|
|
Post by Sock on Jan 31, 2005 23:14:38 GMT -5
[glow=brown,2,300]This isn't a debate, more of a discussion. I just thought it'd be fun to see different forumer's opinions on mythical creatures.
I definetely believe. I mean, reality wouldn't be anything without magic, and magic wouldn't be anything without reality. They go together, like ketchup and fries. I have had some odd experiences with dragons and stuff, if you want to know about them PM me, and we can share stories! ^.^
Please post your opinions!  [/glow]
|
|
|
|
Post by Komori on Feb 1, 2005 0:23:38 GMT -5
0_o;; My roommate believes that dragons exist. I can't get her to tell me why, though, except that she fervently believes they do.
As for me, I don't believe dragons exist. Though don't get me wrong, I don't believe that this world is without its mysteries, and its charm. Not everything in the world can be explained with science. And I believe that magic exists, but my belief in magic is related to my Christian beliefs, and I don't know if that was a road that you wanted to take this thread on. And there are beings out there who cannot be explained by science, but I wouldn't say they were scaly and lizard-like, or shiny and horse-like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sock on Feb 1, 2005 0:49:58 GMT -5
Though don't get me wrong, I don't believe that this world is without its mysteries, and its charm. Not everything in the world can be explained with science.  [/glow] |
|
|
|
Post by Jessica Coconut on Feb 1, 2005 2:12:38 GMT -5
Mythical creatures... always a possibility. There's always a possibility that something living exists out there somewhere that we haven't discovered, and while you might ask why we haven't found any bones, maybe it doesn't have any. You might ask why we haven't found any of it's feces, but maybe it doesn't need to eat like other living things do. You might ask why we've never seen them, they might have a super-advanced form of camoflauge that can totally match surroundings. The only thing that would require to be living by our terms of living is for it to follow cell theory. I'll explain that now...
Cell theory consists of 3 rules.
1. All living things are made of cells.
2. A cell is the basic unit of life.
3. All cells come from the division of pre-existing cells.
I believe that the unexplained is caused by the unexplained. You might say that I'm suggesting that unexplained things cause themselves, but what I mean is, unexplained things will cause other unexplained things. Which, in turn will cause other unexplained things. Which supports the notion that whenever we discover something new, we open up more questions (unexplained things) and are also lead on a new trail to figure out old unexplained things. Like "if this is true, maybe this and this and this are too!" and when you prove that, you can prove more. But the exceptions have exceptions, which have exceptions for themselves. Which is where the new questions come from: the exceptions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gav on Feb 1, 2005 6:57:10 GMT -5
...Sigh... at times I wish not everything can be solved by science. Actually, that's already true. Like the Bermuda Triangle. Anyway, I wish and try to absolutely believe in dragons. I can just stare at them for hours. And why not take a gander at my favourite Neopet? |
|
|
|
Post by Shadyy on Feb 1, 2005 7:59:14 GMT -5
Untill I encounter a mythical creature of some kind, I believe they don't exsit. But that doesn't stop me to believe it would be great for them to really exist, and I definetly adore writing and reading about mythical creatures. I love mythical subjects.  |
|
|
|
Post by Komori on Feb 1, 2005 12:42:38 GMT -5
a super-advanced form of camoflauge that can totally match surroundings. The only thing that would require to be living by our terms of living is for it to follow cell theory. I'll explain that now... Cell theory consists of 3 rules. 1. All living things are made of cells. 2. A cell is the basic unit of life. 3. All cells come from the division of pre-existing cells. Cell theory isn't the only criteria that living things have to follow. They also need to meet these criteria: (quote from: www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/bio99/bio99171.htm)MOTION -- does it seem to move under its own power? Does it move with some discernible purpose? (Toward food, away from heat, etc) REPRODUCTION -- does it have some way of making more of itself, either through sexual reproduction or by budding or fissioning in some way? CONSUMPTION -- does it eat or drink? Does it take in nutrients in one way or another in order to survive, grow, and eventually multiply? GROWTH -- does the organism develop over time, increase in complexity, until it reaches a mature stage? STIMULUS RESPONSE -- does the organism respond to external stimuli, i.e. has a nervous system of some sort to detect external conditions? Aaaaaanyway, but my point is, sure, maybe the creature doesn't have bones or makes poo or has uber-camoflauge. But that would also mean it doesn't look like a giant, winged lizard. |
|
|
|
Post by Jessica Coconut on Feb 1, 2005 20:58:11 GMT -5
Fair enough. I suppose I overlooked a lot of things. Science class can be kind of blinding when you're only taught one thing at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2005 21:15:36 GMT -5
I believe this should be called "legendary" creatures. Myths are generally ficticious, while legends aren't clear.
I believe in the possibility of Sasquatch/Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster, and the Chupacabra, but I don't necessarily believe that they are, without a doubt, true.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ducky being lazy on Feb 1, 2005 21:24:21 GMT -5
Actually, there are 4 parts to the Cell Theory, although part 4 is thought to have been proven wrong.
4. Cells are the smallest living things.
I totally believe in the lochness monster and chupacabras. I just think they're creatures that man hasn't truely discovered yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sock on Feb 1, 2005 22:39:04 GMT -5
I believe this should be called "legendary" creatures. Myths are generally ficticious, while legends aren't clear.
And I agree with Ducky, Nessie and some others definetely exist, but meh I believe in most everything XD[/glow] |
|
|
|
Post by Sock on Feb 1, 2005 22:40:51 GMT -5
...Sigh... at times I wish not everything can be solved by science. Actually, that's already true. Like the Bermuda Triangle. |
|
|
|
Post by william on Feb 2, 2005 2:42:37 GMT -5
Well, I personally don't believe in any of this stuff. If I see a magic trick, I always start thinking 'how did they do that?', instead of just watching it and being amazed. I guess I'm the same with this, I'm scientific in my approach, I like everythink to be explained, not just attributed to magic.
On a side note, someone mentioned Nessie, well, they did a Loch-wide search a whie back, and there was nothing there. They keep it up because they want American tourists to visit.
Also, what's a chupacabra?
|
|
|
|
Post by Sock on Feb 2, 2005 3:46:14 GMT -5
On a side note, someone mentioned Nessie, well, they did a Loch-wide search a whie back, and there was nothing there. They keep it up because they want American tourists to visit.
Also this is a Chupacabra:
kidwizard.com/Glossary/GlossaryC.asp#Chupacabras[/glow] |
|
|
|
Post by william on Feb 2, 2005 3:51:37 GMT -5
[glow=brown,2,300]My belief is mythical creatures live in another dimension, and only come into ours when they WANT us to see them. Thus, Nessie probably does exist, but in another dimension, and is hiding from us.
Also this is a Chupacabra:
kidwizard.com/Glossary/GlossaryC.asp#Chupacabras[/glow] Ooh, thanks for showing me that, I'll be reading it for hours! |
|
[/glow]
[/glow]
Furgo 
Michael. 
