Dragons everywhere you look!

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Dharmaatmaa

Thanks for "quotation" info. But as I see it isn't so flexible as it could be. Look, I saw in a site named I don't remember how, such a function that allows making a real bunch of quotes (from different correspondents at once). I think it's impossible here, isn't it?

It is possible to quote more than one at a time, but I did not want to provide too much information at one time. If you look at the bottom of the post, there are 4 buttons. The second button from the right, with the ( " ) mark, will allow you to mark the additional posts you wish to include when you reply. Use the " button to mark the extra posts, use the reply button to take all of them to the reply box to write your response. There may be other ways of doing this, but this seems the most practical to me.

Originally Posted by Dharmaatmaa

try not to think, but only look at its colour about two seconds. Just look, don't think. Different colours will invite different emotions.

The theme of nature and origin of colours is on the very top of interest and very useful for everyone, but it's completely out of place in our dragon-theme. I find it'd be good if someone opens a theme of colours, sounds and other electrical phenomena in our "Science" section. I really know that not so many science knows of it.

Color psychology is a minor interest of mine, and we have touched on it briefly here at Interfaith in the past. I took the liberty of finding the old threads for you:

What color is your...

Color quiz

Mediaeval Personality Test

These threads are light-hearted and not a serious study. If you would like to open a more serious study of color psychology, I would be happy to participate.

I double-checked the link to the color test and it appears to still be valid:

http://www.colorquiz.com/

Originally Posted by Dharmaatmaa

Now I think it's obvious for everyone dragons, real dragons, are not spirits and are not a myth. Thank you.

Well, it may be obvious to you, and I certainly thank you very much for what you have added to the discussion. I'm afraid dragons at this point are still strongly symbolic and mythical to me. Whether they represent "spirits" or "elements" or humanized expressions of both, and even if they can be shown distinctly to be drawn directly from what we know today as dinosaurs, I hesitate to consider them as "real." In the sense that the mythos are a valid cultural expression, I can agree dragons are real.

Originally Posted by Dharmaatmaa

P.S.: thanks for gargouille links. In Ukrainian one (as it was) I found nothing except architecture, as I expected; but English link is really full.

You are welcome.

[Dharmaatmaa]

Yes, I see and perfectly agree it was not "a serious study'. Looking through that places you proposed, I really see it was far from truly and educated talking. You're right, juantoo3. And how do people talk of it seriously?! And I understand why you don't wanna take part in such fairies.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

If you would like to open a more serious study of color psychology, I would be happy to participate.

And you're in your amploir now. Your expressions are usually on top of misty. I guess it's useful skill. If to say "color psychology" stands for a psychology of understanding colours by a humane being (as you'd meant it I think) I wouldn't "like to open" one more unlimited theme. No, it should be something more scientifical and not quasi-scientifical.

I meant following. Colours itself have their own existence. Even if nobody looks at a coloured thing, it keeps being coloured. Colour exists without any will. They are objective. And as phisical objects they have their origin and properties. Only a few have really ever thought of why colours exist, what phisical phenomena it belongs to, and so on. Maybe someone will present scientifical proves and theories and someone will show an archaic teaching.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

Whether they represent "spirits" or "elements" or humanized expressions of both, and even if they can be shown distinctly to be drawn directly from what we know today as dinosaurs, I hesitate to consider them as "real." In the sense that the mythos are a valid cultural expression, I can agree dragons are real.

Yes, I wanted to say completely the same. I said 'real' not in sense of real existion of them, but real in contradiction to 'fairytales'. I wanted to show they are not just a fairies for children, but have their real significance among educated persons. Just as you said.
The symbol of them was born from dinosaurs, and now has a great variety of symbolical meanings, having their own scientifical and "real" context. That's all.

[Dream]

[juantoo3]

That is one HUGE rabbit.

[Dharmaatmaa]

Wonder, how scientists try to explain that huge world which the wing on photo from? So many species of animals were just large! And now what? Little and short...

[Dream]

They say there must have been a higher concentration of Oxygen in the air to support the bigger bodies -- especially large insects because they don't breath. Maybe they're wrong though. This old dragonfly must have had a wingspan of 1.5 meters or more, so perhaps it could have absorbed extra oxygen through the extra surface area of its wings. I don't know about the turtle. Perhaps it just moved very slowly so as not to faint. Perhaps the dino's had some super gas & temperature exchange abilities, or maybe an oil-cooled dino heavy towing package. Another possibility is that they cut down on their need for oxygen by holding their breath and simultaneously cooling themselves with the gas expansion of continuous methane backfirings.

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Dream

They say there must have been a higher concentration of Oxygen in the air to support the bigger bodies -- especially large insects because they don't breath. Maybe they're wrong though. This old dragonfly must have had a wingspan of 1.5 meters or more, so perhaps it could have absorbed extra oxygen through the extra surface area of its wings. I don't know about the turtle. Perhaps it just moved very slowly so as not to faint. Perhaps the dino's had some super gas & temperature exchange abilities, or maybe an oil-cooled dino heavy towing package. Another possibility is that they cut down on their need for oxygen by holding their breath and simultaneously cooling themselves with the gas expansion of continuous methane backfirings.

oil-cooled dino heavy towing package...ROTFLMAO!

Probably not the absolute best choice for "evidence," but there is an intriguing discovery at the Creation Evidence Museum in Glen Rose Texas that hints pretty strongly at a different atmosphere. They show pictures of what they say is a hammer encrusted with stone, but that the metal could not be smelted in our current atmosphere...I want to say it was something about chlorine content within the metal. Anyway, they went on to create a contained unit with what they speculated was this ancient atmosphere, and I forget what they raised but it did pretty good. One thing I remember is that they said the sky would be a reddish-pinkish-orangish instead of blue because of the chemical composition.

[Dharmaatmaa]

Originally Posted by Dream

They say there must have been a higher concentration of Oxygen in the air to support the bigger bodies -- especially large insects because they don't breath. Maybe they're wrong though.

Well, it's difficult to say if Oxygen had necesserily to play its role here. Contemporary phisiology already clearly proved every creature needs not too much Oxygen to sigh. Humans need something about 24% Oxygen in the air to get healthy long life. Other animals need Oxygen almost such concentration... Of cause, climate do change, atmosphere changes. There is no anything not changing here at all! But if we say phisical laws are steady we must proceed meaning that till the very end. In Russia, we say: "If you've said 'A', then say and 'B'". Phisical laws don't change in time, do they? So, there took place a number of experiments in Antarctica. If I remember correctly, it was Russian phisician Kapitsa who presented those experiments at an International Meeting of scientists. He asserted that consistention of atmosphere did not very much change last several thousands of years. And obviously "they're wrong though", as you said.
And who a hell had said insects do not breath. I'd advise to catch a fly and close it in a glass tin. How long will it stay alive that "unbreathing" poor fly?!

Originally Posted by Dream

I don't know about the turtle. Perhaps it just moved very slowly so as not to faint.

Why slowly? That turtle must've had rather long members of body to move slowly. I just had a turtle at home six years ago. If it lies under the sunshine enough, it can run faster, than several our modern scientists can think! I don't know about the turtle, too.

Originally Posted by Dream

Perhaps the dino's had some super gas & temperature exchange abilities, or maybe an oil-cooled dino heavy towing package.

Oh, I know it's not your own opinion, but please don't tell me about "super gases". Do the scientists really say it seriously!? I don't believe it! Although the "package" looks like truth. But in this case we must have agreed evolution takes much more time than it usually is thought. Revolutionary transformations in phisiology of creatures takes too much time. And we know animals of past are to be relatives to those of future, they're progenitors. And how could that 60 mln. years is fit to such magical changings! But if I'm not mistaken the carbon analysis don't let time to be rubber, does it?

Originally Posted by Dream

Another possibility is that they cut down on their need for oxygen by holding their breath and simultaneously cooling themselves with the gas expansion of continuous methane backfirings

"Another possibility is" just one more phantastical theory... Animals would acclimatise any atmosphere ever be! Even Ch. Darwin repeated that till death. He called it adaptability of species. And methane's just a news for world of developed creatures.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

They show pictures of what they say is a hammer encrusted with stone, but that the metal could not be smelted in our current atmosphere...I want to say it was something about chlorine content within the metal.

Yes, and animals could live on and on even in acid atmosphere. I'm not sure if it's connected with their height and mass. Even today there live enormous animals, both mammalia and reptyles. Look at elephants, crocodyles, cetus and so on! Is our air rich with "chlorine"? It isn't. That hammer was just accidentally chlorined, it seems.

Originally Posted by juantoo3

One thing I remember is that they said the sky would be a reddish-pinkish-orangish instead of blue because of the chemical composition.

I heard of it. Buddhist lamas assert on the fact of another colour of the sky in deep past. But if I didn't forget they ground this on their theory. It says Earth Poles go up and down from time to time. And earlier the North Pole was situated in Himalayas, and in future it'll change its position. I have no time to describe the Poles' teaching but I must confess it's much closer connected with logic that all the hypoteses to be meantioned above. And modern science partially agreed Poles change. Our scientists have very many things to hammer away at. They'll never be unemployed I guess.

[Dream]

The rock melted around the hammer is interesting and reminds me of melted rocks found high up on mountains in S America that no one can figure out how they were melted. I believe the theory Juantoo mentioned is not about Chlorine but Peroxide created by the activity of much larger amounts of ozone in the atmosphere created by cosmic bombardment of a water canopy. Theory goes that the world is very ill compared to what it once was and lifespans are shorter as a result.

On another timescale: the richer oxygen content I mentioned actually is just one of the theories of a time millions of years ago when there was supposed to be less carbon in the air and more dinosaurs walking around and lots more alge making more oxygen in the sea. Anyway, the super gas-temp exchange thing is my own idea. That doesn't make it any less valid as I'm the Proctor of the Nternational Institutes of Truth Wisdom Insight & Terminology (NITWIT), an official representative. My suggestion is that the internal organs were kept cooler than the heavy muscles, allowing the larger animals to run without overheating. The super gases is also my idea. Another possibility is that dragons had an endothermic fermentation process to cool their inner organs. Can't talk anymore -- I'm due to lecture on Zoology at an official NITWIT seminar in 10 minutes.

[juantoo3]

I guess I just hadn't appreciated your humor before now, Dream! Funny!

It well could have been peroxide instead of chlorine, I really don't remember and am being lazy not to look it up. The last time I referenced the Creation Evidence Museum I drew a lot of flak, seems the honcho has a few issues that call a lot of their stuff into question. About the hammer though, I have seen no rebuttal from "authorized" sources, so it seems to still be a valid curiousity.

I am thinking that an over abundant supply of oxygen though would tend to speed a lot of "oxidizing" processes, including aging. Not saying necessarily that you are incorrect, but that if oxygen were increased it would lead to a premature aging process measured as we do now. There is also the consideration that at some point with an increase in oxygen there becomes a greater potential for the atmosphere to literally catch fire. If we had a "pure" oxygen atmosphere, we could not have fire, any bolt of lightning or volcanic eruption could set the sky aflame. So I'm kinda with Dharmaatmaa on that bit.

Here's a link to the hammer:
http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.p...ask=view&id=26

Turns out it is chlorine...my memory isn't failing me as bad as I thought...yet.

[Alex P]

That rabbit's nuffin!!! NUFFN! I tells ya..

http://www.fbipigeons.com/BIG_CAT.jpg

http://www.breaktaker.com/albums/pic...als/BigCat.jpg

[Dharmaatmaa]

No cats! I've found more interesting things at

R.o.t.N. - Discoveries of Giant Bones of the Antediluvian Hybrids of Fallen Angels and Women

It directly relates to our discussion. And I have heard of such things before from Russian gazettes. One of the skeletons was founded in Penjab, India at Dec, 2007.

But it's modern. Ancient writers wrote a great deal of things of giants. Bible says of giants, Ramayana says of giants. Strange... I start believing. But it's so unusual, although we can't know that isn't so.

[Tao_Equus]

Of course they found evidence for even bigger nephilum on Mars. The footprints below are believed to be from a mother and child. The mother would have stood at least 120km tall and the child over 45km tall. This explains Mars' barren surface. The nephilum there ate everything and then themselves leaving the dry and lifeless planet we see today. Of course since nephilum were godless creatures she had no compunction about eating her child. The favoured theory is she did so in a hotdog bun.

[Dharmaatmaa]

Ha-ha-ha! You've never lost your nice humour, Tao. Ancient nephilim (not nephilum!) would die when laughing!

I'm not insist on the reality of nephilim. And I can't say if I'm sure of them, but archaeology says, ancient Scriptures say, ancient authors (e.g. Tertullianus) said.

But to speak of Mars! It's too much. Aren't you from Mars, dear Tao?

[juantoo3]

Originally Posted by Dharmaatmaa

But to speak of Mars! It's too much. Aren't you from Mars, dear Tao?

As in: Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus?

Whether Tao is from Mars is still under consideration around here...nobody is brave enough to look under the wool skirt to find out.