Continued from previous post..
Hoax #37 depicts a drawing you could have sworn it was done on a photo editing program. As a matter of fact it could likely be the case. In this hoax, Woetzel claims that there is a cave drawing depicting a Brontosaurus, the so-called dinosaur (whose real name is Apatosaurus) described to be,
"The 67-foot, 30-ton-like creature scientists believed became extinct millions of years before man appeared on earth. Yet the bushmen who did the paintings ruled Rhodesia from only 1500 b.c. until a couple of hundred years ago."
Rhodesia (now called Zimbabwe) was a recent British colony in Zimbabwe that was established in 1895. Then it was merged with Zimbabwe to become Rhodesia-Zimbabwe in 1980. Before Colonial days, there were once 4 great empires occupying Zimbabwe, Great Zimbabwe (1200-1450), Mutapa Empire (1450-1630), Torwa Empire (1450-1683), and Rozwi Empire (1684-1834). These 4 empires once occupied the land until the Europeans came and settled there in the 1880s, creating the countries of South Africa, Northern (Zambia) and Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), and other British-held lands.
This so-called depiction of "brontosaurus - the 67-foot, 30-ton-like creature" is alleged to have been found in a cave at Gorozomzi Hills 25 miles from Salisbury, now known as Harare, the capitol of Zimbabwe. In which direction is 25 miles is not mentioned as if every reader is assumed to know which direction Woetzel's pointing to, while those who are unfamiliar with the countries of Africa don't. But, what I can tell from this map, I think the hills are located 25 miles southeast from Harare and the actual name of the hills is Goromonzi, not Gorozomzi! Woetzel and the other creationists misspelled the name on purpose! They did that thinking no one will know the truth about the art found at the site and the fact that the art depicting a "Brontosaurus" is not really a Brontosaurus at all, but a depiction of an antelope or a zebra!
"Adding to the puzzle of the rock paintings found by Bevan Parkes, owner of the land where the art is found is a drawing of a dancing bear. As far as scientists know, bears have never lived in Africa."
On the contrary, bears were once commonly sighted all over Africa, but were nearly hunted to extinction by man. The only place in Africa where you can find bears nowadays is in the northern areas of Africa beyond the Sahara where you'll find bears very similar to the bears found in North America. Otherwise the drawing depicts a shaman dancing in form of a bear in the spiritual realm. The art, which the natives became known for, depicts not reality, but the spiritual realm where the Shaman goes to commune with the people and animal spirits living there. The paintings are nothing more than visions of modern and mythical animals as seen under a trance by the Shamen of the Khoisan-speaking San (or Bushmen). These spiritual leaders engage in dancing, healing, communications with spirits, and other types of rituals while creating paintings symbolizing what they saw and become in the spiritual world.
The so-called rock-painting on the left side of the page is claimed to be found in "a cave at Nachikufu near Mpika in northern Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia)." Nachikufu, the cave located near Mpika District, is famous for its Neolithic Sans/Bushmen artwork dated way beyond 6,000 years— something Woetzel and other creationists failed to mention in their drivels. However, what is actually seen in the cave is nothing of what Woetzel claims about them. The real cave art, painted in a very black silhouette, depicts human figurines, in which some are armed with spears, bows, and arrows, and modern animal figurines such as elephant and antelope. When the creationists made the hoax, they used image editing software to trace 2 bows and a spear and transformed them into "three long-necked, long-tailed creatures," traced some parts of the warrior's hunting dress and voila! Creationist-made hoax done and out of ignorance of the authentic paintings made by the real ancient Sans and to help spread lies about dinosaurs!
Next comes Hoaxes #38-39 coming from the "not exactly hoaxes" category. The first one is a form of a Chi Wara headdress made by the African tribe of Bambara to perform dancing ceremonies in honor of a great hero named Chi Wara, a half man, half antelope who introduced the art of agriculture to the people. But, Woetzel, absent-minded as he is, stupidly regards the Chi Wara figurine as a ceratopsian dinosaur,
"Iron sculptures made by the Bambara peoples of Mali Africa in the 1800's display a three-horned creature with what appears to be a neck frill…One shows top horns pointed forward and the neck frill extending halfway down the animal's back, much like the ceratopsian dinosaur Chasmosaurus. The long tail, squat arched body, and sprawled legs also give it the appearance of a ceratopsian dinosaur."
That's not a ceratopsian dinosaur! Not even a Chasmosaurus! That is a horizontal-style Chi Wara headdress with a curvature body and short, crouching legs representing the aardvark, an animal known to dig into the earth like farmers do, and the curved tail representing the chameleon, the symbol for long life. The so-called "neck frill" are the long horns which represents stalks of mullet. The head is form of a human. The absence of antelope ears underneath the horns and additional curvy and nose horn is the result of creationists using photo editing software to subtract and add features to make it as if the animal has no antelope ears and has nose and brow horns that weren't really there in real life. According to the legend, Chi Wara, whose mother was the sky goddess Mousso Koroni and whose father was cobra spirit, descended from the sky and taught the people to raise crops. Those who followed Chi Wara's teachings carefully became prosperous and happy, but forgot to thank Chi Wara for his contribution to the prosperity of the people. Very upset at being unappreciative, Chi Wara burrowed himself underground to await for his people to have a change of heart and thank him for everything he gave to make the people prosperous.
As for the second figurine,
"The second, entitled 'dinosaurian sculpture,' by the exhibiting gallery shows a four-legged creature with a long neck and tail like a sauropod dinosaur. The neck has a slight widening and a ridged frill that makes it a fascinating depiction."
Sorry, Woetzel. That is a Dogon horse, not a "dinosaurian sculpture." The Dogon horse seems to have a rider omitted from its back and its legs cut way too short-pretty typical for creationists to use the likes of GIMP and Photoshop to distort ancient art and use them to help further their dino/human lies. The figurine is very similar to this horse figurine which includes a man riding on its back, representing a hogon, a supreme tribal leader. According to Dogon mythology, the horse was the first animal to leave the ark (not Noah's ark, mind you) after it fell to the earth from the sky, thus the horse became the symbol of wealth and power. Those who ride the horse are recognize as a high classed, powerful leader who possessed wisdom and skills needed to lead his people. Dogon figurines of equestrian riders, though rare, have been around for 1000 years and are made into many different forms, including what Woetzel stupidly regards as a sauropod dinosaur.
Hoax #40, also coming from the "not exactly hoaxes" category, is a large chameleon container with a small human figurine on its back used to store ritual and valuable objects. But, Woetzel and the webmasters of s8int.com, the ones responsible for heavy usage of photo editing software to meticulously twist the images of ancient art and artifacts depicting real and mythical animals around to make them match the images of dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals created by 20th and 21st century artists, even though no human past and present has ever seen a live dinosaur (other than a bird) and other prehistoric animal predating the Dawn of Man, in hopes of convincing the gullible of their lies, stupidly regards it as a hadrosaurid dinosaur despite it looking absolutely nothing like any hadrosaurid known.
"Another African tribe from the Mali region is known for producing [sic] dinosaurian objects in the mid-1800's . This is the same timeframe when Sir Richard Owen coined the term dinosaur in England. The bronze artifact to the left shows a Dogon tribesman riding a long-necked, long-tailed reptilian creature. The oddly bird-like head with strong jawline is reminiscent of the 'duck bill' on certain Ornithopod dinosaurs. The diamond-shaped pattern on the skin matches fossilized skin impressions discovered on a hadrosaur in southern Utah."
Just look at how s8int.com deliberately and meticulously twist the various modern depictions of hadrosaurs and Iguanodons. Anything to make it look deceptively like the Dogon chameleon container out of ignorance of Africa being completely void of Hadrosaurs fossils and the diamond shaped pattern on the skin never matched that of the real hadrosaur skin that are more mosaic-like than diamond-like. Known as the Gurunsi (or Dogon) Bronze Lidded Container, this artifact depicts that of the chameleon, one of the most omnipresent in the art of West Africa especially among the Gurunsi, Senufo, Faso, and among the Dogon of Mali. The chameleon is most mentioned in many stories and proverbs to emphasize on the qualities and the traits of the creature, such as its ability to change colors, eat its meals with its long sticky tongue, and looking everywhere without turning its head.
Hoax #41 depicts some Roman style lead artifacts that were allegedly excavated in Tuscon Arizona in 1924. One of the objects shows a sword with an alleged sauropod dinosaur picture on the sword. In comparison with the accurate images of sauropods based on recent fossil evidence and modern studies of their bone structure, it is likely the dinosaur is inaccurately drawn and sword has the letters F-O-R-G-E-R-Y written all over it just like the rest of the alleged Roman artifacts that were possibly made up by an early Late 19th, early 20th century person who forged these artifacts on purpose to make them to appear deceptively as if they were dated to the time of the Holy Roman Empire.
Hoax #42 and #42a is both claimed to depict "one of the curious “dinosaur” petroglyphs near Middle Mesa at the Wupatki National Park" That's a depiction of a horned water monster shown on page 12 in Adrianne Meyer's book Fossil legends and the First Americans drawn by local Native American tribes in an effort to explain the findings of strange tusks (fossil mammoth and mastodon tusks) sticking out of from under the ground. Next to it is another monster claim by Woetzel to accurately depict an Ankylosaur.
Henry Rowe Schoolcraft was a geologist and Indian agent and wrote extensively about the Sioux Indians. He heard stories about a monstrous creature called Unktehi, something like an ox but much larger; with great horns. Schoolcraft reproduced drawings of several types of Unktehi monsters on birchbark around 1850. These were based upon rock art describing a war party of five canoes crossing Lake Superior that encountered animals resembling giant turtles, snakes, and moose. But some (upper right) clearly look dinosaurian. Sioux Indians further west, when interviewed by ethnologists, described Unktehi as an immense reptile or serpent with legs. He was shaped like a giant scaly snake with feet and a notched backbone or crest like a giant saw and had a heavy spiked tail. Still other Indian reports describe Unktehi as a swamp-dwelling creature. Adrienne Mayor, an evolutionist, believes that the Sioux were weaving stories about fossils they encountered (Mayor, Fossil Legends of the First Americans, 2005, pp. 235-237). But the pictures and description bring to mind the dinosaur Ankylosaurus (lower right) with a low slung body, long tail, heavy armor, and prominent multiple horns."
So says the creationist who made this story and pictures up out of ignorance of the real legendary Unktehi (or horned serpent), who is accurately depicted as a limbless serpentine water monster with large curved ram-like or deer-like horns on their heads. In no way are they Ankylosaurs nor do they accurately depict them. According to a Sioux legend, there were once dangerous reptilian water monsters of various shapes that lived in ancient times until the Thunderbirds and destroyed them, except for small species like snakes and lizards. This kind of legend may have been inspired by pterosaur and dinosaur fossils that were found by the North American tribes of ancient times.
Hoax #43 is one of the best hoaxes around. These are the infamous Ica stones. Stones that were alleged to depict a lost advanced civilization processing technology beyond time, men doing "naughty things" with each other, and live dinosaurs and other extinct animals co-existing with humans. The stones, are hands down, a fraud made up by the Peruvian locals starting in the mid-1960's who gathered up stones from a field, engraved the images of dinosaurs, humans, and advanced technology using all sorts of science fiction materials, put them in the chicken coop to make them look old, and sell them to gullible tourists for profit. It was Vicente Paris, a Spanish investigator, who exposed the stones as a fraud after a four year investigation on the authenticity of the rocks.
To further his lie, Woetzel tells a phony story about Juan De Santa Cruz and his Conquistadors taking some of such stones back to Spain while in reality, they only took back real, authentic stones that bear not a single trace of dinosaur and modern technology etchings on them. They also took back to Spain massive size bones of what they believe to be remains of giant-size humans that were destroyed in the biblical Flood, not knowing that the bones they took back to Spain were in fact mammoth or mastodon bones from the Pleistocene Epoch (Citations also from Adrienne Mayor's Fossil Legends and the First Americans pg. 79).
Note: There are Ica stones out there that are confirmed to be real, but not one of them have any images of dinosaurs and other prehistoric life co-existing with humans and advance technology beyond time etched on them.
A supplemental hoax comes from another stone alleged to depict two sauropod dinosaurs and a man and an elephant together.
A similar association of an American elephant and dinosaur is presented in the Granby Idol. This queer rock relic was unearthed by W.L. Chalmers near Grand Lake, high in the Colorado Rockies. He found the 66 pound stone (along with various ancient utensils) several feet below the surface while enlarging an irrigation reservoir on his homestead. The stone was made of an exceedingly hard green material, like nothing ever known of in the neighborhood. (“Is Pre-Glacial Man Coming Back?” Hutchison News, January 5 1923.) On one side is a carved man, holding a tablet containing symbols. On the back are carved a mastodon and two dinosaurs.
The Granby Stone, an egg-shaped stone found in 1920 by Bud Chalmers on his ranch, which is now under Lake Granby today, is also said to depict a grinning face and Chinese writings that gave one individual the idea that the stone was created by Buddhist Chinese explorers who sailed to North America and explore the region. Chances are the stone is nothing more than a fake relic. For even if it's an "unfakeable relic", that still doesn't explain why no fossil remains of non-avian dinosaurs, humans, and mastodons has ever been found together in the fossil record let alone the historical record.
Next comes Hoaxes #44 and #45 which claims to depict "long-necked creatures displayed on pottery in the museum of Lima and beautiful tapestries from the Nasca tombs (ca 700 AD) with a repeating pattern that looks like dinosaurs." which is alleged to strengthen the beliefs of Dr. Javier Cabrera, whose father is claimed falsely to discover such stones, who became the first to fall for the rock frauds.
In Woetzel's eyes, one of the features that convince gullible creationists to believe these creatures to be [sic] "accurate depictions of sauropod dinosaurs" is the fact that some of them are depicted to have a median row of spines and non-overlapping bumpy rosette patterns on their backs. But the concept is moot for not all sauropods have keratin spines and rosette patterns and it is not known whether or not all sauropods, have such features. Plus, the supposed rosette patterns look more unrealistically like donuts patterns than rosette patterns and the dinosaurs, with incorrect sizes and wrong numbering of fingers and toes, have clearly been traced straight out of a comic book. Although the modern made frauds depicting spiny backed sauropods does predate the discovery of Diplodocid and Titanosaurid specimens featuring spines, whether keratin or bone, and rosette patterns, the true inspiration behind the art indeed came from comic books including The Flintstones and Alley Oop comics which depict sauropods with rosette patterns and row of spines on their backs, like Dinny and Dino.
Hoax #44 and #45 does not look like any sauropod known. H #44 simply depicts a zoomorphic animal representing an iguana, a lizard native to South America, with a row of keratin spines on its back, clinging to a kero (or beaker) which appears to be less elaborate than the keros shown here. Look how the animal's body resembles an iguana. Sauropods don't have iguana bodies. Look how the iguana's legs are sprawling on the kero. Sauropods legs are fully-erect, tree trunk and elephantine-like, and can't sprawl. Note how creationists are making it as if the iguana is a sauropod by taking a photo of the lizard's head and neck from a deceptive angle while ignoring the real anatomy of a sauropod based on skeletal evidence.
H #45 depicts crude images taken from the Nasca (spelled correctly as Nazca, a South American Peruvian Tribe most famous for their mysterious lines) textile that appears to represent either deer, camelids, dogs, rodents, or felines native to South America. One of them is shown to have hand-like feet with two toes, large ears, and V-shaped, disjointed legs (the top part of the front leg appears to be covered up to hide the fact that the front leg is the same as the hind leg, while dinosaurs in reality don't have such legs) while the other is shown to have hand-like feet with 3 toes, straight legs, black, dog-like ears that match the colors of the outlines lining the body inside and out, and what appears to be a small phallus right at the beginning of its long tail. On another creationist site there is an image very similar to the second image, except it has no outlines, ears pointed forward, and 4 toes on each hand like feet.
Sauropods have 5 toed, 3 or 2 clawed elephantine back feet and semi-curved, toeless, one-clawed front feet. None of them have mammalian genitals, pointed ears or antlers, hand-like feet and big heads. Therefore, the animals depicted on the textiles are not sauropods, but crude images of modern animals native to South America. Creationists, without reasonable proof, only conclude that these animals resemble sauropod dinosaurs just because they're simply shaped like one, never mind their gross inaccuracies in comparison with the real images of sauropod dinosaurs based on fossil evidence.
Hoax #46, coming from the "not exactly hoaxes" category, depicts vases made from the ancient Peruvian Moche Tribe that co-existed with the Nazca Tribe.
"Among the artifacts currently in the Lima museum are the Moche stirrup-spout pots and vases. Their main artistic medium was the red & white ceramic pots, which depict with singular realism medical acts, combative events, musical instruments, plants and animals."
Actually the Moche pots depict various daily lives of the people including war, sex, metal work, and weaving. The so-called medical acts Woetzel mentions are likely sacrificial acts performed by priests. The Moche are infamous for the practice of human sacrifices.
"In the Larco Herrera Museum in Peru there are vases that clearly depict dinosaurs. Some of these same types of dinosaurs are shown on the Ica stones, including the dermal frills. The pictures here were taken by Dr. Dennis Swift."
Other than birds, there is not a single vase clearly depicting dinosaurs. If these vases in the photos are claimed to "clearly" depict "dinosaurs," then why are their feet backwards? And why are their dermal frills upside down? Why are the rosette patterns look more of donuts then what they really are? The answers is that they are not dinosaurs at all, but mythical animals that have two heads. No dinosaur ever had two heads. On the Institute for Biblical & Scientific Studies (IBSS) February 2008 article, Dr. Stephen Meyers investigate Swift's claims about the vases to find that "dinosaurs" on the vases are really mythical animals with heads on each end of their bodies, despite Swift's outright denial of the monsters having two heads. He persistently claimed they don't have two heads, but leave it to Meyers to expose the deception behind the vases and the Ica Stones and eventually the Nazca tapestry.
A new hoax added to the new version of the site claims,
To the right is an artifact from Tiwanaku, an important Pre-Columbian archaeological site in Bolivia. Tiwanaku is recognized by Andean scholars as one of the most important precursors to the Inca Empire. The sculptor depicted a dinosaur-like creature at least 800 years before European scientists discovered dinosaurs.
Wanna bet these figurines are nothing more than ancient zoomorphic representations of modern animals such as dogs, pumas, and jaguars that are commonly seen in Tiwanaku art? And that these possible creationist-invented frauds are otherwise nothing like the actual art of the Tiwanaku shown here? For even if these figurines depict dinosaur-like creatures as claimed by creationists, they still do not explain why are there no dinosaur remains found alongside human remains in the fossil and historical record and why are there no physical evidence of non-avian dinosaurs (i.e. intact bodies, eggs, young, footprints, etc.) found in historical and archaeological records dating to that time.
A vase depicting dueling dinosaurs (left) has also been discovered at the Tiwanaku civilization. It is believed to date from 500 – 1000 A.D. and closely resembles the Nazca dinosaurian depictions.
The artifact is no different than that of the Moche vases. It clearly depicts a mythical animal with heads on each end of the body and backward feet.
Hoax #47 is the infamous Acambaro figurines. They are alleged to depict dinosaurs dated to the Pre-classical Chupicuaro Culture (800 BC to 200 AD). But if so, then why are there no dinosaur remains, not even Iguanodon remains, found dated to the time of the Chupicuaro Culture? Why do they appear to have no signs of aging and breakage in nearly all parts of the collection? Answer: They're modern made. These infamous Acambaro frauds are made recently by locals who were paid to make the figurines for Waldemar Julsrud, the man who claimed to have "discovered" the hoaxes.
What really inspired the South American people to create such frauds, according to Mayor's Book (p. 334-339), came from fossilized discoveries of Pleistocene mastodons and horses made by the local villagers who greatly mistaken them as "dinosaur fossils." That inspired them to create the Acambaro and the Ica hoaxes and sell them to gullible people for profit.
Hoax #48 depicts a sauropod figurine with a large head that's claimed to be the legendary Mokele Mbembe of the Congo Basin. Mokele Mbembe is described to be a sauropod with a spike on its nose and other characteristics never seen in actual sauropod dinosaurs such as tridactyl feet, amphibious lifestyle, and a smooth skin.
In (sic) Ancient Pterosaur Depictions, Woetzel brings up an old German book of witchcraft entitled Hœllischer Morpheus; Saducismus Triumphatus dating back to 1704 to which he stupidly claims,
Within this volume are drawings which depict flying dragons containing actual morphological features of certain species of pterosaurs. On the frontispiece of the work is a clear depiction of a long tailed pterosaur represented with two feet, wings, and a snake-like tail ending in a tail vane.
Wrong again, Woetzel! That is nothing more than a wyvern with two limbs, bird-like wings, and coiling tail with a feathered vane at the end. Proof that creationists don't know the concept of pterosaurs at all based on fossil evidence. They'll just look into any form of ancient literature illustrating winged dragons and serpents and say, "A-ha! There it is! Proof that pterosaurs and man once lived together!" Never mind what real pterosaurs look like based on fossil evidence that clearly shows us that pterosaurs looked nothing like the dragons and monsters as seen in ancient literature.
Hoax #49 claims to depict
"..an Indian prayer stick (see below left), roughly a foot long, with a crested head, eyes on both sides, and beaked mouth. The beautiful artistic work stands out as strikingly like a pterodactyl!"
Wrong! It doesn't once you remove the blur, the distortions, and the smear from the photo. The true version of the Indian (Anasazi) prayer stick, coming from the Manitou Cliff Dwellings and Museum in Manitou Springs, Colorado, do not look like what is seen in the distorted photo. According to this article, the true Anasazi prayer sticks are straight and decorated with a snake head on top. The snakes in Anasazi art are sometimes seen with horns on top of their heads and that includes the snakes seen on the prayer sticks. These sticks are elaborately painted in bright colors and decorated with fur, feathers, or beads. When the creationists distort the image, they made the stick crooked, dull-colored, and void of its beads, fur, and feathers and gave the snake a false look of a Pteranodon. Although Pteranodon fossils are found in western North America, there is not one depiction of any pterosaur found in Anasazi art.
Hoax #50 claims to be a Saxon shield depicting a flying dragon Woetzel claims to be "widfloga" which to him means "far-ranging flyer." Actually, the word means "wide flier of a dragon" and the shield depicting the dragon is actually a Shield mount found among the relics fished up from an unusual buried ship located in the Sutton Hoo grave site near Woodbridge, Suffolk, England. This shield mount is claimed to depict a pterosaur resting. False. Even Bill Cooper made this similar claim in his After the Flood book as well. But that doesn't amount to anything for this claim is entirely made up out of ignorance of the mount to depict absolutely nothing like any pterosaur known based on fossil evidence and no pterosaur ever rested like that, nor do they have scale-like sides and a mistakable tail vane like a bird.
Hoax #51 claims to be "so compelling that Peter Wellnhofer (The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Pterosaurs, 1991, p. 20.) suggests it might have been based on fossil finds." As a matter of fact, that dragon-like monster is really a forgery made up of bone composites coming from various types of modern animals including a sting ray. Only a deluded, absent-minded person would regard forgeries as "compelling." Especially this forgery taken from Mundus Subterraneus (The Subterranean World), a book where in it is a story (possibly inspired by discoveries of prehistoric fossils in a cave way up on a mountain) about a man named Winckelriedt who was kicked out of his village of Wilser for manslaughter and was told if he ever wanted to be brought back to the village, he must go and try to slay the dragon that was terrorizing the village for quite some time. So, to redeem himself, he went up the mountain to challenge a small, yet dangerous dragon known as The Dragonet (also known as The Wilser Dragon) whose fiery breath can incinerate anything nearby. Winckelriedt bravely dodge the flames and killed the dragon and returned to the village with a blood-stained sword as proof of his victory over the beast. But the blood of the dragon dripped all over the dragon slayer, killing him instantly - the dragon's blood is extremely deadly to the touch.
Woetzel mentions this story, yet despite what is shown in the image, he still stupidly regards it as a pterosaur, claiming that "the front legs were not added till the 16th century," depicting the "pterosaur" as a four legged monster with all four limbs free from wing attachments. I'll reiterate— only a deluded idiot like Woetzel, the guys behind s8int.com, Ham, Hovind, Cooper, and the rest of the creationists would be stupid enough to regard forgeries and mythical animals as "compelling" even to the point of stupidly regarding winged dragon forgeries and lion-like dragons with, long necks, lion ears, legs, and body, bat or bird like wings, and a long coiling tail as "rhamphorynchoid pterosaurs" despite bearing no resemblance to any actual pterosaurs based on fossil evidence.
Hoax #52 stupidly regards the dragon, in the painting depicting Jason, the hero of the epic Greek mythological tale, Jason and the Argonauts, as "a pterosaurian," leading Woetzel to brainlessly asked, "From where did Rosa get this inspiration?" Answer: Definitely not from an actual pterosaur! The dragon in the painting looks completely nothing like any pterosaur known. The dragon Jason confronted was put there by the gods to guard the Golden Fleece from intruders. The dragon is said to never sleep. But Jason was able to put the dragon to sleep by sprinkling it with a special potion given to him by Medea, his lover, and took the golden fleece.
Finally! Hoax #53, coming from the "not exactly hoaxes" category, depicts a lion fighting a dragon, in which Woetzel stupidly regards as "clear representation of two long-necked creatures [which] should be considered evidence that man and dinosaurs co-existed." Sorry. It shouldn't be considered such evidence. Especially since none of the animals do not resemble dinosaurs whatsoever. H#53 depicts a brass engravement of two animals coming from a brass tomb belonging to Richard Bell, Archbishop of Carlisle who died in 1496— or so Woetzel claims. The image in the creationists' eyes seems to depict two fighting dinosaurs, except one thing. The first body appear feline like while the other seem to depict a classic drawing of a sauropod made by a 20th century artist. What's more, the heads and a shoulder of the two animals are missing. To point out what these animals really are, I want you to take a look at these animals paraded around on various creationist sites…
..and this..
Now go to the brass distorted image and you'll find the two animals missing two heads and dragon wings. Some versions of the image are seen on creationist sites are blurred and whitened out in the middle top part like this.
The photographer, possibly Philip Bell, the one who invented the claim, saw the images and took poor quality photographs of them that hid the details within the images that refute the idiot claims about the animals being dinosaurs. Seeing only what he wants to see he then shows them off to the lay audience, and falsely brands them "proofs" of dinosaurs (other than birds) living with man some centuries ago. The brass image is nothing more than just a brass plate located on the floor of the cathedral church and not on the brass tomb. Much of the parts of the lion and the dragon have been worn away over centuries by the feet of the visitors. The image wasn't on the tomb at all. Thus, the claim about Bishop Bell's Dinosaurs is another blatant lie invented by the creationists to further their dino/human falsehood.
In reality, the image of the lion fighting a dragon is commonly sighted in Medieval churches, mainly in misericords, comfortable shelves in the choir stalls where members of the choir stationing in the stalls seek comfort for their tired legs while remain standing during long prayers. This image is symbolic because it symbolizes Jesus Christ, representing the lion, defeating Satan, representing the dragon. In the new version of the site Woetzel shows photos of other types of dragons carved on the misericords in which he stupidly claims that one of them "looks very much like a sauropod dinosaur" out of blatant ignorance of the fact that unlike real sauropods, these dragons are depicted to have serpentine bodies, lion or donkey-like ears, bat wings, and only two limbs, not four.
And now we conclude this page by seeing Woetzel flat out lying about "evolutionists" having problems with these so-called evidence for human and dinosaur co-existence while it is really the creationists themselves who are having a real hard time with scores of evidence debunking their lies and living in flat out denial of the fact that instead of shaking the foundations of evolutionary theory, if there's valid evidence for dinosaur (of non-avian type) and human coexistence, scientists would allow the evidence to enhance and solidify the foundations of the theory of evolution and learn how did non-avian dinosaurs adapt and evolve to live among humans based on evidence. But none of such evidence for human and non-avian dinosaur coexistence has ever been found. So who's credibility of story-tellers will at last wear thin (and really wearing thin) now?
Next post will feature Dinos in the Bible and how Woetzel is distorting the truth behind the supernatural monsters of Jewish folklore.
