Delacorr Posted June 14, 2003 #1 Share Posted June 14, 2003 If i am not mistaken, myths and legends are stories...if these threads are for myths and legends, how come we talk about "true encounters" when we know that they are myths...Centaurs are proven not rto be true, and nobody talks about them...chupacabra?...who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepsychoticseaotter Posted July 24, 2003 #2 Share Posted July 24, 2003 Probably because 99% of so-called "myth" has a basis in reality. Unfortunatly most people dismiss this as modern day "scientific" thought dismisses any Ideas that conflicts with logical fact. (sorta like the old school Catholic church did) Any way What we are discusing is usually the large amounts of evidence that points to the existance of "unexplained" phenomina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kismit Posted July 27, 2003 #3 Share Posted July 27, 2003 A quote that I particullarly like Delacorr goes something like this ... "Myth and Legend are nothing more than rumor coupled with time ". As I learnt recently because of this forum the legeng of King Arthur may well have originated in Italy. A soldier or saint from Italy was rumored to have embedded his sword in a stone about the same time as the legends of King Arthur surfaced. Legend = Rumor + Time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uranium101 Posted July 29, 2003 #4 Share Posted July 29, 2003 i think that a myth happens earlier than time than a legend unless you're talking living legend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now