LOL! This? There is a place called a "library" in your town. In it is something called "books". Check it out

Lapi'che

Edit: *Clicks on link himself* Heh. Well, hat's not the link I thought I posted. I found one that was full of Native American Artwork with some wierd looking animals on them. I'll post later if I can find it again.

Makes scence now what you all were talking about. I found that site also. I very tired last night. I guess I pasted the wrong link. Yeah, it's moronic.

The word "dragon" is often used symbolicly. I don't think dragons ever existed. I think they were created out of supersitions. So I think it's rather pointless to debate on what is dragon and what is not. Can all of these creatures be called dragons? Possibly. But were they based on the same creatures and myths? Probably not.

When a noted paleontologist like Dave Jones claims that North American native legends abound with dragon-like creatures, and support this claim with dozens of artifacts depicting dragon like creatures, common sense should dictate that these native peoples had no idea of the latin term "Draco" that meant a usually flying, reptilian creature often possessed with supernatural powers. They had their own names for them, but a scientist can see these are the same kinds of creatures we call dragons all around the rest of the world. The Chinese did not call their dragons this latin derived name either. They called them lung, but like the European dragons, (as will as the native american ones), they are large, fierce usually flying reptiles often possessed with supernatural powers and connected to Gods and other aspects of religon. There are probably 100 different names for these supernatural reptilian creatures in native american tongues, but Dr. Jones, like any scientists classifies them all as dragons becasue of both their reptilian characteristics, usually large size and supernatural characteristics. Water Panther, Piasa, etc are just a few of these names.

Frogfish, the Indians may have called the Piasa a bird because it had wings and can fly, but the pictographs the indians drew of the creature show it with teeth, not a beak, front and hind feet, scale covered hide, and a long reptilian tale. Anyone familiar with legendary creatures would call it a dragon. Did you know many pilots call their planes a "bird"? It is not becaue the plane has feathers, but because it flies like a bird. According to your child's logic, because the pilot called the plane a bird, it must be a bird and not a plane.

You are only revealing your adoloescence with the ignorant remarks that you make like saying any small snake or lizard is a dragon. Please mature a little before you waste our time with your entirely ignorant remarks. You have no idea what you are talking about as you reveal with every post you make. If you are not sure what a dragon is, I suggest you read the summas and treatises of your catholic religion's greatests Popes, Theologians, and Saints, all of who confirm they are heavenly creatures created bv God. Or maybe you have denied your religion by now, as you must to deny the exisitence of the dragons your religion adamately claims are real creatures.

Piney, you claimed that all of the native american tribes knew that their horses came from the Spanish. I questioned this, and claimed that these tribes often believed they had horses long before these times and did not acquire them from the Spanish or other tribes.

I know there are many more, but one fully documented legend that contradicts your stand is the Blackfoot legend as to the origin of horses. I know that it is in several books as I have read it in books before, but for now here is an internet source which has a wealth of native american legends. www.firstpeople.us In this legend a young boy is befriended by a water spirit (probably a dragon by another name as many native american water spirits seem to be), who instructs the boy to tie a rope around the neck of an old mallard duck, not to look at it, but to go to sleep. In the morning he discovered that the duck was magically transformed into the FIRST HORSE! I am sure every tribe had similar fantastic mythical stories they believed in themselves, in the 18th or early 19th centuries, but if interviewed by white anthropologists in the 20th century they are going to say things like. "Yes, they came from the Spanish, just as your white history books say".

Please do not think I am being "racist" in my claims that oral traditions can quickly obscure what actually happens in the historical record. I make the same claim when commenting on how hebrew accounts in the bible are often somewhat different, but definately derived from thSumerian theology of their country of origin, though centuries of oral retelling in nomadic cultures often changes these stories. So in the case of the Blackfeet tribe, though horses did indeed come from the spanish, after a few centuries we have a legend about a possibly dragon-like water spirit transforming a duck into the first horse.

I believe the native american horse slaughter site was documented in a National Geographic magazine article a few years ago. It should be no problem finding it again. You may find it quicker than me with you library connections.

Sources with dates please. Not TV shows. I want sources and dates. Where and who are those "anthropologists" from the 1800s? Who recorded the legends? What book? What paper?
I am not going to research your claims. You are making the claims. You do the research.The Blackfeet have always ridden Paints.They came from the French. The Spanish hated technicolor horses. If you quote the legend. Quote the source. If you are refering to the "Clovis site" article. It was a 'Bison kill'. As for the Piasa. The pictograph hasn't existed in about a century. You do not know what features it had.

Lapi'che

I am glad you are not editing this post on paper. It would look like a mess with all your repeated edits......

Lapi'che

This is called "assume". If this was not a family forum I would explain to you what "assume" means in detail.

Lapi'che bro

Hey, a dragon:


Another one:


Oh my gosh, they are everywhere:


Look out, another one!:


This dragon is obviously evil:


You can't turn your head without finding a dragon:


I guess you are right, if you look hard enough, there are dragons everywhere. I apologize for doubting you.

Nice double post btw. Har. Har.
All this time I've been posing at forums, you're the first person to complain. EVER. At least you can't say I'm double posting to jack up my posts count like so people do.

And I'm lol at Fluffybunny.

@ Fluffybunny
That's hilarious.

posing. LOL! I'm not complaining. Your for real kid. You jumped right in. I give you credit. Most people skulk around. You also made an honest effort to provide a source which is more than I can say for some adult members. That is funny bunny.....Oh bad pun....real bad pun.....*hides head*

Lapi'che bro

Poor 'frogfish' is gonna be upset he missed this Yel

I agree. However I'm intruiged to why "dragonlike" creatures are found around the world. But I have a feeling that we'll never know - sadly...

Fluffy, you must really believe the native Americans must have been incredibily ignorant people to dismiss their virtually continent-wide beliefs in terrifying reptilian spirits and entities as merely being familar animals (or modern tools). I am amazed anyone here could find this idiotic and indian-demeaning post amusing, (except probably one little kid who hasn't responded yet). In fact, you dismiss all ancient peoples with similar dragon beliefs as apparently, superstitious and ignorant savages who turned harmless lizards into the terrifying "dragons" of their myths and religions.

Piney, whether you like it or not, that was an authentic Native American legend and proves that this tribe believed that horses originated from a Water Spirit that turned a mallard duck into the first horse. (Whether the water spirit was a winged reptilian one is unimportant, since we are talking about Indian myths as to the origin of horses now).

Obviously, most modern Native Americans don't believe in these quaint legends any more, for they have now been exposed to science and history. It is nothing different than the modern anglo-saxons of America who have dismissed the same quaint Adam and Eve story of their ancestors. The only difference is that you would have use believe that the native American never believed in legends that painted them as superstitious and historically naive as any other people. How arrogant.

Are you really telling me that you believe Native Americans never slaughtered the North American horses that went extinct there? Do you really don't think there is scientific evidence that they hunted them as food? Do you think they somehow believed this game was "taboo" because they knew that thousands of years later Europeans would teach them this was an animal that could be domesticated and ridden instead of simply hunted and eaten? I think you better just stick with the documented Blackfoot legend that the first horse was a mallard duck changed into the first horse by a kindly Water Spirit that may or may not have also been one of Dr. Jones many native american versions of a "dragon".

I have to agree here: if we take the ancient greeks for an example. They were very much civilised and intelligent. They knew that the world was round, and they even figured out how big it was and how far it was to the sun. Some of our worlds greatest philosophers came from here, and their thoughts are relevant even to this day... Ancient ppl were far more sophisticated than most asume. I've heard that the greeks, or the ancient egypt, actually could build a steamboat... Quite remakable! I would say that not untill Da Vinci there were no man (nor woman) that could match the ancient folks... But the medievel times were not as dark as common ppl nowadays think, mind you!

PS, it seems like you DC have had a bad day today, judging from your inputs today

You keep making claims of Native American cultures as if they are all the same and all have the same history, yet when asked to provide supporting evidence to your immense knowledge you skip the point and move on to treat the next person with your wonderfully condescending attitude.

If you want to talk about idiotic posts, I would recommend that you go through your own posts to see how incredibly offensive that you have been. Perhaps then you will get an idea of why you run into the resistance that you have here. You are assuming to know the correct history of NA tribes with oral traditions; when the people that experienced those cultures and histories(Passed along to us by family) tell you that you are not correct you then say that we are wrong and that the information passed along our history is incorrect.

If you think that my posts are offensive to NA, I would hope that you would take time to reflect on your arrogant attidude towards the history of NA tribes. You claim much, but offer little support on the matter.

You refuse to offer supportive evidence for your many of your claims and therefore are not seen by many here as being anything other than a "know it all", who isn't taken very seriously. Your credibility is nil.

When Piney has asked you to offer supportive evidence you skimmed past it, when I asked you to provide support for your broad claims of all NA tribes having "dragons" in their mythos, you point to Jones, yet Jones did not make the extreme claims that you attribute to him. You make the claims but do not support them, and when two NA people come to you with much experience of the history of the NA tribes in question, you blow them off and tell them they are wrong.

Either offer specific quotable sources for your claims of NA tribes and your "dragons" or get off of it...

You are so gung-ho in your beliefs that you are willing to make everyone wrong in order to do it. Do you actually wonder why you are not being taken seriously?

Had you been levelheaded in your approach, you would have a degree of credibility in this forum, but your agressiveness and arrogance make it quite obvious that you are not going to be able to get your point across; you are too busy being rude rather than being right.

I lived on the Navajo Nation(Window Rock AZ); I am familiar with the history of the Navajos, as Piney is with his people, but you are so convinced that you will make any claim to be right; to prove your point. In my experience, as with Piney there are not the creatures that you claim we are supposed to have; that all NA tribes have what you claim as being dragons in their history...we have many references to lizards in our history; good old lizards, similar the photos I posted. We lived in the dang desert for centuries on end; so of course we are going to reference lizards. Lizards are not dragons. Big difference.

...you may not see it that way, hence my sarcastic photo post, but simply put you are making such huge aggressive assumptions that you are bordering on obsessive.

The funniest part of all of this is that I really like Dr. Jones and the point he makes; I believe it is a valid point that deserves much investigation. Had you come here with any degree of respect towards the other members of this board I would have been very supportive of you and your point. You however have come here and been so offensive and condescending that I couldn't care less what your point is.

You are lying.

I have never done such a thing as you claim. If you were to take the time to find out; I actually think that Dr. Jones has a very good point, my entire point here is that you are not correct in your assumptions regarding the Navajo tribe as well as Pineys tribe. I asked you to offer support of your claims and you offered arrogance in return.

As I said in my previous post; I know and like Dr. Jones work. You however are rather offensive in your interpretation of it. Get over yourself, offer evidence and and bit of respect you will have credibility. If you wish to treat people as you have you will be the next Erik Beckjord of this forum; it is up to you.

I'm still waiting for sources and not ones from Television ..........................

Your avoiding the issue. There were only small deer size 'grazing' horses on the plains and giant 'browsing' forest horses in the Southeast. They weren't the "ridng type". If you could saddle one be my guest. The Celts used horses for food too. It was their primary meal when electing a king and holding a ceremonial feast and the modern French still eat them. You implied that we "hunted them into extinction" as for Pack and riding animals my tribe has a legend that we used Mammoths and Mastodons as riding and pack animals "Legend of the Cranberry" collected by Richard Charles Adams (my namesake) c.1899 and the Llama has been used by the Inca for centuries.

Lapi'che

D.C. The "gist" of this debate is you claim to be a legitimate scholar and researcher. I only ask that you provide the sources of your research to back this claim. "Television" or "Google" in my eyes are not legitimate research. Stop "running with your choke out" and avoiding the issue. All I ask is that you provide us with sources to back your claims and prove you do your "homework"


Lapi'che

Fluufy...very nice....


DC! You are calling me immature! You are the one who is calling the whiptail lizard a dragon! Have you ever heard of symbolism!!!! I guess not, in Hindu mythology, they use reptiles a lot as symbols, as some are sacred (Indian Cobra) and we are overrun by countless reptiles...

I might be right, but some of the "dragons" you say just might be a monster made up by Native Americans to keep away their children from deadly diamondbacks, mohaves, and Souther Pacifics! Again correct me If I am wrong Piney. I think they are linked to the lizards and snakes of the land, not your E.T. Supernatural dragons!

Again Fluffy, very hilarious...

Fluffy I loved your dragon pictures.....they were very informative

BTW: I am 1/4 Blackfeet and was NOT offended by your post.

Yeah, I was just saying >_>

And that's interesting about only the horns were said to be from unicorns. I didn't know that one

Piney,
I don't have the time to run to the library (quite a distance) for every little internet argument. But if we made a monetary bet that the Blackfoot Horse-Duck legend" can be authenticated in a book, then it might be worth looking it up. You work in a library, and you probably already know it is an authentic legend. It would also only take you about 10 minutes to confirm that the Native Americans hunted the orignal horses, and some scientists believe they hunted them into extinction. These are facts which we both know, so I don't know why you are playing these games. I agree that during the same time period the Europeans were also eating their horses. If they had not killed all the horses in the earlier period, they too may have discovered how to domesticate them. After all, they had already domesticated the dog.

Curious as it may seem, I am the one who believes that the native Americans WERE NOT ignorant, superstitious fools afraid of tiny lizards and making fables about them. On the contrary, I happen to give ancient peoples all over the world more credit than that. If you and Fluffy, and maybe Zandore all want to believe that native americans were terrified of tiny whiptail lizards and turned them into man-eating monsters that the Indian legends attest to, I guess that is your perogative.

Frogfish,
In many cases, all of the "dragons" shown by Dr. Jones on various native american artifacts, are associated with legends of these creatures being of huge size, with great intelligence, devouring humans, etc. I guess you must think they are all pretty stupid to be frightened of whiptail lizards and making such wild stories about them. Are you really serious? Grow up a little.

If anything, just the opposite is true. Medieval europeans who lived in big cities like London might be frightened by hearing dragon legends even if they never saw such a creature. But the Native Americans were very attuned to their environments, and were familiar with all of the animals. So when they had frightening man-eating "dragons" in their legends it is very likely they were based on something very real and terrible, NOT a tiny lizard or snake. Many of the creatures shown on various original Indian artifacts had several things in common, wings, horns, sharp teeth, claws, scales and serpentine bodies with long tails.

It should be remembered as well that virtually all of the North American "lake monster" legends have original native american origins. And many scientists believe these are no myths but real creeatures.

If you had legitimately researched your book you would have the information "on hand" as I do. It is called a "bibliogaphy" All the sources I listed for you are in MY OWN office/library and many of them are from memory. I personally own over 300 books on Native Americans. Also if you authored or are currently authoring a book you have to include a bibliography which lists all your sources and the dates published. It is unprofessional and illegal not to and you could be accused of plagarism. Now list your sources because you professional crediblity is "nil" without them.



still waiting.............

'

Lapi'che

You do not know how myths form DC...I have an Hindu pot in my home which shows a demon playing a flute to lure away a goddess...Since your 'dragon pots' are true, my pot depiction must be true too...do you not agree?

We call always rely on DC to end his posts with a derogatory remark towards me...so why don't YOU GROW UP and get enough dignity and self-esteem to not insult others....you are not the most mature person DC...

Do not get yourself galled by his attacks. It shows his immaturity and destroys his credibilty even more so. It is self-destructive. Now calm yourself young Padawan and let "Obi Wan" handle it.


Lapi'che

Yes Master...

DC, plainly dragons were based of common creatures or items, like lizards and dino bones...just like Yali, Unicorns, and many, many other creatures...

Frogfish, If little lizards or bones were all that the Native American's dragons and monsters really were, then I guess they must have been very ignorant people to be terrified of such things. But unlike you and piney, I tend to give them and their beliefs about dragon-like creatures a bit more credence.

I guess you can say the same thing about the catholic belief in demons too. My those ignorant people. They see someone with a mental illness and believe they are possessed by a demon. Very scientific.

Piney, you started this argument when you ridiculed my earlier posts by claiming there were no native american legends at all about dragon like creatures and I proved you wrong. You obviously don't know as much about the subject as you claim, and I think I will trust Dr. D. Jones' expertise on the subject, the artifactual evidence he presented, and my own research, than simply accepting that because of "your heritage" you are a (self styled) expert on these subjects. Are you going to claim I invented the Blackfoot duck to horse legend too? By now you have probably confirmed its authenticity, and it proves that in 200 years this tribe at least, had forgotten the historical origin of horses and came up with an improbable and magical explanation, just as I said they did. If I took the time, I am sure I would find similar horse origin legends for other tribes. But yes, in the 20th century sure they told the white anthropologists that they got their horses from the Spanish. After all, they had all gone to schools organized by the Bureau of Indian Affairs where they were taught "history".

You proved nothing. I ridiculed nothing. I just pointed out what I know. If you did the research. List your sources not Jones' T.V. program. I am a "educated" expert on the subject with two B.A.s from Swarthmore and I attended Rutgers. compliments of the G.I. bill. I speak at Rowan, William Patterson and various grade schools on Native American culture. My heritage had nothing to do with it. How can you call me "self styled" when I listed my sources and my educational background which you cannot.
Lets see your sources and background because your avoiding the issue at hand and repeatedly lying and changing the story. "artifactual evidence" LOL! Stories and sources. you "wrote a book" provide me with your bibliography.

Lapi'che

The fact that you keep stating this after I presented you with my sources, references and educational background is just soooo silly and bias.......it's utterly nauseating .


Lapi'che

Well, get into less arguments, and you may.

dc did I miss a reference link that you posted......NO I didn't oh well then you did not prove anything.

As Fluffybunny said:

Then you should have your primary sources and references on hand and in your personal office as I have. Also to have no bibliography for your book is very UNprofessional.


Lapi'che


edit: .....and any respectable museum has a library

I agree with Piney here. If you don't have a proper bibliography, who will give you credit?

I am guessing that you have not been reading any posts...or missing large chunks of the material that we have been posting here as you continually are missing the entire point of our posts.

I will do my best in order to get my point across to you with as little typing as possible so as not to confuse you. Please read it slowly and respond to the following point:

Please offer supportive evidence that Native Americans(Read; Piney and Fluffys Tribe) were terrified by whiptail lizards(or similar creatures you refer to as dragons). Is that too much to ask, or have we caught you in a lie you are not able to dig yourself out of?

You have repeatedly painted all tribes with the same brush and refused to see that two natives with an understanding of their tribes are asking you to support your own claims with evidence. As of yet you have failed to do so, and continue to destroy your own credibility.

The irony is that you have been so bloody arrogant and so bloody wrong and are afraid to admit it. You have leaned on D Jones work, but have bungled that as you have been claiming he made quotes that he did not. I'd love to see what he has to say about you if he were to read your claims. I don't know if he'd laugh or be angry. So far this has turned into a joke, so I guess I know the answer. You have contined to do his work such an incredible disservice I am astounded.

"Artifactual evidence" LOL! I have this rock here with a mastodon scratched on it. Could it be.........possibly............a.........dragon.......LOL!


Lapi'che

And you see a lizard..."Oh that's a dragon"...also very scientific...

You DO refuse to give links and refernces

I see many ignorant people are trying to put words in my mouth. I have never said "Indians were afraid of whiptail lizards". Frogfish and Fluffy said that. What Dr. Jones (and I) both said was that native american tribes across the country "feared" giant winged reptilian creatures, whose images can be found on petroglyphs, pottery ,etc. Please quite behaving so stupidly.

Why am I expected to presernt a complete Bibliography of my book here? I don't see anyone else expected to do that. I have mentioned dozens of my sources hundreds of times in these posts. If you are dying to read the biblography ask your library to order the book, it will be out soon. Then you wont even have to buy it. But unlike Piney, who makes broad statements like "there are no native american dragon legends", EVERYTHING I have said is in these forums are based on references.

I am not trying to prove dragons are real. But I AM proving that virtually every human culture in the world believed that these uncannily similar dragons were real, no matter which part of the world, and no one on these forums has ever presented anything to dispute that. And when they have attempted, I have proven them wrong. Read the posts, it is now a matter of historical record.

.........OH! Huh! someone speaking *yawns*.............

I provided names of numerous researchers and dates. You should do the same.............*yawns again* your circling around is getting old



Lapi'che

Hey, that was a very unique way to avoid showing that you were wrong and cannot provide evidence that the native americans "virtually" all have references to a terrifying lizard in their history. I know Dr Jones didn't say that...No big deal, we will just move on and consider the point settled. Don't feel bad though, I think everyone has stuck their foot in their mouth from time to time; No harm.

I was beggining to think that you were just missing the point.

Now that that point has been resolved, perhaps you would like to make a claim that can be backed up? Something that can be discussed in a manner which allows for an exchange of ideas leading to a nice learning experience? that sounds like fun.

Oh, and if you or anyone else continue to call people ignorant or stupid, you will find yourself lacking a "Add Reply" button. Being such an educated and knowledgeable person I don't think that you will have to resort to such things correct?

lapi'che

I remember where you started talking about The Australian Aboriginals that you soon backed off on

But please if you want to save face you can try again

Don't try to put words in our mouths. We haven't asked you for a 'complete biography of your book.' What we HAVE asked you for is that you post some of the titles of books that you are using as sources, or list the address of even one website that you used as a source. You have failed to do either.

really, from what i have read on both forums regarding dragons, i have seen people request and demand a bibliography from his book. DO NOT reufte this, as i have been reading both active dragon threads, and have seen this.

But on the matter of proof, can you prove to me conclusively that what you or i have said have never been said before?
I am not joking prove to me that my phrases and your phrases and thos of others have never been said.
use as many obscure refernces as you wish but i guarentee that nothing written here is truly oiginal.

Thats playing word games. You know it is not the same. This is same person that believes his friend is a demon. Come on.

As many here including Fluffy (a MOD) has asked.....show some REFERENCE LINKS!
Without them they are just opinions nothing more nothing less.


Who and where?



Could they be the same person?

I have asked DC for his bibliography for two reasons. The first, because it is the simplest and most easily accessible reference source that a writer would have (Note that I am not asking for a specific reference for a specific article; I am simply asking for the body of work he based his book on, which would, by copyright law, be included in his book), and two, becuase I am less interested in his claims about dragons, and more in his claims to be a legitimate researcher.

References are not weapons used to shoot down ideas. They are acknowledgements of another's hard work. They are requisites of academic credibility. To argue that there is no original thought is pointless; we are not asking whether or not DC came up with this on his own. If DC came to these conclusions through his research, then it is encumbent on him to reference the research that he used. His conclusions are his own, and anyone who wishes to use them will, in turn, have to reference his book.

[quote name='DemonWatcher' date='Dec 20 2005, 11:47 AM' post='984327']
really, from what i have read on both forums regarding dragons, i have seen people request and demand a bibliography from his book. DO NOT reufte this, as i have been reading both active dragon threads, and have seen this.[quote]

As someone who has actually READ the entire thread, I don't remember anybody specifically demanding that DC provide the bibliography of his book. We did, however, ask that he either provide reference links to support his statements, or list book titles that support his statements.

[quote]But on the matter of proof, can you prove to me conclusively that what you or i have said have never been said before?
I am not joking prove to me that my phrases and your phrases and thos of others have never been said.
use as many obscure refernces as you wish but i guarentee that nothing written here is truly oiginal.
[/quote]


Go back to page 7 on this thread, and take a look at my first post. See, a reference! But since you didn't pick it up already, I'll explain it again:

There is this logical concept known as Burden of Proof. That means that anyone making a positive claim must provide evidence. A positive statement would be "Prove that Unicorns exist."

The inverse of the above is that you can not prove a negative statement, like the statement you just listed above. It's like asking "Prove to me that unicorns don't exist." Someone could always claim that there is a unicorn hiding somewhere, out there.

Indeed, I never backed off about the aborigeies. Quite the opposite, most anthropologists woould include the Rainbow Snake in the pantheon of "dragon dieties". The broadest definition of a dragon might be a "Supernatural Reptilian Creature". A Chinese dragon is probably more lie the rainbow Snake than it is a European dragon.

I have said this many times, and I will again regarding my sources. At the time I wrote the bulk of the book I was a Department of Defense military Historian "overseas" and had no access to good english test libraries. Much of the theology side of my research is from the internet, but from sources I believe are unimpeachable, such as the online, Jewish Encylcopedia, and Catholic enyclopeadia. Many, many, ancient manuscripts are also on the internet, such as the the books of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, Apololypse of Baruch, etc can all be found on the internet, and they are no less valid than if they came from a university Library, (which is where many of the online sources are connected to).

As DW said, much of this is not a great revelation of mine. It is there for any researcher to find. I do believe I may have put more pieces of the whole "dragon" picture together than has been presented in one place before, and many people seem uncomfortable about it, which is puzzling if it is only nonsense as many of the hecklers here say. But in truth, dragons are far more than "unicorns" or "fairies" as some hecklers have compared them. As Dr. Sagan related, they are deeply rooted in the human psyche, unlike any other animal, real or imagined. Billions of oriental people still believe they are real, and billions more in the west may, when they learn that dragons are integral parts of their theology despite the massive conspiracy to hide that fact.

Fluffy, I suggest you watch the dragon special again and listen this time. While Dr. Jones didn't say he believed real dragons terrorized the native americans (and I didn't say that either), he did say legends and artifactual remains of fearsome dragon-like creatures could be found all across what is now the united states. There was even a map with "regional" native american dragons, if you remember. Piney said there were no native american dragons at all, and I said there were, and the TV Special with an esteemed expert PHD vindicated everything I said. Get over it.

And then you, in a way insulted all of these cultures, maintaining that all the Indians saw were lizards, they are the "dragons" ha ha ha. Aren't the Indians stupid? Somehow you may believe you were ridiculing me, but all you ridiculed were the very native american "dragon" legends that Dr. Jones, spoke of.

I am still waiting for Piney to tell me that the Blackfoot Duck that turned into a horse legend is not authentic. I am right about that too. Some, if not all tribes had no idea that their horses came from the spanish, but instead had supernatural myths and legends about their origin.

Is this what you guys are talking about? Just curious...

You still by law have to give sources to publish it

I never argued that with you. Military historian? What college? Agi quod agis D.C. What historic library?
Interea existimatvit ipse constituit morai Yelekiah..

EDIT: knowing your major you should be able to answer Yel.........
EDIT 2: and DC you should be able to know what I said to Yel studying in Europe and all...

Lapi'che

Proponit sua merita optime Yelekiah. Dedant D.C.


Lapi'che



edit : come on D.C. Tell us.....