It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Do Pterosaurs Still Exist?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by doom27

To continue with examining the Wynn page, I question "Another smaller animal, known as the Duah, is possibly related to the Ropen, a cryptid creature said to haunts some of the far-flung outlying islands." I've lost count of how many times I have to correct this popular misunderstanding about the words "duah," "duwas," and "ropen."

In 2003, I examined some of Paul Nation's videotapes of native testimony on Umboi Island. On one of those videos, a native talks about a creature that stole his father's fish one night, as the men were camping. The man interviewed said, "In our language, we call it 'duwas.'" If I recall correctly, that interview was on Umboi Island, where the Kovai language includes the word "ropen," but probably not the word "duwas."

In Papua New Guinea, there are hundreds of languages. How serious the misunderstanding commonly restated on web pages: the idea that "duah" and "ropen" must designate separate flying creatures! My experiences interviewing natives in Papua New Guinea (native eyewitnesses of pterosaurs or pterosaur-like creatures) and examining reports directly and indirectly, leads me to believe there is no simple distinction, even if the word "duah" were the correct form of the word, which it is not.

The correct form of the word is "duwas," not "duah." The only word "duah," of which I am aware, in Papua New Guinea, is in Tok Pisin: equivalent to the English word "door." It has no relationship to any flying creature.

posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:14 PM
reply to post by doom27

If so many people have seen them, then why aren't there any pictures?

What about many things that we take for granted? How many things we
believe without photographic evidence! But that's a deep subject, and
only indirectly related.

1) Most scientists or professors could lose the jobs and even their
careers, should they suggest going on any expedition in search of
living pterosaurs. Consider the following living-pterosaurs
expeditions in Papua New Guinea: Carl Baugh (1996), Paul Nation
(2002), Whitcomb (2004), Woetzel-Guessman (2004), Paul Nation
(2006), Paul Nation (2007), Destination Truth (2007), Monsterquest
(2009). Not one of those expeditions had any sponsorship from any
university or from National Geographic or from the Smithsonian.

2) Claiming a photograph you took is of a living pterosaur could
leave you branded as a liar and a hoaxer.

3) Many eyewitnesses in remote tropical areas do not even own a
camera. When I handed over my camera to my native translator,
Luke Paina, it may have been the first time in his life that
he had ever held a camera. But those remote areas are where
many of the pterosaur sightings occur.

4) For those who do own a camera, how often do they have it in
hand during their daily routines? Not often.

5) For those who have a camera nearby, how long would it take
to grab the camera, remove it from the case, turn it on,
and point it at where the flying creature used to be flying?

6) What if pterosaurs are both nocturnal and rare? What if those
daylight sightings are extremely rare observations of uncommon
flying creatures that almost always fly only at night?

The list could go on; that is only the beginning of answers to why
there are not many good photographs of pterosaurs available.

posted on Apr, 5 2011 @ 10:41 PM
reply to post by jonwhitcomb

It was something to see! My mother used to work at a factory that was out in the boonies a few years ago. She came home one day and told me about this huge bird that flew over her SUV really close and then beside it about 8 to 10 feet away and a little above it.

My mother is now 65 about 62 or 63 at the time of the sighting. She never made it past the 6th grade and is not into history or science. As she was describing it I asked her to do a rough sketch. IT WAS THE SAME THING I SAW!!! Or at least the same species, due to the the back of the head and other features.

<< 1   >>

log in