Posts Tagged ‘cryptozooarchaeology’

No Your Dinosaurs! Who Knows for Certain What Dinosaurs Actually Looked Like? Nobody!
Except Perhaps the Eyewitnesses Responsible for the Ancient Dinosaur Art at the Peabody.

Amusing?, Church of Darwin, Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, s8int.com, Science, Sophistication of Ancestors, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Oct 19 2013


Isaiah 35:7
“And the parched ground shall become a pool, and the thirsty land springs of water; in the habitation of dragons, where each lay, shall be grass with reeds and rushes.”

           
“No Your Dinosaurs! Who Knows for Certain What Dinosaurs Actually Looked Like? Nobody! Except Perhaps the Eyewitnesses Responsible for the Ancient Dinosaur Art at the Peabody”. by Chris Parker, s8int.com
           

Before you vote; See the follow up to this article Holding On to the Faith of Darwin Though the Hand of God’s Dinosaurs Be Upon Thee

Did Ancient Artists See and Memorialize Dinosaurs In Their Art?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Prologue

In the movie; “The Princess Bride” an important character, Inigo has a conversation with the man in black during a sword fight and that conversation has become a trope in television and movies (convention or device used in creative works). The conversation goes something like this:

Inigo: “I admit it: you are better than I am!”
Man in Black: “Then why are you smiling?”
Inigo: “Because I know something you don’t know.”
Man in Black: “And what is that?”
Inigo: “I AM NOT LEFT HANDED” [Switches the sword to his right hand and starts driving him back]

I sometimes have the feeling that I am in Inigo’s position when I find myself in a conversation with someone about man and dinosaurs living at the same time.

“You believe that man and dinosaurs lived together at the same time within the last 10,000 years they’ll say incredulously”? Or perhaps they’ll say it sneeringly, or contemptuously or in some rare cases even sadly or compassionately.

They are quite certain that they have the upper hand, the science, the good sense, the pure knowledge the unmitigated certainty. They slap their foreheads. They roll their eyes. All that. They believe that they are winning this “fight”-discussion-debate because-come on! They may even be fellow believers.

They’re thinking that I have set science aside for some kind of blind faith belief in what science has said is impossible-for the sake of the Bible. They’re thinking I’m living in some anti-science anti-evidence bubble. However, as a Christian I have choices. I could believe as some Christian’s do that God created through evolution and that man and dinosaur did miss each other by millions of years.

I could believe that the dinosaurs were wiped out in the flood and thus man and dinosaur barely met. I could believe as some Christians do that God sent unbelievers a strong delusion because of their unbelief (Romans 1) and simply put the bones of animals that never existed in the ground in order to further delude them.

I could simply choose not to speak when this topic is raised thinking that as a Christian it is outside of my pay grade, that the answers are unknowable. I could choose to be cowed by the sheer numbers of people who unblinkingly accept the current paradigm.

Caption: The Real Postosuchus? See Below

But I know something they don’t know. I took a fact based approach. I went where the evidence took me and in this internet age the truth can be found. Many non-Christians don’t know that faith is supposed to be built- not on nothing as they assume—but on evidence. “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Heb 1:1

I have spent a lot of time sifting through the evidence in ancient history, the work of ancient “biologists” the articles in old newspapers and recently the evidence in world famous archaeological museums. The evidence is clear. The evidence is persuasive.

The evidence proves that dinosaurs and man lived together all over the world in the last few thousand years. Now, the Bible is a “type” of sword and in this dinosaur and man conversation we’re having they are the ones who don’t have the facts or the truth. There is a reason why I am smiling:– I AM NOT LEFT HANDED!

Peabody Museum Zoomorphic Stone Heads

Historians say that dragons appear in the history and art of virtually every ancient culture (as do stories of a great flood). Here’s an interesting fact along those lines; no matter what culture a piece of ancient art comes from everyone can instantly recognize a dragon. Isn’t that interesting? Here we have a supposedly completely mythological creature, a product of the imagination of man and culture and yet they agree across geography and time in the salient characteristics of their portrayals with the added peculiarity that everyone knows that they are dragons?

No modern artist who works for a science journal or a museum or is otherwise engaged in depicting dinosaurs from a few bones is going to draw a dragon-like creature. So, although dragons are reptilian, frightening sometimes preternaturally large creatures—and so are dinosaurs they don’t often look much alike when you get down to the details. But here’s the rub when it comes to that; no one living actually knows what dinosaurs looked like.

In prior articles on this topic we’ve often quoted Discover Magazine on this point;

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. Discover Magazine, What Did Dinosaurs Really Look Like? By William Speed Weed, Christopher Griffith|Friday, September 01, 2000

http://discovermagazine.com/2000/sep/featdino

Of course, Discover Magazine isn’t the only source that admits that science is just guessing when it puts forth a drawing or illustration of a dinosaur—particularly when many dinosaurs are only known from a few bones.

A new book entitled “All Yesterdays: Unique and Speculative Views of Dinosaurs and Other Prehistoric Animals” by paleo artists C.M Koseman and John Conway is a review of dinosaur depictions and misconceptions in science art and a speculation about potential alternate depictions. They are basically letting the reader in on their secret that the work they do is simply informed speculation.


In the photo on the right they freely speculate on how a dinosaur paleontologist might have interpreted the bones (absent muscle and soft parts) of the cow and the housecat (bottom).

This interpretation problem makes it tougher on “crypto-zoo-archaeologists” like me. My hypothesis that man and dinosaur lived during the same age and that the ancient peoples would have left evidence in the form of their art, history and artifacts is complicated by the fact that the work of paleo artists today might not match up with the work of the actual eyewitnesses living in the past.

Thus, for instance a dinosaur in an archaeological museum like Harvard’s Peabody Museum might be perfectly depicted by the ancient artist but not match up with current thinking on how that dinosaur looked and go unrecognized; categorized as zoomorphic, unknown, animal, mythological creature or simply reptile. (Actually my experience is that any depiction recognizable as a dinosaur or one which is deemed too close does not end up in the front room of the museum in any case).

For example, in eyewitness viewings of what I believe are living pterosaurs over the last few years some have described the creature the saw as “almost prehistoric looking”, which could mean that they saw a living creature that did not completely comport with modern illustrations of the creature.

Moche Culture Vase in the Form of…?

In the last few weeks I set out to prove my hypothesis at the Harvard Peabody, online archaeological museum site as well as at other online collection sites. The Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology at Harvard University “is steward to one of the oldest and largest collections of cultural objects in the Western Hemisphere”. Other online collections visited include, the Penn Museum, the Met and several Museums of Central and South America.

Could it be shown that creatures that are recognizable as dinosaurs and Not dragons-in the mythological sense are somehow going unnoticed in their online collections? Can we show how specific types of dinosaurs might have been erroneously depicted? In that case, the depiction would have to be close enough for an identification to be made.

In this article and shall we say “collection” I intend to show once again through the arts of ancient peoples that man and dinosaur lived together within the last 5,000 years—but only to the fair and open minded.

           
The Eyewitness to Recent, Ancient History Dinosaur Collection, Part 1

1)Chasmosaurus at the Museo Larco, Peru


Actually it is not a piece from the Peabody that I wish to start with. It is a piece from the Museo Larco that illustrates the points we have been making about identification and misidentification most clearly. (See complete vessel at top of this article).

The Larco Museum (Spanish: Museo Arqueológico Rafael Larco Herrera) is a privately owned museum of pre-Columbian art, located in the Pueblo Libre District of Lima, Peru. The museum is housed in an 18th-century vice-royal building built over a 7th-century pre-Columbian pyramid.

The Inca civilization spanned the period of 1438 to 1533 in pre-Columbian South America. That would make this piece between 500 to 600 years old.

Inca Pot Water Carrier Lima
Museo Larco, Peru

I believe that the animal atop this Inca water carrier (and atop this article) is a ceratopsian dinosaur of a type similar to Chasmosaurus particularly given the placement of its horn and the shape of its frill. Ceratopsians might have broken down neatly into the categories now suggested by science or they could have been as widely divergent as dogs are today. They may have been sexually dimorphic and animals identified as belonging to another species may have only been sexually dimorphic or juvenile versions of other science-identified species.

“Chasmosaurus (/?kæzm??s?r?s/ KAZ-mo-SAWR-?s) is a genus of ceratopsid dinosaur from the Upper Cretaceous Period of North America. Its name means ‘opening lizard’, referring to the large openings (fenestrae) in its frill (Greek chasma meaning ‘opening’ or ‘hollow’ or ‘gulf’ and sauros meaning ‘lizard’). With a length of 4–5 metres (13–16 ft) and a weight of 2 tonnes (2.2 short tons), Chasmosaurus was a ceratopsian of average size. Like all ceratopsians, it was purely herbivorous. It was initially to be called Protorosaurus, but this name had been previously published for another animal.

All specimens of Chasmosaurus were collected from the Dinosaur Park Formation of the Dinosaur Provincial Park of Alberta, Canada. C. russelli comes from the lower beds of the formation while C. belli comes from middle and upper beds. “…Wikipedia


Let me explain what I believe that you’re looking at. It is a ceratopsian dinosaur similar to the Chasmosaurus. It is 500 years old. The right horn has broken off and is probably what is seen on the animal’s right side from the reader’s perspective.

The heavy ceratopsian tail curls up at the back and the animal fits in terms of body shape and tail for a ceratopsian. The animal has a crest and you should be able to see that the complete head, ending behind the horns includes a solid neck frill ending in a ‘V” shape similar to that of the chasmosaurus. In the photo on the left I have thoughtfully replaced the animals missing horn. The artist took pains to make sure that the ceratopsian toes were outlined for the viewer as well.

I believe what we have here is a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur that differs slightly from what one expects given modern depictions. The beak is slightly less pronounced-but evident. The horns are actually in the exact place on its head as the horns on modern Chasmosaurus depictions. The creature has growths (possibly pre-horn?) growths on the front of its face that are not seen on ceratopsian depictions.

This is clearly a depiction of a ceratopsian dinosaur by an actual eyewitness some 500 years ago in pre Columbian South America. It should be noted that all the ceratopsia were supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

           

2)Peabody Museum ”6,000 to 7,000 Year Old” Ceramic Bottle with Bi-Pedal Dinosaur (Iguanodon?) from South America

“Peabody Number: 90-27-30/54866
Display Title: Black ware stirrup spouted vase
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic bottle, stirrup spout, chipped rim, animal effigy, molded body, lying on its side.
Classification:
Stirrup spout
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
South America/Peru
Materials: Ceramic


The earliest ceramics known from the Americas have been found in the lower Amazon Basin. Ceramics from the Caverna de Pedra Pintada, near Santarém, Brazil, have been dated to 7,500 to 5,000 years ago. Ceramics from Taperinha, also near Santarém, have been dated to 7,000 to 6,000 years ago.” Peabody Museum

This appears to me quite clearly to represent some type of bi-pedal theropod dinosaur. Here we show the artifact on its side so that the identification of this dinosaur is more easily made.
The trio below is shown with two versions of the dinosaur iguanodon, a bi-pedal dinosaur which has been found in North America.

Distinctive features of iguanodon include large thumb spikes, which were possibly used for defence against predators, combined with long prehensile fifth fingers able to forage for food…Wikipedia.

Unfortunately that part of the sculpture has been worn away-like noses in Egyptian artifacts. Part of the tail has apparently broken off as well. I believe that this piece represents a bi pedal theropod dinosaur like iguanodon or a relative.

           

3)Postosuchus Sculpted by Pre Columbians From the Period AD 500-1350 at The Walters Art Museum?
The creature displayed at the top of the pre Columbian incense burner could be called a dragon, a crocodilian (the museum I.D.) or a mythical creature–but no one who believes that dinosaurs and their alleged ancestors died out more than 65 million years ago would ever think of this as a recently extinct, living creature.

Taking that point of view it is easy to ignore the reptilian/dinosaur like armor, the teeth which no lizard ever sported and the distinct horns. In looking at the creature carefully with the assumption that a living creature was being depicted a tentative crypto-zoo-archaeological identification is that of an archosaur like postosuchus.


Postosuchus, meaning “crocodile from Post”, is an extinct genus of rauisuchian reptiles…Postosuchus is a member of the clade Pseudosuchia, the lineage of archosaurs that includes modern crocodilians (the other main group of archosaurs is Avemetatarsalia, the lineage that includes non-avian dinosaurs and their descendants, birds). Its name refers to Post Quarry, a place in Texas where many fossils of the type species, P. kirkpatricki, were found…

Although the heavy build of the skeleton suggests that Postosuchus walked on all four limbs, the extreme shortness of the forelimbs relative to the hind limbs is a strong indication that Postosuchus was able to walk on two legs…Postosuchus possessed heterodonty dentition, which means each tooth was different in size and shape from the others.

A feature of the skull of postosuchus is a “crest” over each eye. Modern artists have had to decide how to draw or illustrate that skull feature and most have not significantly featured them. This piece from the Walters Art Museum has “eye crests” like those of postosuchus which are more clearly featured as crests above each eye.

In other pieces we’ve noted the three toes of a depiction which were similar to dinosaur toes. Postosuchus actually had a different manus and pes than did the dinosaurs. In the minds of scientists postosuchus and its relatives actually preceded the dinosaurs. Of course, most creationists believe that they lived at the same time.


The Museum Description: This incense burner is topped with the portrayal of a caiman or other member of the Crocodylidae family, one of the frequent animal spirit forms of Central American shamans. Its particularly aggressive stance may refer to the practitioner’s battle against supernatural forces.

Many such incense burners were found ritually broken on the slopes of a principal volcano on the island of Ometepe in Lake Nicaragua, the incense burner lid with its smoke issuing from the top mimicking an active volcano.


Among peoples from southern Nicaragua to Mesoamerica the earth was likened to the back of a crocodile floating in the primordial sea, its dorsal scutes being the volcanic north-south backbone that defines the continents of the Western Hemisphere. This incense burner, then, constitutes a profound ritual vessel pertaining to the transition from the natural to the supernatural realms and a symbolic model of the ancient Costa Rican world.


Uh, huh. That’s pretty complicated. Maybe it’s just a depiction of some exceptional local fauna of the time; an or perhaps a small dinosaur of unknown type. Certainly if this same depiction appeared on a site featuring artists renditions of dinosaurs this piece would not be out of place.

The photos above show comparisons of the ancient art work with modern depictions of postosuchus (without the strong “crests” and body armor and in comparison to the skull and the full skeleton of postosuchus. The comparisons appear to me to show a similarity of this depiction with that of one of the archosaurs–such as postosuchus. The feet are not those of a dinosaurs (many are three toed) but the feet of the animal depicted do correspond to that of our identification.

           

4)Nayarit Chinesco “Embryonic Dog” May Be Baby Sauropod


Nayarit is a state in western Mexico. The Nayarit culture from which this artifact comes is from the period 300 B.C. to 400 A.D.—or even older. This piece is said to represent an embryonic dog. Another identification would seem to be in order for this piece.

           
For one thing, dogs do not have necks this long. Here I’ve shown it in comparison to an animal that really did have such a long neck; the sauropod dinosaur.

Nayarit Chinesco Pottery Painted Embryonic Dog
Online Collections Auction
Auction date November 2012
Pre-Columbian, West Mexico, Ca. 300 BC to 200 AD.
Buff pottery, unique representation, elastic form.
Surface has traces of original polychrome color.
Provenance: Ex-Dr. R. Boyd Stifler, Vanderwagen NM.
Rare specimen Authenticity Guaranteed
Condition:Some wear to surface and with nice dendrite
deposits.”..Online Collections

Recently a sauropod embryo was found and the sauropod embryo depicted comes from the “Tiniest Giants: Discovering Dinosaur Eggs”.

Sauropods are supposed to have gone extinct 65 million years ago.

           

5)Ancient Pueblo Culture (1200 B.C.-1500 A.D.) Native Americans of What is Now Arizona Craft Dinosaur Named Aetosaur; Most of Whose Fossils Have Been Found in Arizona

           
Aetosaur Skeleton Top and Ancient Pueblo Artifact below.


“The Pueblo people are Native American people in the Southwestern United States comprising several different language groups and two major cultural divisions, one organized by matrilineal kinship systems and the other having a patrilineal system.

These determine the clan membership of children, and lines of inheritance and descent. Their traditional economy is based on agriculture and trade. At the time of Spanish encounter in the 16th century, they were living in villages that the Spanish called pueblos, meaning “towns””…Wikipedia

This piece comes from a 1936 expedition to the Hopi reservation and was determined to be from one of the Pueblo Native American cultures. It is described by the Peabody Museum as “zoomorphic”. Looking at a list of dinosaur fossils found in Arizona one can quickly see that there is a similarity between the archaeological piece and –the aetosaur. (Angle of aetosaur skeleton head adjusted for comparison purposes.)

“Aetosaurs order name Aetosauria from Greek, ????? (aetos, “eagle”) and ?????? (sauros, “lizard”)) are an extinct order of heavily armoured, medium- to large-sized Late Triassic herbivorous archosaurs. They have small heads, upturned snouts, erect limbs, and a body covered by plate-like scutes. All aetosaurs belong to the family Stagonolepididae.

Most fossils have been found from Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas…Wikipedia

.

Here is a sobering fact for those of us who can accept the fact that the ancient Pueblo people of Arizona actually saw and depicted an aetosaur which supposedly lived from 200 million years ago becoming extinct 65 million years or more ago;


“Since their armoured plates are often preserved and are abundant in certain localities, aetosaurs serve as important Late Triassic tetrapod index fossils. Many aetosaurs had wide geographic ranges, but their stratigraphic ranges were relatively short. Therefore, the presence of particular aetosaurs can accurately date a site that they are found in.”

You see the problem? Aetosaurs were roaming around the North American continent during the span of the Pueblo peoples; 1200 B.C. to 1500 A.D. and one of their artists memorialized the aetosaur in ceramic.

Peabody Number: 36-131-10/8060
Display Title: Zooomorphic black on white potsherd–animal form
Inventory Description: Ceramic, zoomorphic figurine, with tail, opened mouth, two feet, black painted design on back and sides
Classification: Figurine
Department: Archaeological
Culture/Period: Pueblo
Geography/Provenience: North America/United States/Arizona/Navajo County/Hopi Reservation/Antelope Mesa/Awatovi
Intrasite: Test 14
Geo-Locale: Antelope Mesa
Materials: Ceramic Pigment
Provenance: Dr. John Otis Brew (1936)
Provenance: Peabody Museum Expedition (1936)

           
6) Crested Hadrosaur Depiction by the Ancient Peoples of Costa Rica at the Peabody Museum. (Modern Artists May Need to Put Some Weight on the Bones of these Depictions)

Crested Dinosaurs are fairly easy to recognize. Most of the crested dinosaurs are from the Lambeosaurinae of the hadrosaur group. The hadrosaurs were also known as the duck billed dinosaurs.


This depiction forms the legs of an ancient pottery piece. The pot is from Costa Rica, Central America. The crests on the various types of lambosaurines differed in size and shape even among the same species and they likely differed due to age and due to sexual dimorphism.

The hadrosaurs depicted have relatively small, round crests. Here we compare them to a number of known lambeosaurines including corythsaurus.


It is interesting that the depictions are clearly of the same animal but that the portraits differ. The ancient depictions are similar to modern ones except for the apparent weight of the creatures and the size of the eyes depicted.

“Archaeologists now know that civilization existed in Costa Rica for thousands of years before the arrival of Columbus, and evidence of human occupation in the region dates back 10,000 years. Among the cultural mysteries left behind by the area’s pre-Columbian inhabitants are thousands of perfectly spherical granite bolas that have been found near the west coast.


The sizes of these inimitable relics range from that of a baseball to that of a Volkswagen bus. Ruins of a large, ancient city complete with aqueducts were recently found east of San Jose, and some marvelously sophisticated gold and jade work was being wrought in the southwest as far back as 1,000 years ago. Some archeological sites in the central highlands and Nicoya peninsula have shown evidence of influence from the Mexican Olmec and Nahuatl civilizations.

By the time Columbus arrived, there were four major indigenous tribes living in Costa Rica. The east coast was the realm of the Caribs, while the Borucas, Chibchas, and Diquis resided in the southwest. “..geographia.com

Peabody Number: 26-44-20/C9956
Display Title: Small pottery vessel
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic complete tripod jar, zoomorphic rattle feet (1 missing)
Classification: Jar
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
Central America/Costa Rica

           

7)A New Look at Dicynodont Therapsids Like Moschop from the Ancient Peoples Living I Peru, South America


The identity of this animal portrait was unknown apparently and thus it was given the general description “animal effigy” by the Harvard Peabody Museum. Was this animal purely a mythological one seen only in the imaginary eye of the artist—or was it seen with the artist’s actual eyes?

As you will see the depiction of the living therapsid is actually close enough to modern depictions of these types of creatures as to be readily identified. In appearance it is close to that of therapsids such as moschops which we know from fossils found in South Africa.

‘Moschops (Greek for “calf face”) is an extinct genus of therapsid that lived in the Guadalupian epoch, around 268-260 million years ago. Therapsids are synapsids which were at one time the dominant land animals. It was around 2.7 metres (8 ft 10 in) long..

….Moschops was heavily built, and had short, chisel-like teeth for cropping vegetation. Moschops mostly ate plants, but sometimes ate meat. The forelegs sprawled outwards, like those of a modern lizard, but the hind legs were under the body, like those of a mammal.” Wikipedia

Peabody Number: 46-77-30/5868
Display Title: Pottery animal figurine
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic whistle, animal effigy
Classification: Whistle
Department: Archaeological
Geography/Provenience:
South America/Peru/La Libertad Region///Sausal
Materials: Ceramic


Here we show the ancient, ceramic artifact in comparison to moschop and to another dicynodont therapsid. Moschops and therapsids similar to him supposedly went extinct before the dinosaurs even evolved. Clearly of this ancient Peruvian artifact represents one of these creatures something is extremely wrong with the evolutionary time scale.
           

8) Quapaw’s “Underwater Panther” from the 1500”s Could In Fact Be an Eyewitness Depiction of Dinosaur Such As Tenontosaurus


According to Wikipedia the Mississippian culture was a mound building group of indigenous people who lived in the Midwestern, Eastern, and Southeastern United States from approximately 800 A.D. to 1500 A.D. The collectors at Artsmia.org believe it to be a depiction of a mythological creature called an underwater panther. That makes these people seem “mystical” all right.

But what if it is an accurate depiction of an animal living at the time that we would call a dinosaur-rendered somewhat invisible as a depiction because modern versions of the creature differ greatly? Here is the museum description:

“The prominent colored swirls and eye motifs mark this animal as an Underwater Panther, one of the primary beings in the ancient Mississippian belief system and that of their descendants. The swirling pattern on its sides signifies water, while the eye markings allude to the animal’s unusually keen vision.

Red and white were symbolically significant colors that represented fundamental oppositions such as peace and war, light and dark and the on-going struggle between the celestial and subterranean realms. Underwater Panthers belonged to the subterranean and possessed great supernatural power. Their significance led Mississippian and subsequent artists to depict them frequently in many forms and media, including three-dimensional sculptures like this vessel. “

The toes of this creature appear to be triple toed-similar to a dinosaur. Its tail is very thick in the way dinosaur tails are often illustrated by modern paleo artists. I took a look to see what types of dinosaur fossils were prominent with respect to quadruped dinosaurs in those parts of the United States.


Here we show the “underwater panther” in comparison to tenontosaurus a genus of medium to large ornnithopod dinosaurs. It should be noted that there were a number of ornnithopod dinosaurs found to have lived in those parts of north America which would have had similar body shapes.

The genus tenontosaurus is known from the late Aptian to Albian ages of the middle Cretaceous period sediments of western North America, dating between 115 to 108 million years ago. It was formerly thought to be a ‘hypsilophodont’, but since Hypsilophodontia is no longer considered a clade, it is now considered to be a very primitive iguanodont.

The teeth of this portrait do give me pause. The point is however not that we know the specific type of dinosaur that was sculpted, but rather that it is more likely that it is a dinosaur being depicted here rather than an underwater panther (which itself sounds like a cryptid).

Vessel
Artist Unknown (Quapaw)
(United States, North America), c. 1500
Ceramic, pigment
9 1/8 x 10 3/8 x 5 1/4 in. (23.18 x 26.35 x 13.34 cm)
The William Hood Dunwoody Fund 2004.33

           

9)Metropolitan Museum of Asian Art’s Sauropod Dinosaur from Iran 250 B.C. to 225 A.D.


This artifact is from the Metropolitan Museum of Asian art and is labeled “zoomorphic”. I’m somewhat surprised that they didn’t call it a camel. Clearly however it is a sculpted ceramic in the form of a sauropod dinosaur.

Sauropod dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago according to science. This piece was estimated to have been made between 250 B.C. and 225 A.ZD. That period obviously covers the time of Christ.

Zoomorphic vessel
250 B.C.E.- 225 C.E.
Parthian period
Ceramic
H: 15.2 W: 28.4 D: 12.1 cm
Northern Iran, Northern Iran S1987.944

           

10) Ulisse Aldrovandi’s Detailed Drawing of A Long Tailed Pterosaur; Before They Were “Discovered” By Science

Ulisse Aldrovandi (also Aldrovandus) was born in 1522 and died in 1605. He is sometimes referred to as the father of natural history studies. By profession he was a professor of philosophy but eventually became one of the first professors of the natural sciences at Bologna (no offense intended).


Ulisse died 250 years before the first pterosaur was discovered by a scientist and he mistakenly thought it was a sea going creature. It was not until the beginning of the 19th century that science realized that pterosaurs were flying creatures.

“The first pterosaur fossil was described by the Italian naturalist Cosimo Collini in 1784. Collini misinterpreted his specimen as a seagoing creature that used its long front limbs as paddles.

A few scientists continued to support the aquatic interpretation even until 1830, when the German zoologist Johann Georg Wagler suggested that Pterodactylus used its wings as flippers. Georges Cuvier first suggested that pterosaurs were flying creatures in 1801, and coined the name “Ptero-dactyle” in 1809 for the specimen recovered in Germany.” …Wikipedia

After his death his book Serpentum, et draconum historiæ Serpentum, et Draconum was published. In it, was a drawing supposedly from life (well it was dead!) of a dragon which comports very well with a long tailed, crested pterosaur especially given that Aldrovandi was a philosopher and naturalist –and not an artist.

The interesting thing about Aldrovandi’s pterosaur is that it has the crest of the pteranodon and the tail of one of the long tailed rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Although we don’t know this exact pterosaur from science it closely matches modern day eyewitness descriptions and drawings of a long tailed pterosaur. (There are long tail crested pterosaurs known to science but none with the classic bone sticking out the back of its head kind).

Note what might look like another set of small wings at the legs of Aldrovandi’s dragon. It is shown here in the more modern drawing between the pteranodon’s legs. That is called the uropatagium; and since it does not appear on birds it is one indication that Aldrovandi actually saw what he drew.

“some pterosaur groups had a membrane that stretched between the legs, possibly connecting to or incorporating the tail, called the uropatagium; the extent of this membrane isn’t certain, as studies on Sordes seem to suggest that it simply connected the legs but did not involve the tail (rendering it a cruropatagium). It is generally agreed though that non-pterodactyloid pterosaurs had a broader uro/cruropatagium, with pterodactyloids only having membranes running along the legs; Pteranodon in particular might have developed/redeveloped an uropatagium, given the structure of the tail”..Wikipedia

The picture on the right (above) shows Aldrovandi’s dragon compared to Eskin Kuhn’s drawing (bottom, right) from his eyewitness sighting in the 1970’s. Kuhn was an artist and a soldier stationed at Guantanmo Bay, Cuba. His “pteranodon” had both the backwards facing “crest” and the long tail with tail vain of the rhamphorhynchoid pterosaurs. Top right is a modern drawing of a pteranodon without the long tail. Aldrovandi has the tail, crest and bat like wings of a pterosaur.
           

11) Peabody Museum Seeks to Make an Ancient Veraguas Culture Dinosaur Evolve Into a Bird Right Before Our Eyes

The “Bird” effigy ceramic whistle (middle) is from the ancient Veraguas Culture of Panama. That culture inhabited Panama from approximately 700 A.D. to 1530 A.D.

“This culture inhabited the central region of what is now province of Veraguás in Panama. The area extends from the Pacific to the Caribbean coast and includes a number of islands. The climate here is mainly humid and tropical, and the landscape includes wooded areas and valleys suitable for agriculture, as well as high mountains, hilly areas, and coastal lowlands.” Museo Chileno de Arte Precolombino


The ceramic sculpture with three legs does not have the correct number for either the bird (two) or the crested hadrosaur (four). My take is that given the teeth (which birds do not have) and the thick tail this is not a depiction of a bird but rather of a crested hadrosaur such as corythosaurus.

The single combined front legs represent the two front legs of the creature and this is not uncommon with pre Columbian art. One can certainly decide for his or her self.

Peabody Number: 39-90-20/6461
Display Title: Pottery bird effigy whistle. Light brown, probably faded from red.
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic whistle, animal effigy with tripod legs
Classification: Ceramic
Department: Archaeological
Culture/Period: Veraguas
Geography/Provenience: Central America/Panama/Veraguas

           

12)Plesiosaur or Dinosaur? Mythological or Cryptozoological?


Here are a number of ancient artifacts that do beg the question; sea monster or dinosaur. It may not be clear what animal the artist has in mind but I believe that they so clearly mirror what modern day artists see as dinosaurs and marine reptiles that they simply cannot be imaginary creatures.

The ancient artist in each case intended to represent an actual living creature and they must have expected the beholder to recognize what the creature was as well. In each of these examples only a portion of the animal is sculpted making the crypto detective work more difficult.

In situations like these the museum or the auction house usually leaves this kind of speculation to the viewer but often uses the term “zoomorphic” as the description. Often as well they will name a creature for which if it were truly what the ancient artist intended he/she would have proven to be a terrible artist. That should drive down prices!

Christie’s auction house described this artifact as a horse which may seem reasonable at first but no horse would have that long a neck. Alternative identifications include the plesiosaur or a dinosaur. Plesiosaurs of course supposedly went extinct around 65 million years ago as did it is claimed, the dinosaur.

The artifact is thought to have come from the period of up to 1,000 Years before Christ.

Christie’s
• Overview
• Features
Lot Description
ANCIENT NEAR EASTERN TERRACOTTA ZOOMORPHIC RHYTON
CIRCA LATE 1ST MILLENNIUM B.C.

One in the form of a seated camel, black glazed, carrying two jars on either side of its back; another in the form of a horse, a strap handle joining the rim to the back of the vessel, a perforation at the top of the head forming the spout, 16 cm. high max.; an Amlash terracotta steatopygous idol, possibly 2nd Millenium B.C., 20.5 cm. high, mounted (repaired); and a bull rhyton, not ancient, 15 cm. high (4)

This item is described as a “serpent” effigy bowl; perhaps a “sea serpent”?


This pottery piece has been categorized as Neeley’s Ferry which are artifacts of one of the ancient group of State of Arkansas cultures. Ancient peoples are thought to have lived in Arkansas between 600 B.C. and 1600 A.D.

The Peabody specifically dated the artifact between 1350 and 1550.

This piece is further described as an earthen bowl, animal. The animal has a head with teeth giving the appearance of either a sea creature with long winding tail or perhaps a dinosaur.


Peabody Number: 80-20-10/21621
Display Title: Neeley’s Ferry serpent effigy bowl head and tail start on body & on short axis
Descriptions:
Inventory Description: Ceramic, complete vessel, bowl, mended, serpent head and tail
Object Description: Earthen bowl, animal. Neeley’s Ferry serpent effigy bowl, head and tail start on body, tail turned on itself, head and tail on short axis.
Classification: Bowl
Department: Archaeological
Date: A.D. 1350 – 1550
Culture/Period: Parkin Phase
Geography/Provenience: North America/United States/Arkansas/Cross County//Halcomb’s Mounds; Arkansas State Intrasite: Grave, 18 inches deep; 2 feet from river

Above shows our “sea monster” at another angle which provides additional detail concerning the shape of the head and tail. By the way, seals have fins and flippers not “tails”.

This final piece is also from the Neeley’s Ferry mounds and is described as a “ceramic effigy vessel of zoomorphic design”.


This artifact was found in a gravesite buried three feet below ground level and has been dated from the period between 1350-1550.

As you can see it is very reminiscent of modern paleoartist’s depiction of theropod or meat eating dinosaurs. Of course, we only have the head but is it possible that the artist saw and knew about a then living version of such a creature?

Or is it more believable that this is an effigy of a mythological animal which accidently reminds us of modern ideas about how dinosaurs looked?

Peabody Number: 80-20-10/21195
Display Title: Ceramic effigy vessel, zoomorphic design
Descriptions: Inventory Description: Ceramic effigy vessel, zoomophic design
Classification: Effigy
Department: Archaeological
Date: A.D. 1350 – 1550
Culture/Period: Parkin Phase
Geography/Provenience:North America/United States/Arkansas/Cross County//Neeley’s Ferry Mounds; Arkansas State # 3CS24
Intrasite: Grave, 3 feet deep Geo-Locale: Saint Francis River, West side of
Materials: Ceramic
Collector: Edwin Curtiss (01/01/1880)

           

Bonus: Nicoya, Pre Columbian Incense Burner Maker Tops Reptilian Artifact with Feet of a Theropod Dinosaur Which is Quite A Feat for Someone Who Missed Dinosaurs by 65M Years



Top left is a pre Columbian Censer (Incensario), from the 10th–12th century. There are many examples of this type of pre Columbian censer topped by a dragon/dinosaur. The excellent example at the top left is at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. If you take the time you can see the full body of a quadruped, dinosaur like creature with an extremely ornate crest or horns. This is typical of these artifacts.

No matter how un crocodile like the animal perched at the top is this type of vessel is known as either alligator or crocodile ware and elaborate stories have been concocted by archaeologists about the sacred nature of crocodiles and alligators in the pre Columbian cultures. Here’s a quote describing the object, top left by the Met.

The flare-footed, spherical bowl of this ceramic censer is enhanced, in silhouette, by the flamboyance of its chimney. Textured, appliqué bands encircle and emphasize the tall smoothness of the chimney. On the perforated cap rests an elaborate crested crocodilian. Smoke from the incense that was burned in the bowl escaped through the holes of the cap and from openings in the animal’s body. The rhythmical texture of the appliqué visually unites it with the surface of the creature’s body where the nubby portions are taken to represent the scutes of the reptile.

Both textured appliqués and scutes are surfaced in white. The spiky crest that surrounds the head is customarily found in incensarios of this period. Crocodilians frequently appear in Costa Rican art, strongly suggesting the supernatural import of these creatures in ancient times…The Met

On the Top right is a photo of one of those pre Columbian artifacts, Nicoya, an incense burner.
what is interesting about the artifact on the top, right is that a close up of the animals feet (bottom left) reveal and striking similarity of its feet as sculpted to that of the theropod dinsoaurs (bottom, right) and unlike those of lizards-or crocodiles.

           

Conclusion: There are hundreds if not thousands of artifacts in museums around the world containing representations of extinct creatures that we now called dinosaurs. The most obvious examples are labeled as fakes and are in provide collections.

Those that are not obvious dinosaurs are labeled dragons, unknown, zoomorphic, mythological, animal etc. Of course many artifacts are just those things. The issue is that when a group (archaeologists) are absolutely convinced that these animals lived millions of years ago all evidence will be viewed to reflect that belief and those that don’t will be reinterpreted, labeled or hidden away.

In any case if you should find that even one of the items in our collection is a dinosaur-or that a dinosaur is the most likely explanation that one should be enough to make you question the current scientific history control. But we understand that bucking the system is difficult to do.

Since I began with a quote from the Princess Bride it might be appropriate to finish with a modified version of another such quote:

Big Science: We face each other as God intended. Sportsmanlike. No tricks, no weapons, skill against skill alone. (not actually a believer)
Believer: You mean, you’ll put down your rock and I’ll put down my sword, and we’ll try to convince each other like civilized people-with facts and evidence?
Big Science; [brandishing rock (public opinion, science mythology, ridicule] I could just wipe you out now.
Believer: Frankly, I think the odds are slightly in your favor at hand fighting.
Big Science: It’s not my fault being the biggest and the strongest. I don’t even exercise.

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