Dragons Information Sources

[iPeez]

------Dragons------

Here are some sources with information about Dragons. I love Dragons and I am sure there is alot of others here who do.
There is no special reason for posting this, but I use alot of this information when I create dragons in photoshop.
There is also alot of interesting stories, facts, myths, legends and pictures linked in alot of these pages.

----"General Information"----

Dragon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to HERE BE DRAGONS!

What is a Dragon?

Dragon History

Dragon Information

----"Biology"----

Dragon, form, body, wing, head, size, scale etc...

Outer, muscles and skeleton

Small ditails

----"Diffrent Kinds"----

Subgroups

"The European Dragon"

European dragon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

European dragon: Encyclopedia - European dragon

"The Chinese Dragon"

Chinese dragon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chinese Dragons

Chinese Dragon Homepage

"The Japanese Dragon"

Japanese dragon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dragons, Dragon Art, and Dragon Lore in Japan, Buddhism & Shintoism Photo Dictionary

"The Komodo Dragon"

Komodo Dragon - The Living Dragon

"The Wyvern"

Wyvern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wyverns - Draconika

Wyvern Dragon: Lady Gryphon's Mythical Realm :Wyverns in History, Wyvern Myths, Wivern

----"Additional Sources"----

Alot of Links

Little general info

Small all over page

Myths

----"Useful Tutorials"----
These are tutorials I find very useful and good.

Dragon Tutorial by *alecan on deviantART

Dragon Tutorial - New by *alecan on deviantART

Myth's Dragon Tutorial Part 1 by =mythori on deviantART

Myth's Tutorial Part 2.2 by =mythori on deviantART

drawing a dragon by =mythori on deviantART

Dragon Paint Art Tutorials - A How to Draw Dragons (Part 1)

Dragon Tutorial by ~raerae on deviantART

Biology Pictures

Dragon Body Parts

Dragon Muscles

Dragon Skeleton

European Dragon Skeleton

Basic Wing Skeleton

 

[sacridshadow]

What is this? I clicked on "small details" and the site makes a dragon look like it can't function. They are based on their own fiction. They have no proof and, since dragons don't exist in our knowledge, don't know what the brain really looks like. For all we know, it could be split into 16 parts. Automatic and the other functions would NEVER be in the same area. If it were, the dragon could accidentally stop it's heart or start breathing fire automatically. It wouldn't quite be a "habit" but more like the dragon can't separate it's "vague" functions.

 

[Zombie]

I agree with sacrid. Dragons are based on fiction, and every man can create his own dragons. Despite that, there are some links that provide us with interesting information about the dragon culture and could be used as additions for your own dragon ideas.

 

[Volvox]

Of course it's imagination, AND written by someone who's not really into biology. If you want to sound scientific, you have to assume that dragons are a part of this world's evolutionary chain which means you're not going to compare their brain with the one of an elf -.- Aside from that, it is said that dragon's brain has smooth outer ridge which differs it from human's brain. Then it is said that dragons are capable of telepathic powers and abstract thinking. While first is only assumed to be possible, second is possible only within a human brain, only because of the ridges which increase the brain's effective surface. It's imagined, allright, though everyone would like it to be true, of course.

 

[Pyritie]

WHO SAID DRAGON


Meh, if dragons did exist (which I think they did at some point in the past), I think they would just be large lizards with wings. The western ones anyway. I think the whole fire-breathing stuff was just something made up by storytellers to make them sound more dramatic.

They probably ended up dying out because:

1. Human population growth led to human expansion, driving them to harsher climates.
2. A reptile of that size would require a massive amount of food. When they were moved to these harsher climates there was a lot less food and so most of the dragons would've died from starvation.
3. Humans went and brought their herds of sheep/goats/cattle, and the dragons saw this as an easy food source.
4. Humans got mad, sent out guys to go kill the dragon. Most likely ended up dying of exposure or starvation rather than "getting BBQ'd" as the stories say.

Also, komodo dragons aren't really dragons. That's just a name. Sorta like how this thing is called a "Weedy Sea Dragon". Lots of animals' common names are based on appearances rather than biological research.

 

[Devine]

Don't mess with the komodo dragons .... they're up to something
Dragons are bullshit, made up to scare kids.
Dragons are a LIE

 

[D a w n]

Pterosaur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia could be counted as dragons :>

 

[Zombie]

The term "dragon" is hard to define. As long as a flying lizard breaths no fire, it's no dragon for me.

 

[Elenai]

Dragons are pterosaurs.

 

[TheDivineBoss]

I only accept one goddamn dragon: Pyritie here.

One is enough! D:

 

[chenlimin]

Wasn't it Pyritie's job to post a few page long of dull boring facts about dragons who don't exist?

 

[iPeez]

Dragons are bullshit, made up to scare kids.

... Have I said this is true? No. This is useful information I use when I make dragon base stuff.

Some of these sites have alot of bullshit but I can't delete it from them. They also have alot of good information.

Meeeh... And this is just info, not real. The "facts" they tell us here aren't true.

I agree with sacrid. Dragons are based on fiction, and every man can create his own dragons

Ahhh... These sites aren't the correct answers of what dragon really are...
The biology links displays and tells diffrent types of dragons. This doesn't means that they are writing the correct info... What are the correct info? What is a dragon? How they look? How they act? What can they do? No One Knows!

That is the fun with dragons, no correct answer. Only use your fucking imagination! (and sites as reference xD)

 

[bounty hunter2]

Lol why would dragons scare kids?

I mean how could dragons affect the cultures so much? Something like dragons had to exist

 

[sacridshadow]

Well, dragons effected japanese and Chinese culture. And korean... however, when the first dinosaur bones were discovered, they were originallly thought to be the fossils of dragons. i found that out on a documentary on the history of dinosaur fossils. lol Dragons weren't created to scare kids. The Japanese and Chines thought dragons were protectors, so they highly revered them.

 

[onisaiyan808]

I mean how could dragons affect the cultures so much? Something like dragons had to exist

Totally frigging agree with you, man. Why would the people back in ancient times go through the trouble to make something up if it didn't exist back then. I'm pretty sure there were dragons back then, but just with different images.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Lol why would dragons scare kids?

I mean how could dragons affect the cultures so much? Something like dragons had to exist

Eastern dragons are nothing of the sort. "Dragon" is just the closest western equivalent. It's like calling a parakeet a chicken.

 

[Pyritie]

Eastern dragons are nothing of the sort. "Dragon" is just the closest western equivalent. It's like calling a parakeet a chicken.

They're both flying reptiles.

 

[onisaiyan808]

They're both flying reptiles.

How does an Eastern dragon fly? I ask this scientifically.

 

[Volvox]

I'll tell you if you tell me the same for a western dragon, scientifically.

 

[Rising_Dusk]

How does an Eastern dragon fly? I ask this scientifically.

Electromagnetic field interaction.

 

[Volvox]

off topic: They do kinda remind of MAGLEVs, all long and slender.
on topic: There is no scientific explanation, of course, we kinda said that before.
(you may call me the master of the obvious now)

 

[Tyranid]

IMO all the dragon stories came from people discovering Dinosaur bones in the past. I doubt there ever were large reptiles existing at the same time as humans.

 

[Elenai]

Here is the Scientific reason why Eastern Dragons fly.

Warning, there is a HUGE post in this hidden tag that MIGHT stretch your screen, it is filled with various screenshots, diagrams, and other visual aids to more easily show how the various formulae and scientific principles presented in this hidden essay make a wingless creature fly. So open at your own risk.

Now without further adieu, the scientific reason why Eastern Dragons fly.

Reason

Cuz they're magical.

 

[Pyritie]

Thank you for your... lengthy contribution to this topic.

:/

 

[Elenai]

It was my pleasure.

 

[sacridshadow]

lol I knew you'd say that. they don't have wings. But the thing with the chinese, koreans, and japanese is that they had dragons in their stories of their people. They put dragons up basically as gods. This does not mean that dragons existed then, because then we would've found skeletons or even peices if in fact the "skeletons" were collected and burned. There is no way to prove that they are real. So, as the court rules, "Fiction until proven real!" lol

 

[Teh_Ephy]

lol I knew you'd say that. they don't have wings. But the thing with the chinese, koreans, and japanese is that they had dragons in their stories of their people. They put dragons up basically as gods. This does not mean that dragons existed then, because then we would've found skeletons or even peices if in fact the "skeletons" were collected and burned. There is no way to prove that they are real. So, as the court rules, "Fiction until proven real!" lol

doinitrong. There are skeletons, they're called dinosaurs. So sue ancient Easterners for not knowing the difference.

 

[iPeez]

In My Opinion:

Dragons are fantastic. They are amazing. The way the diffrent kinds move, fly and act is incredible. Dragons are not true, but fantasy and imagination. They cause fear with their huge wings, firebreath and epic size in every good story.

We can not prove that dragons has ever exsisted. Even if there is alot of wild ideas and thoughts about dragons, such as firebreath and levitation, they are facinating and some kind of realistic. There is actually no living creatue in thisO) world, which has been discovered yet, that is like a dragon. (Still there is some animals that are a bit close.)

This is maybe why every person has their very own imagined dragon. "There is no correct answer of what a dragon really is or look like."

I belive that some sort of dragon might lived here a long time ago. Acording to the most biology about them, even if there is many explainations, they agree with a few things:

• Wings ( at some kinds)
• Claws
• Scales/Fur
• Epic size (!)

The above things is possible, and we have seen it in todays nature, but a giant 4 tons flying dragon is not possible I think.

-----

Care if it is true or not! They facinates me and I love them!

 

[sacridshadow]

doinitrong. There are skeletons, they're called dinosaurs. So sue ancient Easterners for not knowing the difference.

I'm sorry, but you're not correct. the bones whould have deteriorated along time ago. the sand and earth around them eventually become harder and harder aroung the bones and form into a layer of rock that resembles the bones. If you don't think this is true, google fossils. And I wasn't complaining about the ancient peleotologists. I was just stating facts, that's all.

I belive that some sort of dragon might lived here a long time ago. Acording to the most biology about them, even if there is many explainations, they agree with a few things:

Wings ( at some kinds)
Claws
Scales/Fur
Epic size (!)

Fairy dragon. lol They're small, maybe bird sized. lol but still fantasy.

The above things is possible, and we have seen it in todays nature, but a giant 4 tons flying dragon is not possible I think.

That's very true. But the fact that they would be very large wouldn't help because then, their wings would have to be VERY large. And that's just to lift their weight! lol Notice how the prehistoric dinosaurs, like the pterasaur, were about large, but they still had wings to lift them into the skies and fish. This shows that the larger the creature, the larger the wings have to be. The pterasaur and it's relative also went for fish because:
1. creatures larger than fish were too hard to bring down, and they did not hunt in packs
and 2. they weren't threatened by the fish. If anything, it was the large underwater creatures that caused the danger, as they could surprise them and drown them when they went for the fish.

 

[Teh_Ephy]

I'm sorry, but you're not correct. the bones whould have deteriorated along time ago. the sand and earth around them eventually become harder and harder aroung the bones and form into a layer of rock that resembles the bones. If you don't think this is true, google fossils. And I wasn't complaining about the ancient peleotologists. I was just stating facts, that's all.

And you can really tell the difference between a grimy fossil and a grimy bone. It's close enough, shut the fuck up with your useless semantics.

That's very true. But the fact that they would be very large wouldn't help because then, their wings would have to be VERY large. And that's just to lift their weight! lol Notice how the prehistoric dinosaurs, like the pterasaur, were about large, but they still had wings to lift them into the skies and fish. This shows that the larger the creature, the larger the wings have to be. The pterasaur and it's relative also went for fish because:
1. creatures larger than fish were too hard to bring down, and they did not hunt in packs
and 2. they weren't threatened by the fish. If anything, it was the large underwater creatures that caused the danger, as they could surprise them and drown them when they went for the fish.

I thought pterosaurs were gliders, and didn't actually fly. Not that you are necessarily wrong, but one of us is mistaken in our terminology.

 

[sacridshadow]

And you can really tell the difference between a grimy fossil and a grimy bone. It's close enough, shut the fuck up with your useless semantics.

What makes you think they are grimy? Because they were buried under lots of dirt? And what makes my info useless? Just because you may not accept them as facts, doesn't mean they aren't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sacridshadow
I'm sorry, but you're not correct. the bones whould have deteriorated along time ago. the sand and earth around them eventually become harder and harder aroung the bones and form into a layer of rock that resembles the bones. If you don't think this is true, google fossils. And I wasn't complaining about the ancient peleotologists. I was just stating facts, that's all.

And you can really tell the difference between a grimy fossil and a grimy bone. It's close enough, shut the fuck up with your useless semantics.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sacridshadow
That's very true. But the fact that they would be very large wouldn't help because then, their wings would have to be VERY large. And that's just to lift their weight! lol Notice how the prehistoric dinosaurs, like the pterasaur, were about large, but they still had wings to lift them into the skies and fish. This shows that the larger the creature, the larger the wings have to be. The pterasaur and it's relative also went for fish because:
1. creatures larger than fish were too hard to bring down, and they did not hunt in packs
and 2. they weren't threatened by the fish. If anything, it was the large underwater creatures that caused the danger, as they could surprise them and drown them when they went for the fish.

I thought pterosaurs were gliders, and didn't actually fly. Not that you are necessarily wrong, but one of us is mistaken in our terminology.

well, they did glide, however, they lived on cliffs overlooking the oceans. sure, there may be some thermal vents... somewhere... but if they get too low or are in danger, they would have to flap, they were technically giant, scaled, bird after all. Our birds are actually descended from them. lol

 

[varsaigen]

And you can really tell the difference between a grimy fossil and a grimy bone. It's close enough, shut the fuck up with your useless semantics.

A quote from wikipedia:

Fossils (from Latin fossus, literally "having been dug up") are the preserved remains or traces of animals, plants, and other organisms from the remote past. The totality of fossils, both discovered and undiscovered, and their placement in fossiliferous (fossil-containing) rock formations and sedimentary layers (strata) is known as the fossil record.

I know for a fact, that fossils are compacted in the soil and buried under layers of soil. The soil compacts as the bone deteriates, leaving a rock in the shape of the bone. This rock formation, is called a fossil. Due to the compacting of different soils and/or rocks, the fossil gains structural stability, thus allowing them to be unburied and transported with little or no damage (unless they are smashed in a car wreck, etc.) A plaster mould is then made from the fossil and it is cast, creating a near perfect replica of the fossils image. They then paint this and stack them on top of eachother to recreate the shape of the creature or creatures (they have had mixed skeletons before, a tooth becoming a backbone, etc.).

I hope this clears up any confusion...? >_>

 

[sacridshadow]

Most paleontologists now believe that pterosaurs were adapted for active flight, not just gliding as was earlier believed. Pterosaur fossils have been found on every continent except Antarctica. At least 60 genera of pterosaurs have been found to date, ranging from the size of a small bird to wingspans in excess of 10 meters (33 feet).
Here's the wiki page. Pterosaur - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[varsaigen]

qite the wingspan! O_O

 

[Teh_Ephy]

What makes you think they are grimy? Because they were buried under lots of dirt? And what makes my info useless? Just because you may not accept them as facts, doesn't mean they aren't.

The validity of a fact has nothing to do with its usefulness. I learnt from the movie Evan Almighty that some species of duck somewhere in the world has a penis as long as its whole body. So what? The difference between a big heavy bone lying around in the dirt and a big heavy fossil lying around in the dirt is 0 when you don't even know there's a difference between fossils and bones; when you don't even know fossils exist, more accurately. A skeleton is also still always a skeleton whether it's fossils or real bones. My point is that they did have evidence of something, whether they got it right what it was or not. You can shut the fuck up with your useless semantics now.

well, they did glide, however, they lived on cliffs overlooking the oceans. sure, there may be some thermal vents... somewhere... but if they get too low or are in danger, they would have to flap, they were technically giant, scaled, bird after all. Our birds are actually descended from them. lol

Not necessarily exclusively pterosaurs, but many dinosaurs are generally agreed upon to be the predecessors of birds, which unfortunately means they were giant chickens, not lizards. Much less intimidating

 

[Tyranid]

Not necessarily exclusively pterosaurs, but many dinosaurs are generally agreed upon to be the predecessors of birds, which unfortunately means they were giant chickens, not lizards. Much less intimidating

Wait... so you're claiming that a giant chicken DOESN'T scare the hell out of you!?

 

[sacridshadow]

The facts are only important if you need them. It's not like the fact that smoking kills people will help someone during an essay on global warming. Your paragraph is hard to translate though. The sentences are a little confusing without the punctuation and proper spelling (I can peice that together. lol). I think what you said is that fossils are the same as bones. That isn't true, fossils are BASED upon bones. If you read about fossils, it may explain it better than I can. Maybe...

 

[Teh_Ephy]

Exactly. The fact that there is a difference between a fossil and a bone is completely useless when some random person in 200 B.C. thinks "oshit this is a dragon bone"; firstly because the superficial differences are small, especially when you don't have both immediately on hand to compare one to another; secondly because nobody knew shit about fossils versus bones when new mythology was still being made; thirdly because a fossilized skeleton is still a fucking skeleton. They had skeletons and they decided they were of dragons.

P.S: I got a perfect writing subscore on the English portion of the ACT, my punctuation and spelling are syntactically flawless kthx.

 

[Mecheon]

Dragons are not pterosaurs. Pterosaurs existed a good 65 million years before the current day, and dragon myths have existed long before we knew of them. Also, eastern dragons are quite clearly chimerical creatures made up of various other parts. Fish scales, snake body, lion or ox head, y'know the drill

Also, birds did not evolve from pterosaurs. They evolved from dinosaurs. Pterosaurs were fuzzy, while dinosaurs had feathers, big difference

People in ancient ages did not dig up entire pterosaur fossils and suddenly say "Oh look, dragons!". No. While regular dinosaur fossils may have been found, and this being just single limbs and fragments, considering the time and the fact no one was looking for them, they tended to contribute to all sorts of mythical creatures, not just dragons. People didn't find the whole fossils at once, you see. Such as a protoceratops skull being misinterpreted as a gryphon skull

Dragons are just taking a creature in nature (Snakes, lizards, bats) and giving them a new aspect. Eastern dragons and western ones are complete opposites anyway. Eastern ones are enpowered by water and are shapeshifting nature spirits, where as western ones are generally evil things that a hero must slay, or representing evil, being combinations of bats, snakes and lizards, which were all seen as evil

Dragons are chimeras, like kirin, nue, gryphons, manticores, hippogryphs, the questing beast, and all those other chimeras out there. Heck, they're amazingly varied in their descriptions anyway, with the only real connection between them being "they're lizard-ish". Compare the Tarrasque, a turtle-shelled, man-faced, many legged obvious land dweller to your typical wyvern, a giant flying reptile with no forelimbs, but two legs. Or heck, throw in the Orochi or Hydra into the mix, both of which are nothing more than giant snakes with many heads

They're myths and stories with very little connection between each other really

 

[Devine]

Dragons didn't excist >.>
The one that says "what if it wuz a dinosaur" is a plain idiot because of the following reason: Humans didn't excist then so it would be like a chance like 1 out of a billion times mol that one man made up a story that reasembled a creature that lived A VERY LONG TIME AGO. Dragons did never excist, they may someday but not untill today. Dragons are myths and like mecheon said, they are chimeras. I agree that some people might be interested in this ballcrap but I don't. The fact that some people believe that a dragon ever excisted makes me lol. Really, if I wasn't feel bad for them, i'd be repping em xP

 

[Pyritie]

where as western ones are generally evil things that a hero must slay, or representing evil

My post would explain most of the whole "evil" connotation they got.

 

[iPeez]

Meeh, can't you read my posts, please? Dragons doesn't excists. Just stop discussing that topic xD. There isn't anyone here who have said they do...?

=)

 

[Teh_Ephy]

I wasn't saying dragons were dinosaurs, I was saying that "dragon" skeletons and bones were really dinosaur skeletons and bones.

 

[iPeez]

That is true ^^

 

[Mecheon]

I wasn't saying dragons were dinosaurs, I was saying that "dragon" skeletons and bones were really dinosaur skeletons and bones.

But not many of them were found until roughly modern times, and you can check out places like that park in England to see what they were interpreted as

They typically found the rough bone or so, but they were rare. And heck, most fossils weren't even associated with dragons. A sauropod limb found somewhere in Europe was claimed to be an elephant bone from Roman times when it was found

 

[iPeez]

Alot of dinosaurs looks like dragons or wyverns.

Bump =)

 

[Mecheon]

Alot of dinosaurs looks like dragons or wyverns.

Bump =)

Would you care to post some that look like them?

Because when I think dinosaurs, I think killer cassowaries from hell personally. I don't think serpentine. Or winged and featherless

 

[InfiniteSeven]

Would you care to post some that look like them?

Because when I think dinosaurs, I think killer cassowaries from hell personally. I don't think serpentine. Or winged and featherless

I think its because of their reptilian qualities that people think dragons and dinosaurs are similar, but indeed, I agree. The dragons are far more serpentine than dinosaurs.

Winged bit... well birds are thought to have evolved from dinosaurs, according to fossil records.

 

[Mecheon]

Winged bit... well birds are thought to have evolved from dinosaurs, according to fossil records.

Yeah, but bird wings are different from dragon wings, which are generally represented as looking pretty damn similar to bat wings, undoubtedly due to the negative aspects of bats in old European mythology

 

[iPeez]

Meeh I will fidn some dragons that looks like dinosaurs. But i will take it later ok =P!