This Newly Discovered Dinosaur Was Basically A Dragon

Dragons. As featured in many a video game. Fictional creatures, right? WRONG. Dragons were real and and science has now (sorta) proven it.

Alright, technically these 'dragons' were 'dinosaurs', but by God these dinosaurs are so dragonlike in size and dimensions that they are literally being called dragons by the people who discovered them.

The recently discovered creature has been called a 'Azhdarchidan', which is the Persian word for dragon, and it was a type of Pterosaur (think Pterodactyl) that existed worldwide during the Cretaceous period. They were one of the last Pterosaurs to roam the planet and I'm hoping they had voices like Sean Connery and breathed fire. I am also hoping one of them was called Alduin. That would be super cool.

But I digress...

For a sense of scale, the Azhdarchidan had a wingspan of 10-12 metres. Not feet. Metres. That's about the same length as your average bus. Okay, now I want you to imagine a living, breathing bus flying through the air (possibly but probably not) breathing fire and shouting at you in Sean Connery's voice. That is a visual I can get behind.

But it's probably all ruined when you consider that all dinosaurs probably had feathers. Just ignore the feathers part.

Just A Heads Up, New Study Says Earth Was Once Covered In Literal Dragons [The Mary Sue]

Note: I'm adding this great post from NegativeZero because I know very little about dinosaurs, but he clearly does!

NegativeZero @negativezero Sorry, have to be that annoying pedantic guy:
Pterosaurs are not dinosaurs! 'Dinosaurs' are reptiles in the orders Saurischia and Ornithishia. Pterosaurs were winged reptiles in a different order (Pterosauria).
Pterosaurs did not have feathers. Feathers are an adaptation that's found in some sub-orders of Saurischia, Coeurlosauria, which includes the Tyrannosaurs, Compsognathids and Maniraptors (and that order includes Aves, the modern bird).
Also it looks nothing like a 'dragon', that's just some spin bullshit that the people reporting on it have added. It's a big awkward-looking winged thing with a massive toothless beak: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2014/08/18/Toothless-dragon-pterosaurs-filled-late-Cretaceous-skies/1801408375504/
They're basically the same thing as the Quetzalcoatlus, except that was probably even bigger.

Thanks for the clarification. I am so not qualified to be writing about Dinosaurs/Pterosaurs/'Dragons'.


Comments

    If you're going to get technical about it, they aren't dinosaurs either: they're pterosaurs :)

    I dunno about "Dragon". Based on a quick Google, "Roc" Might be better. Or "Fell Beast".

    More then 3 syllables, not a dragon.

    Sorry, have to be that annoying pedantic guy:

    Pterosaurs are not dinosaurs! 'Dinosaurs' are reptiles in the orders Saurischia and Ornithishia. Pterosaurs were winged reptiles in a different order (Pterosauria).

    Pterosaurs did not have feathers. Feathers are an adaptation that's found in some sub-orders of Saurischia, Coeurlosauria, which includes the Tyrannosaurs, Compsognathids and Maniraptors (and that order includes Aves, the modern bird).

    Also it looks nothing like a 'dragon', that's just some spin bullshit that the people reporting on it have added. It's a big awkward-looking winged thing with a massive toothless beak:
    http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2014/08/18/Toothless-dragon-pterosaurs-filled-late-Cretaceous-skies/1801408375504/

    They're basically the same thing as the Quetzalcoatlus, except that was probably even bigger.

      I am always happy for a story like this to have "that annoying pedantic guy" - they are the ones who teach us the most :) Thanks for the extra info!

      Guessing the winged beast in Godzilla 2014 movie was based on that creature, looks quite similar in some ways.

      Could this be related?
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/11032567/New-species-of-flying-dinosaur-discovered-in-Brazil.html

      Pffft, get a load a THIS nerd.

        Hardly a nerd, I'm guessing well read. I know most of what he has written from reading dinosaur books to my son.

        Oh, I get it. Books = nerd

        Good for you

          (I hope my comment was read in jest, since any seemingly unironic use of "nerd" as a pejorative in the comments on a website about video game news should be read as facetious at best)

    Didn't dragons come from people in medieval times coming across dinosaur bones and not knowing what they were so they made up stories about them?

      No, they came from the city under Nightvale.
      Or from the dog park.
      Dogs are not allowed in the dog park. People are not allowed in the dog park. It is possible you will see hooded figures in the dog park. Do not approach them. Do not approach the dog park. The fence is electrified and highly dangerous. Try not to look at the dog park, and especially do not look for any period of time at the hooded figures. The dog park will not harm you.

      That's one theory and there's probably some basis in it. Crocodiles and large lizards could be the origin as well. Another theory based off the fact that dragons or dragon-like creatures appear in the mythology of just about every ancient culture that they might be something that our minds instinctively make up as a result of the way we're all wired up. One theory suggests that since humans and most closely-related primates have an instinctive fear or wariness of snakes, large predatory cats and birds of prey that we might have invented the dragons - which combine a lot of features of those animals - out of those subconscious anxieties.

      It's probably a combination of all of those things.

    If you're going to get technical about it, they aren't dragons either: they're wyverns :)

      If you're using the number of legs as an indication, that's a modern invention that has no basis in historical usage. Dragons with two legs have been depicted and referred to as such for centuries.

    Biblical literalists are waaay ahead of you on this score. There are a large number of people who have put a surprising amount of effort into theorising how some dinosaurs could breathe fire. All so that they can "prove" that a metaphor contained within a poem is literally true.

    I don't really care what their motivations are. Anyone putting genuine effort into proving the existence of dragons is OK by me (with regards to their scientific point of view, at least).

    No picture of said 'newly discovered dinosaur'? :|

      Sadly no time travelers have come forward to cooperate.

      I could probably google some pieces of bone if you like though.

      http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2014/08/18/Toothless-dragon-pterosaurs-filled-late-Cretaceous-skies/1801408375504/

      Artist rendering, not real.

    I believe that Benedict Cumberbatch has now replaced Sean Connery as the "official" dragon voice.

Join the discussion!