Cryptozoology, Living Dinosaurs, and Origins Forum

Welcome to our forum. Feel free to post a message.  If you would like to debate me please contact first. Any messages that are not appropriate will be deleted within 24 hours. Thank you!

Cryptozoology, Living Dinosaurs, and Origins Forum
Start a New Topic 
Author
Comment
View Entire Thread
Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom,
Thank you for rephrasing your statement(s). Using Phil’s website as a source for evidence is not the best idea though. He has so much crap on there, would you like to weed out any specifics and present them as evidence? Or do you believe all of his stuff is credible evidence?

Although I don’t agree, I respect your opinions about the unicorns and satyrs. But wow what a violent dance!

Re: hey what about the dragon

If you type in a search with the keywords, "artifacts with dinosaurs on them", you'll find plenty of websites supporting exactly what the keywords say.

So what are your beliefs on the unicorns and satyrs?

Re: hey what about the dragon

”So what are your beliefs on the unicorns and satyrs?”

Mythological creatures, I just don’t agree with your theories of their origins. In any case, as far as them being mentioned in the bible is concerned, it’s just a case of folklore being used as “god’s word” because they were prevailing beliefs at the time.

As far as the search for “artifacts with dinosaurs on them”, I was really hoping you had specific claims that you personally believe. I know of many finds, none of which are very convincing after a little investigation. So for now here are two of the more well known finds, both of which are on Phillip’s home page.
1. The Ica Stones; Fraud, one piece of evidence that points to fraud is the crispness of the engravings, they are quite shallow carvings and if they are as old as is claimed there would be evidence of substantial erosion. Another is the investigation by Spanish investigator Vincente Paris who after four years of investigation took microphotographs of the stones that showed traces of modern paints and sandpaper. That’s just one of his proofs, but its pretty convincing by itself. Also the cave where these were allegedly discovered has never been identified, much less be examined by any legitimate professional, which does nothing to authenticate these as any type of reliable evidence.
2. The Acambro “dinosaurs”; I will keep this short by providing two links;
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH710_2.html and http://www.theironskeptic.com/articles/gef/gef.htm
In addition to the evidence against them I’ll just say that if I was a local in that area and some foreigner offered me money for every figure I could provide, you’d better believe I would come up with as many as I could.

So, I’ll stop there for now, but like I said before I was really hoping you had some specific “evidences” that you believe to be legit.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Well in the Bible, the term "leviathan" is said up until Isaiah, which is long after the flood. Also, the last time the word "leviathan" is used in the Bible, the creature is also referred to as "dragon" in the same verse (Isaiah 27:1). And the word "dragon" is mentioned throughout the old testament, even until the last book. I'll get more in depth with the history of "dragon" sightings in ancient cultures later. I have a book lying around here somewhere that's a good reference.

Re: hey what about the dragon

I fail to see how leviathan and dragons being mentioned in the bible qualify as “artifacts with dinosaurs on them", much less proof that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. You are taking folklore from an ancient text and twisting it to say what you wish.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Well the main topic now is if dinosaurs and man ever coexisted, right? And your statement of leviathans and dragons being folklore in the Bible is your own opinion, unless you can show me evidence otherwise. The Bible also talks about the behemoth. This seems to be described as a sauropod (Job 40:15-24). Whether you believe what the Bible says is true or not, we have people from ancient times describing animals that match the description of dinosaurs, long before paleontologists ever came about to piece together bones and come up with how a prehistoric animal looked just from it's fossilized remains. That's enough evidence for me but obviously not for you, so like I said, I'll add more to this when I find that book.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom said: "And your statement of leviathans and dragons being folklore in the Bible is your own opinion, unless you can show me evidence otherwise."

You and the rest of the Flinstones crowd are well aware (or are willfully unaware) of the VAST amount of paleontological, radiological, and archaeological evidence indicating that dinosaurs were wiped out millions of years before the dawn of man. These evidence suggest that either leviathans and dragons were folklore or sightings of something else that was misinterpreted.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Hey, genious,
Pick up the September 2007 Discover magazine edition. Dinosaurs survived the k-t event. If they survived that, then I have no problem believing they lived long enough to see a human (looking at it in your point of view).

Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom said: "Hey, genious,
Pick up the September 2007 Discover magazine edition. Dinosaurs survived the k-t event. If they survived that, then I have no problem believing they lived long enough to see a human (looking at it in your point of view)."

First of all, Tom, when trying to insult someone by sarcastically writing "Hey, genious", it makes more of a biting impact if you spell genius correctly.

There is one person who has made the claim that he has found a cache of bones that date half a million years after the K-T event. If you'll read carefully, he states "There’s no longer any question that dinosaurs in the area survived the asteroid impact event, finally becoming extinct about a million years later."

Let's assume, for the moment, that future studies support Dr. Fassett's findings. So, what you've done is pushed the extinction of the dinosaurs from 65 MYA to 64-63.5 MYA. The oldest hominid/hominin fossil (not even human, but hominid) is from 6-7 MYA. The first homo sapiens is from 0.5 MYA. To indicate that humans and dinosaurs coexisted a la the AiG museum, you still need to cover about 63 million years of time.

Now, while YOU may be willing to simply wave aside 63,000,000 YEARS of history as granted in your favor, I am less charitable. We know that both dinosaurs' and humans' remains are capable of fossilization. Show me the fossils.

I'll be awaiting the results of the Flintstone Creationists' studious research on this issue...

Re: hey what about the dragon

you know what, i have no problem with debating you, but how about backing the f*ck off with the attitude, huh? Ive got enough on my plate right now. I just had to move 2+ hours away from my fiance and I'm stuck here for God knows how long, and I'm no longer talking to half of my family. The last thing i need is you giving me a snippy attitude about something as simple as if dinos and man coexisted or not.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Wow, talk about a snippy attitude!
Sorry you’re having a rough time, but wow, that language is not very “Christian” of you now is it?
I think your “genius” comment was more of an attitude than what Shygetz said. The “Flintstone creationist” comment was hilarious if you think about it. There is no evidence that man and dinosaur ever co-existed except on the Flintstones (or something else along those lines).

Re: hey what about the dragon

every man has their breaking point. ive just about reached mine

Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom said: "you know what, i have no problem with debating you, but how about backing the f*ck off with the attitude, huh? Ive got enough on my plate right now...The last thing i need is you giving me a snippy attitude about something as simple as if dinos and man coexisted or not."

Then stop posting. Simple enough.

If you expect me to take it easy on what may be the dumbest idea currently percolating through our pop culture becuase you're going through a rough patch, forget it. I am personally sorry for your troubles. I still think this idea is stupid rubbish that's only worthwhile on Saturday mornings in your PJ's.

If you can't handle the Flintstone comment, then quit touting such obvious junk! Like I said before, explain away 63,000,000 intervening years, and then I'll take this idea seriously.

Re: hey what about the dragon

well then what do you think Nessie, Champ, Ogopogo, the pterosaur-like creatures in Angola and South America are?

Re: hey what about the dragon

shame dragons don't exist,or i would consider getting a 3 headed one(preferrably one shoots fire, one ice beams and the third heard fires lightning bolts)

Re: hey what about the dragon

“well then what do you think Nessie, Champ, Ogopogo, the pterosaur-like creatures in Angola and South America are?”

Wishful thinking

To quote Blondie;
Dreaming
Dreaming is free
Dreaming
Dreaming is free
Dreaming
Dreaming is free

Re: hey what about the dragon

to you it is. i dont think "wishful thinking" can be caught on radar, sonar, or video tape. what we need is the government funding to search these areas more in-depth to find out what they really are. We havent explored and discovered everything on this planet. oh, and by the way, here's some other unidentifiable creatures caught on film in Kanasa Lake in China: http://americanmonsters.com/home.php (4th news bulletin down). What do you think they are?
By the way, Blondie's my aunt's aunt. Not a big fan of her music though.

Re: hey what about the dragon

“i dont think "wishful thinking" can be caught on radar, sonar, or video tape.”

Something is caught on radar, sonar and video, but it is wishful thinking that they are actually pterosaur-like creatures. I’ll agree that there needs to be more research, but in the meantime…

“What do you think they are?”

I don’t know, perhaps giant fish? Besides that I can’t understand a **** thing the narrators were saying!
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2004/Sep/106036.htm
http://www.edu.cn/20050617/3141158.shtml
It’s funny how so many unidentified large objects (swimming or not) in lakes are called monsters. Maybe they should be called U. W. O’s - Unidentified Water-bound Objects.

”By the way, Blondie's my aunt's aunt. Not a big fan of her music though.”

Debbie Harry is your aunt’s aunt? How cool is that! I not a big fan but they did have some good tunes. Can you get me her autograph?

Re: hey what about the dragon

I can't believe they censored out ****! Could be darn, but rhymes with ram, just can't believe it!

Re: hey what about the dragon

"Besides that I can’t understand a **** thing the narrators were saying!"
lol neither can I, but it was an interesting video clip. And the website censored that? I didn't know it could do that.
What's pretty interesting though is what's in the second link you gave me: "For those bulls, horses and sheep disappeared along the lake, were they really swallowed up by the "monsters"?"
A freshwater fish snatching a bull at the water's edge? It would have to be the size of a whale!

"It’s funny how so many unidentified large objects (swimming or not) in lakes are called monsters. Maybe they should be called U. W. O’s - Unidentified Water-bound Objects."
I agree. It's fear of the unknown that makes people name these things "monsters". Now obviously it's not a definite fact that things like Nessie are plesiosaurs or prehistoric cetaceans, but even if they are, theyre just animals. Fish-eating animals at that. The Great White Shark is fearsome and kills people (accidentily though, most of the time mistaking us for seals). Why don't we call them "monsters" instead of fish? I'd feel safer in the water with whatever Nessie is rather than a great white.

"Debbie Harry is your aunt’s aunt? How cool is that! I not a big fan but they did have some good tunes. Can you get me her autograph?"
I'm not up on my family's geneology, but according to my dad, she is. I don't really even know her that much though. Plus even if I did get in contact with her, she's always travelling. If I could, I'd fax you an autograph lol.

Re: hey what about the dragon

"I don’t know, perhaps giant fish? Besides that I can’t understand a **** thing the narrators were saying!"
lol neither could I, but the video clip was interesting. And the website censored that? I didnt know it could. What's interesting is in the second link you gave me, about the animals disappearing. It would have to be the size of a whale to eat a bull!

"It’s funny how so many unidentified large objects (swimming or not) in lakes are called monsters. Maybe they should be called U. W. O’s - Unidentified Water-bound Objects."
I agree. It's fear of the unknown that makes people call them "monsters". For example, it's not a definite fact that Nessie is a plesiosaur or a prehistoric cetacean, but even if it is, it's just an animal. A fish-eating animal at that. There's nothing to be afraid of.

"Debbie Harry is your aunt’s aunt? How cool is that! I not a big fan but they did have some good tunes. Can you get me her autograph?"
I'm not really knowledgeable on my geneology other than immediate family members, but according to my dad, she is. I don't really know her that much though. And even if I did keep in touch with her, she's always travelling. If I could, I'd fax you her autograph lol.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom said: >what we need is the government funding to search these areas more in-depth to find out what they really are. We havent explored and discovered everything on this planet.

There is considerably more science that has a greater factual basis and a higher probability to render positive results that is waiting for government funding. Until I see a corpse washed up on shore, or a plesiosaur caught on a fishing boat, I have no desire to waste my money on paid excursions for cryptozoologists. Results first, then funding. This has been the model for decades now.

Re: hey what about the dragon

And that's why it's been going on for decades. Because the chances of us finding anything out of dumb luck without proper funding is really small. Ogopogo's been ripping fish nets and eating fisher's catches before they can drag them in. That should be enough for the department of wildlife,fish&game to investigate whats causing it, even though the answer's obvious. And when theyre surprised at what they find (hopefully not killing it in the process), hopefully they report what they find and scientists will get funding to search for Champ and Nessie. I just hope some hillbilly hunter doesnt try killing any of them after theyre identified as some rare animal (in my opinion, a plesiosaur). And I'd rather be paying my tax dollars to biological research than road construction, which just causes more traffic, aggravation, and pollution that will inevitably bring this world to a crashing end. Or funding to this pointless war of ours, which should be called a slaughter of our forces instead.

Re: hey what about the dragon

Tom,
What exactly is the answer? When you say “even though the answer's obvious” it still sounds like wishful thinking to me. You believe it’s a plesiosaur…you want it to be a plesiosaur…therefore it is a plesiosaur. Specifically on Ogopogo; http://www.csicop.org/si/2006-01/ogopogo.html
I think roads (roads do not cause pollution, and if they do cause aggravation then the tax dollars might fix the aggravating road) are far more important than chasing a mythical creature. However I do agree with you about the “pointless war”.

Re: hey what about the dragon

"What exactly is the answer? When you say “even though the answer's obvious” it still sounds like wishful thinking to me. You believe it’s a plesiosaur…you want it to be a plesiosaur…therefore it is a plesiosaur. Specifically on Ogopogo;"
Well that's what I believe most of these lake monsters are. Theyre reported for the most part as being huge, long-necked, reptilian animals with flippers. What other known animal besides a plesiosaur can be described like this?

"I think roads (roads do not cause pollution, and if they do cause aggravation then the tax dollars might fix the aggravating road) are far more important than chasing a mythical creature."
I'm not talking about the roads. I'm talking about the thousands of cars sitting idly in traffic because of road construction. And when I say "biological research", i don't just mean investigating these creatures. That's one of the topics. The others could be more in-depth research about cures for cancer and other life-threatening illnesses, making more fuel-efficient machines and automobiles that are more environmentaly friendly (yes i know we're already doing that), ecological research and environmental preservation, etc.

Re: hey what about the dragon

the dragon is called Wilma and she aint a very happy dragon...or perhaps its name was Puff...oh yeah it WAS puff. Yeah me and him used to hang and relax and stuff. Maybe this Mbembe character/reptile is just a rhyme character trying to chill...jeez i bet he reads these forums from his African river bank cave and ****** himself!

How you found this site: google