Biggest animals ever to have lived

[dkatwa]

Hi..I posted a thread a while ago on PH, saying that I believe the biggest animals ever to live were in the sea during the dinosaur period, bigger than blue whales...I can't find that thread now...

My reasoning was the everything was bigger in those days, bugs, flying animals, land animals etc...so naturally, the sea should hold the biggest creatures ever, bigger than today's blue whale

It is unlikely to be proved but, looking at the site below, India was at sea millions of years ago and is now colliding with the plate further North...

I would guess that if the rocks in and around the Himalayas were inspected, they could yield clues to the sea animals of the time...

I am definitely not going there as I find the UK cold in itself...but maybe some explorer types on here are planning a trip there an could looks at the rocks...

I am sure other lands masses, previously at sea and now joined, could hold similar clues....


Just my hunch


http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/earthviewer-onl...

[Mr Gearchange]

The blue whale is the largest creature to have ever lived on earth.

My understanding is that we would have found evidence of anything bigger before now as we know where to look

My mate is a palaeontologist - he talks about this stuff but I drift in and out...

[Einion Yrth]

You can believe what you want, but as you were told, repeatedly, in the previous thread; there is no evidence for any animal larger than the blue whale, ever. On the whole in science ( you did notice the sub-forum title?), evidence trumps hunches.

[RobDickinson]

dkatwa said:

Hi..I posted a thread a while ago on PH, saying that I believe the biggest animals ever to live were in the sea during the dinosaur period, bigger than blue whales...I can't find that thread now...

My reasoning was...

100% doesnt belong in the science thread. belief is not science.

Science is based on evidence. You has none.

[JohneeBoy]

A more interesting question would be: How big could an animal possibly be while living on Earth at any time in the planet's history?

[JohneeBoy]

JohneeBoy said:

A more interesting question would be: How big could an animal possibly be while living on Earth at any time in the planet's history?

For which I have found an answer - http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers/viewtopic....

[Fugazi]

dkatwa said:

My reasoning was the everything was bigger in those days, bugs, flying animals, land animals etc...

There were reasons why giant insects and arthopods, like 2 metre long millipedes and dragonflies with 80cm wingspans which existed back in the Carboniferous, around 350 million years ago. They were so big in comparison to modern day versions due to the higher oxygen levels present back then, approx 35% to the 21% we get today and the way these animals breathe. Invertebrates use a system of narrow passageways and tubes down the length of the body in which oxygen diffusion takes place, some of larger insects around now may pump their abdomens to increase the transfer rate of gases as they 'breathe' but by and large it's a fairly passive process unlike vertebrates which actively pump air or oxygenated water, so as the atmospheric oxygen levels decreased so did the size of invertebrates.

The reason we don't see giant flying animals anymore is probably down to two main reasons, the evolutionary niches aren't available and those that were exploited by large animals in the past have have now been filled and the flight mechanisms of birds and bats differ to the huge pterosaurs of the late Cretaceous. Birds that fly aren't really suited to large bodies, although the largest flying bird had a wingspan of about 8 metres compared to Quetzalcoatlus, which had a wingspan of around 17 metres. But again the wings of each were composed differently, feathers instead of a stretched membrane which results in a lighter and less 'draggy' wing.

The Blue whale is still the largest vertebrate animal to have lived, bigger than the mosasaurs and plesiosaurs of the Cretaceous. We actually have a fairly well described fossil record of whales and early cetaceans and even the largest of these were still unmatched by the Blue whale. Also the geology of the Himalayas doesn't contain rocks of the right age in which to find whale fossils other than the very earliest examples from around 50 million years ago when whales resembled aquatic dogs.

Knew my paleontology interest would come in handy one day

[TwigtheWonderkid]

dkatwa said:

Hi..I posted a thread a while ago on PH, saying that I believe the biggest animals ever to live were in the sea during the dinosaur period, bigger than blue whales...I can't find that thread now...

My reasoning was the everything was bigger in those days, bugs, flying animals, land animals etc...so naturally, the sea should hold the biggest creatures ever, bigger than today's blue whale

People with more knowledge on the subject than you posted on that previous thread explaining why your reasoning was almost certainly wrong. Yet you till persist with this strange idea, despite the complete absence of any evidence.

Why?

[Some Gump]

JohneeBoy said:

A more interesting question would be: How big could an animal possibly be while living on Earth at any time in the planet's history?

This big?

[Mr Gearchange]

That's the limit for land mammals

[Eric Mc]

I find her strangely attractive - but I also lusted after Ms Piggy - so I've obviously got a problem.

[Einion Yrth]

Eric Mc said:

I find her strangely attractive - but I also lusted after Ms Piggy - so I've obviously got a problem.

Certainly I find that strange, but she has children, so presumably you would have (had?) competition. Different strokes and so on.

[perdu]

Eric Mc said:

I find her strangely attractive - but I also lusted after Ms Piggy - so I've obviously got a problem.

Oh sod it...



After you for sloppy seconds Eric




not so strange either if you knew a few of my previouses...

[julian64]

RobDickinson said:

dkatwa said:

Hi..I posted a thread a while ago on PH, saying that I believe the biggest animals ever to live were in the sea during the dinosaur period, bigger than blue whales...I can't find that thread now...

My reasoning was...

100% doesnt belong in the science thread. belief is not science.

Science is based on evidence. You has none.

I suggest it is you that doesn't understand the scientific method.
Hunches are hypothesis, to be proven or unproven with a scientific method
To say you aren't allowed to hypothesise beyond known scientific fact is simply to misunderstand how learning takes place.

It would be nice to think random experimentation brings forth evidence which is then incorporated into a theory, but there is very little random experimentation in this world. Its either serendipitous or based on a vague hypothesis which is then adjusted over time with the light of evidence searched for.

Its entirely scientific for him to formulate a theory, but then the scientist in him need to work on it.

[RobDickinson]

its not a hypothesise. a hypothesise is something hinted at by data that you cannot prove with out further research.

by your standards religion is a hypothesise

he has absolutely no evidence, but beyond that he hasnt even a basic explanation of why outside of things were bigger back then. which isnt actually true ( notice the blue whale..)

[Prof Prolapse]

You can use reason alone to form a hypothesis without observational evidence. For example, whilst I have never shoved a pineapple up my anus, I believe due to it's basic shape and my lifestyle choices, I hypothesise it would not be a pleasant experience.

But you then need evidence to test the hypothesis. In my example this would require observational evidence of a kind I would not wish to obtain, but I would need to do so before I could make claims either way.

For the purposes of discussion however, I believe the blue whale remains the largest animal ever. Owing to nothing else has ever been proven, and burden of proof falls on those making the claim of something larger.

[bucksmanuk]

Prof Prolapse said:

For example, whilst I have never shoved a pineapple up my anus, I believe due to it's basic shape and my lifestyle choices, I hypothesise it would not be a pleasant experience.

With your user name?

[scubadude]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Maybe he's upset with Animals playing 3rd fiddle to Trees and Fungus for the largest single living things?

[Prof Prolapse]

bucksmanuk said:

Prof Prolapse said:

For example, whilst I have never shoved a pineapple up my anus, I believe due to it's basic shape and my lifestyle choices, I hypothesise it would not be a pleasant experience.

With your user name?

I find in life, sometimes the return journey is the biggest struggle.

[RobDickinson]

Prof Prolapse said:

You can use reason alone to form a hypothesis without observational evidence. For example, whilst I have never shoved a pineapple up my anus, I believe due to it's basic shape and my lifestyle choices, I hypothesise it would not be a pleasant experience.

Yes you are using reason. Anus = small, Pineapple big, big -> small = not so easy.

There is no reason in the OP.


I look forward to hearing your results btw but please no evidence...