Dinosaurs

[steen]

there are more fertile hybrids then you would expect. Coyote(M)-dog(F) hybrids are very common in our area, we have a chow-chow/coyote ourselves.

Given that the Wolf and the dog are the same species, it merely shows the second example as a hybrid.

Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia (all animals)
Phylum: Chordata (animals with notochords)
Subphylum: Vertebrata (animals with a skeleton of bone or cartilage)
Class: Mammalia (mammals)
Order: Carnivora (carnivores)
Family: Canidae (dog family)
Genus: Canis (dogs)
Species: lupus (wolves)

And
Kingdom: Animalia (all animals)
Phylum: Chordata (animals with notochords)
Subphylum: Vertebrata (animals with a skeleton of bone or cartilage)
Class: Mammalia (mammals)
Order: Carnivora (carnivores)
Family: Canidae (dog family)
Genus: Canis (dogs)
Species: lupus (dogs)

 

[steen]

. I know Neanderthals were the Druedain mentioned by Tolkien....

Hmm, the LOTR books are FICTION. MADE UP. Do you understand the difference? They are not real!!!!

I have also come across scientific evidence that shows Neanderthals DNA is several parts off to the point they are saying they cannot be classified in the fame family tree anymore (as evolutionists once did)

Ah, what scientific evidence was that? Your argument doesn't make sense. Certainly, Neanderthal is MUCH closer to H. sapiens than H. erectus is?????

As far as wizards castles..... there are legends of wizards who had pet dragon like creatures.... but you would only be able to accept this if you beleive dinosaurs and man lived at the same time. Some do, some don't.

And there are legends of martians and of a hollow eartnh with dionosaurs and there are legends of.... Yeah, whatever.

 

[Starcrystal]

Amazing. Using Tolkien as a scientific resource. What Tolkien would have to say about that... I can only imagine. I certainly can't type it because this site has profanity filters.

And replying to Gluadys & Steen too

First, I'll admit I am not an expert in biological sciences but that makes little difference here.
Anyone who does just a little research into the origins of Tolkiens works (namely the Silmarillion, Book of Lost Tales 1 & 2, and the LOTR trilogy would discover he used extensive historical facts, mainly from Norse and ancient gaelic histories such as the Tuatha de Dannan of Ireland. Not only that he revealed things that he didn't even know were facts until after his writing of them, which he admits in his letters. The "Elves" themselves are historical factual people - NOT fictional beings. (We're not speaking of Santas elves here).
Aelf & Aelfwine names of Britain, Yelf, and others of scandanavian - the tracing of the Elves or Faerie race to the Tuatha de Dannan of Ireland (or properly as their ancient title was Tuadhe d'Anu or people of the sky god Anu of the Annunaki) traces back the real and factual history of these people to ancient mesopatamia by way of migrations through Scythia and Scythian kings & warlords - the horseman of the great steppes. Not only that, it has recently been shown the timing/dating of the Middle earth chronology to be exactly that as recorded in certain of earths history... so please do some research on this before saying it's made up fantasy, for it is far from it.

 

[RealityCheck]

And replying to Gluadys & Steen too

First, I'll admit I am not an expert in biological sciences but that makes little difference here.
Anyone who does just a little research into the origins of Tolkiens works (namely the Silmarillion, Book of Lost Tales 1 & 2, and the LOTR trilogy would discover he used extensive historical facts, mainly from Norse and ancient gaelic histories such as the Tuatha de Dannan of Ireland. Not only that he revealed things that he didn't even know were facts until after his writing of them, which he admits in his letters. The "Elves" themselves are historical factual people - NOT fictional beings. (We're not speaking of Santas elves here).
Aelf & Aelfwine names of Britain, Yelf, and others of scandanavian - the tracing of the Elves or Faerie race to the Tuatha de Dannan of Ireland (or properly as their ancient title was Tuadhe d'Anu or people of the sky god Anu of the Annunaki) traces back the real and factual history of these people to ancient mesopatamia by way of migrations through Scythia and Scythian kings & warlords - the horseman of the great steppes. Not only that, it has recently been shown the timing/dating of the Middle earth chronology to be exactly that as recorded in certain of earths history... so please do some research on this before saying it's made up fantasy, for it is far from it.

Tolkien based his work on mythology not history. There is a difference. But clearly I'm talking to someone who does not know that difference, so I would be wasting time saying more.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Tolkien based his work on mythology not history. There is a difference. But clearly I'm talking to someone who does not know that difference, so I would be wasting time saying more.

Well... Tolkien would disagree. As far as he was concerned, a philological fact was as useful as any historical account. And quietly, he did believe that elves and dragons had existed in some form or another.

 

[RealityCheck]

Well... Tolkien would disagree. As far as he was concerned, a philological fact was as useful as any historical account. And quietly, he did believe that elves and dragons had existed in some form or another.

Really. I'd be very interested to see exactly where he left evidence of such a belief. Tolkien very clearly stated that his works were fictional and that he was writing a mythology for England, as English culture had no native mythology (English culture being a blend of Celtic, Norman, Teutonic, and other influences).

 

[steen]

And replying to Gluadys & Steen too

First, I'll admit I am not an expert in biological sciences but that makes little difference here.

Ahem, no, that DOES make a difference, as you are making claims about biological sciences without having, apparently, any knowledge about it. That is not a good foundation for a position to argue from.

Anyone who does just a little research into the origins of Tolkiens works (namely the Silmarillion, Book of Lost Tales 1 & 2, and the LOTR trilogy would discover he used extensive historical facts,

Which doesn't make it evident to be real, though. If I write a fictional account, using historical places and events as backdrop, then that doesn't make it evidence of anything. Otherwise, we would have to accept the Da Vinci Code as the newest biblical Gospel.

....The "Elves" themselves are historical factual people - NOT fictional beings. (We're not speaking of Santas elves here).

Funny, how I have never seen any historically verified claims to this extend.

Aelf & Aelfwine names of Britain, Yelf, and others of scandanavian -

And Da Vinci is a real name also.

I think we are done here.

 

[steen]

Well... Tolkien would disagree. As far as he was concerned, a philological fact was as useful as any historical account. And quietly, he did believe that elves and dragons had existed in some form or another.

Utterly irrelevant. Beliefs are not evidence. If I believed in the flying spaghetti monster would that mean that it is historically and biologically real? See, it even has its own Wikipedia site, so it MUST be a fact, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_spaghetti_monster

 

[shernren]

Does this mean Poe's Law is disproved?

 

[gluadys]

Does this mean Poe's Law is disproved?

I'm not sure. Poe's Law applies to parodies. The "reality" of Tolkien's world looks like it ought to be a parody. But if the poster who raised it is serious, is it still a parody?

Maybe it's an example of dad-ism. Just a different mythology.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Utterly irrelevant. Beliefs are not evidence. If I believed in the flying spaghetti monster would that mean that it is historically and biologically real? See, it even has its own Wikipedia site, so it MUST be a fact, right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_spaghetti_monster

I didn't say it was.... just clearing up a misstatement about Tolkien. And once again, he would disagree with you, since philological facts were the basis for his belief.

 

[Starcrystal]

Really. I'd be very interested to see exactly where he left evidence of such a belief. Tolkien very clearly stated that his works were fictional and that he was writing a mythology for England, as English culture had no native mythology (English culture being a blend of Celtic, Norman, Teutonic, and other influences).

Oh absolutely, he did set out to create a mythology for England.... but you need to understand what mythology is. Mythology is NOT fantasy. It has its roots in real times, places, and people. The BIBLE happens to be Hebrew mythology, hence should I call Jesus a fictional fantasy character? Hmmm. Norse mythology is based on real beings and while I do not consider them gods they were powerful beings nonetheless.
Tolkien also said he felt we were in the 6th or 7th age at this present time (he said it in the 60s or 70s) He made referrence to the actual time period of LOTR. He very clearly spoke of Aelfwine of England.

"I believe that legends and myths are largely made of 'truth', and indeed present aspects of it that can only be perceived in this mode." The Letters of J. R. R Tolkien, page 131.

“A few years ago I was visited in Oxford by a man whose name I have fogotten (though I believe he was well-known). He had been much struck by the curious way in which old pictures seemed to him to have been designed to illustrate The Lord of the Rings long before its time. He brought one or two reproductions. I think he wanted at first simply to discover whether my imagination had fed on pictures, as it clearly had been by certain kinds of literature and languages. When it became obvious that, unless I was a liar, I had never seen the pictures before and was not well acquainted with pictorial Art, he fell silent. I became aware that he was looking fixedly at me. Suddenly he said, "Of course you don't suppose, do you, that you wrote all that book yourself?"

Pure Gandalf! I was too well acquainted with Gandalf to expose myself rashly, or to ask what he meant. I think I said: "No, I don't suppose so any longer." I have never since been able to suppose so. An alarming conclusion for an old philologist to draw concerning his private amusement. But not one that should puff any one up who considers the imperfections of "chosen instruments", and indeed what sometimes seems their lamentable unfitness for the purpose”
From Letter number 328 (Autumn, 1971)

[Here Tolkien confesses that the writings were inspired, a revelation and not just fiction. A writer of fiction/fantasy does not refer to themselves, however so humbly as "chosen instruments."]

Wayne G. Hammond — “A Continuing and Evolving Creation”: Distractions in the Later History of Middle-earth:

“It is now clear that Tolkien did not write according to (in T.A. Shippey’s words) a Grand Design or guiding star, excepting broad elements of plot such as the motive in The Lord of the Rings that the Ring had to be destroyed. Rather, he tended to feel his way, working out through trial and error the ‘true’ story among different versions that came to mind. Indeed he sometimes felt that he was not so much writing stories as discovering something already written. Through this process Tolkien at last ‘discovered’ the importance of the Silmarils, and the nature of the One Ring, and that the mysterious figure at the inn at Bree was not after all a hobbit named Trotter but a man, Aragorn, who would become the King Elessar—many, in fact, of the myriad details of character and plot, landscape and language, that contribute to the success of Tolkien’s writings as works of art.”

Verlyn Flieger — The Footsteps of Ælfwine:

“The name Ælfwine, a compound combining the Anglo-Saxon word for ‘elf’ with the word for ‘friend,’ must, as Ramer suggests, have originally had a literal meaning, describing or alluding to one who was in actuality an elf-friend. Although Ælfwine continued to be a proper name long after belief in elves had dwindled to folk superstition, the word itself no longer conveys the old meaning or indeed any meaning at all except to a student of onomastics.

[We see in the first quote that Tolkien often set out to write one thing and ended up going in a different direction. Tolkien also confessed the story seemed to write itself. He was uncovering truths hidden for a long time, since the ancient days, forgotten to all except perhaps those who held the traditions of the faerie faith.

In the second quote it is shown that the name Aelfwine is a very old word meaning "Elf Friend," and that this word once had a litteral meaning. We need to look back to the times when such a word did mean something, and understand the importance of what it implied.]

Oh, and to bring back on topic about Dinosaurs.... the fell beasts, nazgul were dinosaur type creatures, Smaug and Glaurung the dragons were dinosaurs, and Mumakil were most likely a form of Mastodon or Mammoth...

 

[Willtor]

It is almost certainly the case that Tolkien thought that he was writing the truth of the English people, but I don't think that he ever (even for a moment) thought that what he was writing was historically factual. It is true that myth is not fantasy, but neither was Tolkien an historian as John Keegan is an historian.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Tolkien as literal history, poor man must be rolling in his grave.

Is Christianity now so threatened by reality that we must pretend that myth and fantasy are real?

 

[RealityCheck]

Tolkien as literal history, poor man must be rolling in his grave.

Is Christianity now so threatened by reality that we must pretend that myth and fantasy are real?

If so, that's a terribly sad statement on Christianity.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

but neither was Tolkien an historian as John Keegan is an historian.

this ought to be worded as:
neither were Tolkien's literary works, history in the same way as Keegan's work as an historian are history. For Tolkien himself was a professor of English who did write several books on history. Or better yet refer to particular books as being historical or not, the man himself is far too complex to label "not a good historian".

 

[Willtor]

but neither was Tolkien an historian as John Keegan is an historian.

this ought to be worded as:
neither were Tolkien's literary works, history in the same way as Keegan's work as an historian are history. For Tolkien himself was a professor of English who did write several books on history. Or better yet refer to particular books as being historical or not, the man himself is far too complex to label "not a good historian".

Yes, you're right. I wrote incorrectly. My statement was in reference to works such as The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, in which he was not at all concerned with historicity, but was deeply concerned about expressing something of England. These particular works are not the same sort of literature as The First World War (Keegan) and it doesn't make sense to compare them.

 

[steen]

I didn't say it was.... just clearing up a misstatement about Tolkien. And once again, he would disagree with you, since philological facts were the basis for his belief.

If they are facts, how do you prove them?

 

[Starcrystal]

Tolkien as literal history, poor man must be rolling in his grave.

Is Christianity now so threatened by reality that we must pretend that myth and fantasy are real?

Why would this be threatening to Christianity? It would actually support and compliment Christianity since the accounts in the Silmarillion parallel those of the Bible.
And as I've said before... myth is based in reality and is not the same as fantasy.
I could list a few websites that confirm the historical accuracy of Tolkiens works....
but I'll list just this one http://www.thehiddenrealm.org
and here's a quote from it

"We feel that JRR Tolkien's Legendarium is in fact a valid mythology, in that mythology itself is well-told and well-repeated STORIES! JRR Tolkien, being an expert linguist and master story-teller, was the perfect medium. He invested 56 years of his life to create this gorgeous mythological "tapestry" by unravelling the time-tattered threads of the oldest stories of our ancestors, and using the threads of these mythological "truths" from known and unknown legendary sources - and rewove them, filling in any empty spots with great care not to disturb the essence of the work but rather support it - and then arriving at a deep and profound result that strikes our collective spiritual cords, allowing us to do the ultimate: CONNECT with the One, the Source, or All That Is, even if only for a glimpse - and then we feel so alive and are mesmerized! For more information on this topic, please visit our FAQ's."

They don't take a Christian approach to it as I do, but they certainly will support the reality of its history.

 

[gluadys]

They don't take a Christian approach to it as I do, but they certainly will support the reality of its history.[/B]

Read it again. They support the thesis that it is genuine mythology. Mythology is not history.