Something escaped from wuhan lab.

lol! In all seriousness though... It's quite possible dragons were hunted to extinction and there's some sort of Jurassic Park style experimentation to bring them back.

Some literary references of flying dragons from Scandinavia:

Excerpt from the Saga of Ketil Trout:

One evening after sunset Ketil took his ax in hand and went north toward an island. But he had not gotten very far away from the farm when he saw a dragon flying southward toward him from some rocky cliffs. It had a coil and a tail like a wyrm but wings like a dragon. Fire seemed to burn forth from its eyes and maw. Ketil thought he had never seen such a fish or any other such evil creature, and he would rather have had to defend himself against a host of men. The dragon attacked him, but Ketil defended himself well and manfully with his ax. So it went for a long while until Ketil was able to strike the coil and cut the dragon in two. It fell down dead.

(The Penguin Book of Dragons, pgs. 78-79)

Excerpt from the Saga of Þiðrekr of Bern:

They [Þiðrekr and Fasold] see a huge flying dragon (flugdreka). It is both long and stout; it has thick legs and claws both sharp and long. Its head is huge and terrifying. It flies along close to the ground and everywhere its claws rake the earth, it was as if the sharpest iron blade had struck it. In its mouth it is carrying a man [Sistram] and had swallowed his legs and everything up to his arms. His head and shoulders were sticking out of its mouth. His arms were in the lower jaws, and the man was still alive...They leap from their horses and draw their swords and both strike the dragon at the same time. Þiðrekr's sword cut somewhat, but Fasold's not at all. Although the dragon was big and strong, it was beyond its power to carry the man along with the weapons, and it could not rise aloft to fly or to defend itself, as it would have done if it were free. Then the man in the dragon's mouth said to Fasold: "I see that your sword does not cut into him because he is so tough-skinned. Take the sword here in the dragon's jaws; it is more likely to cut almost anything that comes under its blade, if a brave man wields it...Strike carefully. My legs have gone way down into the dragon's throat and you should take care because I do not want to be wounded by my own sword...Strike hard, good lads, because the evil dragon is squeezing me so hard with his jaws that blood is springing from my mouth and I do not know how all of this is going to turn out." Now they both struck with mighty strokes until the dragon was dead. The man was now set free from the dragon's mouth.

(The Penguin Book of Dragons, pg. 79)

The Hava Supai Petroglyph 




Located in Arizona's Hava Supai Canyon, it was first discovered by a prospector named E.L. Dohney in the year 1879. The pictograph measured about a foot high and seven inches wide. It clearly resembles some species of dinosaur, with its long serpentine neck and tail supported by two large feet. The most likely estimates were either an Iguanodon or a Diplodocus. 

It was photographed and even had a cast made of it during the 1924 "Dohney Expedition" in which the man it was named after partook. The expedition was led by Samuel Hubbard, who was the Honorary Curator of Archaeology at the Oakland Museum in Oakland, California. A paleontologist was there, and not just any paleontologist, but one associated with the United States National Museum named Charles W. Gilmore, who was then Curator of Vertebrate Paleontology at that institution. 





Concerning this find, Hubbard (unlike most establishment scientists) did not dismiss this evidence for man's coexistence with dinosaurs with a mere wave of the hand, nor did he try to assert that this drawing was "misidentification" of an animal that lived during the mythical Ice Age; rather, he admitted honestly that this find undermined "the science" in his report on the expedition entitled Discoveries Relating to Prehistoric Man:

The fact that some prehistoric man made a pictograph of a dinosaur on the walls of this canyon upsets completely all our theories regarding the antiquity of man. Facts are stubborn and immutable things. If theories do not square with the facts then the theories must change, the facts remain.

(Discoveries Relating to Prehistoric Man, pg. 5 as quot. in Cowboys and Saurians, pg. 399 by John Lemay)

Here is a brief comparison image of the pictograph with depictions of the Diplodocus:





And since those artistic depictions are now considered outdated by modern standards, I will insert a modern illustration that also shows Diplodocus in a bipedal position. Note again the similarities:



This seems to be the most likely candidate for the creature portrayed in the image; Hubbard believed so himself and stated this in his report, going as far to place images of the two side by side, and I find no reason to disagree with him (Cowboys and Saurians, 339). 

Some other details concerning this pictograph is that:

1) There were other pictographs near it that portrayed evidently non-extinct animals such as snakes and goats. 

2) Hubbard believed that whoever drew this image must have seen this animal alive due its upright posture. 

3) On the edge of the Painted Desert (not far from the canyon) fossilized dinosaur tracks were found, proving that they had been roaming about this area at some point in the past. 


I might write another post about this subject, as there is more about it that I'd like to share. 

Fr. Chazal actually talked about Dinosaurs in his recent sermon, equating them with dragons.
https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-sermons/from-the-depths-of-hell-fr-chazal-mcspx/

I noticed this when I listened to it a few days ago, glad that he mentioned this. Inspired me to post more on this subject here on CI.

A pretty good Biblical explanation of the fossil record through flood paleontology 

P.S. there were never any dumb "cavemen" wearing skins and wielding clubs. Men might have dwelt in caves for a short period after a disaster, including the Flood, but that's it. Man has always had full use of Reason, he could build tools (including projectiles like arrows, "darts", catapults, etc.), and was always a force to be reckoned with. Even in ancient times.

Absolutely. The only "feral" men were most likely the progeny of Cain for a time, until Tubalcain started constructing cities and technologies. Not to mention the giants who, at least according to Anne Catherine Emmerich, were not stupid brutes but extremely intelligent and crafty. I love Chesterton's opening to "The Everlasting Man" where he makes fun of the caveman myth, noting that even cave paintings have a skill and fluidity to them that would be impossible for subhuman brutes, a form not even modern men can recreate (much like many post-diluvian wonders of antiquity)

Man, I love looking into the antediluvian period

And yet, as we know from Scripture, this same longevity led to serious and widespread errors that necessitated the Deluge.

I started reading Ignatius Donnelly's book on Atlantis, which paints an interesting picture of that antediluvian civilization which has been relegated to myth and legend rather than historical fact

https://archive.org/details/Atlantis1882

I was wondering what you all thought about the existence of creatures like vampires and werewolves. Its interesting how they are in every culture around the world just like dragons are. I think if they did, they have something to do with demonic possession.

It's not a subject that I have spent a great deal of time on but Montague Summers seems to be pretty knowledgeable.

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/867837.Vampires_and_Vampirism

https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/764633.The_Werewolf_in_Lore_and_Legend