Sorry, but isn't the end of that story (in the link) go with the photos i saw awhile back, where it was a vietnam helicopter pilot who snapped the pictures of the giant snake?

Impossible


Its impossible for a snake to weight 5 tons...the largest is a burmese weighed at 400 lbs.

Yes. They were talking about the various pictures they had of supposedly 'giant" snakes.

hahah a 5 ton snake of man u peopel will belive anything jesus frogfish do u think these peopel have ever even seen a rela snake before? and hey a blue whale can reach 100+ feet because of water its neutral boyence

Probably not because they believe this BS

Wow! Have some courtesy people! No one started this board saying that they "know" it is a giant snake. Nor are the people that believe is calling the people that don't believe stupid. Have some respect! If your looking for a debate pick another topic, and leave this one to be determined by grown adults.

Tell them to have some intelligence first I do not respect stupidity.


Why grown adults? Do you think intelligence comes with age? Ignorance

I'm thinking that you missed the point.
This thread was something brought up to be discussed in a mature fashion.
There are pros and cons to the subject. I realize that you and rob have opinions differing from some of the others here, but to call them stupid or ignorant because their beliefs are different then yours is just a little rude.
Notice I said nothing about age. Age has no bearing on a persons actions. I've known older people that act just as immature as some juveniles.
I think it's just a matter of tact and how something is said.
Also, I doubt anyone here is 100% sure that snakes of gigantic proportions exist or not.
All they are doing is expressing their opinions.

I did not direct anything at you.

Its physically impossible for a snake of gigantic proportions to exist It would crush itself to death...too much energy wasted which could of been used for mating...

I dunno guys. Normally I like your posts Frog (skepticism is great) but we don't need to be insulting.

As far as the snake situation, this may be a case of a 'fish story' (you know, uncle comes back and says he caught the worlds biggest fish, even though everyone knows it's impossible, yada yada)

People when they catch really big snakes (30' is freaking huge regardless of who you are) are probably so excited etc that they exagerate the story so tremendously. Like a game of telephone.

However, to say with 100% certainty that something does not exist is taking it a little too far. With most things on this board, the best one can do is 99% *probability* that it is not true. Many times in history things most people have deemed impossible have then become known.

In reality, I am with the skeptics with this one, but who knows what evolutionary traits may have emerged for a giant snake. It may be able to avoid crushing itself etc. That's where the *possibility* comes into play. It's not a big possibility, infact it's minute, but it still is a possibility.

Complete refusal to see possibility (whether it be from a believer or a skeptics perspective) is the utter peak of ignorance and arrogance. None of us should fall into that trap (I have before, everyone has at some point).

Besides, respectful communication is a hallmark of maturity, one which some on the UM message board are not capable of it seems.

A snake weighing 5 tons would crush itself to death...That's what happens to beached whales...Especially because they don't have feet.

Snake that grow to a size over 40 would just waste way too much energy growing. They are already the apex predator at 30...no need to grow more.

As I see it, it is just a waste.

Good post Marty

Possibility of a snake over 40 feet is very unlikely today I agree, but not 100% totally impossible. Fossil of African Rock Python at 15 meters have been found.

the problem is people tend to think that anything cna get bigger for instance people. a gila monster is abotu the maxium size it could get u will never see a 5 foot long gila monster because it physicly wouldnt be able to walk thus to fund a 50+ snake is the same thing it would crush its own ribs

Ever heard of the Komodo dragons? I think you are getting confuse with something that is big from something that is just fat! When an animal or human being is bigger than norm, their bones and muscle is usually bigger and stronger to support it's size. If EVER a gila monster grows to 5 feet, it's muscles and bones will be bigger and stronger in proportion to their size. Same with an Elephant, those legs are strong enough to support the tremendous weight. But I don't think so too that there is a 50 foot snake out there, maybe.

no u are wrong it has to to with angles my dear please dont get into this with me because ur a fool if u think u know more aboutthis then me i realy dont want to sound conecded oraa anything but i did go to school on this (zoology)the reason elephants can move is ther legs are fixed under them. in fact there tiba is set arther up so it is directyly under the femur as opposed to huamas our tiba is set slightly back this allows elephants to walk despote there huge weight. think aobut it andrea the giant dide because his heart gave out it wasnt able to supply blood to his body he over grew the size people were ment to be. a gila monsters body in proportion ot ther elgs is emese compared to the komodo dragons legs and body.

ignorance is bliss

A large snake over 500 lbs would just be too akward on land to evolve...

Strange that Adrea the Giant is in your Zoology class, I always though he is with the Wrestling world. As you said Adrea died because of his over growing, the fact is that he did grow to that size before he died. So they do grow bigger than normal, just that they die once they reach that size, right? Report of African Rock Python fossil at 15 meters or 45 feet have been found, PROOF that they once grew quite big.

ok 15 meters is not 45 feet first off and it wast a5 meters i forget the actualy legenth but it wasnt that large. second andred the giant had a disease it was a normal growth ting and its a disease that reptiles cant get.

1 meter is equivalent to about 3.2 feet, do the math.

The earth was very different back then...things have changed.

No u do the math. 15 meters isi what u siad it was ok here we go. first of it wasnt 15 meters at all but lets say it was. 1 meter is 100 cm 2.54 cm's is 1 inch and 12 inches in one foot so now using that ill prove u wrong. 1x100=100/2.54=39.37/12=3.281x15=49.2125ft that is one meter turned into 100 cm divided by 2.54 to get u to inches now divide that by 12 to get u how may feet are in a meter now multiply that by 15 to get u how long it is 49.2125-45=4.2125ft and this ladies and gentelmen is how an average size snake can get to be well out of proportion. now the true legeth of this imfamous snake is 11.5 or very close to that the 15 meters was an exageration still larger the the 32'9'' reticulated python. this rock python was 37.7feet massive yes not 49 feet nor 45 feet

Look at a conversion table,
1meter = 3.2(rounded off) feet.
Simple formula
15 X 3.2 = 48
Now if you have your own theory or measuring system to prove your argument then I guess every calculation you do will be as you want it to be.

mine is exact where as urs is rounding. 1 inch is exaclty 2.54 cm and there are exactly 100cm in 1 meter and exactly 12 inches in one foot u proved me right the second u said that 1 meter is about 3.2 feet. ur right its lcose but i used exacts where as u didnt. its simple chemistry conversions man. u have meters and ur trying to get to feet so u know how many cm's are in a meter and u know how many cm's make up n inch and u know how many inches are in a foot so u go by it that way and u will get exacts by saying 1 meter is about 3.2 feet u open the door for an inacurate answer. anf thus u are wrong congrats.

YUP! Mine is rounded of while your is exactly how you want it to come out.

True, could be the reason dinosaur ceased to exist. And earth is continously changing, maybe the time of big species like dinosaur may come back or species will even get smaller???
If ever, I don't think we will get to see it anyway.

I doubt dinos would evolve again...no devolution here...

way to be a little u know what about it all i was saying is ur math was not accuate as mine is. mine gave exact conversions where as urs gave a rounded answer. in the world of science exact measurments are needed that why i know how to do the conversions

I agree ( much to my disliking) things can't devolve, unless it is in the cartoon pokemon

Rounding off of numbers is use because the numerical difference is irrelevant to the result.

are u highits irevalant to the result? dude u gave a round off of the size mine was exact and ur pissed aobut it idk why its not a big deal but why dont u cry al ittle more aobu it

Pissed? Who me? I'm having fun here watching you trying your best to make yourself look like you know what you are talking about.

Not a fake pic but also not one which could be taken for an estimate of size. It's taken from an angle which makes it look big. Still...it doesn't look that big.

no dude u said 1 meter is about 3.2 feet. yea thst is close but the exact conversion is 1 meter equals 100 cm and 1 inch is exactly 2.54 cm the text book defination of an inch is 2.54 cm. now by knowithng this knowlede u can say 1 meter is 100 cm. 100 cm divided by 2.54 will giv us inches the answer is 39.37007874015748031496062992126 this is how many inches are in 1 meter exactly. now take 39.37007874015748031496062992126 and divide that by 12 and u will get ur feet 3.2808398950131233595800524934383 so in reality the closer measurment would be 1 meter is 3.3 feet. and now it u multiply 3.2 times the 15 meters the snake was said to be u get 45 in reality its 48 now multiply the actualy conversions and u get 49.212598425196850393700787401575

slightly over a foot is kinda a big deal when talking aobut sankes legenth

15 metes even if u sues it as 1 meter being 3.2 feet is not 45 feet. the conversions i gave u are 100% acurate if u would liek to learn how to do it its realy easy and ill teach u but belive me there correct

Thanks for the lesson offer but a calculator is as accurate as anyone can be, definitely more fun and simplier. By the way 15 meters is 48 feet AS I HAVE POSTED earlier. Now rounded to 3.3 feet/meter then it is 49.5 feet. That is even a bigger snake!
Use a calculator and if you don't agree I suggest you return the calculator to the manufacturer and get a refund.

i used a calculatro to do that and if u read the earlier post i made that fossi snake was not 15 metres it was a media exageration it was 11.5 meter i belive still a huge snake not denying that but it isnt a 49foot snake, remeber the 3.3 is a round up justl ike 3.2 is a round down so 3.2 is smaller then the actualy one and 3.3 is bigger thne the actualy conversion 3.2808398950131233595800524934383 is the 100% acurate one. that is exactly how mny feet are in one meter no smaller no bigger that is it my friend. im not trying to decive u im trying to teach u some new tool i never though i woudl use this stuff before but once u learn it u can use it all the time and its amazingly easy. the hardesty thing to remember is 1 inch is 2.54 cm and afteru have thatu can convert 1 mile into km or m or anything or vis versa i can convert 1 cm in to miles 100% acuratly using this.


haha u def need a calculator to do this do u realy think i cna get a number to 32 decimal points in my head or on paper thats entirely to much work lol u plug it in to the calculator very easiy look heres one il lmae 5 feet into cm. 1 foot times 12 inches times 2.54 cm so u put it in the calculator liek this 1 times 12 equals 12. 12 times 2.54 equals 30.48 there are exactly 30.48 cm in 1 foot. now multiply that times 5 (because u have 5 feet) and u get 152.4cm in 5 feet its 100% acurate. its realy easy

The report say it is 15 meters, go to Scenic City Reptiles and tell them that their info is wrong and that you know that is is not. By the way, how did the fossil look like since you seem to know more about it?

Here's a link to some SNAKE facts.............

And i still think there is at least one snake (anaconda) that is or close to 40' in the Amazon.

Here's a Quote from this same site....

Most modern herpetologists have a healthy scepticism about any snake claimed to be longer than 9.14m (30ft). However, it has been calculated, by taking into account the biomechanical and physiological stresses imposed on a large snake moving over land, that the upper length limit is probably about15m (49ft); a longer snake would have to spend most of its time in the water, to support its enormous weight. These calculations, combined with many un-authenticated reports of giant snakes suggest that specimens in the 12-15m (40-50ft) range may well be found in the future.

http://members.tripod.com/wellsking/worldrecs.htm

not is south americna so no giant anacondas. giant rock pythons and retics yea its possible for thme but a giant anaconda 50 fetl ong is not gonan happen

Modern Rock pythons don't even grow over 20..

i realise that but what im saying is from fossils we know that at one point they "did" get bigger we have no records of huge anacondas get what im saying that was kinda unclear what i posted before srry

The environment just can't support large snakes anymore...

Freak accidents in nature happen sometimes, and with snake you never know.

Very unlikely we all here in this forum will ever see one because of reason like the environment, but the possibility is there always. Maybe a breeder can grow a 30-40 footer one day and finally cash in the reward for the first ever live specimen of a 30 footer!

Hmm... Very true, very true. People will do anything for money these days, also to be famous for 'finding' a long snake. I really do agree with the whole scientist thing. But if the snake was found in the amazon, that truely is different. There are so many things still needed to be found, and filed. Everyday something is found there.

eh snakes in captivity grow faster then thgere eild counter parts but snakes in captivity rarely reach there wild counterparts size records. legenth wise at least they can def be heavier.

Really, then how come the longest live specimen now is in a zoo in Illinois, a 28 footer burmese python? And all those giant snakes in the wild are stories with no proof?

u are on crack arent u i was refering to record legeth of snakes i.e. retic who reached 32 feet 9 inches retics in captivity ususaly dont get close to that snakes size and i do not know of this 28 foot snake that u are tlaking aobut i do know that a 21 foot long snake that died in 2002 and in a four year period its doubt fu lthat a snake in sexual maturity will grow 9 feet so ur supposed burmeese is probly not realy 28 feet long. if u could tell me where u heard of the 28 foot snaked id appericate it. a burmeese in captivity does hold the record for heaviest snake though.

The longest documented snakes on record are in zoos...Including the 33 foot reticulated.