There is a world somewhere between reality and fiction. Although ignored by many, it is very real and so are those living in it. This forum is about the natural world. Here, wild animals will be heard and respected. The forum offers a glimpse into an unknown world as well as a room with a view on the present and the future. Anyone able to speak on behalf of those living in the emerald forest and the deep blue sea is invited to join.
Maybe you're right, but, here, you are just asserting your opinions, only claiming them.
Then, worse, you're irrelevant and insulting. Thus, you disqualify yourself. Learn to debate, to convince. It isn't easy, 'cause I know.
Sincerely i have no time to argue with teenagers who talk about animals with fanboy discussions (my animal is the strongest of the universe bla bla...) that you apparently approve. So believe what you want, i do not care.
Best regards.
Quote:OK, I understand your arguments... I was persuaded that Megalodon was the marine life apex predator. I don't mix the biotops, I will never compare the terrestrial predators with the marine predators because the rules aren't the same (for this reason one I don't appreciate the Steve Alten's book "The megalodon 2" cheerfully mixing and speculating encounters between mosasaurus and megalodon, megalodon and t.-rex and so on, mixing the epochs and the living environments reflects a lack of rigour). But the fact which perturbs me a little bit is to imagine the apex predator being the biggest animal which existed at a given time. Because if we don't consider the megalodon case, at any period the biggest animals which existed within a determined biotop weren't predator and by far... A 65 tons sharks would have been the absolute predator, the personified nightmare of the whole marine animal community, unless we learn it existed a 200 tons whale or leviathan. Just look at the extant animals (leaving aside the human action): there is no one terrestrial predator's weight exceeding 800 kilos, the most performing one is the tiger, 300 kilos whereas the biggest herbivores reach a few tons. And as concerns the extant marine life, orcas reach 6-8 tons, sperm whales 40 tons, but the blue whale far more heavier.
I remain persuaded there was some marine creatures which were able to withstand a megalodon but clearly we don't know them enough good. After all the ferocity, the temperament doesn't fossilize. Perhaps too, the megalodon was more indolent than the extant whales, even if I don't really think that... But we don't know everything about the Pliocene marine fauna, for sure. I would rather believe in a predator living in prides and knowing how to react together against a megalodon. In a way as the extant orcas would do. But even living in prides the "Pliocen orcas" should have been larger than the actual ones. Just to have a serious chance to collectively withstand...
You made some good points. I also see why you'll never compare terrestrial predators with marine predators, fair enough. In a way, you're right. The rules aren't the same.
There's no way the megalodon could have been more "indolent" than the extant whales. Absolutely not possible and makes no sense. The megalodon was the supreme apex predator of the ocean, which means it must have regulated the populations of other predators and super-predators. It was an active hunter at the very top of the food-chain. In a way, megalodon did what tigers do today. Just like how Amur tigers actively hunt and kill other large predators like bears, which regulates the bears populations, and also actively pursue, kill and reduce wolf populations to the point of localized extinction, the megalodon was also actively killing and eating other marine predators, which also regulated or severely reduced their numbers. So its a very similar dynamic.
Here's a video from the researchers. Emma Kast states: "The megalodon must have been at a extraordinarily high position in the marine food-web, and not just high in terms of similarity to apex predators we have today, but actually multiple trophic levels higher than anything we have in the modern ocean."
Professor & researcher Daniel Sigman states: "Their diet must have been largely composed of predatory and super-predatory animals."
As to other marine animals able to withstand megalodon. A whole pod of Livyatan Melvillei whales probably could. An entire pod (mainly comprised of adult whales) may have been able to withstand a lone megalodon, but if the megalodon came across a lone Livyatan Melvillei, then the Livyatan whale would have been in serious trouble.
If the mosasaurus lived alongside the megalodon, then the mosasaurus would have got destroyed. It would have had zero chances against the megalodon. The mosasaurus only weighed around 15 tons, whereas the megalodon weighed 50 - 65+ tonnes. Its a complete mismatch, the mosasaurus would have been food for the megalodon.
God knows what other undiscovered creatures existed in the prehistoric oceans. We can only imagine or speculate.
Quote:What I just want to say: prehistoric marine life has always been abundant, prolific. The sharks have always been a success of the evolution: they survived through 5 main extinctions even if we consider that the biggest shark of the Cretaceous ocean disappeared with the marine reptiles 65 millions years ago. Just after, sharks regained lost ground. In short, sharks have never been alone under the sea, it's difficult to believe, that suddendly, a monstruous shark, the megalodon, dominated so intensively. They coudn't be alone, I am just persuaded about that.
Well, honestly, I don't know of any other marine creature that could have been on par with megalodon, in terms of size, power, weaponry, dominance, killing prowess etc. Maybe there was another predator but hasn't been discovered yet. Who knows? But that's just a wild guess.
But overall, the sheer dominance of the megalodon is simply undeniable. Their absolute top position in the food-chain and active predation on other predators/super-predators clearly indicates that they did indeed dominate so intensively.
However, I'm always interested when wildlife experts/scientists make new discoveries about other unknown predators which existed in Prehistoric times.
You talk just like a little fanboy who imagine animals like war machines, it is really pathetic. Megalodon was a great predator without any doubts, very massive and strong without any doubt. But in water, there are more important factors like mobility, social behaviors, intelligence... A pod of orcas is probably much more dangerous than your Megalodon for many reasons.
And concerning tigers and bears, whatever you think, bears are stronger, have a better plasticity and have more cognitive capacities than tigers and an adult male brown bear in good health has nothing to fear about tigers. But you know, i know tiger fanboys who believe that a tiger could kill a prehistoric elephant which is 10 tons in mass. How stupid they are...
So the general consensus among the worlds foremost marine experts, scientists, palaeontologists, researchers etc, who all adamantly state that the megalodon was the undisputed king of the ocean and most formidable and powerful marine apex predator ever, are all "little fanboys" and are "pathetic" ??? The recent scientific research/studies is all nonsense? The marine predator experts are liars?
Only according to your personal and meaningless opinion, a pod of orcas is "much more dangerous" than a megalodon, NOT according to facts, reality and the actual real experts. A pod of orcas in extremely rare cases, if ever, dare to attack a full-grown bull sperm whale and they get regularly chased off by (sometimes lone) Humpback whales, and yet you compare them to megalodon. Are you serious?!! Thats a joke.
Yes, "bears are stronger" than tigers and that's why bears are regularly hunted and eaten by tigers and are one of the Amur tigers favorite prey items. And yes, "adult male brown bear in good health has nothing to fear about tigers" and that's why recently, just some months ago, a large adult male brown bear got hunted, killed and eaten by a smaller tiger. Literally, your empty claims and nonsensical statements make no sense.
Spalea and I were having a nice, fruitful debate/discussion about megalodon, there was no reason for you to get involved and try ruin and derail the conversation with your insults, baseless claims and nonsense.
After having seen your short video, all I can say is, if that is true, that your geant shark would be the only one apex predator ( during the history of life on Earth) surpassing in size and weight all other marine creatures. And that, it's exceptionnal. When you are evoking the Amur tiger, this felid weights 220-300 kilos and I can name the brown bear, a big male boar, the asiatic bison (wisent ?) as animals sharing its environment and being bigger than it. Yes it's an apex predator, he hunts some preys bigger than itself, thus an hunting error isn't allowed. During a recent past, Pleistocene period, when the human action was so much more weaked than today, the bears were bigger, some cave lions ruled over the Siberia, some wolves, bigger too than the extant ones, plaged in bigger packs. In short, the Amour tiger, being a solitary apex predator, had to be careful.
If I spoke about T-rex, there were so numerous preys which were bigger than it (big ceratopciens, big duckbilled dinosaurs, sauropods ...). For it too, hunting error wasn't allowed.
But, in the case of megalodon, nothing like it. Apparently, this apex predator crushed the competition ! It's for this reason one, I find it very particular, I would believe in an other predator able to withstand solitarily or in pride against it. Because It's very hard to believe in an absolute mega apex predator (like the human specy nowaday in fact !).
I'm only repeating what the marine predator experts & researchers say about megalodon. According to experts, nothing could have taken on megalodon. It was the undisputed top marine predator of all time, and according to the most recent research (as also shown in the video) the megalodon occupied the absolute highest position in the food-chain, multiple trophic levels higher than any other marine apex predator today. Now, what you personally make of this information, is up to you. At the end of the day, its not like I'm stating my opinion, this is what actual scientific research shows and what the experts say.
I brought up Amur tigers because what the megalodon was doing to other marine predators it co-existed with, reminded me of what Amur tigers do to other predators (i.e. bears and wolves) in Far East Russia. Its a very similar dynamic. But I agree, in the Pleistocene era, the solitary Amur tiger had to be careful of prides of cave lions. Not about wolves though, as wolves naturally always had a very strong fear of tigers and got killed and driven out of tiger territories. The bears were bigger, but so were the tigers. Amur tigers hunted bears in the Pleistocene era as well, this is not just a modern phenomena. Bears have always fallen prey to tigers throughout many millennia.
I said in my previous post that a whole pod of Livyatan Melvillei whales could probably withstand against the solitary megalodon.
After having seen your short video, all I can say is, if that is true, that your geant shark would be the only one apex predator ( during the history of life on Earth) surpassing in size and weight all other marine creatures. And that, it's exceptionnal. When you are evoking the Amur tiger, this felid weights 220-300 kilos and I can name the brown bear, a big male boar, the asiatic bison (wisent ?) as animals sharing its environment and being bigger than it. Yes it's an apex predator, he hunts some preys bigger than itself, thus an hunting error isn't allowed. During a recent past, Pleistocene period, when the human action was so much more weaked than today, the bears were bigger, some cave lions ruled over the Siberia, some wolves, bigger too than the extant ones, plaged in bigger packs. In short, the Amour tiger, being a solitary apex predator, had to be careful.
If I spoke about T-rex, there were so numerous preys which were bigger than it (big ceratopciens, big duckbilled dinosaurs, sauropods ...). For it too, hunting error wasn't allowed.
But, in the case of megalodon, nothing like it. Apparently, this apex predator crushed the competition ! It's for this reason one, I find it very particular, I would believe in an other predator able to withstand solitarily or in pride against it. Because It's very hard to believe in an absolute mega apex predator (like the human specy nowaday in fact !).
I'm only repeating what the marine predator experts & researchers say about megalodon. According to experts, nothing could have taken on megalodon. It was the undisputed top marine predator of all time, and according to the most recent research (as also shown in the video) the megalodon occupied the absolute highest position in the food-chain, multiple trophic levels higher than any other marine apex predator today. Now, what you personally make of this information, is up to you. At the end of the day, its not like I'm stating my opinion, this is what actual scientific research shows and what the experts say.
I brought up Amur tigers because what the megalodon was doing to other marine predators it co-existed with, reminded me of what Amur tigers do to other predators (i.e. bears and wolves) in Far East Russia. Its a very similar dynamic. But I agree, in the Pleistocene era, the solitary Amur tiger had to be careful of prides of cave lions. Not about wolves though, as wolves naturally always had a very strong fear of tigers and got killed and driven out of tiger territories. The bears were bigger, but so were the tigers. Amur tigers hunted bears in the Pleistocene era as well, this is not just a modern phenomena. Bears have always fallen prey to tigers throughout many millennia.
I said in my previous post that a whole pod of Livyatan Melvillei whales could probably withstand against the solitary megalodon.
You should really try to think by yourself instead of repeating always things like "best experts say, best experts say...". Such words things like "nothing could take on..." are just pure and stupid marketing opinions in order to do some kind of publicity. You should really educate yourself on animals. Like i said you, there is absolutely no animal which is invulnerable and animals are not killing machines. Do you want i give you a real superpredator? Ok. Here it is: Homo sapiens. Megalodon is a great animal, i love it but it is not invincible, only kids can believe that...
And you are completely wrong about tigers and bears but it is useless to talk with you, you have absolutely no logic, you repeat only what you heard in pseudo scientific documentaries...
After having seen your short video, all I can say is, if that is true, that your geant shark would be the only one apex predator ( during the history of life on Earth) surpassing in size and weight all other marine creatures. And that, it's exceptionnal. When you are evoking the Amur tiger, this felid weights 220-300 kilos and I can name the brown bear, a big male boar, the asiatic bison (wisent ?) as animals sharing its environment and being bigger than it. Yes it's an apex predator, he hunts some preys bigger than itself, thus an hunting error isn't allowed. During a recent past, Pleistocene period, when the human action was so much more weaked than today, the bears were bigger, some cave lions ruled over the Siberia, some wolves, bigger too than the extant ones, plaged in bigger packs. In short, the Amour tiger, being a solitary apex predator, had to be careful.
If I spoke about T-rex, there were so numerous preys which were bigger than it (big ceratopciens, big duckbilled dinosaurs, sauropods ...). For it too, hunting error wasn't allowed.
But, in the case of megalodon, nothing like it. Apparently, this apex predator crushed the competition ! It's for this reason one, I find it very particular, I would believe in an other predator able to withstand solitarily or in pride against it. Because It's very hard to believe in an absolute mega apex predator (like the human specy nowaday in fact !).
I'm only repeating what the marine predator experts & researchers say about megalodon. According to experts, nothing could have taken on megalodon. It was the undisputed top marine predator of all time, and according to the most recent research (as also shown in the video) the megalodon occupied the absolute highest position in the food-chain, multiple trophic levels higher than any other marine apex predator today. Now, what you personally make of this information, is up to you. At the end of the day, its not like I'm stating my opinion, this is what actual scientific research shows and what the experts say.
I brought up Amur tigers because what the megalodon was doing to other marine predators it co-existed with, reminded me of what Amur tigers do to other predators (i.e. bears and wolves) in Far East Russia. Its a very similar dynamic. But I agree, in the Pleistocene era, the solitary Amur tiger had to be careful of prides of cave lions. Not about wolves though, as wolves naturally always had a very strong fear of tigers and got killed and driven out of tiger territories. The bears were bigger, but so were the tigers. Amur tigers hunted bears in the Pleistocene era as well, this is not just a modern phenomena. Bears have always fallen prey to tigers throughout many millennia.
I said in my previous post that a whole pod of Livyatan Melvillei whales could probably withstand against the solitary megalodon.
You should really try to think by yourself instead of repeating always things like "best experts say, best experts say...". Such words things like "nothing could take on..." are just pure and stupid marketing opinions in order to do some kind of publicity. You should really educate yourself on animals. Like i said you, there is absolutely no animal which is invulnerable and animals are not killing machines. Do you want i give you a real superpredator? Ok. Here it is: Homo sapiens. Megalodon is a great animal, i love it but it is not invincible, only kids can believe that...
And you are completely wrong about tigers and bears but it is useless to talk with you, you have absolutely no logic, you repeat only what you heard in pseudo scientific documentaries...
So the worlds leading marine predator experts, scientific researchers & paleontologists etc, are just stating "stupid marketing opinions" in order to get some publicity??!! Really? So when people want to learn about animals and educate themselves, who are they supposed to learn from then, if the experts are just stating "stupid opinions"?? Please enlighten me?
The problem is, is you have ZERO humility. You're a completely unqualified random person who doesn't know anything. What makes you right and the actual experts wrong? Just because they made statements about megalodon that you don't like, you then resort to ridiculing them. You're the one with absolutely zero logic and you're the one who its completely useless to talk too. You're talking absolute nonsense.
People like you are the worse to debate or discuss with because when you don't like what you hear or read, you just ridicule and insult the highly qualified and respected experts/researchers who are a million times more qualified and knowledgeable than you are. You, for no reason, interrupted and derailed mine and Spalea's discussion with your insults and nonsensical comments.
You said: "animals are not killing machines", are you serious? Then what the hell is a predator then? How does a predator live and survive? By going to McDonald's and eating cheeseburgers? OK, let me educate you now. Predators are literal killing machines roaming this earth who's sole purpose on this earth is to KILL and eat other animals in order to survive. They're specifically built, designed and equipped for killing! So yes, some species of animals are literally killing machines!
The fact that you claimed a pod of orcas (which often get chased off by single humpback whales and extremely rarely would dare to attack a bull sperm whale) are "much more dangerous" than a megalodon, confirms that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. And then you actually have the nerve and audacity to say that the scientific experts are stating "stupid marketing opinions" for publicity. Unbelievable!
So most of the worlds leading marine predator experts, researchers, and paleontologists are just stupid "megalodon fanboys" who have no clue??
Everything I said about tigers and bears is 100% facts based on factual information. (i.e. Scientific field research, studies, numerous observations by various biologists & leading authorities etc). You just can't handle the truth and facts, so you resort to spewing insults and talking nonsense.
(06-22-2022, 12:34 PM)Semyon Wrote: You don't know what you're talking about, do you ?
Which people investigating this do you refer ? Pimiento ? Shimada ? Cooper ? Kent ? Godfrey ? Ferrón ? Perez ? Greenfield ? Siversson ?...
Because those are the people actually actively working as academics on this genus since two decades, and none of them are claiming about a new body plan. The sculpture at the Smithsonian is based on mako (following Brett Kent and Hans Sue suggestions) but is still cruisiform very much like a great white shark. From what I've seen, the people you refer are deviant users, comments sections and tweets filled with wishful thinking, no data, no review, no actual work.
You don't even check the links and data provided so you're clearly not serious nor an academic and certainly less interesting to talk with than investigating about this fascinating genus.
You can't even properly list the actual updated status about phylogeny (Greenfield 2022), body size (Perez 2021), metabolism (Ferrón 2017)... so please either you check the actual data or don't argue there is a new form to be accepted because this is simply wrong.
The last time that I accessed to this topic was in June 21 of 2022, I believed than that will be all, although I suspected that this guy will probably continue his debate. I decided to ignore it.
However, today I was talking with other poster and I decided to check the old post of this topic and for my surprise I found this same post with different words, modified and with direct attacks to me. Check the image, showing the date of the modification and the part that was added:
*This image is copyright of its original author
It is really contradictory that this guy, who says it is a "professional", use this type of words and this attacks that looks more like a fan-boy than a real scientists. I had many debates to know how to identified when a "passionate professional" actually wrote and when an "animal fan-boy" do the same.
So, I will blow his/her mind saying this, but all this thing about megalodon size and apperiance is pure speculation bassed in assumptions that change every new document, so how can we take it seriously? We have many fragmentary prehistoric animals with more backup that this overrated creature. So, again, I repeat what I said, I am not interested in this animal because is like study an air baloon, few facts and a lot or air.
After having seen your short video, all I can say is, if that is true, that your geant shark would be the only one apex predator ( during the history of life on Earth) surpassing in size and weight all other marine creatures. And that, it's exceptionnal. When you are evoking the Amur tiger, this felid weights 220-300 kilos and I can name the brown bear, a big male boar, the asiatic bison (wisent ?) as animals sharing its environment and being bigger than it. Yes it's an apex predator, he hunts some preys bigger than itself, thus an hunting error isn't allowed. During a recent past, Pleistocene period, when the human action was so much more weaked than today, the bears were bigger, some cave lions ruled over the Siberia, some wolves, bigger too than the extant ones, plaged in bigger packs. In short, the Amour tiger, being a solitary apex predator, had to be careful.
If I spoke about T-rex, there were so numerous preys which were bigger than it (big ceratopciens, big duckbilled dinosaurs, sauropods ...). For it too, hunting error wasn't allowed.
But, in the case of megalodon, nothing like it. Apparently, this apex predator crushed the competition ! It's for this reason one, I find it very particular, I would believe in an other predator able to withstand solitarily or in pride against it. Because It's very hard to believe in an absolute mega apex predator (like the human specy nowaday in fact !).
I'm only repeating what the marine predator experts & researchers say about megalodon. According to experts, nothing could have taken on megalodon. It was the undisputed top marine predator of all time, and according to the most recent research (as also shown in the video) the megalodon occupied the absolute highest position in the food-chain, multiple trophic levels higher than any other marine apex predator today. Now, what you personally make of this information, is up to you. At the end of the day, its not like I'm stating my opinion, this is what actual scientific research shows and what the experts say.
I brought up Amur tigers because what the megalodon was doing to other marine predators it co-existed with, reminded me of what Amur tigers do to other predators (i.e. bears and wolves) in Far East Russia. Its a very similar dynamic. But I agree, in the Pleistocene era, the solitary Amur tiger had to be careful of prides of cave lions. Not about wolves though, as wolves naturally always had a very strong fear of tigers and got killed and driven out of tiger territories. The bears were bigger, but so were the tigers. Amur tigers hunted bears in the Pleistocene era as well, this is not just a modern phenomena. Bears have always fallen prey to tigers throughout many millennia.
I said in my previous post that a whole pod of Livyatan Melvillei whales could probably withstand against the solitary megalodon.
You should really try to think by yourself instead of repeating always things like "best experts say, best experts say...". Such words things like "nothing could take on..." are just pure and stupid marketing opinions in order to do some kind of publicity. You should really educate yourself on animals. Like i said you, there is absolutely no animal which is invulnerable and animals are not killing machines. Do you want i give you a real superpredator? Ok. Here it is: Homo sapiens. Megalodon is a great animal, i love it but it is not invincible, only kids can believe that...
And you are completely wrong about tigers and bears but it is useless to talk with you, you have absolutely no logic, you repeat only what you heard in pseudo scientific documentaries...
So the worlds leading marine predator experts, scientific researchers & paleontologists etc, are just stating "stupid marketing opinions" in order to get some publicity??!! Really? So when people want to learn about animals and educate themselves, who are they supposed to learn from then, if the experts are just stating "stupid opinions"?? Please enlighten me?
The problem is, is you have ZERO humility. You're a completely unqualified random person who doesn't know anything. What makes you right and the actual experts wrong? Just because they made statements about megalodon that you don't like, you then resort to ridiculing them. You're the one with absolutely zero logic and you're the one who its completely useless to talk too. You're talking absolute nonsense.
People like you are the worse to debate or discuss with because when you don't like what you hear or read, you just ridicule and insult the highly qualified and respected experts/researchers who are a million times more qualified and knowledgeable than you are. You, for no reason, interrupted and derailed mine and Spalea's discussion with your insults and nonsensical comments.
You said: "animals are not killing machines", are you serious? Then what the hell is a predator then? How does a predator live and survive? By going to McDonald's and eating cheeseburgers? OK, let me educate you now. Predators are literal killing machines roaming this earth who's sole purpose on this earth is to KILL and eat other animals in order to survive. They're specifically built, designed and equipped for killing! So yes, some species of animals are literally killing machines!
The fact that you claimed a pod of orcas (which often get chased off by single humpback whales and extremely rarely would dare to attack a bull sperm whale) are "much more dangerous" than a megalodon, confirms that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. And then you actually have the nerve and audacity to say that the scientific experts are stating "stupid marketing opinions" for publicity. Unbelievable!
So most of the worlds leading marine predator experts, researchers, and paleontologists are just stupid "megalodon fanboys" who have no clue??
Everything I said about tigers and bears is 100% facts based on factual information. (i.e. Scientific field research, studies, numerous observations by various biologists & leading authorities etc). You just can't handle the truth and facts, so you resort to spewing insults and talking nonsense.
For me you are just a kid who is a fanatic fanboy absolutely unable to make the difference between stupid youtube videos and scientific work. You are wrong on all subjects. Animals are not war machines. Like i said: try to think by yourself. I know animal forums for 20 years now, and trust me, i know very well fanatic fanboys who are the cancer about animal discussions.
(06-21-2023, 12:05 AM)Spalea Wrote: After having seen your short video, all I can say is, if that is true, that your geant shark would be the only one apex predator ( during the history of life on Earth) surpassing in size and weight all other marine creatures. And that, it's exceptionnal. When you are evoking the Amur tiger, this felid weights 220-300 kilos and I can name the brown bear, a big male boar, the asiatic bison (wisent ?) as animals sharing its environment and being bigger than it. Yes it's an apex predator, he hunts some preys bigger than itself, thus an hunting error isn't allowed. During a recent past, Pleistocene period, when the human action was so much more weaked than today, the bears were bigger, some cave lions ruled over the Siberia, some wolves, bigger too than the extant ones, plaged in bigger packs Roofing Repairs. In short, the Amour tiger, being a solitary apex predator, had to be careful.
If I spoke about T-rex, there were so numerous preys which were bigger than it (big ceratopciens, big duckbilled dinosaurs, sauropods ...). For it too, hunting error wasn't allowed.
But, in the case of megalodon, nothing like it. Apparently, this apex predator crushed the competition ! It's for this reason one, I find it very particular, I would believe in an other predator able to withstand solitarily or in pride against it. Because It's very hard to believe in an absolute mega apex predator (like the human specy nowaday in fact !).
The Megalodon, an ancient and colossal shark that roamed the oceans from about 23 to 3.6 million years ago, was a formidable predator. Based on fossil evidence and comparisons with modern sharks, the Megalodon likely had a robust, torpedo-shaped body designed for efficient swimming and powerful predatory strikes. It is estimated to have grown up to 60 feet in length, with some reconstructions suggesting it could have been even larger. Its massive jaws, capable of exerting a bite force stronger than any known creature, were lined with rows of serrated teeth up to seven inches long.
