So sad...the opposite is true for religion...
Dragosn have been only found in Mythology, do you really think the Minotaur existed, or that Unicorns are real? Many, like DC, use the Bible as proof...I wouldn't use the most debated, controversial, metaphoric book ever written by humanity.

I'm pretty new to this forum, so hi everyone!

I suppose dragons could be dinosaur leftovers, a species that was still in existance, but slowly dying out. Larger sauropods would fit the mold quite well, but some of the smaller ones could work for the 'legends' as well.

Fire Breathing: I'm not so keen on the idea of anything breathing fire. I mean... why? I'm willing to bet though that such creatures could 'spit' venom. Certain species of cobra can spit quite a lot of venom very accurately into the eyes, creating a burning, maddening sensation. It has been suggested that certain species of dinosaur could do the same. Perhaps this was the case and the knight who survived, mentioned that he felt as if his eyes were burning. Play 'chinese whispers' as it goes around the country, let some artists get their hands on the idea, and *bam* your creature now breaths fire.

Flight: I think only the romantic novels included flight for such creatures. Unless they were reporting several different species of dinosaur, and they were all mixed up into one through more application of chinese whispers (remember that most communication was oral, and most people were illiterate. Tales also have a habit of growing with the telling). Pteradactyls certainly were good flyers with their huge leathery wings, and I've heard that these may also exist in NA as the 'thunderbird'.

Another explanation is that people in the middle ages seem to have the notion of sticking wings on everything made it somehow supernatural, as well as adding intelligence and... er... and... um... and it breathed a sheet of fire at me! (yeah, that'll impress those commoners). It's much more prestigious to defeat an intelligent, flying, firebreathing creature than to defeat a really big dumb lizard (no mean feat in itself, though!). I lay the charge of embellishment at the knights and especially at their bards.

Treasure: If these things were as territorial and agressive as they seem to have been, then I'd say that the 'treasure hoard' would likely be the armour and swords and equipment of all the other damn fool knights errant who went in after one and didn't come back out. Alternately, the treasure hoard or 'kings ransom' might be not gained from the dragon directly, but from slaying it and getting a reward from the local lord. The two facts got mixed up and merged into one.

Slumber: Works for me. If the 'dragon' is actually a large sauropod dinosaur, then it likely wouldn't want to move around a lot except to feed. Alligators and crocodiles sun themselves for hour after hour on the banks of rivers, so why would a really really big lizard not do the same? 'sleeps for days after a good meal' indicates a similar behaviour to that of many snakes as well.

Why would a lord want to get rid of one?: Depends on the species. Just assume for a second that they didn't sneak into a castle and steal a princess from under the noses of everyone there. A large meat-eating dinosaur would be havoc to anyone with cattle or sheep or... er... peasants. You'd find your kingdom under ruin in no time. Or if it were a large sauropod type, I'd say that the amount of food required to keep these suckers going would mean that your crops and plants would suffer heavily, leading to famine, another good reason to call out the shiny men on their shiny horses with their shiny swords.

Conclusion: I feel that dragons certainly were real, but may have been dinosaurs of some kind. Their powers and abilities amplified through song and prose until they became much greater than they ever were, although what they were would certainly have been impressive enough!

Welcome


Not true...no evidence has supported that idea...No respected paleontologist ever propsed that...watching too much JP

If they were dinosaur remnants, then whre are their remains...why haven't any fossils been found?

Why should there be fossils? At the risk of sounding quite silly, there have been BILLIONS of humans born, raised, and died here since we discovered what happens when you rub two sticks together really fast, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of fossils.

Are you saying the greeks, the romans, the dark and middle ages didn't exist because there are no fossilised people? (j/k)

fossilization takes place only under very peculiar and specific circumstances. Everything else organic just crumbles to dust over time unless it is well preserved.

As for my comment about 'spitting' dinosaurs, I never said that there was proof, but the JP dinosaur was based upon speculations of head structure of that particular species by reputable scientists. I'm not suggesting that there is proof. I'm saying that there is a theory created by scientists.

Then again, scientists aren't always THAT smart. Give me another year or so and I'll be an ecologist (hopefully with some funding for cryptozoology research, you never know!). Do I strike you as all that smart?

The only take I have on all of this is the following.

It's great that the early biblical scriptures tied dragons to powerful angels. I believe this is only because, one or two of these beasts MIGHT of survived extinction. These were powerful creatures, that nothing else in the world compared too. Also I highly doubt they had wings, they more or less died out in some way or how, and they assumed they "flew" away.

Finally, if you believe in God, and Angels, then you should believe Angels are powerful spirits. In thinking this, an angel can manifest itself into whatever it wants. Whether it be a winged angel, a flying dragon, a poor man on the street. It's look may appear different depending on who it's appearing too, whether it wanted to be threatning, calming, or to simply deliver a message.

about fire breathing in dragons:

After digestion, food is divided into three states: Ligid, solid and gas. The gasious state is usualy methane. Methane is higly flamable, and can be stored. in the case of the dragon, since there is a huge body mass, there is a possibility ofa second"lung" to store the methane. when there is a need of fire, the dragon can exhale it, an produc a spark by clanging it's teeth together.

Whats amazing is that this topic is still going.

Yes, we do have proof of People existing, but not dragons...they only show up in scriptures and paintings...


Oh yes, just like how those "respectable scientists" added raptors on steroids! JP is all fantasy, Velociraptors never got that big and fast, DILOPHOSAURUS never had frills and never spat venom, same goes for every dinosaur!



Quite true Azalin, If anyone has ever studied the Heirarchy of Angels, they can see how Seraphims could be mistaken for dragons.

Making a spark with your teeth is very, very unreliable, even if that is posibble... No animal can do that... Plus, igniting the methane when it exhales would also ignite the methane coming out of its trachea, and then igniting the methane in its stomach, causing the poor ole' dragon to explode...

you migt think that it is not pissible, but if we look at it from a fairy tale perspective, dragons ate brave knights.

Brave knights wore armor

Armor was made from iron

When two peices of iron are stroken, they produce sparks

(dragons were supposed to be intelegent)

They would find two peices of metal, and pass it down from generation to generation.

the peices of metal would be fixed in the back of the mouth, and whenever they would need a spark, thy could just scrape the two peices of metall against each other



About the methane blowing the body into peices, imagine a modern cigarette lighter-
It doesnt blow up into peices. If you would breathe out methane fast enoght, the fire would not be fast enough to get into the trachea

So, your saying, a Dragon would of had to of eaten a knight before he could breathe fire .....?. And yes, in order to create a spark, you need flint and steel to make that spark. Unless the dragons teeth were made out of those 2 compounds, their would be no spark present. And I agree Dragons were quite intelligent, but I highly doubt evolution would give them the ability to breathe fire IF they were able to create a spark in their mouth. What would be the entire purpose, evolution wise, to have a second lung to hold methane gas, if they still needed an external device to breathe fire.

flint and steel are not necessary for a spark. a sprk can be generated by stetic electricity, so a dragon might of had a furry mouth, with hairs invulnerable to fire.

also, if you would strike two knives together, and that would create a spark.

I am not saying that all my statements are right. Right now, i might even be denying statements that i made. I just say my thought aloud, cause if i brewup a funky idea, i might forget it by the time i get pen and paper

too bad its not possible for them to close of the passage fast enough...at the least, they would burn their mouth to a crisp....Do be as thick-skulled as DC

i dont know what you two have against eachother, but i would recomend you stop it, cause your taking presios time out of my life by making me scroll down longer than the meaningfull articles last

and if the dragons had scales in their mouth, fire would not be such a danger

scales are not fire-proof...scales in the mouth would inhibit eating, and that trait would of never been evolved

Hey!

has anyone read Eragon?

The best book ever.

all about dragons

loved it

recomend it

yes, i have read Eragon....

the mouth tissue could of become fire-proof over long periods of fire practice:

My great grandma cooked huge pots of soop to feed her big family. When the soop would be cooked, she would grab the handleless boiling-hot pot by the rims,and cary it for 100 m from the kitchen to the house. after a while, her fingers became senseless, but they were intakt and perfectly healthy

I am not sure about the petroglyph, Milo; to me it is more reminiscent of Australian Aboriginal rock art.

However, I risk digressing from the Draconic to make a note that St Brendan traveled to what is now known as America in about the period that the *Fort Ancients* culture existed. If you look at the aerial photograph and the layout drawing, what you might be looking at is a Dun... Where is Putnam County?



For reference, see the following for a little more information:

http://www.castletown.com/brendan.htm
http://www.irishclans.com/articles/famirish/stbrendan.html
http://allaboutirish.com/library/people/stbrendan.shtm

Tiochfaidh ar la!
Seamus

Yes, they would of certainly still be alive after the first time...Sarcasm



That is just a trick they play, like coal-walkers in India

I dint mean it like "spitting fire for a long time", but more like "after a few years of practice, with increasing fire lengths"

And now that i think about it, it would increace their lung capacity! (i mean both of their lungs)

Still would burn their mouths to a crisp...
Plus, how would you know if they were smart

I have a dragon in my basement.

do you have pics?

i am verry curious

where do you live?

he was sarcastic

no duh

Hi Nogard,

I see what you mean about those two kids bickering... lol. Still, they both have opposing points of view and are williing to present them as rational arguments. That's fair enough in my book.

Anyway, I'm going to present a rational argument against your concept for a fire-breathing dragon.

Dragons breathe fire at things
First of all.... Why? What benefit does it create for the dragon? I presented the idea of a 'spitting lizard', but very few creatures have any sort of ranged attack. Something as big as a dragon is supposed to be would likely not NEED any defence or offence. It could chew things up at leisure and be relatively immune to most other things (except other dragons and people with swords).

No, really. They have a biology that takes the methane from the bottom and sends it back up to the top
What would evolve a 'third lung' and then the insanely complex biology required to ignite it, especially with a 'blowback valve' to stop it from exploding? Your dragons are going to wind up like Terry Pratchett's 'swamp dragons' in his discworld novels. Sad, pathetic, smelling like a chemical factory and dangerously explosive.

It gets ignited by clicking their teeth together like castinets
Champ your teeth together for sparks? Huh? That's not going to work. You've got simple ivory there, so all you'll wind up doing is wearing down the teeth at a phenomenal rate, or just a lot of shattered ivory and raw nerves (maybe it's where dragons get their notorious bad tempers? They all have toothache?)

OK. Let's not champ teeth. They used discarded armour that they wedged in the back of their throat because they are terribly smart
Not that smart. The back of your throat and your nasal sinuses are quite moist and damp, as is all of your mouth. Same with every living creature. So even if you clang two bits of metal together back there, you'll just get an uncomfortable (and slightly muffled) musical 'clank' sound. Add to which, how did they stick it back there? Would YOU like to have a couple of bits of metal stuck back around your vocal cords with no anaesthetic? Let's not forget that saliva is acidic and would start to break down the metal, or the potential for infection and inflamation (pun intended) from the sharp metal jabbing in the back of their throat. Anyway, how did they keep them there? Or did they perhaps fashion some sort of steel dentures with a 'zippo' wheel and a bit of flint? I mean, this would indicate that evolution gave them an ability (methane lung), and then they can't actually use it without getting something they cannot make from another creature, and painfully wedging it down their throat, trying not to choke on it. This would imply a simbiotic (or parasitic) relationship with humans that I've never heard of.

all right, all right... but you have to admit that it's a cool idea
well, no. I think this one would have been better if it had not seen the light of day.

My grandma... who grandpa often called 'the old dragon'...
Well, tough hands are very impressive. But are you sure she carried that pot a HUNDRED METRES from the kitchen to the house? Was the builder of the house a) psychotic sadistic c) liked his food cold d) was REALLY concerned about fire hazards or e) all of the above?

erm... scales can be fireproof, you know.
I don't think that there are too many reptiles out there with scales INSIDE their mouths and gullets, and intestines. Scales are strictly external. It's like you saying that you have teeth in your tummy for grinding up that extra grit. Besides, at the temperatures we're talking, Dragonscale would have to be made out of asbestos.

Conclusions:
Dragons are fine metalworkers able to make zippo-lighter-dentures.
Dragons are excellent miners and refiners of asbestos for lining the insides of their mouths
Dragons die very young from emphysemia and other lung-related illnesses due to constant inhalation of asbestos fibre. They can't sue James Hardie but if they were around today they'd probably try.
People from one hundred years ago ran marathons from their kitchens to their living rooms with large cookpots to see if it were still warm by the time it got there.

I purport your conclusions are false in my semi-serious take on your argument.

STOP CALLING ME A KID

I only did it once. No need to get touchy.

...... But you forgot to say 'please'! (j/k)

No, just everyone is because I'm 14

Finaly a decent disapproval of my hypothesisises (???)
(and one with humor in it: almost died laughing)

I dont know if it's true( will have to google it), but doesnt cooking something make you more gaseous?



they could have an extra stomack that would extract gas from the dragon digested food

maybe their teeth wern't ivory?

and waht the hell are castinets

how about they used some other gas that if mixed with methane made fire(i am again too lazy to look it up on google if there is any such type of gas)(i doubt there is)



i never said throat, i said mouth. i meant that one peice would be stuck between the two teeth on the top jaw, and the other on the bottom. the mouth has a wider moving range. The sparks would be produced by the scratching of the two peices together via a sideways movement of the lower jaw.


i never asked for an opinion, but i think i deserve some credit for originality



Maybe i overexadurated a bit. But, it was in pre-revolutionary Ukraine, with huge farms. The distance between the kitchen and the main house was atleast 10 meters



dont know what the hell is asbestos, but the scale idea was not supposed to be taken seriosily.



thanks for this great argument

loved it

Yes, it creates gas, but that's what we do (sortof) when we digest things. We generate a fair amount of heat doing it, too, but not enough to ignite anything. No, not even baked beans.



The only creature that I am aware of that uses an extra stomach for things would be the Queensland Lungfish. It uses a stomach as a rudimentary lung. Other fish also do this, but I can't recall species. I believe that the Coelacanth can do this also. What you're talking though is to extract a particular gas type from fecal matter (so it would have to have passed through into the large intestine, where methane is created) then drawn back up into a secondary holding section (stomach/lung) The sphincter inside that would have to close and then with a thrust it would be expelled from nozzles within the mouth. There are serious problems with this arrangement. One would be the extraction of the gas alone. Otherwise small amounts of fecal matter would be drawn up inside a membranous area, leading to serious infection problems. Bacteria likewise would be drawn up. This would be one sick dragon. If it's expelling this through the INTERIOR of the mouth, then you have the potential to re-ingest its own fecal matter, which apart from HORRIBLE halitosis could also lead potentially to poisoning itself.



Hmm.. maybe. Maybe the conspiracy theorists are also correct and the moon IS made of cheese. Stilsons, for preference. The only tooth-like thing that I know of that is not a tooth is the horn of the rhinocerous, which is made from the same stuff as hair or fingernails. Still not enough to make a spark.



Musical instruments that are often used in spanish flamenco dancing. My mistake, though. They are spelled Castanets. This link should be of some help.
http://www.music.vt.edu/musicdictionary/textc/Castanets.html




I am also unaware of any. A variety of other chemicals can be combined to make fire or explosive from room temperature, but usually they are not found in food, or if they were, they would be metabolised for energy. After all, fire is a LOT of energy and so any organic matter capable of releasing that amount would go into the body, rather than syphoned off into a defensive 'lung' (for want of a better word)



But your mouth is not dry. Neither is any living things'. So if you held flint and steel with your teeth and lips, you would not be able to make a spark, no matter how hard you tried. The creation of saliva would dampen both to the point of uselessness. But please, go ahead and try. I want to watch.



Kudos. It's an idea, and DEFINITELY an original one!



I kinda guessed that. I personally thought that you had mixed up feet with metres.

EDIT: Waitaminute... you don't know what asbesdos is? It's a rock. A mineral. It comes from the ground and is/was mined in great quantities throughout the first half of the 20th century. It is fibrous and can be woven after treating. There are two types: Blue and white. (my dad used to be an asbesdos miner). It is well known for it's heat-resisting and fire-retardant qualities and was used for fire blankets, insulation in houses, fibro building materials, major insulation in large buildings (now costing millions of dollars a year to remove). James Hardie was one of the largest companies to mine this. Health problems are caused by the ingestion of tiny fibres into the lungs, where they can cause cancer, emphycemia, or other lung-related (terminal) diseases. Pretty horrible. James Hardie knew of this but did not provide its australian workers with any sort of protective gear (like dust masks). As a result, most of the workers who were doing this in the 50s and 60s are very very dead. Those who live are pushing for compensation.



Hey, thanks. It's a heck of a lot of fun and neither of us takes it personal. Keep shooting the theories at me, and I'll come back with what I think. (or vice versa!)

I went back to see how DC had phrased it back in post 181: "But anyone who would suggest the overwhelming evidence is not there that establishes dragons being heavingly creatures in the minds of the ancient Bible writers, are just "tuning out" the solid scriptural and archaeological evidence.” (emphasis added)

It's proven (by the very existence of these writings) that the ancients once belived this to be true, that God could command dragons. It's in the orginal Hebrew scriptures and in the KJV translation of these records. I don't think DC is implying that dragons as physical creatures were walking around like dogs and cats. (Right DC?) Just that the ancients believed that God had the power to use them, if necessary. That if suitably ticked off at His chosen people, he could summon the dragons and bring vengeance. Yes?

The unicorn and cockatrice are also mentioned in the bible (KJV, anyway), hence my comment about them in the following post. I forget exactly where they appear in the bible, though.

The Minotaur thing was mine (see 182). I'll quote DC again from 181:
“The Catholics thought they destroyed all of the copies of Enoch, for example, but it was discovered again in 1913 complete with Cherubim and Seraphim dragons. If you looked up all of the things I mentioned on previous posts, you would know it too. Does this prove dragons really did the the things the bible says. No, no more that anything about angels or anything else of a supernatural nature in the Bible. It only means dragons are ‘real’, if the God that created them is real.” (emphasis added)

There. No positive statement that dragons really exist. Just positive belief back then of their existence. Is this an accurate paraphrase of what you meant, DC? If we are going to claim that God is real today, then these dragons are also real by association.

The cherubim thing, though. You say definitely dragons, but I was looking at an article somewhere over at bibleorigins.net which suggested that what might have been carved into the side of the Ark were representations of Sphinxes. The writer theorized that Egyptian culture might have influenced the art quite heavily at the time. There were some links on there to illustrations that supported this claim. This is not a history I know anything about (Ark stuff, I mean – all I’ve seen is Indiana Jones!) so what are your thoughts on this theory?

Well, here's a bit of history of dinosaur muck-ups for ya, Froggy.

Museum of Natural History in Toronto. Has a dinosaur (Apatosaurus, I believe) with the "wrong" number of vertebrae. How they sorted THAT out is no knowledge of mine, but neither have they bothered to fix it. They've just got a note by the dino commenting that it's inaccurate.

There was another instance where a claw was assumed to be a horn. I forget where I read that. It was a glitch that sat like that for years though, until more of the skeletons were discovered. Completely farked up every drawing of that dinosaur up to that point.

How do you know how big a raptor could get? There isn't conclusive evidence of other bigger/smaller species of this thing therefore can't be possible? So a writer takes some artistic license to make a movie more exciting. I could beak about every change directors did to Harry Potter, too. heh. (Wonder how nice those dragons are gonna look come Friday...) There's truth, and there's entertainment.

Another thought coming to the brain here. St. George. I'd be tempted to speculate that the dragon George fought is less an actual "dragon" and more an analogy for a political enemy perhaps? Consider St. Patrick ridding Ireland of snakes. As far as I can recall, the snakes were supposed to represent paganism (EDIT ALERT! I said protestants first time around. So much for my ability to recollect much of anything. har!)
That's all. Cheers.

Is it considered impolite to do so many posts in a row? If so, let me know and I'll stop doing it. heh.


Coming to mind here are tar pits and peat bogs. I don't know what's been found by anyone who's bothered checking pits (anything?) but I know human remains have been discovered by people cutting peat and the bodies have looked like they just died last week and when investigated, turn out to be quite "ancient". Perfect preservation if correct conditions are met. Um, Ice dude. Wherever he was found, with clothes and weapons still and I think hair maybe too. So fragile he can only be studied for minutes at a time in carefully controlled environments. (curses.. too lazy to find this stuff and link it..)

So lucky, I thank you, you've proved my point.

Oetzi (the iceman) and 'Pete Marsh' (one of a number of neolithic burials taken from a, ahaha, peat marsh) are preserved neolithic humans. But there doesn't seem to be a lot of them. Just a few that pop up in the UK and France occasionally, and Oetzi up there above the snow line (and his mysterious curse that seems to kill everyone who has something to do with him).

So where are all the other neolithic remains? All the bones? All the burial grounds? All the PEOPLE? Gone, gone to dust. Only a very few, preserved in special circumstances, remain. So it could be with dragons. There didn't seem to be so many of them in the first place, so if they died someplace where the weather wasn't precisely right, then they likely would also have crumbled to nothing, or their flesh and bones would have made a brief passage through the digestive systems of the local dogs and scavengers of the time.

This argument can be used to embellish your other argument. Do we know how many dinosaurs there were? No! Why? Because what if they all weren't fossilized? What if only a very tiny few were fossilized, and there was enormous variation? We don't know, and without a time machine we never will. As for putting them together... well it's like doing a jigsaw puzzle without the picture on the box and only half the pieces. Iguanodon's thumb being put on the end of his nose was just one of the more famous mistakes. I don't think that true palentologists ever claim to be 'experts' in dinosaurs, as we make new discoveries that trounce old theories all the time. For example, it is now known due to recent discoveries in China that many large dinosaurs had feathers, and these beasts obviously could not fly, so therefore they were there for warmth or display... but that's just a theory, and it all could be wrong again next week!

draconity corruption test
I scored 49%
[/quote]


Here be the results that I was diagnosed with:

Your Draconity Purity Test Results
You answered "yes" to 26 of 100 questions, making you 74.0% draconity pure; that is, you are 74.0% pure in the draconity domain (you have 26.0% dragon in you).
According to the scoring guide, your draconity experience level is: May have had a dragon ancestor
Your Weirdness Factor (AKA Uniqueness Factor) is 22%, based on a comparison of your test results with 124302 other submissions for this test.

The average purity for this test is 47.6%.

Now I have to go figure out my wierdness factor... GRRRRRRROOWRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Oh bugger. It looks like my cover is blown (and to be honest, I answered the questions quite truthfully as well!!!)

Your Draconity Purity Test Results
You answered "yes" to 49 of 100 questions, making you 51.0% draconity pure; that is, you are 51.0% pure in the draconity domain (you have 49.0% dragon in you).
According to the scoring guide, your draconity experience level is: Heart of a dragon
Your Weirdness Factor (AKA Uniqueness Factor) is 16%, based on a comparison of your test results with 124302 other submissions for this test.

The average purity for this test is 47.6%.

I have no idea what my wierdness factor is, but most of my friends and associates would use the word 'wierd' when describing me at some point or the other.

19 posts in a day - did your doctor give you a new prescription; or are you just really, really keen?

Then again, maybe prolific think-writing is what it takes to be anything other than embryonic lol.

ive concluded with a lack of rigorous testing or any knowledge on the subject that fire breathing dragons did exist, and may even exist today!

yesterday i made something like 13 posts, 10 of which were completely irrelivant to the topic

yes...sadly....

DC has dissapeared....

now i wonder, why didnt you?

Hey look at this article i found! . I cant tell if thats photoshoped. Wow... what if that is really what it looks like... Read the whole article.

http://www.theepochtimes.com/news/5-8-7/31030.html#farko

Draconic Chronicler is right on one thing; if the Christian God does not exist, then dragons probably do not exist. The reason is pretty simple. There have been no known large reptilian flying evolutionary lines since the end of the Mesozoic Period, and those creatures were birds and pterodactyl-like creatures, neither of which resembled any of the popular forms of dragons.

Moreover, unless the dragons were very small, they would consume large amounts of meat, and thus would require a large habitat. Just think about a theoretical dragon like Smaug from Lord of The Rings. It is not only a giant carnivore, but a flying one at that, meaning the amount of meat it would need to consume in order to survive would be tremendous. A large dragon, like the kind in legends, would probably need to strip an area dozens and possibly hundreds of square miles large of basically all animal life on a regular basis.

That's not to mention the weight problems. The largest flying creature that the paleontological community is confident existed was the pterodactyl-like Quetzacoatlus, which had a wingspan of 15 meters (about 50-60 feet). It was huge, but it was only a glider, weighed no more than about 100-200 pounds, and primarily ate fish. Even if you somehow came up with a living dragon larger than possibly an albatross, or an eagle, it would still be almost all wing in order to fly, and avoid the problems of it requiring tremendous amounts of food.

Yes, that is in fact fake. It's actually a frozen stream / river running through the valley, not a dragons tail.

really? cool . I was thinking it was photoshoped

Perhaps Draconic Chronicler(spelling) is finalizing all the paper work for his book.

Just for argument's sake, what if the dragons could use magic, and would levitate themselves?