Archive for December, 2012

Ancient Viking Brachiosaurus? Plus; Remarkarble Correlation Of Ancient Sauropod Depictions with Specific Genera of Sauropoda

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 24 2012

Photo: How to Train Your Dragon? Viking vs Brachiosaurus.

“Look at Behemoth, which I made just as I made you; it eats grass like an ox. Its strength is in its loins, and its power in the muscles of its belly. It makes its tail stiff like a cedar; the sinews of its thighs are knit together. Its bones are tubes of bronze, its limbs like bars of iron. It is the first of the great acts of God— only its Maker can approach it with the sword.” …Job 40 15-19 New Revised Standard Version

“Megasthenes writeth, that there be serpents among the Indians to that bignesse, that they are able to swallow stags or buls all whole….Attilius Regulaus, generall under the Romanes, during the warres against the Carthaginians, assailed a Serpent neere the river Bagrada, which caried in length 120 foot…” Book 8 Pliny’s Natural History

Ancient Viking Brachiosaurus?
by Chris Parker
Copyright 2012

Photo: From the latter part of this article; fully explained below.


Dragons; sometimes huge, reptilian, dangerous, sometimes winged, sometimes not creatures – are reported not as mythological but as real in every ancient culture on every continent. Of course, those creatures that we now call dinosaurs were also sometimes huge, dangerous, sometimes winged, sometimes not creatures – that lived on every continent. (Technically pterosaurs are not considered dinosaurs).

Among those ancient cultures who described living dragons were the Norse and that subset of the Norse culture the Vikings.

The Vikings

Painting: Just to be clear; the “dragon” on the ship’s prow is not our subject today.


“The Vikings (from Old Norse vĂ­kingr) were the Norse explorers, warriors, merchants, and pirates who raided, traded, explored and settled in wide areas of Europe, Asia and the North Atlantic islands from the late 8th to the mid-11th century.

These Norsemen used their famed longships to travel as far east as Constantinople and the Volga River in Russia, and as far west as Iceland, Greenland, and Newfoundland, and as far south as Nekor. This period of Viking expansion – known as the Viking Age – forms a major part of the medieval history of Scandinavia, Great Britain, Ireland and the rest of Medieval Europe.

Popular conceptions of the Vikings often differ from the complex picture that emerges from archaeology and written sources. A romanticised picture of Vikings as Germanic noble savages began to take root in the 18th century, and this developed and became widely propagated during the 19th-century Viking revival.

The received views of the Vikings as violent brutes or intrepid adventurers owe much to the modern Viking myth which had taken shape by the early 20th century. Current popular representations are typically highly clichéd, presenting the Vikings as familiar caricatures.

    The Norse Dragon Tradition

Dragons are common in Norse lore; we associate viking raiders with dragon headed ships. However this is slightly misleading because Norse lore made no distinction between dragons per se and serpents. A serpent was simply a dragon without wings.

In Nordic mythology, the figure of the dragon was often used as symbol of material greed, and harbringers of destruction, that is to say: they acquired a clearly negative symbolism, (unlike some aspects of the dragon in Eastern mythology). Clearly this makes them excellent figureheads for Viking raiders!

One of the most important Norse dragons is Nithhogr. This creature lives at the base of the world tree Yggdrasil and gnaws at the roots, attempting to destroy it. Nithhogr also devours the corpses of the dead. The world serpent Jormungandr would also be classed as a dragon in Norse lore. Jormungandr – the Midgard serpent – lives in the waters curled in a circle round the world and biting his own tail.

Another well-known Norse dragon tale is that of Fafnir, who was turned into a dragon by his greed and who was slain by Siegfried. The hero Scandanavian hero Beowulf also fought dragons. Some have classed grendel and his mother as dragons, however they are more usually considered to be some form of troll”.Dragonrama

An Antique Viking Diplodocus?


This “ANCIENT VIKING BRONZE ZOOMORPHIC PENDANT,RARE” is actually a pendant currently on sale on Ebay. It is a bronze, zoomorphic depiction of a long necked, quadruped with curled tail used as a connection for the wire to be passed through for a wearer. The item actually has “bumpy skin” in the manner of the sauropod dinosaurs we believe it represents.

Not much information is provided about the object other than that which has been provided above. The location of the seller is Latvia, the seller is gint5812 who has a 100% approval rating. I’m not providing a link because the item has been sold and I have no way of knowing how long the link will be active.

The item is a “pendant”, approximately 3 inches from tail to nose. Is the item a real, antique Viking pendant? we can’t prove it is, however the surest way to have an object declared a fake is to present it in the shape of a dinosaur.

We have additional views of the object as well as comparisons with modern depictions of a certain type of sauropod dinosaur.

Sauropod dinosaurs are probably the most easily recognized type of dinosaur. They are large, long necked with a stocky body and a long tail. However, there were differences among the various types of sauropods and we believe that rather than just generally identifying this ancient depiction as a sauropod I believe we can go even further and identify the specific type of sauropod dinosaur that is being represented.

Of course, sauropod dinosaurs supposedly became extinct over 65 million years ago.


Right we compare a side view of the artifact along with a side view of a brachiosaurus skull and a modern version of brachiosaurus.

Brachiosaurus has a distinctive shaped head among the sauropods; it has a “bulb” or a large bulge on the top frontal portion of its skull. Various artists and paleontologists have represented that bulge in a number of ways in modern depictions. The skull of diplodocus is longer and more horse like than is the skull of brachiosaurus. Camarsaurus and Euhelopus have more rounded skulls. We believe that this ancient, Viking artifact specifically represents what science calls the brachiosaurus today. A chart showing these sauropod skulls is provided a bit further down in this post.

A potential issue (among some would say, many) is that brachiosaurus is supposed to be an American dinosaur even though “related” dinosaurs and potential brachiosaurus remains have been found in Africa and Europe.

Does this prove that these Vikings made it to America? I’m not serious. One of the many differences that creationists have with evolutionists is that the need for isolated populations creates a bias for continent only dinosaurs. Creationists are not surprised when the same species appears on many or even all continents.


This grouping (photo) is not from Wikipedia and provides a comparison between the heads of modern depictions of brachiosaurus from fossil remains and a possible ancient eyewitness depiction.

“Brachiosaurus is a genus of sauropod dinosaur from the Jurassic Morrison Formation of North America. It was first described by Elmer S. Riggs in 1903 from fossils found in the Grand River Canyon (now Colorado River) of western Colorado, in the United States. Riggs named the dinosaur Brachiosaurus altithorax, declaring it “the largest known dinosaur”. Brachiosaurus had a proportionally long neck, small skull, and large overall size, all of which are typical for sauropods. However, the proportions of Brachiosaurus are unlike most sauropods.

The forelimbs were longer than the hindlimbs, which result in a steeply inclined trunk, making the overall body shape reminiscent of a modern giraffe. Also, while the tail is a typical long dinosaur tail, it was relatively short for a sauropod.

Brachiosaurus is the namesake genus of the family Brachiosauridae, which includes a handful of other similar sauropods. Much of what is known by laypeople about Brachiosaurus is in fact based on Giraffatitan brancai, a species of brachiosaurid dinosaur from the Tendaguru Formation of Tanzania that was originally described by German paleontologist Werner Janensch as a species of Brachiosaurus. Recent research shows that the differences between the type species of Brachiosaurus and the Tendaguru material are significant enough that the African material should be placed in a separate genus. Several other potential species of Brachiosaurus have been described from Africa and Europe, but none of them are thought to belong to Brachiosaurus at this time.”…Wikipedia

The Upshot


How do we account for the close match of the head of this artifact with the actual skull of brachiosaurus? Is this some quadrupedal, dragon like, reptile like (with “reptile” skin”) and frankly brachiosaurus like object nevertheless a wholly mythological depiction? Is that the simplest explanation or is it more likely that the maker of this artifact was familiar enough with the animal to make even a stylized form of it–which others would also recognize?

There must be an infinite number of mythological animal shapes from which an artist could choose from. Wouldn’t it be too much of a coincidence to believe that a purely mythological animal had nearly exact feature matches with a creature that allegedly became extinct 65 million years ago? “Behold now behemoth”!

Just for Kicks, Two Additional Viking Sauropods?


The same seller has another artifact, also described as an ancient Viking Zoomorphic bronze pendant, (rare). The location of the object is also Latvia.

The bidding has closed at $140.00. This artifact has the “telltale” head bulge on top of its head.

   

SOLID 830 SILVER DRAGON TEA SET 1892 ANTIQUE NORWEGIAN

This piece can be associated with the seven others that we are showing below because they all clearly represent the same long necked creature. We are making what we believe is the proper identfication below.


“A stunning rare Norwegian sterling silver tea set. It is hallmarked with the 830S standard mark and the makers mark of David Andersen, Christiania (the name for Oslo pre 1924), and the date 1892. For those unaware Andersen is regarded as Norway’s most sought after maker. It has been beautifully made being designed around a dragon theme. The teapot has a cast dragon spout and handle and cast dragon feet, the sugar bowl and cream jug have dragon handles and feet. Each piece has been engraved DK or KD as they are entwined.

Photo: Right 1910 Sauropod Drawing


It is in outstanding condition being free from dings splits and repairs. The pot handle wobbles a little due to the shrinkage of the natural insulator rings but this is very easy for a silversmith to put right and there are of course a couple of faint marks but nothing of any significance”.

This piece sold for approximately $2,200. The date of 1892 means that it was created some 15 years after the bones were intially discovered in 1877. The head of the “dragon” matches the other six dragons from across time and around the world that we show below.

We do not need to suppose that David Anderson the maker actually saw a live sauropod-only that at that through that time the depiction of this dinosaur was known and rather consistently drawn and sculpted. The detail and style of depictions of these dinosaurs at tha time were nothing like the current versions of these creatures.
   
Remarkable Correlation Of Ancient Sauropod Depictions with Specific Genera of Sauropoda Across Time and Continents (How to Terrain Your Dragons?)

Here’s that promised sauropod skull chart. Notice that cranial bulge on the skull of brachiosaurus? If there were in fact ancient depictions of this sauropod might we not notice today the long neck, dragon nature, long tail and the telltale head bulge? see story above.


We have been noting for some time that man and sauropod certainly interacted in the recent past.

Although in most respects these creatures are quite similar there are characteristics of the skull that might allow us to show not only that man was an eyewitness to living examples of these creatures but with specific genera of the sauropoda!

The 5,300 Year Old Mesopotamian Diplodocus on an ancient cylinder seal.

This ancient cylinder seal, currently housed at the Louvre Museum portrays sauropod like creatures as well as giant “birds” or pterosaurs. The seal is from Mesopotamia, approximately 3300 B.C. (Moortgart, Anton, The Art of Ancient Mesopotamia, 1969, plate 292., presumably seen by the artist.


I would ask that the interested reader note the points of similarity between a close-up of the “sauropod” depiction created by rolling the cylinder with the skull of Diplodocus Longus. This is the basis for me to call this creature and the consistent comparisons below diplodocus depictions.

    

Tang Dynasty Euhelopus

The Euhelopus skull is shown in the chart above. It is the skull in the top, left of the chart. Its skull is more rounded than that of either brachiosaurus or diplodocus. The artifact shown is more than 2,000 years more recent and on an entirely different continent.

Euhelopus; Source: Thinkquest.org

One of the big plant-eating dinosaurs similar to Camarasaurus, Euhelopus, or “good marsh foot,” had a longer neck and nose. Like Camarasaurus, it had strong teeth that grew around its jaws.


Other dinosaurs of this type had teeth growing only in front. Euhelopus had large nostrils on top of its head. Because of this, some scientists think it had a long trunk. That would have made it look very strange.

Photo: Collection description: Tang Dynasty (618 A.D.-906 A.D.) nephrite jade finial in the shape of a bird’s head (sic). It was probably used as a handle for a knife or other such implement. There is a bit of calcification on the jade, but it is an exquisite piece. It’s in a private collection on sale for $5,500.00

Both Camarasaurus and Euhelopus were camarasaurid (chambered lizard) dinosaurs, with hollow chambers in the backbone.

Euhelopus was a little slimmer than Camarasaurus, but large members of the family may have weighed as much as 24 tons. The biggest could have been up to 50 feet in length – without trunk. From fossil remains, scientists believed they were at home in marshy land at the bank of muddy rivers or in swamps.

They would have been safer there than on dry or wooded land where big flesh eater roamed.

Location: Shandong, People’s Republic of China
Size: Length- 50 feet (15m)
Classification: Family-Camarasauridae
Suborder-Sauropodomorpha
Order-Saurischia
Time: Late Jurassic


It may not be possible to readily identify the specific similarity of the Euhelopus sauropod depiction with that of the Tang Dynasty artifact. On the right we’ve placed the unedited drawing of the Euhelopus skull (except that we tinted it red) on top of the artifact for comparison. What do you think? Bird or sauropod?

    

Diplodocus, Right to Left, Around the World and Across Culture and Eras-Click to enlarge photo. 

We believe that each of these depictions is of diplodocus, which has a flatter skull than does Brachiosaurus or the other rounder headed sauropods, Camarsarus and Euhelopus. There is a remarkable consistency between the depictions, whatever it is that is in the artist’s eye. The depictions span a time period beginning 5,300 years ago through the Acambaro depiction of possibly the last 1,000 years.


From left to Right:(A)This is another version of the Mesopotamian cylinder seal (colorized). 3,300 B.C. Currently housed at Louvre Museum.

(B) Coffee Pot. By: Unidentified artist, Portuguese (Lisbon)
19th century, about 1825-1850 Metal; silver, wooden handle 29.5 x 26.7
Curved steamed body, 4-sided, heavy moulding below long contracted neck. Flattened domed cover. On 4 claw-ball feet. Curved spout flat at back, with animal’s head tip. Angular wooden handle. Cast parrot on ball, finial screwed to cover. Bands of floral repousse at base, above and below mid-moulding, at neck and on cover.
Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

(C)From the Vietnamese Bronze Age: 3rd century A.D. Cast bronze. Museum of Fine Arts, Boston. Dongson culture.

(D)Bronze Ladle with “dragon head” handle. Han dynasty(220 B.C. to approx 220 A.D… Chinaweb
(E)Acambaro Mexico. Carbon dated to 1,500 to 4,000 years old. http://www.omniology.com/ManyDinos.jpg

(F)Record ID: HAMP-9A5B16
Object type: BRIDLE FITTING
Broad period: EARLY MEDIEVAL
County: HAMPSHIRE
Workflow stage: Awaiting validation
A slightly corroded fragment from a late early-medieval/Anglo-Scandinavian cast copper-alloy cheekpiece (c. 11th century AD). The fragment is formed of a curved Ringerike style animal head and neck in profile, possibly a dragon or sea monster. The cheekpiece is flat and the neck is long and the head is set at roughly right angles to it. On the outer edge of the curve is a recessed protrusion, broadly semicircular with a small central knop and suggestions of losses behind. At the end of the head is a recurving hook, perhaps representing a horn. Below are three small lobed protrusions …

The piece (F) on the far right is Scandavavian, from the 11th century A.D. The piece on the far left (A) is from 3300 B.C.-and yet from left to right the open minded can see that it is always the same creature that is being depicted; long necked, fleshy nosed and often bearded.

(G) 1892 Norwegian Tea Set. (Described above)

A word about the noses. It seems that the noses portrayed here for diplodocus are “fleshy” when compared with modern depictions. Here is a idea why the ancient depictions could be more accurate.

Study Paints New Picture of Dinosaur’s Nose. John Roach for National Geographic News August 2, 2001

A new study suggests that anyone who sits down to draw a detailed picture of what dinosaurs may have looked like will have to tweak the nose a bit to get it right. Usually the flesh-covered nasal passages of dinosaurs are shown toward the back of the openings in the nose bone. But Lawrence Witmer, a paleontologist at Ohio University in Athens, Ohio, says that’s wrong, and the nostrils were really much closer to the front, just above the mouth, and were larger than thought.

Photo:Science Tries Fleshy Nosed Diplodocus

The finding, which Witmer reported in the August 3 issue of Science, is significant not just because it changes our idea of what dinosaurs looked like. It also has implications for how dinosaurs breathed, smelled, and regulated their body temperature and water loss.

“I don’t know why we got it wrong for so long,” said Witmer. “In general, the fleshy nostril the opening into the nasal cavity has escaped scientific inquiry.” People have relatively small bony nostrils, so there’s little doubt about where the flesh-covered nasal passages can be located to effectively do their job. The bony noses of dinosaurs, however, could have been more than two feet (0.6 meters) long, which leaves the placement of the fleshy nostrils open to interpretation.

Was the story of Noah’s Ark true? Archaeologist who found the Titanic claims Biblical flood DID happen 12,000 years ago

Church of Darwin, Science, The Flood of Noah, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 11 2012


And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed….Luke 17
    

Some Christians are hailing this article and the scientific discoveries underlying them as support for the Biblical view of the earth’s history. Bible skeptics are feeling the pinch a bit and are defensively talking about Gilgamesh and flood legends that they would like to believe began before the Biblical story in Genesis. Christians however should accept nothing short of the Biblical world-wide flood–not some pseudo scientific replacement explanation for the real event. Where ever the reader is standing it is likely over or around sedimentary rock-which covers the entire planet. “Sedimentary rocks are types of rock that are formed by the deposition of material at the Earth’s surface and within bodies of water….The sedimentary rock cover of the continents of the Earth’s crust is extensive…Wikipedia

Nearly every ancient civilization has its own story of the great worldwide flood. 70% of the surface of the planet is covered with water and there are oceans of water under the surface of the earth. This kind of evidence to us is more important because it points to the worldwide Genesis flood and not to a local flood–no matter how widespread….s8int.com

   
Was the story of Noah’s Ark true? Archaeologist who found the Titanic claims Biblical flood DID happen 12,000 years ago

A flood of Biblical proportions just like in the story of Noah’s Ark may have actually happened, according to the oceanographer who found the Titanic.

Acclaimed underwater archaeologist Robert Ballard claims his team of researchers have uncovered evidence that suggests The Great Flood described in the Bible was actually based on real events. Mr Ballard told how he investigated a controversial theory proposed by two scientists from Columbia University that there was a massive flood in the Black Sea region.

In an interview withABC News, he said around 12,000 years ago much of the world was covered in ice and the Black Sea had been a freshwater lake surrounded by farmland.

But when the glaciers began to melt during a warming period in the cycle of the Earth’s temperature around 5600BC water rushed toward the world’s oceans, Mr Ballard said.

This, he claimed, caused floods all around the world and water cascaded through Turkey’s Straits of Bosporus towards the Black Sea.

‘Where I live in Connecticut was ice a mile above my house, all the way back to the North Pole, about 15 million kilometers, that’s a big ice cube,’ he said.

‘But then it started to melt. We’re talking about the floods of our living history. The questions is, was there a mother of all floods?’

His research follows a 1997 study by William Ryan and Walter Pitman who, drawing on archaeological and anthropological evidence, claimed that ‘ten cubic miles of water poured through each day’, and that the deluge continued for at least 300 days.

More than 60,000 square miles of land were flooded, they said, and the lake’s level rose by hundreds of feet after merging with the Mediterranean, triggering mass animal migrations across Europe.

According to their study, the force of the water was two hundred times that of Niagara Falls, sweeping away everything in its path. It also transformed the Black Sea from an isolated freshwater lake surrounded by farmland into a saltwater inlet.

The researchers, whose findings have been backed up by carbon dating and sonar imaging, claimed that the story of Noah’s flood had its origin in this cataclysmic event.

‘We went in there to look for the flood,’ Mr Ballard told ABC News. ‘Not just a slow moving, advancing rise of sea level, but a really big flood that then stayed… The land that went under stayed under.’

The team found an ancient shoreline which Mr Ballard believes is proof such an event did take place.
He believes that, by using carbon dating shells found along the shoreline four hundred feet below the surface, it took place around 5,000 BC.

‘It probably was a bad day,’ he said. ‘At some magic moment, it broke through and flooded this place violently, and a lot of real estate, 150,000 square kilometers of land, went under.’

As the theory goes, the story of the disaster was passed down from generation to generation and eventually inspired the biblical account of Noah.

Noah is described in the Bible as a family man, a father of three, who is about to celebrate his 600th birthday.

‘In the early chapters of Genesis, people live 800 years, 700 years, 900 years,’ said Rabbi Burt Visotzky, a professor of Talmud and Rabbinics at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York.

‘Those are mythic numbers, those are way too big. We don’t quite know what to do with that. So sometimes those large numbers, I think, also serve to reinforce the mystery of the text.’

‘It probably was a bad day,’ he said. ‘At some magic moment, it broke through and flooded this place violently, and a lot of real estate, 150,000 square kilometers of land, went under.’

Mr Ballard’s team has also found an ancient shipwreck, as well as ancient pottery. Although he does not think he will ever find Noah’s Ark, he believes he may find evidence of an ancient community washed away.

In the book of Genesis, God despairs of human corruption and decides to flood the Earth, instructing Noah to build an ark to save himself, his family and a pair of each animal species. The Ark is described in the Book of Genesis as 300 cubits long, or approximately 450ft (137m), but despite many rumours and claims of sightings, no scientific evidence of its existence has ever been found.

‘The oldest shipwreck that we have discovered so far of that area is around 500 BC, classical period,’ Mr Ballard said. ‘But the question is you just keep searching. It’s a matter of statistics.’

Mr Ballard, who led the international team that located the wreckage of the Titanic in 1985, does not think he will ever find Noah’s Ark.

However, Mr Ballard does think he may find evidence of a people whose entire world was washed away about 7,000 years ago. He and his team said they plan to return to Turkey next summer.

‘It’s foolish to think you will ever find a ship,’ Mr Ballard said, referring to the Ark. ‘But can you find people who were living? Can you find their villages that are underwater now? And the answer is yes.’
According to Genesis 8:4, it came to rest ‘in the mountains of Ararat’. Experts have agreed that these mountains are to be located in present-day Armenia and eastern Turkey.

Many biblical scholars believe the story of Noah and the Ark was inspired by the legendary flood stories of nearby Mesopotamia, in particular ‘The Epic of Gilgamesh.’

These ancient narratives were already being passed down from one generation to the next, centuries before Noah appeared in the Bible.

‘The earlier Mesopotamian stories are very similar where the gods are sending a flood to wipe out humans,’ said biblical archaeologist Eric Cline.

‘There’s one man they choose to survive. He builds a boat and brings on animals and lands on a mountain and lives happily ever after? I would argue that it’s the same story.’

Catastrophic events of this kind are not unique to the Bible. Some contemporary examples include the 2004 tsunami that wiped out villages on the coasts of 11 countries surrounding the Indian Ocean.

There was also Hurricane Katrina, described as the worst hurricane in United States history.

Scholars aren’t sure if the biblical flood was larger or smaller than these modern day disasters, but they do think the experiences of people in ancient times were similar to our own.

‘If you witness a terrible natural disaster, yes, you want a scientific explanation why this has happened,’ said Karen Armstrong, author of A History of God.

‘But you also need to something that will help you to assuage your grief and anguish and rage. And it is here that myth helps us through that.’

Regardless of whether the details of the Noah story are historically accurate, the author believes this story and all the Biblical stories are telling us ‘about our predicament in the world now.’

Read More

Late Survival Theorem, Regarding Chalicotherium
From A Comfy Chair, We I.D. Un-cuddly “Nandi Bear”?
Plus, a Terrace of Lions? Dude You’re not even Tryin’
Enigma’s & Mysteries Due to Skewed View of History

Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, Fin De Siecle, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 04 2012



Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth after their kinds, and cattle after their kinds, and every thing that creeps upon the earth after its kind:
and God saw that it was good.”

   
Can a Leopard Change Its Paradigm?

As a Christian my interests are not strictly limited to debates about the meaning of scripture, issues concerning salvation or debates concerning the existence of God. Those are all important to be sure but throughout history science has been driven by human curiosity about and discoveries concerning the world and the universe that God has made.

One of the interests I have is in something I like to call crypto-zoo-archaeology. Clues to the true history of our planet can be discovered by examining the art and artifacts of past civilizations. The truth is; studying and writing about what I and many others have found in these artifacts is another way of addressing; the meaning of scripture, issues concerning salvation and debates concerning the existence of God.


In this pursuit I have found that those who accept the literal creation account of Genesis have an incredible advantage in this arena. One can look at the artifacts of ancient history through at least two filters; 1)that all living creatures are descended from a single living cell and have evolved through some process (essentially linear and sequential) into the higher order living species that we see today, or 2)the Genesis account of creation which would mean that all living creatures including man have all lived together simultaneously through all history in essentially their current forms.

No matter which filter one uses much of ancient history will still be a puzzle. But using the wrong filter certainly leads to a copious number of; inconsistencies, anomalies, contradictions, unknowns, mysteries and a need to fill in missing information with speculations and assertions which are not data or evidence.

Personally, I have tested the Genesis account and found that what I see and what I expect to find in the historical and archaeological record better fit that filter.

Once one of the two above named paradigms are accepted however it is very difficult to see or even to consider evidence that conflicts with the paradigm. This is true whether you believe in evolution or in Creation ex Nihilo by God. This relative inability to see or except or even to evaluate evidence that might appear to conflict with your adopted paradigm afflicts even those among who are quite certain that we are actually open-minded and objective.

This doesn’t negate the fact that one of the referenced paradigms-is actually true-and that the selection of one or the other filter for your own life doesn’t have consequences.

When news outlets announced that James Cameron and others had allegedly found “the Jesus Tomb” it did not cause any consternation among us Christians who paid zero attention to the story. We waited for secular archaeologists to refute it-which they have. When news conferences, books and television series were coordinated around the announcement of an alleged human ancestor—which was going to change everything- exploded on the scene-“Ida”, I personally did not do a spit-take.

By the end of that year “Ida” was not even on lists for the top ten science stories of that year. “She/it had been debunked. I have never seen “evidence for evolution”. I’ve never seen a transitional fossil.

I accept that evolutionists have not seen evidence for the theory of creation either. However, shouldn’t just a single ancient artifact indicating that humans and dinosaurs lived together falsify the notion that we missed each other by 65 million years? In the 1920’s the World’s foremost archaeologist discovered human and dinosaur bones together in Mongolia and he found that they had fashioned jewelry by boring the shells and making ornaments of dinosaur eggs. (See our article: Dinosaur and Human Interactions in Our Times; the New York Times, LA Times, Chicago Sun Times ect)

Do I need to tell you that you need to use “fresh” un-fossilized dinosaur eggs for this purpose? Archaeologist, Roy Chapman Andrews, went on to become the director of the American Museum of Natural History-so how come so many evolutionists ask where there has ever been such evidence (of co-existence) ever in the world?

Let’s test my paradigm theory. Note the middle, right photograph compilation; the one with the three views of an archaeological object above. Once you read the museum’s description of the object, or perhaps prior thereto your filter goes into action.

“Colima Horned Toad. Protoclassic, ca. 100 B.C. to A.D. 250. Height: 5.3 in. (13.5 cm.); Length: 10.5 in. (26.7 cm.). Price: $2,250

There are four rows of spiked protrusions in high relief along the length of the body, and one row across the head, thirty in all. Coffee bean eyes, recessed nostrils, open mouth, spout as tail, and short legs create a reptile that seems pleased with his surroundings. Provenance: From a Riverside County, California Collection.”

Our article can be found Here.

Now, if you are a creationist, willing to believe that dinosaurs and man co-existed, you may see that the photo comparison with an armored dinosaur is very apt. If however, you are using the evolution filter it will be a toad. There is no way that it could be a dinosaur because you believe that they missed each other by 65 million years.

This is then, for you a toad, a fake or etc.. Paradigm preserved. Forehead unfurrowed. In the same way, of course, I have trouble accepting this as a toad because I see the dinosaur explanation as a better fit-however, I do believe that the toad explanation is a possibility.


These filters exist and work to protect us from having to flip flop our beliefs and our view on the world every five or six minutes.

Just above, left is another very interesting ancient artifact. This artifact is described by the curator as a “lion”. I picked this one out because I want to get into the heart of this post and talk about another group of famous lions. Most people would be perfectly willing to see this depiction as a “lion”.

“Early Islamic glass lion (zoomorphic balsamarium). 7th-9th century AD”.

Certainly no one would object to “mythological”, or “unknown animal” or even; “stylized lion figure”. One must make a decision and call it something. However, if you accept the evolutionary filter it is possible that a whole group of potential candidates can’t even be considered. What if the true depiction here is of some type of crested dinosaur? In the photo we’ve compared it to Olorotitan, a European, crested hadrosaur (top, right of photo) and to Amargasaurus, a crested sauropod. Fossils of the specific species have been found in Argentina.

My point is that creationists can consider the entire creation when examining an artifact but those using the other filter cannot—and maintain their paradigm-al purity. They must describe every artifact in terms of the ruling evolutionary paradigm or face the penalties that the scientific/academic/media culture will mete out. Can you imagine someone from Academia describing this as either a badly composed lion or possibly a sauropod like Amargasaurus?

So now let’s talk about some other depictions labeled “lions” by the archaeological establishment.

The Terrace of Lions at Delos


“The island of Delos, recognized as the birthplace of the god Apollo, has been a sacred area used for various reasons throughout history. Today it is one of the most important archaeological sites in Greece and is covered in excavations, one of which is the famous Terrace of the Lions. This terrace was erected and dedicated to Apollo by the people of Naxos just before 600 BCE.

The terrace consisted of a row of nine to twelve marble carved lions that faced eastward towards the Sacred Lake of Delos along the Sacred Way from Skardana Bay to the temples. The lions, with their mouths open as if roaring or snarling, were both meant to guard the sanctuaries and to inspire a feeling of divine fear among the worshippers. The way in which they were positioned is similar to the way sphinxes were set up along avenues in ancient Egypt.

Today, only five of the original lions remain with remnants of three others and the headless body of another has been transported and put over the main gate of a Venetian arsenal.” Biers, William R. The Archaeology of Greece. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1996. Whitley, James. The Archaeology of Ancient Greece. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

“The island of Delos near Mykonos, near the centre of the Cyclades archipelago, is one of the most important mythological, historical and archaeological sites in Greece. The excavations in the island are among the most extensive in the Mediterranean; ongoing work takes place under the direction of the French School at Athens and many of the artifacts found are on display at the Archaeological Museum of Delos and the National Archaeological Museum of Athens.”

Photo:Naxian Lions held at the Museum at Delos are less damaged.


Question? Are these in fact, lions? If they are lions, they are surely “stylized lions” because their proportions are incorrect. Their front legs are too long. They have three fingers paws. Their bodies are too long. This from a culture that provides us many examples of museum level, realistic depictions of lions and other animals. If these are lions built to “guard” the sanctuaries why aren’t they more self-evidently and accurately sculpted; lions?

Could they depict some other animal? Are they mythological?

Prior to trying to answer that, we switch to a more recent crypto-zoological mystery; the Nandi Bear of Kenya for reasons which I hope to make clear.

The Nandi Bear and Chalicotherium


“The Nandi Bear, also known as Ngoloko, is a cryptid, or unconfirmed animal, reported to live in Africa. It takes its name from the Nandi people who live in western Kenya, near where the Nandi Bear is reported as living.

Frank W. Lane wrote, “What the Abominable Snowman is to Asia, or the great Sea Serpent is to the oceans, the Nandi Bear is to Africa. It is one of the most notorious of those legendary beasts which have, so far, eluded capture and the collector’s rifle.

…Descriptions of the Nandi Bear are of a ferocious, powerfully built carnivore with high front shoulders (over four feet tall) and a sloping back; somewhat similar to a hyena. Some have speculated that Nandi Bears are in fact a misidentified hyena or a surviving Ice Age giant hyena: Karl Shuker states that a surviving short-faced hyena Pachycrocuta brevirostris,extinct ca. 500,000 years before present, would “explain these cases very satisfactorily.”

Other than the Atlas Bear (extinct by the 1800s), no bears are known to be native to Africa, besides those of the prehistoric genera Agriotherium and Indarctos, which died out 4.4 million years ago. Louis Leakey suggested that Nandi Bear descriptions matched that of the extinct Chalicotherium, though chalicotheres were herbivores.

The Nandi people call it Kerit. Local legend holds that it only eats the brain of its victims. Nandi Bears were regularly reported in Kenya throughout the 19th century and early 20th century. Bernard Heuvelmans’s On the Track of Unknown Animals and Karl Shuker’s In Search of Prehistoric Survivors provide the most extensive chronicles of Nandi bear sightings in print.”


A syndicated news article appearing Mansfield News of January 6, 1924 reported that a very large fresh, fragment of unfossilized claw of chalicotherium had been discovered at Bunyoro, Uganda ( Central Africa) and that the thought to be extinct chalicotherium might be very much still alive.

In fact, Zoologists were making a connection between the stories the Nandi peoples had been telling of a fearsome, man killing, brain eating deadly night creature they called “Gereit” might exist and was in fact, chalicotherium. The drawing above right, is from that 1924 article and is a depiction of chalicotherium.

“Chalicotherium, genus of extinct perissodactyls, the order including the horse and rhinoceros. Fossil remains of the genus are common in deposits of Asia, Europe, and Africa from the Miocene Epoch (23 to 5.3 million years ago). The genus persisted into the following Pliocene Epoch, and remains of a related genus, Moropus, are found in North America.


Chalicotherium and its relatives, collectively known as the chalicotheres, ( we’re not locking down on the genus) were very unusual in appearance and structure. In overall appearance the body and slim skull were horse like. The front limbs were longer than the hind limbs, and the back sloped downward. The teeth were distinctive in structure and unhorse like. The feet were quite distinctive.

There were no hooves; instead, each of the three toes on each foot terminated in a strongly developed claw. It is probable that the development of claws was related to the feeding habits of the animal. Chalicotherium may have browsed on branches of trees, pulling them down with the front claws; the claws may also have been employed to dig up roots and tubers.”…Encyclopedia Britannica

The Crux: is the Nandi Bear a Chalicotherium? And What of the Lions of the Terrace at Delos?

Photo: Left, drawing of the Nandi bear from eyewitness accounts and Right, a frontal view of one of the Terrace of Lions, “lions”.

The Chalicotherium is supposed to have gone extinct from 5-7 million years ago. The chalicotherium has been forth as a possible ID for the Nandi bear primarily because the chalicotherium is also known for having much longer front legs than back legs and to have claws as some eyewitness accounts of the Nandi bear have described it.

The Nandi bear is also a cryptid whose description fits no known, living animal so the late survival of some animal thought to have been prehistoric are put forward as potential suspects. Hyenadon is another animal thought to have been prehistoric that has also been put forth as a potential suspect for the same reasons; high front shoulders, long front legs and a sloping back.

The chalicotherium ID is interesting in that this animal also has very unusual feet and claws which set him apart.

Photo:Comparison of admittedly carefully selected chalicotherium depiction inserted into old photo of Naxian (Terrace of Lions) Lion at Delos.


I came across the Terrace of Lions of Delos quite by accident while investigationg some other matter and was struck by how un-lion-like the lions were. They are magnificent animals to be sure but not like any lions I’ve ever seen. Could they be depictions of real creatures-who were not lions?

I did a quick Google search for prehistoric animals with long front legs and immediately was taken to articles about chalicotherium. Articles about chalicotherium also eventually led to articles concerning modern day speculation by cryptozoologists that chalicotherium was a potential match for the Nandi bear, a cryptid that I was unaware of.

The photo at the top of this section shows a very common drawing of the Nandi bear (of unknown source) along with a frontal photo of one of the lions of the Terrace of Lions. This is interesting because as far as I know no one has ever speculated that the “lions” of the Terrace of Lions has anything to do with either the Nandi bear or with chalicotherium. So is this visual similarity (if your filters aren’t preventing you from seeing it or mine forcing me to) just a coincidence?

Chalicotheres are usually depicted as thick, slow and sloth-like and not as fast, relatively slim and dangerous as the lions of Delos seem to appear.

Photo:Comparison of the skeleton of chalicotherium with a Naxian “lion” from the Delos Museum. Note that the face of the Naxian lion shown here has been worn down by weathering and age..


We know from articles about dinosaur depictions that scientists and artists are only guessing when they depict dinosaurs how a dinosaur looks just from their fossils alone.

We also remember that last year a scientific journal reported that scientists now believe that due to an error in a formula they have been using that they have overestimated the size of some dinosaurs by as much as 33% to 50%. The size of their bones are known it was the amount of meat the artists were throwing on the bone that is in question. This suggests that certain dinosaurs were depicted as much bulkier animals than they actually were. Could this be true of chalicotherium?

When artists or illustrators depict known animals the variety of the depictions, the form, the poses can be infinite because the real creature can appear in infinite poses and can be seen from infinite angles.

This not the case with unknown creatures. Inevitably, once a depiction of an animal is made (a guess) all other depictions take the shape of the reference depiction (or first few) and there becomes a limited view of the shape of the creature and even the poses that the animal is shown in. This group think about the look of an unknown creature appears to be inevitable. A radical departure from the consensus view of the creature won’t even be recognized as a depiction of said creature. Ironically an ancient depiction by an eyewitness to the living creature might be rejected because it does not look like the modern, consensus depiction.

Chalicotherium has three toes on each foot ending in claws. Still, the front and back feet are completely different from each other which may provide us some ID possibilities. Are there Nandi bear descriptions of three-toed feet? (By the way lions have five toes in front and four on their back feet).

Here is an antique, eyewitness account of an encounter with the Nandi bear:

“…the whole tent rocked; the pole to which Mbwambi was tied flew out and let down the ridge-pole, enveloping me in flapping canvas. At the same moment the most awful howl I have ever heard split the night. The sheer demoniac horror of it froze me still…I heard my pi-dog yelp just once. There was a crashing of branches in the bush, and then thud, thud, thud, of some huge beast making off. But that howl! I have heard half a dozen lions roaring in a stampede-chorus not twenty yards away; I have heard a maddened cow-elephant trumpeting; I have heard a trapped leopard make the silent night miles a rocking agony with screaming, snarling roars. But never have I heard, nor do I wish to hear again, such a howl as that of the chimiset. A trail of red spots on the sand showed where my pi-dog had gone. Beside that trail were huge footprints, four times as big as a man’s, showing the imprint of three huge clawed toes, with trefoil marks like a lion’s pad where the sole of the foot pressed down. But no lion ever boasted such a paw as that of the monster which had made that terrifying spoor.” Karl Shuker’s Blog

The Nandi bear has been described as having five or six toes in various accounts over the last century as well. I believe that Dale Drinnon who has written extensively on the Nandi bear postulates that the six toed account is assumed to have been where the back feet stepped into an existing three-toed front track.

Various descriptions noted that the animal liked to sit back on its haunches, described it as bear-like (hence the name) having large feet and as being brown in color.

Photo: The interesting foot of the Naxian lion from the Delos Museum compared with the interesting rear foot of the chalicotherium.


Regarding the lions of Delos again; it can be clearly seen from the less damaged statues inside the museum that the lions have three toes on the front feet and very long rear feet, also with three long claws. This superficially at least matches the front feet and rear feet of chalicotherium.

We’ve shown here additional photographs comparing the feet of chalicotherium with those on the Delos lions-both front and rear as well as a number of photographs comparing the physiology, including the long front legs and sloping back.

Photo:A comparison of the three clawed front foot of chalicotherium with the front feet of the Delos, Naxian Lion.


I’ve gone back to look at the actual chalicotherium skeleton to see if a depiction of the living creature as long, slim bodied with a sloping back would also have been a realistic way to depict the creature notwithstanding all the thousands of versions of fat chalicos.

I’ve concluded that the skeleton does lend itself to the Delos, Terrace of Lions, chalicotherium which has closely matching front and back feet, the long front legs and the sloping back of the fossil chalicotherium. (See my admittedly unscientific juxtapostion photo above left.) Even the long hair (mane) of the statues fails to accurately depict the mane of a lion and does remind me of the long hair on certain sloths.

It appears that there is reason to connect the chalicotherium; a creature that supposedly became extinct 5-7 million years ago to the Naxian Lions at Delos. There appears to be some evidence that there is a connection between the Nandi bear of Kenya and Central Africa and the chalicotherium. The elongated bodies of the Naxian lions could be a match for the elongated bodies, and unusual feet of the chalicotherium which could aide in an affirmative identification and prove that chalicotherium was a “late survivor” and could even still be alive.

One More Mystery; Are They Telling the Truth About this Great Monument-or are They Still Lion? Filters On?


Sigiriya (Lion’s rock) Sri Lnkan Mega Site

“In 1831 Major Jonathan Forbes of the 78th Highlanders of the British army, while returning on horseback from a trip to Pollonnuruwa, came across the “bush covered summit of Sigiriya”. Sigiriya came to the attention of antiquarians and, later, archaeologists. Archaeological work at Sigiriya began on a small scale in the 1890s. H.C.P. Bell was the first archaeologist to conduct extensive research on Sigiriya. The Cultural Triangle Project, launched by the Government of Sri Lanka, focused its attention on Sigiriya in 1982. Archaeological work began on the entire city for the first time under this project. There was a sculpted lion’s head above the legs and paws flanking the entrance, but the head broke down many years ago”….Wikipedia
Sigiriya consists of an ancient castle built by King Kasiappan during the 5th century. The Sigiriya site has the remains of an upper palace sited on the flat top of the rock, a mid-level terrace that includes the Lion Gate and the mirror wall with its frescoes, the lower palace that clings to the slopes below the rock, and the moats, walls, and gardens that extend for some hundreds of metres out from the base of the rock.

The site is both a palace and a fortress. Despite its age, the splendor of the palace still furnishes a stunning insight into the ingenuity and creativity of its builders. The upper palace on the top of the rock includes cisterns cut into the rock that still retain water. The moats and walls that surround the lower palace are still exquisitely beautiful.

During Kassapa’s reign in the 5th century AD, a massive, 60-foot lion was chiseled out of the rock. The steps which continued up to the royal palace started at the lion’s feet, wrapped around his body and eventually entered his mouth. Today, all that remain are the paws, but they give a good idea of the statue’s scale. It’s hard to appreciate how impressive it must have been 1500 years ago. It would be impressive now.

The final flight of stairs, hugging tightly to the stone wall, is not for those who suffer from vertigo…Great Photos as the site of srilanka for 91days.com

Here is the mystery; the lion’s head has fallen down and that years ago. One of the most famous parts of the entire sight is the gigantic “lion’s Paws that begin the assent to the next level. But the paws rendered in great detail, are of a creature with three claws on each foot. Lions have five total claws on each front foot although one claw is a “thumb” that usually does not show in a foot print.


So, did someone take the time and input the engineering to construct a megalithic structure featuring a lion only to get the detail concerning the number of claws wrong? I’m even more amazed that no one seems to be questioning whether or not these are meant to be lion’s paws. People seem content just to accept the ID and to move on to the other incredible features of the site.

At least cryptozoologists ought to be asking about the three-clawed lion–if not biologists.

Seriously, is it even reasonable to suppose that the people who built this great monument intended it to represent a three toed lion? Even beyond the number of claws, go google lion claws, view the images and you will note that notwithstanding the actual number of claws–they are nothing like the claws of a lion. What creature, perhaps lion-like in demeanor could be confused with a depiction of a lion- and have three sharp claws on its front feet?

Well, certain dinosaurs might fit the bill–and of course there is the Naxian lion come chalicotherium….

–Comments to: s8intcom@comcast.net