While my mind is wide open to the idea of strange and wonderful creatures living secretly in jungles, in the oceans and rivers and even close to
humans, I'm having a hard time calling them
dinosaurs. Sure, there might still be dinosaurs of the reptile kind that survived throughout the
ages. Not outside the realms of reality... But dinosaurs living side-by-side with humans ala Jurassic Park - not likely. It is up for debate
The biggest issue I have is using "ancient art" as proof of anything. Anyone with more than two brain cells they can rub together knows you don't
believe everything you see on the Internet presented as "proof"...
The same goes for ancient art and artifacts. You don't always know the context, purpose or history of an item or image. If we were to take ancient art
as proof of anything, then we'll have to consider other manuscripts as well.
Like the Codex Gigas
with a real
depiction of the devil...
Or that gazelles and lions played chess in ancient Egypt as per the so-called "Satirical Papyrus
Perhaps someone's mother-in-law from the Voynich manuscript
Perhaps my favorite of them all - the Smithfield Decretals
Showing a time when brave knights defended the kingdom against giant snails...
And homicidal giant rabbits were a real problem...
Perhaps in 400 years' time someone will make a thread on ATS using images from Codex Seraphinus
as evidence that little umbrella people
And so on, I'm sure the point has been made.
We just don't know the background of the images used as "evidence". Perhaps the person was a terrible artist? Anyone with a 5 y.o. child can tell you
it's often a challenge to identify the subject of the latest crayon art work. Is it a chicken? Is it a dog being frisky with a hedgehog? Or did the
child see a monstrous creature with his sixth sense?
Ask someone with no artistic capabilities to draw a lion. Quite entertaining and easily mistaken for a tyrannosaurus rex. Not to forget that back in
the day certain mind altering substances were not as regulated and used regularly. Perhaps a the artist drew/carved when they were a bit "out of it"?
And I think it is safe to say that imagination is not a modern invention...
So, to point to an image that's 3,000 years old that looks like a stegosaurus if you tilt your head and squint and call it evidence...
It would be fantastic if 40,000 years ago there existed a Flinstonesque society, but if you've watched Jurassic Park - fiction, yes, but still a
hypothetical scenario - you'll understand that if dinosaurs and humans lived together, it would've been unlikely that humans ended up at the top of
the food chain.
(Then there's the "fact"
that not all those dinosaurs existed the same ages, i.e. Ankylosaurus and Tyrannosaurus lived in the Cretaceous
Period, Stegosaurus in the late Jurassic, Protoceratops in the early Cretaceous and Brachiosaurus in the Oxfordian to Tithonian. Yeah, that's right
Steven Spielberg, most of your Jurassic Park dinos didn't even exist in the Jurassic era
That being said, there is a lot that can be said about dragons, the fact that they occur worldwide in (supposed) mythology, in various forms and in
various societies throughout history. If they existed (or still do?
) my personal opinion would be that they are not related to dinosaurs. (Reminds
me of a thread I made over a decade ago about Da Vinci's Dragons
. Sadly some of those
images are lost - and apparently nowhere to be found anymore...)
Fascinating topic to ponder, but I wouldn't use the word evidence
edit on 22/6/2018 by Gemwolf because: Wrong picture