Printable View
http://www.genesispark.org/genpark/f...aphic/delk.jpg
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
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.
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
For future reference, I'm not interested in hearing your crap ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
What if I tell you that Adam and Eve rode their dinosaurs when they went talking snake hunting?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
Damn that fucking Allah-saurus...Quote:
Originally Posted by bluefinger
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."
<------------this guy might know something about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JET73L
Yes, man did walk with dinosaurs. We have pictures to prove it.
http://images.starpulse.com/Photos/P...tones-cn10.jpg
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
Btw: That was faked.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
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?
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Enterer
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.
What?? But it looks so real! :pope:Quote:
Originally Posted by Seismosaur
:lol:
The Flinstones are also proof positive of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
Dude, universal mind already made that pointm and he did a far better job of it than you i might add!Quote:
Originally Posted by iseeu
That wasn't the point of this thread. It was a good read and had some interesting information, like the conditions on earth in the dinosaur era and how they might have contributed to things growing larger. The "Sonic Bloom" growing technique developed from studying those conditions is just amazing, and I can't help but wonder what that would do to a pot garden.:roll:
But as usual, we can't get away from a basic schoolyard mentality. I really should have known better to start a thread like this, but it's fun every now and then just to how people react.
Oh hey. Archaeological anomalies. They are always fuin. Did you know they found plans for ancient Egyptian lightbulbs, and computers, and batteries, and this interesting two billion year old sphere in a lump of coal, and cities that appear to have been nuked, and the ancient Indians had airships and space travel technology. Probably the ancient Egyptians used van der graaf generators in ritual!
Lots of ancient tribes knew about stars we hadn't discovered, or dinosaurs. Some old maps even show what look like the outline of Antarctica! Maybe they got these ideas from ancient Atlantis, or aliens, or ghosts.
I am willing to entertain all of these ideas because they are very very entertaining. There is a lot we haven't fitted into our idea of history yet and I'm interested in what all this weird evidence means.
But the idea that the world was created in six days by a being from another dimension approximately 10,000 years ago to be a home for two primates who were tricked into eating an apple by a talking snake does not to me seem like the most probably explanation.
More likely, aliens have been watching the Earth for billions of years and one day they got so drunk that they ended up accidentally teaching our ancestors palaeontology.
But yeah, for the record the facts there are interesting. The problem with sources like this is knowing what is factual and what is hearsay or really badly misinterpreted.
What the fuck are you talking about? Jesus Christ on a cracker.Quote:
Originally Posted by apachama
It's always fun to say ridiculous things with-out backing them up.Quote:
Originally Posted by apachama
I think apachama is referring to
Baghdad Batteries
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad_Battery
Antikythera Mechanism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism
Vitrified Desert Glass and Vitrified Forts
http://jcolavito.tripod.com/lostcivilizations/id9.html
The Nazca Lines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazca_lines
And the like. I agree that it is very interesting, but purely from a mythological standpoint. I love what conspiracy theories and the interent have done to myth making. Some people feel that unexplained mysteries need fantastic myths as explanations. It is like backing up in your car, and automatically assuming there is a unicorn hiding in your blind spot.
You can tell that humans were not around with dinosaurs bacause of the fossil locations. The dinosaur bones are way deeper than human bones.
65 million years ago, some dude had a NASTY foot injury for a little while (before he was eaten).
Archaeological anomalies are quite real. The problem is that books on them tend toassume all sorts of crazy things. Also, some of the evidence they refer to is obviously a hoax if you look into it at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grod
I imagine this is especially true for sites like this. I mean, they take the testimony of a ten year old boy as obviously not faked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apachama
lol! I love this
it is very fun when history pops up with something that we can't easily answer - we'll probably never know - but its fun all the same
Just -- if you're going to come up with things like that, try to put at least one source after you say it.Quote:
Originally Posted by apachama
I think apachama was simply talking about something, not trying to prove it
everyone hears about some ancient mystery or myth - I mean we all hear about aliens building the pyramids. But I think apachama was just saying "look at these interesting things". but I guess that depends on your age too, how much you've been exposed to the weird side of history
Hey cusp look up michael cremo on youtube. He has theorised man has been around for millions of years.
Er, well technically we have.
The genus Homo has been around for 2MY at least...
Flintstones, meet the Flintstones. They're that modern stone age family....
All right, there is no way those footprints were faked. There is video of them lifting up layers of limestone to find more underneath. Then geologists slice those stone footprints open, and the geological evidence proves they were not carved.
12 minutes into this video to to see them uncover the footprints from the limestone, and at 13 minutes for the geological evidence.
Or just watch the whole thing. Charlton Heston wouldn't lie to you!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...68803639628771
There is a fair chance that most people that visit the religion forum here have already heard of Genesis Park and the Creation evidence Museum, and so would know already that there is no actual evidence and that they just have a bunch of wax statues of dinosaurs with saddles and other similarly ridiculous "evidence".Quote:
Originally Posted by The Cusp
I'd debate this, but I'm rather preocuupied with this dinosaur I'm fighting.
Amusing. One of my bodies got eaten by a t-rex last night.
OP (original picture, in this context) was actually made by UK graffiti artist and guerilla political activist, Banksy
He broke into the Natural History Museum in London and planted the fake fossil in a glass cabinet in the dinosaur exibit, where it went unnoticed by staff for a number of weeks
http://www.banksy.co.uk/menu.html
*edit*
Also known for defacing other people's paintings
http://www.banksy.co.uk/indoors/images/oils/CCTV.jpg
Everything you said pisses me off. Defacing other people's art? Screw him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Yes. Evidence? Dragons in mythology. IT HAS TO BE THAT!
Can you link me to an article where there is some info about the defaced painting you posted. I can't find anything, beside http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7244682.stm. Do you mean defaced as in "I ruin your picture" or in some other way?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot
Defaced, as in, buys a copy of a painting and draws on top of it
This is from 2003, where Banksy bought some random oil painting from a sale somewhere, stencilled over the top, broke into the Tate Modern and glued it onto the wall
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertain...re/3201344.stm
Thanks. I looked at his site and it was quite interesting.
Oh, well that isn't as bad as what I thought you meant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ynot