PDA

View Full Version : Dragons may be real! =D


Kura Kusa
06-16-2005, 04:50 AM
http://img231.echo.cx/img231/5962/dragon0cw.jpg

In many early mythologies from Asia we find Dragons as either God's or messengers to the God's. Again like in earlier Mideast stories the Dragons are most often associated with water and wisdom. From these mythologies people have seen dragons has these supernatural beings of legend, but are they just that? Are they legend?

If you study many of the ancient cultures you will find that most of them have dragon's intermingled with their culture. When there cultures deal with dragons its not in a mystical way like Asian mythology, it's in a literal sense. Here is some quoted famous "dragon lore" taken back about a thousand years ago.

"The dracontia (eyes) could be used repeatedly by boiling it in water, the water was drunk as a medicine. The fat of dragons, after being dried in the sun, was a known cure for ulcers. It also tended to repel a variety of undesirable beasts, including, perhaps, one's neighbors, and the heart was also greatly valued as a source of strength and intelligence. Of all the parts of a dragon, none was more highly prized than its blood. The hero Sigurd, according to the thirteenth-century Scandinavian saga of the Vilsvings, accidentally tasted the blood while roasting the heart of a dragon on a spit and was suddenly able to have stronger hearing. Drinking dragon's blood was believed to cure a variety of ailments from blindness to kidney stones, and it was the only solution known by alchemists to be capable of dissolving gold, which made it valuable indeed. Dragon blood from the Yucatan population was found to be particularly powerful medicine and was fondly referred to by the few who could afford to buy it as "The Big Red ". With the advent of the Industrial Revolution and the free-enterprise system, the commercial potential of dragons became obvious to many, and several dragon-hunting companies were formed. Expeditions were sent from Europe and the British Colonies to seek out all species of dragons, and it is at about this time that the populations of dragons began to decline precipitously. Many of these dragon hunters were wasteful in the extreme Some cut out only the heart, leaving the rest to rot, while others drained the blood and ignored all the other useful portions. Still others gathered the teeth of the dragon, especially in the Orient where it is widely believed that dragon teeth have great medicinal value.

Of course, unscrupulous merchants were not long in discovering that dragon blood could easily be diluted with the blood of other creatures and still sold as the real thing. Two hundred-proof dragon blood became extremely rare, and many experiments were made to determine whether an easy test to judge the purity of dragon blood could be devised before it was purchased. It was discovered that eagle blood would not mix with dragon blood, and a market for eagle blood as a testing material soon developed. Just as rapidly merchants began selling fake eagle blood. This, surprisingly enough, did not mix with fake dragon blood, and soon nearly everyone was profiting from the bonanza except the users of dragon blood.

Because of the efficacy of authentic dragon blood as a cure-all, it quickly became apparent that many physicians and drug manufacturers were likely to lose fortunes in consulting fees and pharmaceutical sales. Therefore, strong lobbying action was begun to place both real and fake dragon blood on the list of controlled substances. Word went out that dragon blood was highly addictive and could lead to early blindness and sterility if consumed too frequently. Soon it became illegal to deal in dragon blood on the open market, and so a thriving black market developed. At present, the official policy maintains that dragon blood is highly addictive and should only be given by special physicians in life-threatening situations. All other uses of real or fake dragon blood is strictly prohibited by federal law, and a great deal of effort is being made to stamp out illegal use of the substances."

Of coarse stuff like this is commonly referred to as "dragon lore". A lot was written about dragons always in a very literal sense like "this cooking recipe requires a dragon tongue". This is writen by English historian Edward Topsell, 1658 about the known history of dragons.

"Humans and dragons have lived in proximity to one another for a thousands of years or more. It was probably on the African plains that the earliest humans first learned about the use of dragons for medicine. However, we have very little knowledge or information about these early encounters. However, we have very little knowledge or information about these early encounters. We do know that by the time of the early Egyptian period a considerable dragon- and serpent-worshipping cult had developed. This cult gradually spread to Babylon, India, the Orient, the Pacific Islands, and finally the North American continent, as more and more cultures began to recognize and appreciate the special powers and intelligence of dragons. The cult reached its peak during the days of the Roman Empire and disappeared with the advent of Christianity."

There is a lot of stories and information on dragons written thousands of years ago that isn�t written like lore. So if its not lore is it supposed to be true, were dragons real beasts? If they were real and so common why haven�t we found any dragon skeletons? Well I don�t know, I haven�t heard of any actual dragon skeletons ever being found so who knows. Can you tell me what the images on this old Inca pottery dated at around 500ad pictures look like?

http://www.greatdreams.com/dino-man.jpg

http://paranormal.about.com/library/graphics/ica_stone_lg.jpg

Hmm� Very strange those look like dinosaurs. Well what do you think these dug up sculptures look like found at base of the El Toro Mountains dated back to around 800-300BC? All and all they dug up over 32,000 figurines and artifacts, lol I love this guy

http://img184.echo.cx/img184/8617/think7pg.jpg
http://img184.echo.cx/img184/6777/think29ou.jpg
lol I love this guy too
http://img184.echo.cx/img184/3255/eyebrows8xl.jpg
http://img184.echo.cx/img184/4691/eybrows29bs.jpg

Wow those look a lot like dinosaurs also�. What do you think of these images on this pot and this quilt look like dated back to 700AD?

Therapod Stone procured by geologist Dr. Don Patton Pottery in the museum of Lima displaying long-necked creatures

These all look like dinosaurs, well all of these are described by there civilizations as �dragons��. Why would they call them dragons? They are obviously pictures of dinosaurs?

Well the word dinosaur was coined in year 1841 by Richard Owen a British scientist who realized that these ancient bones were a new species long extinct (of coarse all my readers should know that they are living just very rare!!). The reason there is no recorded history of Dinosaurs with man, is because before then they were referred to as dragons, and the reason that no dragon remains have ever been actually found is because when we find them we believe they are dinosaurs, they are one in the same. There were also sea dragons that were often feared, because explorers would come back and tell these horrid story�s of long necked huge monsters coming out of the sea like a snake, but not a snake because they could see a big body, and then some that just thought it was a huge snake because they saw no body, none of these types of dragons have ever been found either, well we do find a lot of sea dinosaur fossils and bones and such, but it couldn�t have been them because we KNOW that they have been extinct for millions of years, and all those people had to have been telling �sea monster lore�. Well to older civilizations they were referred to as dragons like the Vikings.

http://www.visualparadox.com/images/no-linking-allowed-/vikingship800.jpg

The reason for the dragon head, isn't because of superstition or mythology, its because they would come into contact with "sea dragons" frequently on trips from Greenland, Iceland, Norway or America. What they did was mimic what they saw and put the image on the front of the boat to disguise themselves, thinking the dragon would just think that they were a dragon.

This explains some things. What happened to the dinosaurs? They were hunted for sport, for food, for medicine and out of fear. When you know this and you read about dragons it all makes sense "a dragon was terrorizing our town, and KURA the greatest warrior slain him, and there was a big feast". It also explains why dragons aren't mentioned in history after 1600ad, its because then the land dinosaurs were so rare that they weren't in populated area's only in places like the Congo, and sea dinosaurs were referred to as "sea monsters" instead of dragons by most cultures.

more random cave paintings and what not pics. These are all suposed to be dragons, you tell me they are not dinosaurs. Isn't it crazy how much flat out truth evolutionary scientists ignore to hold up with thoery of evolution. You tell me that Dinosaurs went exstict 256 million years ago, and that so many has ever seen a dinosaur.

Kura Kusa
06-16-2005, 04:51 AM
Here are some other random old artifacts and drawings of dragons dated back to upto 500BC (the little cute figure with the big head dates to 500BC)

http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/ancient1.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/ancient2.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/pterosaurth.jpg
http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/horse.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/castlesm.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/castlesm.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/ashanti.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/ancient8.jpg

Kura Kusa
06-16-2005, 04:57 AM
more =D

http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/rhodesia.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/rockwall.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/incastonesm.jpghttp://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/graphic/muralsm.jpg

_Aatlaar_
06-16-2005, 05:00 AM
This has got to be the mother of all rants.

I think I love you.

I'll be back to comment more, if I can find some information to add...



Good lord man :twisted:

Therian
06-16-2005, 09:00 AM
And some of them are pickled...

Kura Kusa
06-16-2005, 05:57 PM
Lol Therian, I wish that was a valid proff, but that was a proven hoax =P

Here is some more information for yall, anyone who has studied this subject is familiar with the "Inca Burial Stones". If you don't study this subject then you haven't because these stones are a slap in the face to the current and past evolutionary theory.

The more we learn about dinosaurs the more these "Inca Burial Stones" make sense.

Here are some pics.

http://www.homestead.com/davidgoliathministries/IcaPeruBurialStones3.jpg

Read these little blurbs -

TOP-LEFT SHOWS A MAN APPARENTLY FIGHTING OR FEEDING A SAUROPOD DINOSAUR. NOTE THE DERMIL FRILLS AND ROSETTE PATTERN ON THE DINOSAUR.

TOP-CENTER IS A MAN RIDING ON THE BACK OF A TRICERATOPS DINOSAUR APPARENTLY SMOKING A PIPE.

TOP-RIGHT IS A BURIAL STONE WITH THE EXACT SAME IMAGES THAT ARE FOUND ON THE NASCA PLAINS OF PERU.

CENTER-LEFT SHOWS A MAN WITH A KNIFE BEING ATTACKED BY TWO T-REX TYPE DINOSAURS. NOTE THE ROSETTE PATERNS ON THESE DINOSAURS AS WELL.

CENTER-MIDDLE IS A CARNIVORE TYPE DINOSAUR (GRASPING FRONT LIMBS) LIFTING A MAN OFF THE GROUND.

CENTER-RIGHT IS EITHER A MAN ATTACKING A SAUROPOD DINOSAUR WITH AN AXE OR IT'S A SAUROPOD DINOSAUR KISSING THE MANS AXE. AGAIN NOTE THE DIRMAL FRILLS.

BOTTOM-LEFT IS ANOTHER SAUROPOD DINOSAUR WITH DIRMAL FRILLS AND MAN WITH AT LEAST TWO LARGE LIZARD LIKE CREATURES, ONE OF WHICH APPEARS TO BE BITING THE MAN FROM BEHIND.

BOTTOM-CENTER IS A SAUROPOD DINOSAUR WITH DIRMAL FRILLS, DANGLING A MAN IN THE AIR WITH THE MANS LEG IN ITS' MOUTH.

BOTTOM-RIGHT SHOWS FIVE DINOSAURIAN CREATURES, A SAUROPOD, A TWO HORNED CERATOPS, A STEGOSAURUS, A PTEROSAUR AND A CARNIVORE TYPE DINOSAUR EATING A FISH.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THESE 9 BURIAL STONES ARE FROM THE MORE THAN 300, FROM THE COLLECTION OF Dr. JAVIER CABRERA, THAT DEPICT SPECIFIC TYPES OF DINOSAURS. FOR YEARS THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMMUNITY HAS DISCOUNTED THESE BURIAL STONES AS FAKES BECAUSE "EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT MAN EVOLVED WELL AFTER THE DINOSAURS WERE EXTINT."

PALEONTOLOGISTS USE TO RIDICULE THE ROSETTE SKIN PATTERN AND THE DIRMAL FRILLS PRIOR TO THE 1990's. SINCE THEN FOSSIL DINOSAUR SKIN CLEARLY SHOWING ROSETTE SKIN PATTERNS (SEE OUR WEB PAGE, "THE CERAMIC DINOSAURS OF ICA PERU") AND IN GEOLOGY, DEC.,1992 DIRMAL FRILLS WERE CONFIRMED FOR THE FIRST TIME.

IT IS OBVIOUS TO ANY OPEN MINDED RESEARCHER THAT THE PEOPLE WHO CARVED THESE STONES SAW THESE CREATURES WITH THEIR OWN EYES.

THERE ARE 1100 OF THESE BURIAL STONES IN Dr. CABRERAS' COLLECTION IN ICA PERU. THEIR ART FORM AND LOCATION OF FINDS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE INCA CULTURE, c.a. 500-1500 AD. IN THE 1570's THE INDIAN CHRONICLER, JUAN DE SANTA CRUZ PACHACHUTI LLAMGUI WROTE THAT AT THE TIME OF THE INCA PACHACHUTI MANY CARVED STONES WERE FOUND IN THE KINGDOM OF CHINCA, IN CHINCHAYUNGA. HE ALSO STATES THAT SOME OF THESE STONES WERE TAKEN BACK TO SPAIN AT THAT TIME.

ON OCTOBER 3, 1993, THE OJO, LIMA DOMINGO, A MAJOR NEWSPAPER IN LIMA, PERU DESCRIBED A SPANISH PRIEST TRAVELING IN THE AREA OF ICA IN 1525 INQUIRING ABOUT THE UNUSUAL ENGRAVED STONES WITH THE STRANGE ANIMALS ON THEM.

THESE HISTORICAL RECORDS VARIFY THE EXISTANCE OF THESE STONES BEFORE THE 1800's WHEN "MODERN" MEN BEGAN TO LEARN ABOUT THE PAST EXISTANCE OF DINOSAURS.

THESE DINOSAUR ENGRAVED BURIAL STONES ARE POWERFUL EVIDENCE THAT THE CLASSICAL EVOLUTIONARY WORLD VIEW IS NOT TRUE!

THIS BEING TRUE, THE "EVOLUTIONARY" ARCHAEOLOGICAL COMMUNITY HAS DELIBERATLY SUPPRESSED THE EVIDENCE YOUR SEEING HERE FOR YEARS.

more pics of them -

http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/images/dinos/petro_trex.jpghttp://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/images/dinos/petro_triceratops.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/images/dinos/petro_hovind_inca_stone1.jpg

OVER 50,000 have been found since 1961. Now remember these have been documented about being found since 1570, way before the word dinosaur was coined and these were refered to as "dragon stones", when they were traded and shown around Europe.

Some people believe a lot are fakes, and if some are proven to be fakes that is fine. But the fact is there are over 60,000 of them found over the coarse of over 400 years. If some stones are fakes only those found after 1990 would have frills on the backs of some and rosset paterns in the skin because before then, we had no idea.

THESE PEOPLE LIVED WITH DINOSAURS, PERIOD.

and the more you read about dragon history the more the picture all unfolds.

Raya
06-16-2005, 06:53 PM
I especially love the Viking ship one. It gives me chills when I look at it, even though it is not properly a dragon lore item. And the first picture in the first post is also awesome.

An absolutely astounding collection of dragon lore...thanks for sharing it, Kura.