Man and dinosaurs, when did we first know about them?

Soldato
Joined
6 Mar 2009
Posts
4,925
Location
In training.
If we discovered about dinosaurs for the first time in the nineteenth century, by the discovery of fossilized bones, then what are these etchings on the side of Bishop Richard Bell of Carlisle's tomb from 1496?

http://storiesfromthediogenesclub.blogspot.co.uk/2007/07/strange-beasts-on-bishop-bells-tomb.html

Pics and more at the link above.

Also a two minute video showing evidence of humans knowledge and interaction with dinosaurs around the world in cave drawings/paintings and stone carvings.
Skip the first minute.

 
Last edited:
Doofer, love the dinosaur card. xD

Except you are wrong with the first premise, humans have been finding dinosaur bones for thousands of years. People believed them were ancient remains of dragons, or giant lizards - which is pretty accurate really. The earliest documented discoveries in the UK were in 1686, but that was using scientific methodology. People were discovering fossils in the UK long before that, anyone in the Jurassic coast (devon-dorset) would find fossils daily on the beach etc. and assumed they were remains of ancient animals killed in a giant flood, possibly the biblical flood. They were well aware that such fossilised shells were from animals that didn't apear to live in that region anymore but that fact wasn't too important to most people back then.

Not necessarily wrong, in fact far from it as that is the perceived idea nowadays. Check wikipedia.
Also they were thought to be human bones, take Robert Plot in 1676, the curator of an English museum, described and drew a thigh bone that he believed belonged to a giant man. Though that is another "huge" subject.

How did the tomb engravings have such accurate depictations of a dinosaur, i.e. what looks like Diplodocus surely no one had put together a full skeleton of said found fossils?
 
They don't. They depict a lion fighting a dragon (the lion is Christ, the dragon is Satan) but many years of wear have worn away some of the details. What you do then is take really bad photographs with overexposed flash and you can say "They closely resemble dinosaurs, creation must be true!!"

I can see the lion, fighting the dragon you describe, yet still that "dragon" looks uncannily like what we would call today, a Diplodous; or a dinosaur of that kind.
 
I'd be wary of direct inferences from evidence like that anyhow - its not that unlikely for someone to take an example of an existing animal use a bit of creativity to draw a mythical monster that happens to resemble a dinosaur.

Fair do's. Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Probably because you cant see the wings due to the (deliberately) awful photography. Take the wings off a dragon and it will look somewhat like a sauropod, it doesn't mean that they were around 500 years ago.

Better photos here, can't see any remnants of wings? Though can now see, the tail of said "lion".
 
[FnG]magnolia;24961595 said:
Are we talking about dinosaurs, dragons or the hilarious joke that is creationism? I'm slightly worried that we're only a handful of posts in and already I'm confused.

Well the OP was regarding dinosaurs and man. I am not sure where that and creationism tie in, though seems to be the ball people are running with. I wonder why? :D;)
 
I like how you link it as a dinosaur and ignore the article. No surprise there. Ignoring everything to suppport your goal.

lol what?
I guess you mean that it was concluded to be a basking shark by the amino acid chains in the carcass. :D Funny though no one knows the amino acid chains of a plesiosaur.

My goal is nothing more than the truth.

I bring one more thing to the table, the yarra. Check out tribal paintings of it. It even shows an outline of the gastro-intestinal tract, indicating that these animals had been hunted and butchered.

I find it undeniable these creatures have coexisted with us, to some extent at least. As a child I kind of knew it too.



Some more very interesting pictures and info:- http://www.docstoc.com/docs/57757705/Dinos-or-Dragons---Unlocking-SAR
 
Last edited:
No its nt the ttruth at all and you dont seek it. Read the wiki, then come back. Why missoead with your posting.

You drinking again? Keep the faith.

I love the mosaic of the romans hunting Krokodilopardalis. (Literally crocodile-leopard.)
 
Er, what? No-one knows the amino acids of a plesiosaur? How is that relevant? The amino acids matched the basking shark so it's a basking shark. They were not unknown amino acids that therefore couldn't be a basking shark.

classic argument by false connections and claims of undeniable logic when the reality is the complete opposite of logic and connectivity. You people are are as desperate as a Year 11 boy at a school disco (and of roughly equivalent levels of knowledge about life)

The link was really to get people thinking, I understand and I agree with the lines of evidence strongly indicating that the Zuiyo-maru carcass was a large shark, and most likely a basking shark, rather than a plesiosaur.
Doubts still remain, including the observed large hind fins, the small, hard head with the nares (nostrils) at the front of the head, the existence of the decaying fat, and the presence of red flesh so that many still believe it was a plesiosaur.
 
Hold on, has this turning into some half-arsed attempt at justifying Literal Biblical Creationism?

Bloody Nora!!!!!!

No.

Not from me, unfortunately though any link I have provided, seems connected to one of these camps of creationism.
 
First century piece of art from Pompeii.

http://www.douglashamp.com/nile-mosaic-of-palestrina/

Pompeii is a ruined Roman city near modern Naples in the Italian region of Campania, in the territory of the commune of Pompei. It was destroyed during a catastrophic eruption of the volcano Mount Vesuvius on 24 August 79 AD.
The volcano buried the city under many metres of ash and it was lost for 1,600 years before its accidental rediscovery in 1748. Since then, its excavation has provided an extraordinarily detailed insight into the life of a city at the height of the Roman Empire
Both of the images on the left are from the “Hunt” mosaic discovered in the House of the physician in Pompeii, Rome.

When the images are discussed, it is within academia, not with the general public.
 
Apparently if you find an old dictionary pre 1946, in the description for Dragon we get: Now rare.
The word dragon is known to of been used to refer to a dinosaur.
 
What is Marco Polo describing here in "The Travels Of Marco Polo", The Venetian? :confused:


"Leaving the city of Yachi and traveling ten days into a westerly direction, you reach the Province of Karazan which is also the name of its chief city… Here are seen huge serpents, ten paces in length and ten spans in the girt of the body. At the fore-part, near the head, they have two short legs, having three claws like those of a tiger, with eyes larger than a fourpenny loaf and very glaring. The jaws are wide enough to swallow a man, the teeth are large and sharp and their whole appearance is so formidable, that neither man, nor any kind of animal, can approach them without terror. Others are met with a smaller size, being eight, six or five paces long; and the following method is used for taking them: In the day-time, by reason of the great heat, they lurk in caverns, from whence, at night, they issue to seek their food and whatever beast they meet with and can lay hold of, whether tiger, wolf, or any other, they devour; after which they drag themselves towards some lake, spring of water, or river, in order to drink. By their motion in this way along the shore, and their vast weight, they make a deep impression, as if a heavy beam had been drawn along the sands."

"Those whose employment it is to hunt them observe the track by which they are most frequently accustomed to go, and fix into the ground several pieces of wood, armed with sharp iron spikes, which they cover with the sand in such a manner as not to be perceptible. When therefore the animals make their way towards the places they usually haunt, they are wounded by these instruments and speedily killed. The crows, as soon as they perceive them to be dead, set up their scream; and this serves as a signal to the hunters, who advance to the spot and proceed to separate the skin from the flesh, taking care immediately to secure the gall, which is most highly esteemed in medicine. In cases of the bite of a mad dog, a pennyweight of it, dissolved in wine, is administered. It is also useful in accelerating parturition, when the labour pains of women have come on. A small quantity of it being applied to carbuncles, pustules or other eruptions on the body, they are presently dispersed; and it is efficacious in many other complaints. The flesh of the animal is also sold at a dear rate, being thought to have a higher flavour than other kinds of meat and by all persons it is esteemed a delicacy."
 
There is irrefutable credible evidence of the Incas knowledge of dinosaurs on burial stones, textiles and death masks. Do some research; It is obvious.
 
Are people really that stupid that they think the creatures in Job are not Dinosaurs?
Also try as hard as you can, no matter how convinced you may be, to leave room for possible error in what you only know from being told. Why the deception or is it simply a mistake of modern historians saying we have never lived with such creatures?
Behemoth quite clearly is what we know now as a dinosaur; the description below is an accurate translation, check the original Hebrew yourself. How did they know about an animal they supposedly should not have, describing it's movement even?


Behemoth.

15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.

16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.

17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.

18 His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron.

19 He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him.


Leviathan.

Job 41

15 His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

19 Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.

20 Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.

21 His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
 
I agree with you, dinosaurs existed a lot longer than all the scientists suggest and I believe that they still do to this day. With the revelations about the planes that hit twin towers recently, I reckon that they were were in fact flown by dinosaurs, I'm unsure of their intentions or goals though.

An old John Lydon quote comes to mind, "Ever get the feeling you have been cheated?"

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom