Dragon Terrorized Europe 80 Million Years Ago

[Agonaces of Susa]

Meat-eating 'dragon' terrorised Romania 80 million years ago - Telegraph

The creature was a powerfully-built meat-eating dinosaur with scythe-like claws for ripping its prey apart. It used its lower limbs to disembowel its victims.

Experts have named the seven-foot long dinosaur, which was discovered in Romania, Balaur bondoc, which means ''stocky dragon''.

 

[AV1611VET]

Meat-eating 'dragon' terrorised Romania 80 million years ago - Telegraph

That is way cool, bro!

Except for the decimal place --

I think if a cryptozoologist went back in time, he would come back shell-shocked --

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

That is way cool, bro!

Except for the decimal place --

I think if a cryptozoologist went back in time, he would come back shell-shocked --

LOL...probably a heart attack...

 

[Cabal]

Dinosaur, AoS, dinosaur. Not dragon.

Let us know if it breathes fire, then we'll talk.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Dinosaur, AoS, dinosaur. Not dragon.

Let us know if it breathes fire, then we'll talk.

"The notion of a 'fire-breathing dragon' is regularly held up to ridicule any relationship between dinosaurs and dragons. Actually, scientists would find it very easy to explain an animal that could literally breathe out flames. Many animals generate methane in their digestive tracts. Methane, or natural gas, is quite flammable, and there's a college prank (which I will not describe) based on setting human methane on fire! Some scientists think that dinosaurs belched so much methane that a 'greenhouse gas' may have helped keep the polar regions of the earth warm! Scientists also know of dinosaurs that had cavities in their skulls with tubular passages leading to the fronts of their mouths. Imagine such chambers contained an enzyme that would accelerate the chemical reaction between methane and oxygen. If the enzyme were injected just as the belching dinosaur opened its mouth, the methane blast would burst into a fiery stream of flame as the methane hit the oxygen in the air." -- Gary Parker, biologist, 2007

"Dinosaurs had a lot of vegetable materials in their stomachs and it would have produced a lot of methane gas. Sea dwelling reptiles could have easily had it too, especially if they ate kelp and similar aquatic plants. So, here we would have a source of fuel for a fire breathing dragon." -- Grady S. McMurtry, theologian, 2009

 

[Cabal]

Evidence would be great, rather than cranks going yakety yak.

 

[AV1611VET]

Dinosaur, AoS, dinosaur. Not dragon.

Let us know if it breathes fire, then we'll talk.

All dragons breathed fire, did they?

 

[Cabal]

All dragons breathed fire, did they?

You got me there, AV.

I have absolutely no idea about the collective characteristics of a bunch of fictional creatures.

How many angels fit on the head of a pin?

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Evidence would be great, rather than cranks going yakety yak.

You have no evidence.

 

[Cabal]

You have no evidence.

I've not made a claim in this thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have absolutely no idea about the collective characteristics of a bunch of fictional creatures.

Uh-huh -- and at what stage of investigation did science ascertain that dragons are 'fictional creatures'?

If you can't tell me, then would it be proper for someone to, say, hire you as a crew member in search of the Loch Ness Monster, the thunderbird, chupacabra or the yeti?

 

[AV1611VET]

I've not made a claim in this thread.

Yes, you have:

I have absolutely no idea about the collective characteristics of a bunch of fictional creatures.

 

[Cabal]

Uh-huh -- and at what stage of investigation did science ascertain that dragons are 'fictional creatures'?

There is currently no evidence supporting their existence, so what other description suffices?

If you can't tell me, then would it be proper for someone to, say, hire you as a crew member in search of the Loch Ness Monster, the thunderbird, chupacabra or the yeti?

Yup - it shows a healthy degree of skepticism.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is currently no evidence supporting their existence, so what other description suffices?

'Pending investigation'?

 

[Cabal]

'Pending investigation'?

So is the gnome that lived in Marcus Aurelius' armpit.

 

[AV1611VET]

So is the gnome that lived in Marcus Aurelius' armpit.

Yup -- and it's keeping you from understanding; isn't it?

 

[Cabal]

Yup -- and it's keeping you from understanding; isn't it?

Not really, it doesn't exist

 

[nathanlandon1]

We shouldn't be so ready to demand evidence when evidence is (at its foundation) arbitrary. It is evidence because it is observed. It is observed because it is sensed (via senses.) It is sensed via neurological dynamics. Neurological dynamics (brain activity) is very sensitive to changes because it is regulated by chemistry and electrodynamics. This is how there can exist illusions (situations in which one or more senses perceive something that is not) such as mirages. Therefore, all evidence requires some degree faith.


With that said, how do we know that all the creatures we think of as dinosaurs WERE NOT dragons, and that they never showed the wings at public excavations and exhibits?

Or, what if the process described by Agonaces of Susa is possible (fire-breathing?)

Methane at earth tropical temperature (around 29 - 35 degrees Celcius) has a specific heat, c, of 2.226 kJ/kg*K. If the heat of combustion of methane gas, H, is 55.5 MJ/kg, then the change in temperature, T, needed to produce a fireball is

T = H*c = (55.5 x 10^3 kj/kg)/(2.225 kJ/kg*K) = 24,943.8 K/kg = 24670.7 Celcius/kg.

This is the temperature change needed to explode one kilogram of methane, which is a ridiculous amount of gas. Humans pass 0.000026 kg of methane gas per incident, about 0.000359 kg a day of methane. You would need a temperature change of 0.65K to combust a fart, but the density of the gas in the anus is lower, and the velocity of the gas is so fast that this temperature change wouldn't be felt by the gases (the anus is around 37.5 C).

The tropical density of methane is 0.000717 kg/L, so if a dinosaur expels 15 liters of gas (~400x more gas than we expel), or 0.0717kg of methane, the dinosaur/dragon would only need a temperature change of 268K, or 23 degrees Farenheit. Heating gases can be readily achieved by holding the pressure constant and reducing the volume, or holding volume constant and raising the pressure. It is much more than plausible to believe dinosaurs had mechanisms to do this, however we have no "evidence" because no one even believes it is possible enough to research it. I am not saying this was a characteristic of dinosaurs/dragons necessarily, but it is definitely scientifically possible. And, it is scientifically probable also. Dinosaurs may have an organic adiabatic chamber to accomplish this.


There are excavation photos of people who have uncovered skeletal systems they think belong to the n'phiyl - humanoid skeletal systems between 9' and 35' tall. Yet, some people say these skeletons are fake. O.K., that is fine to entertain. But, if one entertains that this kind of historical find can be faked, why cant the findings of dinosaurs be a covered-up for dragons, or even completely faked?


So, before we say "show me the evidence" or "that is absurd," consider some of the stuff our matriarchs and patriarchs had to go through where they did not have the luxury of "modern science" to explain phenomena. If you were to bring a person from the dinosaur age to our time, very few people would take that person seriously. In 1000 years, the things we think are interesting but not mythical may yet become things of myths to those in the future. Does it mean it was a myth? Absolutely not.

 

[Cabal]

We shouldn't be so ready to demand evidence when evidence is (at its foundation) arbitrary. It is evidence because it is observed. It is observed because it is sensed (via senses.) It is sensed via neurological dynamics. Neurological dynamics (brain activity) is very sensitive to changes because it is regulated by chemistry and electrodynamics. This is how there can exist illusions (situations in which one or more senses perceive something that is not) such as mirages. Therefore, all evidence requires some degree faith.

Which is why good evidence is objective.

With that said, how do we know that all the creatures we think of as dinosaurs WERE NOT dragons, and that they never showed the wings at public excavations and exhibits?

This is the problem with throwing evidence out the window, any old claim of conspiracy goes. I'm sure you don't want people discarding something like the Bible on such an arbitrary basis, do you?

It is much more than plausible to believe dinosaurs had mechanisms to do this, however we have no "evidence" because no one even believes it is possible enough to research it. I am not saying this was a characteristic of dinosaurs/dragons necessarily, but it is definitely scientifically possible. And, it is scientifically probable also. Dinosaurs may have an organic adiabatic chamber to accomplish this.

I think you're missing the point here somewhat - it's not that anyone's claiming that it's implausible, just that there is no reason to think that this is the case - people merely suggesting an idea is neither here nor there, any joe can do that. The only reason AoS is using the word dragon is because the taxonomical name includes the word dragon, and the skeleton apparently looks like that of a dragon (although I'm not sure what they're using for references as there ARE NO DRAGON SKELETONS)

There are excavation photos of people who have uncovered skeletal systems they think belong to the n'phiyl - humanoid skeletal systems between 9' and 35' tall. Yet, some people say these skeletons are fake. O.K., that is fine to entertain. But, if one entertains that this kind of historical find can be faked, why cant the findings of dinosaurs be a covered-up for dragons, or even completely faked?

Um....because they show no signs of being faked. Again - this is why you can't just throw evidence out the window.

So, before we say "show me the evidence" or "that is absurd," consider some of the stuff our matriarchs and patriarchs had to go through where they did not have the luxury of "modern science" to explain phenomena.

What, that modern science that's based on evidence? Make up your mind.

If you were to bring a person from the dinosaur age

to our time, very few people would take that person seriously.

I would hope so - bringing a person from an age that is not only far in the past but from an age where dinosaurs and man coexisted even though there is no evidence at all supporting such a situation should merit a healthy degree of skepticism.

In 1000 years, the things we think are interesting but not mythical may yet become things of myths to those in the future. Does it mean it was a myth? Absolutely not.

This is not really the point, the point is would there be reasonable evidence to think so.

 

[Agonaces of Susa]

Not really, it doesn't exist

Gnomes existed in ancient times just as they do today.

For example Homo floresiensis, were hobbits that lived in ancient times 92,000 B.C.-11,000 B.C.

Dwarves are well known from ancient times.

Today we have pygmies, dwarves, and midgets.

The only things that don't exist are transitional fossils...