"It was the English paleontologist Richard Owen, who in

File: 1487803574374.png (158KB, 666x607px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 666x607px

Go on...

>>2431925

Dinosaurs did exist, but it's definitely true that '''''''archeology''''''' in the US in the late 1800s was shit-tier.

>Muh bones of giants that were spirited away by the Smithsonian
>Muh Celtic artifacts in fucking Appalachia

File: IMG_0728.png (356KB, 572x380px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 572x380px

>>2431925
>Dinosaurs are a hoax

Now this is a redpill I'm not I'm sure I'm ready to swallow

File: dinosaurs.jpg (3MB, 2376x3696px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2376x3696px

>>2431954
Not a hoax, they're real animals that are largely extinct.

What they're lying about is when these creatures lived (protip: its not millions of years ago).

Tbh American archeology&paleontology is literally fueled by we wuz.

>>2431954
>he fell for the objective science meme

dinosaurs was 19th centurys hot meme, like in the 20th was space race.

both were used by countries to one up each other. both were huge frauds, of course.

>>2432928
Early 20th century's human ancestor meme is my favorite.
>ooga booga, krauts have their own caveman so better mash together human and orangutan skull and hope that no one notices what we did

>>2432948
Refresh my memory. The anglos did it right? Totally falsified some skeletal remains claiming they found it in a peat bog in Ireland or some such right?

File: 1468580228570.gif (3MB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x500px

Why the FUCK haven't anyone made a TV-series covering the Bone War?

>>2432948
>>2432928
>>2431947

so how much of early modern science is tainted?

>>2432841
Ima need some sauce on bottom right.

Good thread lads

File: How It Happened.jpg (132KB, 496x423px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 496x423px

>>2432974
Since Darwin's myth of evolution has been infiltrating academia and preventing people from knowing about creation.

>people only started looking for a thing after they found out there was a thing to look fo

Vs

>massive multi century hoax

Excellent thread, as always.

>>2431925
>>>/x/

File: Swift-Dueling-Dino-Vase.jpg (1MB, 2127x3025px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2127x3025px

"The historical support for dinosaurs co-existing with man is overwhelming. First, there are reports of dragons from many disparate civilizations that had no known interaction. These reports come down from credible historians, sources of much of our knowledge of western civilization. Along with the written reports from antiquity, there are many ancient artistic works depicting the great reptiles as men knew them. The similarities between the iconography and known kinds of dinosaurs is striking evidence that these artists saw or heard reliable reports of the great reptiles in their day. The evidence is so compelling that darwinists have resorted to speculations about primitive paleontologists in antiquity.

The paleontological support for dinosaurs co-existing with man involves collapsing the evolutionary timescale from both directions. Clues in the dinosaur bones themselves show they are not millions of years old. Human implements in the lower layers reveal man’s presence going back to early in the fossil record. Of course human and dinosaur footprints (trace fossils) in the same rock layer are direct evidence of coexistence, indicating both walked through those sediment before they hardened. And the increasing number of “modern” fossils discovered alongside the dinosaurs is further evidence that the evolutionary timeline is all wrong."

Even though dinosaurs are largely extinct, there are still modern reports of them. The following list of "giant lizard" sightings have been verified by zoologists and paleontologists as being incredible stories that remarkably sound like dinosaurs or the dragons of past.

Lake Champlain's "Champ"
The Loch Ness Monster "Nessie"
The Zuiyo-Maru "Catch" (the claim that this was just a decomposing shark has been debunked)
The Sea Monster of Santa Cruz
Lake Okanagan's "Ogopogo"
The "Kongamato" of Africa
The "Ropen" of Papua New Guinea
"Mokele-mbembe" of the Congo
The Monster of the Cameroon and Gabon
Diplodocus in the Amazon
"Emela-ntouka" of the Congo
The "Burrunjor" of the Australian Outback
The Lake Murray Monster

>>2433007
and the third, but more esoteric one

>people retroactively created remains of ancient creatures by generating a global, psychic ground for it

File: dinosaur tissue.jpg (60KB, 520x386px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 520x386px

In 2004 the paleontologist Mary Schweitzer was examining in her lab a T-Rex bone taken from a canyon in Montana. She was shocked to discover soft, pliable tissue inside the bone! Later analysis revealed that it contained red blood cells and the unique hemoglobin protein. “This protein deteriorates very rapidly… surely if dinosaurs died millions of years ago, then any trace of this protein would be long gone. To find unfossilized dinosaur bone is already an indication more consistent with a young age for the fossils. The evidence that hemoglobin has indeed survived:

1. The tissue was colored reddish brown, the color of hemoglobin, as was liquid extracted from the dinosaur tissue.
2. Hemoglobin contains heme units. Chemical signatures unique to heme were found in the specimens when certain wavelengths of laser light were applied.
3. Because it contains iron, heme reacts to magnetic fields differently from other proteins – extracts from this specimen reacted in the same way as modern heme compounds.
4. To ensure that the samples had not been contaminated with certain bacteria which have heme (but never the protein hemoglobin), extracts of the dinosaur fossil were injected over several weeks into rats. If there was even a minute amount of hemoglobin present in the T. Rex sample, the rats’ immune system should build up detectable antibodies against this compound. This is exactly what happened in carefully controlled experiments.

>>2433063
“Evidence of hemoglobin, and the still-recognizable shapes of red blood cells in unfossilized dinosaur bone is powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible’s account of a recent creation.” (Wieland, Carl, “Sensational Dinosaur Blood Report,” Creation Ex Nihilo, vol. 19, pp. 42-43, 1997.) But in 2008 evolutionists published a paper claiming that what appeared to be blood vessels was merely the result of more recent bacteria work, forming “endocasts” that followed the shape of where the original vessels lay, and that the red blood cells are actually iron-rich spheres called framboids. In May of 2009 Schweitzer’s team examined a fossil hadrosaur bone, taking extreme measures to ensure against contamination or misinterpretation. The results, published in the journal Science, bolster the original conclusion that the soft tissue (including collagens and amino acids) inside dinosaur bones is highly problematic for conventional interpretations of age.

Testing has even documented intact DNA in dinosaur bones. “However, even under the best preservation conditions at -5°C, our model predicts that no intact bonds (average length = 1bp) will remain in the DNA ‘strand’ after 6.8 Myr.” (Allentoft, M.E. et. al., “The Half-life of DNA in Bone,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 279, 2012, pp. 4724-4733.) Paleontologists have described dozens of original, unmineralized tissues, including histone proteins and DNA in a T. Rex, bone collagen in a Jurassic Chinese sauropod, keratin protein in an Archaeopteryx bird, chitin and protein in Precambrian worm casings, etc. Yet experiments continue to confirm that such materials can last thousands, but not millions of years.

>>2433026
>>2432990
>>2432990
>>2432841
cannot tell if this is like serious posting or some coordinated and consistent memeing on this board

File: Evolutionism.jpg (67KB, 316x247px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 316x247px

>>2433065
In April of 2013 the journal Nature published the report of an amazing discovery in Yunnan Province, China. Embryonic dinosaur remains contained complex organic structures. “In contrast to previous studies of organic residues based on extracts obtained by decalcifying samples of bone, our approach targeted particular tissues in situ. This made it possible to detect the preservation of organic residues, probably direct products of the decay of complex proteins, within both the fast-growing embryonic bone tissue and the margins of the vascular spaces…. Previous reports of preserved dinosaur organic compounds, or ‘dinosaurian soft tissues’, have been controversial because it was difficult to rule out bacterial biofilms or some other form of contamination as a possible source of the organics. Our results clearly indicate the presence of both apatite and amide peaks within woven embryonic bone tissue, which should not be susceptible to microbial contamination or other post-mortem artefacts.” (Reisz, Robert R., et. al., “Embryology of Early Jurassic Dinosaur from China with Evidence of Preserved Organic Remains,” Nature, vol. 496, pp. 210-214.)

Evolutionists have proposed far-fetched scenarios to attempt an explanation of biomolecules lasting for tens of millions of years. But regardless of any other environmental factor that would affect tissue preservation, radiation is still a major issue. Even if Schweitzer’s T. rex had died in a cooler, drier climate than the Hell Creek Formation, radiation would have degraded its body. “Bones absorb uranium and thorium like crazy. You’ve got an internal dose that will wipe out biomolecules.” (Yeoman, B., “Schweitzer’s Dangerous Discovery,” Discovery Magazine, April, 2006, pp. 37-41.)

>>2433066
Not an argument.

>>2433056
>The Loch Ness Monster "Nessie"
i remember being a kid and reading some popular science magazine having very shitty blurry pics (that classic pic) of nessie. that shit had lots of staying power and credibility because people grew attached to the concept "nessie", it was a cute monster, a literal pet monster.

File: MokeleMbembe.jpg (347KB, 988x708px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 988x708px

“The dragons of legend are strangely like actual creatures that have lived in the past. They are much like the great reptiles which inhabited the earth long before man is supposed to have appeared on earth. Dragons were generally evil and destructive. Every country had them in its mythology.” (Knox, Wilson, “Dragon,” The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 5, 1973, p. 265.) The article on dragons in the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1949 edition) noted that dinosaurs were “astonishingly dragonlike,” even though its author assumed that those ancients who believed in dragons did so “without the slightest knowledge” of dinosaurs. The truth is that the fathers of modern paleontology used the terms “dinosaur” and “dragon” interchangeably for quite some time.

In his 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language Noah Webster sought out the derivation of the word dragon among the ancient Medieval roots. He concluded, “Hence I infer that the word originally signified a shooting meteor in the atmosphere, a fiery meteor, and hence a fiery or flying serpent, from a root which signified to shoot or draw out.” His first definition of the word dragon was “A kind of winged serpent, much celebrated in the romance of the middle ages.” (Webster, Daniel, An American Dictionary of the English Language, S. Converse, New York, 1828, p. 67.)

>>2433063
>>2433065
this is complete nonsense

>>2433076
>science is nonsense

Funny how atheists reject science when it doesn't suit their agenda.

File: Josephus.jpg (71KB, 427x544px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 427x544px

Ancient explorers and historians, like Josephus, told of small flying reptiles in ancient Egypt and Arabia and described their predators, the ibis, stopping their invasion into Egypt. (Epstein, Perle S., Monsters: Their Histories, Homes, and Habits, 1973, p.43.) A third century historian Gaius Solinus, discussed the Arabian flying serpents, and stated that “the poison is so quick that death follows before pain can be felt.” (Cobbin, Ingram, Condensed Commentary and Family Exposition on the Whole Bible, 1837, p. 171.)

File: Herodotus.jpg (111KB, 463x505px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 463x505px

The well-respected Greek researcher Herodotus wrote: “There is a place in Arabia, situated very near the city of Buto, to which I went, on hearing of some winged serpents; and when I arrived there, I saw bones and spines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to describe. The form of the serpent is like that of the water-snake; but he has wings without feathers, and as like as possible to the wings of a bat.” (Herodotus, Historiae, tr. Henry Clay, 1850, pp. 75-76.) This is a remarkable description of a pterosaur! In his third volume Herodotus goes on to tell how these animals could sometimes be found in the Arabian spice groves. He describes their size, coloration, and reproduction. It seems that venomous flying serpents were infamous for living in frankincense trees. When workers wanted to gather the tree’s incense, they would employ putrid smoke to drive the flying reptiles away. (Note the illustration below to the the left.) Herodotus has been called “the Father of History” because he was the first historian we know who collected his materials systematically and then tested them for accuracy. John Goertzen noted the Egyptian representation of tail vanes with flying reptiles and concluded that they must have observed pterosaurs or they would not have known to sketch this leaf-shaped tail. (Goertzen, J.C., “Shadows of Rhamphorhynchoid Pterosaurs in Ancient Egypt and Nubia,” Cryptozoology, Vol 13, 1998.)

Daniel was said to kill a dragon in the apocryphal chapters of the Bible. King Cyrus challenged Daniel’s refusal to worship the idol Bel. Daniel revealed to the king a conspiracy on the part of the priests to eat the food offered to Bel, making the god seem real. Not only were the deceptive priests executed, but Daniel was allowed to destroy their idol and a dragon that was being worshipped. In the brief narrative of the dragon (14:23-30), Daniel killed the dragon by baking pitch, fat, and hair to make cakes that cause the dragon to burst open upon consumption. In the Hebrew Midrash version, other ingredients serve the purpose of destroying the dragon.

After Alexander the Great invaded India he brought back reports of seeing a great hissing dragon living in a cave. Later Greek rulers supposedly brought dragons alive from Ethiopia. (Gould, Charles, Mythical Monsters, W.H. Allen & Co., London, 1886, pp. 382-383.) Microsoft Encarta Encyclopedia (“Dinosaur” entry) explains that the historical references to dinosaur bones may extend as far back as the 5th century BC. In fact, some scholars think that the Greek historian Herodotus was referring to fossilized dinosaur skeletons and eggs when he described griffins guarding nests in central Asia. “Dragon bones” mentioned in a 3rd century AD text from China are thought to refer to bones of dinosaurs.

>>2433066
>not recognizing pasta

File: 1451890791096.jpg (49KB, 704x441px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 704x441px

>>2433066
I wouldn't be surprised if some of it was unironic. it did start as shitposting.

>>2433094
>>2433093
still not an argument

File: childhood ruined.jpg (200KB, 1600x800px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1600x800px

>>2431925
Dinosaurs are literally glorified birds

The first century Greek historian Strabo, who traveled and researched extensively throughout the Mediterranean and Near East, wrote a treatise on geography. He explained that in India “there are reptiles two cubits long with membranous wings like bats, and that they too fly by night, discharging drops of urine, or also of sweat, which putrefy the skin of anyone who is not on his guard;” (Strabo, Geography: Book XV: “On India,” Chap. 1, No. 37, AD 17, pp. 97-98.) Strabos account may have been based in part on the earlier work of Megasthenes (ca 350 – 290 BC) who traveled to India and states that there are “snakes (ophies) with wings, and that their visitations occur not during the daytime but by night, and that they emit urine which at once produces a festering wound on any body on which it may happen to drop.” (Aelianus, Greek Natural History:On Animals, 3rd century AD, 16.41.)

>>2433098
>he unironically believes that dinosaurs are birds

why are evolutionists so retarded?

>>2432979
I already showed this autist that the bottom right is a hoax.

>>2433106
[citation needed]

File: zodiac.gif (36KB, 300x168px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 300x168px

>>2433105
Years of brainwashing does that to you.

"It is interesting that the twelve signs of the Chinese zodiac are all animals–eleven of which are still alive today. But is the twelfth, the dragon merely a legend or is it based on a real animal– the dinosaur? It doesn’t seem logical that the ancient Chinese, when constructing their zodiac, would include one mythical animal with eleven real animals. “The interpretation of dinosaurs as dragons goes back more than two thousand years in Chinese culture. They were regarded as sacred, as a symbol of power…” (Zhiming, Doug, Dinosaurs from China, 1988, p. 9.) Shown to the top left is a dragon (click to enlarge) that was cast in red gold and embossed during the Tang Dynasty (618-906 AD). Notice the long neck and tail, the frills, and the lithe stance. Shown above in the middle is a ferocious Ming Dynasty (1368-Chinese Shell Dragon of Xishuipo2 cropped1644 AD) dragon statue that is part of the Barakat Gallery Collection. China’s oldest known dragon depiction is a curious discovery found at the ancient Xishuipo Cemetery Ruins along the Yellow River in Henan Province (see right). There, three artistic dragons (along with tigers and other animals) composed entirely of white shells were placed alongside human remains. No doubt this indicates a burial place of some very important ruler from the beginnings of the Chinese culture. The Xishuipo site dates back several thousand years, yet the dragons shown are surprisingly like modern renditions. This shows the dragon concept did not slowly develop through Chinese history from a simplistic, primitive mythological figure. This would make sense if they were, in fact, modeled after living creatures."

>>2433098
>tfw so much money is wasted on these giant ground dwelling birds while more interesting creatures are left to rot

>>2433076
http://www.livescience.com/41537-t-rex-soft-tissue.html
The dinosaur tissue actually is one of the few non-fraudulent things this guy posts. This explains how it actually happened without his bullshit. I don't see how he fails to see that actual tissue being found would be abnormal even if it was only a few thousands years old

Ulysses Aldrovandus is considered by many to be the father of modern natural history. He traveled extensively, collected thousands of animals and plants, and created the first ever natural history museum. His impressive collections are still on display at the Bologna University (the world’s oldest university) where they attest to his scholarship. His credentials give credence to an incident that Aldrovandus personally reported concerning a dragon. The dragon was first seen on May 13, 1572, hissing like a snake. It had been hiding on the small estate of Master Petronius. At 5:00 PM, the dragon was caught on a public roadway by a herdsman named Baptista, near the hedge of a private farm, a mile from the remote city outskirts of Bologna. Baptista was following his ox cart home when he noticed the oxen suddenly come to a stop. He kicked them and shouted at them, but they refused to move and went down on their knees rather than move forward. At this point, the herdsman noticed a hissing sound and was startled to see this strange little dragon ahead of him.Trembling he struck it on the head with his rod and killed it. (Aldrovandus, Ulysses, The Natural History of Serpents and Dragons, 1640, p.402.)

>>2433122
Aldrovandus surmised that dragon was a juvenile, judging by the incompletely developed claws and teeth.The corpse had only two feet and moved both by slithering like a snake and by using its feet, he believed. (There are small two-legged lizards that do this today.) Aldrovandus mounted the specimen and displayed it for some time. He also had a watercolor painting of the creature made (see upper right). Perhaps these two-legged, snake-like dragons had been known for some time in Medieval Europe. A 13th century statue of Eve and the Serpent displayed at Reims Cathedral in Palais du Tau (below right) displays the same two-legged dragon motif. It is interesting to note that two-legged dragons have also been depicted in the ancient Acambaro art found in Mexico and Chinese art (see the Marco Polo dragon report).

>>2433115
not an argument

In Medieval times, scientifically minded authors produced volumes called “bestiaries,” a compilation of known (and sometimes imaginary) animals accompanied by a moralizing explanation and fascinating pictures. One such volume is the Aberdeen Bestiary, written in the early 1500s and preserved in the library of Henry VIII. Along with the newt, the [Aberdeen Bestiary Image] salamander, and various kinds of snakes is the description and depiction of the dragon: “The dragon is bigger than all other snakes or all other living things on earth. For this reason, the Greeks call it dracon, from this is derived its Latin name draco. The dragon, it is said, is often drawn forth from caves into the open air, causing the air to become turbulent. The dragon has a crest, a small mouth, and narrow blow-holes through which it breathes and puts forth its tongue. Its strength lies not in its teeth but in its tail, and it kills with a blow rather than a bite. It is free from poison. They say that it does not need poison to kill things, because it kills anything around which it wraps its tail. From the dragon not even the elephant, with its huge size, is safe. For lurking on paths along which elephants are accustomed to pass, the dragon knots its tail around their legs and kills them by suffocation. Dragons are born in Ethiopia and India, where it is hot all year round.” Flavious Philostratus, the third century historian provided this sober account: “The whole of India is girt with dragons of enormous size; for not only the marshes are full of them, but the mountains as well, and there is not a single ridge without one. Now the marsh kind are sluggish in their habits and are thirty cubits long, and they have no crest standing up on their heads.” (Philostratus, Flavius, The Life of Apollonius of Tyanna, 170 AD.) Pliny the Elder also referenced large dragons in India in his Natural History.

>History shows that dinosaurs lived with man
>Atheists on suicide watch, go full shitposting mode

Really makes you think.

Protestantism everyone.

The 16th century Italian explorer Pigafetta, in a report of the kingdom of Congo, described the province of Bemba, which he defines as “on the sea coast from the river Ambrize, until the river Coanza towards the south,” and says of serpents, “There are also certain other creatures which, being as big as rams, have wings like dragons, with long tails, and long chaps, and divers rows of teeth, and feed upon raw flesh. Their colour is blue and green, their skin painted like scales, and they have two feet but no more. The Pagan negroes used to worship them as gods, and to this day you may see divers of them that are kept for a marvel. And because they are very rare, the chief lords there curiously preserve them, and suffer the people to worship them, which tendeth greatly to their profits by reason of the gifts and oblations which the people offer unto them.” (Pigafetta, Filippo, The Harleian Collections of Travels, vol. ii, 1745, p. 457.)

St. John of Damascus, an eastern monk who wrote in the 8th century, gives a sober account of dragons, insisting that they are mere reptiles and did not have magical powers. He quotes from the Roman historian Dio who chronicled the Roman empire in the second century. It seems Regulus, a Roman consul, fought against Carthage, when a dragon suddenly crept up and settled behind the wall of the Roman army. The Romans killed it, skinned it and sent the hide to the Roman Senate. Dio claimed the hide was measured by order of the senate and found to be one hundred and twenty feet long. It seems unlikely that either Dio or the pious St. John would support an outright fabrication involving a Roman consul and the Senate.

>>2433136
Ad hominems are not arguments.

Author Charles Gould sought to dispel supernatural notions and give a sober account of the dragon. “The dragon is nothing more than a serpent of enormous size; and they formerly distinguished three sorts of them in the Indies. Viz. such as were in the mountains, such as were bred in the caves or in the flat country, and such as were found in fens and marshes. The first is the largest of all, and are covered with scales as resplendent as polished gold. These have a kind of beard hanging from their lower jaw, their eyebrows large, and very exactly arched; their aspect the most frightful that can be imagined, and their cry loud and shrill… their crests of a bright yellow, and a protuberance on their heads of the colour of a burning coal. Those of the flat country differ from the former in nothing but in having their scales of a silver colour, and in their frequenting rivers, to which the former never come. Those that live in marshes and fens are of a dark colour, approaching to a black, move slowly, have no crest, or any rising upon their heads.” (Gould, Charles, Mythical Monsters, W.H. Allen & Co., London, 1886, p. 140.)

The seventeenth century Bible scholar Samuel Bochart penned an in-depth study of the animals in the Bible. He describes how winged serpents are not only a thing of the Old Testament but were still alive in his day: “If on your travels you encounter the serpent with wings who circles and hurls himself at you, the flying snake, hide yourself because of its reputation. Lie down when the snake appears and guard yourself in alarm for that snake’s manner is to go away calm, considering it a victory… There are winged and flying serpents that can be found who are venomous, who snort, and are savage and kill with pain worse than fire…” (Bochart, Samuel, Hierozoicon: sive De animalibus S. Scripturae, Vol. 2, 1794.)

On April 26, 1890 the Tombstone Epitaph (a local Arizona newspaper) reported that two cowboys had discovered and shot down a creature – described as a “winged dragon” – which resembled a pterodactyl, only MUCH larger. The cowboys said its wingspan was 160 feet, and that its body was more than four feet wide and 92 feet long. The cowboys supposedly cut off the end of the wing to prove the existence of the creature. The paper’s description of the animal fits the Quetzelcoatlus, whose fossils were found in Texas. (Gish, Dinosaurs by Design, 1992, p. 16.) Could this be thunderbird or Wakinyan, the jagged-winged, fierce-toothed flying creature of Sioux American Indian legend? This thunderbird supposedly lived in a cave on the top of the Olympic Mountains and feasted on seafood. Different from the eagle (Wanbli) or hawk (Cetan) the Wakinyan was said to be huge, carrying off children, and was named because of its association with thunder and lightning–supposedly being struck by lightning and seen to fall to the ground during a storm. (Geis, Darlene, Dinosaurs & Other Prehistoric Animals, 1959, p. 9.) It was further distinguished by its piercing cry and thunderous beating wings (Lame Deer’s 1969 interview).

>>2433094
Voltaire never said that. Praise Jesus.

>>2433148
Evolutionary Zoologist Desmond Morris wrote, “In the world of fantastic animals, the dragon is unique. No other imaginary creature has appeared in such a rich variety of forms. It is as though there was once a whole family of different dragon species that really existed, before they mysteriously became extinct. Indeed, as recently as the seventeenth century, scholars wrote of dragons as though they were scientific fact, their anatomy and natural history being recorded in painstaking detail. The naturalist Edward Topsell, for instance, writing in 1608, considered them to be reptilian and closely related to serpents: ‘There are divers sorts of Dragons, distinguished partlie by their Countries, partlie by their quantitie and magnitude, and partlie by the different forme of their externall partes.’ Unlike Shakespeare, who spoke of ‘the dragon more feared than seen,’ Topsell was convinced that they had been observed by many people: ‘Neither have we in Europe only heard of Dragons and never seen them, but also in our own country there have (by the testimony of sundry writers) divers been discovered and killed.'” (from the forward to Dr. Karl Shuker’s Dragons: A Natural History, 1995, p.8.)

>scholars wrote of dragons as though they were scientific fact
It's almost as if dinosaurs and dragons are the same thing.

>>2431925
You're a funny guy
t. Geologist

>>2433107
http://bizarrezoology.blogspot.com.br/2014/06/on-matter-of-alleged-civil-war.html

>>2433162
I didn't know photoshop existed during the U.S. Civil War.

>>2433162
that doesnt show the bottom right photo that the anon asked source for.

also this is evidence that the photo was legit, because atheists/darwin worshippers were quick to make a doppelganger photo that is obviously fake, to discredit the real one

File: image.jpg (58KB, 433x340px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 433x340px

>he thinks anyone is reading those walls of texts.

File: Thunderbird.jpg (99KB, 866x518px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 866x518px

Evolutionists so irrational and illogical.
You have to suffer from some severe case of cognitive dissonance to deny that dinosaurs are younger than we've been told.

Your ancestors wrote books about them.
Your ancestors described their appearance (which sounds just like the dinosaurs we are digging up).
Your ancestors described their behavior.
Your ancestors described how they encountered and killed them.
Carbon 14 and fresh T-Rex tissue disprove the "million years" myth.

There are even still modern reports of a dinosaur living in the swamps of Congo.
"The region is the reputed home of the mokele-mbembe, an amphibious dinosaur-like creature said to be up to 35 feet long, with brownish-gray skin and a long, flexible neck. It lives in caves it digs in riverbanks and feeds on elephants, hippos, and crocodiles."

>>2433178
>complaining about reading on the HISTORY board

atheists on suicide watch

>this is how far protestants need to go to keep their retarded religious principles of literal interpretation of a book written two thousand years ago
The rest of the christian world is deeply embarassed

File: world views.png (27KB, 520x632px)

27KB, 520x632px

>>2433197
Because that would mean accepting God exists.

The underlying issue is scripture. They are afraid that the Bible might be literally true. Instead of addressing or trying to refute the evidence, their brain just shuts down because it contradicts their Darwinian "goo to you by way of the zoo" myth.

>>2433213
thanks for proving
>>2433217
his point

>>2433026
dinosaurs aren't reptiles though, lmao

>>2433224
Yes they are.

File: image.jpg (40KB, 300x277px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 300x277px

>Reports of dog-headed races can also be traced back to Greek antiquity. In the fifth century BC, the Greek physician Ctesias wrote a detailed report on the existence of cynocephali in India, known as Indica.[2] Similarly, the Greek traveller Megasthenes claimed to know about dog-headed people in India who lived in the mountains, communicated through barking, wore the skins of wild animals and lived by hunting.[3] Herodotus reports claims by ancient Libyans that such creatures inhabit the east of their lands, as well as headless men and various other anomalies.[4]

And people still deny that there were dog-headed men. I mean after all Herodotus and a bunch of other credible ancient sources wrote about them... Cognitive dissonance is appalling.

>>2432841
If they had lived more recently we would have access to even more bones and complete sets of bones, not less.

>>2433224
Dinosaurs are literally over-sized lizards.

Lizards never stop growing, they only stop as much oxygen they can take in. It would make sense that lizards were gigantic before the Flood because oxygen levels were much higher (that explains giant cockroaches and animals in general, as well as the long human lifespans).

>>2433229
There are literal dinosaur graveyards, showing that these creatures were hunted down.

>>2433227
Source please?

American Protestantism is the cringe that keeps on cringing!

>>2433226
>dinosaur bones literally have quill knobs in them
>hurr durr they're giant lizards

>>2433238
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynocephaly

File: kek.jpg (185KB, 1000x1000px)

185KB, 1000x1000px

>>2433240
>he thinks dinosaurs are birds

I CAN'T BREATH

>>2433231
nope. genetic analysis has shown that dinosaurs are more genetically related to birds than reptiles. reptiles already existed in the dinosaur age, meaning that they diverged from dinosaurs earlier. birds are actually descendants of a particular species of dinosaur

>>2433066
Actual 4chan users do not go out and download grandma's-email-tier cartoons unless they are doing it for the express purpose of making you mad.

Even though it's mostly trolls who poke fun at you without presenting any semblance of their own reasoning, it can get annoying because that's exactly what actual creationists do, as well.

>>2433239
Trying to find the argument in your post.. nope, didn't find out.

Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance. - Albert Einstein

Truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. - Arthur Schopenhauer

>>2433247
This is what you personally believe and has no basis in reality.

File: image.jpg (49KB, 400x386px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 400x386px

Omg he might not be just trolling! Mfw people like this exist!

>>2431925
How is this /his/ related? This very clearly belongs on /sci/ but OP is a faggot and know he'll get told there.

>>2433227
THEY WERE THE NEPHILIM! NEPHILIM CONFAAARMED!

>>2433261
>Dinosaurs are not history

>ITT: butthurt atheists in damage control

science, archeology and history proves the bible is correct.

your feelings wont change that

>>2433261
>/sci/
>not /x/
>not /trash/

>>2433277
Theory of evolution belongs in /x/

Historical facts belong on /his/

File: 800px-Kievskaya_psaltir_kinocefal.jpg (241KB, 800x748px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 800x748px

>>2433227
was jesus a furry?

>>2433227
Some libcucks still deny the existence of Marco Polo's torso-people. Truly science is a giant leftist conspiracy, which denies actual evidence in favor of a falsified narrative that doesn't actually benefit the people I'm accusing of faking it.

>>2433231
>>2433224

Right and wrong, Dinosaurs aren't Reptiles but it's awkward for biologists because then that means Reptiles are a paraphyletic clade instead of a "real" clade. But yes, "Reptiles" and "Dinosaurs" are two separate and delineated terms.

>>2433227
>tfw dog-headed man

ITT: atheists show how irrational and dogmatic they are

>>2433254
I'd like to hear the alternative beliefs that you hold and how they are in any respect more "based in reality." Do you have even more evidence for your claims than modern paleobiologists have for theirs?

>>2433301
why can't reptiles be their own clade separate from dinosaurs?

Omg I'm lmaoing so much right now. This thread is so much win. If you're s troll pls keep the act. Don't ruin my immersion!

File: doghead.png (475KB, 349x647px)

475KB, 349x647px

>>2433291
Yes

>>2433323
Omg there's pictures of it. Why would they draw them if they didn't exist? Check mate skeptics! Doubters on suicide watch.

>>2433267
>Dinosaurs are history

History starts with historical events being documented, not biology.

>>2433334
..So like all the stories posted in this thread of how ancient people saw dinosaurs and wrote about them?

>>2433336
>>2433227

>>2433333
>Omg there's pictures of it. Why would they draw them if they didn't exist? Check mate skeptics! Doubters on suicide watch.

>>2433341
woops meant to say your quads prove it right

>>2433320
Clades are defined by most recent common ancestor, an ideal clade is monophyletic, meaning you pick a single ancestral species and all of its descendants (like mammals, which all share one ancestral diapsid ancestor). Since Dinosaurs are also descended from the common ancestor of reptiles, defining them as their own clade forces us to remove dinosaurs from the list, and thus our list of "Reptiles" contains only some of that ancestor's descendents, making it "paraphyletic."

Iirc most biologist will now claim that dinosaurs are technically a member of the Reptilian clade, but are different enough from "true" reptiles that they're dealt with and discussed separately.

>>2433090
>The well-respected Greek researcher Herodotus

hahahaha

File: image.jpg (68KB, 480x296px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 480x296px

I mean people wouldn't draw something that didn't exist right?

>>2433090
Let us not forget that Herodotus also wrote about giant ants in india bigger than cats that dug up gold from the earth

>>2433056
There were no marine dinosaurs, though. Plesiosaurs and mosasaurs and the like are not dinosaurs. The closest you get to a marine dinosaur is Spinosaurus and it was more like a giant crocodile.

>>2433098
I don't understand the feather hate. Feathered dinosaurs look far cooler than featherless ones.

Also

>baby chicks and stuff can walk up very steep slopes by using their wings to provide lift
>raptors might have been able do this too for the same reason

You can't tell me it wouldn't be awesome to see a raptor in a movie or video game ascend up a nearly vertical slope to kill someone.

>>2433347
ok i see now. so do some people prefer "dinosaur clade" over "reptile clade"? can't they think of some unifying name that encompasses some underlying genetic or anatomical feature common to both branches?

>>2433413
there is a name but it would be far removed from both "reptiles" and "dinosaurs". Think of a clade that unifies both mammals, birds and reptiles. That's what you're suggesting.

>>2433236
No. It proves that herds would sometimes die in natural distasters such as floods.

>>2431947
Palaeontology.

Fuckwit.

What is radiometric dating, Alex?

/thread

>>2433545
A darwinist lie that cannot produce accurate results.

>>2433659
Hahaha. Bullshit.

>>2433098
What kind of faggot loser doesn't like birds?

>>2433685
I like birds. I've a fondness for a good boatrace, tight 'arris, and nice big bristols.

>>2433417

It's already been mostly sorted out. The problem lies in the fact that laypeople apparently cannot understand species classifications, and how retrospectively made-up they really are.

A Crocodile is a Reptile.

A Swallow is a Reptile, a Dinosaur, and also a Bird.

To some people, these statements are too hard for them to mentally process and therefore must be "false."

>>2433352
dogs and humans exist, but do you know what else exists too?
[spoiler]vivid imagination[/spoiler]

>>2433412
Do you have a source for the baby chick thing? I can't find anything but it sounds cute as hell desu.

>>2433828
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5Rjin-tjOxU

>>2433834
Confirmed for cute as hell

Thanks Anon

>Dragons, griffons, and other magical beings being sighted till around XVII century
>Some of noble families became extincts at least in male line in XVII century
>Tales of sunken cities, islands, continents, castles that disappeared

>Statute of Secrecy of Wizarding population was made in XVII century
Coincidence? I think not!

Conclusion: dragons are not dinosaurs. Dinosaurs lived millions of years ago. Dragons are simply hidden from people by magic.

>>2433067
>Nature, vol. 496, pp. 210-214.
Science

>Discovery Magazine, April, 2006, pp. 37-41.
Pseudoscience

>>2433494
>flood
Never say that word to a creationist

& humanities was a mistake

>>2433856
/thread

>>2434388
>"& humanities" scapegoat
>implying shit threads like these wouldn't get posted anyway