[quote name='Nena' date='Jul 25 2007, 01:28 AM' post='1791856']
23 foot Pacific Sleeper Shark, not a Megalodon.
oh i didnt say it was a megalodon.
and there is NO way to know for shure that there are no more megalodons. The sea covers most of the earth, if you think sicence as explored all of it, every depth, thats just stupid.

^Woah! I see now that you and me share a common history of being a believer.
Kay, anyone who can explain WHY would any megalodon still exist, rather than the old 'we haven't fully explored our ocean" reason?

Additionally, we do not know EVERYTHING beyond the shadow of a doubt. I loved that line in the Matrix.

"Common experience has taught us that dropping a stone will result in it landing on the ground. How do we know for certain that the next time, it won't float to the ceiling?"

Just because we know something as a fact does not mean that it will always remain a fact. Look at the Coelacanth (am I spelling that right?) We thought it was extinct and then WHAM! there it was.

JKS

i think you doubt the size of the sea. the sea gets deeper than any man made machine can go, there for we HAVE NOT FULLY EXPLORED OUR OCEAN. Sounds like you doubt how smart sharks are. it is fact that there hasten been any megalodons spotted, so im leaning towards the idea that there are none. the sea would be 100% un inhabitable.

holy sh** i didnt know we had a fish expert on our hands. No matter what you say, the fact is humans have only explored 1% of the sea. a shark that big COULD chill that deep for as long as he wants.

You take a great deal of refrences from movies don't you.

As for the stone, yep, it's gonna hit the ground buddy. Click here this will explain why it will hit the ground everytime. You see, there was this fellow around the mid 1600's this fellow called Issacc was sitting under a tree and wham, heck, I wont spoil the end for you!

You did spell it right.

Everybody, all together now to the tune of Batman............(after each sentence, instead of Batman, go Coelacanth)



Close but no cigar. I have mentioned a coouple times now that the Wollemi Pine is a far better example as far as the Fossils resembling Wollemia and possibly related to it are widespread in Australia, New Zealand and Antarctica, but Wollemia nobilis is the sole living member of its genus. The last known fossils of the genus date from approximately 2 million years ago. It is thus described as a living fossil, or alternatively, a Lazarus taxon. Genetic testing has revealed that all the specimens are genetically indistinguishable, suggesting that the species has been through a genetic bottleneck in which its population became so low (possibly just one or two individuals) that all genetic variability was lost.

Better argument no ?

No, it's more than 1% now.

A big shark would certainly chill well down there, without food sources, heat etc, it would be dead about uhhh, I dunnno about 1.6 million years ago.

We have been at the greatest depth-- though the sea is not completely explored, but that really doesn't say anything about Megatooth shark survival.

Also smart sharks, lol'd- You saying it decided to dive down deep one day? "I must go down..."

Anyone Know where can i get the books by Steve
ok spare the remarks i only want to know where to get the books from singapore
not thought the web,thx
Nena:" that really doesn't say anything about Megatooth shark survival."
" that also doesn't say that Megatooth shark could not survival."

It doesn't matter how large percentage of giant depths we haven't explored.

This is really frustrating. IT'S NOT A DAMNED DEEP WATER FISH. Okay? Get it? Not a deep water fish.

Also I wasn't the one who raised this point of how much of the oceans are explored, I don't find it very relevant to the discussion at hand. The climate in which the Megatooth shark foraged just doesn't exist anymore.

There are plenty other points but they've already been discussed ad infinitum in this thread alone.

Hey, I bought my first Steve Alten's Meg book in Singapore! I bought it in Changi Airport during a transit tho!
As for The Trench, I bought it in Harrod's in London, while I was there. Anyway, Megalodon couldn't survive because of all the factors we've been discussed in this long thread, so before you ask a question, make sure you've read ALL the pages, and not just one page in a thread. And more, don't answer question with question. MAkes you look like...you know, dork.

Jesus, go watch the discovery channel. And WE have not been at the seas greatest depth. Cameras have. If your such a "non believer" what are you doing on this web site? But keep fighting the good fight, I can under stand your crusade. People must not go on in this world thinking that there are creatures or undiscovered animals, roaming OUR Earth and Seas. Go. And tell the world...........THERE IS NO NESSIE, BIGFOOT or MOTHMAN. YOU DUMB BELIVERS! YOU FOOLS!! WHY ARE YOU ALL SPENDING YOUR ENERGY TRYING TO LEARN SOMTHING NEW!! HOW DARE YOU FILL OUR YOUTHS HEADS WITH THE IDEAS OF UNDISCOVERED THINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!?!?!?!?

wouldn’t you feel more comfortable on myspace??

and i can see with you 1303 poast, your not a dork at alllllllllll.

It's not like you're not trying to learn anything new. Also your excessive exclamation points are quite the bestial sight, like knives in my eyes. This is not about undiscovered animals. We're talking about a prehistoric animal here. There is nothing new in this thread, it just a rehash of the same old fight.

But whatever, you can't even spell post right, "poast". Toast. Coast to Coast AM-- Military fired lasers to make the sattelite go offline-- learning anything new?

Your name has this uncanny resemblance to that fellow who vanished, "tharedphantum" or whatever his name was... He made over a 100 posts in a single day once.

yup. an emo kid.
im glad for theredphantum and his 100 POST.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
if that hurts your eyes, you need to get off your computer and get out of your house. Just for a little while.
hay? didnt that prehistoric shark just pop up in Japan not to long ago?
Like i said, go to myspace if your just going to shoot smart ass coments to everyone.

What prehistoric shark? Frilled sharks aren't prehistoric...

And who is an emo-kid? Me? Oh wow, I lol'd.

Wow, Personal Insults, I lol'd.

wow gun powder
Thx capo but airport is very far any idea which book store?

*sigh* Keep talking. You might eventually say something intelligent.

-JKS

Gun powder? What gun powder?
Anyway, nevermind. Airport is far from your place? Tell me where in Singapore do you live then. I've been only twice to Singapore and don't really remember alot. If you happen to be close to Orchard Road, surely you can find many bookstores there (right?), perhaps you can find one by the Maruzen? Or if you happens to live around Jurong...now that's a problem coz I got lost on the area once (which means: Idon't know the area). Ask some locals or browse the net, hope you can find one. You can also buy the books from Amazon.com or ebay you know?

Back to the thread...what's happening here? Seems like somebody started the fire! We need some mods here to cool this thread down. Ooopphh....

gonna have to somewhat disagree. humans havent been at the greatest depths, yes, youre right. but i dont beleive our cameras have been all the way down there as well. plus, there not going 24/7 with millions of them only 10feet away from each other to tell us exactly whats going on.

I have had interest in the Megalodon shark for many years, but from what I have been able to learn, it does look as though it's survival to this day and age is somewhat doubtful. I do have an alternate theory to present though. Carcharodon Megalodon and Carcharodon Carcharias (Great White) share many simularites with each other. The Megalodon is believed to be the ancestor of the modern Great White. Here is the theory. What if these "giant" sharks that people claim to see, from time to time, are actually Whites?
Fact one: Nobody knows how long Great Whites live. It's life expectancy is unknown, there have been estimates made that range from ten, to over fourty years.
Fact two: Nobody knows exactly how large Great Whites get. If you do some research, you will notice that over the years, the sharks maximum length has been increased until it is now excepted that it can reach at least twenty-one feet. Some books list this as twenty-one feet plus. There have been undocumented reports of Whites far larger than this.
What if these massive unidentifed sharks, are ancient Great Whites, hundreds of years old? Granted, it would probably be very rare for a White to reach such an age (if it's even possible for it to do so), but it would go a long way to explain the reason people think they are seeing a Megalodon. Like I said, it's just a theory of mine. Feel free to shoot holes in it, if you wish.

Well, White shark maximum size is one of my favourite subjects...

The reason the white shark maximum size has decreased is that information has become better, and as the generally accepted maximum lenght has decreased, stories of larger specimens come to face much harsher scrutiny.

The largest reported White shark was 43 feet long (13.7 metres) and supposedly stalked a ship into False Bay, South Africa, where it was subsequently caught. The references to it are unclear and impossible to verify, a book by South African writer Lawrence Green from 1958 being the original source. Gerald L. Wood discussed it briefly in his 1984 book on animal records, but proved unable to track down newspaper stories or any further evidence of the sharks existence. Another reportedly massive what shark was the 37 footer that was supposedly caught off White Head Island in the Bay of Fundy, Canada (where also the largest basking shark [12.27 m] was also caught) in June, 1930. Gerald L. Wood mentioned a weight of 10.8 tonnes (24,000 lbs) in his first (1972) edition of the book, but later editions did not include this number. It was probably a speculation, since even a 11 metre Great White would not weigh quite that much. Teeth later tracked down, however, indicate a size of no more than about 17 feet.

There are plenty of other and unprovable giant sharks. 32-footer (9.7 m) caught off St. Monica (no date), a 30-footer off the Maldives, accompanied by a apparently doctoered photograph, a 29.6 footer off the the Azores in 1978, a 28-footer caught by whalers off South Australia in the 1920-30's, a number of anonymous 26, 25, and 24 footers. A maltese 23 footer (7 m) from 1987 (measurements of jaws and teeth etc, concluded that it most likely was in the range of 18-20 feet), a second 23 footer off Kangaroo Island, Australia the very same year, a specimen of 22'11" caught by Vic Hislop in 1978 (also supposedly caught a 20-footer in 1984, pictures does show a very massive shark indeed). A 23 footer from Adritatic sea in 1984 is reported, however no further information about it's measurements is avalible, a 22 footer was supposedly caught in the Mediterranean 1989, also lacks verifiable other measurements. A 21 footer off Cuba has become cited as the commonly accepted "largest white shark", though Randall, in his 1987 "refutation" of various reported giant white's, claim that is was most likely not more than about 15-18 foot long.

In older days, a maximum lenght of 11.1 m (36.5 feet) was often recited, the jaws of this shark were on display in the British Museum. However, the shark was no more than 16.5 foot (the printer accidentally typed 3 instead of 1), and in the times when 36.5 feet was a commonly accepted maximum lenght, 20-25 footers were seldom subjects of any scrutiny. It would take until 1973 before the 36.5 figure was refuted in a publication by Perry Gillbert, who had measured the jaws in the British Museum and compared them to the jaws of a 16.5 feet shark in Durban.

In my opinion, the largest white shark was the specimen caught off Prince Edward Island in 1983, which was supposedly 20 feet long. It was however quickly driven away, and local authorities did not want many pictures of it taken, since a "man-eater" at a tourist beach is less than attractive for the community. There is some doubt about this sharks size as well, however, some mentioning a lenght of merely 17.8 feet, which would mean the largest was the shark lassoed somewhere near Albany in 1984, measuring 19.6 feet and weighing 3,324 lbs.

But, your theory isn't too bad, I'd say it's more likely than the Megalodon one. I'm more inclined to believe that if such a giant ghastly white shark existed, it' would be an entirely undiscovered species of shark.

^Yeah Nena, somehow this gigantism factor on Great White is much more acceptable than the Megalodon lore...

Possibly!

Some similarities between the structures of the teeth of both these sharks have led us to this belief.


This theory is wrong. Megalodon is not the ancestor of GWS.

Actually the GWS came in to existance about 10 million years ago, which means that they have indeed lived in the age of Megs for a very long time.

But paleocology studies have indicated that these two species seldom came in to contact with each other, despite co-existing with each other for a long time because of the following two major reasons:

1) Both these species have occupied entirely different niches and habitats.
2) Great White Sharks have always avoided those regions that were populated by Megs because they were actually easy "snacks" for the mighty Megs.

And the shark that is now actually considered to be the true ancestor of GWS is called "Isurus Hastalis."


Possibly! But the size factor pointed out is more compatible with that of Megs and not that of GWS.

The biggest fossilized GWS tooth ever found is said to be 3 inch long and it belongs to a Great White Shark that have lived in the Miocene period (millions of years ago). So the largest ever Great White Shark was possibly about 30 feet long. But Great White Sharks no longer grow so big today, though we still do not know for sure.

Here is the link: Click to see the biggest GWS tooth ever! [NOTE: This tooth belongs to a GWS and if it really is 3 inch long then it belongs to an individual that was possibly about 30 feet long and lived in the Miocene period]


Some rare fossilized teeth of the GWS actually show us that the GWS might have exceeded 25 feet in length but such big ones mostly existed in the Miocene period and were rare even in that age. Though many fossilized GWS teeth are over 2 inch long and indicate that this shark could indeed exceed 20 feet in length.

The largest ones caught by us (humans) may not be as big as claimed to be by their catchers but they still are eye-openers for us. Here are a few contendors: Click to see! [NOTE: The mentioned sizes of most of these caught sharks are still under dispute due to lack of sufficient and reliable evidences.]

Though it is believed that 20 footer GWS do exist even in this modern age. A fresh tooth from one of these large ones have been found: Click to see!

In 2004, a woman was swallowed whole by a large Great White Shark in a beach near Cape Town and this shark when spotted, was said to be bigger then the helicopter that was used in the search for the remains of that women. Here is the link: Click!

Another recent and close (but not fatal) encounter took place with a GWS in a region called "Hale'iwa" and it is estimated to be about 18 feet long, Here is a link: Click!


The ancient Great White Sharks were indeed bigger then the ones that we see today as evident from some fossilized teeth but they were still consderably smaller then the Megs.

Peter Benchley's JAWS was actually inspired by the size of a large ancient GWS.

Not really. Sharks the size of ships - over 80 feet - is not compatible to a Megatooth shark.



I've been too lazy to bother understanding the lenght-ratio to teeth size, but the Kangaroo Island shark (claimed TL of 7 m/23 feet) had teeth that was 5.16 cm long (just over 2 inches) [The Malta shark, also caught in 1987, and with a claimed TL of 713 cm/23 feet had teeth 4.9 cm long], but it's lenght is most likely exagerrated and the specimen was actually most likely somewhere around 18 feet. 7.5 cm teeth would probably be from a specimen about 20-27 feet long. Then again, lenght can vary quite a bit within given tooth parameters. (The Cuban 1945 "21-footer" supposedly had teeth 2.8 in/7 cm long)



Seriously, that hideous watermark is repulsive. Alf Dean's 1959 2,664 lbs shark wasn't very large, it's just that all other sharks caught since that have been larger used mammalian meat to lure them up (Dead did too, but it wasn't banned till 1972).



In 1985 a woman was "bitten in half" by a shark just north of Port Lincoln, Australia, reported as "over 20 feet long" that later returned to consume what was left.

And what makes you so sure about this?

Have you seen an alive Meg? NO

The Megatooth shark is the biggest shark ever found and only it is the most suitable candidate yet for a shark reported to be of that size and actually looks like a GWS.


The length to teeth ratio of the GWS is like this: An individual with 1 inch long teeth is most likely 9 ft or 10 ft in size and the same case applies to the bigger ones. Currently Gottfried's formula is being used to measure the size of the GWS, based on it's upper anterior teeth.

Thus a GWS with over 2 inch long teeth is most likely a 20 footer. And an individual with 2.8 inch or 3 inch teeth is probably more then 27 feet long.


This would be a mistake unless any concrete evidence is available to verify this claim.


That is why the comment "True or False?" has been added in to the mentioned details below each PIC of those contendors.

And I have already said that the mentioned sizes of most of these sharks are under dispute due to lack of sufficient evidences.


And this means what?

Nothing more than:


means...



Blah blah blah, 5000 foot sharks, blah blah blah. No. Not 80 foot. Not even the most liberal estimates suggests anything over 20 metres (64 foot).

Did you even read the news?

A GWS shark was actually "spotted" in that same region and it is estimated to be about 18 feet long.


Are you in your senses?


Firstly, 20 meters is actually 66.6 feet and not 64 feet.

And once again! What makes you so sure about this?

Have you seen an alive Meg? NO

Have any shark expert seen an alive Meg? NO

The theories about the size of Megs are "hypothetical" in nature. We do not know for sure that how Megs actually looked like or how big they could really grow and no Meg expert can solve this mystery.

The only clues that we have got are several very large teeth (some over 7 inch in length) and big bite marks on bones of Whales. Now common sense dictates that a shark that has such big teeth and attacks and feeds on Whales must be of considerable size.

Some latest and modest estimations (based on extensive research) do suggest that the Meg infact did reached or exceeded 60 feet in length.

Here are some reliable sources that confirm my point!

- The experts who place Megs in the league of 60 footers:

Case 1: Meg exhibition in Florida Museum of Natural History. Check the link: Click!

Case 2: Check a new Meg video called "The Perfect Shark" in my Sig. It is an awesome video and shows that how a Meg attacked and incapcitated its prey and how large it could grow. The shark expert in that video is using the latest "state-of-the-art" technology to show the habitat of Meg and the tooth that he shows belongs to a Meg that was 60 feet long.

- The experts who say that Megs might have exceeded 60 feet in length: (The most liberal estimates!)

Case 1: A famous Meg expert "Vito Bertucci" developed a Jaw (consisting of real Meg teeth) from the remains of an adult Meg shark and it indicated a Shark of over 65 feet in length and this guy have studied Megs for over 20 years and have excavated some of the largest Meg teeth ever seen. This guy was even nicknamed as "Megalodon Man" for his amazing discoveries.

Case 2: Check this 100% real and huge Meg tooth: Click to see! [This tooth is about 7.5 inch long and belonged to a Meg that has been estimated to be over 65 feet in length]

Case 3: The largest "modern" Meg Jaw contains all real Meg teeth amd some of them are over 7 inch long and this Jaw indicates an individual that was over 75 feet long in real life. Check this link: Click to see! [Steve Alten's shark is based on the size of this individual]

Case 4: A Meg tooth in "Black Hills Geological Institute" is so big that it belongs to a Meg that is possibly a 70 footer. Click!

Case 5: Check this Meg exhibition as well: Click!

I have already told you before that it is not wise to argue about the size of Meg because of some obvious reasons. So you better take this advice more seriously now and stop posting declarations that cannot be verified. The point is that we will never know for sure that how big a Meg really could grow.

Though 60 footers are already accepted but the most liberal estimates actually push the Megs in to the 70 footer league (Not that far from the 80 feet reported size? Right?)

(Mollet et all) (73 mm = 2.87 inches).




Supposedly this shark was "6.7 to 7 m" (22-23 feet). Taiwan, 1997, I hadn't heard of this one till today, srsly. -_-

Interesting find. Thanks for sharing!

Though I have seen the PIC of this shark before but never paid much attention.

And I always have doubted the accuracy of Randall's method and even that of Gottfried's formula to a certain extent because of the reason that Maths cannot actually define the size and structure of an animal with 100% accuracy. Though some people now prefer Gottfried's formula to measure the length of that shark.

Still it is true that GWS of Miocene period were bigger then the ones that we see today because many fossilized GWS teeth (of Miocene period) have been found that are over 2 inch long. Here is a source that verifies this: Click to see!

In this modern age, you hardly get to see such large fresh GWS teeth.

However the JAW in that PIC does finally makes Peter Benchley's JAWS believable.

18 feet is large but not sensational.



No, are you?



Imperial sucks. I was too lazy to convert.



I wouldn't really consider a museum exhibition very good a source.



I question the scientific authority of this little flick. The jaws look over-dimensioned, and the numbers provided seem basic and general.



Oh, someone you adores I see. Did he use the right teeth in the right places, or did he do it like the American Museum of National History did and created a jaw many times too big?



19 cm is pretty large indeed. Might be the relationship between the teeth are not in any way similar to that of the white shark, and it actually had a much smaller TL. Or larger, which you probably will be in support of.



Which is the same as case 1-- However, the jaws Leonard Compagno supervised the recreation of were merely 4 feet high, though I don't know what size the largest teeth in that set were of. Also Steve Alten is vermin, doesn't really add credibility to your making of my argument "into dust".



The "the point is that we will never know for sure that how big Meg really could grow" part is true, however I find your attitude, this elitism of yours, extremely repulsive. As much as I could be wrong, so could you.



Still some distance from 80 feet.

Thus your argumentation was in vain.

When you will see one as big swimming near you, then you report back to us to tell that was it a sensational experience for you or not.


I never made such a silly comment actually. So once again the question point backs towards you!


And your lazy attitude makes your case credible?


Have you visited that exhibition? NO

And I suggest that you do because it will open your eyes.

It is one of the best Meg exhibitions ever carried out and many Meg experts including "Mark Renz" have taken part in that exhibition.


Then you seriously need to get your eyes checked. That shark does not looks over-dimensional and it is perfectly designed by using the "state-of-the-art" technology that we enjoy today, thus making its appearance far more realistic then we would anticipate before. Megs were indeed really that big.

Infact the largest one known is even bigger then this one.


No! He was an idiot and never knew about Sharks and their anatomy.

FACT: He had 20 years of "experience" at his disposal and many real Meg teeth (a few over 7 inch long) to work with, when constructing that JAWS and his construction is based on the structural features of the GWS, like many Meg Jaws are.


Again, we would never know the truth but that tooth is indeed an eye-opener and belongs to a very large individual.


The 4 feet high Meg Jaws belong to juveniles and not the adults.

The Jaws of an adult is about 7 feet high or even higher.


I said that Steve Alten's shark is based on the Meg Jaws that was constructed by Vito Bertucci. This has nothing to do with Steve's credibility. Try to read my comments more carefully next time.


In other words! You are extremely conservative, while I am not.


Not that much! Specially the biggest "modern" Meg Jaws confirms the existance of an individual more then 75 feet long. Amazing, isn't it?


Says the one who thinks that he is always right...

I never made such a silly comment in any seriousness.



20 years of "experience" could be anything. Basing it on a white shark might not be accurate, either. Could possibly give the CM misleading dimensions, one way or another.



Or you are just gullible.



Not confirm. As you have previously said, "The theories about the size of Megs are "hypothetical" in nature. We do not know for sure that how Megs actually looked like or how big they could really grow and no Meg expert can solve this mystery."



No, I assume I am always wrong but that everyone else also is.

You did describe yourself quite well, though.

This is an acceptable reason but we are involved in a serious debate, so you should keep this thing in mind.


20 years of his "experience" is based on his extensive study and research about Megs and many daring excavations that he made to find the facts about this monster shark. Thus his work does holds some credibility.

Though again, we would never know that which Meg expert is actually 100% right because no one has seen a live Meg yet. However it is important to note that those shark experts who actually go down in to the ocean floor to find fossilized remains of the Megs, actually do know better about them then those who only judge the size and shape of Megs by just looking at their teeth. Vito Bertucci is indeed among the most famous "Meg experts" the world have ever witnessed but unfortunately he is now dead or else, he might have revolutionized the history and information of Megs for us by now.

Still the shark expert in the "The Perfect Shark" documentary have also done an awesome job by demonstrating to us some very important facts about the mighty Meg through the use of the "state-of-the-art" technology and some important evidences at hand. His work is indeed highly accurate and much better then the works of many shark experts.


No! I am very open-minded and do not like conservatism and extremism.


Thanks for repeating my comment, mate! However the sad thing is that you yourself have yet not understood the logic behind this comment.

I already have once mentioned to you that it is not wise to argue about the size factor of Megs but you still did. So next time, don't do so and be more open-minded.


I agree that no one is perfect.


I never said that I am the definite authority on the subject of the sharks because no one in this world actually is. Though there are some shark experts that hold more knowledge about these animals then I do. Still we have lot to learn about sharks and specially about Megs.

And I do try not to make any outright declarations in case of things that cannot be verified with 100% accuracy due to absense of sufficient proof. But unfortunately the same cannot be said about you.

Wait, before we go off topic, Meg man, do you believe Megalodon still roams the ocean today? Did you ever see Megalodon yourself (I mean the healthy swimming one) ?

I don't think it could live under the cold ocean bottom and the pressure would kill it.

Maybe in the warm Tropics I really don't know.

What do you mean by this?


Megalodon is an now an extinct species of sharks. The complete demise of this species occured about 1.6 million years ago due to major changes in the environmental and climatic conditions of the world and its main source of food (Whales) had escaped in to much cooler waters. And the absence of the main food source might have forced Megs to commit cannabalism. So all these factors massively contributed in the extermination process of once a dominant species.


No one has seen a live Megalodon and no one will ever be able to do so because of an obvious reason. Though I am always open to any kind of surprises that might unexpectedly occur.

Sometimes people do get to see things that they cannot properly describe due to very limited or distorted visibility.

Against my better judgment, I'm going to say the following. If Nena does not want to believe the Meg exists, who are we to attempt to force our views upon him/her (I apologize Nena, not sure of your gender). We believe one thing, and our beliefs are our own. I believe the Meg still exists. Nena does not. Perhaps he/she is right. Perhaps I'm right. I don't care at this point.

-JKS

Healthy debate is ancouraged in a forum.

That's the point of them. Meg Man has offered some facts, Nena has honed them down.

Nena's gender is listed as male.

Nobody has put forward belief Megolodon is extant. Both have outright stated Meg is dead.
You would care in order to reply. You cannot be right because of the many reasons stated over and again - belief will not change this.
If more facts are available that have not been brought to light in his thread, please offer them forward.

I was attempting to graciously back out of the argument before the bullets began flying. I have been in other forums like this, and I recognize the signs I am seeing. I would rather not be involved in a verbal firefight.

JKS

Methinks you have made incorrect assumptions about the crypto crowd Julian.

We wish to offer facts, compare new information and offer best case scenario. Feel free to offer input, just a belief system does not count for much in this forum a great deal of people jump all over a "believer" not to bring them down, but to awaken them to some current fact. Please feel free to offer anything factually incorrect as we all like to learn in here. It's all very scientific

It's OK to also go "I didn't know that!" That is what keeps me coming back to here

No flaming necessary Mostly grown ups in here I think you'll find LOL. (except me )

Come on...I'll bet you learned a new fact about Meg in here hey

Naturally. I have learned much from listening to you all. I do not deny this. However, I have been in a LOT of forums in the past. Many of them escalate to the point where hate mail is sent, and that is where I draw the line. When I get a PM from someone (you know who you are, I am NOT vindictive) saying I am a "toothless inbred" with the brains of a "f**king cow", I believe it is time for me to back out of the forum. I prefer to maintain a healthy mental environment, thank you very much.

JKS

If someone is sending you hatemail of the sort you described, you ought perhaps to take it up with a moderator.

i stand corrected good sir!

But I have to say, the 10-feet-away-cameras-etc thing might be the only way to find a live meg - or another species we haven't seen in a million years (or a new species entirely). Otherwise, creatures can slip away from the cameras. And who says they crawl on the bottom. We'd need to put a gridded cube of cameras in the ocean! That, I believe, would be rather expensive.

JKS

You know, we actually debate about the possiblity of Megalodon still roams the ocean today, not particularly at the shark's size (although it's defiinitely a great deal of additional information). I just wanna know where your stand is. And now I understand well that you're with the unbeliever, I suppose. That's all!

And by the way, I like healthy and competitive debate like you just did with Nena. Good job !

everybody on here that believes that there is no possibility that a megalodon exists, is not thinking too clearly. It has recently been proven that great white sharks have been found to travel to depths of over 2000ft. We all know that many of the ocean has not been explored, it is not very probable that a megalodon exist, but it is possible. We know now for sure that giant squid exist, as they wash up on shores of various countries all the time. I was just reading that one washed up on the Tasmanian coastline that with it's tentacles would have measured over 25ft. Yet we have never really seen any of these animals alive. So to use the argument that an animal that big would without a doubt been discovered by now, is not completely valid. It is in fact possible for this animal to still exist however not probable.

I actually emphasized on the "size factor" of Meg because it was becoming necessary to point out to some people that they cannot say for sure that how big a Meg really was or what is the maximum size that this monster could attain. No one can give a definite answer that how big a Meg could really grow but some Meg teeth are so big that many shark experts are still getting nightmares when thinking about the size of the individuals that were owners of such big tooth.

Here is an example:




Thanks for appreciating my contributions.

Okay, I stressed it again, I believe that no megalodon exist today. And here we were talking about a megalodon, not a random giant shark...it's okay if one day a huge oversized great white was captured and you start yelling to me "There, there!". I'll simply say "Was that a megalodon? Or was it a great white or another shark?". If the answer happens to be the second one, I won't be surprised. You see, megalodon is NOT a giant white shark, it's different. Perhaps Nena, Meg_man or Psyche can help me out showing this, will ya ?