Did Dinosaurs live with man?

I googled "Vandana Prasad and dragon coprolites" and found links to Free Republic and articles by Brian Thomas of the Dishonesty Institute. I would not consider either a source for reliable science.The articles by Vandana Prasad deal with dinosaur diet and make no mention of dragons.Do you have specific links to some reliable articles or are you engaging in wishful thinking and creation "science" once again?

If you were pretending that you weren't mentally ill, how would you have phrased that?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Translate it into Yawnish yourself, Inadequate. The feline prefers playing with you crypto-creo bigbanger quackademic mice the way he pleases.

This is only marginally more entertaining than the threads where Moose tried to elicit profound interactions with Mabus.

Masturbation can be fun.

Who would win in a debate between Alfred and Mabus? highlight for the answer

Well, Vatican. There are nonsensical beliefs galore and there are oceans of pretence to certainty about those beliefs. The firm believers whose name is multitude are easily offended by any doubt expressed. That's why there are so many of so-called trolls. He who has no faith in nonsense never fears any trolls, says the feline. Now be a good boy, Vatican, go to the science section and pontificate a little on how certain you are at what rate the universe expands and what species in it randomly mutate into what exactly and so on.

Brian Thomas' beliefs and affiliations are as irrelevant as yours, Coy. Dishonesty? Irrelevant again. They can run a polygraph test on you and Brian to check how sincere your respective beliefs on possible co-existence of simians and dragons or dinosaurs are. That would not help to solve the problem as neither of you may have those beliefs from any first-hand experience. Otherwise, Vandana Prasad is not from Brian's sect at all. The paper just points to the presence of rice or similar grass in dragon's diet. It might undermine a little your certainty about the geological column and the entire chronology but that is all there is to it in the paper. Vandana does not offer any wide-reaching interpretations. Nothing like Michael Cremo does who is another recommended reading for you though coming from a different perspective and so on.

Brian Thomas has a well-earned reputation for posting creation "science" in the guise of real science. He doesn't let evidence interfere with his religious beliefs. This is typical for the Dishonesty Institute. They are well-known for pushing creation "science" and ID in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. They are nothing more than a propaganda mill. Drivel. The papers I saw from Prasad did not mention dragons at all. They dealt with dinosaurs. Looks like you are out there on a limb all by yourself, as the papers you cite as support do not actually support your position. I don't see any of that in the papers I read. Perhaps you can post a link to the exact paper you are referring to? Otherwise, what I read from your cited author does not say what you claim it said. Specifically, he never mentioned dragons in the articles I read.You are just making up things, as usual? I don't think I will learn much from Michael Cremo.Do you have any real science to cite?I'll leave to you the magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff.If you have any real science to support your view that dinosaurs = dragons and that one or both co-existed with modern humans, let's see it.Bones would be nice, but you've had 100+ posts to provide evidence of dragon bones and have yet to come up with any.I'm beginning to think you're just a troll.As suggested above, maybe you should go two falls out of three with David Mabus and have the winner get back to us.

Traditionally, cats catch mice by the exercise of their superior skill and cunning. They don't roll about in their own filth drooling while the mice mock them.But then, as I have pointed out, you are not actually a cat.

None of that didn't make no sense.

How do you mean real and unreal science? Are you to decide which is which for the feline, Coy Boy? Is real science only what you and the boys in your choir sing? All the boys in my coy choir, cats should hear and admire? Cremo does not sing all of that so he is unreal science kind of thing? That is not how it goes with the Cheshire. You've got a witness opinion and Cremo got another. You and him got an equal time to state it. No favours you are hungry for are given. Contradictions found, the bollocks cut by the judge. Gives you pain? Tough, sorry. Your list of red herrings you've dragged in here is irrelevant. Contradiction are indeed found in your story. Ouija board, my foot. It is coming down on your head. Address contradictions in your chronology pointed to you and cited by other witnesses, shy girl.

Clearly someone should. We've seen how you manage when it's left up to you. Distinguishing real things from unreal things is, how shall I put this delicately, not exactly your forte.So, let us help you out. Dragons do not exist. You are not a cat. Creationists are not reliable sources.

I'm kinda drunk and I would like to babble incoherently. Can I? This thread seems to be the place to do that.