What really are dragons?

[Hyraxylos]

[Serenity]

I think the only way we'll be 100% positive of what dragons really are is to look at the actual bones. Just like the dinosaurs, we could be mistaking dragons for an entirely different type of vertebra. We can't just eye-ball them and say "Yes, this creature is such and such." We'd have to study the anatomy to state whether what it is or isn't.

[Jasriella]

And unfortunately we will most likely never have a body so its just going to have to remain a mystery, a myth, and a legend. I do know that with my knowledge and others' knowledge of their past lives that dragons do exist on other planets or realms, but I don't think that we will ever live long enough to see the day that we find one.
_________________
I am trapped between heaven and hell. My wings carry me upon the winds. Above lies heaven, below hell. Yet I must land in hell to soar in heaven. I am a Dragon!

[eelukathe]

I agree that dragons would need there own class and going with the species classification hierarchy (Kingdom, Phylum, Subphylum, Class, subclass, Order, Family, Genus) that would alow room for different forms of dragons. Dragons is a very general term as is the classification of class compared to that of the classification of genus which is very specific. However i would dare to place the dragon into a Kingdom, Phylum, and subphylum. I would place the dragon into the Kingdom of Animalia because as far i know (please correct me if i am wrong) all dragons match the requirements of this kingdom (From the Nelson Biology 110 text book: Animals are multicellular, and move with the aid of cilia, flagella, or muscular organs based on contractile proteins. They have organelles including a nucleus, but no chloroplasts or cell walls. Animals acquire nutrients by ingestion.).
I would then place the dragon into the Phylum of Chordate (From Nelson 110: All animals in the phylum Chordata have backbones and are vertebrates. Examples include fish, birds, amphibians, reptiles and mammals.). Finally i would place the dragon into the subphylum of Craniata (same source: Craniata includes all animals with a skull, or cranium, as the name suggests.) I stop there because the next lower classification is class of which different dragons fit into different catagories such as Reptilia (eggs are protected from dessication and other environmental problems by an extra membrane.) This class also includes birds not just reptiles as the name may lead you to believe. Or there is Mammalia (Mammalia are a class of vertebrate animals whose name is derived from their distinctive feature, mammary glands, by the possession of sweat glands, hair, three middle ear bones used in hearing) Now would say some dragons fall partly into this because of the eastern dragons. I do not know if they have mammary glands but as far as i know they do have hair or a mane which disqualifies them from any other class. Dragons are unique and diverse and as serenity said we need a physical example until we can classify any further. If anyone has any argument to my placing of the dragon in any of the three fields please post and tell me so, i made these conculsions on the basis of my knowledge and i do not know every type of dragon. There may exist one type that may not fit into the definitons that are used to place them (the definitons used for the first three i provided are vague but that is because they are very broad areas).

[Hyraxylos]

I don't think they could be classified because of how variable they are. I tried to work it all out once. But you can't place the "dragon" category BELOW the "class" level because not all dragons are reptiles, and yet you can't place them ABOVE the "class" level either because then that would imply that all reptiles (or birds, mammals, etc.) are dragons. It would have to be split apart into multiple categories sorted under multiple classes.
_________________
The statement below this one is false.
The statement above this one is true.
This statement is false.