Counter-Point: Bigfoot-ologists Give Dragons the Finger
If you would like to read the point to my counter-point, cryptonaut has provided one, but it involves a lot of "facts" and therefore is incredibly boring.
Question: Are dragons valid topics for cryptozoological consideration?
So let me get this straight. Bigfoot and the Lochness Monster are legitimate things for cryptozoologists to study, but Dragons aren’t? It sounds as though you may be unjustly prejudiced against dragons. Did a dragon kill your family when you were a child, or perhaps eat a young maiden you fancied? I assure you that not all dragons partake in such debauched activities, though I do acknowledge that a few have indulged these base instincts. However, judging all dragons on this basis is uncalled for and I would ask you to refrain from such ignorance.
For now I will ignore your ignorance and attempt to continue this discussion as rationally as is possible with an ignorant, prejudiced opponent. I respectfully disagree with you that dragons are not a valid topic for crytozoological study, and you know who else disagrees with you? A few gentlemen known as George and Charles Merriam and Noah Webster, that’s who. Their definition of dragon is a “huge serpent”. Are you arguing that huge serpents cannot possibly exist good sir? Surely you acknowledge that some in fact do and that we cannot possibly know of all variants of huge serpents. Such a declaration would be foolhardy at best.
What, that’s not good enough for you? Well how about I drop another definition on you? Perhaps you are curious what the good men listed above have to say about cryptozoology? I am happy to oblige you with the answer, in fact it would be an honor. Accorrding to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, cryptozoology is defined as “the study of the lore concerning legendary animals (as Sasquatch) especially in order to evaluate the possibility of their existence”. Are you arguing that dragons are not legendary animals? I can only assume that you would not say such a thing as it would demonstrate just how far your prejudice against dragons goes. How dare you sir! I have been trying to keep this a civil discussion and you imply that dragons are not legendary? That is simply the height of hubris. I say good day to you sir, good day!
Question: Are dragons valid topics for cryptozoological consideration?
So let me get this straight. Bigfoot and the Lochness Monster are legitimate things for cryptozoologists to study, but Dragons aren’t? It sounds as though you may be unjustly prejudiced against dragons. Did a dragon kill your family when you were a child, or perhaps eat a young maiden you fancied? I assure you that not all dragons partake in such debauched activities, though I do acknowledge that a few have indulged these base instincts. However, judging all dragons on this basis is uncalled for and I would ask you to refrain from such ignorance.
For now I will ignore your ignorance and attempt to continue this discussion as rationally as is possible with an ignorant, prejudiced opponent. I respectfully disagree with you that dragons are not a valid topic for crytozoological study, and you know who else disagrees with you? A few gentlemen known as George and Charles Merriam and Noah Webster, that’s who. Their definition of dragon is a “huge serpent”. Are you arguing that huge serpents cannot possibly exist good sir? Surely you acknowledge that some in fact do and that we cannot possibly know of all variants of huge serpents. Such a declaration would be foolhardy at best.
What, that’s not good enough for you? Well how about I drop another definition on you? Perhaps you are curious what the good men listed above have to say about cryptozoology? I am happy to oblige you with the answer, in fact it would be an honor. Accorrding to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, cryptozoology is defined as “the study of the lore concerning legendary animals (as Sasquatch) especially in order to evaluate the possibility of their existence”. Are you arguing that dragons are not legendary animals? I can only assume that you would not say such a thing as it would demonstrate just how far your prejudice against dragons goes. How dare you sir! I have been trying to keep this a civil discussion and you imply that dragons are not legendary? That is simply the height of hubris. I say good day to you sir, good day!