romans eaten by dinosaurs

Originally posted by The Vagabond
I'd at least want to bear in mind the possibility that those are just interpretations of dragons based on an amalgamation of several creatures.

I'm in no way saying dinosaurs were around when the Romans were (that I know of), but aren't dragons always thought of as being able to fly and pictured with wings? Also, and I'm not sure of this, wasn't the first depictions and stories of "dragons" long after the time of the Romans?

Here's another....

www.s8int.com...

And now we come to one of the most important pieces of Tolone’s collection. One that will receive the closest scrutiny and interrogation by experts--and for which the collector has been quite emphatic of its authenticity,- a terracotta statue of of approximately 18 cm of length representing one strange dinosaur/sauropod with plates on its back.

The plates are triangular, and continue along the back until reaching the tail. The view from above the object reveals a strange curving of the plates, as if the animal had been represented in motion on the land...

The legs are large and awkward, as of an animal of great weight, not at all like those of a lizard or of "modern" animals, such as the crested triton or other types of salamander which the sculpture has been compared to.


No type of salamander or lizard like this species is currently known, that has similar plates, but-- it is possible to take up any handbook on paleontology and it becomes clear immediately that the animal represented in the sculpture belongs to a species of stegosaur,-- a species of dinosaur with plates on its back;-- that scientists assert became extinct approximately 65 million years ago...

If the terracotta statue representing a dinosaur were a fake, it would not be at all difficult to try subjecting it to radiocarbon 14 dating, asserts Tolone, but if the scientific report shows that it is authentic and aged a few thousand years, we would be faced with one of the most incredible enigmas of world-wide archaeology.

[edit on 28/10/06 by Yossarian]

no1. I never said ANYTHING about the arctic, they were discovered in Russia.

no2. The Channel is just called Educational Access, and has a Radio show run by W-something, when it comes up ill tell you the exact letters, a group of EDUCATED people have a show on there Called, what else, conspracy hour

and BTW i just got digital cable today!

the armor was found in the area where the stomach is supposed, so why NOT call it the stomach to be, most of their guts rotted, leaving the metal behind

There are some creatures belived to be living on today, such as nessie and the lake champlain monster.

[edit on 28-10-2006 by Resident Skeptik]

[edit on 28-10-2006 by Resident Skeptik]

Hum mm nice pieces but they are from a creationist site so I will take it with a skepticism.

Now we need Bird expertise here to separate facts from fiction.

who ever said anything about creationism, there is nothing said about the earth being so older than we think, HECK, there isnt really anything about creationism

Here is reference to the discovery of fossilised organs in Rome.

In fact, organ preservation has only been noted once before, in the fossilized skeleton of a baby Scipionyx theropd discovered in near Rome, Italy earlier this decade.

Source

Other links to the more recent fossilised heart discovery are at the bottom of the above page.

Originally posted by Resident Skeptik
who ever said anything about creationism, there is nothing said about the earth being so older than we think, HECK, there isnt really anything about creationism

Yes but the sites presented are.

And as for the dinosaurs news of one being found frozen and with human DNA as stated it is already probably just a creationist geared propaganda for the viewer.

Because even when it sounds very interesting I can not seem to find any sources to back the thread statements yet.

Can you supply some?

i was wrong on the first post, i put the actual "facts" from the show on in my edited posts

Originally posted by Yossarian
Here is reference to the discovery of fossilized organs in Rome.

Thanks for the link, only known fossilized heart of a dinosaur I guess we have found a fossilized hart but fossilized is far from Frozen and Human DNA while your link is believable the claims of the thread as Human DNA is just to incredible.

how is the last one about creationism?

ok marg, When did i ever say ANYTHING about DNA, i said METAL, not DNA, ok?

Originally posted by Resident Skeptik
ok marg, When did i ever say ANYTHING about DNA, i said METAL, not DNA, ok?

You are right, I was asking the questions to the starter of the thread and for some reason I ended up mistaking you for him. Sorry.

My mistake.

You won't find anything about frozen dinosaur remains unless it's from a creationist site. That's not to say it's false, it's just...

Originally posted by Yossarian
You won't find anything about frozen dinosaur remains unless it's from a creationist site. That's not to say it's false, it's just...

Yes I understand. That is why its so hard to believe a finding like that would be making head lines all over the world just like when the first whole frozen Mammoth was found.

just what exactly is the crerationism things you guys are talking about exactly, i dont really understall 100% of it

its a "real" finding it was on conspiracy hour on this local access channel man

[edit on 28-10-2006 by Patrick The Religious Man]

This was described as a 'dinosaur-like' animal wasnt it, not a t-rex or a velociraptor? Crocodiles are still around now, why couldnt some other remnant of dinosaurs have survied as well for a time being? Why is this such a huge stretch for people to consider plausible?

Originally posted by subz
why couldnt some other remnant of dinosaurs have survived as well for a time being? Why is this such a huge stretch for people to consider plausible?

Is nothing more that I would like to see, that the prove of some dinosaur species surviving in modern days or at least alone side humans.

But is not evidence and is not prove so is not fact just a theory and a wishful thinking and wanting.

Is nothing wrong with that, what I find wrong is how certain theories and believes are tagged to stories like this one for some groups deliberated manipulation of facts.

Every time that I think is some good story about something found that it could be amazing it ends up to be nothing more than a scam and a lie and nothing more than sensationalism.

Originally posted by Patrick The Religious Man
its a "real" finding it was on conspiracy hour on this local access channel man

I understand that now, but still it sounded good and interesting enough to see it, If I could.

Originally posted by marg6043

just like when the first whole frozen Mammoth was found.

And it's a mystery how the mammoth could have been frozen as well. How big was this dino? As big as a mammoth?

The Beresovka Mammoth Problem


To satisfactorily freeze a side of beef takes 30 minutes at -40 degrees Fahrenheit. To deep freeze a huge living warm blooded mammoth, insulated in thick fur, they estimated that temperatures below -150 degrees would be required. Temperatures so low have never been recorded in nature, not even in the artic.

Source: AboveTopSecret.com