CMI article image.
Angkor-stegosaur-carving
Close-up of the ‘Angkor stegosaur’ carving. The trademark scales on the back have made it so easily recognizable that CMI speakers have never received another suggestion for what this animal could be other than a stegosaur.
From the website:
“”A reader’s comment
Patrick G., United States, 23 June 2014
Evolutionists have often strongly criticized creationists suggesting this artwork to be a stegosaurus. The problem is that one of the first people to suggest this in print wasn’t a creationist at all.
A photograph of this particular sculpture is found in the book “Angkor Cities and Temples” on page 215. The corresponding description of it is found on page 213:
“Roundels on pilasters on the south side of the west entrance are unusual in design. In particular, that at left shows an animal which bears striking resemblance to a stegosaurus.”
The man who described it in this manner was Claude Jacques, a long standing member of the Ecole Francaise d’ Extreme Orient. He lived in Cambodia for nine years where he taught Khmer history at the Archaeology Department of Phnom Penh. By reading his other comments throughout the book, it is obvious he was an old earth evolutionist. His credentials and time in the region should make him an expert in anyone’s mind. Yet he still saw this artwork as resembling the extinct dinosaur more than any other animal found in this area.
Anyone who wants criticize this carving being interpreted as a stegosaurus should start by criticizing this man first.””
CMI article caption.
The context of the ‘Angkor stegosaur’ shows that it is pictured with numerous animals known to the locals, such as a water buffalo (above the stegosaur).
[ The plates along the back of the animal are unlike all the other decorative designs in the temple walls. One objection is that the temple carvers may have carved the stegosaur from nearby fossils. However, it takes a lot of training and skill to accurately reconstruct from fossils what a dinosaur looked like. ]
I disagree, any culture that deals with people who are butchers and hunter will have a decent idea of what an animal once looked like based off it’s bones.
Clearly Godzilla.
Note that Angkor is largely ruins, supporting the Godzilla theory.
It’s not a Stegosaurus.
There is no Thangomizer attached to the tail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thagomizer
I don’t know exactly what it means but I have noticed that dragons are pretty much the same in all ancient peoples.
They also look suspiciously like some dinosaurs.
I’ve read that some of the Mayan designs look like elephants,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Maizeresearcher/The_Idea_of_the_Elephant_in_Cultures_of_Pre-15th_Century_Americas
And Earl Stanley Gardener, writing about Mexico, said there was a man who bought hundreds of statues of dinosaurs, found in the area.
http://forbiddenarchaeology.blogspot.com/2012/11/acambaro-figurines-from-waldemar.html
http://www.fairservicenz.com/dinosaur/dinosaur-5.html
Scroll down to photos.
Maybe it's a curelom?
I don't get that. How does that "clearly support the Biblical view of dinosaurs"? That's a 3200 year old carving. Creationist dogma says all of the dinosaurs were wiped out in the Great Flood 800 years before this carving was made.
So, Garudas really existed along with Dino's?
Yes, they saw it.
The last one of its kind alive.
Then they ground its plates into powder to use as an aphrodisiac.
Actually, though those do look more like stegosaur plates, I think the head shape make it look more like an ankylosaurus to me.
Thanks fishtank. There are a lot of “ooparts” like this. The question is, how could they so accurately depict an animal they’d never seen?
Additionally, there are accounts of human interaction with large reptiles that were decimating livestock (and in some cases killing people). Invariably, the people banded together and eliminated the threat. (From ldolphin.org)
The giant reptile at Bures in Suffolk, for example, is known to us from a chronicle of 1405:
‘Close to the town of Bures, near Sudbury, there has lately appeared, to the great hurt of the countryside, a dragon, vast in body, with a crested head, teeth like a saw, and a tail extending to an enormous length. Having slaughtered the shepherd of a flock, it devoured many sheep.’
After an unsuccessful attempt by local archers to kill the beast, due to its impenetrable hide,
‘...in order to destroy him, all the country people around were summoned. But when the dragon saw that he was again to be assailed with arrows, he fled into a marsh or mere and there hid himself among the long reeds, and was no more seen.’
(This chronicle was begun by John de Trokelow and finished by Henry de Blaneford. It was translated and reproduced in the Rolls Series. 1866. IV. ed. H.G. Riley. (cit. Simpson, J., British Dragons., B.T. Batsford Ltd. 1980. p. 60).)
The Bible describes behemoth:
Job 40:15 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.
Job 40:16 Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly.
Job 40:17 He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together.
A huge animal whose tail is massive like a cedar. Elephant? Nope. Hippo? Nope. Rhino? Nope.
Calling them ‘dragons’ instead of ‘dinosaurs’ might be enlightening...
I do not see why some dinosaurs could not have survived into the last few millenia. Are crocs and komodos imaginary?
There is no reason ,though, to think that a “modern” critter would have to be as huge as their ancient ancestors were-——look how much smaller many modern mammals are than their Ice Age predecessors. Maybe the stegosaur pictured was the size of a cow.
Then they MUST have seen a LIVE one...
...except...