What's up with Dragons ?

Lets also keep in mind that this is a guy who thinks that there were cars and jet aircraft back then too

letter from Dr. Donald Chittick. (this being in reference to the 'coso artifact', which was a sparkplug in a peice of mud)

He also thinks that Plate Tectonics has been 'proven wrong' (er, it hasn't).
From the same page, we can also see that he's also claimed that dinosaurs breathed fire because:

it burped huge quantities of methane, which certain organs in the head or throat fired up from time to time, producing the legend of the fire-breathing dragon. The pyrotechnic organs might have been special teeth that clacked together to make sparks, or a sparking organ based on something like that in electric eels, or most likely, an organ that made a substance that bursts into flame on contact with air, such as arsine gas

What do you find convincing from the video?

I believe that dragons were real. True they might not have had every similarity with the dinosaurs we know, but isn't it possible that there was a kind of dinosaur with sclaes and leathery wings? I was watching the discovery channel, there was an episode called Flying with Dragons, or Walking with dragons, or something like that. In this episode they were talking about the possibility of dragons having been real. They theorized that they started out as a small dinosaur, that walked on two legs and had small wing flaps mostly to make itself look bigger around predators. Then it went down an evolutionary path that lead the the idea of dragons that we all have today. True there are different views of dragons in different cultures, but maybe the ancestor of dragons went down different evolutionary paths. Some of you brought up that we had no solid evidence that dragons are real, this isn't true. Scientists recently found an ice cave near Romania that held in different chambers throughout the cave the frozen bodies of three perfectly preserved fifteenth century warriors, and the bodies of two perfectly preserved dragon corpses, a mother and daughter. They were able to find that dragons did have wings but not large enough wings to allow flight. Then they discovered a second bladder very similar to the hydrogen bladder of sharks. They theorize that this bladder contained hydrogen producing bacteria to make the dragon lighter and allow flight. They also found the dragon to have very spongy bones similar to those of birds. As far as the fire "breathing" they covered that too. The dragons had a false palet in the back of there throat, much like those found in crocodiles. scientists also found that the mouths of the dragons were covered with platnum dust. They theorize that the dragons had a natural instinct to chew on platnum ores, then the could open there false palet and release hydrogen from their second bladder, the combination of hydrogen and platnum caused sparks that lit a stream of fire. It seems farfetched that they should be able to exhale flames, but there are many animals alive today who have abilities that we would consider farfetched if we didn't have proof of their existence.
We know of snakes that spit venom in the eyes of their victims, toads that cry tears of blood to look sickly to predators, fish who reproduce by fusing the bodies of the males into the bodies of the females, so that the female will have a store of sperm attached to her for the rest of her life. Many of these animals had strange evolutionary paths that led to these abilities, so who can say that dragons are any different? In addition to the mountain dragon that I have been talking about, they believe that the evolutionary paths of the dragons ancestor led to water dragons too. They beleive that when the meteor struck many dragons took to the ocean swimming and finding under water caves to live in. They're feet may have become webbed, the hydrogen bladders would allow them to be boyant, and their long powerfull tail could be used as a rudder.
This would cause their general body shape to change though, they might grow to be long and thin like giant legged snakes. Millions of years later they might make a return to land. Maybe they swam too far upstream and tried walking on the banks of the rivers of China. Maybe their new shapes would be benificial to living in the thick forests of China, long slender bodies would surely help them walk in highly wooded areas. And maybe they started using fire agian, maybe as a weapon to kill prey.
Now we have the mountain dragons of the West, and the Forest dragons of the East. The only question now is why doesn't anybody know of these discoveries? how could we find two bodies, study them, show them on the discovery channel while these theories are told, and still we consider these creatures legend. Maybe we have been too conditioned to not believe. Even when the evidence stares us in the face.

Yeah I believe that dragons existed in some form or another, we have dinosaurs that still exist today so why could dragons not have made it to a certain degree. Whether they actually breathed fire or not is another question of which the answer to I believe is negative.

Originally posted by george_gaz
we have dinosaurs that still exist today

Outside of birds, which are small feathered dinosaurs, what dinosaurs are you talking about?

I wasnt referring to winged dinosaurs (even though thats what a dragon is depicted as) I was just saying that there are animals around today that have a close lineage to dinosaurs. Crodiles for example.

crocodiles, alot of different types of reptiles are still-living dinosaurs.

I think dragons did exist. I dont, of cours,e have any proof or evidence to support my theory, but i think they did. i think the 'fire' was, as stated already, a venomous spray maybe orange in color that burned its prey, thus representing fire. Quetzalcoatlus (terradactyl) had a wingspan of about 39 feet or 12 m. A dragon would have to have a wingspan of about 50ft and would have to flap fast just to keep itself up.

What about Wyverns, going back to the post above about birds being small feathered dinosaurs. Wyverns are supposed to be much more bird like by only having two legs, then wings as opposed to the many dragons depicted as having two wings, two legs and then I guess two arms (argueably four legs).

Just to be clear, crocdiles aren't dinosaurs, they arent' descended from them. Crocodiles and Dinosaurs share a common ancestor, but that ancestor greatly predates any dinosaur. Whereas birds are directly descended from dinosaurs.

Originally posted by hotsheets
One of the questions posed by researchers was that how come so many different cultures have legends about dragons when these cultures never interacted with one another.

In my opinion this is becuase dragons were very real and we have fossil evidence to back this up.

When the first people reached Australia, they encountered the largest lizard that had ever lived. Megalania prisca AKA ( Giant ripper lizard. This monster looks alot like the modern Komodo dragon but was a but more robust and stocky.

It reached a length of 20-30 ft and weighed nearly 900 lbs

This monster could easily have caught prey of twice its own weight, and could have tackled animals of up to 10 times its own weight. That was for all intensive purposes a very real dragon that early man encountered.

www.bbc.co.uk...

The dragon mythos is more complex then that and more what early man assumed was real evidence backed this up. Mainly dinosaurs fossils found be early man of giant carnivorous dinosuars was all the evidence needed for people that had no concept of extinction.

Megalania prisca was the real dragon though.

Originally posted by hotsheets
^ but wouldn't that run counter to every other organism animals/plants on this planet?

Not necessarily, because we wouldn't know of the other ones that left no records.

Hello all,

It was the ancient belief that the earth originated through accretion (the building up by layers like the skin of onion or a pearl) from within the depths of Jupiter. Hence it was that Jupiter was the ruling deity in the ancient Pantheons, (Osiris the King, in ancient Egypt, Zeus, to the Greek, and Jove to the Romans!)

The how of it - that they saw the Great Eye of Jupiter - or how they saw the dragon on the face of Jupiter was lost when the ancient books were burned and the libraries were destroyed. But see it they did.

Go to the dragon on Jupiter and click on vjupitrl

www.solarviews.com...

And forget the nay sayers who will jump onto google and post a bunch of URL's about material they are unable to articulate.

Bc
.\

Originally posted by infinite8
Not necessarily, because we wouldn't know of the other ones that left no records.

Maybe, we are thinking of Dragons, as coming through the 'Normal' evolutionary chain, when they may well be from an alternative origin, such as Majic, or Manipulations.

It is not to far from the mark, to suggest, that our ancestors had some curious behaviors in the past, and they may have delved into Genetic Studies, that could have made most of the 'COMMON MYTHIC CREATURES'.

Do we have Fossil Records, for Minators, or Fawns? Could this be a reason why we do not find records of such creatures?

I do believe, that things of this nature, such as dragons did exist, since I have no belief that humanity as a whole is creative enough to have fabricated these tales. But some evidence would be nice to see.

Just a thought

Ciao

Shane

Id like to say that I love Dragons and i am prepared to say i belive in them.

i think that they are wise and magical creatures

i belive they existed and have long since vanished into hiding or gone from this world!

its kinda romantic!

but silly i know

but hey everyones gotta belive in somthing silly at some point

thanks for the link to Uk Dragon reports, must go off in search of those dragon hordes