Evidence for the Co-Existence of Humans and Dinosaurs

a reply to: Phage

You mean to convince us that what we are seeing in that picture is pareidolia , Come on there's way to much evidence for even you to debunk

a reply to: Phage

I wasn't being all that serious! So you're saying its just a natural colouration in the rock? (Also seems quite a bit larger than I would have thought after having a quick skim over that report).

So obviously it was a snake that ate a pet which then got smooshed into a rock and left quite an impression on it.


But more on topic, I wonder if many of the dragon reports were goanna's or komodo dragons that by the miles and ages and word of mouth became larger than life?

a reply to: Qumulys

I can see your thinking but remember Komodo Dragons were only on one island .

a reply to: cooperton

Thank you for the excellent thread. Historically there are so many pictures that apparently don't make sense.
The most important thing though, for me, is that you took the time to make a thread that is a quality read.

Sometimes it seems that ATS is filled with superexperts who can shout down any and all content, but it really isn't.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

The picture, including the "original" has been significantly "enhanced" (and cropped) read the article.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: cooperton

I only got as far as the Acambro figures ...

Archaeologist Charles C. Di Peso was working for the Amerind Foundation, an anthropological organization dedicated to preserving Native American culture. Di Peso examined the figures and determined that they were not authentic, and had instead been produced by local modern-day farmers.[3][4] He concluded that the figurines were indeed fakes: their surfaces displayed no signs of age; no dirt was packed into their crevices; and though some figurines were broken, no pieces were missing and no broken surfaces were worn.

Furthermore, the excavation’s stratigraphy clearly showed that the artifacts were placed in a recently dug hole filled with a mixture of the surrounding archaeological layers. DiPeso also learned that a local family had been making and selling these figurines to Julsrud for a peso apiece since 1944, presumably inspired by films shown at Acámbaro’s cinema, locally available comic books and newspapers, and accessible day trips to Mexico City’s Museo Nacional.[5]

Wiki

Kewl story though.

Maybe you should read the entire post before saying you only got as far as the Acambro figures and posting "kewl story though".

One thing that you may not agree with does not discount what is presented.

a reply to: Gargoyle91

That's true (I think), which is why I added that perhaps it was seen (by an early adventurer) and then word of it was spread about and exagerated of time and distance. Just a theory though.

You forgot one of my favorite dragon stories. Where St George agrees to get rid of a dragon if they promise to become Christians.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: toms54

In the vast majority of cultures which have them, "dragons" are far more snakelike than dinosaurlike.
en.wikipedia.org...

While reading, I came across creation.com which has quite a few articles based upon science.

No.

Yes. I am not talking dinosaurs but the subjects I was researching. Mostly synthetic petrified wood and quick forming rock. I can't say there is any natural petrified wood formed in the same type of process as the lab petrified wood but the artificial methods do exist. Also not all rock requires millions of years to form. I am still learning about this now but if you think it's impossible just google it.

As for dinosaurs one should take notice of the carbon dating results. I don't believe dinosaurs lived 4000 yrs ago but if bones test that way how can we rely on any C14 dates? I've seen a lot of criticism but I don't know enough to form an opinion. However I have noticed they appear to be trying to find other types of tests lately so maybe some of the criticisms are valid after all.

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
a bible telling us the earth is only 6500 years old.

That's just it, the Bible doesn't say the earth is only 6500 years old. Where does everybody keep getting this from? My dad was a minister. One fact to point out the fallacy of this. Remember in Genesis when Cain killed Able and God marked Cain so that all people who saw him would know him as a murderer? What people? Supposedly at this time there was only Adam and Eve and the rest of the family. I think they already knew what he did. No, it's a race of people that were somewhere else on Earth. For how long? Noboby knows.

a reply to: cooperton

What a great OP.
I recently came across a great site. The premise being that history is not complete, in other word's what we are lead to accept as conventional "history"


www.stolenhistory.org...

History assigned architects for most of them, but you will not find any concrete proof of any sort of construction for approximately 99% of these buildings). Some of those buildings still exist today. The majority of them do not. A good portion was deliberately destroyed in so-called Urban Fires and Earthquakes. But all of those buildings appear to share the same architectural school.
....

I believe, as recently as 150-200 years ago there was one World Union with no countries. It was a civilization whose technical development was similar to that of ours. I am not saying that it was good or bad. I merely state that in the 19th century the entire world was fighting, while it would have to be building to get all the buildings and cities delivered. I do believe that current political system of the world conquered and destroyed the previous one. In the process billions of people were killed. These buildings we see all over the world are the remnants of that previous civilization. (I am still working on this concept. I believe something catastrophic happened twice: once in the 18th, and once in the 19 century. I also believe that the Timelines of World History, as well as the World History itself were intentionally altered. Meaning to the point where it is impossible to say what happened, when it happened and if it happened at all.)

a reply to: cooperton

Gobekli Tepe

Wow, what a wonderful thread. Loved it. Wish there was more!!! S&F X 10 if I could.




But.......JESUS H CHRIST Phage? Who's been taking the grumpy tablets this morning huh? Talk about "Deny the Obvious". Usually you are spot on and debunk even the silliest post. However, this time mate I have to speak up.

Pareidolia? Really?

I suppose those stick men accompanying the "Dragons" can be open to debate then? Perhaps they are not "Men" at all, but actually trees? Or scarecrows?

Stop "Debunking" for Debunking sake.

Have a beer or go for a walk??

xx

I will go with isolated stragglers that somehow, because of location and isolation, did survive for some time after the massive "extinction", however we are talking .0000001% , if that. They appear to be all gone now, but who knows. Perhaps when we cut down the last of the rain forests, a few more will crop up.

There have been many cases of finding what we thought were totally extinct species of animals today, but again, they are that .00000001%, which we accept as statistical realities.

Our cognizant history is as young as newborn chicks in comparison to the age of the Earth. We should not be so naive as to ignore what our ancestors drew in caves and carved in stone and that there are always exceptions to the rules... rules that are our own invention.

The odds of ancient peoples coming up with such depictions of what we know as dinosaurs go beyond chance. Some, perhaps, could be handed down memories from a far more ancient civilization that was able to contemplate and study the remains of dinosaurs and recreate their images, just like we did. What remains in our folklore could even be a combination of stragglers and contributions from early civilizations we are totally unaware of as of yet.

What came first the chicken or the egg? What we think that dinos look like is just a rough guess. We put muscle and skin on bones and say SEE DINOSAUR! We see a drawing that looks kind of like our idea of a dinosaur is and we say DINOSAURS WALKED WITH MAN!

We see a cloud and say BUNNY! too.

Show me some bones that are not 200 million years old and I might believe. Give me some 20k year Stegosaurus bones and you won me over. Most of the OPs evidence is much newer than 20k years, so show me the money and not a picture of a dollar bill...so to speak.

originally posted by: Xtrozero
What came first the chicken or the egg? What we think that dinos look like is just a rough guess. We put muscle and skin on bones can say SEE DINOSAUR!

We see a could and say BUNNY! too.

Show me some bones that are not 200 million years old and I might believe. Give me some 20k year Stegosaurus bones and you won me over. Most of the OPs evidence is much newer than 20k years, so so me the money and not a picture of a dollar bill...so to speak.

fossilization is a very rare event. Back to the .00000001%. Of all the plants and animals that have lived, we have incredibly few fossils of any of them. The conditions that allow for the preservation of plants and animals as fossils are very specialized.

If some species survived in the fringe, the odds of finding any of their fossils is almost non existent. I would rather go with the fact that we will forever be surprised at how much we do not know.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Gargoyle91

The picture, including the "original" has been significantly "enhanced" (and cropped) read the article.

It's a bit light on, you attacking one of the many stone pictures and ignoring everything else
If this article posted here has one fault, it leaves out so much more information that has been gathered worldwide.
Ooparts@s8int .com would give you great cause for concern, all the pictures on rocks, the eyewitness accounts that are also obviously paradoilia (seriously phage?), the modern accounts.
So, why does it bother you so much phage that there may have been big lizards living in recent times, what's the drama, does it hurt your faith in modern science

Paradoilia may explain a rock carving or two but what of all the other evidence, hallucinogens maybe?

I've heard the oxygen content made the dinosaurs huge. If man was around in those days I imagine they would have been huge too. [In those days there where giants.] So I guess like today with bears and lions dinosaurs where like any other animal and kept there distance. Just a thought.

originally posted by: korath
I've heard the oxygen content made the dinosaurs huge. If man was around in those days I imagine they would have been huge too. [In those days there where giants.] So I guess like today with bears and lions dinosaurs where like any other animal and kept there distance. Just a thought.

I would say they were not human or even hominoid...

a reply to: cooperton

Excellent OP!

I have a certain affinity for dragons (witness my avatar - although there's actually a very good reason for the dragon on the mission patch).

One of my hobbies is antique map collecting. They can be extraordinary in their simplicity and/or complexity, and I love the way they can depict older state or country boundaries and land masses. They are also often beautifully hand colored in using special inks that faded very little over time compared to other colored inks.

Some of the earliest known maps - i.e. completed long before Mercator came onto the scene - have areas where the map maker had to depict areas that were as of yet, unexplored and unknown. Often, in those areas, the map maker used the words "Here There Be Dragons" as it was widely believed that dragons existed and lived in the unexplored places of our world. Over time, it became part of our collective unconscious which is why so many writers and film makers use some form of dragon in their stories - both good and evil.

It's probably just me, but I think it's very cool. Of course, your mileage may vary, etc...