in the living-pterosaur investigations. In addition, for those who have read Kuban’s page, Paiva and I are not declaring that Ptp must have been a photograph recorded during the American Civil War or that it must have been in Vicksburg, Mississippi. The scene could have been photographed a little after the Civil War and in some other part of the United States.


copyright 2017 Jonathan Whitcomb


Civil War Photograph of a Pterodactyl

A number of names or labels have been given to this old photo, probably the most practical being “Ptp,” for that helps to distinguish it from the more recent hoax photo that was created to promote the Freakylinks television show produced by Haxan Films at the beginning of the 21st century.

Ptp: Civil War Pterodactyl Photo

Paiva started examining the Ptp photo many years ago, finding evidence for authenticity; I have known about Ptp for a long time, possibly as early as 1968, but I’ve hesitated putting great confidence in it until mid-January of 2017. That was certainly not my friend’s fault but my own weakness . . .

Old Photo of a Pteranodon

On Saturday, January 14, 2017, the missile defense physicist Clifford Paiva and I communicated by phone and mutually agreed that the image herein labeled “Pteranodon Photograph” contains a genuine image of a modern pterosaur, regardless of the specific species or type of pterosaur that it may have been.

Photograph of soldiers with a pterodactyl

Answering skeptical comments and criticisms of a direct interpretation of a photograph that some persons report remembering from the middle of the 20th century, long before Photoshop digital imaging processing was generally available.

Ropen of Papua New Guinea

Gideon Koro was interviewed by Jonathan Whitcomb,in 2004, on Umboi Island. The American found this native’s testimony to be highly credible: The long-tailed ropen terrified Gideon and six other boys, as it flew over Lake Pung one day around 1994. [This appears to be a modern living pterosaur, perhaps related to the orang-bati of Indonesia]


A Word for Male-Female Marriage: Adahmeve

In 2015, the United States Supreme Court ruled, by a 5-4 vote, that marriage licenses must be granted to same-sex couples. I maintain that this was a serious mistake for more than one reason, including the following:

Marriage has always been primarily either a religious ceremony or a solemn contract with religious traditions or sentiments. In the United States, the official granting of marriage licenses, by governments, has been of secondary importance. Those five members of the United States Supreme Court should have recognized this fact, and that the central conflict over same-sex marriage has always been primarily related to a difference of religious beliefs. The Supreme Court would have done far better by recognizing this and removing government control over the granting of marriage licenses.

A new word for traditional marriage

So it seems that the U. S. Supreme Court has, by redefining “marriage,” practically extinguished our only English word for the official union of a husband and wife. In other words, because of that 5-4 legal decision in 2015, we no longer have one word for traditional marriage between a man and a woman. Yet it’s not quite as bad as that.

We have the word adahmeve. It means the following:

Marriage between a man and a woman

Here are the various forms of this word for traditional marriage:

  • adahmeve (noun) – uh-DAH-meev
  • admeve (verb) – ud-MEEV
  • admevial (adjective) – ud-MEE-vee-ul

Those words can be used in a wedding ceremony in which a man is married to a woman. It cannot apply to any same-sex “marriage”—by definition. This means that a husband and wife really do have a word for their married relationship: Adahmeve.


(husband-wife) adahmeve

A happy adahmeve in California


The following is taken from a statement by the leadership of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: “The Family: A Proclamation to the World.”

. . . marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God . . . the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.



Adahmeve – a New Word for Marriage

With one little-known exception, no longer do we have a single word, in English, that refers to the formal union of a man and a woman in marriage. That exception is the word adahmeve.

Why this new word for marriage: Adahmeve

Across the Western world, some countries have seen the adulteration of the word “marriage,” through legal means, in the granting of marriage licenses to couples of the same sex. . . . Consider some examples of this new word, in its various forms: adahmeve, admeved, admeves . . .


Why we Need Proof Readers

In print publications, the following headlines demonstrate why we need poof . . . proof readers. Included are possible responses.

Something Went Wrong in Jet Crash, Expert Says

An interesting idea

Miners Refuse to Work after Death

Well, we always have expected too much from the mine workers

War Dims Hope for Peace

What else is new?

One-Armed man Applauds the Kindness of Strangers

I never heard that one.

Cold Wave Linked to Temperatures


Federal Agents Raid Gun Shop, Find Weapons


New Study of Obesity Looks for Larger Test Group

How big were the first participants?

Local High School Dropouts Cut in Half



Manta Ray Versus Pterodactyl (This is no joke)

In July of 2008, I received a phone call from a man who reported a very large flying creature, seen one year earlier, in Orange County [California] . . . . He described the dark gray or black animal as 30 feet long, with 15-16 feet of that being a tail.

Recent Reports of Pterosaur Sightings

Reports of “flying dinosaurs” or “pterodactyls” have accelerated during the past year or so, probably because more and more eyewitnesses are becoming aware of the research of cryptozoologists like Garth Guessman and me, Jonathan Whitcomb. Some reports are of sightings that happened months ago or even years ago, accounts of flying creatures described like what scientists would call “pterosaurs.”

Two (+) Pterosaurs in Kentucky

This sighting of two “pterodactyls” in central Kentucky was by two men who live in an area of the state where there are many caves in which nocturnal creatures might hide. I received this report just last week.

I live in Lamero, Kentucky [a rural location]. I have a friend who lives near Renfro Valley . . . about 12 miles north of me [also a forested area] with a small fishing lake nearby as well as several caves . . . a lot of caves . . .

Last July, I was visiting my friend . . . a little after sunset [but] still daylight . . . The weather was nice, so we were outside, sitting on his deck, watching aircraft flying by. This is something we do all the time, hoping to maybe catch a glimpse of a UFO, or anything out of the ordinary. Well, we got our wish that evening. I was looking northward when Brandon, my friend, shouted behind me . . .

Approaching us . . . flying westward were two very large animals. They were really moving on. . . . They appeared to be a brownish color and had every characteristic of a pterodactyl, from head to tail. I’d say they were roughly 15+ feet long . . .

Within five seconds of him pointing them out to me, they were out of sight. I know I wasn’t seeing things because, thankfully, I had another witness right there and we both agreed that the best word we could use to describe what we saw was Pterodactyl.

Naturally, everyone around, including his wife, thinks we are just [joking].

However, there is a guy who lives about 5 miles down the road . . . who, upon hearing our story, said he saw something one evening outside his home that sounded exactly like what we had described, but he only saw one. The lake I mentioned was in the direction they were travelling and like I mentioned before, there’s caves in any direction you point to. Since that day I haven’t had the chance to see another one, but let me tell you, that made a believer out of me. So, that’s my story in a nutshell. I just feel like stories of sightings such as mine mainly fall on deaf ears or get swept under the rug by all the skeptics . . .


Wilderness area, Daniel Boone National Forest, Kentucky


Wilderness area in Kentucky (Daniel Boone National Forest)


Some Recent Sightings in USA

  • Charlotte, North Carolina, January 3, 2013: “a dragon or flying dinosaur . . . a long tail that was skinny and had a pointed shape at the end of it like a triangle . . .”
  • Crestview, Florida, November 14, 2012: “a Huge rhamphorhynchus like flying entity . . . wingspan of 8-12 feet and a tail as long as its torso with a large bulb or lump at the tail very diamond shaped . . .”
  • Northern Georgia, December 9, 2012: “there were three of us who saw this bird fly over, in plain sight, in daylight, up close ….. it was a young Pterodactyl . . .”


Sightings of Pterosaurs That are Alive

. . . the creature had both a head crest (common in Pterodactyloids) and a long tail with a “diamond tip” (common in Rhamphorhynchoids). He saw a living pterosaur near the Maryland-Virginia border, in the 1980’s.

Pterosaur Sighting in Kentucky

I just found your site and thought I’d share a story with someone who actually might take me seriously for once. [same sighting as above but with a few more details

Pterosaur Sightings in the United States

. . . north of the University of California at Irvine. He described the dark gray or black animal as 30 feet long, with 15-16 feet of that being a tail.


1965 "Gitmo Pterosaur" or "pterodactyl" or "dinosaur" seen by two children in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba

Patty Carson (eyewitness) sketched what she had seen in Cuba in 1965: “Gitmo Pterosaur”