Fire Breathing Dragons

Another idea just came to mind.

Perhaps the fire breathing aspect is more about the sense of being burned. For example some reptiles spit acid and if you touch it it burns your skin, maybe this idea was passed on through stories and turned into fire breathing because fire also burnt the skin and i expect people were most likely pagan's who worshipped the elements to give importance to fire?

and we still do have big reptiles like the komodo dragon

homepage.mac.com...

another idea is the inca stones

ancientx.com...

not sure about the date of these but it is claimed that they were manmade long ago perhaps giving further support to humans co existing alongside dinousaurs at some point, which could have made the "giant dragon" type stories

reply to post by TheNewKid


I like your idea of reptiles spitting acid or chemical that wasn't necessarily fire breathing. What we need to be careful of here is the word burn. We don't want to connect a word in English with the way words are used in other languages. On the other hand I can see that the action of pain from acid is similar with similar results to contact with fire.

The Inca stones are modern. They are not old.

TheNewKid
Thanks for the interesting website. I enjoyed reading the article about the Ica.
The idea of what fire might mean is interesting. The bombardier beetle uses a chemical reaction. I think that is an acceptable definition of fire breathing.

stereologist,
I wasn’t implying that a population of T Rexes still exists in the Amazon. When natives report strange or larger creatures, they are often considered to be fantasy or mythical or superstition.
I think that conditions on earth have changed enough to produce somewhat more diminutive creatures. Perhaps the Little Ice Age marked the end of dinosaurs/dragons in Europe.
I doubt that any fire breathing dragons are still alive. I do think the literature and art suggest that a type of dinosaurs did exist long after it was commonly thought they became extinct.
We may explore a new path here: www.mythicalcreaturesguide.com...
(My only reserve with this site is that it attributes human emotion to dragons. I don’t believe that.)

Western Dragons
These enormous, fire-breathing serpents have scaly bodies and huge bat like wings. Fierce and always hungry, a Western dragon will eat anything but especially likes weak, young, human flesh. Dragons live in caves, mountains, or lakes. They were particularly active in the Middle Ages, when brave knights challenged them to battle.

Eastern Dragons
Compared to Western dragons, these beasts are quite small. Their bodies are long, and they have two horns for ears. They have no wings, and their soft breath is said to form clouds. They do not roar; instead they make the sounds of beating gongs and jingling bells. Chinese dragons dine on sparrows. They live wherever there is water. The western and eastern dragons are some of the most referred to of the dragon species. Many trans-breed dragons have derived from these two types. In a few instances, some Dragons will take livestock from nearby farms. Many times the missing will be sheep.

Are dragons are one of man's greatest achievements of fiction? Dragons may have been real. Think about this: Many people believe dinosaurs didn't die out, they evolved. Some people even say that T-Rex evolved into chickens! What if in-between this evolution was a reptile bird? A flying lizard? A dragon?! But that would mean that humans were alive during an evolution.

This is the point where you and I have our greatest point to tension.

What people need to remember is that some dinosaurs were only the size of a chicken. Just as mammals have diversified from the shrew to the elephant and whale, so too did dinosaurs diversify. Some were stunningly big and others small.

What about a dinosaur that is small and lives in the canopies of the rain forest. That could provide a large enough territory, and remove the animal from the the immediate view of hunters. On the other hand, native hunters are good and they have hunted canopy animals, and done that successfully. It also doesn't explain dead falling to the forest floor. Still, it might be possible.

Another condition that might hide such a creature is that it has been found in the fossil evidence, but has been misidentified as a bird or other maybe a lizard. Animals that live in erosional zones are unlikely to be found in the fossil record. High mountains are bad places for animals to live if they want to make an entry in the fossil record (obviously joking here about the intent).

I always get a kick out of the anthropomorphizing of animals. We do it all of the time. Why should dragons be left out? They are given language, intelligence, and often wisdom.

"English word "dragon" derives from Greek δράκων (drákōn), "dragon, serpent of huge size, water-snake", which probably comes from the verb δρακεῖν (drakeîn) "to see clearly".[1]"

Dinosaur and mammalian fossils were occasionally mistaken for the bones of dragons and other mythological creature; for example, a discovery in 300 BC in Wucheng, Sichuan, China, was labeled as such by Chang Qu

Source: en.wikipedia.org...

i thought this was interesting just picked out a few parts relating to origin

Dragon activity in Europe seems to correspond to the Medieval Warm Period which occurred from about AD 950–1250. The warm period was followed by the Little Ice Age (LIA). The warming trend may have allowed larger reptiles to grow and spread from more equatorial area. During that time, Greenland was green and grapes grew in England. When the climate again turned cold, they died out, perhaps only surviving in areas like the Congo or Amazon Basin.
en.wikipedia.org...

I also found a site that reiterates the theory that I set forth at the beginning of this discussion:
www.allaboutcreation.org...
“We have a history of dragons because ancient peoples from all over the world spoke about unusual, reptile-like creatures (large and small) that once roamed the earth. People from Europe called them “dragons.” The descriptions sounded similar to dinosaurs. Dragon pictures are found in Africa, India, Europe, the Middle East, the Orient and every other part of the world. Dinosaur-like animals have been drawn and written about since the beginning of recorded history. “

I wondered about this statement and did some checking:
“Scientists agree that legends are almost always based on facts, not just imagination.”
I found this website that differentiated between legend and myth.
www.diffen.com...
It’s not as fine a line as I thought it would be.

We personify many animals and give them human attributes. I think dragons are associated with evil because of Biblical teaching. The Serpent is also called the Dragon. He is intelligent, subtle, and cursed, a creature to be killed or avoided. In non-Christian areas, he is considered to be wise and sought after.
I can’t explain the treasure seeking dragon, unless they are like my cockatiel. She will “go for the gold” in a heartbeat.

reply to post by zachi


There are a few false claims on the "all about creation" web page.
1. No human footprints have been found with dinosaur fossils - none at all
2. It claims sea monsters have been captured in modern times - not true
3. Dinosaurs were not created along with man - 55 million years or more of separation
4. No evidence exists for a global flood
5. Evidence of rain can be found in ancient rocks
6. No iguana can grow to a few tons

I did find the distinction between legend and myth interesting. Understanding the subtleties of language is important to use words well.

One of the commonest human abilities given to animals is the ability to speak. This happens in myths and legends from around the world. It happens in modern stories. Where are the talking animals? I see the existence of dragons no more compelling than talking animals. You'd think that if someone killed a dragon that someone like a king would have kept a skull as part of the royal assets. That would be a lot showier than the antlers of an Irish elk or the horns of the aurochs. Where are they?

I don't know if you have studied the creationist perspective.
This is a typical creationist argument:
1. No human footprints have been found with dinosaur fossils - none at all
www.rae.org... This is an interesting article with photos.
For a creationist, footprints are icing on the cake.
orgs.usd.edu... Here is some interesting information on dating.

2. It claims sea monsters have been captured in modern times - not true
www.who-sucks.com...
www.gennet.org...
www.pibburns.com... This site has a long list of cryptids.

3. Dinosaurs were not created along with man - 55 million years or more of separation.
Creationists do not believe in conventional dating methods.
Here is some interesting information on dating.
orgs.usd.edu...
If you are a creationist, dinosaurs were created earlier in the day that God made man.
The not fossils occurring together isn’t a problem for them.
This is the evolutionary idea. www.actionbioscience.org...
Fossil dating is accurate since the method follows strict scientific guidelines:
• the age of rocks around a fossil can be considered - that’s circular reasoning since rocks are dated by fossils and fossils are dated by rock strata.
• mathematical calculations are used
• the state of decay, carbon-14, and isotopes figure in calculations - Mathematical calculations are great, but how do you know how much radioactive material was present to begin with? Creationists believe in the apparent age theory. The Earth was created with age just as Adam and Eve were.
• tree of life relationships often help sort the dates - canopy or greenhouse theory explains why the break between “prehistoric and historic” times.
4. No evidence exists for a global flood www.globalflood.org...

5. Evidence of rain can be found in ancient rocks
I couldn’t find this topic on the net.
6. No iguana can grow to a few tons
According to the canopy theory, harmful rays of the sun were blocked. Since reptiles never stop growing, they would have had long life spans and could have been very big.

African gray parrots have a very good vocabulary. Some give appropriate comments and can choose objects by color and shape.
en.wikipedia.org...

I don't have a complete response, but I did want to mention the Tuba city dinosaur tracks. I am deeply disturbed by the extensive damage done to the dinosaur tracks. They have been heavily chiseled and completely ruined. It is really sad. I saw the tracks back in 1984 before they were vandalized by locals. After the Jurassic park movies came out the tracks were modified and so-called guides showed up to illustrate the claws and other features that had not been originally seen.

The guide showed us what he thought was an allosaurus talon. I rather doubt it was one, but I suppose it could have been. The entire area was strewn with brightly colored stones, and concretions. He showed us a spherical concretion called a "Moki marble." I told him it was an eye of a whale. It sure looked like one.

This is a typical scene in the 90s. The Moki marble by the way is a concretion common in the area and other parts of the Southwest.

None of the photos purporting to be human tracks are human tracks. In fact they aren't tracks at all, but rock fragments.

I rekon if they did exist (which they don't, though I think it's possible through evolution)

They blatently fart (Methane), it doesen't come out of it's ass but it's redirected into a cavity inside the dragon, in which another chemical is injected and a chemical reaction occurs, igniting the methane, the dragon breathes out heavily and everyting burrrrns. Though, if dragons ever existed (Which they don't), they would have probably gone extinct through accidently inhaling the concuction and frazzling there insides.

EDIT: Another plausible idea, the stored methane is squirted in it's throat, as the dragon exhales he has two granite teeth at the rear of his mouth, as he grinds the two, sparks fly and wham, everyting burrrrrns.

So it's that simple
1. Animal (dragon) farts
2. Fart is stored in a second stomach of sorts
3. Fart is injected into throat cavity
4. Dragon exhales while gnashing two special granite teeth
5. FIRE!!!!

I think... it's possible.

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Mr Zeropoint]

[edit on 12-6-2010 by Mr Zeropoint]

the age of rocks around a fossil can be considered - that’s circular reasoning since rocks are dated by fossils and fossils are dated by rock strata.

That's not true. There are 2 ways to measure time, relative and absolute. Fossils are used to establish relative times. If an absolute measurement is taken in one place it should match the absolute measurement in other places. So no, this is not circular reasoning. There are many ways to do relative ages of rocks. Fossils are simply one means.

Creationists believe in the apparent age theory. The Earth was created with age just as Adam and Eve were.

I've seen this called the hoax Earth notion, because God creates a universe which tells a story that never happened. It is also called the working world idea. I think that's a better description. But you would have to create a world that never existed in which light is made that comes in from distant galaxies for instance.

Evidence of rain can be found in ancient rocks

In field work back in college I have seen rain drop impact marks in rocks. I did a quick search and found this comment:

Rain-drops - small imprints of rain-drops may also be found on some sedimentary rock surfaces; can be used to indicate which way is up in a stratigraphic section.

This is from

According to the canopy theory, harmful rays of the sun were blocked. Since reptiles never stop growing, they would have had long life spans and could have been very big.

The canopy theory is not a theory in the sense of science. Has anyone tried the prediction that the iguana could even reach say 100 pounds? The rate of growth of reptiles is not linear. It does not suggest boundless growth. The rate of growth slows does very quickly and becomes barely perceptible after a while.

I still want to respond to the global flood issue. Once again you've done a fine job of producing lots of information. Cheers.

The global flood link talks little about the evidence for a global flood. It does talk about other issues. Some of which are a bit weird.

On the earth age page
The Age of the Earth

This earnest effort to understand this 'contamination problem' therefore has generated scores of peer-reviewed papers in the standard radiocarbon literature during the last 20 years.

What's weird is that not a single paper is listed or referenced. Ther eis just this unsubstantiated claim. At the bottom of the page are several references to papers, none of which are from scientific peer reviewed journals.

I also noticed at the top of the page that the use of Uniformitarianism is more like the post Hutton, pre 1900s version of the use of the term. It certainly does not match modern thinking about Uniformitarianism.

Later on the C14 dating is applied to materials for which the technique does not apply. It's a rather sad effort to make a false claim.

I think some form of Dinosaur was mistaken for a Dragon at one time. I think the entire myth grew off of that sighting.

I just have serious doubts that Dragons in the AD&D sense, have ever existed.

reply to post by -Blackout-


How would a single sighting or a hand full of sightings lead to the notion of dragons across the northern hemisphere?

reply to post by stereologist


/shrug - Its about the only thing that makes sense to me. Dinosaurs are the only living thing that were ever on the Earth that came close to looking like a Fire Breathing Dragon of any real size.

So mistaking one for a Dragon, isnt exactly out of the question IMO.

reply to post by -Blackout-


Why do you say that? What about people imagining lizards to be much larger. Look at the paintings. They do not have the dinosaur structure of legs under the body.

Job 19:

[1] Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a cord which thou lettest down?
[2] Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw through with a thorn?
[3] Will he make many supplications unto thee? will he speak soft words unto thee?
[4] Will he make a covenant with thee? wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?
[5] Wilt thou play with him as with a bird? or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?
[6] Shall the companions make a banquet of him? shall they part him among the merchants?
[7] Canst thou fill his skin with barbed iron? or his head with fish spears?
[8] Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no more.
[9] Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be cast down even at the sight of him?
[10] None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is able to stand before me?
[11] Who hath prevented me, that I should repay him? whatsoever is under the whole heaven is mine.
[12] I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely proportion.
[13] Who can discover the face of his garment? or who can come to him with his double bridle?
[14] Who can open the doors of his face? his teeth are terrible round about.
[15] His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.
[16] One is so near to another, that no air can come between them.
[17] They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
[18] By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
[19] Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
[20] Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.
[21] His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.

Doubt it if you will as the Bible is clear that many will be willingly ignorant ( That is dumb on purpose) about the World as created by God and the Word of God as written down.

Fire breathing Dino's or Dragons as they were called before the creation of the word dinosaur.

reply to post by ACTS 2:38


So your proof of fire breathing entities is based on this section of the bible. Then you make the huge leap of faith that this describes a dinosaur. Why? A large reptile is not a dinosaur. A monitor lizard is not a dinosaur even though they are bigger than some dinosaurs.

There are 2 ways to measure time, relative and absolute.

Absolute radiometric dating requires a measurable fraction of parent nucleus to remain in the sample rock. For rocks dating back to the beginning of the solar system, this requires extremely long-lived parent isotopes, making measurement of such rocks' exact ages imprecise. To be able to distinguish the relative ages of rocks from such old material, and to get a better time resolution than that available from long-lived isotopes, short-lived isotopes that are no longer present in the rock can be used.

Just as an example, supposed you analyse a rock and find that 20% of the rock is U-238 and 80% is lead. How do you know that it was originally 100% U-238? Was ALL lead U-238 at one time?

The apparent age theory.

I've seen this called the hoax Earth notion, because God creates a universe which tells a story that never happened. It is also called the working world idea. I think that's a better description. But you would have to create a world that never existed in which light is made that comes in from distant galaxies for instance.

Scientist can measure the speed of light. If God created the stars and all the galaxies at one time, it was for the same reason He created Adam and Eve as adults. According to Genesis, God spoke light and dark into existance, then seperated them into day and night. Sun,moon, and stars weren't made until the 4th day.

Rain-drops - small imprints of rain-drops may also be found on some sedimentary rock surfaces; can be used to indicate which way is up in a stratigraphic section.

The canopy theory...how about a big snake
Then: Paleontologists estimated the length of the snake to be 43 feet long and estimated to weigh 2,500 pounds!
Now:The largest anaconda ever measured was almost 28 feet long with a girth of 44 inches. She wasn't weighed at the time she was caught, but scientists estimate that she must have weighed over 500 lbs.

www.extremescience.com...

Thanks, I have been enjoying the debate too.

reply to post by Mr Zeropoint


If we could get cows to fart methane through their udders, and we feed them cocoa, we could have hot chocolate milk. If they practices a little, they could even provide us with roasted marshmallows!

Hey Acts2:38
Good for you! It's a KJB

[edit on 6/14/2010 by zachi]