A common criticism used by those who ridicule some cryptozoologists involves what C. S. Lewis labeled “bulverism.” The author of The Chronicles of Narnia once said, “The modern method is to assume without discussion that he is wrong and then distract his attention from this (the only real issue) by busily explaining how he became so silly.” Lewis criticised that practice of avoiding direct reasoning.
Jonathan Whitcomb mentions a web page that seems to libel those who report eyewitness accounts of living pterosaurs.
When someone publishes a web site with a URL that includes the words “stupid” and “lies,” and the point of the site is to ridicule those who promote the idea of living dinosaurs or living pterosaurs, “bulverism” probably fits (I will not link to that URL). Of course “libel” also fits, but the point is this: Individuals are attacked, real persons, me and my associates. Quotations of what we say can be hard to find on that site; the attacker’s portrayal of our motivations, easy to find. An average reader who gets very far on that site is unlikely to search out the actual words and deeds of living-pterosaur investigators. Why search for the writings of people who are both stupid and liars? But what if the critical mistake is in the one making accusations?
The paleontologist Glen Kuban seems to have left out many significant eyewitness sighting reports, accounts that could have made his attack against living-pterosaur ideas appear flimsy at best. He appears to be trying to protect traditional paleontology, including the idea of complete extinctions of all species of pterosaurs.
Read of an even better example of bulverism regarding critics against living pterosaurs.