[draconic chronicler]

The latest Destination Truth featured a segment in which a huge flying creature had been spotted by numerous witnesses in Alaska, and an artist's conception of the beast depicted it as a long necked, sharp toothed, long tailed reptile like creature. Could the "thunderbird' be a great flying reptile, possibly a form of Pterosaur that survived extinction? Virtually every culture that left records described such creatures. and many would worship them as gods, crediting them with great intelligence, and giver of life-giving rains. Yes, some of the sightings could be inspired by large birds, and native american art depicts both birdlike and distinctly reptiian winged creatures, but even today, many witnesses describe these giant flying creatures having leathery wings and looking more like prehistoric reptiles, such as relatively recent sightings in Texas.

So were humans all over the world since the beginning of recorded time, up to modern Texans and Alaskans all crazy, or is there some truth to the belief in large, flying, reptile-like creatures inhabiting the earth even today?

[Ebonykrow]

Personally, I think it's a stretch to state all cultures. To that, the answer is no. But to some cultures? Yes.

In my opinion! These "living dinosaurs" are dinosaurs, but they did not survive extinction. They're residents of another universe, that at regular periods comes into contact with our universe. Certain dinosaurs are regularly sifted between the two, at "way stations", where they are deposited and picked up. Such as the Burunjor in Austuralia, the Ropen in New Guinea, Mokele Mbembe in the Congo, saber-toothed cats in other remote regions of Africa, even thunderbirds of North America. Maybe even Bigfoot and Nessie are universal time-skippers. But, most of these creatures are confined to one specific place, and appear in patterns.

They are so much apart of certain cultures that it's ridiculous to suggest they weren't real, that they wouldn't have seen them and that they simply would have made them up. IT IS, however, also easy to suggest that many of these cultures were simply seeing fossils, and based living representations based on the bones. We know ancient Greeks did this, why not other cultures? But, people are still witnessing something inexplicable today, and every single sighting (also given the amount of credible people who have witnessed such curiosities) cannot be written off as a misidentified animal, a hallucination, or something so ridiculously simple it's disrespectful to the eye-witness.

Do I think a lot of people are seeing something unexplainable? A real, living dinosaur? Yes.

Do I think all people are seeing something unexplainable? A real, living dinosaur? No.

But I don't expect my opinion to be openly accepted. I admit, it is a stretch (even for me!), but I'm eager to learn more about these possible time-skips. If a pattern could be discovered between credible sightings of certain creatures, who knows what we could find? Who knows what we could anticipate.

This post has been edited by Ebonykrow: 27 October 2009 - 12:27 PM

[Abramelin]

draconic chronicler, on 27 October 2009 - 12:40 PM, said:

The latest Destination Truth featured a segment in which a huge flying creature had been spotted by numerous witnesses in Alaska, and an artist's conception of the beast depicted it as a long necked, sharp toothed, long tailed reptile like creature. Could the "thunderbird' be a great flying reptile, possibly a form of Pterosaur that survived extinction? Virtually every culture that left records described such creatures. and many would worship them as gods, crediting them with great intelligence, and giver of life-giving rains. Yes, some of the sightings could be inspired by large birds, and native american art depicts both birdlike and distinctly reptiian winged creatures, but even today, many witnesses describe these giant flying creatures having leathery wings and looking more like prehistoric reptiles, such as relatively recent sightings in Texas.

So were humans all over the world since the beginning of recorded time, up to modern Texans and Alaskans all crazy, or is there some truth to the belief in large, flying, reptile-like creatures inhabiting the earth even today?

If these sightings are true, maybe there's a possibility that some can be explained by unknown huge bats.

Flying foxes are the largest bats as far as is known, but they are fruit eaters, and not found outside the tropics.

I am thinking of huge bats with small ears and a longer muzzle.

Btw, flying foxes can grow quite large:





...although the perspective in which the photo was taken is helping it grow in size too...


They are also quite strong:

Here's one fighting a python, and survives:




"Its probably one of the world's largest bat, shot down by the village locals after it was trying to grab a human baby, in Khushaab district, PAKISTAN!"

[667-Neighbor of the Beast]

If these thunderbirds actually exist, I think a more rational explanation would be more plausible. No sense in trying to explain something that is not proven to exist with something else that is not proven to exist.
The large bats could be a rational explanation, however, the episode of DT took place in Alaska, in sub zero temeratures. I can't see a bat migrating to this environment. I would rather think a large bird, perhaps one not native to the area, like the one they showed in the episode, and then imagination and story telling blowing it's size out of proportion.

[Abramelin]

667-Neighbor of the Beast, on 27 October 2009 - 02:57 PM, said:

If these thunderbirds actually exist, I think a more rational explanation would be more plausible. No sense in trying to explain something that is not proven to exist with something else that is not proven to exist.
The large bats could be a rational explanation, however, the episode of DT took place in Alaska, in sub zero temeratures. I can't see a bat migrating to this environment. I would rather think a large bird, perhaps one not native to the area, like the one they showed in the episode, and then imagination and story telling blowing it's size out of proportion.

The reason I suggested some sightings might be caused by a huge bat is because these animals are the only known animals alive today that have wings similar to those of pterosaurs. And I think that if a large species of bats exists (and I mean really large), then it's possible they could be mistaken for pterosaurs.

And I am not saying it was a (huge) bat which may have migrated to Alaska from warmer areas, it may be a large species adapted to the cold overthere.

Another thing is that animals tend to develop into larger species in cold areas.

But of course I am very aware of the fact that there are a lot of 'ifs' in this explanation.

[Corp]

I wouldn't think repitles of any sort would do well in Alaska.

[Spend]

Abramelin, on 27 October 2009 - 02:10 PM, said:

The reason I suggested some sightings might be caused by a huge bat is because these animals are the only known animals alive today that have wings similar to those of pterosaurs. And I think that if a large species of bats exists (and I mean really large), then it's possible they could be mistaken for pterosaurs.

And I am not saying it was a (huge) bat which may have migrated to Alaska from warmer areas, it may be a large species adapted to the cold overthere.

Another thing is that animals tend to develop into larger species in cold areas.

But of course I am very aware of the fact that there are a lot of 'ifs' in this explanation.

problems with this idea are fairly large

the giant bats would have to either migrated in massive numbers for enough to survive to breed, or it been a slow progression over time moving northward for them to adapt, which likely would have brought them into contact with humans and have left some sign

do animals in cold areas grow large?

This post has been edited by Spend: 27 October 2009 - 05:16 PM

[Abramelin]

Spend, on 27 October 2009 - 06:15 PM, said:

problems with this idea are fairly large

the giant bats would have to either migrated in massive numbers for enough to survive to breed, or it been a slow progression over time moving northward for them to adapt, which likely would have brought them into contact with humans and have left some sign

do animals in cold areas grow large?

Why are you talking about migration? If they exist, that could have lived in that area for many millennia and long before any human lived in the Americas.

And animals don't grow large in a couple of generations, but to better contain heat (surface/volume ratio) many species in the colder regions of the earth have evolved into larger animals over time.



.

This post has been edited by Abramelin: 27 October 2009 - 05:31 PM

[Clobhair-cean]

Should I be surprised that from the Destination Truth episode, DC managed to pick up a single filler illustration that has nothing in common with the descriptions, and completely evade the conclusion of the show that the Alaskan "thunderbirds" are most probably stray Steller's Sea Eagles (one of the largest eagles in the world, with a 2.4 meter wingspan) from across the Bering Strait?

[storminateacup]

Clobhair-cean, on 27 October 2009 - 07:23 PM, said:

Should I be surprised that from the Destination Truth episode, DC managed to pick up a single filler illustration that has nothing in common with the descriptions, and completely evade the conclusion of the show that the Alaskan "thunderbirds" are most probably stray Steller's Sea Eagles (one of the largest eagles in the world, with a 2.4 meter wingspan) from across the Bering Strait?

No, you shouldn't. But I'm not even going to bother this time, wasn't going to post at all had it not been for this:

- snip -

This post has been edited by Saru: 27 October 2009 - 09:31 PM
Reason for edit:: Removed quoted post

[Clobhair-cean]

_Libby, on 27 October 2009 - 09:37 PM, said:

No, you shouldn't. But I'm not even going to bother this time, wasn't going to post at all had it not been for this:

- snip -

I also have no intention of getting dragged into yet another immense and farcical thread about dragons, but I had to do this one post for the sake of steller's sea eagle, which is probably one of the coolest animals most people haven't heard about.

[storminateacup]

Clobhair-cean, on 27 October 2009 - 10:37 PM, said:

I also have no intention of getting dragged into yet another immense and farcical thread about dragons, but I had to do this one post for the sake of steller's sea eagle, which is probably one of the coolest animals most people haven't heard about.
...

They're quite, quite beautiful.

But to comment with anything other than that, I'd have to do a bit of research about them.

Isn't Destination Truth called The Monster Hunter over here in the UK? Or am I mixing up two shows?

[draconic chronicler]

Spend, on 27 October 2009 - 12:15 PM, said:

problems with this idea are fairly large

the giant bats would have to either migrated in massive numbers for enough to survive to breed, or it been a slow progression over time moving northward for them to adapt, which likely would have brought them into contact with humans and have left some sign

do animals in cold areas grow large?

Sure they do, polar bears are among the biggest of bears, Walruses are also very big.

Dr. Jones, in An Instinct For Dragons, recounted an Inuit legend of 'dragons' raiding villages and devouring people. Although he did not say these 'dragons' flew, but this is implied by his definition of a dragon being a flying carnivorous creature. I believe it is documented that everyone in an Inuit village vanished without a trace in the early 20th century.

[draconic chronicler]

Clobhair-cean, on 27 October 2009 - 02:23 PM, said:

Should I be surprised that from the Destination Truth episode, DC managed to pick up a single filler illustration that has nothing in common with the descriptions, and completely evade the conclusion of the show that the Alaskan "thunderbirds" are most probably stray Steller's Sea Eagles (one of the largest eagles in the world, with a 2.4 meter wingspan) from across the Bering Strait?

Dr. Jones cited Inuit legends of great creatures (that Jones defines as 'dragons' that raided villages and devoured people. Somehow I don't think Stellers Sea Eagles can do that.

[draconic chronicler]

Corp, on 27 October 2009 - 11:19 AM, said:

I wouldn't think repitles of any sort would do well in Alaska.

Pterosaurs are considered reptiles (archosaurs to be exact), have fur on their bodies, and are believed to be warm-blooded. The winged reptile described and drawn in Destination Truth also had fur, but a long neck and tail like the popular conception of a dragon. Interestingly, many depictions of medieval dragons give them fur, also suggesting a possible pterosaur.