What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
68 Comments
- ZincSaucier, on 10/27/2009, -2/+27i haven't read the article yet.. but i just wanted to take a guess here, just cause it's dailymail: the article is about a creature that has already been discovered.
- heavydigga, on 10/27/2009, -1/+24This is cool would love it if they were still around
- rokusky, on 10/27/2009, -2/+18There are sea creatures way bigger than this still alive. They are called Blue Whales.
- Roboctopus, on 10/27/2009, -0/+12I wonder how many hit points it had.
- zip000, on 10/27/2009, -0/+11It's funny, but in my mind I have completely exaggerated the size of dinosaurs - I'm not sure if it has been movie representations or what. But an animal that "Dwarfed a T Rex" seems huge beyond belief, but one that is "capable of swallowing a man whole" doesn't seem that big really...yet these are speaking of the same animal.
It is interesting to note that the largest animal to ever live is still alive today! The blue whale can get up to 30 meters compared to this fossil in this article's estimated 16 meters. - fxu1989, on 10/27/2009, -0/+11DEY TOOK YER JOB!!
- ngregge, on 10/27/2009, -0/+10...that came to Britain and stole our jobs.
- Bic823, on 10/27/2009, -0/+10DRRRKA DERRRRBS
- bobbinika, on 10/27/2009, -1/+11Great white shark expert Great white shark experts Richard Ellis and John McCosker have included a rather compelling chapter on Megalodon in his definitive 1991 volume, Great White Shark. Ellis (who authored the chapter on Megalodon), notes that although all the fossilized Megalodon teeth found so far indicate that the shark is extinct, we should really get concerned about the welfare of our divers if someone ever dredges up a white Megalodon tooth. Because if we did, "we would know that the giant shark became extinct quite recently," writes Ellis, "or is flourishing somewhere in the vastness of the oceans and has simply lost a tooth."
As frightening as a notion like that may seem for anyone who doesn't live in central Nebraska, could it ever happen? Almost all who have investigated the possible existence of the great Megalodon realize that if it is extinct, it has only recently occured in the geological record. The creature lived as long ago as 50 million years (Middle and Late Tertiary Period), but Ellis confirms that scientists have concluded Megalodon probably "just" became extinct, in the late Pleistocene or early Holocene epochs. In other words, as close as 10,000 years ago! Pretty scary stuff, Mr. Cousteau.
Zoological history has proven that very large animals can remain hidden from modern science, especially in our planet's under-explored ocean depths. So if the famous coelacanth can remain undisturbed for 60 million years, why not push our giant white shark up a mere 10,000? Apparently Ellis sees no major problem with that when he writes, "Except that we have not found one, there appears to be no reason why Megalodon should not be flourishing today." Granted, Ellis feels that no concrete evidence has been found for Megalodon's current existence. "But there will always be those who keep hoping that one will appear. Let us hope we are not in the water when it does."
Or has one already appeared? Contained in Ellis's chapter on Megalodon is quite an amazing sighting report from Australia. It is taken from David G. Stead's Sharks and Rays of Australian Seas, published in 1963. Here is the now-classic monster encounter, in Stead's words:
In the year 1918 I recorded the sensation that had been caused among the "outside" crayfish men at Port Stephens, when, for several days, they refused to go to sea to their regular fishing grounds in the vicinity of Broughton Island. The men had been at work on the fishing grounds--which lie in deep water--when an immense shark of almost unbelievable proportions put in an appearance, lifting pot after pot containing many crayfishes, and taking, as the men said, "pots, mooring lines and all." These crayfish pots, it should be mentioned, were about 3 feet 6 inches in diameter and frequently contained from two to three dozen good-sized crayfish each weighing several pounds. The men were all unanimous that this shark was something the like of which they had never dreamed of. In company with the local Fisheries Inspector I questioned many of the men very closely and they all agreed as to the gigantic stature of the beast. But the lengths they gave were, on the whole, absurd. I mention them, however, as an indication of the state of mind which this unusual giant had thrown them into. And bear in mind that these were men who were used to the sea and all sorts of weather, and all sorts of sharks as well. One of the crew said the shark was "three hundred feet long at least"! Others said it was as long as the wharf on which we stood--about 115 feet! They affirmed that the water "boiled" over a large space when the fish swam past. They were all familiar with whales, which they had often seen passing at sea, but this was a vast shark. They had seen its terrible head which was "at least as long as the roof on the wharf shed at Nelson's Bay." Impossible, of course! But these were prosaic and rather stolid men, not given to 'fish stories' nor even to talking about their catches. Further, they knew that the person they were talking to (myself) had heard all the fish stories years before! One of the things that impressed me was that they all agreed as to the ghostly whitish color of the vast fish."(3)
In this popular account, we apparently have credible witnesses, and a knowledgeable investigator, Stead, who believed the fishermen were telling the truth (and that they may have witnessed a living Megalodon). I believe the "fact" that they did not return to sea for days could be added to their credibility, and to their loss in wages after the apparently traumatic experience (unless they were hoaxing the entire event, of course.) We also have some rather strange features in this report, including the tremendous lengths the fishermen reported, if we cannot attribute these to exaggeration due to intense fear. If we cannot, then it seems if Megalodon has survived, it may have grown bigger, and I am not sure which idea is scarier.
In his 1989 book There Are Giants in the Sea, BBC film producer and wildlife author Michael Bright concludes his sea-monster volume with mention of the giant fish:
Imagine, then, the shock when scientists dredging the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, earlier this century, discovered two 10 cm. (4 in.) long megalodon teeth that were what can only be described as geologically "fresh." One was estimated to be 24,000 years old--roughly the time of the Lascaux cave paintings. The other was just 11,000 years old and therefore belonged to a gigantic shark that swam in the Pacific Ocean at the same time as man was migrating from Asia into North America. Could this enormous predator still be lurking in the ocean depths?(4)
I suppose we'll have to see what the oceans of the world turn up for the monster hunters to hold triumphantly over the heads of skeptics. But how exciting it would be if a 70-foot shark was deposited on the shores of California, surrounded by excited vacationers with video cameras in tow. Putting child-like dreaming aside, however, leaves us with the fact that whether or not the huge Megalodon is alive today is debatable only on theoretical grounds. Despite thousands of giant, still fossilized teeth, no matter how "fresh" they might be, and the amazing (perhaps exaggerated) report from Stead, there is not much to go on.(5) However, if some shark experts can agree not to completely write off "Meg" into extinction, then we might want to ponder the possibility that Peter Benchley's imagination is not as wild as we thought it was. And we will never go deep-sea fishing in anything smaller than an aircraft carrier ever again. - Iceman4, on 10/27/2009, -2/+12Lame. Megaladon could reach over 100ft - twice the size of this. And there's always the possibility that they're still around...
- weister42, on 10/27/2009, -0/+7"Look at the size of the teeth on this beaut mate, and now I'm gonna poke him with a stick and see if I can piss him off and observe his predatory nature! Crickey that was close, let's try that again!"
- digggggggggg, on 10/27/2009, -0/+6Why compare a sea monster to a land animal? I think a more relevant comparison would be to a whale.
- XTomTomX, on 10/27/2009, -2/+8No, there isn't.
- wem003, on 10/27/2009, -1/+7we are gonna need a crapload of tartar sauce for this one.
- Chooxo, on 10/27/2009, -1/+6"A Dorset council employee wit the huge fossilised skull"
I didn't know Daily Mail wrote in urban. - MacBookForMe, on 10/27/2009, -6/+10Thank goodness that they have gone for good...
- psion01, on 10/27/2009, -0/+4Awesome! Thanks for bringing a little mystery and suspense back to the modern world! I'm calling my wife right now to tell her we're not buying that quaint little beach house.
- norman619, on 10/27/2009, -2/+6For all we know it may be. We are only aware of a small fraction of what actually lives in the world's oceans.
- BubblesTheChimp, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3Yes, waitress. I'll have the Colossal Sea Monster and chips please.
- inactive, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3Epic artist depiction
- norman619, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3Exactly.
- 08STI, on 10/27/2009, -0/+3would be cool if my tree fiddy were still around
- MMusick, on 10/27/2009, -2/+4Sea monsters are real!
- gankige, on 10/27/2009, -5/+7Nessie: "Mom!?"
- mrzack7, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2it would be something if that creature would still be alive today. such magnificent species. I would love to swim with it and experience the exhilarating thrill.
- PirateD00D, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Thank goodness I thought it was going to be an giant enemy crab.
- Trav1289, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2You go get em tiger!
- Trav1289, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Possible, but I highly doubt it, I read somewhere a while back that said that scientist predict there are maybe only 8 different sea life that could be 5 meters or bigger we have not seen yet. and that is a big maybe.
- norman619, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Anyting that scares the ***** out of you that lives in the sea qualifies as a "sea monster."
- MerchantofPanic, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Rosie O'donnell's family tree just got bigger.
- mmittimm, on 10/27/2009, -0/+2Daily Mail... sensationalist garbage. T Rex wasn't even close to the largest dinosaur, it was clearly added to the title for hype. Not to mention the blue whale is even larger than this.
- TheBlargh, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1i see what you tried to do there...but you failed horribly.
- Trav1289, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1In west Philadelphia born and raised
On the playground was where I spent most of my days
Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool
And all shootin some b-ball outside of the school
When a couple of guys
Who were up to no good
Startin making trouble in my neighborhood
I got in one little fight and my mom got scared
She said 'You're movin' with your auntie and uncle in Bel Air' - Rudegar, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1they did it for the lulz
- gossumx, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1.....If only T-Rex could fly
- magamiako, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1The beast returns from whence it came. The wrath of Neptulon has subsided.
- XTomTomX, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1YO!
I gotcher "Colossal Sea Monster" right here, buddy! - hoodedrobin, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Folk memory... thats all I'm saying...
okay I know it wasnt around during any humans existence. - MOJIRA, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Blue Whale already drawfs T-Rex, as do a couple of other dinosaurs.
Raptors? You bred raptors...? Dundun dundunn dadada dadaadada... - TheRipper, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1I didn't check the numbers.
Blue Whales are bigger ? Maybe. Are Blue Whales as deadly as this beast ? I don't think so. - itsmikey, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1for the advertising revenue
- johnwayne1, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1Sure am thankfull for asteroids.
- noisician, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1eh...
every dino and sea monster ever to have lived
is still smaller than the blue whale
take that, jurassic period - noisician, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1But what about the:
COLOSSAL SEA MONSTER
which dwarfs the T-Rex
AND EVERY OTHER CREATURE to have existed ever on earth
. . . and this sea monster is still alive today!
THE BLUE WHALE = the largest creature ever to have lived - Rudegar, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1relax I'm sure they were friendly giants
- itsmikey, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Clearly this is the monster that has been kickin' it in Loch Ness all these years
- inactive, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Ever seen a blue whale? They can be seen from space and could swallow a 56 ft pliosaur.
- IvenomI, on 10/27/2009, -0/+1Viral marketing for Cloverfield 2.
- umdigger, on 10/28/2009, -0/+1The article says the skull was about 8 feet long and one of the biggest ever found, yet their graphic shows it as at least 15 feet. Something doesn't seem accurate.
-
Show 51 - 71 of 71 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is