Thread: Did man walk with the dinosaurs?

No. They are separated by 65 million years.

I can only hope that this is a bad joke.

Sigh, that's about what I expected from you people. The length of time between my post and those replies indicates you didn't examine that site in the least. It must be nice to know everything.

Originally Posted by The Cusp

Sigh, that's about what I expected from you people. The length of time between my post and those replies indicates you didn't examine that site in the least. It must be nice to know everything.

You had a question, and I answered it. I don't give credibility to what mythology buffs trying to make money off books have to say about it. I looked at some of it, and it was laughable. Every dinosaur extinction theory worth anything says they became extinct 65 million years before humans were ever here. If you don't want to know my view, mention that next time.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

If you don't want to know my view, mention that next time.

For future reference, I'm not interested in hearing your crap ever.

Originally Posted by The Cusp

For future reference, I'm not interested in hearing your crap ever.

What if I tell you that Adam and Eve rode their dinosaurs when they went talking snake hunting?

Originally Posted by bluefinger

Damn that fucking Allah-saurus...

Ah yes, the Genesis Park! Talk about going out of your way to "substantiate" a claim!

I've read as much as I can stand there. I can no longer fill myself with their baloney.

THis is just theories based on depictions of dragons, which are common in the mythology of almost every known historical culture. No one alive now knows, or at least is willing to explain, where the idea of dragons came from, but it's assumed to have been from fossil records about whioch stories wrere told, then spread and changed (i personally don;t like this theory, but it's the best I've heard.) As for the fossil footprints, at least two of those, and probably several more, are both proven and admitted to be hoaxes, so I find that decreases the likelihood that the rest of the site is more factual than, say, wikipedia a couple of years ago. Probably less.

It only appeared that the dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago because in the epic battle between man and saurians, a super-sayan monkey-beast came to our defense and launched a level five attack, blowing the dinosaurs 65 million years into the past. And THE LORD looked upon it, and sayeth "Holy Shit."

Originally Posted by JET73L

THis is just theories based on depictions of dragons, which are common in the mythology of almost every known historical culture. No one alive now knows, or at least is willing to explain, where the idea of dragons came from, but it's assumed to have been from fossil records about whioch stories wrere told, then spread and changed (i personally don;t like this theory, but it's the best I've heard.)

<------------this guy might know something about it.

Yes, man did walk with dinosaurs. We have pictures to prove it.

I find the universal concept of the dragon and it's apparent correlation with dinosaurs to be interesting. I know there is no historical connection there, but I find it interesting anyway.

I agree with Enterer. I like the mythology of it all.

I think it is interesting to think of small populations of monsterous creatures living longer than we currently believe. I'm talking purely from a mythological standpoint, and I'm not referring to any creationism / flood myth type scenario. I'm referring to more of the cryptozoology type B.S. that is all over the internet. It fascinates me, even though I realize it is bull.

I love how people with a limited understanding of history and mythology can smash the two together with fascinating results. For example, read this rediculous theory that someone obviously took a lot of time putting together:
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/nation10.htm

Especially the part halfway through titled:
Table 4. ZOOLOGICALLY APPLIED TERMS IN THE BEOWULF.

It's awesome! I love it! I think you can appreciate such things without committing to believing them.

Tyrannosaurus din't live 150 mya.

Get the fuck out.

the need of fundies to prove their idea of genesis has tired me, and websites such as that are growing hard to visit. or even read, and this coming from someone who loves to read the craziest stuff around

HOWEVER, there have always been stories of people seeing dinosaur like creatures. every now and then we discover an animal that we thought should have been extinct for millions of years - animals from the dinosaur age. I'm not saying there are any dinos running around today, but it is a possibility some prehistoric dino like creature could have survived till the day of man. crocs certainly did.

maybe this dino like creature was on the verge of extinction around the time of early man, making there appearance mystical - maybe inspiring the dragon?

or maybe the dinos that people saw out in the wild were a diseased featherless bird - like the elmendorf dog case being labeled as the chupacabra. =b

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elmendorf_Beast

Originally Posted by The Cusp

I had heard something about a 150 million year old cave painting that depicted a T-Rex, so I did a search to try to find out more about it, and came across the most fascinating site. It's well worth the read no matter where you stand on evolution.

http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/exhibit/exhibit.htm

Btw: That was faked.

Aren't dinosaurs just another name from dragons. Yeah, and dragon is written in the bible somewhere. So yes, they did it sas in the bible.

Anyway, think about it, if a lizard could live a thousand years, wouldn't it grow big, then wouldn't in a thousand years it would be as big as a bus or something.

^lol

I like the theory that the dragons came from finding dino bones. It makes the most sense to me. Apparently the idea of cyclops in Greece came from finding mastadon skulls with no tusks as well. At least thats what the history channel says

Seriously though, there are numerous extant creatures that, given a game of telephone played across continents, could account for dragons--not least of all dragons, as in komodo. Familiarity with snakes + valley-dweller's first view of a river from afar = dragons. Dinosaurs need not be involved, and really don't bear that close a resemblance to dragons of myth, which tend to be impossibly large serpents (i.e. exaggerated fear/archetypefication of snakes), not raptors or appatosaurs. The Western dragon, aggressive, dominant and maiden-ravaging, is basically a big scaly penis. Any connection to dinosaurs is a stretch well after the fact.

I'm not sure I buy that completely. I don't really 'see' a snake when I look at most depictions of dragons. And Why would the giant lizard be such a constant? Why not giant rats or giant frogs?

Originally Posted by The Enterer

I'm not sure I buy that completely. I don't really 'see' a snake when I look at most depictions of dragons. And Why would the giant lizard be such a constant? Why not giant rats or giant frogs?

Humans all over the world have had a fear/worship relationship with snakes throughout history, and many people have a fear of snakes written deeply in their genes, to the extent that any snake they encounter literally appears monstrous and huge. It's only natural that, in depicting this fear, we conflate serpent features with other natural enemies--lions, bats, wolves--and connect them to any related creature we encounter, like monitor lizards or dinosaur bones, but snakes remain the creatures with perhaps the single strongest hold on our imagination. For the agricultural societies in which dragon myths arose, where most people worked in the fields, this had to be doubly true.

Our modern depictions tend to be lion bodies with crocodile legs and serpent necks, and more creatures of the air than the earth and water, which divorces them in our minds from their origins, but they still bear little resemblance to a T-rex or Pterodactyl.

So why do you think it is that the serpent motif cuts so deeply into the human psyche? It's always interested me that the snake seems to take on opposite meanings as a symbol in different cultures.

EDIT: Now that I think of it cultures do seem to see snakes and dragons in the same light. Where dragons are bad snakes are evil, Where snakes are wise dragonons are good juju.

Originally Posted by Seismosaur

Btw: That was faked.

What?? But it looks so real!