Any of you got any sightings you'd like to share? I need

Could u pet this

>>18315596
Sightings of what?
Dragons? There is no proof that dragons existed.
And before you say dragons=dinosaurs: no, that is wrong.
Dinosaurs are a species that died long long time ago.
Dragons are mythos from medieval times.

>>18315727

At the very least it is interesting how many civilizations with no contact came up with the idea of dragons and other mythical creatures. Could just be coincidence but still

File: age-dinosaur-bones-1.jpg (28KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 400x267px

>>18315734

>>18315734
Please note that dragons differ a lot from civilizations to civilizations.
To give a broad example in Europe they were beats slain by knights while in Asia they took a godlike stand, a being that posses wisdom and power and that locals would pray to.
And when it comes to looks there are a wide range of dragons: from snake like, to lizard like to some that look like worms.
We believe today that all dragons were about the same everywhere because of the media today.

>>18315737
Do... Do you think that looks like a dragon? It doesn't even have wings. Still it would be interesting to see how many of these civilizations have actually uncovered dinosaur bones.

>>18315743
Read some fiction books with dragons. There are a lot that have no wings.
See>>18315741

>>18315741

>Please note that dragons differ a lot from civilizations to civilizations.

Every depiction of dragons from ancient civilizations share atleast a few characteristics.

They are all scaly obvious reptiles.
All capable of flight unlike any reptile
Big teeth and a spiky back.

It could certainly be a coincidence but I am not dead set on believing that, when even the Asian sea serpent dragons are remarkably similar.

There were dinos with wings.
You have a few partial fossils mixed together it's not a massive leap to think up the image of the archetypal dragon.

>>18315764
Yes they share a few characteristics, but there are a shitload that do not share.

Some had feather, some hairs, some scales.
Some were like a worm like I mentioned.
And they were not all capable of flight, and not all had spiky back.

Where are you getting this shit from?

>>18315737
>>18315765

Kek, people keep believing the "dinosaurs are the reason for dragons" logic even though there has never been evidence of ancient people stumbling onto dinosaur bones.

Go on, show me where archaeologists have dug up dinosaur bones while searching an ancient city

>>18315778
Yes, I agree that is stupid. I don't know what that anon is on about.
But saying they are real because different isolated cultures described them with similar traits while ignoring the mountain of diferent things about each description is just as stupid.
Dragons have been works of fiction inspired by nature. If they trully lived we would know about it by now.

File: 2016-11-09-18-49-32-162717059.jpg (21KB, 323x156px)

21KB, 323x156px

>>18315783

How ever if we are going to question whether or not dragons are real we need to figure out when they were alive and when they simply became legends and fables. From the limited research i have dome on the subject Asians and Greeks were some of the oldest to have depicted them.

Pic related is a greek dragon, can you really say its significantly differentt from an Asian dragon?

>>18315818
Really? I though Quetzalcoatl was one of the older depiction of a dragon dating back all the way back to 400 BC. I might be wrong.
And if memory serves me right Kukulkan is even older.

>>18315596
The creature in the picture is a Tatzelwurm it's a lesser known cryptid from the Swiss alps

>>18315727
Anything cryptid, not necessarily the creature in the photo

>>18315596
Can I have sex with it?

>>18315972
Why?

File: 1478281656008.png (421KB, 700x720px)

421KB, 700x720px

>>18315972
I like how you think.. it's a boy dragon if that means anything to you.

>>18315986
Well that would be interesting