GameBanshee Forums

I agree, Gwally Now, we only lack that Sasquatch - Australopithecines descendants-hypothesis

Originally posted by C Elegans
I agree, Gwally Now, we only lack that Sasquatch - Australopithecines descendants-hypothesis

...And an appearance by the Piltdown Man!

Originally posted by fable

...And an appearance by the Piltdown Man!

Gaaah!

ROFL

Originally posted by fable

Not really too good an example. Galileo was an arrogant bas!ard who occasionally took theories from others without giving credit. He ignored other scientists when they couldn't do him any advantage, and approached them slavishly if they could. When the current Pope suggested that the Ptlomaic theory of planetary revolution (involving spheres) and earth-centrism could quite possibly stand alongside the solar theory and that both might be correct, seen from different vantage points, Galileo just had to write these remarks alongside highly sarcastic replies that were sent to scientists all over Europe. Of course, this was a slap in the face to the very people who had supported him--for Galileo did have the favor and support of the Church up until that moment. But he so angered and polarized the RCC that his ideas were subsequently rejected out of hand.

The only reason I used Galileo was because he was the first example that came to mind of what happens when the status quo view is challenged. If anyone has a better example of someone who challenged the accepted worldview and got slammed for it, that example would serve just as well if not better.

My point was, if for instance evidence was ever found of some creature that could possibly have served as the basis for the dragon legends; or if evidence was ever found of a ruined place that could possibly have inspired the Atlantis tales, etc. etc. etc. -- that evidence will never be accepted, because we are bound and determined to believe that such things were pure myth. I think human beings are very, very reluctant to change their views on such things.

@Der-draigen, that's a bit unfair, as a reply to my post. I think it was pretty evident I didn't mean that one should stop looking for evidence. This is what I wrote:

This isn't to say that unicorns, or people with faces pointing backwards, never existed. But merely because a bunch of books once quoted each other and the same, single ancient Roman or Greek reference, doesn't make it so. By that same token, the absence of evidence doesn't mean such creatures never existed. But a sound case for their existence really requires more than just a hope.

So I'm not suggesting you shouldn't cease to look, or cease to keep in mind the possibility of their existence. All I was saying is that hope doesn't constitute evidence, and that if you wish to convince others of this possibility, some evidence would help.

I know you didn't mean one should stop looking for evidence But again -- I don't believe evidence is necessary in order to admit a possibility. Evidence is necessary to admit a probability, but not a possibility. Take a criminal case, for example -- Much evidence is needed before it can be determined that the person on trial is probably guilty of the crime. However, the very fact that the person has been arrested and is on trial admits to a possibility that he is guilty, yes?...

Personally, I think one has to admit possibility as an impetus to gathering evidence. Otherwise the evidence will be discounted. This is what I meant when I said that science needs to keep an open mind and be willing to change its current views.

Originally posted by fable
Let me throw another possibility, wild as it is, into the mix of thoughts on legendary creatures. What if they did exist, but seldom on any level of phyiscal reality? What if they were primarily limited to other "planes or conditions of existence?"

This concept of differing planes is not too far from a prevailing religious interpretation. As Marlowe so astutely noted in his Doktor Faust, Hell is not necessarily a single place, put a condition of existence that travels with its denizens, wherever they may go. Ancient Greek initiates of various religious groups said they moved to other levels of reality after undergoing rites, which let them see or hear things that were normally beyond their understanding. Popular Islam adopted the pre-Islamic idea of fire elementals, Djinni, who were servants of Iblis (often identified with Shaitan, or Satan) and existed in their own pocket dimension--when they weren't consigned to bottles, lamps, and other objects by the great Sulieman the Wise (the Judeo-Christian King Solomon) under curses to serve those who freed them.

In more recent times, after the Greek concept of the Empedoclean Elements became a popular part of Renaissance "science," different creatures were attributed to each of four dimensions: earth, air, fire and water. The great sculptor and goldsmith Benvenuto Cellini writes in his Memoirs that his father once backhanded him across his face, to get him to remember something he saw: a salamander, a small fire-dimensional being, jumping in their fireplace, before vanishing. Of course, Cellini was also a large-scale liar when it suited his own interests.

So who is to say that dragons didn't manifest at a time when humanity had less hold over the world, and the links with other dimensions were less tenuous? That under the right conditions, creatures might move into our own reality--or possibly from our world, into another?

Interesting and well worth exploring, I think. I agree that it would be difficult for dragons to teleport into our plane with all the electronic interference nowadays

Fable, I believe you are misplacing causation. I’m familiar with the discovery of what might be more ancient trade routes than previously thought, but how do you support your speculation of what ideas traveled along these routes and in what direction?

Seems to me you don’t. It’s a case of showing how something could be true, but failing to apply Occam’s razor. If the choices are Europe borrowing dragons from the east but morphing them from lucky to malevolent creatures without any leaving any trace of the transition, or Europeans picking dragons up from nearer sources such as the Greek draco, the Babylonian Tiamat, and biblical stories, I’ll place a bet on the latter until new evidence is introduced.

Strange Creatures indeed....

.....behold ..."The age of fable" .

No worries,

Beldin

Re: Strange Creatures indeed....

Originally posted by Beldin
.....behold ..."The age of fable" .

And did you get my great-aunt's permission to run that picture of her before using it, hmmmmm?