Giant prehistoric krakens may have sculpted self-portraits using ichthyosaur bones

For decades, paleontologists have puzzled over a fossil collection of nine Triassic icthyosaurs (Shonisaurus popularis) discovered in Nevada's Berlin-Ichthyosaur State Park. Researchers initially thought that this strange grouping of 45-foot-long marine reptiles had either died en masse from a poisonous plankton bloom or had become stranded in shallow water.

But recent geological analysis of the fossil site indicates that the park was deep underwater when these shonisaurs swam the prehistoric seas. So why were their bones laid in such a bizarre pattern? A new theory suggests that a 100-foot-long cephalopod arranged these bones as a self-portrait after drowning the reptiles. And no, we're not talking about Cthulhu.

Where vertebrae in the assemblage are disarticulated, disks are arranged in curious linear patterns with almost geometric regularity. Close fitting due to spinal ligament contraction is disproved by the juxtaposition of different-sized vertebrae from different parts of the vertebral column. The proposed Triassic kraken, which could have been the most intelligent invertebrate ever, arranged the vertebral discs in biserial patterns, with individual pieces nesting in a fitted fashion as if they were part of a puzzle. The arranged vertebrae resemble the pattern of sucker discs on a cephalopod tentacle, with each amphicoelous vertebra strongly resembling a coleoid sucker. Thus the tessellated vertebral disc pavement may represent the earliest known self‑portrait.

source

Well Cthulhu fans I suppose you might have to read between the lines on this one yet it would be hard to ask for much more in a scientific paper. If these kraken were busy making self portraits I wonder would else could be lost to time.

website of park where formation was discovered

Very interesting.

I have always thought that marine animals were the first to form some form of abstract intelligence, this maybe just the first in a long line of discoveries coming that could hint at the fact that we are not the only intelligent beings to have walked our plains or swam our oceans. However I did not expect giant tentacled monstrosities outside of Lovecraft lore.

I wouldn't be surprised if we find mass amounts of preemptive artificial structures deep in the ocean, which may have been created by an intelligent ocean dwelling creature. We have honestly have no idea what is down there.

I wonder what else these proposed Triassic kraken got up to? A self portrait seems inteligent! I mean what other creature on Earth aside from Humans and possibly Ape's and Monkeys are capable of this today?

reply to post by andy06shake


As far as I know nothing else does anything like this. Cephlapods hold a special fascination for me. Cuttlefish can do some amazing things with coloration in their bodies



Octopi also have some awe-inspiring abilities

Wow, this is pretty incredible! As you can see by my username I'm a big fan of the cephalopods and this new theory is something I never thought I'd hear scientists propose that ocean dwelling creatures were smart enough to re arrange bones into a likeness of themselves. I seriously wish we had the technology to explore the oceans more, I'm sure theres so much incredible stuff down there that would boggle our mind. Star and flag for you my good sir.

reply to post by ConspiracySquid7


I dont think anyone has really considered that which is what I am sure will make this paper a tough sell. However if it encourages others to start looking then maybe we will find something more to help back such an incrediable hypothesis.

Aw man, this is the coolest thing I've read in weeks. Thanks, OP.

I'm sure many are already familiar with the vaunted intelligence of our modern cephalopods. Here's a neat little clip, and a shout-out to all my tentacled brethren out there keeping it real.



I love the idea that self-reflection through art is an universal manifestation of intelligence.

I give this thread eight tentacles up.

reply to post by mistermonculous


Nice video thanks for the information I appreciate

Wow! This is an amazing post and very interesting. If this cephalopod indeed did create a self portrait of itself with bones, then with would suggest it was self-aware which also indicates other capabilities that go along with extreme intelligence possibly borderline culture or language or some other mode of advanced communication among its own species.

reply to post by JoBee


I agree I think that the more we learn about communication in animal species the more complex it becomes.

reply to post by Openeye


I just realized I had replied to everyone here but you, apologies. Thanks for your thoughts I guess they so mirrored my own that I failed to fully recognize them.

Pretty violent way to create "art".

More likely the dawning of self awareness.

reply to post by iforget


Meanwhile, back in reality:

The Giant, Prehistoric Squid That Ate Common Sense

There is no direct evidence for the existence of the animal the McMenamins call “the kraken.” No exceptionally preserved body, no fossilized tentacle hooks, no beak — nothing. The McMenamins’ entire case is based on peculiar inferences about the site. It is a case of reading the scattered bones as if they were tea leaves able to tell someone’s fortune. Rather than being distributed through the bonebed by natural processes related to decay and preservation, the McMenamins argue that the Shonisaurus bones were intentionally arrayed in a “midden” by a huge cephalopod nearly 100 feet long. (How the length of the imaginary animal was estimated is anyone’s guess.) But that’s not all — the McMenamins speculate that his “kraken” played with its food:

The proposed Triassic kraken, which could have been the most intelligent invertebrate ever, arranged the vertebral discs in biserial patterns, with individual pieces nesting in a fitted fashion as if they were part of a puzzle. The arranged vertebrae resemble the pattern of sucker discs on a cephalopod tentacle, with each amphicoelous vertebra strongly resembling a coleoid sucker. Thus the tessellated vertebral disc pavement may represent the earliest known self‑portrait.

I guess a giant, ichthyosaur-eating “kraken” wasn’t enough. A squid with a stroke of artistic genius was clearly the simplest explanation for the formation of the bonebeds.

The giant, prehistoric squid that wasn't

Mark McMenamin and wife Dianna Schulte-McMenamin of Mount Holyoke College have come up with their own theory: that it was an old cemetery, where a squid like none has ever been seen used to eat and throw its meals. Now, nothing wrong with that mind you – it’s as good a theory as any, but THERE IS NO CLEAR EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP.

Evidence for 'Triassic Kraken' Sea Monster Called "Pathetic"

The McMenamins may believe in the mythical kraken, but University of Minnesota professor and popular blogger PZ Myers says the hypothesis is ridiculous:

"I love the idea of ancient giant cephalopods," says Myers. "But then reality sinks in: That's a genuinely, flamboyantly extravagant claim, and the evidence better be really, really solid. And it's not. It's actually rather pathetic."

"Let me explain something here," he writes. "This 'Triassic kraken' has not been found; no fossils, no remains at all, no evidence of its existence."

reply to post by CLPrime


Yeah, Yeah

It's not like you'd expect to find a fossilized kraken what's more is that perhaps the formation is worthy of a more extraordinary explanation. There is as much evidence for this idea than as any other cryptoid I can think of.

anyways thanks, I had also thought the kraken mythological and went looking for evidence of it's prehistoric evidence thinking that if this paper was at all serious there must be some and came up with the same information you posted

Originally posted by iforget

There is as much evidence for this idea than as any other cryptoid I can think of.

Depends on the cryptid. There's a lot more evidence for Bigfoot and the Loch Ness monster than there is for the Kraken. There's about the same amount of evidence for the Kraken as there is for the mermaid or most local cryptids (like the Jersey Devil, or Mothman).
As for the idea, itself...there's no evidence whatsoever. Which is just ever so slightly less than the evidence that exists for the Kraken and mermaids.

Also, if we're finding fossilized dinosaur tissue, then I would expect to find fossilized Kraken tissue. Though, it's quite possible that such finds would be scarce, so it might be a case of just having not looked in the right spot yet.

But, just the title: "Giant prehistoric krakens may have sculpted self-portraits using ichthyosaur bones"... doesn't it sound a little like something you'd find in a Flintstones episode?

reply to post by CLPrime


I am not sure i think that we find the fossilized tissue inside the bone of the dinosaur. There must have been some type of prehistoric cephalpod

Fossils of octopuses are by far the most enigmatic and mysterious of all the ancient groups of cephalopods. Due to their delicate structure fossils of these animals are exceptionally rare, as the soft-bodied nature of the animal does not lend itself to fossilisation. They are so unusual that there is just one known from Illinois, one from France, a handful from Lebanon and a couple of jaw fragments from Japan and Vancouver Island. In almost three hundred million years of octopod existence, the fossil record currently comprises just eight species in six genera - our entire record would fit inside a suitcase! Very little is known about ancient octopus history, how they evolved and developed, or their lifestyle. [at the link] is a brief look at some of the theories surrounding them, the octopus fossils themselves and the sites they were found in. These ancient forms almost certainly do not represent a single line of descent.

source

I'd still argue that there is a much evidence for kraken as bigfoot or lochness. You may not even need the gigantism, that we know to have existed, to have been present in ancient cephlaop species to explain gathering bones into a pattern if you consider it could have been done after the ichthyosaur was long dead


t

Originally posted by iforget

You may not even need the gigantism, that we know to have existed, to have been present in ancient cephlaop species to explain gathering bones into a pattern if you consider it could have been done after the ichthyosaur was long dead

I agree with everything except this last bit. If the claim was that the Kraken was arranging bones in a pattern, then it would be easier for me to accept (easier). However, the claim is that this Kraken arranged the bones to form a self-portrait. This requires two things: 1) self-awareness and a sense of species identity, to know its own appearance; and 2) problem solving and limb articulation, to be capable of analyzing, reproducing, and forming a representation of itself, using the above-mentioned self-awareness.
This is what I, as well as every paleontologist capable of critical thinking, have a problem with.

Actually, what we have here would seem to be a case of pareidolia. What's happening here is the same thing that happens when people look at clouds and see rabbits. It just happens that, in this case, it's a cloud of ichthyosaur bones, and a mythological, sea-dwelling, ship-sinking, man-eating rabbit with tentacles and a terrible disposition.

reply to post by CLPrime


yeah probably