|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 5, 2008 9:51:28 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 5, 2008 21:10:34 GMT
Do they actually have a skull? I mean the cranium. I thought all they has is the jaw and teeth.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 5, 2008 21:45:01 GMT
Either way,that was one hell of a Badass shark  |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Aug 8, 2008 17:22:07 GMT
that would be a big trophy for fishing ;D anyway this is one of the coolest marine animals ever (hehe I always say that)
|
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 8, 2008 22:06:51 GMT
JAWS!
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Aug 9, 2008 0:36:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Aug 9, 2008 1:21:58 GMT
I know sharks have skulls but I did'nt think they had a preserved Megalodon cranium. Maybe Dinotoyforum could shed some light on this topic.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomhet on Aug 9, 2008 2:50:46 GMT
I don't think they have found one, to my knowledge there is no cranium so far, only teeth. I bet that's a generic reconstruction based on the white shark.
|
|
|
|
Post by [][][]cordylus[][][] on Aug 9, 2008 13:08:29 GMT
I don't like how they say that the megalodon was ancestor to the great white. I believe it was rather like a "great uncle" to the great white, and that great whites actually came from a group of prehistoric makos. It's cool that they did the study though. "Pound for pound, the average housecat can bite harder then this shark". lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on Aug 9, 2008 13:55:39 GMT
When you have teeth like a great white/megalodon, and the power to back up a strike, you don't really need a strong bite.
Adult crocs (the ones with the power) on the other hand don't really have sharp teeth at all...just a bunch of "pegs"
|
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 9, 2008 14:04:50 GMT
When you have teeth like a great white/megalodon, and the power to back up a strike, you don't really need a strong bite. Adult crocs (the ones with the power) on the other hand don't really have sharp teeth at all...just a bunch of "pegs" Exactly - They are effectively battering rams. |
|
|
|
Post by sbell on Aug 9, 2008 14:06:52 GMT
'Ancestor' has become fool's shorthand for 'somehow related to'. Even though it is often used incorrectly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on Aug 9, 2008 15:03:58 GMT
'Ancestor' has become fool's shorthand for 'somehow related to'. Even though it is often used incorrectly. unfortunately so.  Like the recent T.rex 'ancestor' from Poland. www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/08/03/scifossil103.xmlThe scientist foolishly said: "this gives us new knowledge about the whole evolution of the T-Rex group", meaning theropods, and that was that...this creature is a T. rex ancestor. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Aug 10, 2008 2:24:58 GMT
'Ancestor' has become fool's shorthand for 'somehow related to'. Even though it is often used incorrectly. *cough* chicken *cough* *cough* tyrannosaurus |
|
|
|
Post by dinoboy on Aug 11, 2008 14:32:27 GMT
In the comparison picture the Meg looks just like a great big Great White. I'd have to agree, therefore, that the Meg reconstruction is probably based on the modern Great White....
|
|
gus
Junior Member
Posts: 70
|
Post by gus on Dec 4, 2011 10:53:00 GMT
By thw way do they have any megalodon figure???
|
|
![[][][]cordylus[][][] Avatar](http://files.sharenator.com/Troll_Face_U_MAD_RE_wrestling_1-s407x405-126802.jpg)
