Lair of Ancient 'Kraken' Sea Monster found?

[Still Waters]

A giant sea monster, the likes of the mythological kraken, may have swum Earth's ancient oceans, snagging what was thought to be the sea's top predators — school bus-size ichthyosaurs with fearsome teeth.

The kraken, which would've been nearly 100 feet (30 meters) long, or twice the size of the colossal squid, Mesonychoteuthis, likely drowned or broke the necks of the ichthyosaurs before dragging the corpses to its lair, akin to an octopus's midden, according to study researcher Mark McMenamin, a paleontologist at Mount Holyoke College in Massachusetts.

There is no direct evidence for the beast, though McMenamin suggests that's because it was soft-bodied and didn't stand the test of time; even so, to make a firm case for its existence one would want to find more direct evidence.

Read more...

[+DieChecker]

Interesting. That would be one bad critter to wander into in the sea. Like the giant octopus from the old 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea movie. Probably it would have been just as intellegent or more so then todays octopus. Maybe the layout of the bones in patterns is no mistake or accident?

[Big Bad Voodoo]

It is a legendary sea monster which fed on ships and whales in a single mouthful.

Now one researcher claims he has found proof the mythical creature actually did exist.

Read more...

[grendille]

definitely interesting but it seems like a lot of conjecture at this point, I hope it pans out though proof of the Kraken would be awesome.

[Timothy]

If the pattern in the fossils is all he's got then it doesn't seem very rock-solid theory

Edited October 11, 2011 by Timonthy

[SHaYap]

A giant sea monster, the likes of the mythological kraken, may have swum Earth's ancient oceans, snagging what was thought to be the sea's top predators — school bus-size ichthyosaurs with fearsome teeth.

Read more...

Lair of Ancient 'Kraken' Sea Monster Possibly Discovered

Jeanna Bryner, LiveScience Managing Editor

Date: 10 October 2011 Time: 09:42 AM ET

Found ?

[UFO_Monster]

I hope it's true and not the marks left behind by some dumb fish laying eggs or some other junk. (Idk if that would be logical, but it's not meant to be taken seriously.)

[TheSpoonyOne]

definitely interesting but it seems like a lot of conjecture at this point, I hope it pans out though proof of the Kraken would be awesome.

Awesome? I think it would be terrifying!

[ShadowSot]

Awesome? I think it would be terrifying!

Luckily you'd be seperate from the real thing, if it existed, by millions of years.

Should be noted the original kraken was only dangerous in the sense that when it left the surface, it caused whirlpool that would suck sips under.

[Evo]

Just goes to show how huge the ocean is.

[Myles]

This is pretty stupid. If this is all that is needed to declare a discovery, then each of us could come up with discoveries with this much evidence.

Interesting. That would be one bad critter to wander into in the sea. Like the giant octopus from the old 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea movie. Probably it would have been just as intellegent or more so then todays octopus. Maybe the layout of the bones in patterns is no mistake or accident?

What leads you to think that?

[Setton]

Probably it would have been just as intellegent or more so then todays octopus.

Sorry, but there's absolutely no reason to think that. As a general rule, species do not get less intelligent over time.

[DigitalDreamer]

This article is utter rubbish,There is still not enough evidence to suggest such a creature is real.Mass killing due to natural disasters is what what most scientists agree.

[The Lone Ranger]

People (in general term) shouldn`t act ignorant and accept the possibility that there are still "monsters" alive. if i am correct only 5% of the sea is explored and only 1% of the deep sea. Even though i am aware of the fact that in order for a specie to survive there has to be a population. But despite that i wouldnt exlude that possibility that animals like the megalodon are still alive.

The oceanic trenches probarly hold a lot of life and as we know life evolves.

even 3700 miles long rivers are still being found http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/viewnews.php?id=212978

the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence -

[Cryptozological Mascot]

This article is utter rubbish,There is still not enough evidence to suggest such a creature is real.Mass killing due to natural disasters is what what most scientists agree.

Rubbish?!! This article is merely pointing out someone's hypothesis... the article itself seems to be very unbiased and informative of both sides of the argument. I thought it to be rather good. However, I will agree that there is nowhere enough evidence to support the hypothesis.

[BackFromTheDead]

Someone put me right on this please but....

If an animal is scarred when younger (and smaller) by an octopus does that scar increase in size as it develops into an adult? If so you would get the impression that the original lesion was caused by a much larger creature?

I have scars that I got when just 6 / 7 years old, and relatively speaking, they have remained the same size as my physical frame grew.

If so, then scars bear little relationship to the original injury (my knees bear testament to that )

[BaneSilvermoon]

I like the idea, but there's really zero evidence for it. A few bones laying in an odd pattern doesn't mean you can create a new creature that must have put them that way. Perhaps it's a really good guess. Perhaps it's not even remotely accurate.

Without finding a huge fossilized cephalopod beak somewhere this will remain complete guesswork based on nothing.

[alandhopewell]

Something that puzzles me....if the largest squid are only about 40-50', as they're commonly saying now, then what in the name of Samuel Z. Arkoff was leaving those scars on sperm whales that were the size of dinner plates? Any number of books on the ocean from the 50's and 60's spoke of them.

Edited October 13, 2011 by alandhopewell

[DigitalDreamer]

I like the idea, but there's really zero evidence for it. A few bones laying in an odd pattern doesn't mean you can create a new creature that must have put them that way.

Agreed,Many people still do this which is such an annoying occurance

[BaneSilvermoon]

Agreed,Many people still do this which is such an annoying occurance

When you say "Many people do this," what specifically are you referring to?

If an animal is scarred when younger (and smaller) by an octopus does that scar increase in size as it develops into an adult? If so you would get the impression that the original lesion was caused by a much larger creature?

Something that puzzles me....if the largest squid are only about 40-50', as they're commonly saying now, then what in the name of Samuel Z. Arkoff was leaving those scars on sperm whales that were the size of dinner plates? Any number of books on the ocean from the 50's and 60's spoke of them.

As I understand it, yes, scars grow as the skin grows. So it would depend on where a scar is on your body how much it would be effected by growth. If the scar didn't grow it would tear the skin around it as growth of the body underneath needs more surface area in that location. In the same way, with a whale, a minor scar on an adolescent could potentially become a very large scar later in life.

::edit::

Also, from personal experience. I have a scar near my knuckle that I'm told is from an IV running into my hand when I was still in the hospital as a baby. The scar on my hand looks like a semi-round hole about the size of a 10 or 12 gauge needle. If the back story I was given by my family on that scar is true, I assure you they didn't use a 10 gauge needle on an infant. A standard adult IV needle is generally an 18 or 20 gauge.

Edited October 13, 2011 by BaneSilvermoon

[Xanthurion2]

i just killed a kraken on a video game a few days ago

[marharthm]

How deep?

You have to remember that the deeper you live, the bigger you are likely to be due to pressure.

If this creature evolved in the deep ocean, it is likely it can be extremely large.

[ShadowSot]

I had to reread the article.

There's not any sucker marks, but that the vertebrae look like suckers.

I misread that originally.

Actually, at extreme depths, things tend to be small.

however, there's a thing called deep ocean giganticism, where normaly small species are represented in larger forms at depth. Then there's the reverse, where normally large creatures are represented by smaller specimens at depth.

[The Unseen]

Very scary if I say so myself,Would not want to run into that while deep sea fishing.

[King Fluffs]

Nightmares...