tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post2094062969414479059..comments2024-01-05T05:02:20.353+00:00Comments on CRYPTOZOOLOGY ONLINE: Still on the Track: Shadow of the ThunderbirdUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-26515656886293899352009-01-21T13:12:00.000+00:002009-01-21T13:12:00.000+00:00RICHARD FREEMAN WRITES: Mistaking somthing like a ...RICHARD FREEMAN WRITES: Mistaking somthing like a turkey vulture or a buzzard for a thunderbird at a distance is one thing but most of these encounters were at close quaters. American Indians and hunters / outdoorsmen would not mistake an 'odinary' bird for a thunderbird.<BR/> <BR/>No known species of bird can lift a man, or even a large child, off the ground. Marlon Lowe's hair turned from ginger to white because of his attack. This only happens with extream fear.The Lowe family gained nothing from their story and suffered abuse.<BR/> <BR/>As a zoologist myself, i find it hard to understand how such large birds could go undetected and why we have never seen nest sights. But there are only two ways of looking at this. Witnesses are all liars or victims of hoaxes or there are indeed giant birds.<BR/> <BR/>If my idea of the 'goliath gene' is correct then it would explanne why there are not populatiuons of huge birds. This is because only a few mutantt indiviuals grow to the giant size of the thunderbird.CFZ: Cryptozoology Onlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12998273142393983112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16505569.post-40517212455992349572009-01-18T13:23:00.000+00:002009-01-18T13:23:00.000+00:00I don't understand how you can posit a "goliath ge...I don't understand how you can posit a "goliath gene" when your case for the giant birds existing at all is so weak. First things first.<BR/><BR/>Especially with the more modern (and therefore, less distorted in the retelling) sightings it's pretty obvious we're dealing with people who were startled by completely normal birds, and mistook them for being much farther away then they were really were. Do the optics if you don't understand how that makes a difference.<BR/><BR/>Also, for the sake of intellectual honesty you should probably indicate that that first photo is a fake manipulated from an authentic photo with no pterodactyl in it.Scott Hamiltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01239391361895323698noreply@blogger.com