grimsituation6 Posted August 30, 2016 #1 Share Posted August 30, 2016 Just to throw it out there, any biologist out there can elaborate more on the subject. Life has a maximum size when it comes to organisms. On land the elephant i believe is as big as you can physically get, in the current atmosphere and time period. Stresses from gravity and other physical factors like lung capacity or heart size all create a maximum statute for size. As far as the ocean goes, the blue whale seems to be king, large predators of similar size are unlikely as they would need a large selection of food. The Orca seems to be the largest carnivore both on land and at sea. Its ability to migrate vast distances, its keen intelligence, and plentiful easy to access food sources, are all vital to this large preditor's existence. I hope this debunks some giant seamonster theories and helps encourage rational thinking when it comes to crypto biology. Rationale can save time by dismissing what we know is not possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Habitat Posted August 30, 2016 #2 Share Posted August 30, 2016 All whales are carnivores, and obviously much bigger land animals than elephants have existed in the past. Talking of sea monsters, a scientific research experiment to attach a transmitter to a 12 foot Great White in southern Australian waters came to a sudden end when it was found floating on the surface, without the shark attached ! Data logged by the equipment showed it had been exposed to pressures only found at extreme depths, and it had recorded temperatures much higher than the ambient water conditions. It seems either a much larger shark, or Orca, had done it in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldrover Posted August 30, 2016 #3 Share Posted August 30, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, grimsituation6 said: Just to throw it out there, any biologist out there can elaborate more on the subject. Life has a maximum size when it comes to organisms. On land the elephant i believe is as big as you can physically get, in the current atmosphere and time period. Stresses from gravity and other physical factors like lung capacity or heart size all create a maximum statute for size. As far as the ocean goes, the blue whale seems to be king, large predators of similar size are unlikely as they would need a large selection of food. The Orca seems to be the largest carnivore both on land and at sea. Its ability to migrate vast distances, its keen intelligence, and plentiful easy to access food sources, are all vital to this large preditor's existence. I hope this debunks some giant seamonster theories and helps encourage rational thinking when it comes to crypto biology. Rationale can save time by dismissing what we know is not possible. This is a good question. Trouble is, the more you think about it the more complicated it gets. And, any answers just raise more questions. There are going to be numerous things which'll limit the size of species. But one thing is certain, they'll be different for various groups. Most significantly between herbivores and predators. With herbivores, or as in the case of the baleen whales a good analogue, always be the bigger. Due to constraints imposed by food supply. Its size, and availability. Atmosphere may play a part. The biggest land animals of all time were obviously non avian dinosaurs. And there's persuasive evidence they shared the, more efficient, uni-flow system of respiration found in birds. And to varying degrees, the Crocodilians. As well as at least one species of monitor. Mammals have a less efficient tidal respiratory system. Dinosaurs, appear in the Triassic, when O2 levels were significantly lower than today. So, it's been postulated that this may have given them an advantage over the great radiation of mammal like reptiles/proto-mammals/whatever, who dominated the Permian period. A time when O2 levels were higher. But, not all these became extinct at the end of the Permian, some persisted into the Jurassic, and maintained a fair body size. O2 requirements are higher in mammals than reptiles, including birds and by extension dinosaurs, maybe. Because of their metabolic requirements. And, some studies do find a link between spikes in O2 levels and increase in mammalian body size. O2 levels increase in the Jurassic and Cretaceous, a time when really big body size appears in the dinosaurs. But, continue to be high, as opposed to the Triassic, right through to the present day. Obviously, they fluctuate, and at no time do they approach the super oxygenated environment of the Carboniferous. But the trend is to a well oxygenated atmosphere. Another factor to consider is CO2, much higher in the Mesozoic, with its implication for plant life, and so food availability. Bio mechanical factors are also probably a constraint. Dinosaur bones are pneumatised and lighter than those of mammals, but as strong. Mammalian gestation, may also be a factor. Gestation periods increase in Eutherian mammals proportionately to their size. A mammal the size of an, egg laying, sauropod, is going to have an absurdly long and expensive pregnancy. Though, this of course doesn't necessarily apply to the Metatherians, or the Monotones. But, all this aside the largest animals ever are mammals. Whales. Although they're free of many of the stresses of a land animal. And, the largest land mammal known is much bigger than an elephant. So, even aside from any potential constraints of breathing and atmosphere, elephants aren't anywhere near the upper size limit for a land mammal. Aside from metabolism in general. In mammalian herbivores, digestion and the arrangement of the gut also seems to a limiting factor to size. With those that process food in the rear part of the gut, rather than in multiple stomachs, producing the largest animals. And that's without considering the size limits of a flying animal, which is a different thing again, upper stress limits on bone, muscle mass versus effective strength, environment, food supply, and competition. A couple of points, the orca isn't the largest of the toothed whales, who hunt down individual prey items, that's the sperm whale. And while it is true that tag attached to a 12' great white was recovered detached after a period of constant temperature suggesting that it had passed through the body of an animal. But, as was pointed out on the TetZoo Podcast. This is evidence that the tag was swallowed, not the shark. Apparently, they come off annoyingly regularly. Edited August 30, 2016 by oldrover 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrLzs Posted August 31, 2016 #4 Share Posted August 31, 2016 7 hours ago, oldrover said: And while it is true that tag attached to a 12' great white was recovered detached after a period of constant temperature suggesting that it had passed through the body of an animal. But, as was pointed out on the TetZoo Podcast. This is evidence that the tag was swallowed, not the shark. Apparently, they come off annoyingly regularly. THIS, Habitat. Do a little wider research and don't get taken in by the first story you read. Most newspapers do not have marine biologists working for them, and would rather simply run a sensational story. You'll even find out that the logger itself verified that no super giant shark was involved, just a similar one. They do fight and die (and get old or injured) you know, and the victor isn't always bigger.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted September 9, 2016 #5 Share Posted September 9, 2016 Whales eat krill well baleen whales do. Krill tiny shrimp or tiny sea creatures 1 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