Still Waters Posted March 10, 2012 #1 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Scientists conducting deep-sea dives around the Galapagos Islands have identified a new species of shark. Part of a family known as a catsharks, the new species is about 1.3 feet long, roughly the same size as a typical housecat.Read more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 10, 2012 #2 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Its amazing that there has been enough actual evidence collected and analyzed to identify and categorize a new species of housecat-sized shark living in one corner of the enormous ocean and yet nobody can come up with a single actual piece of physical evidence for a species of giant hairy man-ape that has supposedly has a range that spreads it out all over the planet. Wonder why that is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie333 Posted March 10, 2012 #3 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Wonderful, thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evancj Posted March 10, 2012 #4 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Its amazing that there has been enough actual evidence collected and analyzed to identify and categorize a new species of housecat-sized shark living in one corner of the enormous ocean and yet nobody can come up with a single actual piece of physical evidence for a species of giant hairy man-ape that has supposedly has a range that spreads it out all over the planet. Wonder why that is? Makes you wonder about the validity of such claims don't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbi Laveau Posted March 10, 2012 #5 Share Posted March 10, 2012 No,I saw a news article with photos.Its real. Google it,you should find it. The people who do this stuff are quite abundant.They get grants blah blah,because everyone wants some new species named after them. An article was published beginning of this year,with photos of bunches of newly documented species. There was a lot of them ,all different places.Sea,rain forest ,etc. There's a species of cuttlefish,that only lives in one small patch of ocean,I want to say in Indonesia ....i am not quite sure.It walks,not swims,its sooo frigging small...amd someone that studies cuttle fish, managed to find it. There's also a humming bird,with incredible plumage,that's only on one island ,somewhere outside the USA,and hummingbird peeps found it. This is what these people do for a living so....its not made up . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neognosis Posted March 10, 2012 #6 Share Posted March 10, 2012 sweet. No,I saw a news article with photos.Its real.Google it,you should find it. The people who do this stuff are quite abundant.They get grants blah blah,because everyone wants some new species named after them. An article was published beginning of this year,with photos of bunches of newly documented species. There was a lot of them ,all different places.Sea,rain forest ,etc. There's a species of cuttlefish,that only lives in one small patch of ocean,I want to say in Indonesia ....i am not quite sure.It walks,not swims,its sooo frigging small...amd someone that studies cuttle fish, managed to find it. There's also a humming bird,with incredible plumage,that's only on one island ,somewhere outside the USA,and hummingbird peeps found it. This is what these people do for a living so....its not made up . You misunderstand. what he is saying is the idea that BIGFOOT might be real, yet leave no evidence, and we find the things you mentioned with AMPLE evidence and documentation, is what is hard to believe. Dogfish or catshark? Make up your mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbi Laveau Posted March 11, 2012 #7 Share Posted March 11, 2012 (edited) sweet. You misunderstand. what he is saying is the idea that BIGFOOT might be real, yet leave no evidence, and we find the things you mentioned with AMPLE evidence and documentation, is what is hard to believe. Dogfish or catshark? Make up your mind! I was responding to evancj .Nothing at all about bigfoot. I inferred that they might think this claim was also invalid. Edited March 11, 2012 by missymoo999 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evancj Posted March 11, 2012 #8 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I was responding to evancj .Nothing at all about bigfoot. I inferred that they might think this claim was also invalid. Sorry for the misunderstanding missymoo999, Neognosis is right, I was referring to the validity of the claims of a Giant ape that is supposedly seen all over the world, yet no one is able to produce any evidence. While we can go down to the bottom of the ocean and find a tiny fish and come back with the evidence of it's existence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbi Laveau Posted March 11, 2012 #9 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Ahhh,my mistake . I blip right over stuff about bigfoot unfortunately. I find it to be complete bs,so I tune it out I guess. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobyyy Posted March 11, 2012 #10 Share Posted March 11, 2012 You cannot completely rule out the existence of a 'Big foot' unless someone proves they don't exist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msmike1 Posted March 11, 2012 #11 Share Posted March 11, 2012 You cannot completely rule out the existence of a 'Big foot' unless someone proves they don't exist Actually you are wrong. Bigfoot does not exist. There I just did it, now prove me wrong. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryso Posted March 11, 2012 #12 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Its amazing that there has been enough actual evidence collected and analyzed to identify and categorize a new species of housecat-sized shark living in one corner of the enormous ocean and yet nobody can come up with a single actual piece of physical evidence for a species of giant hairy man-ape that has supposedly has a range that spreads it out all over the planet. Wonder why that is? Haha, so true Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangepeaceful79 Posted March 11, 2012 #13 Share Posted March 11, 2012 You cannot completely rule out the existence of a 'Big foot' unless someone proves they don't exist The burden of proof lies on the shoulders of those making the extraordinary claims - ie, those people who claim that Bigfoot exists. Proof equals evidence, of which there is to date - none. Zip, zero, nada, zilch, zed. And before you say it - eyewitness accounts are not evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spud the mackem Posted March 11, 2012 #14 Share Posted March 11, 2012 It looks like a baby Leopard Shark to me,or maybe its just a mutant,caused by all the crap on the ocean floor,chucked in by Humans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Fluffs Posted March 11, 2012 #15 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I want one in my fish tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spud the mackem Posted March 11, 2012 #16 Share Posted March 11, 2012 I want one in my fish tank. Ha Ha,it wouldnt be very good for your goldfish,unless you have piranha in there and no goldfish... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRIPTIC CHAMELEON Posted March 11, 2012 #17 Share Posted March 11, 2012 Its good to see a new species of shark, I just wonder how long it will take before they make shark fin soup out of it. Oh & by the way isn't the Patterson footage real as I recall it hasn't been disproven. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeptic Chicken Posted March 12, 2012 #18 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Actually you are wrong. Bigfoot does not exist. There I just did it, now prove me wrong. Mike Actually, it does exist, but not as the name Bigfoot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus May not be alive, but it still exists in fossil records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaitSith Posted March 12, 2012 #19 Share Posted March 12, 2012 (edited) The burden of proof lies on the shoulders of those making the extraordinary claims - ie, those people who claim that Bigfoot exists. Proof equals evidence, of which there is to date - none. Zip, zero, nada, zilch, zed. And before you say it - eyewitness accounts are not evidence. yet you have one account of this shark species and dont question it for a second. Good to see double standards are alive and well on UM Edited March 12, 2012 by CaitSith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simbi Laveau Posted March 12, 2012 #20 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Actually, it does exist, but not as the name Bigfoot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus May not be alive, but it still exists in fossil records. I actually never knew it did once exist .I thought it was just a modern urban legend.Interesting . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msmike1 Posted March 12, 2012 #21 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Actually, it does exist, but not as the name Bigfoot. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus May not be alive, but it still exists in fossil records. Like I said, prove me wrong. You did not do that. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeptic Chicken Posted March 12, 2012 #22 Share Posted March 12, 2012 I actually never knew it did once exist .I thought it was just a modern urban legend.Interesting . Yeah, well it's not exactly bigfoot, but it is the closest thing to what people are seeing. Indeedly interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Am Not Resisting Posted March 12, 2012 #23 Share Posted March 12, 2012 yet you have one account of this shark species and dont question it for a second. Good to see double standards are alive and well on UM But don't you think that it helps that this new shark species can be caught and at least genetically tested to make sure it's a new species rather than not finding any physical evidence of a modern bigfoot? I mean, if a live bigfoot could be caught and studied, it would be a total game changer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paracelse Posted March 12, 2012 #24 Share Posted March 12, 2012 Its amazing that there has been enough actual evidence collected and analyzed to identify and categorize a new species of housecat-sized shark living in one corner of the enormous ocean and yet nobody can come up with a single actual piece of physical evidence for a species of giant hairy man-ape that has supposedly has a range that spreads it out all over the planet. Wonder why that is? If you were Big Foot would you like to meet humans who would happily place you in zoo for all sort of mo-ons paying to see you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZaraKitty Posted March 13, 2012 #25 Share Posted March 13, 2012 Now we can move on to finding Megaladon.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now