What creatures lurk in the deep sea?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
In the deep? You mean aside from lawyers?


Hey! We're not all bad!!


And I personally get freaked out by deep water. So there.




posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
In the deep? You mean aside from lawyers?
Anyway, that corpse has been proven to actually be a whale shark, the way they decompose, parts dropping off and the like, leaves the shape of a pleisiosaur behind.
Personally I'm interested in the video from monster quest of the giant squid, seeing as how it was estimated to be much larger than any squid previously thought.


Damnit, I was just considering that. If a whales upper and lower jaw fell off it might look like that corpse.

But how did they 'prove' this by looking at the photograph? I've seen rotted whale corpses and they look like masses of jelly, nothing is left but the blubber. The fisherman were familiar with all creatures of the sea and were baffled with this thing for hours before they decided to drop it... you'd think they would consider it a whale right away. Oh well.



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   
On the topic of deep sea creatures, here is an interesting topic to go along with it


bloop link



posted on Jan, 1 2008 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
But how did they 'prove' this by looking at the photograph? I've seen rotted whale corpses and they look like masses of jelly, nothing is left but the blubber. The fisherman were familiar with all creatures of the sea and were baffled with this thing for hours before they decided to drop it... you'd think they would consider it a whale right away. Oh well.


This site gives a fairly detailed analysis of the carcass, has me convinced - Sea Monster or Shark?



posted on Jan, 2 2008 @ 10:05 PM
link   
I would love it if the megaladon was alive because then any people who are gonna try and kill it will end up being eaten lol. It would serve them right but there is the danger of swimming and the whole jaws fiasco so its really half and half. What do you guys think???
Man this thread rocks lol

Woo! Glory to New zealand lol



posted on Jan, 3 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
Well I know this is probably a bit of a lame thing to bring up (and I believe I have done before) but, remember the "rediscovery" of the Coelacanth in the 1930's?

Everyone thought that the prehistoric Fish was long extinct until some fisherman netted one somewhere near South Africa I believe. Now I know that they're not exactly colossal in size, but if they can still exist then surely it would be foolish to believe that other prehistoric fish could not still be roaming the murky depths of the largely unchartered oceans.



posted on Jan, 4 2008 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Is it foolish to believe that other prehistoric fish are down there? Not at all. But missing a sixty or more foot shark? Keep in mind that sharks are attracted to electrical impulses and will checkout a food source. So a sub or electronic sensor will attract a large shark if it's in the area from the electronic sensor it gives of. Now by electronic sensory, I mean of the kind like a fish gives off, nothing overly special. Unlike the coelocanth, which is a fairly docile creature all things said, sharks are proactive hunters. They actively look for food. We'd be finding something from their attacks at the least. If there were even a small population, can you imagine how many carcasses they'd generate with huge an enormous bite radius?



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by RuneSpider
 


Unless theres no carcass left?

Hell, look at the T-Rex... nowadays...we're pretty sure it is a scavenger. It was miss-understood, bones/remains wise that it might of been a savage predator.

How do we know the Meg' doesn't use its massive, powerful jaws to eat whale carcases...and moves slowly? I mean there is no '100%' way to say it has no food



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Actually there is still proof running both ways on the T. Rex, as far as I know. I'm a bit outdated though so maybe I'm wrong. What I meant was that a shark that size would eat a lot, sure, but you'd find left overs on occasion. It happens with normal shark attacks, you get the remains of the seal floating to shore or the birds pecking at it.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 02:41 AM
link   
Well, acording with the moust recent discouveries, a huge ocean exists inside the earth:




Source: Lifescience:

If you look very close the pic, you will see that are some points where it looks bouth the surface oceans and the intraterrestrial ones comunicate directly. This can be the reason why see "monsters" are so rare to see or detect. If they just "came out" to open surface ocean, times to times for some reason, and if they live almoust all the time in the intraterrestrial ones, that will make them hard as hell to be detected.
About loch ness...i think it is known the lake comunicates with the sea by a sub tunnel. If that is correct, the nessy could evenctualy be a "visitor" to the lake, instead of "living" there.
But it can also hide in a sub cave inside the lake, what make him imune to normal sonar.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Umbra Sideralis
 

I wish people would READ THE BLOODY ARTICLE THEY REFER TO


Notice how the very title of the article state 'Ocean'. Not OMGFOCEAN or Ocean without ''. If you read further: “The water molecules are actually stuck in the mineral structure of the rock”.

No hollow earth.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 04:51 AM
link   
i think that it was proven that the shark video was a normal sized shark and then very small sharks swimming around. i think they made the fake shark video for the show.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by merka
reply to post by Umbra Sideralis
 

I wish people would READ THE BLOODY ARTICLE THEY REFER TO


Notice how the very title of the article state 'Ocean'. Not OMGFOCEAN or Ocean without ''. If you read further: “The water molecules are actually stuck in the mineral structure of the rock”.

No hollow earth.


Well, must i talk here like i was in a court of law room??! I think not!
Im using that article to rise another "Theory",and rising more questions!
IF what is in the article is possible, could also be possible that can exist huge caverns of water linked to the oceans, where imense beasts can hide?
The way i wrote in my last post may not be so clear, but that was what i intend to say!! I think that is clear when i wrote "This Can be the reason"!
Obvious it was not sufficient!
Dificult when we must write in a diferent language, but for sure there are plenty other ways to say what you sayed with out the need to be so hard and savage on other members! That i am 100% sure


For a moment i was afraid that you wanna bite me



P.S.- Btw, if in that article was normal huge water deposits, that will not be sufficient to call a "hollow earth"...but at the least a more cavernous one!


[edit on 5/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]errors & more errors...as usual

[edit on 5/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]

[edit on 5/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]

[edit on 5/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]

[edit on 5/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
I understand that people want to keep saying and believing that extremely large fish like creatures can not live because they dont have a a sufficient food source. Well what about an anaconda or boa constrictor? They are the largest snakes in the world but they can go months without any food or on one meal. Why can't this "sea-monster"? Also people try and compare these creatures to sharks all the time and say "Well why is it always killing things to feed its massive body, and where are the remains of whales with bite marks in them?"
Why should we compare them to sharks? If it is possible for them to exist then why can't it be possible to act like themselves and not always sharks. Maybe they're like big tuna or something. Who says they have to be predators?



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seiju
Who says they have to be predators?


I agree with all what you say exept that quote.
Every living bieng is a predator of something.
They all need to eat, so they all predate something. Even a cow needs to "predate" from "grass"/plants.
Normaly huge animals tend to adequate to the ambients where they live.
And because under water is quite dificult in many places to find huge amounts of food at once, they usualy especialize in one of this 2 tecniques:

- They take a huge meal, and they rest for months! (Gigant squids & sperm wales use this one)
- They are continuasly eating very small abundant animals, by filtration while they swim (Many types of wales use this ones, filtering the water with they'r "Barbs")(The Manta is another exemple of continue filtration)



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Seiju
 


Why must it act like a shark? Well, in the case of the megalodon, it IS a fricken shark. It's the ancestor of the great white, it's not going to be Flipper.
Now of course, not ever large animal is a predator or epic proportions, after all, most whales feed on some of the worlds smallest lifeforms. But keep in mind, everything from giant squid to whales wash up on beaches on occasion, most of the large animals leave carcasses behind that people stumble on. If something huge feeds on something huge, you'd eventually find evidence. Even if it feeds only occasionally, you're talking about a few hundred critters that only feed occasionally on a food sources that should be fairly large. Keep in mind how scientists these days keep track of whales and dolphins and other marine mammals. Not all of them or even most of them of course, but enough that if there was something huge that fed on them there'd be some sort of evidence.



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Right then! Great feedback and theorys. My favourite so far is the theory of a underearth??!!?? Sea. Most people do their tasks in the day and a small percentage do their tasks at night. What if we're looking for a shark that only comes out at night like all the other fish??? Now if their was a underearth sea and the megaladon swims from there to one of our known seas then there must be other species down in that sea that the megaladon preys on. I haven't got the time right now to scan through the web finding prehistoric creatures that todays oceans can support. Just like we don't know where the great white shark migratory route if there even is one. What are we looking for anyway? Both the whale shark and basking shark feed on the same prey or at least the family. Yet they look so different. The whale shark has a nice bullet look to it whilst the basking shark has a big head and small body and even smaller tail. The way we're gonna even find the evidence of the megaladon is by studing the following: Basking shark and whale shark (Biggest fish) the great white (Closest live relative) And the ellusive megamouth. The megamouth found in 1976 had lived in most oceans, Pacific, Atlantic and indian oceans. So if its been swimming there for years and years why have we only found out last year when 39 species where recorded in some of the busiest places with the clearest waters. So post your ideas of a possible reason for the late discovery of the megamouth and a possible prehistoric marine creature that the megaladon could feed on!

New zealand rules hehe



posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 09:53 PM
link   
Also about how the megaladon won't bite a submarine crammed with electronic devices with electricity being fed down the tube thats communicting with its mother ship well it pretty much answers its self


New zealand rules



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by RuneSpider
Is it foolish to believe that other prehistoric fish are down there? Not at all. But missing a sixty or more foot shark? Keep in mind that sharks are attracted to electrical impulses and will checkout a food source. So a sub or electronic sensor will attract a large shark if it's in the area from the electronic sensor it gives of. Now by electronic sensory, I mean of the kind like a fish gives off, nothing overly special. Unlike the coelocanth, which is a fairly docile creature all things said, sharks are proactive hunters. They actively look for food. We'd be finding something from their attacks at the least. If there were even a small population, can you imagine how many carcasses they'd generate with huge an enormous bite radius?


well the whole arguement is that they live in the deep sea - far away from anything else and how long would it take any left over carcasses to not only reach the chartered areas after being scavenged by other predators but to reach our beaches as well to be examined.
oh did i mention how whales have been witnessed with huge scars, bite marks and giant octopus/squid circle marks - they used to think they were just made when they were young till they discovered the giant and the colossal squid.



posted on Jan, 6 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   
But what about the possibility of a shark that evolved from the megaladon
Maybe it just adapted and became used to the cold water just like the basking shark in the north waters. Also what about vents in the ocean floor how hot they are, maybe the underground sea could be filled with these vents giving off the same heat the world did when the large fish was alive. Funny how everyone thought of the megaladon when you started the post mama.

New zealand rocks


Megaladon lives!!!! hehe





new topics
top topics
 
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join