Giant Pterosaur Exaggeration?

Copyright 2009, 2010 Jonathan Whitcomb all rights reserved --- Please consider eyewitness testimonies with an open mind.
Whitcomb is the author of the nonfiction books Searching for Ropens (Second Edition) and Live Pterosaurs in America

Some critics assume that it is reasonable to automatically apply “exaggeration” to reports of flying creatures larger than any extant bird classified in zoology. But consider: Is that an example of scientific criticism? No. It seems to be based on one of two ideas: 1) There is nothing more to be discovered in zoology 2) All of those reports are part of an attempt to force a cryptid to be recognized and classified in zoology. But is cryptozoology a branch of zoology? No. It is an approach to trying to discover new creatures that are not yet classified; the key concept is “to discover.”

We now need university involvement.

But pronouncements of exaggeration are only one of several criticisms having the same foundation. My critics assume that it’s OK to demand much more of us than they do of their own case. They demand a pterosaur in the flesh, dead or alive; they demand a photograph or video that is beyond dispute: a living pterosaur. They seem to ignore the fact that my associates and I, almost without exception, are

cryptozoologists. We have found a

many eyewitnesses and I now ask for

help from zoologists, to investigate

these sightings of apparent pterosaurs.

I suspect that supporters of universal pterosaur extinction assume it is a proven scientific fact (nobody that I know of, in the last two centuries, has come up with any scientific test for extinction). That is part of the foundation of my opponents’ position: Pterosaur extinction has, at some time, somehow been proven already.

That I dispute. Extinction is an axiom.

The point is that the official discovery of

living pterosaurs depends first on the work

of cryptozoologists, and then zoologists. Please support scientific research on this.