It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
At least two very significant books testify to the authenticity of the stegosaurs carving. Ancient Angkor was first published in Thailand in 1999 by River Books Ltd., Bangkok. A small picture of the carving is seen at the bottom of page 143. On page 144 we read, "Along the vertical strip of roundels in the angle between the south wall of the porch and the east wall of the main body of the gopura there is even a very convincing representation of a stegosaur."
The large, beautiful 320 page book, Angkor, Cities And Temples, by the same author and photographer, includes a half page picture of the stegosaur sculpture. On page 213 the author describes it as "an animal which bears a striking resemblance to a stegosaurus".
Originally posted by laiguana
While the general body does resemble a stegosaurus, the head is what bothers me the most. It's too large quite frankly. And the mouth itself has little resemblence. It doesn't seem like the 'plates' over the ridge of this carving was unintentional or a mistake. Perhaps it was like decorative additions or representing something that is unknown, but could be anything like stones.
The head is too large Stegosaurs had no horns or frills on the head" The sculpture has no spikes on the tail... Therefore, they conclude that the sculptor never saw a Stegosaurus.
One is tempted to respond to these claims by pointing out that our modern restorations involve some guess work, that Stegosaurs may have exhibited a significant amount of anatomical variety (like dogs), that a view of tail spikes may well be blocked by the surrounding stone circle, etc., etc. However, this line of reasoning focuses the discussion on the wrong issue. The relevant question is not, Can you find anatomical differences with today's popular restorations? Rather, the real question is, What kind of sculpture would be produced by an artist who remembered seeing a Stegosaurus?
Consider the following brave observation regarding this sculpture by an author unknown to me, posted to a web site dominated by skeptics.
"As an artist myself, I find it amusing that skeptics are picking at the anatomical incorrectness of this rendering. If I were going to draw a stegosaurus from memory, that's what it would look like, by gum. And of COURSE it was done with a chisel. Just like the rest of the wall. Sheesh. Most artists have handwriting,' and this artistic style matches the rest of the pictures, as well. Isn't the triceratops head frill a neat addition? It's actually more convincing to me than if it HAD been a perfect replica. Says that there was some confusion there. Combined legends? Conflicting sightings? Cool."
Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
Maybe it's a chameleon? On that last pic it looks like it has a bulbous eye, similar to a chameleon no? Maybe it represents a chameleon sitting in a branch infront of some leaves.
Originally posted by Uplifted
Found it on Cryptomundo. I remember someone posting that this temple was one that the Tomb Raider movie was shot at. They pointed out how much newer it looked than the rest of the temple. Probably a hoax, or a leftover movie "prop".
I'm hopeful though...
I want my own stego!!!