They were commonly reported being seen for 4,000 years of human history, and appeared as real creatures in text books thorugh the 18th century. The large, reptile like Sea Serpents and Lake monster, replete with sonor records, photos and even voice recordings are very likely the same creatures our ancestors called dragons. And of course, dragons appear in the beliefs of virtually every religion, and the believers number in the several billion.

The lengths I refer to are those typically seen in the ancient dragon art, certainly not as long as a Sauropod but long enough to give that impression, such as M.M. in the congo, and various lake monsters and sea serpents. The term 'swan necked seals' is a great exaggeration of their actual appearance.

You were ignored because of your ridiculous claim that I know nothing about the Bible. From your remarks, it is clear you know far, far less. Ancient Christian and Jewish theology is filled with dragons but you haven't the slightest idea about this as you have admitted yourself. If you care to learn, get my book when it's out, and if you cannot wait, go back and read my old posts here.

Do you keep this quote resident in your computer's memory, to save you the trouble of typing?

We get it, this is your pet theory. How you can produce scores of pages on this forum with this drek is amazing. Horrendously tedious, but amazing.

Indeed. So were werewolves, vampires and a wide variety of demons. By your reasoning then these mythical beings should exist as well.



There's one outstanding problem that flies in the face of this assertion of yours; sea serpents and lake monsters have not been proven to exist. This means that you are trying to prove the existence of one mythological creature with another.



Once again you have distorted the facts to fit your theory. Though there may have been references to dragons in the ancient religions the believers you refer to today do not believe in dragon deities. You cannot use the faithful to back up your belief in a flying, cowardly (it hides from humans, remember?) fire breathing, drunken lizard because the religions of today are NOT the same as those thousands of years ago.

And one more thing, you have one helluva larger task than to just prove dragons exist. If, as you claim, dragons were the servants of the creator, then you're going to need to prove the existence of god as well.

Good luck on that last one, my friend.

Actually, Wraith, the brain:body mass ratio is important for mammals because: major motor control functions are centralized in the brain, and are linear. Larger bodies need more nerves to control them, the processing is located in the brain, and the nerves carry the information in a straight line to the muscles. This is a lot of wiring, and why intellegent mammals have to have big heads (even carnivores, cetatians, and elephants have a rounding of the cranium).

It's different for birds, reptiles, and presumably, dinosaurs. Much of the motor control processing is located in the spinal chord, freeing up space in the brain-pan (youv'e heard about chickens walking around with their heads cut off?). Reptiles typically use a motor-nerve system that is pyramidal. Essentially: a nerve for a leg fires off, then sends a cascade of signals to local leg nerves, and the whole leg moves. It is a highly efficient system, and it is no wonder that first won the size race (mammals having split off at the same time). So: more of the brain pan can be dedicated to other Functions: like sensory and analysis. And, so: the brain:body mass ratio is not a good rule of thumb for these species.

Examples: Crows are remarkably intelligent, and African Grey parrots have demonstrated in laboratory contritions the ability to differentiate number, kind, and color, simultaneously. Crocs routinely outsmart herbivorous ungulates, cooperate socially, have widely varied system of calls, and, can be taught "tricks" and recognize individuals. For all of their great memory, horses are pretty dumb when faced with a new situation, crocs are more adaptable. T-Rex may have had a big brain, but since almost all of it was devoted to massive scent processors, probably wasn't too bright. The pack hunting dinos, as well as opportunists, such as troodon, may have been far more intelligent than their brain ratios might indicate.

I'm not saying any of the species I went over approach human intelligence (something we measure poorly in ourselves), but there is a cultural tendency to dismiss the idea of any intelligence in other species.

PS: sorry for a biology heavy response in a religion topic. Prehaps we should have different threads to deal with different aspects of the subject.

Links? Video? Pictures? Sound? Sonar Images???? Show me one text book that has ever been used that say that dragons are real (besides the komodo and things of that nature).
You haven't produced proof of any of this yet you keep spewing it forth as fact.
If there were in fact true pictures and/or sonar images of any type of large creature in any lake or river, the scientific community would be on it like white on rice.
Why don't you just stop posting nonsense until you can back your senseless claims up with a bit of E V I D E N C E ... And stop talking about this book, I have been on here for quite a while now and all you ever talk about is "Its coming, Very Soon..." How about you give me the name of your publishing company and I'll ask them when your book is due out...
Anyway... to sum up this reply.... "POOP OR GET OFF THE POT!"

Ah despite site rules, DC thinks you should have to search through his posts for links. Even then it is subject to so many more parsimonious explanations.

The evidence for lake monsters and sea serpents has been posted here many times. The evidence has been sufficient for scientists to assign them names and governments to order their protection.

I am merely suggesting these animals are the same dragons our ancestors recorded, and their ability to elude capture reflects the intelligence our ancestors believe the cretures possessed.

LOL, Nessie is indeed protected. Nessie is protected by the 1912 Protection of Animals Acts of Scotland.
Also taking into concideration that Nessie is worth $40 million annually to Scottish tourism industry.
So, there is no wonder Nessie is under protection rights.

But lets see how many have names with the IUCN DC? What about in Fauna Britannica? How about being acknowledge by scientists (not from joke bi-nominals or 1 off's). If being protected is evidence of existence to you DC then you must believe in fairies since Iceland protects them.

Greetings All;

It has been awhile since I was last on the forums due to moving, etc. It just took me a bit to read through the 31 pages here.

I have found that "dragons" have been found on every continent of the world-the "legends", pictographs, etc. Now, if they were found in the pictographs, etc-there would have had to have been some basis for it. What the older civilizations saw would be depicted-so, what did they actually see then?
There has to be a basis for the "legends".

I have found in other cases that there is some sort of truth to the basis of the legends. Cases in point- Recently in Cambodia/Vietnam forests the deer hybrid that the locals all saw and scientists thought were just stories-until a scientist saw one and took pictures. Then they found herds of them living around the areas deep in the forests. Another case in point is the huge Coelacanth fish(I think that my spelling is off)- which the scientists said were extinct. The fisherman had been catching them in their nets and told the scientists-who thought that they were just giving them "fish stories" until a fisherman put one in front of one of the scientists. So, now they are not considered extinct. Another case in point is the giant squid-thought to be a "fairy-tale" until they found a huge one washed on shore (50ft with tentacles) They have found bigger ones deep-where they mostly stay. They have filmed ones as large as 100 ft in length.
So, there goes that "fairy-tale". (They have even found huge Octopus as well.)

There are too many unknown species of animals, fish, etc out there that sooner or later will come off the "fairy-tale" list.

We have not even scratched the surface out there, yet.

So, I for one will keep my mind open for the differant species of the legends. Sooner or later the proof will be there as it has in the past for the other species.


Raven2

So, basically, what you just said is...

There will be proof later, so we must believe now.... Sorry, im not buying it. Oh, and DC, I notice you still didnt give up the publisher of that book of yours...

DC, go back and read over the rules for this forum. You should be posting links to your claims... until then you cannot be expected to be taken seriously.

And maybe scientists don't take these claims seriously for a reason???

Not in a book-on the Discovery Channel- which is why I did not give a book's name. Get a grip, dear. There are more resources out there then books.

And I am not asking you to believe anything-never do- keep your eyes open on the TV channels for news, history channels, discovery channel, etc.
I do not care one way or another-just stating the facts which have already been in the newspapers and the TV.

Raven2

Interesting how my earlier post regarding a creator was overlooked. Typical MO I've come to expect, however.

The Discovery Channel hardly counts as a good source of information, as it's proe to exaggerate to get viewers. Just my 2cents.

You can call them FACTS all you want to. But, the only thing there is, are speculative theories that are open to interpretation.

Greetings;

For your viewing pleasure: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coelacanth

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okapi

http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saola


Raven2

There is fairly good evidence some of the lake monsters and sea serpents are indeed some uknown animal, and many fit the bill of 'dragon', with accounts going back to when all of manking ackowledged these creatures.

Vampires and werewolves and other such nonsense simply do not have the universal belief of dragons. It is ridiculous to even make the comparision with the ancient dragon deities of world-wide human belief.

You are right, religions have changed considerably since their inceptions, but if a diety was once a dragon, it will still be a dragon no matter what modern worshippers prefer it to be.

The "cowardness" of the dragons today may simply be obedience to orders. And with the knowledge they must possesss from all they have seen in their long lives , they may someday be regarded as 'world treasures' if we are eveentually allowed to communicate with them again.

But some do, there are scientists on most of the lake monster hunting expeditions, and some have recorded sonor readings of large creatures, and even unidentified 'voice' recordings. And many of hte photos and videos have been judged untampered with.

Are there any sightings (Recent, as in 1970's to 2008) of creatures that have actually been labelled as dragons? Not Plesiosaurs or sea monsters pr thunderbirds or loch ness monsters etc. have there been any actual dragon sightings, where the people who saw the creature called it a dragon?

Not sure if this has been mentioned but Quetzalcoatl is a type of dragon native to the Toltecs. The Aztecs Sun and War God, Hutzilopochtli, was to have sent another, Tezcatlipoca, to trick and seduce him by first getting him drunk on pulque. Quetzalcoatl was shamed and left towards the east on a burning raft. This is symbolized as Venus. This is when the Toltecs lost their lands to the Aztecs. The Aztecs always feared his return while others whom feared the Aztecs welcomed his return. When the time came closer of his return their were signs, a three headed comet over Tenochtitlan, modern day D.F. (Mexico City), and also a woman crying at night could be heard. She later turned into La Llorona, a woman who killed her children in the lake or river by drowning them but is unable to enter heaven until she finds them, so she wanders at night crying by lakes and rivers. These accounts draw from a lot of sources but all have a connection. Also of note on that same exact day he was to return, instead of Quetzalcoatl, they saw Spanish galleons, it was Hernando Cortes who had come as a conquistador.

There are many things man cannot do today with all our technology that the Ancients did. Namely build megaliths. Many megaliths point to constellations as they would have been configured in 10500 BCE. Something happened important in that year we no longer remember. There are legends of dragons and dragon like serpents all over the world. This can be no coincidence. There are things today none can understand especially if they only rely on what their senses tell them. Let those people limit themselves. I personally believe it was the Nehphilim, the halfling demon human hybrids, who taught man many things including how to plant crops and even how to work herbs, the Book of Enoch tales that story as well as Genesis partially. I am not sure how dragons play a part but there is something to them.

People will explain these things off but most of them simply have a need to try and correct others or to destroy their faith. Ignore them and keep searching for someday we might no the truth. I would not trust dragons or anything else that appeared and told us they helped us in the past and are here to help again. Caveat emptor.

Quetzalcoatl means feathered serpent. Very interesting in that birds are one of the only ancestors of the dinosaurs left on earth. Could the pyramid builders of Anahuac known of that connection?



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

Yes...Exactly, what will this book be called..When will it be out...And who's gonna actually sell it? May be intresting, my library will prolly have it if it comes out..But whats it called atleast DC?

Of course, virtually every large monster sighting in the orient is still called a dragon, becasue billions still believe in dragons.

Western man is embarrased to acknowledge dragons today because of the fairytale connotations. Christians today have even changed the Biblical dragons to whales, even though this term makes no sense in many of the passeges.

Now you speak for Western man? I think not.

The only embarrassment is that you've propagated here, yourself.

Don't you have a book to publish?

I've come to the conclusion that there is no book. DC Avoids that topic as much as possible....

As he should. What does a book has got to do with this topic on hand?

Back on topic. Who would worship dragons?

I think you are right. He has been talking about it for 3 years. He is not willing to give sources. I don't buy it.

Superstitious monkeys.

I've never heard of monkeys being superstitious.

Eric was speaking metaphorically Spork! The monkeys are the people on here that are superstitious,
and blindly accept any belief thrown at them.

Edit: Edited to remove the name Electro, and add Spork.

Yea. He just completely skipped my question....I honestly think there is no book. If there was he would advertise the hell outta it...

Sources?


Yeah, there's probably no book.....

The title has not been announced yet because a web site is going to be made with the same title. Don't worry, you will hear about it at the right time..

Actually, the bible even gives a better connection between the Tanniyn dragons and birds, from the epoch before the age of mammals. Most Christian bibles today though rather stupidly call the Tanniyin whales instead of dragons, even though the term makes no sense since many accounts of the Tanniyn are on the land.

Quetzelcoatl can mean 'bird serpent" instead of feathered serpent. He may have been a more tradiitonal dragon that simply wore feathered headresses as some of the art seem to imply.

And when would that time be? Hell, if i had a half decent title, i'd be posten the name of my novel in my siggie, but i have no decent title yet

and wow me + inactivity= bad thing

i left here when there was like 28 pages or so and im gone for like 3 days and theres 33 just wow

How's the progress on your novel?

It is such a pain, i have all of the things that i have covered so far with my friend but am running dry on ideas... and of course the title still eludes me can seem to get one that fits...

and the odd thing for me, the only referance to dragons, is 1 area designed around them

by the way its a fantasy genre novel so there is little or no facts in it

Good luck, and that last statement sez a whole lot.

It does and thank you

Personally i prefer Fantasy genre over a non-fiction book it lets the mind wonder and think "Could this even be possible?"

wait no my mistake thats Robert Jordan books

but still Fantasy lets you think outside the box, and go back to a time were magic, and dragons ruled, well in most of the Fantasy books that is.

And since facts regarding dragons are completely lacking, one is compelled, by necessity, to write a fantasy book.

You could be describing the Old Testament.

It is very easy to write a fantasy that takes place in a fantasy world. It is much more difficult to write realistic fantasy (or speculative history)that takes place in this world. It actually requires research.

.i

That is not necessarily true. I doubt my book will categorized as "fantasy", but we'll have to wait and see.

Can't we just HAVE the title of the book, or the release date??? We have zero info about this book, so most of us don't even think it exists, DC. Until you give us a name or other sort of reference, I doubt that's going to change.

For a second i thought you were talking to me, and DC i intend it to be a fantasy style that is along the lines of well its hard to give an example of a book that has the style,

Mostly, what im doing to generate ideas is make a D&D (yes D&D) Campaign with my friend who also is helping me with the title

It is more along the lines of D&D fantasy, there will be very little realism involved, but i am trying my hardest to aquainte you with the characters (whom by the way are twins that are opposites)

and by opposites *and this is the ONLY spoiler i'm going to give out* i mean

One is a Barbarien Class, very chaotic, loves beer, and is deadly with an axe

the other is a Monk Class, Extremely Lawful, and beats the ssnot out of evil dudes

only spoiler

1) No one in the orient believes in Dragons, I've travelled asia and no one considered dragons as actual beings, they considered them symbols of power

2) You can provide no sources that prove that "Of course, virtually every large monster sighting in the orient is still called a dragon, becasue billions still believe in dragons"

3) Totally unrelated to my question that last bit was.

Sounds good dude, can't wait to read it!

My book (The Dawn and Doom of the Dragons) will be released on U-M, and focuses on the natural history of dragons. It features their evolution from early dinosaurs through to the now-extinct man-eating dragons, with the main, and only, character of sorts being evolution itself.

It is super-violent, so don't say I didn't warn you. ll be illustrated... lavishly.

Dragons appear as entities in Taoism, Buddhism and Christianity. Anyone who believes in these faiths in their original forms have little choice but to accept dragons as described in their holy texts.e . I know a number of chinese that still acknowledge dragons as entities. The Christians that do not, simply ignore their some of their holy scriptures to create a "neo christianity" with only those things they feel comfortable with, much lika any other 'new age' belief.

And yes, when these sighting occur in the orient of course they are called dragons. That's a no brainer. Do you not recall the oriental 'dragon' sightings right in this forum? There was the dragons that turned out to be a frozen river, and the creature described as a black horned dragon in a lake. That might even be mentioned on this very thread. According to the book, "Dragons Triangle" when ships still mysteriously disappear in that region, some people in japan still claim it was caused by dragons as they believed for thousands of years.

I agree that there are many Orientals that are complete atheists that believe in nothing supernatural, just as in the west. And then there are those that pick what they like in religions and leave out the rest. But who are very wrong to think dragons are not still cnsidered deities in the oriental world, and hundreds of millions of Christians likewise worship a deity that archaeologists can show was a cannanite storm dragon who before that was the "great dragon of edidu" in Sumeria who created eden, tricked Adam, warned the original Noah of the flood, and many other things taken from Sumerian beliefs by the Hebrews.

Are you saying here that because someones iterpretation of religous texts is different to yours that thier belief systemn becomes 'new age' and they are 'neo christians' I feel this is a grossly unfair statement.

You can't say that anyone who believes them has little choice but to accept dragons. All you have is a personal theory, that does not make your views fact. It is perfectly legitimate for someone to follow their religion and the interpretation of it they see as fitting. If this interpretation does not include dragon Gods it is not that they are ignoring holy scripture. It is simply that they interpret it differently.
Basically your personal beliefs and ideas in no way change the validity of someone elses. If they state i am Christian and do not believe dragons to be real there is no hypocrisy here. It is simply a different point of view.