Bipedal Reptilians

ID, You've got my vote for "Way Above".

Your excellent research and insightfulness on this subject should help clear up some misconceptions as well as spark some interest in these matters.

Here are two theories on why there have been no remains found:

1) Perhaps they're cartilaginous, because as I recall, cartilage requires very favorable conditions to fossilize. So that could explain lack of fossil evidence.

---OR---

2) Being bipedal humanoids,would their Bone Structure not be quite similar to that of ours? Therefore, mere confusion in the fossil record.

It could just be that very few go ut to the surface, after all they probably know a human would freak and either shoot it and or run off and tell everyone. (guessin they dont want us to know they live down there if they have hid it this long). But still you would think at least a couple of remains would be found?! Maybe they just beam em underground lol. After al how else they gonna get in and out of caves that deep in the earth. Hey maybe there just invicible! Got to cut the head off!!!

Grey,

I appreciate the vote for the W.A.T.S. award. It was my intention while writing this to gather all the cases I could find and place them all in the same thread. You so often see posts on individual instances that I simply wanted to see how they all would stack up to one another. Also Grey, it is very good to see you back on the boards. I took a lot of time off from posting here and was disappointed in seeing that you were gone when I finally got back to ATS. I appreciate the vote and welcome back.


GrendelsBacon,

I am not sure that it is possible for a bipedal creature that large to move well if it had no actual bone structure, I believe the cartilage would break under that amount of stress. I am however not an expert so this theory may in fact hold up.

As for there bone structure being similar to ours I would agree that from a distance or to the untrained eye the skeletal structure of a bipedal reptilian may resemble a small child or as the case may be a large man. However if someone came upon a set of bones they believed to be human, odds are they would alert the authorities quickly.

As for the skulls you mentioned that were found in Peru, many experts believe them to be elongated human skulls however a small group believe that due to the distinct look the skulls posses they may actually be from another species. These elongated skulls also appear in Egyptian pictographs.



cecil the lost alien,

I agree that even if these creatures are intelligent they would attempt to avoid humans however trips to the surface would seem necessary to gather supplies. If there is a race of super intelligent bipedal reptilians then we need not speculate on why there are no remains as they would have sufficient technology to retrieve their associates upon their demise.

Everyone seems set on the underground theory but allow me to again reiterate the fact that six out of the nine original stories I presented happened extremely close to, if not in, large bodies of water. It would seem to me that these creatures prefer water to caves.

It would seem to me (correct me if I am wrong) that based on all the provided evidence we have to diverging theories here; on the one hand we have intelligent dinosaur descendents living in caves and on the other we have extremely evolved lizards or frogs residing in large bodies of water.

Though both seem far fetched at first glance the evidence turns this laughing matter into a serious one. Which of these seems more likely to you?

-id

Id have to go with the underground evolved Dinos because would they not have less predators underground and evolve quicker therefore be at a higher intelligence as many believe they are? Also as they can grow there entire species in a safe place would that not encourage communication too as they are all concentrated together for so long?

Yes I agree, I did a little more looking into it, and I have disregarded the possibility of the large organisms being cartilaginous, but, I still consider it possible for a smally creature to be cartilaginous. Also, if you take evolution into account, and remember that birds supposedly descended from reptiles, remember the avin bone structure. The problem however with this concept is that avian bones aren't as durable, thus leading to breaks. So possibly they (Reptilians) have less dense bone structures, and are more lean. This would allow for faster reactions/movement. I would like to note, there is no fossil record evidence for these organisms to my knowledge, please enlighten me if I am mistaken.

EDIT: In regards to the elongated skulls, they have been moderately debunked as Skull Binding, a practice of many South American cultures throughout history. It has also apparently been cited as have been practiced in Egypt.

[edit on 22-1-2005 by GrendelsBacon]

Cartilage skeleton:

Hyaline cartilage: This can be located in the nasal septum, the tracheal rings, and in growing bones. While this type of cartilage sustains some natural pressure it is unlikely that it would be able to support a creature similar to a human.

Elastic cartilage: This can be found in the ear and has a moderately ridged yet overall elastic frame. This type of cartilage is the least qualified for the proposed hypothesis.

Fibrocartilage: It the best bet for creating a working skeleton as it is found in intervertebral discs and joints meaning that it is able to take a great deal of pressure.

Though fibrocartilage MIGHT be able to support a standing human frame the possibilities of it being able to move as a human does would be extremely unlikely. Through daily activities we put a great deal of stress on our bones and while the cartilage may be able to support under vertical stress I believe that this vertical stress combined with any lateral stress would wreck havoc on the cartilage.

Physical remains:

Decomposition takes place in roughly 5 stages; these stages combined can take over 365 days to strip a body to its bone structure. This not only makes finding decaying remains of one of these creatures in even a moderately populated area extremely likely, but it also makes the possibility of discovering skeletal remains extremely likely.

Similarities:

Using the Troodon skeleton a Human skeleton and a bit of imagination I am attempting to compare the two. While this is not affair test as to whether a Bipedal Reptilian could be confused with Human remains as there is no skeletal evidence of bipedal reptilians the Troodon may provide a little information.

Approximately 5 feet tall
Approximately 7 feet long
Approximately 90 pounds

Though they may be similar in size, the skeletal structures obviously have little in common. The only similarities I can plainly see would be the forearm structure and the fingers though the latter would be a stretch. These similarities may actually be good evidence that the two could have been confused as we are not looking at a Late Cretaceous Period Troodon but a modern day humanoid descendant.

Cave Dwellers:

I still cannot accept the possibility that these creatures reside in caves and caverns. If they evolved to resemble Homo-sapiens then it would stand to reason that the conditions under which they evolved would also be similar. If they were to have developed as cave dwellers I would think that their physical structure would support such a life style. Also, all the sightings of these creatures near lakes, rivers, and swamps do not help the cave dweller hypothesis. The main problem with the river dweller hypothesis is the lack of physical evidence; obviously neither of these is fool proof.

-id

Though the Troodon and other bipedal Dinosaurs provide a fairly sturdy basis for the hypothesis of currently surviving and evolving humanoid descendants, this may not be going back quite far enough. Through my continued research of these sighting I have stumbled upon a well documented find. Eudibamus cursoris a bipedal reptile that existed 290-million-years ago predates all known bipedal Dinosaurs.



The skeletal remains of Eudibamus cursoris were removed from a Quarry in Germany by a team of scientists in the year 2000. As further proof that this creature may be the origin for previously posted sightings it is also believed to be the direct ancestor for several bipedal dinosaurs. The creature measures only 10.3 inches in length, obviously extremely different from any of the sightings, however, given the age of the reptile it is a possible starting point for this phenomena. The reason this find is so important is that it adds to the number of times that a bipedal creature has emerged. Dinosaurs were thought to be the first creatures to deviate from the usual sprawled four legged stature of most land animals, followed by birds, and then obviously by mammals. This creature in addition to those shows that the being bipedal is a favored trait of evolution that provides many advantages. Lastly, the discovery of this creature shows that Reptiles developed the trait prior to even dinosaurs lending more merit to calling current sightings “bipedal reptiles.”

-id

Originally posted by lizzardsamok
wanna see what they did to the cow
www.think-aboutit.com...

That alleged case of human mutilation in Brazil has been debunked. Linda Moulton Howe herself quite knowledgeable in the mutilation phenomena had investigated this herself. Apparently that mutilation was a human made revenge murder.