Talk:Thunderbird (cryptozoology)

Moved
I've moved this article from Thunderbird (cryptid) because there is no need to use the slang term "cryptid" in article titles, especially where a real word will suffice! 80.255 08:41, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

That, 80.255, is exactly the point. By describing it as Thunderbird (animal), you are trying to insert the point of view that it exists. That is simply pushing your point of view. It would be equally wrong&mdash;though doubtless much more accurate&mdash; to title his Thunderbird (dreamed-up-fantasy). I moved it back to cryptid (and will continue to do so) because that is the correct and neutral term. It both recognises that the claim is regarded as fanciful/fictional, and that there are people who take it seriously. It strikes an appropriate balance. Tannin 11:30, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Classifying it as an "animal" does not imply that it exists; if there were an alternative meaning of the word "dragon", then I would do exactly the same thing - I certainly do not believe that dragons exist, but there is no denying that, in their mythological sense, they are animals. That you object to calling something by an easily understood, correct and simple term (animal) but then wish to use instead a slangy non-word used exclusively by a small group of cryptozoologists is utterly inconsistent! Whether or not thunderbirds exist is irrelevant - they are nonetheless animals. If I claimed to see such a creature, then I would be claiming to have seen an animal, irrespective of whether I was, in fact, lying.
 * If you would like to suggest a better, non-slang, term to replace "animal" in parentheses, then please do. However, I shall continue to move "crypid" labels back in the absense of any better ideas. An encyclopaedia should not use slang terminology, least of all in its fundamental indexing structure. To do so would be being unencyclopaedic in the extreme! 80.255 11:43, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

3000 Google hits and you are calling this a "small group" and a "slangy term"? If it is slang, why do we have an article on it?
 * There are articles on all sorts of slang terms, and (in most cases) rightly so - they simply document the meaning and usage of informal language, and there is nothing unencyclopaedic about that. It is very unencyclopaedic, however, to actually write articles using slang terms.
 * As for "small groups' - ask a dozen random people what is meant by "cryptid" and it is likely that the overwelming majority would not be able to define it; it is a term used almost exclusively by those in the cryptozoological field, and even then, informally - you would never see it used in scientific papers. 80.255
 * I got 16.4 million hits for "phat" and 4.09 million for "kewl". So mothaf***ing what? Aragorn2 18:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

The Photo
I swear I've seen that photo, and I know it was before 'freaky links' existed, but it might have still been a fake made to illustrate the idea of the original. Actually it looked more like an old-timey drawing, like the original political cartoons.
 * I felt like I've seen it too when I read about it in another book, but when I tried to figure out where, I just couldn't. And I have read quite a bit about cryptozoology and other strange phenomena, starting in the '60s. (ok, now I'm dating myself!). I'm certain it cannot be in any of the major books and I do not have a great range of newspaper sources. If I did REALLY see it, it must have been in one of the magazines, such as Fate or one of the UFO mags I picked up when I was a kid. But Fate and the rest have been searched with no results. As much as I think I've seen it, as long as it can't be found I have to put my memory down to psychological causes, such as what's suggested. And let it be a good example of how tricky human memory is, even my own. CFLeon 08:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Update: There's a sketch based on descriptions of the 'photo' at Cryptozoology.com. I don't know their copyright policy, but if it's ok, perhaps that culd be posted here- making clear it's an artist's conception. As an aside- it's certainly not MY recollection: I remember seeing a pic outside with cowboys just standing around, not stretched alongside. And the critter I remember was much less obviously birdlike and limp. CFLeon 03:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * If you're talking about the upside down bird/pterosaur drawing, with the men standing behind it and it hanging in front of them, it is a copyrightten image they do not own the rights to. I had sworn I'd seen the photo as well, but upon seeing that image again, I realized it was, in fact, that drawing which I had seen. I could remember it quite well, considering, but I had forgotten it was a drawing, not a photograph. I think it is rather likely that it is the source of the remembered photographs. Titanium Dragon 04:40, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Would it be utterly wrong to add right|288px|thumb to the article, it seems barren without some artists impression. On the other hand, it is quite kitch to put a pokemon in a cryptid article -- zacius
 * Aaaargh! Definitely too kitsch! Totnesmartin 11:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Plausibility check
''He claimed to have seen it fly over a thunderhead cloud that was over a group of hills to the south that was approximately one and a half miles from where he was standing. The boy claimed that from his point of view it looked the size that a crow-sized bird would at twenty feet away. From this it could be assumed that the flying creature reported had a wingspan of around twenty-five feet.''


 * One and a half miles, that's 7920 feet, which means by the rule of three that an object appearing to be the same size as a crow at a distance of 20 feet must be about 400 times the size of said crow. If our assumed typical crow has a wingspan of 2 feet, than said larger bird would have to have a wingspan of almost 800 feet, more than twice that of the infamous Spruce Goose. Even a really open-minded cryptozoologist should find the thought that such large birds exist anywhere in the world ludicrous! As far as Wikipedia is concerned, the number suggested here ("twenty-five feet") just makes no sense at all in relation to the other numbers. Aragorn2 19:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Aragorn2 is correct. Article text changed. 64.122.41.167 03:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Biased Comments
Removed a troll's rants. CFLeon 00:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

No comment!
Just removed this:

"A Thunderbird was reported in Wichita Kansas in the early hours of the morning late in November of 2006 by the self proclaimed three-time alternate for People Magazine’s Sexiest Man Alive, Charles Coley II. The overwhelmed Coley described a gargantuan birdlike creature that was staring at him as he walked out of his house. Coley was found to not be under the influence of any controlled substances." Totnesmartin 20:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Maine
I have a friend who lives next door to me. He didn't say it was but from the description it sounds like what he and his friend saw was a thunderbird. Monksbane 6:51, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Thunderbird picture found?
Is this the origin of the much sought-after Thunderbird picture? Titanium Dragon 06:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

That picture is a life size cutout of Argentavis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fishlover3 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

This might be what you are looking for

photo — Preceding unsigned comment added by BDUAres (talk • contribs) 02:05, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Thunderbird (mythology) - cryptozoological overburden
Would one of you eager-beaver cryptozoology-oids please trim the crypto content at Thunderbird (mythology); that page is supposed to be for aboriginal mythologies about the Thunderbird, not latter-day cryptozological mythology. I'll give it a day for someone to migrate/merge the stuff about crypto and the teratorn on that page and then I'm just going to delete it....no wonder aboriginal/indigenous people haven't seen fit to add to taht page; it's a "white man's fantasy" page, as one of my native acquaintances might describe it. They take one look at the content "you" have put there, and decide it has nothing to do with them, so leave. Please be mindful of the purpose of articles and their titles, OK?

Material from mythology page
The following blockquote was placed onteh Thunderbird (mythology) page where it does not belong. Please do not place it back here. I dlno't ahve time to try and fit it into this article; n o doubt some of the same authors/content is involved, but please respect the purpose of teh mythology article.

Contemporary cryptozoological sightings
There is a story that in April 1890, two cowboys in Arizona killed a giant birdlike creature with an enormous wingspan. It was said it had smooth skin, and featherless wings like a bat. Its face resembled an alligator. This description has more than a cursory similarity to the prehistoric pterodactyl. They dragged the carcass back to town, and it was pinned, wings outstretched across the entire length of a barn. There is supposed to be a picture of this event, that may or may not have been published in the local newspaper, the Tombstone Epitaph. Despite numerous people who have claimed to have seen this photograph recently, no one has ever been able to produce a copy of the picture nor make historic corroboration that this event ever occurred, and it is most likely an urban legend. Ivan Sanderson is perhaps the best-known person who claimed to have seen this Thunderbird Photograph.

There have also been thunderbird sightings more recently. In the 1960s and 1970s, sightings of a large bird the size of a Piper Cub airplane were made in Washington, Utah, and Idaho. On occasion, such reports were accompanied by large footprints or other purported evidence.

Among the most controversial reports is a July 25, 1977 account from Lawndale, Illinois. About 9 p.m. a group of three boys were at play in a residential back yard. Two large birds approached, and chased the boys. Two escaped unharmed, but the third boy, ten-year-old Marlon Lowe, did not. One of the birds reportedly clamped his shoulder with its claws, then lifted Lowe about two feet off the ground, carrying him some distance. Lowe fought against the bird, which released him.

Viewed by some as a tall tale, the descriptions given by the witnesses of these birds match that of a California condor: a large black bird with a wingspan up to 10 feet. In South America, some Andean condors are purported to attack and carry away newborns when very hungry or otherwise starved, but it is unknown whether this is based in fact as condors do not hunt live prey.

In 2002, a new sighting in Alaska was announced; the most probable explanation was a stray Steller's Sea Eagle.

Merriam's teratorn
Some cryptozoologists first theorized that the thunderbird myth is based on sightings of a real animal. Regarding the question whether such a large bird could have flown at all, the prehistoric vulture-like Aiolornis incredibilis (previously known as Teratornis) which was described in 1909 had a wingspan of around 5 m (16 ft) and was capable of flight, but probably would have favored heavy winds to facilitate takeoff. This bird, however, was almost certainly never seen alive by human beings, but a slightly smaller relative, Teratornis merriami must have been frequently encountered by early Amerindians.

It is generally believed that Merriam's Teratorn was a dynamic soarer, riding upcurrents of heated air. Their finger bones have adapted to bear the load of huge primaries, allowing them to maneuver expertly in strong updrafts, as typically found associated with storms (Campbell & Tonni, 1983).

Paleontologists reject the continuing existence of a large and conspicuous bird like Aiolornis or Teratornis in modern times, and anthropologists point out that American Indian thunderbirds were not especially similar to this creature (and usually not very similar to birds at all). The changes of "thunderbird" records over the years - from pterodactyl-like beings in the late 19th and early 20th century to teratorn-like birds becoming prominent from the middle 20th century onwards, as reconstructions of teratorns were reaching a wider audience - suggest that most records are considerably shaped by underlying expectations. In a similar vein, cryptozoologist John Keel states that his mapping of Thunderbird sightings corresponded chronologically and geographically with storms moving across the United States, but this is only to be expected in either case.

It is furthermore telling that thunderbirds are commonly described as condor-like; while an old vernacular name of Aiolornis is "Giant Condor", this is erroneous since the two birds are not very closely related, and while many early reconstructions of teratorns show condor-like birds, it is far from certain that the birds looked very alike, and indeed even considered not likely at all today.

However, it is generally accepted that the first people that settled North America did in fact encounter Teratornis merriami, making it the largest flying bird ever seen alive by modern humans. American Indian tales of mammoth-like animals suggest that it is possible for oral tradition of an incredible creature to survive 10,000 years. Thus, the most likely explanation for the Thunderbird legends is that they are mythologically expanded narratives based on the Teratornis encounters 12 millennia ago. Midden remains prove that Merriam's Teratorns were hunted and eaten by Amerindian settlers. There is also some sort of picture of the Thunderbird in El Paso, Texas on the Franklin Mountains. 'Nuff said I hope.Skookum1 (talk) 03:36, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm curious to know what evidence you have to say no Aiolornis survived to the time of humans? Late Pleistocene remains have been uncovered of them, and humans came to North America somewhere between 20,000 and 13,000 years ago.--75.175.83.76 (talk) 11:10, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Update - It has recently come to my attention that a new species of Teratorn was found at Woodburn, Oregon (Campbell & Stenger, 2002) at a 12,000 year old site which has evidence of human habitation. The partial skeleton includes a humerus which is over 14 inches long. The species is estimated to have had a wingspan of over 4 meters (14 feet), which puts this bird's size somewhere between Merriam's Teratorn and Aiolornis Incredibilis. Perhaps this now opens the window to the possibility that Aiolornis sized birds may indeed have lived up to as recently as 10,000 years ago? --75.175.83.76 (talk) 02:26, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

The idea that such big birds, Aiolornis, or Woodburnensis sized with 14 to 18 ft wingspans could have existed up until say, recent memory I would say is really not all that far fetched when we realize how many species have gone extinct in the last 200 years alone. Lewis and Clark shot and measured a Condor up near the Columbia river, just north of Portland in 1806 which had a 9 foot 2 inch wingspan! These 9 to 10 foot Condors were a common feature of Pacific North West landscape just 200 years ago, so a few relict 12 to 18 foot birds probably can't be ruled out completely.--75.175.83.76 (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Modern humans, not "humans" - although only modern man is known in N.A. - and until the fossil record shows otherwise, the generally accepted paleontological view is the one Wiki has to go by. HammerFilmFan (talk) 22:39, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

If I am not mistaken, the site at Woodburn has been dated tentatively at between 10,800 and 12,800 years BP. The humerus and skull bones of the giant Teratorn found at Legion Park near Woodburn, Oregon and officially named "Teratornis Woodburnensis" in 2002 (According to the "Woodburn Independent" Aug. 31, 2005) was calculated at some 14 feet (4.26 meter) of wingspan. Furthermore some remnants of the giant fossil Teratorn Aiolornis with its 16 - 18 ft (5 -5.5 meter) wingspan, have also been found in late Pleistocene deposits. This suggests Teratorns of appreciable sizes of 4 - 5 meters potentially existing as late as perhaps, 10,000 years before present, and certainly there were modern anatomical human beings in North America at that time. There is no burden of proof as of yet to suggest one to believe these birds lingered on several thousand years beyond the beginning of our Holocene epoch, but in the great scheme of evolutionary history the difference between 10,000 BP and say 3,000 BP isn't a huge jump in geological and biophysical imagination; of course, skeletal evidence is needed to confirm such a theory. Regardless, it is a fair statement to say anatomically modern human beings co-existed with perhaps two or more species of gigantic Teratorn in North America between 20,000 and 10,000 years ago.

--71.32.244.160 (talk) 04:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

contested statement removed

 * In the 1960s and 1970s, sightings of a large bird the size of a Piper Cub airplane were made in Washington, Utah, and Idaho.

Please do not return this information to the article without a citation.-- Birgitte SB  14:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

The legend of Thunderbird.
I'm an Native American & Related to One of The Cowboys. However The Photo is in Fact Real Not Faked Because I have it in Basement. I Even Saw the Thunderbird once But Ddid not report it, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.188.106.35 (talk) 12:01, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Removied
Removed this, because I don't think the quality is good, and it was in the wrong section. are my contributions.

This great and enormous bird is from the old indian tribes. Not many would know about this gigantic bird, but it is said that this bird was actually a human with a bow and arrow. This bird has apparently been appearing lightly (or so people think they see it). This bird was said to have a head of 2 ft. and the wingspan up to 9 ft. long. This bird has great potential and it has been said that it can create one of the most stongest storms. Some people think that a "Thunderbird" is to have electric currents through its wings or that its an extremly gigantic bird is completely blue resembling thunder.

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Thunderbird (cryptozoology). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090816231958/http://www.cryptozoology.com/cryptids/thunderbird.php to http://www.cryptozoology.com/cryptids/thunderbird.php
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/metro/stories/MYSA072707.mysterybird.KENS.ba5c450e.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Epitaph Report
I wonder why no one ever added the complete description from the Epitaph? Possibly because a 160 foot wingspan is less plausible that just "an enormous wingspan", and the detailed description doesn't fit other speculations as well. --tronvillain (talk) 20:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)