RuneOfRedWings
can you prove they were not vampires?
Yes. Aborigine - and other cultures' - myths cannot be called vampires because they do not match the myth of the vampire/vampir/uper in European folklore. That creature is commonly defined as a blood-sucking undead corpse, not a creature who lives in a tree, but a person who, after death, has risen again to hunt the living and who can be dispatched or controlled in a variety of ways, generally including staking, beheading and leaving something for them to count. "Vampire" is a culture-specific term, and not appropriate to use with other cultures.
Quote:
and if you believe in ghosts, ghouls and djinns are easily explained.
Neither a ghoul nor a djinn is any class of ghost, according to their mythology. Both of them are supernatural beings, and not related to humans.
Quote:
many other mythical creatures were modern identified animals mistaken by sailors for something more powerful and mystical. kind of how i see the vampire.
Some of them were, yes. However, considering there are accounts of humans using blood etc in history/mythology, without them being identified as vampires, it makes more sense to say that the mythological form of the "vampire" you are is actually a serial killer, or sexual pervert; not a vampire.
Quote:
there was no mention of vampires until recently because we would have been prosecuted. i mean, look at what happened to pagans.
and yet we have accounts of pagans surviving from hundreds of years ago, because there have always been rational men - like Scot, who documented types of witchcraft - who argued that people should not be prosecuted/killed/whatever. Furthermore there are not even any "a friend of a friend had X happen to her" types of folklore in England concerning vampires. Which there are in other countries.