Heuristic Rotating Header Image



This is the kind of thing that I’m always ambivalent about linking to, since that gives the dimwits who write it more publicity, but sometimes it’s worth it just to make fun of them.

Let me introduce you to Project Pterosaur. Sounds innocuous, even interesting, doesn’t it? Not so. The goal of this project is “to mount an expedition to bring back living pterosaurs so that they may testify against Evolutionism”.

Well then.

I read that novel, but apparently the ability to differentiate fact from fiction is not a skill that is as widely practiced as one might like. The Bible is many things, but I was completely unaware before reading this article that it is also the most authoritative historical source on pterosaurs.

That premise, and a vivid imagination, leads to (illustrated!) statements such as: “During the Exodus, Israelites within sight of Moses’s brazen pterosaur-scaring device (pictured above) were safe, but many stragglers still perished from the persistent bites of the serpentine pterosaurs. (Artistic reconstruction by Peggy Miller.)”

The author feels that including as much pseudo-scientific jargon as possible will entice the gullible into believing his premises.

There are two main baramins of pterosaurs: rhamphorhynchoid and pterodactyloid. Rhamphorhynchoid kinds are small to medium sized (usually no larger than a sea gull) with long tails, short heads and necks, and teeth. Pterodactyloid kinds are medium to very large (in fact, they include the largest flying animals that ever lived) with short tails, longer necks and limbs, often crested heads, and usually lack teeth. It’s still debated whether these groups are monobaraminic or holobaraminic, and it is one of Project Pterosaur’s science goals to answer this question (if we find specimens of both groups, we can determine baraminicity by using Intelligent Design Theory to measure their specified complexity and apply the Dembski-Shannon equation to extrapolate the amount of relative informational loss due to genetic degradation from their perfect Creation.)

And note the use of “kinds” instead of “species”, because of course “species” is Evolutionistic.

There are some real gems here: “Another famous misclassification is that of the Puerto Rican chupacabra (“goat sucker,” after its fondness for attacking the flocks of local shepherds), which some researchers hold is a type of pterosaur. However, I am of the firm opinion that it is in fact a velociraptor.”

Ah, that clears it all up for me. Welcome to the skewed world of ethnographic pterosaurology.