Posts Tagged ‘conversational hypnosis’

Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs-How Evolutionary Science Hides Historical Man and Dinosaur Interaction in Plain Sight

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Dec 13 2011


“Behold now, behemoth, which I made as well as thee; He eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, And his force is in the muscles of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are as tubes of brass; His limbs are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God….. Job 40

“So God created the Great Dragons” …Genesis 1:21 The Latin Vulgate; 5th Century

 

By Chris Parker, Copyright 2011
Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs Part 2

Obi-Wan Kenobi is a fictional character and one of the primary protagonists in the Star Wars movie series. Portrayed by Alec Guinness in the original trilogy, he was one of the most memorable. In the world of the Star Wars films, Kenobi had a particular skill that he used to great effect known now as “conversational hypnosis”. He was able to convince his antagonists by speaking in a specific tone of voice to alter their intended courses of action or for example, to see something that wasn’t in fact there.

Someone or something with even greater abilities is at work here in the real world. When it comes to modern science’s ability to utilize that same skill in convincing the world that dinosaurs and man never interacted, I’m afraid that Obi-Wan Kenobi comes off as a Wookiee;/rookie. Of course, in the movie Obi-Wan had the virtue of not being on the “dark” side. Not true of modern science.

Citizen: ”Science, Shouldn’t I look into the dinosaur/ancient dragon connection more closely?”
Evolutionary Science: [with a small wave of its hand]’ You don’t need to look into the dinosaur question more closely”.
Citizen: ” We don’t need to look more closely.”
Evolutionary Science: [calmly, smoothly, head moving side to side; indicating no..] These aren’t the dinosaurs you’re looking for.
Citizen: [trancelike] “These aren’t the dinosaurs I’m looking for.”
Evolutionary Science: You can go about your business.
Citizen: “ I can go about my business”.
Evolutionary Science:” Move along”.
Citizen: “ Moving along, moving along.”

It’s a bit ironic how easily even evolutionists accept portrayals of man and dinosaur together in cartoons, television programs and movies. However, we have all been trained regarding when it is acceptable to see these interactions and when it is not. Dinosaurs in cartoons; yes-dinosaurs in ancient art museums, no!

(I know that this particular one isn’t funny, but how about; “When this game evolves we’ll be using pigskin instead of dinosaur skin, but they won’t be here ‘til the Olicene”?)

Click on the cartoon above for the rest of this story. The point; dinosaurs and dragons; change the context change the dragon.

 

Photo Right:Top-Rhamphorynchus fossil at the British Nuseum, 1922. Bottom- Aurora Defeating the Dragon, Aurora Consurgens, Published 1420.

When the British Museum put the fossil remains of Rhamphorynchus on display in 1922, it was labeled “Pterodactyl or Extinct Flying Dragon”, drawing a direct line from the pterosaur of modern science to the historic tales of dragons, flying and otherwise that had pervaded the written and artistic history of virtually every ancient culture.

A photograph of that 1922 exhibit is shown here along with a drawing from the 1420 Book Aurora Consurgens (Aurora Defeating the Dragon). This 1420 book depicts a version of the British Museum pterosaur some 350 years prior to their scientific discovery by Cosimo Collini in 1784. Collini thought that they were seagoing creatures.

It’s true that pterosaurs are not considered to be dinosaurs but ancient cultures considered them all (dinosaurs, marine reptiles and pterosaurs) as either dragons or flying dragons. So what happened? How did the clear reference made by the British Museum of the obvious link between, giant, dangerous, reptilian, land, air and sea monsters with the modern discovery of giant, dangerous, reptilian, land air and sea monsters that we call dinosaurs get severed? These dragons are not the dinosaurs you seek!

Let’s start with why before we consider how. Even prior to Darwin many people had become skeptical about such things as the Biblical chronology of the earth and biblical history. For many dragons were considered mythological and a reason to doubt the Bible’s veracity. In this same period, the theories of the geologic column and formation of the earth over millions of years served as grist for the evolution mill. The term dinosaur was coined in 1842. Origin of the Species was published in 1859. All these tended to provide some evidence or support for Atheists and skeptics.

As more and more of these giant, mysterious creatures science called dinosaurs were discovered there was a chance that they could have been associated with the dragons of “recorded history” but instead were placed by science by use of the geologic column to an age millions of years ago.

This fit neatly with modern anti-biblical notions regarding the age of the earth and with evolutionary processes which needed millions and billions of years to complete. Of course any suggestions that dinosaurs were the dragons of the Bible and of ancient cultures would serve to undermine these theories and to support the Bible. The relatively new claim that birds evolved from dinosaurs would seem even more ridiculous if it was understood that dinosaurs were running around with birds –and man just a few years ago.

How Did They do it?

For one thing; scientific illustrators try to make sure that dinosaur depictions look nothing at all like ancient depictions of dragons. It may surprise you to know that scientists actually have no idea what dinosaurs looked like. Witness this rather long exerpt from a Discover Magazine Article in 2000 entitled: What Did Dinosaurs Really Look Like?

“In recent months, artists in the workshop have been putting finishing touches on a special exhibit called Fighting Dinosaurs. In a diorama for the new exhibit a fierce velociraptor, looking like a thinned-down turkey with frighteningly large teeth, stalks a protoceratops. With a flanged crest and beaked mouth that make it look like a goat-sized version of its larger and more famous cousin, Triceratops, the protoceratops sees the predator coming and snarls.


The scene is so vivid that some visitors may glance around nervously to be certain they haven’t been whisked back 80 million years by a hidden time machine. “When you come upon a diorama,” says David Harvey, the museum’s vice president of exhibitions, “it transcends all of the data. It becomes a real experience.”

Yet it is precisely that experience with which a growing number of scientists have a big problem: There is precious little data about dinosaurs to transcend. What the museum scientists know about Indians, whales, and elephants is more than enough to mimic real life. But when it comes to dinosaurs, all they really have to work with is an incomplete jumble of bones. Indeed, if the exhibits department were limited to just skeletal data for its dioramas and reconstructions, these halls would take on a most unromantic flavor. For instance, the Indians in the canoe would lack noses, ears, and breasts, and the diorama artists (ignoring for the moment that they are humans themselves) would be at a loss for what to cover them in—slick skin like a dolphin? Monkey fur? Gorilla hair? As for the blue whale, no one would know to make it blue. And the elephants are a special case. There’s a running joke among professional dinosaur artists that goes like this: Given just an elephant skeleton, they’d probably render a titanic hamster.

Does anyone know what dinosaurs really looked like? Sure we do. We see them everywhere, not just in the museums, but in magazines, movies, even in value meals at McDonald’s. But all of these lifelike renderings are mostly artistic interpretations based on very sparse scientific evidence. To begin with, dinosaur skeletons are rarely found intact, and figuring out how scattered bones fit together is not always clear. Then, making the leap of placing tissue and skin on those bones is a process fraught with unknowns.

Some paleontologists trained in comparative anatomy are beginning to analyze microscopic marks that soft tissues make on bones in search of clues to what dinosaurs actually looked like. But taking a pile of bones and conjuring up what snarling dinosaurs about to battle each other really looked like involves at best equal parts educated guesswork and complete artistic fancy. As Mark Norell, curator of vertebrate paleontology at the museum, puts it, dinosaur artwork “is a fantastic leap from what we know.” And most scientists say we may never know a lot more than we do now”….Discover Magazine, September 2000

Dinosaurs look as little like dragons as possible considering that they are both giant, reptilian ‘monsters”. Could artists render them with bonier heads, external ears, beards and the ferocious dragon mien? Not if they want them published or taken seriously. If dinosaurs looked more like dragons it would be even more difficult to get us to “move along” on this issue.

Just a few more things about dinosaurs here; there are not nearly as many types of dinosaurs as you think. Because of evolution theory, dinosaurs are supposed to differ from continent to continent but they don’t. This doesn’t stop science from giving them different names though.

This last note will be important as we begin to look at some actual dinosaur depictions from ancient China—the actual intent of this article –if I can get to it. An article describing a recent study was published in Live Science on June 22, 2009:

Giant Dinosaurs Get Downsized “Some dinosaurs were the largest creatures ever to walk on land, including the classic long-necked, whip-tailed Diplodocus, but a new study suggests it and its many extinct brethren weighed as little as half as much as previously thought.” A new equation for calculating dinosaur mass based on skeletons found that scientists have been overestimating the girth of many dinosaurs.” Giant Dinosaurs get Downsized

    Photo:Might down sized sauropods have looked like this 3,500 year old Mesopotamian Cylinder Seal depiction rather than the standard depiction on the right?

    More here.


Please keep the foregoing in mind and your mind open as you view a few of the many, many examples of dinosaurs catalogued by the ancient Chinese and classed as mythological dragons by modern science; “Crouching dragon? Hidden Dinosaur?” I picked China here today because China and Asia are thought to be the ancient source of the “mythological dragon”. In truth, they appeared in the art and written history of virtually all ancient cultures in some form because “dinosaurs” lived all over the planet within recorded history. Of course it must be said that many alleged mythological creatures were in fact fanciful.

It’s time for a little show and tell!
[whisper] chris parker; these are not the dinosaurs you seek…

Tang Dynasty Running Dragons

I’ve often particularly noticed these little gold Tang Dynasty (618 A.D. to 907 A.D.) running dragons at the Shanghai Museum. Known as running dragons, this little herd of “dragons” are versions of the same type of dragon that crops up in the art of a number of ancient Chinese Dynasties. What a curious way to portray a mythological creature! In a herd.

I thought that perhaps they might be depictions of actual creatures but I was never successful in finding anything similar in modern depictions of dinosaurs.

I noted that there are other versions of this dragon in ancient Chinese art, but I also came across a very similar dragon in the art of ancient Babylon. What strikes me about these dragons is their slight build but also the seemingly “exaggerated” distance between their front and back legs. They certainly don’t make one think of most modern depictions of dinosaurs.

Remember however, that 1) no scientist today has a clue what dinosaurs actually looked like and 2)there is some indication that artists have been placing a little too much meat on the bone; oversizing them as much as double according to the Live Science article quoted above.

The Tang Dynasty dragons are in the center; on the right of the graphic is the famous dragon of Marduk from the Babylonian Ishtar gate. The Babylonian dragon precedes the Tang Dynasty versions by 1,000 years. Is it a coincidence that two ancient societies created nearly identical mythological dragons?


Perhaps. But perhaps not.. The creature on the left is Massospondylus (above photo; skeleton is alongside this para) (“a genus of prosauropod dinosaur from the early Jurassic Period (Hettangian to Pliensbachian ages, ca. 200–183 million years ago).” Wikipedia), as it appears on a Canadian stamp.

Massopondylus’ skeleton is very slight and most artists have depicted it as a heavier creature. However, drawn as a slighter animal it bears a resemblance to the Chinese dragons. Certainly if this group of dinosaurs, including other similar dinosaurs such as plateosaurus (small prosauropods) had been depicted like this some of us would have drawn a straighter line between dinosaurs and dragons even without the external “dragon” features.

“fossil concentrations have suggested that Massospondylus was a herd animal, perhaps wandering through the ancient landscape of what is today South Africa – as well as the rest of Africa – like modern wildebeest. It was certainly widespread. Remains of Massospondylus have also been found in North and South America, China and India.

When Massospondylus was alive, today’s land masses were all joined together in the super-continent Pangaea (‘Pan-jee-a’, which is Greek for “All Earth”). This distribution of fossils indicates that the animals were present in large numbers over very large areas.” ….www.primeorigins.co.za/young_minds/massospondylus.htm

Let’s look at other slighter depictions of prosauropods like Massopondylus and compare them to depictions of ancient Chinese “dragons”.

At left, on top, is a Song dynasty dragon, (1127 A.D.-1279 A.D.) in silver and gold with turquoise inlays from the Musee Guimet, in Paris. Below is a depiction of plateosaurus, a prosauropod, similar to massospondylus. (Note to the detail oriented: the modern depiction has the rear left leg extended backwards at the same time as the forward left leg is extended forward. The mythological dragon seems as though he has the better gait?)

Do these dragons in fact represent truer versions of prosauropod? It could be. The point remains that no one knows what dinosaurs actually looked like.

 

 

I want to show you an additional dinosaur depiction that makes it clear that the same allegedly mythological dinosaur was modeled by as we showed the Babylonians on the Ishtar Gate, (604- 562 BC), the Tang Dynasty (618A.D. -907A.D.) and ancient South America from the Pre-classical Chupicuaro Culture (800 BC to 200 AD).

On top is a piece from the Julsrud collection; a collection of over 30 thousand miniature figurines found buried at the foot of El Toro Mountain on the outskirts of Acambaro, Mexico.

Of course, because the collection features so many obvious dinosaurs interacting with man it is not considered to be genuine. It is remarkable that the same dinosaur/dragon depiction has appeared on at least three continents representing cultures spanning 1,500 years.

The dinosaur/dragon on the bottom is also from the Tang Dynasty; it is a rare painted ceramic that recently sold at auction for over $23,000. The fact that the 1945 discovered Julsrud collection depicts dinosaurs not as modern artists do but as the ancients did provides credibility for the collection and the idea that these are real and not mythological creatures.


Here on the right an apparently clueless ancient Chinese hunter chases a “mythological creature” with either a bow or a bolo weapon. These Sketches (rubbings) of Han Dynasty (206 B.C. to 220 A.D.)motifs are by Lampo Leong, a University of Missouri Professor. The dynamic movement is typical of Han art. This appears to be the same dragon depicted by the Tang Dynasty, the ancient Babylonians, the ancient South Americans and-the Canadians!?

Science does not know hat dinosaurs looked like but “it” is sure of this one thing; they did not look anything like dragons!

Moving on.

Liao Dynasty

This next beautiful piece comes down to use from Liao Dynasty, China. (Photo from Wikimedia). It is a drinking flask covered with a Sancai glaze.

“The Liao Dynasty, also known as the Khitan Empire was an empire in East Asia that ruled over the regions of Manchuria, Mongolia, and parts of northern China proper between 907 – 1125. It was founded by the Yelü clan of the Khitan people in the same year as Tang Dynasty collapsed (907), even though its first ruler, Yelü Abaoji (Yaruud Ambagai Khan), did not declare an era name until 916.” Wikipedia

This piece is interesting because it features two different dragons. I want to discuss the “dragon” on the top of the flask. First of all, as for it being a dragon; it instead reminds me very much of a ceratopsian dinosaur. After all “ceratopsian” is Greek for “horned face”. The ceratopsians, which includes triceratops; supposedly went extinct more than 65 million years prior to the Liao Dynasty.

I see the horned face, and I see what appears to be from the only angle we have, a rudimentary neck frill.

But do you know what else?

Yes! The feet!. The dinosaur feet! Well, feet that would make tracks similar to those three-toed tracks made by many types of dinosaurs (although there are wide variations in three-toed dinosaur tracks). Note here the leptoceratopsian dinosaur; his feet are very similar to that of our dragon aboard the flask.

Note: “Except in extraordinary circumstances, it’s pretty much impossible to identify the specific genus or species of dinosaur that made a given footprint. What paleontologists can figure out fairly easily is whether the dinosaur was bipedal or quadruped (that is, whether it walked on two or four feet); what geological period it lived in (based on the age of the sediment where the footprint is found); and its approximate size and weight (based on the size and depth of the footprint).”..About.com Dinosaurs

Early American naturalist Edward Hitchcock wrongly interpreted the thousands of dinosaur footprints that he encountered on the America plains as the footprints of giant, flightless birds who roamed the Americas in giant herds. His mistaken hypothesis was taken up by a number of other naturalists for a time.

Here however, the Ancient Chinese somehow rightly associated dinosaur footprints with large dragon and dinosaur-like reptiles….

On the right here we compare the two right footprints of our Liao Dynasty dragon with those of the dinosaur. My guess is that the Ancient Chinese did not have to look at ancient tracks on the plain to figure out what sorts of creatures made them. The creatures; dinosaurs were still living at that time.

 

 

Late Eastern Zhou Sauropod

“The Shang dynasty (1766 BC – 1027 BC) ruled parts of northern and central China. Its capital city was located at Anyang near the border of Henan from about 1384 BCE. This dynasty was based on agriculture; millet, wheat, and barley were the primary crops grown.

In addition to the crops, silkworms, pigs, dogs, sheep, and oxen were raised. Aside from their agricultural prowess, the Shang dynasty was also advanced in metallurgy. Bronze ships, weapons, and tools were found from that era.” Thinkquest

This Ancient Chinese ornamental box of bronze features an unmistakable depiction of a sauropod dinosaur. To be more precise, likely a prosauropod dinosaur. A version of the object appeared in the book (The Great Bronze Age of China, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980, p. 285.) Fong, Wen ed. This photo is from Zhengzhou, from the Henan Museum.

The sauropod dinosaurs are easily recognizable and difficult to miss, however, might science here again made its depictions of the creature to large? One alternative to consider is that the creature depicted is one of the group that modern science now calls prosauropods who among other things was generally smaller. The creature crawling up the side of the box is also making an appearance here out in the water in the introductory photo at the very top of the page.

Here also he is shown in comparison to several dinosaurs described as ancient Chinese prosauropods, extinct for over 65 million years.

Top, left Yunnanosaurus; “ a genus of prosauropod dinosaur from the Early to Middle Jurassic Period, a position in time that makes it one of the last prosauropods. It is closely related to Lufengosaurus. Known from two valid species, Yunnanosaurus ranged in size from 7 meters (23 feet) long and 2 m (6.5 ft) high to 13 m (42 ft) long in the largest species.” Yang Zhongjian (aka C. C. Young) discovered the first Yunnanosaurus skeletons in the Lufeng Formation of Yunnan, China…Wikipedia

Bottom, right: Yimenosaurus .”Along with its close contemporary, Jingshanosaurus, Yimenosaurus was one of the largest prosauropods, measuring about 30 feet from head to tail and weighing as much as two tons–not much compared to the plus-sized sauropods of the late Jurassic period, but beefier than most other prosauropods, which only weighed a few hundred pounds. Thanks to its numerous (and near-complete) fossil remains, Yimenosaurus is one of the better known herbivorous dinosaurs of early Jurassic Asia, rivaled only by another Chinese prosauropod, Lufengosaurus.”…Wikipedia

PHOTO;Lufengosaurus Skeleton

The point here is not so much to identify the actual species of prosauropod that the Eastern Zhou “dragon” represents but rather to show that the artist could have credibly meant to represent one of these animals which were thought to have gone extinct 65 million years prior to the Shang Dynasty. This crouching dragon was more likely a hidden dinosaur.

 

 

Han Dynasty Theropod Dinosaur

The Chinese dragon bronze sculpture (below right, faded) is on display at the Glendive dinosaur and fossil museum in Glendive, Montana.

It is dated to the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.-220 A.D.)and is approximately 2,000 years old. The piece looks remarkably like a Theropod dinosaur including the correct posture, dermal spines, and forearms that end in “hands”. It bears a remarkable resemblance to a Therizinosaur.

The larger and clearer photo of the figure to the left is a virtually identical artifact described as an “ancient Chinese artifact”. The item is for sale on EBAY. The seller claims that it is a bronze, ancient piece from the Bronze Age of China.

If the item is authentic, then it bears a close resemblance to a Therizinosaur with its exaggerated claws and bi pedal stance. One would have to be impressed that the ancient Chinese could have even mythologized a bi pedal dragon/dinosaur. (Note the “compare” drawing is actually of Harpymimus (Wikidino) which is basicallly the Chinese version of the same theropod dinosaur.)

 

 

Ancient Chinese Fu (Foo) Dogs/Lions and other Mysterious Buddhist Temple Creatures

Photo:Pair of Asian stoneware lions 18th century.(1700’s) Busacca Gallery.

Foo Dogs/Lions are neither dogs nor lions. No one is quite sure what they are/were other than mystical creatures. I’ve been interested in them for some time because they are so ubiquitous, because they appear elsewhere in the ancient world outside of China; in ancient India for instance.
From Wikipedia “Chinese guardian lions, known as Shishi lions (Chinese pinyin: shísh?; literally “stone lion”) or Imperial guardian lion, and often incorrectly called “Foo Dogs” in the West, are a common representation of the lion in pre-modern China.

They have traditionally stood in front of Chinese Imperial palaces, Imperial tombs, government offices, temples, and the homes of government officials and the wealthy, from the Han Dynasty (206 BC-AD 220), and were believed to have powerful mythic protective benefits. Pairs of guardian lions are still common decorative and symbolic elements at the entrances to restaurants, hotels, supermarkets and other structures, with one sitting on each side of the entrance”.

Photo: Wall at the Ellora Caves

Some time ago I was struck by the following description; from India of a dragon which seemed to picture a creature somewhat similar to the Chinese Foo Dog. Later I found a photo of this Temple scene which also seemed to match the written description of a living creature.

“This kind also have beards, and lift their necks on high, while their scales glitter like silver; and the pupils of their eyes consist of a fiery stone, and they say that this has an uncanny power for many secret purposes.

The plain specimen falls the prize of the hunters whenever it draws upon itself an elephant; for the destruction of both creatures is the result, and those who capture the dragons are rewarded by getting the eyes and skin and teeth.

In most respects they resemble the largest swine, but they are slighter in build and ‘flexible, and they have teeth as sharp and indestructible as those of the largest fishes.”

(See the creature on the far left of the photo above). The Life of Apollonius of Tyana Philostratus {220 AD}On the Existence of Dragons …. Upon his visit to India

Let’s cut to the chase; I may have discovered what these creatures were and they were not mythological as modern science can attest. However, they weren’t dinosaurs either-which is why it took so long for me to identify these particular Chinese/Indian dragons.

For the final section of this somewhat long article I modestly propose to unmask in fact two ancient “mythological creatures”-by name, both of whom it is claimed lived 255 -260 million years ago. One key in examining this upcoming visual evidence is to remember that modern science and modern scientific illustrators like to draw their retrospective animal recreations “unadorned”.

“Moschops (meaning calf face) is an extinct genus of therapsid that lived in the Late Permian, around 255 million years ago. Therapsids were proto-mammals (non-mammal synapsids), which were the dominant land animals. Five metres long, Moschops was the largest land animal of its time, a herbivore preyed on by other therapsids. Its remains were found in the Karoo region of South Africa.

Here is a photo of “dragons” on the temple roof in Ellora.

It was the largest land animal at the time, with a body length of around 5 metres (16 ft). It was a heavily-built herbivore with short, chisel-like teeth for cropping vegetation. The forelimbs sprawled outwards, like those of a modern lizard, but the hind limbs were more mammalian in form, being placed directly under the body. The diet of Moschops was mostly plants, sometimes eating meat.”

“Ellora (Marathi) is an archaeological site, 30 km (19 mi) from the city of Aurangabad in the Indian state of Maharashtra built by the Rashtrakuta dynasty. Well-known for its monumental caves, Ellora is a World Heritage SiteEllora represents the epitome of Indian rock-cut architecture.

The 34 “caves” – actually structures excavated out of the vertical face of the Charanandri hills. Buddhist, Hindu and Jain rock-cut temples and viharas and mathas were built between the 5th century and 10th century” Wikipedia….


Are you familiar with the flack that has been caused by the discovery of a stegosaurus depiction at Angkor Wat? “(or the ceratopsian at Muktinath Temple?

This “dinosaur”/dragon depiction is much older. Here is an up close picture of the Ellora Roof Dragon and moschops or a close relative. Moschops did not live over 250 million years ago. He lived within the history of mankind. He was created by God during the six days of creation.

One could literally crop a close picture of the Ellora dragon, label it Moschops and when it came up in image searches for moschops the internet searcher would be none the wiser.

Another group shot of the ellora roof dragon and moschops should make it even more clear that these creatures were living in India during the 5th century A.D.

How did I get in India talking about moschops when I started out writing about Chinese dinosaur/dragons? I have to confesds that initially I believed that the Foo Dogs of China and India were moschops or one of its close relatives.

This just proves that like paleontology, cryptozoological historical archaeology is not an exact science. It’s not even an exacpt pronunciation. I have come to believe that the Foo dogs/lions of China might have been another creature entirely.

Anteosaurus (meaning “previous or early reptile”) is the name given to an extinct genus of large carnivorous synapsid. It lived during the Capitanian epoch of the Middle Permian (266-260 million years ago) in what is now South Africa. They became extinct by the middle Late Permian.

Anteosaurus was a semi aquatic synapsid with a long tail and weak limbs, which indicate a lifestyle including water, much like that of a crocodile. Anteosaurus weighed approximately 500-600 kg and was around 5-6 m long…

Let’s compare a modern depiction of Antesaurus with an ancient one of the Foo Dog/lion.

There is a lot to like in this depiction of antesaurus as a possible model for the Food dog in China and India;.the musculature, the posture and the incisors to name a few.

This Marx toy version of Moschops by Marx toys is what first made me see a possible association with Moschops.

There are so many articles of ancient art that we didn’t get a chance to examine here that there will no doubt have to be, God willing a part two and three of this article.

These are the dinosaurs you seek.

I feel a disturbance in the farce.

 

Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaurs Part 2
Crouching Dragon, Hidden Dinosaur Part 3