Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: dragons
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Cryptozoology, Myths and Legends
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
lil gremlin
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 12:02 PM) *
Sure Grem, that really sounds like a cop out answer. It is the same dragon. So tell me which lung do the chinese refer to when they say the oldest ones have wings. The imperial Han lung you call a bixie has prominent wings and a short, western dragon body.



cop out answer my foot.

find me a reference to one as a lung.

the chinese are not saying that the 'earliest' dragons had wings....but mythologically, when a dragon reaches a certain age it gets its wings.

there is a big difference.

Undeadskeptic
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 24 2008, 12:07 AM) *
scientists have pointed out large theropod dinos vs. primitive humans.


Now that I want sources for! I'd bet a bit of cash on the therapod fair enough, but if there were enough cavmen with spears I'm sure they could bring at least one carnosaur down.
Mattshark
QUOTE (Otterclaw @ Apr 23 2008, 01:02 AM) *
That really depends. (science is always either bashing the Bible or using it as a reference to help prove their theories.) I mean, I've noticed that the Bible doesn't say a lot of what you've said it mentioned. Trust me, I should know.

Erm, if you use the bible as a reference you certainly are not doing scientific work and science does not bash the bible (scientific evidence leading to conclusions that do support the bible is not bashing the bible). Science is independent of religion.
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (Mattshark @ Apr 23 2008, 07:35 AM) *
Erm, if you use the bible as a reference you certainly are not doing scientific work and science does not bash the bible (scientific evidence leading to conclusions that do support the bible is not bashing the bible). Science is independent of religion.

dont bring religon into this
Undeadskeptic
QUOTE (WEREGIRL666 @ Apr 24 2008, 12:41 AM) *
dont bring religon into this


He was replying to a comment which did in fact 'bring religon into this' and made a naive generalisation about religon and science. Mattshark was not being opinionated like you imply, he was stating fact.
Mattshark
QUOTE (WEREGIRL666 @ Apr 23 2008, 12:41 PM) *
dont bring religon into this

I am not I am referring to a specific misconceived post by otterclaw.
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (Mattshark @ Apr 23 2008, 07:47 AM) *
I am not I am referring to a specific misconceived post by otterclaw.

i ment 2 everyone not just you sir.
Dariune99
Its actually very difficult not to mention religion as it often bears significance to the tales of dragons.
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (Dariune99 @ Apr 23 2008, 07:55 AM) *
Its actually very difficult not to mention religion as it often bears significance to the tales of dragons.

true....yes ill admit i was wrong sorry sirs.
Dariune99
No worries original.gif

And no one is actually wrong when discussing dragons as there is little evidence to dictate what someone should think or believe original.gif
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (Dariune99 @ Apr 23 2008, 08:02 AM) *
No worries original.gif

And no one is actually wrong when discussing dragons as there is little evidence to dictate what someone should think or believe original.gif

yeah but DC is always doing the religon thing...pisses me off..
Saru
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 12:36 PM) *
1. Yes, many animals as well as people could theoretically 'spew flames' if their methane gasses were to ignite. And scalding hot liquid is spewed from the Bombardier Beetle. Humans are able to spew flames as a popular trick by putting flammable liquid in their mouths and spewing it out with something to ignite it.

But no natural species of animal that actually does do this, not one example of it in nature anywhere.

QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 12:36 PM) *
2. I was going to leave this as a surprise in the book, but it is almost ready for production so I will say it now. Yes, flame spewing could be a defense mechanism, but since dragons are already top order predators, the purpose of breathing fire was simply a dragon trick to make them seem even more godlike to their human worshippers.

There is nothing secret or impossible at all about this. Dragons requested liqour. Even Yahweh whose fire spewing abilities are recorded in the Bible, specifically asks for liquor among all the fatted calves, lambs and children.

Spewing fire is a trick used by dragons exactly as it is used by humans in carnival and nightclub acts. But a dragon could really make an impressive and god-worthy show of it. How would they light their fire? Probably a small torch concealed in a forepaw, or perhaps flint and meteorite iron (until humans made iron strikers). There is nothing amazing or impossible for a sentient creature like a human or dragon to spew flammable liquid out of their mouths.

So you are saying that the concent of a fire breathing dragon isn't based on a dragon's natural ability to breath fire but is instead a case of a dragon performing a magic trick like a fire-eater at a circus with a bottle of liquor and a small concealed torch ?

So dragons don't really breath fire at all then, in that case; doesn't this contradict your previous argument about the possibilities in nature of some animals being theoretically able to breath fire ? What is the relevance to dragons if dragon fire breathing is just a trick ?

Also, given that according to what you've said dragons were huge, sentient, flying reptiles, why would they need to put on a fire breathing display to make themselves appear more Godlike ? Why would dragons require humans to think of them as Gods and why in the present day and age do we still not see these type of draconic displays ?

What evidence do you have to support that this theory is correct ?
Pol_Pot_will_killyou
I didnt read thru most of these posts but I heard a story of Plato writing a first-hand account of seeing dragons in the middle east, describing them as flying like "ribbons". And for years the description of the Dragon of Ishtar Gate has never varied, which seems kind of suspect... Aside from personal accounts, I think dragons are the remnants of early-humanity's compacted fears; the snake, lion, and bird of prey.

-Pol
Undeadskeptic
I agree Pol Pot, 100%, but unknown bones being found and plain lies do come into it too.
zandore
OH MY!
The top man felt compelled to get into this debate.

Back on topic...I think this poll I did a while back fits right in with this thread: Dragons, Do you think they are real

It got closed because of a fellow member (will not mention who rolleyes.gif ) did not like the way the results were going.
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (zandore @ Apr 23 2008, 08:37 AM) *
OH MY!
The top man felt compelled to get into this debate.

Back on topic...I think this poll I did a while back fits right in with this thread: Dragons, Do you think they are real

It got closed because of a fellow member (will not mention who rolleyes.gif ) did not like the way the results were going.

i think they could be real
HAJiME
QUOTE (lil gremlin @ Apr 23 2008, 01:27 PM) *
cop out answer my foot.

find me a reference to one as a lung.

the chinese are not saying that the 'earliest' dragons had wings....but mythologically, when a dragon reaches a certain age it gets its wings.

there is a big difference.

Source?

For god sake people. >:C

And if it's true that the Chinese say this, mythologically, "wings" might not even refer to actual, literal wings.

I agree that the Bixie is more like a cat.

Everywhere I look on the net, it says a Bixie is a Chimaera and cat-like. No where I can see does it suggest they are dragons.

http://www.eskenazi.co.uk/Exhibition/Stocl...t10stoclet.html
http://www.chinese-handicraft.com/lucdy-th...-Bixie_107.html
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=572
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=657

After a quick google search, it looks like most bixies look like ugly fat little lion things. Not like this dragon-esque one - http://www.studiopotter.org/articles/img/art0010c.jpg Which I admit is dragon-like, but still very much feline.

I also think it's no co-incidence that lions are guardians in Chinese culture and that the Bixie is too.
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (HAJiME @ Apr 23 2008, 08:39 AM) *
Source?

For god sake people. >:C

And if it's true that the Chinese say this, mythologically, "wings" might not even refer to actual, literal wings.

I agree that the Bixie is more like a cat.

Everywhere I look on the net, it says a Bixie is a Chimaera and cat-like. No where I can see does it suggest they are dragons.

http://www.eskenazi.co.uk/Exhibition/Stocl...t10stoclet.html
http://www.chinese-handicraft.com/lucdy-th...-Bixie_107.html
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=572
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=657

After a quick google search, it looks like most bixies look like ugly fat little lion things. Not like this dragon-esque one - http://www.studiopotter.org/articles/img/art0010c.jpg Which I admit is dragon-like, but still very much feline.

I also think it's no co-incidence that lions are guardians in Chinese culture and that the Bixie is too.

dragons dont only refer to the east!!!!!!! so what the hell?? western dragons are myth 2!! not just east!!
HAJiME
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Dec 21 2005, 02:27 AM) *
For heavens sake.... READ MY OLD POSTS, I have mentioned sources many, many times. Are you so lazy to do this?

Wow, DC was referring to sources in his old posts way back in 2005... And calling people lazy for not looking them up? How far back does this go???

I say DC's the lazy one, if he can't be arsed to post the sources again. But you all know this.

[/spam]
WEREGIRL666
QUOTE (HAJiME @ Apr 23 2008, 08:45 AM) *
Wow, DC was referring to sources in his old posts in 2005... And calling people lazy for not looking them up?

I say DC's the lazy one, if he can't be arsed to post the sources again.

yeah he really doesnt know that much bout stuff...he is lazy but thats not the topic here
zandore
I wonder if he published the book he has been mentioning since he joined this forum........
Undeadskeptic
Hey Zandore I remember you from the Sightings board.

DC: Does your book make any mention of the New Zealand Dragon, the Taniwha? If so, where does it fit into your theory?
HAJiME
QUOTE (WEREGIRL666 @ Apr 23 2008, 01:48 PM) *
yeah he really doesnt know that much bout stuff...he is lazy but thats not the topic here

To be fair, your posts hardly contribute anything. Which would suggest you don't "know that much about stuff" either.
HAJiME
QUOTE (HAJiME @ Apr 23 2008, 12:26 PM) *
You chose to ignore the fact that snakes do not have ears. Which was my main point. And that dragons are nearly always described as serpents, both by definition "Dragon (from Ancient Greek δράκων - drakōn, "a serpent of huge size, a python, a dragon")" and sightings. And that a serpent is a snake or something snake-like... and symbolizes everything a snake stereotypically invokes.

What I'm missing, though, is why you have any reason to think thats dragons did exist or even still do. There really is no reason to. Nor is there any reason to take a serpent, and transform it into an archosaur.

You grab every slightly reptilians, large cryptid sighting and go "DRAGON!" It's like what Gremlin said about the Bixie. Why do you do it?
Moro
QUOTE
HAJiME Posted Today, 10:44 AM
You grab every slightly reptilians, large cryptid sighting and go "DRAGON!" It's like what Gremlin said about the Bixie. Why do you do it?

That is a very good question, and it does not add any more credibility to the theory.

Inquiring minds would like to know.
The Skeptic Eric Raven
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 22 2008, 07:47 PM) *
The biggest problem with dragon sceptics is that most of them have only the vaguest knowledge of ancient and medieval history, so they have no idea of how common dragon sightings really were.

I think the bigest problem with dragon believers is that they have left reality and logic at the door.
The Skeptic Eric Raven
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 06:43 AM) *
if I still lived in Europe I'd probably use my real name, but here in the Bible Belt..... probably not.

Of course there will be bibliographies, and copious footnotes to every chapter.

Why would the bible belt care? Your book is not going to make anyone believe in dragons. It will be looked at as a piece of fiction.Nothing more.
Pluto-x
Its just like ghosts... its just belief. Unless it can be scientifically proven by someone with credibility???

667-Neighbor of the Beast
QUOTE (Pluto-x @ Apr 23 2008, 12:14 PM) *
Its just like ghosts... its just belief. Unless it can be scientifically proven by someone with credibility???


Unfortunately, he sees himself as that "someone". Although he also claims legitimate scientists also believe in dragons. Let me take you through the though process that he used to come to this coclusion:

Fact: SOME scientists agree that SOME cryptids COULD exist.
DC's erronious opinion: All large crytpid sightings are dragons.
Ergo, by DC's assupmtions: Scientists believe that dragons exist, and your just too stupid to understand the complexity because you know nothing of the subject.

The Skeptic Eric Raven
QUOTE (667-Neighbor of the Beast @ Apr 23 2008, 11:51 AM) *
Unfortunately, he sees himself as that "someone". Although he also claims legitimate scientists also believe in dragons. Let me take you through the though process that he used to come to this coclusion:

Fact: SOME scientists agree that SOME cryptids COULD exist.
DC's erronious opinion: All large crytpid sightings are dragons.
Ergo, by DC's assupmtions: Scientists believe that dragons exist, and your just too stupid to understand the complexity because you know nothing of the subject.

thumbsup.gif
zandore
QUOTE (667-Neighbor of the Beast @ Apr 23 2008, 12:51 PM) *
Fact: SOME scientists agree that SOME cryptids COULD exist.
DC's erronious opinion: All large crytpid sightings are dragons.
Ergo, by DC's assupmtions: Scientists believe that dragons exist, and your just too stupid to understand the complexity because you know nothing of the subject.

ERGO: True
Undeadskeptic
QUOTE (667-Neighbor of the Beast @ Apr 24 2008, 04:51 AM) *
Unfortunately, he sees himself as that "someone". Although he also claims legitimate scientists also believe in dragons. Let me take you through the though process that he used to come to this coclusion:

Fact: SOME scientists agree that SOME cryptids COULD exist.
DC's erronious opinion: All large crytpid sightings are dragons.
Ergo, by DC's assupmtions: Scientists believe that dragons exist, and your just too stupid to understand the complexity because you know nothing of the subject.


Ditto.
HAJiME
QUOTE
The biggest problem with dragon sceptics is that most of them have only the vaguest knowledge of ancient and medieval history, so they have no idea of how common dragon sightings really were.

The biggest problem with dragon believers is that they are incapable of copying and pasting urls which provide examples... Or using a scanner or camera, or using copy and paste.

Just so you know, thats ctrl c to copy on a pc... And ctrl v to paste. On a Mac, you use apple c and apple v.

There you go. I've taught you what I know, now you teach me what you know using what I've just taught you!

It's REDICULOUS to expect everyone to have the historic knowledge you apparently have. It's even more rediculous to expect people to "realise" that the examples you do give of dragons are dragons, because they just aren't. By any definition. See what 667 wrote,

QUOTE (667-Neighbor of the Beast @ Apr 23 2008, 05:51 PM) *
Unfortunately, he sees himself as that "someone". Although he also claims legitimate scientists also believe in dragons. Let me take you through the though process that he used to come to this coclusion:

Fact: SOME scientists agree that SOME cryptids COULD exist.
DC's erronious opinion: All large crytpid sightings are dragons.
Ergo, by DC's assupmtions: Scientists believe that dragons exist, and your just too stupid to understand the complexity because you know nothing of the subject.
Undeadskeptic
Rediculous?
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (SaRuMaN @ Apr 23 2008, 08:11 AM) *
But no natural species of animal that actually does do this, not one example of it in nature anywhere.


So you are saying that the concent of a fire breathing dragon isn't based on a dragon's natural ability to breath fire but is instead a case of a dragon performing a magic trick like a fire-eater at a circus with a bottle of liquor and a small concealed torch ?

So dragons don't really breath fire at all then, in that case; doesn't this contradict your previous argument about the possibilities in nature of some animals being theoretically able to breath fire ? What is the relevance to dragons if dragon fire breathing is just a trick ?

Also, given that according to what you've said dragons were huge, sentient, flying reptiles, why would they need to put on a fire breathing display to make themselves appear more Godlike ? Why would dragons require humans to think of them as Gods and why in the present day and age do we still not see these type of draconic displays ?

What evidence do you have to support that this theory is correct ?


A number of scientists have proposed reasonable theories of how a dragon could realisitically spew fire, though the sceptics here who know little of chemistry dismiss them out of hand. I personally believe it is possible, but if in fact a natural way of spewing fire is impossible, dragons could still spew fire in the identical way of a circus fire-eater. And there is some historical precedent for this as dragons often request alcoholic beverages among their offerings. This then proves that a dragon spewing fire would not be impossible, for humans can perform the same act.

The dragons clearly answer to a higher authority. This is suggested in a variety of theologies. Their mission seems to have been ensuring the survival of the infant human race, and once the great civilizations were established, seem to have retreated into obscurity, though they have continuously been reported ever since. Only in hte last 200 years have these creatures changed from being called dragons to dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, etc.

From the ancient stories, we see evidence that the dragons are not perfect beings, but exhibit pride, anger, jealously and trickery. Pretending to breath fire to make them appear more awesome and godlike to their human 'flocks' is to be expected. The more powerful the dragon seems, the more worshippers, and attendant offerings would be provided. Many of Yahweh's miracles could have been tricks with logical explanations.

But mankind could not continue to develop if controlled by dragons, so the creator entity ordered them out of their temples and into the wilds, where they have continued to be reported even to this day. As humans became more dangerous with more advanced weapons, dragons seem to have become more and more wary, until now, most sighting are mere fleeting glimpses of the creatures, and today, few people realize these are the same dragons recorded by our ancestors.

This scenario is well supported by the historical record. The old dragon gods are replaced in some areas with human-like gods, and dragons appear less like gods, and more like monsters.
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (HAJiME @ Apr 23 2008, 08:39 AM) *
Source?

For god sake people. >:C

And if it's true that the Chinese say this, mythologically, "wings" might not even refer to actual, literal wings.

I agree that the Bixie is more like a cat.

Everywhere I look on the net, it says a Bixie is a Chimaera and cat-like. No where I can see does it suggest they are dragons.

http://www.eskenazi.co.uk/Exhibition/Stocl...t10stoclet.html
http://www.chinese-handicraft.com/lucdy-th...-Bixie_107.html
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=572
http://www.askasia.org/teachers/images/image.php?no=657

After a quick google search, it looks like most bixies look like ugly fat little lion things. Not like this dragon-esque one - http://www.studiopotter.org/articles/img/art0010c.jpg Which I admit is dragon-like, but still very much feline.

I also think it's no co-incidence that lions are guardians in Chinese culture and that the Bixie is too.


There is almost nothing cat like about the Han era dragons that we posted here, I suggest you scrol back and look at the pictures again. They are covered in scales, have long serpentine necks, wings and horned reptilian heands with long snouts and huge caping mouths. None of these things are characteristic of felines, but are universal traits of dragons. Maybe there is a feline chimera like a "foo dog", but this is NOT the Han era dragons in the pictures we all have seen. These are pure dragons with completley reptilian features.
Undeadskeptic
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 24 2008, 11:04 AM) *
The dragons clearly answer to a higher authority. This is suggested in a variety of theologies. Their mission seems to have been ensuring the survival of the infant human race, and once the great civilizations were established, seem to have retreated into obscurity, though they have continuously been reported ever since. Only in hte last 200 years have these creatures changed from being called dragons to dinosaurs, plesiosaurs, etc.


Personally the idea of reptillian cryptids being prehistoric survivors etc. seems, whilst hugely unlikely, a lot more likely than the idea of dragon demi-gods farming humans since the infancy of our species.
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (Undeadskeptic @ Apr 23 2008, 06:37 PM) *
Personally the idea of reptillian cryptids being prehistoric survivors etc. seems, whilst hugely unlikely, a lot more likely than the idea of dragon demi-gods farming humans since the infancy of our species.


It doesn't matter which idea is "cooler'. I am trying to explain why our ancinet ancestors had dragon gods that they credited with teaching them things. That is the whole point. Our same ancestors that amaze us with their mathematics and architectures said dragons taught them everything. Go figure.
WraithGod
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 08:19 PM) *
It doesn't matter which idea is "cooler'. I am trying to explain why our ancinet ancestors had dragon gods that they credited with teaching them things. That is the whole point. Our same ancestors that amaze us with their mathematics and architectures said dragons taught them everything. Go figure.


Who said anything about the "cool" appeal? The third sentence in that paragraph is a blanket if I ever saw one, I don't remember you posting specific passages that say huge flying reptiles that eat virgins also gave us the common-sense and slowly-developed field of architecture. The evolution of architecture from the first sticks laid out as a temporary shelter seems obvious to me, not sure about you guys.

I still stick to the most likely possibilities being large reptiles and dragon bones. I would be more than eager to start a cult about crocodiles - to the ancient peoples, these huge, stealthy beasts appeared wise and calm, but ultimately deadly and so foreign to the human psyche. And even today they give off an aura of invincibility, both when you see them and when you know their history and how long they've been around with that same body plan. I definitely get a feeling of inferiority and awe around them, and I've eaten their meat before and have guns to pick 'em off better than any poor human a couple thousand years ago.
Archosaur
QUOTE (WraithGod @ Apr 23 2008, 08:43 PM) *
Who said anything about the "cool" appeal? The third sentence in that paragraph is a blanket if I ever saw one, I don't remember you posting specific passages that say huge flying reptiles that eat virgins also gave us the common-sense and slowly-developed field of architecture. The evolution of architecture from the first sticks laid out as a temporary shelter seems obvious to me, not sure about you guys.

I still stick to the most likely possibilities being large reptiles and dragon bones. I would be more than eager to start a cult about crocodiles - to the ancient peoples, these huge, stealthy beasts appeared wise and calm, but ultimately deadly and so foreign to the human psyche. And even today they give off an aura of invincibility, both when you see them and when you know their history and how long they've been around with that same body plan. I definitely get a feeling of inferiority and awe around them, and I've eaten their meat before and have guns to pick 'em off better than any poor human a couple thousand years ago.


w00t.gif Crocodile cults wink2.gif

Honestly, I think there is a relationship between crocodile, serpent and dragon cults. I think that the prior dragon cults help to found the others, Grem is of the other opinion (but either way there is often an overlap).

As to weather dragons actually taught early man his skills (or even existed at all), is unprovable, but is is clear from many of these early legends than many early human cultures believed it to be so. Dc is on the mark with general trend of replacing less-human deities with more human ones over time (there isn't really much dispute on this) although how and why is still open to interpretation.

PS: Good luck on your crocodile cult! Let us know when you are accepting members! grin2.gif
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (Mattshark @ Apr 23 2008, 07:35 AM) *
Erm, if you use the bible as a reference you certainly are not doing scientific work and science does not bash the bible (scientific evidence leading to conclusions that do support the bible is not bashing the bible). Science is independent of religion.


I certainly agree, but is significant that sometimes they complement one another.
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (lil gremlin @ Apr 23 2008, 07:27 AM) *
cop out answer my foot.

find me a reference to one as a lung.

the chinese are not saying that the 'earliest' dragons had wings....but mythologically, when a dragon reaches a certain age it gets its wings.

there is a big difference.


The very fact that the short bodied, winged dragon (your so-called bixie) was the dragon in official Imperial seals of the Han Dynasty PROVES that this is a celestial lung, only perhaps a more anatomically correct one, based on artists seeing live dragons during this time. This proof throws the whole idea of the Bixie out the window, unless you and others are simply confusings these 100% reptilian, short bodied dragons as felines, even though they have no feline traits. They look almost like the Welsh dragon, not a puma.

No, I believe you have it wrong. According to The Oldest dragons needed wings but later dragons supposedly learned to fly without them.
WraithGod
QUOTE (Archosaur @ Apr 23 2008, 09:45 PM) *
PS: Good luck on your crocodile cult! Let us know when you are accepting members! grin2.gif


Well, I need to write a book on it first. Then I'll sit in a comfy "church" and collect money and live luxuriously while telling people mental illness does not exist. Oh no wait, someone already did that. xD

Uhm... worship at the zoo on Sundays and pilgrimages to the Nile? wub.gif

QUOTE
According to The Oldest dragons needed wings but later dragons supposedly learned to fly without them.


Since magic, no matter Criss Angel says, isn't real... rotating helicopter limbs? laugh.gif
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (Pol_Pot_will_killyou @ Apr 23 2008, 08:12 AM) *
I didnt read thru most of these posts but I heard a story of Plato writing a first-hand account of seeing dragons in the middle east, describing them as flying like "ribbons". And for years the description of the Dragon of Ishtar Gate has never varied, which seems kind of suspect... Aside from personal accounts, I think dragons are the remnants of early-humanity's compacted fears; the snake, lion, and bird of prey.

-Pol


If they are remants of their "compacted" fears, why did they sing hymns to them that they were "the good shepherd" and credited them with bringing rain, laws, wisdom etc? You see, the anthropologists who dream that stuff up have only a the barest knowledge of dragon legends and think they all deal with the rare, quite late, 'evil dragons', and not the beneficient dragon gods of the earliest times.
draconic chronicler
QUOTE (Undeadskeptic @ Apr 23 2008, 07:08 AM) *
The Bixi, from the images I have seen personally, is noticably feline in body shape. From my perspective there is very little to suggest it is even reptillian.


I do not doubt there may be a winged feline called a Bixie, but the short bodied Han dragons, like the one I have shown, and the others posted here are NOT felines. They are totally reptilian in nature.
Lady Otterwynnd
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 23 2008, 07:55 PM) *
If they are remants of their "compacted" fears, why did they sing hymns to them that they were "the good shepherd" and credited them with bringing rain, laws, wisdom etc? You see, the anthropologists who dream that stuff up have only a the barest knowledge of dragon legends and think they all deal with the rare, quite late, 'evil dragons', and not the beneficient dragon gods of the earliest times.

Because Jesus isn't a dragon! Woah! It all makes sense all of a sudden!

Anyway, sarcasm aside, the ancient people's obviously evolved out of using dragons as divine figures, if they did at all, and replaced them with more human ones. Jehovah's description doesn't fit a dragon at all. I remember reading a passage from one of the books in the Bible (can't find the exact passage but I'm looking for it!) that I'm pretty certain describes Jehovah as having the face of a lion, a man, an eagle, and a ram(?) as well as wings and the body of a man. Sounds like all of the animals that would eat early humans put into one being. Definitely not draconic, that's for sure.
MUM24/7
QUOTE (MUM24/7 @ Apr 22 2008, 11:52 AM) *
So you believe that dragons exist today and live in lakes around the world ?? What do they eat ?? I thought that dragons were supposed to be land-dwelling creatures who would also have the ability to fly but I wasn't aware that they lived in water as well......And are you suggesting that they can live for a very long time ?? Can you elaborate please ??

Also, why wouldn't there be a whole colony(?) of dragons running around, for example females, males and offsprings......How can the alleged species continue to survive if it doesn't breed ??

I hope you can answer my questions, even if they seem pragmatic and down-to-earth, so to speak...... original.gif


DC, I re-posted this cause you seemed to have missed it, I would appreciate a reply, thanks......

Also, you constantly mention that there are 'countless sightings each year' which could be attributed to dragons, do you have access to any written reports of these alleged sightings ?? For example, newspaper reports or police reports or maybe calls to radio stations etc.....I have seen numerous eyewitness reports of Nessie-like creatures in lakes around the world but I'm more interested in sightings involving 'dragons flying' or simply 'hanging' around remote forest areas or wherever they congregate......

HAJiME
QUOTE (draconic chronicler @ Apr 24 2008, 12:12 AM) *
There is almost nothing cat like about the Han era dragons that we posted here, I suggest you scrol back and look at the pictures again. They are covered in scales, have long serpentine necks, wings and horned reptilian heands with long snouts and huge caping mouths. None of these things are characteristic of felines, but are universal traits of dragons. Maybe there is a feline chimera like a "foo dog", but this is NOT the Han era dragons in the pictures we all have seen. These are pure dragons with completley reptilian features.

The point is;

Most "bixies" look feline. http://images.google.co.uk/images?um=1&...G=Search+Images
I cannot find any source stating that a "bixie" is a dragon.
Bixies, everywhere, are referred to as Chimeras. Which are part lion.
Even the dragonic looking bixies are quite feline in appearance.
Bixies are guardians.
Lions are also guardians in the same culture.

Go figure.

linked-image
"Chimeras, called bixie in Chinese, are mythical hybrids with leonine characteristics as well as wings and horns. They were often carved in stone and placed in pairs at the start of the pathway leading to a tomb. These ferocious beasts were thought to enhance the dignity of the tomb and to protect the dead from malevolent intrusion in the afterlife."
Evangium
More on Bixies -

Link to Source, where larger image is available

linked-image

QUOTE
Large bronze male chimaera, cast in a striding position, the back left leg extended and right front leg stretched forward, with paws slightly lifted off the ground exposing sharp claws. The head is raised alertly and cast with a pair of long curving horns, pointed ears, rounded eyes with hooded lids, furrowed brow and sharp nose. The mouth is open in a roar, exposing the tongue and fangs. Large tufts of fur, incised with scrolls, stripes and cross-hatching, emerge from the side of the face and under the chin.


And on the same page

QUOTE
During the Han period (206 BC-220 AD), there appears to have been an increasing interest in ‘miraculous creatures as omens and portents and as links with the spiritual world’.1 Among the fabulous beasts commonly portrayed was the bixie, in a variety of materials including stone – seen in the large stone sculptures of the spirit roads – jade and, of course, bronze.

In the case of the present bixie (literally to ‘ward off evil’), the figure undoubtedly must have originally been intended to provide powerful spiritual protection for its owner. In addition, however, the tubular sockets on its back indicate that it must have also had a practical function. A number of small bixie sculptures in the round with such sockets in the back have been found, both in bronze 2 and jade.3 It is possible that the sockets were intended for the insertion of a support for a lamp – light apparently also being an important element in warding off evil and aiding the journey in the afterlife.4


That body is very feline. And pointed ears... Can't say I can think of any exmples of birds or reptiles that posses pointy ears.
Sporkling
But bats do have pointy ears. Do you think thats it?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.