Ah yes, I didn't explain myself fully.
I meant, yes, Terror, the actual bible as a collection of writings first popped up about 2 thousand years ago, but many biblical writings, such as that of Noah and the Ark (which dates back to the Sumerians) existed WAYYYYY before then.

I should have went to college and taken those courses like I'd planned... then I'd be able to read the origional and wouldn't have to rely on other people to translate it.

I wish it were that simple. The bible has had so many changes to it, and so few of the original writings exist, that even a Hebrew translation is still as messed up as the modern Western translations.

Now, to
It just occured to me that this thread talks about the Inca people encountering dinosaurs. I seemed to have it in my head that it was talking about the Mayans.
I have no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of places in the Andes mountain range remote enough to support the continued existence of a dinosaurian creature.

[Kadesh]

 All of this based on the wrong people?  Nice.   

This thread interests me greatly. There is a large possibility of some of the more remote areas of the Andes being able to support the existence of a small population of dinosaur descendants.

[Kadesh]

 If I find a baby one, I'm so bringing it home!! I wanna pet one!!!!!!!!!

 Sorry... I get a little crazy about my mini zoo.

 That would be an amazing discovery indeed. Well worth the investment.
 

[TheTerror]

Ah yes, I didn't explain myself fully.
I meant, yes, Terror, the actual bible as a collection of writings first popped up about 2 thousand years ago, but many biblical writings, such as that of Noah and the Ark (which dates back to the Sumerians) existed WAYYYYY before then.

I should have went to college and taken those courses like I'd planned... then I'd be able to read the origional and wouldn't have to rely on other people to translate it.

I wish it were that simple. The bible has had so many changes to it, and so few of the original writings exist, that even a Hebrew translation is still as messed up as the modern Western translations.

Now, to
It just occured to me that this thread talks about the Inca people encountering dinosaurs. I seemed to have it in my head that it was talking about the Mayans.
I have no doubt in my mind that there are plenty of places in the Andes mountain range remote enough to support the continued existence of a dinosaurian creature.

Ok sorry

[LeXtruX]

Bleh... I respect your opnion and your information.......... but I still say it's bullshyt. 

a bit of a late reply seeying this topic is 120+ days old
But it might be possible...
It could have been so that dinosaurs survived in southern america due to it's remote location??? But even still, it might have been a very advanced civilization of humanoids living with them who could have been reptiles at the time and not humans... if that were to be true it would mean that during the ages of the dinosaurs there were already intelligent lifeforms right???

And don't say: it's impossible, because it is! if they were resided in southern america it's more than normal we haven't found any fosile leftovers of them... we haven't  discovered everything in the amazon either...

The fact those 'drawings' are made to last thousands or maybe millions of years can only mean the engineering must have been very advanced that you can't put a pin between 2 stones, and that not something you can take lightly...

They knew surgery and such? you need to be advanced to be able to do that, with all the risk of bacterial infections you might get when being operated.

I'm not wanting to give a reply of truth here, but if you follow my way of thinking it may well be true in some way

[KubeSix]

Well.... If it's a worldwide cataclysm that killed off the dinosaurs, South America being remote shouldn't matter so much. (And other than the mountains, most of South America is pretty accessible as far as I know... I dunno how it was back then (obviously), but with all its rivers, the jungle wouldn't really make it remote or anything.) I mean, easily accessible or not, a tsunami or meteor shockwave wipes out pretty much anything, right?

Then again, dinosaurs exist today still. Crocs, birds, (Nessy? ), they're what the dinosaurs became, so who knows what could've been there when the Inca were around....

[BowAndArrow]

I apologize, but if this thread is having any approach on the human race being present with dinosaurs. I disagree. Dinosaurs never had and never WILL walk along side humans. They are so many years apart in existance. Thinking "Oh, prove why these 'relics' have dinosaurs on them?" I am sorry, but they are most likely a hoax, or if those 'people' had any scientific knowledge what-so-ever, it may have been in their mental capacity to imagine or base off bones, just as the human race today does. I am not taking sides here, well I sort of am. But this is just ridiculous. Literally, if you want to get all scientific, you look at the bone layers. See when you look back to even the late Cretaceous period, there is no scientific evidence that humans existed among dinosaurs at that time (well, civil, human humans anyway). Nor is there evidence that some dinosaurs survived whatever caused the mass extinction (No, I am not going to get into Nessy-The lochness monster here. Please take that out of your mind now) what-so-ever. So, long words short, I disagree in there being any realism in these stones.

[BowAndArrow]

Bleh... I respect your opnion and your information.......... but I still say it's bullshyt. 

a bit of a late reply seeying this topic is 120+ days old
But it might be possible...
It could have been so that dinosaurs survived in southern america due to it's remote location??? But even still, it might have been a very advanced civilization of humanoids living with them who could have been reptiles at the time and not humans... if that were to be true it would mean that during the ages of the dinosaurs there were already intelligent lifeforms right???

And don't say: it's impossible, because it is! if they were resided in southern america it's more than normal we haven't found any fosile leftovers of them... we haven't  discovered everything in the amazon either...

The fact those 'drawings' are made to last thousands or maybe millions of years can only mean the engineering must have been very advanced that you can't put a pin between 2 stones, and that not something you can take lightly...

They knew surgery and such? you need to be advanced to be able to do that, with all the risk of bacterial infections you might get when being operated.

I'm not wanting to give a reply of truth here, but if you follow my way of thinking it may well be true in some way

Sorry to double post but... Look at the bold text..


What? Is there EVEN any logic in that? Humans are humans, reptiles are reptiles. They cannot be humans who were reptiles. I am sorry, please gather logic before posting a supposedly intelligent post.

[LeXtruX]

Bleh... I respect your opnion and your information.......... but I still say it's bullshyt. 

a bit of a late reply seeying this topic is 120+ days old
But it might be possible...
It could have been so that dinosaurs survived in southern america due to it's remote location??? But even still, it might have been a very advanced civilization of humanoids living with them who could have been reptiles at the time and not humans... if that were to be true it would mean that during the ages of the dinosaurs there were already intelligent lifeforms right???

And don't say: it's impossible, because it is! if they were resided in southern america it's more than normal we haven't found any fosile leftovers of them... we haven't  discovered everything in the amazon either...

The fact those 'drawings' are made to last thousands or maybe millions of years can only mean the engineering must have been very advanced that you can't put a pin between 2 stones, and that not something you can take lightly...

They knew surgery and such? you need to be advanced to be able to do that, with all the risk of bacterial infections you might get when being operated.

I'm not wanting to give a reply of truth here, but if you follow my way of thinking it may well be true in some way

Sorry to double post but... Look at the bold text..


What? Is there EVEN any logic in that? Humans are humans, reptiles are reptiles. They cannot be humans who were reptiles. I am sorry, please gather logic before posting a supposedly intelligent post.

i said humanoids, those are creature that are like humans but not humans... it could have been those ancestors weren't humans or even mamals but reptiles that walked like humans and such, thus the name humanoids...

[KubeSix]

Ummm.... Yeah... BowAndArrow, follow your own advice and make sure what you say is logical. Lex's statement that you bolded out was completely logical, you just didn't take the time to correctly comprehend it.

Although I do agree that there probably weren't any dinosaurs walking along humans, you're also saying nothing survived the mass extinction. You're wrong there. Crocodiles, anyone?

Let's take a look at the crocodilian order, shall we? Crocodilians have been around since the Triassic era. That was BEFORE the Jurassic even came about. Oh, and you know what? Crocodilians are part of the Crurotarsi. The Crurotarsi are the sister group of the Avemetatarsalians. You know what those are? Birds. More precisely Archosaurs closer to birds than Crocodilians (Which are also Archosaurs) Let's see.... They include birds AND the Triceratops along with the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Ever looked at a chicken walk? Funny how they resemble dinosaurs, huh? Evolution, they call it, those fools without scientific knowledge.

There is more than enough proof that dinosaurs survived after the extinction. They simply adapted to the new face of the world. Now I'm not saying Nessy exists. Maybe it does maybe it doesn't, but "please take that out of your mind"? No. Maybe it doesn't live in the Loch Ness, but when the fark did humans explore the deepest parts of the sea? Why did I miss that when it was on the news? If you think we know everything about what's underwater, you've got lots to learn before you can argue anything concerning the animal kingdom.

You're new here, so I won't be too much of a d*ck, but you'll soon learn I, along with most around here, never say anything without justification. Don't call bulls**t without knowing what you're talking about, if you're as wise as you claim to be in your other posts.

[LeXtruX]

Ummm.... Yeah... BowAndArrow, follow your own advice and make sure what you say is logical. Lex's statement that you bolded out was completely logical, you just didn't take the time to correctly comprehend it.

Although I do agree that there probably weren't any dinosaurs walking along humans, you're also saying nothing survived the mass extinction. You're wrong there. Crocodiles, anyone?

Let's take a look at the crocodilian order, shall we? Crocodilians have been around since the Triassic era. That was BEFORE the Jurassic even came about. Oh, and you know what? Crocodilians are part of the Crurotarsi. The Crurotarsi are the sister group of the Avemetatarsalians. You know what those are? Birds. More precisely Archosaurs closer to birds than Crocodilians (Which are also Archosaurs) Let's see.... They include birds AND the Triceratops along with the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Ever looked at a chicken walk? Funny how they resemble dinosaurs, huh? Evolution, they call it, those fools without scientific knowledge.

There is more than enough proof that dinosaurs survived after the extinction. They simply adapted to the new face of the world. Now I'm not saying Nessy exists. Maybe it does maybe it doesn't, but "please take that out of your mind"? No. Maybe it doesn't live in the Loch Ness, but when the fark did humans explore the deepest parts of the sea? Why did I miss that when it was on the news? If you think we know everything about what's underwater, you've got lots to learn before you can argue anything concerning the animal kingdom.

You're new here, so I won't be too harsh, but you'll soon learn I, along with most around here, never say anything without justification. Don't call bulls**t without knowing what you're talking about, if you're as wise as you claim to be in your other posts.

also I want to add that humanoids aren't humans, they look like them in key points, walking on 2 legs, being able to talk, things like that, they could be reptilian, amphibian or even birds ^^

[KubeSix]

Yeah, human-like (usually) physical characteristics are what make a being humanoid. "Anthropoid being" could also be used in this case.

See here:

humanoid (plural humanoids)

   1. A being having the appearance or characteristics of a human.

anthropoid (comparative more anthropoid, superlative most anthropoid)

   1. having characteristics of a human being, usually in terms of shape or appearance
   2. having characteristics of an ape

[Kadesh]

It could have been so that dinosaurs survived in southern america due to it's remote location???

 Antarctica is a remote location, but I don't think they live there now either.


 And since when is South America 'remote'