This Carving Should Not Be There ~ Ta Prohm Revisited

Yes, I know, 99.9% of evidence we have says this is not possible. This thread is about the other .1%. I'll try my best not to bring up human & dinosaur footprints found together in Texas, as that would guarantee a flame war

Is this a dinosaur or not?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e2c95177b5d9.jpg[/atsimg]

At Ta Prohm, near Angkor Wat and built by the epic builder king Jayavarman VII in the late 1100s, a small carving on a crumbling temple wall seems to show a dinosaur - a stegosaurus, to be exact. The hand-sized carving can be found in a quiet corner of the complex, a stone temple engulfed in jungle vegetation where the roots of centuries-old banyan trees snake through broken walls.

Source

The site was used in the movie Tomb Raider . The carving of what appears to be a Stegosaurus. Yes, this subject has been discussed here again and again. It seems to me to continue to raise a very important question about mankind’s past…Could they have found bones, reconstructed them, and came up with this carving? There is no evidence of this type of activity. Is it simply a tree behind a rhinoceros?

They lived some 150 to 145 million years ago, in an environment and time dominated by the giant sauropods Diplodocus, Camarasaurus, and Apatosaurus.

Source

*the head does appear smaller than in our carving*
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3fbf4a5fa4a8.jpg[/atsimg]

Mitochondrial DNA and fossil evidence indicates that modern humans originated in Africa about 200,000 years ago

Source


Something doesn’t add up.

Did man and dinosaurs walk together?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/590f8ceea829.jpg[/atsimg]

If Stegosaurus lived in Cambodia only 1000 years ago when the Angkor Wat/Ta Prohm temples were built, why are there no Stegosaurus bones found in Asia, whether in archeological sites or in the fossil record?

Some have suggested a rhinoceros or boar in front of a vegetated background. I think a much better alternative is a chameleon. The head and eyes are right, the overall body shape isn’t bad, and chameleons have a serrated ridge along their back (though not as pronounced as on the carving).

Another Side Of The Debate For What It's Worth

That carving shouldn't be there!

Since they quarried rock to build their temples the only sensible answer is that they did indeed unearth a good stegosaurus skeleton.
Perhaps it was carved on the temple for "interest", just like things are placed in museums for us to wonder about.
Steve Vai is da man btw

reply to post by Signals
Very nice OP. Well-laid out and illustrated

The carving has been discussed a lot on ATS. IIRC Gemwolf's is a good one to look at....long thread.

My take is that it can't be a steggy...they were extinct over 140 million years ago. No evidence has been found that even a maverick anti-extinction outfit of survivalist Steggys made it through the dawn of homo sapiens. No bones etc.

A popular interpretation is that the carving is a chameleon and the 'spines' are a continued curlicue of the frame. I favour that idea. Despite this, it's a poor rendition of a chameleon when many more of the other carvings are accurate...and superbly executed. This leaves room for debate amongst some people...

Not stegasaurus IMO

Edit to add...Steggies did roam the area millions of years ago...stirring the pot...





[edit on 19-3-2010 by Kandinsky]

Originally posted by Kandinsky
Despite this, it's a poor rendition of a chameleon when many more of the other carvings are accurate...and superbly executed. This leaves room for debate amongst some people...

Good point , that's what makes the least sense.

How can one accept the other recognizable figures yet discount this one?

reply to post by Signals
Personally, I discount it for reasons mentioned in the previous post.

Maybe it was an apprentice piece? A bad day for the stonemason? A work of imagination?

It's interesting in its own right, hence the discussion. Without evidence that steggies somehow succeeded for millions of years...we should rule out the notion that it represents one.

Being slightly pedantic, it defies natural selection too. Stegasaurus survives for millions of years without predators and doesn't evolve? No chance!

The portrayed animal in the carving is not of a small body type.
His legs are chubby and elongated -- unlike a chamaleon`s skinny and short ones.
I think it could be an extinct animal, but one of a species gone rather a few hundred years ago; not millions.

The symbol that encircles the smaller graving, what`s it? (maybe it could shed some light on the subject. What does it mean?). I was thinking of what you said about it being an adorned mundane animal or a misrepresented one. But I remember watching a documentary on Angkor Wat and that thing is amazing, impressive. I don`t believe its builders would allow a gross mistake to go unnoticed or unrepaired.


[edit on 19/3/2010 by maoklein]

of course its a frigging stegosaurus. use your eyes. what else is it, seriously?

so logicially the answer is that they saw a live one and carved it.

hence, logically, the answer is that isolated pockets of stegosaurus must have survived the general extinction until recently.

this is not at all impossible.

there continue to be rumours and sightings by locals and others of dinos in the swamps in the congo; also in papua new guinea in the heavy rainforest. many other sightings abound, including many of pterasaurus in texas and the usa. the ancient babylonians are believed to have worshipped a dino which they carved on the walls o their gates. the dino is mentioned in ancient texts and is a bit of a tourist attraction.

anyone saying an x million year old animal cant exist today just doesnt know their biology. there is a xxx million year old lizard in new zealand that hasnt changed since the age of the dinos. there is an xxx million year old fish in australia (lungfish) which hasnt changed either.

there is nothing odd about pockets of animals surviving an otherwise general extinction.

the dinos carved on the ica stones are another interesting example. but the romans have a mosaic of group of soldiers trying to kill what looks like a dipoloducus or type of dinosaur. There are many such depictions in history via art and written sources. not surprising then, are the many modern day sightings as well.

answer: clearly some survived. stop being so skeptical. if darwin was as skeptical as you guys he would never have discovered anything.

this is what amuses me about this site. you guys cry out for evidence, and when someone kindly carves you a stegasaurus, you won't believe what you're seeing.

which is why if a ufo landed on your heads you probably wouldnt believe it either.

sometimes you can take skepticisim too far, and it just becomes stupid.

reply to post by rapunzel222


good points. but it could also be an insect.

reply to post by Kandinsky


i kinda repeated your main argument, bah.

edit to uncontradict myself: actually it couldn`t be an insect for the exact same reason of it not being a chamaleon. -.- also, a 4 legged insect... too exotic ^^

[edit on 19/3/2010 by maoklein]

[edit on 19/3/2010 by maoklein]

reply to post by rapunzel222
Hiya Rapunzel

The Ica Stones are hoaxes. Not because people think they're dodgy...they're admitted hoaxes. Nice to see you on the boards...I never know whether to or

reply to post by rapunzel222




The most logical answer appears to be what we are looking at.

Is that a stretch? If so I just don't see why.

reply to post by Signals


Perhaps the image is from an animal that their ancient ancestors knew --the steg and was passed down through the ages in oral tradition. You know tales of what accomplishments of ancestors--ie hunting dinos.

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by Signals

 

Perhaps the image is from an animal that their ancient ancestors knew --the steg and was passed down through the ages in oral tradition. You know tales of what accomplishments of ancestors--ie hunting dinos.

Did a recent thread not come up with the fact that it is a fairly recent addition to the carvings? Also, that while it resembles a steg...there are as many actual differences in physiology as those discounting the chameleon therapy.

Don't bet the farm just yet...

Since when, are we, the humans of the last century, the one humans who have been able to find dinosaur bones?

It's not plausible to consider that people back in the 1100's hadn't stumbled across bones before from a skeleton of a dead dinosaur.

If someone who lived in the time of jesus had stubbled across bones and kept digging to uncover the whole skeleton, they would have been able to put them together to see what it would look like as an entire.

There would have been an artist there to draw what it could have looked like as well, as it compares to other species alive at the time like certain reptiles.

Conclusion, WE SHOULD NOT BE HERE

Yes. That is a dinosaur.
And while it could be that these ancients found some fossils, called in some artists and did some ancient CSI type artist-like reconfig, Sig, I would say that it's more likely that man once walked with dinosaurs.

I think it is a dog that somebody put one of those stupid halloween costumes on. That seems to be the logical explanation.

You don't think ancient peoples ever dug up fossilized remains?

Huh.

Originally posted by rapunzel222
many other sightings abound, including many of pterasaurus in texas and the usa.

I take it you mean one of these little critters.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/5e8e7b782650.jpg[/atsimg]

And yes, it is exactly that. This is a Stegosaurus in the relief. You would be FN nuts to think otherwise.

Just my two cents

Ciao

Shane

reply to post by 517.101


I dont think they would be able to put the bones in the correct places.
think about the greeks who made myths of giants when they were really dinosaur bones.

[edit on 21-3-2010 by platipus]

reply to post by Signals


Looks more like a Chameleon or Rhinoceros to me than a dinosaur. The possibility exists that they did find some Stegosaur fossils that were well preserved enough to carve a likeness. However the fossil hypothesis is unlikely as finding a complete skeleton is essentially unheard of and dinosaur bones found by most peoples pre-19th century were interpreted as giant bones or dragon bones usually.

Look at the placement of the eyes on the side of the head though, it looks a lot like a Chameleon. I'm not sure what types of lizards live in Cambodia but you have to admit it looks a lot like this:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/baf00e901486.jpg[/atsimg]



If the strong resemblance to known animals weren't enough just imagine the implications if it had been a real Stegosaurus co-existing with people. It would mean that somehow a Stegosaur managed to survive the mass extinction AND that it hadn't changed enough through evolution to look different. Remember that today's birds evolved from dinosaurs, so we know that organisms can change a lot over the course of 65 Million years. Going down this line of reasoning based on a sculpture that already resembles known animals seems fool-hardy to me.

[edit on 21-3-2010 by Titen-Sxull]