About Dragons...

[Deep Sea Kraken]

Did any of you see the film Reign of Fire?

It comes up with several semi-plausable scientific ways dragons can exist.

A) Dragons can "hibernate" (kinda like frogs/toads) for centuries.
B) They have 2 chemical sacs which create the fire when mixed. These sacs are located in the dragon's head, and if it was bit there, it'd die anyway.
C) Dragons in RoF are very mortal, you can kill them fairly easily.
D) They eat ashes (this is the part that isn't really plausable), hence the fire breath and the hibernation: they wake up, propogate, burn the world clean of life, then re-enter hibernation, waiting while the earth replenishes itself of life.
E) They are like fish, one male can fertilise hundreds of eggs, so they can spred fairly easily.
F) If they posses the capabilities for extremely long periods of suspended animation (we are talking millenea here), who knows what kind of envoronment they originally lived in?

[Hakeem]

Evolution can create all sorts of chemical reactions. Take electric eels for instance, they generate lethal doses of electricity. But it doesn't end there, it only takes a look into the ocean to tell you that any kind of animal can exist.

As for dragons existing, (I see no reason to make another thread to discuss this) it's a certainty that they did not. At least not the flying, fire-breathing ones. They most certainly would not have gone extinct, and there aren't any today.

[Mecheon]

Originally Posted by Deep Sea Kraken

Did any of you see the film Reign of Fire?

It comes up with several semi-plausable scientific ways dragons can exist.

... Yeah, this is going to be fun, I can see this

A) Dragons can "hibernate" (kinda like frogs/toads) for centuries.

Frogs and toads are, for a start, amphibians. Secondly, they don't hibernate for centuries

B) They have 2 chemical sacs which create the fire when mixed. These sacs are located in the dragon's head, and if it was bit there, it'd die anyway.

Oh yes, because raging fires inside your body are completely safe for your digestive system

C) Dragons in RoF are very mortal, you can kill them fairly easily.

... And?

D) They eat ashes (this is the part that isn't really plausable), hence the fire breath and the hibernation: they wake up, propogate, burn the world clean of life, then re-enter hibernation, waiting while the earth replenishes itself of life.

... Yeah, I don't see it happening

E) They are like fish, one male can fertilise hundreds of eggs, so they can spred fairly easily.

Or, more likely, they exhaust their food supply and go extinct. Seriously, creatures can't just live for centuries on ashes. The only creatures which live near that long are giant turtles and whales, and they eat plants and plankton

F) If they posses the capabilities for extremely long periods of suspended animation (we are talking millenea here), who knows what kind of envoronment they originally lived in?

How the heck would have something even evolved in the first place to take advantage of that environment?

Seriously people, just because you see it on TV or the movies doesn't mean it can happen in real life

[Pyritie]

That ashes thing seems kinda... unfeasible. Same goes for your other arguments.

[Deep Sea Kraken]

They aren't my arguments, they are the arguments the film makers made.

[Mecheon]

Originally Posted by Deep Sea Kraken

They aren't my arguments, they are the arguments the film makers made.

No, they're just how they exist in the movie

The filmmakers did not say that dragons could exist in real life, that's just the excuses they gave to make it seem slightly more feasible and to try to suspend disbelief for a bit longer

[~Void~]

Fire breathing dragons actually do exist. They use a chemical reaction to produce fire, and another one involving helium in the lungs to fly. I saw a documentary about it on the discovery channel.

According to the documentary, they actually eat platinum, and that's why it's so rare. Unless the dragon body they found and dissected just liked chewing precious metals.

[Pyritie]

Yes, that was the same documentary I saw too, and which Mecheon already destroyed.

[Elenai]

The existence of dragons are indeed possible. Aside from dragons being referenced in nearly every culture on earth, they are also physically possible.

Take for example the pterosaurs. Massive flying creatures that are featherless are indeed hypothetically possible.

The Quetzalcoatlus -- a pterosaur that is easily larger than a car



A dragon with hollow bones could easily be as large or larger than the above pterosaur. And with a bone structure (like the one I provided) it would look like a dragon as well.



More info support soon.

[Japut3h]

I believe that i heard about a race of dinosaurs that had the inside of their throat covered with very resilient and thick scales,which would easily allow them to breathe fire without harming themselves.

So yes,something like a dragon could have existed,but i seriously doubt that there is such a thing today.

[Elenai]

With the Flood of Noah, or the meteor of Evolution, dinosaurs and pterosaurs have passed on...And so too have dragons most likely, if they ever existed.

However, its quite fun to figure out how to design a creature that is possible ^^

[Mecheon]

Originally Posted by Elenai

The existence of dragons are indeed possible. Aside from dragons being referenced in nearly every culture on earth, they are also physically possible.

Take for example the pterosaurs. Massive flying creatures that are featherless are indeed hypothetically possible.

The Quetzalcoatlus -- a pterosaur that is easily larger than a car

A dragon with hollow bones could easily be as large or larger than the above pterosaur. And with a bone structure (like the one I provided) it would look like a dragon as well.


More info support soon.

However, note how there are no massive fliers around any more. They're all extinct. Also, dragons in different cultures are VERY different. I'm pretty sure, much like how the Sphinx of Egypt is just named as such because it reminded the Greeks of their own mythological creature, that ancient people saw that they both believed in giant reptiles and associated them together, despite the fact that Eastern ones are mostly snake like, benevolent and connected to water, while Western ones are more lizard like, malevolent and connected to fire

The only resemblance between the two is that they are lizards. People just associate mythical snake-like things with dragons

The Pterosaurs are the only things even close to a dragon that has existed. However, birds drove them to extinction millenia ago. Birds are a far more successful flier than the pterosaurs ever were. Pterosaurs could cross entire oceans in days, but that didn't do them a lot of good when the continents started moving towards their modern positions

And seriously people, don't you know what a Mockumentry is?

[Elenai]

-Note I am supporting a hypothetical theory, with hypothetical evidence and my own hypothetical theories.-

Eastern ones are mostly snake like, benevolent and connected to water, while Western ones are more lizard like, malevolent and connected to fire.

Actually, both dragon breeds where associated with snakes.

Originally Posted by wikipedia

The dragon (from Ancient Greek δράκων - drakōn, "a serpent of huge size, a python, a dragon") is a mythical creature typically depicted as a gigantic and powerful serpent or other reptile with magical or spiritual qualities.

Furthermore In Christian Europe, the dragon was more serpentine "a writhing wyrm" than the lizardoid dragons we see today. Often dragons where accociated with Satan (the symbolic nature of it) because of that, and its serpentine nature, (the fact that snakes in general are often seen as maelevolent) is why that culture saw dragons as evil.

The cultures of the East had a completely different world view at its core level. Based not on the principles of an Abrahamic religion, or the various pre-christ European cultures, but instead a world view that measured life in luck, and peace through self discipline and wisdom, not salvation or honor through order and obedience.

The similarities to dragon creatures can be seen clearly.

Serpent bodies, flight, and magical power over some element.

Eastern "dragons" could well have been pleisosaurid in nature more than pterosaurian if dragons ever did exist.

And even if they were of the same species, different animals from different species can vary in all sorts of exotic ways.

Fish, birds, dinosaurs after their kinds, pterosaurs, pleisiosaurs, lizards, even dogs have varying traits that make them very much unlike their cousins.

A nearly wingless snake like pterosaur like creature, that waded in streams and ate fish constantly could easily be seen by an eastern culture as being a sign of good luck and benevolence. Especially if it was beautifully coloured.

The nigh wingless kiwi compared to the soaring hawk...the long necked water dwelling flamingo compared to the stout parrot.

And seriously people, don't you know what a Mockumentry is?

I do, good thing I am not basing any of my ideas off that special ^^

As for the myth of fire, I do not believe that any sort of helium or hydrogen gas was used. As mecheon has stated, any amount of gas that is able to sustain more than a burst of fire or heat would be highly dangerous for an animal to contain in its own body.

More info on possible dragon "fire" defences soon:

[~Void~]

The documentary said that the species of dragon varied in different environments, to the point where it resembled more of a giant newt. For example, there were flying dragons, forest dragons without wings that were just serpents with legs, and there were sea dragons (nessy?) that were related to sea-dwelling dinosaurs.

It also says that most of the Dragons were wiped out by other dinosaurs such as the t-rex and the pterodactyl.

Now, not to say everything in this documentary was exactly correct, but I think it sounds reasonable.

[Hakeem]

Originally Posted by Mecheon

The Pterosaurs are the only things even close to a dragon that has existed. However, birds drove them to extinction millenia ago. Birds are a far more successful flier than the pterosaurs ever were.

I must ask for some sources, because I understand two things:

1. Pterosaurs and birds never existed at the same time.
2. Pterosaurs had mastered flight far beyond modern birds.