As far as the web-site, the data is the data, period. Pictures, written accounts, etc,...are no less real just because a web-site dedicated to the anomalous or strange stuff publishes them.
I don't doubt they are real, but are they genuine? A lot of these pictures look stylistically different from their contempories. It would be nice to see a reliable source (an archaeologist as opposed to a creationist) discuss them to see what they have to say.
The question is why are there numerous reports, written accounts, drawings on pottery and elsewhere of quite specific anatomical details matching so precisely with what we know of many dinosaurs.
The question is, if dinosaurs were contempory with humans, why are so many of the drawings, reports and written accounts blatantly unlike dinosaurs? Creatures with chimeric qualities, or hexapods such as winged dragons, or winged snake-like creatures? Why do we see so many of these monstrosities as compared to a couple of things which look like dinosaurs?
The problem you face of course is even worse. It doesn't matter if dinosaurs lived contemporously with humans 6,000 years ago. It would be surprising, and unusual, but not impossible. Natural History would have it that they went extinct, but evolution doesn't require it at all.