reply to post by wolfman6688
This wouldn't have been the show where they 'hypothetically' found the remains of a dragon would it?
The same show that gave detailed and logical reasoning as to why dragons, in the flying/breathing sense could not have existed.
Not trying to discredit anyone's beliefs, and didn't mean to sound harsh in my earlier post with this topic, but there is more evidence against
dragons rather than for them.
Could earlier depictions of dragons be derived from an actual creature? Sure.
Do I think the stories and truths surrounding dragons may have been embellished a bit, very probable.
Whether this is the case or not, there has yet to be any evidence that dragons existed before or now.
If the dragons legends/stories were based on a 'single' creature, I may be more inclined to believe its existence many years ago, but to say they
lived in abundance at any time during history has no support.
My belief is the story of the dragon may have evolved from earlier discoveries of dinosaur fossils, with more and more folklore added throughout the
ages, resulting in the fire breathing, flying reptile we all know and love today.
But it doesn't mean I'm a fantasist ... I studied 'Natural Earth
Sciences' at university, so I feel I have the advantage of being able to see things from both sides ... rather than the 'left-brainers' who can
only form an opinion from what they perceive as total logic (if it can't be seen, photographed or prodded in a laboratory then it doesn't exist,
kind of attitude) 
: TC 
