What do you think about these ancient artifacts and petroglyphs?

In Cambodia. Is that a stegosaurus?
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/buddhisttemplesandstonesm.jpg
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/buddhisttemplesandstone2sm.jpg

A piece of a beautiful mosaic that was one of the wonders of the second century world. Called the Nile Mosaic of Palestrina, it depicts Nile scenes from Egypt all the way to Ethiopia.The Greek Letters above the reptilian animal in question are: KROKODILOPARDALIS which is literally translated Crocodile-Leopard:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/nilemosaicth.jpg
This picture was drawn by North American Indians that lived in the area that has now become Natural Bridges National Monument in the western United States:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/dinoglyph3-1.jpg
A similar petroglyph was been found in Arizona’s Havasupai Canyon:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/wall.jpg
There are stories of a plesiosaur-like creature seen in Queensland, Australia. Both aboriginal peoples around Lake Galilee and tribes farther up to the north tell of a long-necked animal with a large body and flippers:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/yarru01.jpg
The art below is from an Mesopotamian cylinder seal dated at 3300 BC:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/pterosaurth.jpg
The January 2003 issue of National Geographic magazine presents an artifact described as a “cosmetic palette . . . from a cemetery of the first dynasties in Manshaat Ezzat.”
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/ancientslatesm.jpg
A slate palette from Hierakonpolis showing the triumph of King Nar-mer:
http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/snakes.jpg
The dragons that every culture from every corner of the globe talk about, know what I’m saaaayin’?
The petroglyphs are touted as the real deal, as the “glaze” over them was put there from the natural weathering.

6 Responses to “What do you think about these ancient artifacts and petroglyphs?”

Read below or add a comment...

  1. Izen G says:

    The cylinder and sculptures look authentic… The cave drawings and other artwork do not! Those look to me like something which was created back in the 1960’….. The others, yes they do look like what you perceive them to be and probably are! “Dinosaurs” are not nearly as old as what many people claim them to be!

    “Dragons” did exist on this planet as well, numerous types…. up into the 15th century. They could very well be related to “dinosaurs” and both could also quite possibly be with us still…. “Nessie” etc.

    SFU, had an interesting class once in which carbon dating was demonstrated…. One of the students donated a bologna sandwich made fresh earlier that morning for one of the tests… According to it, that sandwich was 45 thousand years old!!!!! Everyone got a good laugh…..

    Yet “science” insists on relying upon such a closed framework of belief! People need to remember one thing….. “science” dictated that the earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe etc etc etc etc……. 😉 😉 😉

  2. Ludwigvan_Beethoven says:

    Your question is not clear.

    Ancient artifacts of human origin tell us much about the history of mankind and also tell us in some cases tell us much about the pre-history of mankind.
    They in some instances tell us about cosmic events that occurred millions of years ago as in Petroglyphs such as those in Diablo Canyon which record the explosion of what is today the Crab Nebula. They tell us about the religious life of shamans as in the famous cave paintings at Lascaux in France.
    They tell us much about people who had no formal writing system such as the Incas and Aztecs and Mayas whose civilization the Spanish Missionaries destroyed and which we are only recently have begun to be able to decipher.

    The glyphs are both art and communication and the artifacts that accompany them add mutually to their value.

  3. bclow says:

    It’s hard to say exactly what petroglyphs depict (in general) because the creators are not around to ask, so everything is speculation. Those who are decended from people who may know can be reluctant to share that information, and will protect that knowledge from outsiders.

    The petroglyphs from AZ http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/wall.jpg look like they could be Big Horn Sheep or horses (depending on the time they were created, before or after contact). The other figures could be hunters along with their gear and magical symbols that will help them with their hunt. They could also be agriculturalists and the horn-like shape could be a depiction of corn.

    from Below the Rim
    “We paused beside a giant cottonwood as Tilousi pointed to a high cliff to the west. “See those two white marks up there?” Through binoculars I discerned a pair of white alkaline streaks made by seeping water in the ruddy cliff, seemingly inaccessible below the distant rim. “Those are two ears of corn, placed there by the Creator,” Tilousi said. “We pray to them, asking for plenty.””

    The dinosaur looking shape at the lower left is not a dinosaur.
    http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Thebes/7755/havasupaipics.html

    Dinosaurs have been extinct for a very long time, but our imaginations are just getting started…

    Petroglyphs and artifacts are not concrete proof of the existence of a creature at any given time. Imagine what archeologists of the future will think about our movies. Like Jurassic Park… but they must have had dinos or how else would they know what they looked like?

  4. shoveling_ferret says:

    All I can say that given the number of inconsistencies and out-right factual errors in the information you provide that I assume you have gotten primarily from a web site (http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm) promoting Creationism by suggesting that all of these depictions indicate that humans co-existed with dinosaurs, I’d be highly skeptical of the reliability of the information on the website, or, at least of the conclusions drawn from that information, much of which is taken out of context.

    First, some corrections:

    The slate palette you’ve linked to at:
    http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/snakes.jpg
    is not the famed “Narmer Palette” interpreted by some scholars as showing the conquest of Upper and Lower Egypt by Narmer. Instead, what you’ve scanned a picture of is one side of the so-called “Two Dogs Palette.” While it is part of the same cache of objects from the city of Hierakonpolis from which the Narmer Palette came and is of roughly the same date, they are not the same.
    The Two Dogs Palette shows, on both front and back side, a fairly typical assortment of both realistic creatures and somewhat fantastic creatures. The elongated necks of the animals shown on the side of the palette you’ve linked to are a rather inventive way of harkening back to the inspiration for these large commemorative pieces – the original cosmetic palette, used for grinding minerals for eyepaint. Though it seems none of the “monumenal” slate palettes like the Narmer Palette and the Two Dogs Palette were used for cosmetics, the well or circle formed by the elongated necks of the creatures does recall that use.
    The image you link to at: http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e397/Bigpappadiaz/ancientslatesm.jpg
    And describe as being from: “The January 2003 issue of National Geographic magazine presents an artifact described as a “cosmetic palette . . . from a cemetery of the first dynasties in Manshaat Ezzat.””
    Is in fact THE “Narmer Palette” and, as I stated, was found at Hierakonpolis, by Quibell in the 1890s, in a cache of objects cleaned out of the temple there sometime near the end of the 6th Dynasty, as the deposit included artifacts spanning the Early Dynastic Period through the 6th Dynasty.

    It’s probably worth noting that the long-necked animals on the palettes have been identified as giraffes, various ordinary animals with necks elongated for artistic effect, or as totally fantastic mythological beasts. The theme seems to have been fairly short-lived in Egyptian art, and demonstrates a moderate degree of cultural contact with either contemporary Mesopotamia or Iran where similar motifs were common.

    I am vaguely familiar with the Nile Mosaic from Palastrina. What your cropped image fails to demonstrate is that most of the animals in the mosaic have a label in Greek nearby done in much ligher mosaic tiles on a darker background. The image you’ve shown, with the warriors and a reclining crocodile is part of a much larger scene. Just above the section you’ve shown is an image of a leopard. Given the layout of the mosaic, the closest dark area on which to put the labels for both the crocodile and the panther is in one place. Greek inscriptions are quite variable, but it’s not that uncommon for words to be run together. Crocodiles and leopards are known to have been in the Nile Valley in ancient times.

    As for petroglyphs – there is no widely accepted, reliable way to date petroglyphs. There was much made a few years ago about “patina” on the rock face, differential coloration, etc., but it’s all essentially come to nothing. There’s simply too much variability in the way exposed rock weathers to reliably date petroglyphs. So, without additional information about the petroglyphs, it’s difficult to evaluate them.

    The extended, elongated necks of creatures are a fairly common element of Mesopotamian art as well, as the cylinder seal impression you show demonstrates.

    There’s been a massive quantity of ink spilled trying to explain the depiction of “fantastic” creatures or their description in myth and legend from all over the world. A fairly common theory that has only recently received popular attention is the notion that the depictions and descriptions of fantastic creatures were inspired by fossils encountered by people during exploration of caves, mining,etc. or that were exposed by earthquakes or other natural events. Thus, some scholars posit that a mastodon skull, encountered by an ancient population unfamiliar with such a creature saw a resemblance to a human skull, though with only a single eye, and on an enormous scale, and thus we have the inspiration for Cyclops. Some work has been done matching up typical fossil finds for certain regions with the “fantastic” creatures associated with culture groups of the past in those regions and it has been fairly successful in finding what some people regard as plausible matches.
    While there’s no reliable way to confirm such a theory as correct, it does serve as a plausible explanation for the origins of various fantastic creatures and, while I’ve not spent a great deal of time looking into it, the scholarship behind it seems to be rigorous and responsible. And, as history and archaeology are not hard sciences, evaluation of hypothesis, theories, reconstructions, etc. are conducted according to slightly different standards.

    In some ways, though, I rather think that entirely too much is made of fantastic creatures in ancient artwork. I don’t find it hard to believe that creativity was the primary inspiration for such designs. Nor was art in the ancient world necessarily intended as a documentation of “reality” as we in the modern Western world define reality. Nor are non-realistic or non-naturalistic depictions of humans, animals, or other subjects exactly uncommon in either ancient or modern art.
    For example, I doubt very much that the so-called “coffee-bean eyed”/”lizard men” figurines from the Hassuna and Ubaid cultures of Neolithic Mesopotamia depict actual lizard men and women. Though I suppose that if you’re willing to believe that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, you might be willing to believe that they could interbreed. And those figurines have become the centerpiece of any number of ancient alien theory nonsense.
    For that matter, the bull in Picasso’s “Bullfight” has a really long neck, small head, and long legs – it looks a little like a dinosaur. Do you suppose that Picasso watched a dinosaur and matador going at it in 1934?

  5. mikeledo says:

    Many locals of poor tribes have discovered they can make money by carving dinosaur looking creatures into ancient artifacts. The fundies buy this stuff up in droves and display it on their creationist web site.

    Now many of those arifacts you link are real ancient artifacts and carvings. There are two possible reasons for their likeness to extenct species. One reason is that they did find ancient dinosaur bones which they realted to a dragon type creature. The other is the cosmic myth. Real animals were placed in the constellations and their features transformed such as your Nam-her artifact.

  6. jfmm says:

    A true passion in my life is the study of ancient artifacts and petroglyphs. Mankind has been here far longer than supposed authoratative experts would have people beleive. Some embellishments on artifacts were purely decorative, I’m sure. Just as surely, I also beleive other embellishments and petroglyphs were ways of trying to communicate, and also document important occurances in the lives of the people who lived then. Disputes are ongoing in archaeology, paleontology and anthropology as to discrepancies in time lines. Facts will eventually prove the antiquity of man. Truth will always stand there no matter how long words dance around it. I think it’s cool . Imagine man knowing dinosaur as we know deer!

Leave A Comment...

*