Dragon legends are in every tribe, nation, and people group. Most anthropologists will tell you that legends and myths are based on actual truth. Legends can become sensationalized—which is what the pagan religions often do by attaching meanings to these things (e.g., a dragon being responsible for the tides), but if you strip all of the sensationalism away, there is a consistency throughout all the dragon legends. Most dragons in these legends do not fly, but the ones that do have wings like a bat. The dragons from these legends look like big reptiles, with long tails and scales, having sharp teeth and claws (quite often only three, as we see on many dinosaurs). In fact, these descriptions are actually consistent with what we call "dinosaurs" today. When you read the descriptions of these dragons in these legends, or in historical writings, they sound exactly like the dinosaurs we see in picture books.
The word "dinosaur" did not exist until the mid-1800's. Prior to this, the word that was used was "dragon." We have many stories of knights fighting dragons. Obviously the myth is based on a truth. People tend to dismiss this when they hear about dragons breathing fire. But wait a moment... the Bombardier Beetle shoots fire from its butt! "Fire breathing" does not necessarily mean the kind of fire we see depicted today. Something similar to what the Bombardier Beetle shoots can easily be described as fire as it burns you. If people who encountered these dragons described it as like fire, a hearer could easily repeat it as "fire breathing." Most of the images conjured in our minds tend to be of the sensationalized dragons and their literal fire-breathing.
In a national park in Nebraska, there are structures made in the side of the rocks that look like cork screws. Scientists, in their ever-changing "great wisdom", attributed these to plants. Once they started to excavate them, they found fossils of beavers at the bottom. Evolutionary time lines would put these beavers as being extinct 30 million years ago, yet Native Americans saw them first hand. Had scientists asked the local Native American tribes what had made these structures, they would have been told, "Beavers". So-called "science" looks at these people and historic people as if they are complete idiots. This just goes to show "science's" pre-conceived narrow-minded mindset of "billions of years". Another example revealing this: if you drill into the ice and notice the many layers, "science" attributes these to years, whereas any intelligent person living in the area or observing it regularly will tell you they represent thawing and freezing. There is no such thing as "millions" and "billions" of years for our Earth and the universe. It is all less than 10,000 years old! But I digress.
Another Native American tribe tells a tale of a giant eagle. So-called "science" mocked these people and said they had no clue what they were talking about until they actually verified that their words were true and a giant eagle did indeed exist. If these people were right about seeing these things—the beavers and the giant eagle, what about other things they have recorded as having seen? Do we dismiss it just because we do not understand it?
The Epic Poem of Beowulf describes two monsters that sound identical to two dinosaurs: the Pteranodon and a bi-pedal sauropod dinosaur, most likely Tyrannosaurus Rex. Pteranodons (the smaller species) were pests in England and to the North and Central American Indians and others.
In order to understand about Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, we need to rely on historical accounts. Many of the historical figures we know of come from second-hand information written years after the fact, having no eye-witness accounts (unlike the Bible, which was written by first-hand eye-witnesses and has been attested to repeatedly by history, archeology, and science). Much of the information we have about dragons comes from eye-witnesses who wrote down their experiences (e.g., Herodotus, Marco Polo, etc.). We will believe everything else they write, but when they write about dragons we dismiss it as "miss identification". Funny how we make every people group prior to us out to be completely stupid and imagine ourselves to be great geniuses. Yet, we cannot for the life of us figure out how ancient civilizations built the pyramids and temples and other structures. Our best machinery today could not do the job. The fact is, we are dumber today than people were years ago. The American S.A.T.s are proof positive. They have been dumbed down compared to years past. Many of the things we think are new inventions today really are not. For example, Egyptians had batteries hundreds of years before we created what we have today.
Before the flood, they built cities, they had musical instruments, and they had tools of iron and brass. That means that before the flood they had to find, mine, and smelt the metals for their tools the same as we do today. Let us not accuse them of being unintelligent and untechnological. When I traveled to Peru, at one of the tourist locations in Puno, I saw some huge rocks that had been transported from a long distance away (see Fig. 1). How they moved these rocks, we cannot figure out. But that is not the most amazing part. The Inca's would some how get these huge rocks up on top of another rock and some how cut it perfectly to fit the one below it in their structure (see A and B of Fig. 2—B is about an inch drop). They were smooth and perfect, as if cut by a laser. Then, they had to hoist it up on top of the others, some 15 feet up and higher (see Fig. 2). The post-Inca burial towers were sloppy, as if done by amateurs (see Fig. 3).
Evolutionism
dictates that we must conclude these ancient people and historians were all wrong. "They could not possibly have seen what they claim to have seen because we 'know' that they have been extinct for millions of years." The Evolutionists "know" nothing. "Millions of years" is a conjecture—not a fact. Evolutionists believe these people are wrong because they believe these things have been extinct for millions of years. In order to keep their theory alive, Evolutionists have to make liars out of these ancient people and historians; they have to treat the information dishonestly.
Most people would say that dinosaurs are extinct, but there have been numerous eye-witness accounts from around the world in recent decades that challenge that thought. Most "dinosaurs" are extinct, but not all. Many of them simply do not get as large as they once used to. Lizards, turtles, octopus, and squid never stop growing. Give them the perfect environment and they will grow much larger than we currently see them. Our oceans are largely unexplored. On an episode of Monster Quest, they went looking for large squid, testing legends of the past. What they caught on camera shocked and amazed all of them. They captured an image of a squid larger than anything on record today. Some of their episodes are actually worth watching, while most are sensationalized with mythical garbage (such as The Jersey Devil, American Werewolf, and Aliens).
When Westerners go to the Congo or Indonesia, they automatically assume the people living there are idiots and do not know how to identify their animals correctly. Yet, when shown animals in books, they can readily identify which animals are local to their region, which animals are distant from their region, and which animals they have never seen. They can also identify certain photos of dinosaurs as being creatures they have seen. In fact, while the Western world is brain-washed with the false religion of Evolution, the rest of the world laughs at us mockingly and asks, "How can you say this does not exist? I have seen it with my own eyes."
The Bible is right yet again, revealing that man and "dinosaurs" (dragons) lived together (Job 40:15; 41:1), which science is trying to explain away despite the evidence. They have found footprints of man and dinosaur together in the mud. They tried saying someone forged it, yet when they excavated some rock, those prints continued together underneath. Science agrees that man and mammoths walked together, but deny that man and dinosaurs walked together. Yet, evidence has been found showing a mammoth and a dinosaur engaged in battle together, which apparently was not supposed to be. So, if man and mammoths walked together, and dinosaurs and mammoths walked together, then clearly man and dinosaurs walked together.
If you look around the globe, you will find carvings, etchings, and hieroglyphs of images that look exactly like dinosaurs. If dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, and the first dinosaur skeleton was not discovered until the mid-1800's, how is it that every nation, tribe, and people group could draw the exact same thing? A stone temple in Cambodia from 1186 A.D has a carving of a Stegosaurus on it. How did these people, 800 years ago, carve an image that looks so exact to the Stegosaurus? Obviously dinosaurs were not extinct when we are told they were. This is one of over 80 instances around the world where the people would have to have seen it to reproduce its anatomy so perfectly. A cathedral in the UK has a bishop who was buried there over 600 years ago. On his tomb are carved a number of animals, including sauropod dinosaurs. How could these images get there if they were extinct 65 million years ago? These people obviously saw these creatures for themselves.
How is it that all these people groups could draw the exact same myth, and yet they are separated by distant time and distant geography? Dragons and dinosaurs are the exact same creatures. They have always lived alongside mankind and still do today, although the majority of them are now extinct. You cannot take modern day fictionalizations of dragons and attempt to conclude that the use of such terms are automatically mythical. This is an unscientific approach. Modern representations of dragons are what is mythical; dragons themselves are not.
The word "dinosaur" did not exist until the mid-1800's. Prior to this, the word that was used was "dragon." We have many stories of knights fighting dragons. Obviously the myth is based on a truth. People tend to dismiss this when they hear about dragons breathing fire. But wait a moment... the Bombardier Beetle shoots fire from its butt! "Fire breathing" does not necessarily mean the kind of fire we see depicted today. Something similar to what the Bombardier Beetle shoots can easily be described as fire as it burns you. If people who encountered these dragons described it as like fire, a hearer could easily repeat it as "fire breathing." Most of the images conjured in our minds tend to be of the sensationalized dragons and their literal fire-breathing.
In a national park in Nebraska, there are structures made in the side of the rocks that look like cork screws. Scientists, in their ever-changing "great wisdom", attributed these to plants. Once they started to excavate them, they found fossils of beavers at the bottom. Evolutionary time lines would put these beavers as being extinct 30 million years ago, yet Native Americans saw them first hand. Had scientists asked the local Native American tribes what had made these structures, they would have been told, "Beavers". So-called "science" looks at these people and historic people as if they are complete idiots. This just goes to show "science's" pre-conceived narrow-minded mindset of "billions of years". Another example revealing this: if you drill into the ice and notice the many layers, "science" attributes these to years, whereas any intelligent person living in the area or observing it regularly will tell you they represent thawing and freezing. There is no such thing as "millions" and "billions" of years for our Earth and the universe. It is all less than 10,000 years old! But I digress.
Another Native American tribe tells a tale of a giant eagle. So-called "science" mocked these people and said they had no clue what they were talking about until they actually verified that their words were true and a giant eagle did indeed exist. If these people were right about seeing these things—the beavers and the giant eagle, what about other things they have recorded as having seen? Do we dismiss it just because we do not understand it?
The Epic Poem of Beowulf describes two monsters that sound identical to two dinosaurs: the Pteranodon and a bi-pedal sauropod dinosaur, most likely Tyrannosaurus Rex. Pteranodons (the smaller species) were pests in England and to the North and Central American Indians and others.
'dinosaurs', in the form of flying reptiles, were a feature of Welsh life until surprisingly recent times. As late as the beginning of the present century, elderly folk at Penllyn in Glamorgan used to tell of a colony of winged serpents that lived in the woods around Penllyn Castle. As Marie Trevelyan tells us: 'The woods around Penllyn Castle, Glamorgan, had the reputation of being frequented by winged serpents, and these were the terror of old and young alike. An aged inhabitant of Penllyn, who died a few years ago, said that in his boyhood the winged serpents were described as very beautiful... He said it was "no old story invented to frighten children", but a real fact. His father and uncle had killed some of them, for they were as bad as foxes for poultry. The old man attributed the extinction of the winged serpents to the fact that they were "terrors in the farmyards and culverts".'Alexander the Great talked about a giant lizard that frightened his army. Marco Polo recorded having seen dragons when he was in China. Herodotus heard rumours of winged creatures and, showing the mettle of a true historian, went to check it out for himself and recorded it in his work. Flavius Josephus writes about dragons. Many historians recorded these facts but modern humans brush it aside as fables (because of the sensationalism attached to it) while accepting everything else written without question. These respectable historians have wrote in their books, "This is what I have seen; this is what I have witnessed." The descriptions in their records sound just like dinosaurs, yet were clearly labeled as "dragons". The words of these reliable historians should be taken at face value. What reason would they have to lie? Why would they make it up? What would it benefit them?
"After the Flood", Bill Cooper
In order to understand about Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, we need to rely on historical accounts. Many of the historical figures we know of come from second-hand information written years after the fact, having no eye-witness accounts (unlike the Bible, which was written by first-hand eye-witnesses and has been attested to repeatedly by history, archeology, and science). Much of the information we have about dragons comes from eye-witnesses who wrote down their experiences (e.g., Herodotus, Marco Polo, etc.). We will believe everything else they write, but when they write about dragons we dismiss it as "miss identification". Funny how we make every people group prior to us out to be completely stupid and imagine ourselves to be great geniuses. Yet, we cannot for the life of us figure out how ancient civilizations built the pyramids and temples and other structures. Our best machinery today could not do the job. The fact is, we are dumber today than people were years ago. The American S.A.T.s are proof positive. They have been dumbed down compared to years past. Many of the things we think are new inventions today really are not. For example, Egyptians had batteries hundreds of years before we created what we have today.
Before the flood, they built cities, they had musical instruments, and they had tools of iron and brass. That means that before the flood they had to find, mine, and smelt the metals for their tools the same as we do today. Let us not accuse them of being unintelligent and untechnological. When I traveled to Peru, at one of the tourist locations in Puno, I saw some huge rocks that had been transported from a long distance away (see Fig. 1). How they moved these rocks, we cannot figure out. But that is not the most amazing part. The Inca's would some how get these huge rocks up on top of another rock and some how cut it perfectly to fit the one below it in their structure (see A and B of Fig. 2—B is about an inch drop). They were smooth and perfect, as if cut by a laser. Then, they had to hoist it up on top of the others, some 15 feet up and higher (see Fig. 2). The post-Inca burial towers were sloppy, as if done by amateurs (see Fig. 3).
 Fig. 1 |
 Fig. 2 |
 Fig. 3 |
|
Most people would say that dinosaurs are extinct, but there have been numerous eye-witness accounts from around the world in recent decades that challenge that thought. Most "dinosaurs" are extinct, but not all. Many of them simply do not get as large as they once used to. Lizards, turtles, octopus, and squid never stop growing. Give them the perfect environment and they will grow much larger than we currently see them. Our oceans are largely unexplored. On an episode of Monster Quest, they went looking for large squid, testing legends of the past. What they caught on camera shocked and amazed all of them. They captured an image of a squid larger than anything on record today. Some of their episodes are actually worth watching, while most are sensationalized with mythical garbage (such as The Jersey Devil, American Werewolf, and Aliens).
When Westerners go to the Congo or Indonesia, they automatically assume the people living there are idiots and do not know how to identify their animals correctly. Yet, when shown animals in books, they can readily identify which animals are local to their region, which animals are distant from their region, and which animals they have never seen. They can also identify certain photos of dinosaurs as being creatures they have seen. In fact, while the Western world is brain-washed with the false religion of Evolution, the rest of the world laughs at us mockingly and asks, "How can you say this does not exist? I have seen it with my own eyes."
The Bible is right yet again, revealing that man and "dinosaurs" (dragons) lived together (Job 40:15; 41:1), which science is trying to explain away despite the evidence. They have found footprints of man and dinosaur together in the mud. They tried saying someone forged it, yet when they excavated some rock, those prints continued together underneath. Science agrees that man and mammoths walked together, but deny that man and dinosaurs walked together. Yet, evidence has been found showing a mammoth and a dinosaur engaged in battle together, which apparently was not supposed to be. So, if man and mammoths walked together, and dinosaurs and mammoths walked together, then clearly man and dinosaurs walked together.
If you look around the globe, you will find carvings, etchings, and hieroglyphs of images that look exactly like dinosaurs. If dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago, and the first dinosaur skeleton was not discovered until the mid-1800's, how is it that every nation, tribe, and people group could draw the exact same thing? A stone temple in Cambodia from 1186 A.D has a carving of a Stegosaurus on it. How did these people, 800 years ago, carve an image that looks so exact to the Stegosaurus? Obviously dinosaurs were not extinct when we are told they were. This is one of over 80 instances around the world where the people would have to have seen it to reproduce its anatomy so perfectly. A cathedral in the UK has a bishop who was buried there over 600 years ago. On his tomb are carved a number of animals, including sauropod dinosaurs. How could these images get there if they were extinct 65 million years ago? These people obviously saw these creatures for themselves.
How is it that all these people groups could draw the exact same myth, and yet they are separated by distant time and distant geography? Dragons and dinosaurs are the exact same creatures. They have always lived alongside mankind and still do today, although the majority of them are now extinct. You cannot take modern day fictionalizations of dragons and attempt to conclude that the use of such terms are automatically mythical. This is an unscientific approach. Modern representations of dragons are what is mythical; dragons themselves are not.