Weston Meehan

In today’s society there is a war going on, a battle to control our minds, hearts, and souls with a simple idea. An idea so dangerous that it not only has it indoctrinated us as a generation, but indoctrinating future generations without so much has a scrap of scientific evidence. An idea that questions our livelihood, why we are here, why we do what we do, and where do we go when it is all said and done. This idea is known as the Evolutionary theory and its concepts derived nearly 200 years ago by Charles Darwin in his book the Origin of Species.Darwin states† I see no good reasons why the views given in this volume should shock the religious views of anyone. † (1859, pp. 520) Claiming Evolution does not exist would be as empirical as proving God does exist. In these arguments there is no middle ground, either God does exist or he does not, either evolution is real or it is not. There is only one way to prove the evidence and that is to seek it out with examinatio n. Would such evidence exist? If so what could possibly the nature of this evidence?Before the Evolutionary theory’s inception the four burning questions of man has been who am I, where did I come from, why am I here, and where do I go when I die? The answer to these questions has always been some sort of religion, and that this world has a designer with an incredible plan. Now as time has progressed a very dangerous solution was introduced to the world and with its arrival it is changing the very fabric of humanity. The new religion of the day is science and this affects our legal system, school system, and thought process.These effects over time can be detrimental to the minds and morals of us as a society. One of the most basic and fundamental questions of the human mind is the question, â€Å"does God exist? † The one thing every human has in common is having a worldview. A worldview is how you view the world. There are two ways you can view this world. Some people look at this world and say, â€Å"it’s amazing this came from evolution† that is the Evolutionists’ worldview. Others say, â€Å"this world has incredible design there must be a designer† this is the Creationists’ worldview.These two views are polar- opposite from each other in a clash where one side has to be wrong. When mentioning Evolution, keep in mind that there are six theories and basis to the word evolve. Cosmic Evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter i. e. the â€Å"Big Bang†. Chemical Evolution: the origin of higher elements from hydrogen. Stellar and Planetary Evolution: origin of stars and planets. Organic Evolution: the origin of life. Macroevolution: the changing from one kind in to another. Finally, Microevolution: variations within kinds.These theories are studied in every American education curriculum but only one has scientifically been proven. In a common Webster Dictionary from an online website the definition o f the Big Bang Theory (Cosmic Evolution) is â€Å"a theory in astronomy: the universe originated billions of years ago in an explosion from a single point of nearly infinite energy density. † (Webster Dictionary Online) Another is Alan Guth’s theory stating, â€Å"†¦ the entire observable universe could have evolved from an infinitesimal (Greek for dot) region.It’s then tempting to go one step further and speculate that the entire universe evolved from literally nothing. † (1984 p. 128). The two theories of the creation of the Earth are basically the same but the Evolutionists believe it happened for no reason. The Creationists believe that God was the creator. The first law of the Conservation of matter is that, â€Å"matter (and or energy) cannot be created or destroyed. † Thus, if the matter cannot be created nor destroyed then who created this world? The choices still remain, it created itself or someone created it.Scientifically how can s omething be created from nothing unless there was a creator? Instead of raising questions that are gaudy, scientific, and quite frankly a bit harder to understand I would like to use history as the main source of discussion. The arguments most skeptics tend to stray away from are whether or not Dinosaurs existed with man. As ridiculous as that might sound to do believe that the very thought of such a notion existing could shake the beliefs of your modern Evolutionists. If dinosaurs did exist then the Evolutionary theory would be completely and utterly false and visa versa for creation.This topic is rarely touched based on just due to most of societies’ presuppositions on the matter and considering alternative evidence with an unbiased open mind. Let’s start with the question â€Å"what happened to the dinosaurs? † and there are scores of theories on this matter. The main theory is that a comet struck the earth, and the dust that was raised blocked out the sun. W hen the sun was blocked out the climate turned cold and the cold-blooded animals couldn’t survive. The flaw in this theory is that we still have animals today such as alligators, crocodiles, and Komodo dragons and supposedly these species date back to before the inosaurs were evolved (according to Evolution). Another theory is E. Baldwin’s exotic notion to say that they use to eat a laxative plant and when this plant went extinct the dinosaurs died out due to constipation. (2002, pp. 210) According to the Bible there was a major catastrophe that wiped out the Dinosaurs as well as most of the life on Earth. This was the great Genesis flood, which was global destroying all of existence except a man named Noah, his family, and two of every kind of animal to be taken aboard an Ark and to repopulate the Earth.Logically, Noah would of obtained only infant animals. This is for three reasons; they eat less, sleep more, and take up less room. This account of a global flood is n ot only found in the Bible but in every major culture’s history such as China, Mesopotamia, and Polynesian cultures. In 1841 the first use of the term Dinosauria (meaning terrible lizard) was created by the famous British anatomist and Paleontologist Sir Richard Owen. The term was used for the first time at a meeting of the British Association of the Advancement of science held in Plymouth. No reptile now exists which provides a complicated and thecodont dentition with limbs so proportionally large and strong having such well-developed marrow bones and sustaining the weight of the trunk by synchrondrosis or anchylosis to so long and complicated a sacrum, as in the order Dinosauria. † (Owen 42) After that meeting the word Dinosaur became a popular term to describe these giant lizards that were being discovered by paleontologists. During the 1800’s after the first discovery of theses fossils scientists began to look for clue to what had happened to these â€Å"ter rible lizards†.Unfortunately the focus was on the rocks and buried fossils and failed to examine history on what had really happened. Examining ancient history and the historical record you will not find the word â€Å"dinosaur† remember the word dinosaur was not created until 1841. Every culture shared a common name for these creatures but the most familiar is the name dragon. Even in our local library’s dictionary the definition of dragon shares a chilling depiction. Even the old dictionaries recognize these dragons to be real and not apart of myth.It seems that all cultures have different names for these dragons such as the list provided on page 13. Dragon history is nearly universal through ancient cultures. Where did this concept derive? Why is it so universal among cultures that are separated by continents? How did societies through out the world describe, etch, draw, and sew these creatures with such uniformity if they were not of eyewitness accounts? Cert ain things that aren’t shown to us growing up when learning the evolutionary theory as well as all of history are all of the artwork of the ancient cultures and the people of the culture depicting dinosaurs.It is safe to say that most of all the ancient art are mainly illustrations of everyday life and this gives us a good idea of how these cultures hunted, lived, and the ceremonies they practiced. The highly technical civilization of the Nazca Indians off the coast of Peru flourished from about 1 A. D. to 750 A. D. These cultures produced an array of technologies as well as crafts including ceramics, textiles, and geoglyphs. Today it is still unknown how this culture produced these geoglyphs called the Nazca lines. The Nazca Indians also produced thousands of carvings on burial stones, these carvings are known as the Ica stones.There have been over 16,000 of these remarkable stone found over the years. They contain depictions of daily life, battle scenes, advanced technologi es, and most amazingly dinosaurs. Most skeptics try to debunk the Ica stones being a hoax or created during our time period, but the evidence points otherwise. Other than the Ica stones there has been thousands of pieces of ancient art depicting dinosaurs found in many different cultures spreading over the planet. The authenticity of this art has divided skeptics, but most that have no preconceived biases believe in their genuine nature.Here are just some of the different examples of the uniformity of these creatures that are shared. Again, how could each culture depict these dinosaurs if they were not of eyewitness accounts? Could it be possible that dinosaurs still exist today? For at least a hundred years there have been many reputable reports in English speaking countries of seeing a dinosaur like creature in the lakes of Loch Ness, Champlain, and Ogopogo. The accounts describe a Plesiosaur or a water dwelling dinosaur. These lakes are vast bodies of water reaching depths of fou r hundred feet in certain parts.To add to the elusiveness of these creatures it is believed that like crocodiles, alligators, and caimans this type of dinosaur is nocturnal. The most intriguing of eyewitness reports do not come from the lakes of England, Scotland, or America but from the darkest regions of the African Congo a swamp named Likoula. Likoula is the largest swamp in the world, 55,000 square miles in size and remains eighty percent unexplored. Most civilized people do not venture into these swamps due to the harsh conditions, but tribe’s people living in the swamp say that several creatures that are apparent dinosaurs are still alive today.There’s a creature the natives call Mokele-Embembe â€Å"described as a large animal 16 to 32 feet in length with a long neck and a tail. It is also alleged that the reddish-brow to gray, which lives in the swamp and only eats on vegetation. † (â€Å"Half-God, Half-Beast†, 1999) The National Geographic show à ¢â‚¬Å"The Beast Man† presented an episode where the host interviewed a local villager and the experiences he had with the creature. The villager stated, â€Å"it was a long time ago, I was scared and ran away. † (Beast Man) This shows the power of the creature and how scary it can appear.The Bible shares a probable depiction of this very same creature, â€Å"behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. † (King James Bible, Job. 40. 15-19) The dangers of the theory of Evolution have affected and corrupted the minds of people for generations.With the evidence shown the devotion put in to this theory brings loyalty s imilar to no other. Most scientists put all of their faith in science just like as if it were a religion. As a Christian would lay their faith in to the Bible their faith lies in theories that are still not proven today. I chose to interview an Environmental Science professor at our college to question his openness and possibility of such a notion. In my interview with professor Meizeka I asked, â€Å"if dinosaurs still existed and what would that do to the evolutionary theory? He then stated â€Å"it’s not possible† when I told him about the eyewitness accounts in the Likoula Swamp he stammered around the question stating â€Å"it just doesn’t†¦you’re certainly going to find species that we never thought existed, but a large scale dinosaur hard to believe. † My question never seemed to be answered if the theory would be shaken or not but maybe his silence speaks volumes. Why are these issues confronted with such skepticism? What would be the reasoning behind not thoroughly accessing the possibility of this phenomenon?In conclusion through out all of my research and reflecting on my thesis, the Evolutionary Theory has indeed indoctrinated society. The majority of scientists would rather reject the possibility of dinosaurs’ existence with man to better enforce their belief system. The scariest notion is what if this theory was made to prevent our generation and future generations in the belief of creation. (Word Count) 2231 ? Dragons in Different Cultures 1. Arabic: ah-teen (pl. tah-neen), (Al)Tineen, Plural: (Al)Tananeen ? 2. Athebascin (Alasken): Manchu 3. ?Austrian: Drach`n, Lindwurm? 4.Bulgarian: drakon (phonetic), a? aeii (Actual spelling) ? 5. Catalan (N/E Spain): drac ? 6. Chinese: lung/long, Liung (Hakka dialect) ? Chinese: old & new: ? 7. Croatian/Serbian: zmaj (pronounced â€Å"zmai† means Dragon), azdaja (pronounced â€Å"azhdaya† means Hydra) ? 8. Czech: Drak, Draeek (Draaachek) ? 9. Dani sh: drage 10. ?Dansk: drage ? 11. Draconian: Khoth, (pl. Khothu)? Driigaran (music language): C4 G4 C5 D5 B5 C5? Double-Dutch: dridi-gag-dridi-gen? 12. Dutch: draak ? 13. Elven/Drow: Tagnik'zur ? 14. Egg-Latin: Dreggageggon ? 15. English: dragon ? English (Middle): dragun, dragoun ? 16.English (Old): draca ? Enochian: Vovin (Voh-een)? 17. Esperanto: drako, dragono? 18. Estonian: draakon, lohe, lohemadu or tuuleuss (Wind Snake), lendav madu? 19. Euskera (dialect of the Basque Country): Erensuge ? 20. Faeroese: eitt dreki, eitt flogdreki, ein fraenarormur ? Finnish: lohikaarme, draakki, dragoni? 21. Fire Witch tongue: Katash wei' vorki (kah-TASH whey VOR-key) ? 22. Flambian: kazyeeqen (comes from kazyee-aqen, fire lizard) 23. ?Flemmish: Draeke? French: dragon,dragun, dargon ? 24. Gaelic: Arach ? 25. German: drache (pl. Drachen), Lindwurm, drake (pl. draken) ? 26. Greek: drakon, drako.Male: drakos (or thrakos), Female: drakena (or thrakena) ? 27. Greek (ancient): Male: drakkon (or thra kon), Female: drakkina (or thrakena) 28. ?Hawaiian: Kelekona, (plural) Na Kelekona ? Hebrew: drakon (plural) drakonim, Tanniym ? 29. Hungarian: sarkany ? 30. Icelandic: dreki 31. ?Indonesian: Naga ? I 32. ranian: Ejdeha 33. ?Islamic: th'uban, tinnin ? 34. Italian: drago, dragone, volante, dragonessa ? 35. Japanese: ryu, tatsu ? 36. Jibberish: gidadraggidaen (pronunced â€Å"gid-a-drag-gid-ah-en†)? 37. Klingon: lung'a' puv (pronounced loong-AH poov) â€Å"Flying Great Lizard† ? 38. Korean: yong ?Latin: draco, dracon, draco, dragon, dragoon, serpent,serpens 39. ?Luxembourgian: Draach ? Middle earth Ency. : Anguloce: generic, Ramaloce: winged dragon, Uruloce: fire breath dragon 40. ?Malay: Naga 41. ?Milanese (Italy): Dragh, Draguun,Dragoon ? 42. New Zeland (Maori): tarakona ? 43. Norse: ormr ? Norsk: drake, dragonet, liten drake ? 44. Norwegian: drage ? Oppish: dropagoponop (pronounced drop-ag-op-an-op)? 45. Ourainic Barb: Duxobum ? 46. Philippines: male: dragon short o, female: Dragona with a short o and a ? 47. Pig-Latin: Agon-dray ? 48. Polish: smok 49. ?Portuguese: dragao ? 0. Quenya (elven): Loke, winged: Ramaloke, sea: Lingwiloke, fire: Uruloke ? 51. Reinitian (of Reinita): Dralaghajh ? Roman: draco ? Romanian: Dragon, (pl. Dragoni), Zmeu (pl. Zmei), dracul, drakul ? 52. Russian: drakon ? Sanskrit: naga (type of snake-human-dragon)? Slovenia: Zmaj = Dragon, Hidra = Hydra.? 53. Spanish: dragon, El Draque, Brujah? 54. Swedish: drake, lindorm ? Swedish (Ancient): flugdrake, floghdraki? 55. Swiss German: Dracha ? 56. Tagalog: drakon ? 57. Thai: mung-korn ? | Works Cited â€Å"Ancient Dinosaur Depictions. † Genesis Park. N. p. , n. d. Web. 01 Dec. 2012. ;http://www. enesispark. com/exhibits/evidence/historical/ancient/dinosaur/;. (Internet) Conner, Susan, and Linda Kitchen. Science's Most Wanted: The Top 10 Book of Outrageous Innovators, Deadly Disasters, and Shocking Discoveries. Washington, D. C. : Brassey's, 2002. 210. Print. (Book) Critt endon, Jules. â€Å"Half-God, Half Beast. † Boston Herald [Boston] 29 Jan. 1999: n. pag. Print. (Newspaper) Darwin, Charles (1859), The Origin of Species (London: A. L. Burt). (Book) Guth, Alan and Paul Steinhardt (1984), â€Å"The Inflationary Universe,† Scientific American, 250 116-128, May. (Magazine) Hawk, Ray, and E. E. Hubbard. What Is the Law of Conservation of Matter? † WiseGeek. Conjecture, 24 Sept. 2012. Web. 29 Nov. 2012. . (Internet) Job. King James Bible. Nashville, TN: Holman Bible, 1973. Print. (reference) N. p. , n. d. Web. . (Internet) â€Å"John Meizeka. † Personal interview. 29 Nov. 2012. â€Å"Nazca Lines. † , Peru. N. p. , n. d. Web. 30 Nov. 2012. ;http://www. sacred-destinations. com/peru/nazca-lines;. (Internet)Neilson, William Allan, Thomas A. Knott, and Paul W. Carhart. Webster's New International Dictionary of the English Language. Springfield, MA: G. & C. Merriam, 1960. Print. (Reference) Owen, Sir Richard. â€Å"Report o n British Fossil Reptiles. Part II. † Report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science 60-204 (1842): 42. Print. (Journal) â€Å"Say â€Å"Dragon†Ã¢â‚¬  How to Say Dragon in Many Languages. N. p. , n. d. Web. 29 Nov. 2012. . (Internet) Spain, Pat. â€Å"Mokele Mbembe. † The Beast Man. 7 Dec. 2012. Television. (Media) African: nrgwenya ? 58. Afrikaans: Draak ? 59.Arabic: ah-teen (pl. tah-neen), (Al)Tineen, Plural: (Al)Tananeen ? 60. Athebascin (Alasken): Manchu 61. ?Austrian: Drach`n, Lindwurm? 62. Bulgarian: drakon (phonetic), a? aeii (Actual spelling) ? 63. Catalan (N/E Spain): drac ? 64. Chinese: lung/long, Liung (Hakka dialect) ? Chinese: old & new: ? 65. Croatian/Serbian: zmaj (pronounced â€Å"zmai† means Dragon), azdaja (pronounced â€Å"azhdaya† means Hydra) ? 66. Czech: Drak, Draeek (Draaachek) ? 67. Danish: drage 68. ?Dansk: drage ? 69. Draconian: Khoth, (pl. Khothu)? Driigaran (music language): C4 G4 C5 D5 B5 C5? Double-D utch: dridi-gag-dridi-gen? 70. Dutch: draak ? 1. Elven/Drow: Tagnik'zur ? 72. Egg-Latin: Dreggageggon ? 73. English: dragon ? English (Middle): dragun, dragoun ? 74. English (Old): draca ? Enochian: Vovin (Voh-een)? 75. Esperanto: drako, dragono? 76. Estonian: draakon, lohe, lohemadu or tuuleuss (Wind Snake), lendav madu? 77. Euskera (dialect of the Basque Country): Erensuge ? 78. Faeroese: eitt dreki, eitt flogdreki, ein fraenarormur ? Finnish: lohikaarme, draakki, dragoni? 79. Fire Witch tongue: Katash wei' vorki (kah-TASH whey VOR-key) ? 80. Flambian: kazyeeqen (comes from kazyee-aqen, fire lizard) 81. ?Flemmish: Draeke? French: dragon,dragun, dargon ? 2. Gaelic: Arach ? 83. German: drache (pl. Drachen), Lindwurm, drake (pl. draken) ? 84. Greek: drakon, drako. Male: drakos (or thrakos), Female: drakena (or thrakena) ? 85. Greek (ancient): Male: drakkon (or thrakon), Female: drakkina (or thrakena) 86. ?Hawaiian: Kelekona, (plural) Na Kelekona ? Hebrew: drakon (plural) drakonim, Ta nniym ? 87. Hungarian: sarkany ? 88. Icelandic: dreki 89. ?Indonesian: Naga ? I 90. ranian: Ejdeha 91. ?Islamic: th'uban, tinnin ? 92. Italian: drago, dragone, volante, dragonessa ? 93. Japanese: ryu, tatsu ? 94. Jibberish: gidadraggidaen (pronunced â€Å"gid-a-drag-gid-ah-en†)? 95.Klingon: lung'a' puv (pronounced loong-AH poov) â€Å"Flying Great Lizard† ? 96. Korean: yong ? Latin: draco, dracon, draco, dragon, dragoon, serpent,serpens 97. ?Luxembourgian: Draach ? Middle earth Ency. : Anguloce: generic, Ramaloce: winged dragon, Uruloce: fire breath dragon 98. ?Malay: Naga 99. ?Milanese (Italy): Dragh, Draguun,Dragoon ? 100. New Zeland (Maori): tarakona ? 101. Norse: ormr ? Norsk: drake, dragonet, liten drake ? 102. Norwegian: drage ? Oppish: dropagoponop (pronounced drop-ag-op-an-op)? 103. Ourainic Barb: Duxobum ? 104. Philippines: male: dragon short o, female: Dragona with a short o and a ? 05. Pig-Latin: Agon-dray ? 106. Polish: smok 107. ?Portuguese: dragao ? 108. Quenya (elven): Loke, winged: Ramaloke, sea: Lingwiloke, fire: Uruloke ? 109. Reinitian (of Reinita): Dralaghajh ? Roman: draco ? Romanian: Dragon, (pl. Dragoni), Zmeu (pl. Zmei), dracul, drakul ? 110. Russian: drakon ? Sanskrit: naga (type of snake-human-dragon)? Slovenia: Zmaj = Dragon, Hidra = Hydra.? 111. Spanish: dragon, El Draque, Brujah? 112. Swedish: drake, lindorm ? Swedish (Ancient): flugdrake, floghdraki? 113. Swiss German: Dracha ? 114. Tagalog: drakon ? 115. Thai: mung-korn ? | Dragons in Different Cultures