Author Topic: DRAGONS is on now :D (Read 873 times)

Mini D · « **Reply #15 on:** March 21, 2005, 07:28:52 AM »

There's nothing really to debate. They said "900 lbs". If you were to examine a bird, you'd see every aspect of it was designed to be lightweight. Nothing about a dragon is. It's why they had to create the stupid hydrogen theory. Looking at the paintings means the lift necessary for actual flight made the notion of a dragon simply impossible.

Of course, I found the undersea version just as laughable. Somehow, the hydrogen system that rendered a dragon light enough to fly still allowed him to maintain neutral buoancy. Yeppers. some sound thinking there.

Nice effects. Not much thought into anything else.

SunTracker · « **Reply #16 on:** March 21, 2005, 07:36:17 AM »

Minus the part about hydrogen being absolutely necessary to fly, it was a neat show. Hydrogen would *help* a large animal fly, but wouldnt be necessary.

Looks like they drew on evolutionary paths of birds and reptiles to create the dragon show. And maybe the bombadier beetle, which shoots fire out of his rectum.

Muckmaw1 · « **Reply #17 on:** March 21, 2005, 08:46:56 AM »

Have they figured out how a bumble bee flies yet?

boxboy28 · « **Reply #18 on:** March 21, 2005, 09:21:22 AM »

i was just pissed to find out the whole thing was made up!

I mean the tauted it as a realy special, well from what i saw.

but it was entertaining to say the least.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #19 on:** March 21, 2005, 09:51:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D

Of course, I found the undersea version just as laughable. Somehow, the hydrogen system that rendered a dragon light enough to fly still allowed him to maintain neutral buoancy. Yeppers. some sound thinking there.

Only problem is there really were creatures that remarkably resembled the underwater dragon.

And whats so far fetched about that? Dont submarines work under a similar principle?
Perhaps while they produced it they simply didnt store as much of the hydrogen.

And if you look at the way they described the Dragon. They too were designed to be as light as possible. According to their description.

Actually the single largest problem I have with Dragons is ones never really been found.
People laughed at the thought of a world with giant reptiles in it and didnt think that was possible until people started digging them up. But we now know they were real.
If science has taught us one thing about nature, its taught us that there are all sorts of animals in the world that can and have been able to do all sorts of things we didnt think possible. So just because we may beleive something isnt possible doesnt mean it isnt.

But the fact still remains that will all the Dinosaurs that have been found. a Dragon hasnt.At least not yet.
And that more then anything else is the strongest arguement against their existance.

slimm50 · « **Reply #20 on:** March 21, 2005, 10:19:34 AM »

Besides the other obvious things mentioned above, did anybody besides me find the whole thing about their craving for platinum a little too much to swallow.

Pun intended.

OIO · « **Reply #21 on:** March 21, 2005, 10:41:27 AM »

dredlock, MYTHBUSTERS had a special on it.

To be able to lift the weight of a 5 year old child they needed like 400 balloons full of hydrogen. There were so many it practically filled the aircraft hangar they were doing the show in.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #22 on:** March 21, 2005, 10:44:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by OIO
dredlock, MYTHBUSTERS had a special on it.

To be able to lift the weight of a 5 year old child they needed like 400 balloons full of hydrogen. There were so many it practically filled the aircraft hangar they were doing the show in.

then how did the Hindenburg fly?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #23 on:** March 21, 2005, 10:57:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by slimm50
Besides the other obvious things mentioned above, did anybody besides me find the whole thing about their craving for platinum a little too much to swallow.

Pun intended.

Not really when you consider this

"Understanding Salt and Sodium
By ANN LOUISE GITTLEMAN, N.D., M.S.

SODIUM IS ESSENTIAL TO LIFE.

Sodium is so important, in fact, that humans have a specific sensor on the tongue that can detect salt. Thousands of years ago, when the diet of humans was potassium-rich and sodium-poor, this sensor for salt was a crucial survival tool. Nature, in her infinite wisdom, devised a way to help humans (as well as animals) seek out salty foods so they could be assured of receiving adequate sodium from their diets"

Animals often seek out specific nutrients during key times of the year

Some species of birds often take in stones to aid in digestion
So its not totally out of the realm of possibility

SuperDud · « **Reply #24 on:** March 21, 2005, 11:07:48 AM »

Yeah, I can believe the possiblity of dragons I guess, with some exceptions. First, the fire breathing. Why would such a large apex preditor need this extra weapon? Normally species evolve a special ability through a need. The dragon was easily at the top of the list throughout time. Tooth and claw would have been more than enough. Also, with the excepton of the beetle(which is an insect, and insects seem to be the only things that don't follow the norm) no other creature has something so dramatic. You might say snakes have venom, but I wouldn't put that in the catagory of fire breathing.

Also the flight and helium kinda leaves me at a lose. I find this more likely than the fire breathing however, but once again, a large predator would have little use for this. Throughout the evolutionary coarse of history, I can't think of 1 large apex predator that has flown. I'm talking T-rex, tigers, bears, etc. Teridactles don't count, they were hardly and apex preditor.

And my final point is they had to throw in abilities from every species to make it work. Body of a reptile, wings of a bird, fire like an insect. And even after that, they still have to throw in helium sacs. It's just a bit to much for me. The dragon that was the most believable to me was the slender forest dragon. It didn't fly and it didn't rely on fire except to cook tigers lol. It was more realistic, it just sat still and ambushed, much like a tiger would do in that enviroment.

Basically, the closest thing to a dragon for me is a T-Rex. And at the same time, it's the strongest case against a dragon. The T-Rex was the king in it's day and it id it all without flying or fire, and it thrived. Hmmm, I didn't mean to write this much, I think I'll stop here. Anywho, that's my take on it all.

Mini D · « **Reply #25 on:** March 21, 2005, 11:47:47 AM »

dred... the things that make a creature lighter in air would make it much too light to be under water. Submarines use COMPRESSED air to displace water from TANKS. Having the compressed air in cannisters does nothing for them. If you don't believe me, ask a diver.

Also, just how does fire-breathing evolve in a sea based creature?

I have no doubt that there were creatures that resembled dragons. I have serious doubts about the fire-breathing and the flying capability. That show did nothing to dispell those doubts. The theories they offered up were simply rediculous.

In order for Hydrogen to lighten anything, it would have to be uncrompressed (displacing volumes of something)... not in a bladder. Check out exactly how big the hindenberg was and compare it to how small the cargo capacity was.

Dunno... seems like a pathetically silly thing to try an play devil's advocate on. That is, unless you have the same basic lack of understanding (in regards to physics) as the writers of that show.

OIO · « **Reply #26 on:** March 21, 2005, 11:49:37 AM »

dredlock: the zeppellins, just like hot air balloons and just like the little kid they tried to make fly with party balloons fly by bouyancy, not just because there is lighter than air gas inside them.

http://quest.arc.nasa.gov/aero/planetary/atmospheric/balloon.html

in laymans terms, bouyancy works by creating a 'bubble' of lighter than the enviroment around you gas/fluid.. the density of the gas/fluid inside that bubble will determine the size (volume displaced) the 'bubble' needs to be to lift something.

To lift a 200lb human you would need a balloon about 4 meters in diameter to create bouyant lift to counter the 200lbs weight..more would be needed to actually fly it. A 900 lb dragon would need an 8 meter diameter bladder to counter the 900lbs weight. So even if the dragon used its wings to help counter its own weight, the dragon would still need to have hydrogen bladders displacing several meters wide inside it to have any bouyant lift.

And the dragons shown were barely bigger than a small cow in their body core (aka no tail/neck/wings taken into account). No place there to put the needed hydrogen sacs.

Unless they inflated like a frog's throat that is hehe.

The firebreathing is entirely possible... maybe the platinum thing was farfetched but theres nothing to indicate a creature cant create a spark via chemical interaction (like the bombardier beetle) to ignite hydrogen thats coming out of its mouth.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #27 on:** March 21, 2005, 12:17:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mini D
dred... the things that make a creature lighter in air would make it much too light to be under water. Submarines use COMPRESSED air to displace water from TANKS. Having the compressed air in cannisters does nothing for them. If you don't believe me, ask a diver.

Also, just how does fire-breathing evolve in a sea based creature?

I have no doubt that there were creatures that resembled dragons. I have serious doubts about the fire-breathing and the flying capability. That show did nothing to dispell those doubts. The theories they offered up were simply rediculous.

In order for Hydrogen to lighten anything, it would have to be uncrompressed (displacing volumes of something)... not in a bladder. Check out exactly how big the hindenberg was and compare it to how small the cargo capacity was.

Dunno... seems like a pathetically silly thing to try an play devil's advocate on. That is, unless you have the same basic lack of understanding (in regards to physics) as the writers of that show.

Not nessicarily true.
One of the adaptations of Bony Fiishes includes a swim bladder. which is a Gas-filled sac that allows regulation of buoyant density

In our case the creature in question was not only the cargo but the balloon itself.

I already admitted it was silly.
but its not a whole lot more silly then most of the threads

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #28 on:** March 21, 2005, 12:28:29 PM »

on another thought I am thinking. Again playing devils advocate if great leaping ability combined with and aided by wings could have been mistaken for powered flight

Its widely accepted that Dinosaurs such as velociraptor had great leaping ability now if the adaptation of wings were included.

Similar to the flying squirrel

Another thought comes to mind. the locust and the preying mantis each have large bodies in relation to their wings. the preying mantis in particular

And looking at this pic it does kinda bear a resemblence of a dragon LOL

Mini D · « **Reply #29 on:** March 21, 2005, 12:31:57 PM »

The whole problem with the theories is scale. It just doesn't translate to 1/2 ton creatures. The show errored greatly in that aproach. It was very poorly thought out.

I would have rather seen them delve more into the actual mythology of dragons and work from that aspect instead of the autopsy aproach.

They also failed to explain how their autopsy subject survived the comet that they claim wiped out all mountain dragons. A minor oversight in their timeline.