It was posted on the forums a few times, posted on a few news sites... posted on a ton of other forums...

So.. you could have seen it pretty much here or anywhere!

So.. they're gunna see about tests. Ten to one they're inconclusive, lost, or say it's a flat out wax fake.

yes, there are flying reptiles, but not with six limbs as dragons are said to have (2 legs, 2 arms, 2 wings). the flying reptiles of the past simply have the fingers of their hands extended and webbed to their arms, not completly new limbs. a six limbed reptile is such a stretch of possibility that i dissmiss it. how did these creatures evolve to have an extra pair of limbs? there are absolutly NO land or air vertbrates with six functioning limbs. and the mixture of chemiclas that ignite is also a stretch. how did this evolve? it would serve no purpose to a creature that could eat raw meat and catch its pery by flying anyway. the rest of the animal kingdom has survived perfectly without breathing fire.

anyway, i will say the same as i have said in the 5 other topics about this. the hip/waist crotch area looks unatural where they join, as well as the spindly wings.

They wer creatures of magick!

oh, i see, instead of a hairless ape youd rather be a glob of slime scooped up off the ground by God and made into a person, and brought to life by beign snorted on.

That is because Dragon Slayers killed them all

Where have you been all my life?

Yes. Thanks. Koi. I have built 4 ponds in my yard and one in my house. All goldfish except the one in the avatar.

Lol I never said that the possible different forms of dragons meant that only one kind of them where actually dragons, I just mentioned that just because something as wings that don't gell, doesn't mean it can use them. I used those above things as an example.

Moving on the atmosphere as altered greatly over the past millions of years and just because something say as six legs and looks similar to a reptile doesn't mean that it is a reptile, just that it is a possible branch off,

for example a t-rex is different to a stegadon, the rex can move on 2 legs because of its predatory nature of neading to be able to allocate possible high placed vulnerabilities but it also needs a greatly stiff and balanced tail (for stability) also they have arm like front limbs, Where as a stegadon is 4 legged (had feet along the lines of things like elephants) its tail wasn't needed as much for stability due to it being four legged due to this its tail was more flexible.

A modern day example, snakes and lizards, snakes have no limbs and Lizards(most of them) have 4 limbs. Yet they are of the same family of creatures (Reptiles).

Just because there is no evidence at the minute that anything other than invertabrates(sp?) have at some point had six or more limbs doesn't mean that there wasn't a creature with 6 limbs that was large.

New species of dinosaur are still being found and many differen't types are yet to be found, moving on I'am very sure that undoubtably there would have been many many species who's existence wont be known because none of their kind was or could be fossilised. This would mean lots of possible links to family branch off's and missing links won't be known.

Right here waiting for you, my dear....

I'm...........not.............real?

Maybe maybe not that is for you to decide.....

do you mean a stegosaurus? stegodon is a type of mammoth.

crocs, dinos, thecodonts, and birds are archosaurs, on one branch of the diapsid (reptile) family tree. lizards, snakes, and pliosaurs are on the other because they are more primative.

Damn it, I wish I'd been paying more attention to this thread...

When I first saw the dragon, I instantly thought to myself "I've seen more convincing things in curiousity shops in Glasgow" and left it be...after reading that quote, I wish I'd been keeping tabs

The endless amusement I can get from you people....

But anyway, the dragon looks like a fake to me...a pretty well made one, no doubt, but as I said it's not unlike something you might find in curiousity shops and the like in any big city. There are any number of tests that could be carried out to establish if it was a real creature or not, and when I last read the article, not one of them had been carried out.

If this thing had been genuinly considered as worth investigating, it would have taken five minutes to determine if it was a genuine pickled creature The chances of it qualifying as an enduring mystery are slim at best.

dimetrodons spine couldnt be compared to a third limb. it was a row of elongated spinal protrusions. ever felt that ridge of bumps on your back going down your spinal collum? imagine that they were 4 feet long, and thats dimetrodon. however, he did not have control of his spine, mustles to move the spine, or joints in the spine.

now your changing your ideas. a fan or heat absorber? if dragons had internal combustion engines, why would they need to absorb heat for m the sun? and fans? no way. the rest of the animal kingdom has survived just fine without fans. and maybe dragons were little creatures? that makes since, but now your adjusting the definition of dragon to where its not a dragon any more, just a pelycosaur.
and attracting mates? usually a feature of that purpose gets larger and more prominent as the creature evolves, yet i think your suggesting that the wings started as wings for flying and gradually became display features. that wouldnt be plausible.

sorry for the post-o-bashing, but i like debates.

You mean Flaming (thats the name most people use).

Thats because no known animal spewed fire or anything along that line like highly corrosive acids...etc, So they wouldn't need to cool down would they?.

Also take one look at this Late Triassic creature.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/seamonsters/f...stropheus.shtml

Not a dino either but see the resembalence, some people at first glance would most likely say or come out with something like did that evolve into things like plesiosaurs but it wasn't even related. So you see how things like that can be mistaken.

Depends on the species actually, if there is great competition for a mate then most likely yes they will grow big but if there isn't then what you said about it growing larger is wrong.

Also what if they had few bones and lots of cartilage, this would explain why few remains haven't been found and say those that wouldn't be cartilage, may just be pawned off as some sort of dinosaur fossil, seeing as they don't have the adequate amount of bones/cartilage to reconstruct its skeleton.

true, but thats assuming it spossible to brathe fire period.

but if it was a reptile, how would it have a skeleton of mostly cartilidge? thats a more primative trait. if it was as large as people think, it would need solid bones to support its heavy body. cartilidge generally isnt good at support. now, you may say, what about whale sharks and things, they have all cartilidge skeletons and support their weight, no, they dont, the water supports their weight. dragons on land or in air dont have water to buoy them up.

now we've got amphibious dragons with cartilidge skeletons......
any way, we need to think here, what sort of dinosaur are you people assuming dragons evolved from? if its the sauropods, which is what i would pick, they would have little buissness slopping around in the ocean (and walking with dinosaurs is not proof).
and the word is 'bayous' not 'byues' yes i take that sort of think personally, i am a bayou folk....

Whats wrong with that?, lots of dragon stories mentions them living near large bodies of water and rarely any where else.

and the fact you post bash/flame, gets me personally, but I don't say so, because its not easy not to offened someone. Also I see pointing out one spelling error out of several both of us have made in this thread is stupid or even stupider what about gramatical errors, there are plenty of them, you even did one. I won't go into details but you put the word "and" after a full-stop.

But I don't bring up petty things such as this. I'am a dark water folk (I was born and where raised) in a old forested area that had lots of isolated streams, and river tributaries) Yet I don't take offence if say someone gets a name wrong, I have no need to, they may not have used that word before.

Well this is way off topic so someone answer M-I-M-B's question.

it was a joke......
butna nyway, i havnt heard any water dragon stories......they all live in caves or on top of mountains....


[EDIT:Fixed quotes]

Would a dragon being a reptile have an umbilical cord?

I think that its probably a wax sculpture, but it is pretty cool to look at.

its in a glass jar because a dragon embryo not in a jar would get egg juices everywhere, be very hard to take pictures of, not hold a good position, be sort of 'squishy', and eventually rot without the fermaldihide to preserve it. if it was a sculpture, wasnt in a glass jar, and didnt do the things i just said, everybody would then realize fairly quickly that it was, after all, a sculpture.

Why should the paranormal be constrained by such trivial matters as reptillians not having umbilical cords, don't ask why a dragon would have an umbilical cord, just accept it it doesnt need a reason, it can be whatever it wants and YOU CANT PROOVE OTHERWISE