It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Dinosaurs- Are They Alive Today

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 10:29 PM
A lot of these things are not actually dinosaurs. They are cross-animals that ancient humans used to make for religious reasons, like the hydra. the fisherman thing extracted from the sea is just a shark, not a pleasaur. the long necked dinosaurs, if you look closer, are really just lions with long necks. the tails are that of a lion and each has a mane. The roman thing I've seen before. They're not dinosaurs. They're representations a creature I forget. The Australian thing is a long necked platypus. I believe there's a local legend about that. Or maybe that was for otters. Either way, you can tell from the duck bill on the creature. The Indian thing also looks like a rhino with sun rays, an elephant with no tusks or long nose, or, more than likely, a hippo or other marine mammal.

sigh. disproven things reused over and over again do not make them true.

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 11:24 PM
The Tsunami Giant video is a video game advertisement for shadow of the colossus or something. It's not real. I hate when they do the stupid viral marketing like that, and don't put disclaimers or anything on em.

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 11:45 PM
reply to post by Gorman91

This is a great thread thanks.

Gorman, that was the worst attempt at debunking in ATS history.

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 03:47 PM
reply to post by disgustedbyhumanity

Thanks for the kind words and thanks for the help
Lets find more information and let this thread grow some more!

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 05:37 PM

Originally posted by dmorgan
It would be so damn cool if dinosaurs were still around today. The witness accounts are interesting but it's only evidence, no proof.

I hear what your saying but lets not forget the Coelacanth:

The strange-looking coelacanth is one of the oldest species of fish in the world. It is considered by many to be an actual living fossil.
Known scientifically as Latimeria chalumnae, this fish was thought to have been extinct since the end of the cretaceous period over 65 million years ago. Fossils of the coelacanth have been found that date back over 350 million years. But, against all odds, in 1938, a fisherman actually caught a live coelacanth off the coast of South Africa.

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by karl 12

The coelocanth is a relic species of fish that's related to the species in the fossil record. It has no recent fossil record mostly due to its ancestors being under water, and they themselves live about 2000 feet down.

There's a marked difference between them and comparing them to supposed megafauna that has been repeatedly the goal of multiple investigations.

posted on Jun, 9 2009 @ 09:53 PM
Just letting you know that Monsterquest's latest episode is another dinosaur-based one.

They look for a living Pterosaur in Papua New Guinea. Supposedly tribes there have been reporting a 'sky demon' for quite a while.

MonsterQuest : Flying Monsters Airs on Sunday June 14 03:00 PM

If there is one place on earth that could be home to a prehistoric flying monster, it is Papua New Guinea. These islands to the north of Australia are the closest thing to a real "lost world" and eyewitnesses here claim that a terrifying monster is circling above them. Natives call this creature the "Demon Flyer," but its twenty-foot wingspan, gray leathery skin and crested head appear to be only one thing--a living pterosaurs. Ancient sea charts made by early explorers in the sixteenth century show that they saw pterosaur-like animals and warned mariners of these legendary monsters. Paleontologists, however, are doubtful and suggest that a more likely explanation is a yet to be discovered species of giant bat. Whichever theory is correct there is something here that has reportedly killed locals and may have been caught on tape by a western witness.


If you are in the US I think you can watch the episode on the website. It won't work for me.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 09:37 AM
It seems a lot of people are saying that dinosaurs can't exist because someone somewhere would have seen them but then when someone steps forward and describes their encounter with a true unknown which fits the description of a dinosaur then we'll go to any length to explain it away as anything just as long as we don't have to consider, just for a second, that these things may still be roaming around the remote areas of the earth. . .Why?
Consider this, we are constantly being told that we are never more than 7 feet away from a rat yet I've never seen one! So what chance of seeing an extremely rare creature hidden in the exspance of the Congo? I can see plenty of scope for there being dinosaur survivors hidden away deep within the dense jungles and unreachable mountain areas of this planet. To say we know everything and have discovered everything is to just talk nonsense.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 09:51 AM
reply to post by fooffstarr

Awesome, great to know. We discussed the pterosaur earlier, but now its going to be on TV? Thats awesome, I will try and find a link so we can watch it.
Nice Find.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:12 AM
reply to post by TheMythLives

I'm sure the intent of this thread was to demonstrate how dinosaur like carvings are proof of creationism but that's not credible with what we know about fossils. Until you can present a fossil that's only a few hundred or thousand years old then you've really got nothing to say.

Now that's not to say that there's not ancient art work that does depict things that do look an awful lot like dinosaurs, what you have to remember is that it's not inconceivable that these people couldn't have come across dinosaur fossils themselves. And it's not so inconceivable that it could just be a coincidence.

I mean even today in our movies we create tones of monsters, we are a monster creating people, humanity loves its monsters. Just watch the movie alien, i mean if we can make that up then there's probably no limit to what our minds can conceive of.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 11:16 AM
Great thread! I always liked Dinosaurs esp after I saw "The Land Before Time" when I was little. Oh how I wanted a Stegosaurus for a pet! I have always wondered if any survived and where they went. I read once that alligators are Dinosaurs, so if that is true then yes there are some alive today! I will now read the links you have posted! SF

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 12:04 PM
reply to post by andre18

How you came to the creationists perspective I do not I know that creationists say that the earth is 10,000 years old and that would in turn make dinosaurs younger. But I have not stated that in anyway shape or form. So I'm not sure what the hell your talking about willis.... And its no joke that it would take a young fossil and whatever, we already discussed this earlier in the thread.....

Thanks for contributing nothing to the thread..

reply to post by mblahnikluver

Yes, I think that would be amazing! I wonder if having a dinosaur as a pet would be illegal? After all, technically, they do not exist. Makes one wonder. I appreciate the kind words and I hope you keep contributing to the thread.

[edit on Jun 10th 2009 by TheMythLives]

[edit on Jun 10th 2009 by TheMythLives]

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:18 PM
Found this:

Engravings in the floor of Carlisle Cathedral appear to be of dinosaurs. They are on the tomb of bishop Richard Bell, who died in 1496. The question is why are these brass engravings here? If they are not dinosaurs why do they have such long necks that they use to wrap around eachother? The bishops tomb is engraved with things that he enjoyed such as hunting and foilage and these dinosaur engravings...


Animal found after millions of years...

The discovery is an example of what scientists call the "Lazarus effect," a situation when an animal known only through the fossil record is found living.

Perhaps the best known example of the Lazarus effect is the coelacanth, a lobe-finned fish discovered off the coast of South Africa that scientists thought died out at least 65 million years ago.

Most examples of the Lazarus effect in mammals, though, only go back 10,000 years or so.

"It is an amazing discovery and it's the coelacanth of rodents," said study coauthor Mary Dawson of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History. "It's the first time in the study of mammals that scientists have found a living fossil of a group that's thought to be extinct for roughly 11 million years. That's quite a gap. Previous mammals had a gap of only a few thousand to just over a million years."


Once thought to be extinct for MILLIONS of years, yet it is still alive and well....


this story of a dinosaur killed:

"The Brazilian Minister at La Paz, Bolivia, had remitted to the Minister of Foreign Affairs in Rio photographs of drawings of an extraordinary saurian killed on the Beni after receiving thirty-six balls. By order of the President of Bolivia the dried body, which had been preserved in Asuncion, was sent to La Paz." The "monster" was reported to be twelve meters long (39 ft) from snout to point of the tail, which latter was flattened. It’s head resemblance the head of a dog and its legs were short, ending with formidable claws. The legs and abdomen sported a kind of scale armour, and all the back is protected by a still thicker and double cuirass, starting from behind the ears of the anterior head, and continuing to the tail. The neck is long, and the belly large and almost dragging on the ground."( "A Bolivian Saurian," Scientific American, 49:3, 1883.)

No one really knows if the above story is true or not. But hey, its interesting to consider.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 03:46 PM
reply to post by TheMythLives

Once thought to be extinct for MILLIONS of years, yet it is still alive and well....

It's habitat is 2000 feet below sea level, and is only raised to the surface when a fisherman accidentally catches them. There's a difference between that and making that claim on land.

On the engraving, since it has wording that appears on either side, is there a translation?
Note the tails and legs, they appear much more like a mammal, especially a large cat.
It may be a animal, but except for the neck itself, the appearance itself matches a cat.

And the Bolivian encounter, again, save for the neck, could match a crocodile or alligator.

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:02 PM
reply to post by disgustedbyhumanity

Call it what you'd like. Once you look at these "dinosaurs" you'll see they all have mammalian body parts with exaggerated features.

Here's an article about the fisherman "pleasiasaur"

Or it could be the mythical sea lion here:

The intertwined long necked beasts have sea lion heads.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Gorman91]

posted on Jun, 10 2009 @ 04:23 PM
reply to post by TheMythLives

If those are dinosaurs, why do they walk like mammals? No quadruped dinosaur walked on its ankles. However, such common religious symbolic animals like lions and dogs do.

Sorry, there's no dinosaur anatomy here. Even the tail on the left look lion-like.

A good REAL possible evidence for your cause would be Ica burrial stones.

South America is an ideal location for preservation due to the topology. I'm still trying to figure it out myself.

[edit on 10-6-2009 by Gorman91]

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 12:03 PM
Keeping in mind most dinosaurs (apparently) were the same size as a small sheep so... we may just not have found them yet.

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 01:01 PM
reply to post by TheMythLives

Well i assumed you were a creationist because of "Southern by the grace of God." I mean lol what else am i to expect. But if you're not one then you're not. But in any case, why haven't scientists accepted dinosaurs living in the modern world as a reality? If there's so much evidence why aren't i reading about it in science books?

Let me guess, you think it's a conspiracy? That there's this huge conspiracy that science has to suppressed the truth about dinosaurs still walking around. Where in fact science says the exact opposite. It's an established fact that birds are the only descendants left of the dinosaurs, so right there there's proof that dinosaurs still exist in some form today. But of course not in the manner that you mean, but that's as close as you'll ever get.

But let's say that it's true, that there is a conspiracy. That by and large every single scientist that is in the field of science today is trying to suppress it, let's say that's the case. All that the supporters of the idea that dinosaurs and man lived together would have to do in order to get a foot in the door is to present some evidence. That's how the scientific process works, it doesn't matter how outrages your ideas are as long as the evidence is on your side you will win people over.

Knowledge and facts are demonstrable so if you can show somebody that they are wrong and that your entire dinosaur theory has merit and you're able to use actual evidence to demonstrate your point, then that would win people over.

If it didn't win all of these scientists who are intrenched against it over, then the new scientists who are coming up, the people who are just getting into the field would all be able to tell that the evidence is on your side and the lab work and the evidence would speak for itself - there would be no denying it. No matter how insane a theory might sound, if the evidence is on its side then it will eventually be accepted, because rational people to not deny demonstrable evidence.

So even if you're right and there's this ridiculous conspiracy that's holding back the truth about dinosaurs, even if you're right about that, you're still wrong because eventually your ideals would have hit the school books anyway.

[edit on 20-6-2009 by andre18]

posted on Jun, 27 2009 @ 10:39 PM
Man I remember the old days when we were taught that dinosaurs were cold-blooded. There is a odd chance some might still lurk around today. Some areas of the world are remote and not fully explored. We are still [re]discovering new species from fossils. Odds are pretty against anything really large still being around. But some species surviving till recent history sounds possible and plausiable. Hey the old knights may have contributed to their extinction. We should not assume anything nature likes to confound humanity.

posted on Jun, 28 2009 @ 05:06 AM
If you're referring to dinosaurs similar to those from 65 odd million years ago, then the short answer is to a high degree of probability is NO.
For them to still be in existance would imply sufficient numbers to maintain a strong and genetically diverse breeding stock to survive the mega-millenia. Hard to imagine them successfully hiding from the global encroaches of modern civilzation.

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9 >>

log in