Comments on: Lair of the Giant Kraken Discovered

By: wolfatrest

wolfatrest — Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:55:41 +0000

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

By: Redrose999

Redrose999 — Fri, 14 Oct 2011 17:06:02 +0000

All they need to do is look at the bones for signs of a beak marks. The idea of a HUGE octopus isn’t impossible. It is exciting though.

Paleopathology if applied with basic paleo forensics would help to shed some light on this. All they need to do is study the “victims” for injury, and match it up with modern animals and look for similarities with injury patterns. Obviously they’ve already done with with the stacking of bones and animal’s injuries. They should be looking for marks as well.

They do this all the time with Dinosaurs and it is why we know T-rex, hunted Hadrosaurus. They matched teeth marks on the victim animal and it fit with the T rex teeth.

By: springheeledjack

springheeledjack — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:43:01 +0000

I agree. There’s not enough evidence to prove anything yet, but that’s how it all starts: you find something, you make a hypothesis, test it and see where it goes. The article to me, sounded like he was looking into it–didn’t mean he bought it hook line and sinker either, just saying that it was another possibility to explore.

All of the kraken stories I’ve heard told (and granted many of them are probably just regurgitated renditions of a single story), talk about the actual kraken being so big that sailors actually mistake it for an island…to the extent of getting out of their ship/boat/etc. and exploring only to have the thing start moving around and realize it’s a living critter. The squid motif doesn’t fit there for me, because while squids get big, they’re more cylindrical and not very “island” like.

As to what the kraken could be…heck if I know…the whale is the closest thing in size and volume we know of…however, Mcmenamin did point out that with the cephalopods and such things without vertebrae, they’re even more difficult to find in the fossil record. SO, if we have to take into account invertibrates, there could be an entire host of critters that have so far been unrecorded in history–now something the size of a small island seems a little sci-fi to me, but then again…I’ve seen some pretty weird critters coming up out of the ocean lately here and elsewhere…

In the meantime, it is just another theory, but one we can watch and see what else shows up…to either support the idea or rule it out.

By: Hapa

Hapa — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 01:14:53 +0000

I think this is a stunning idea. Though the scientists will not be able to get a new species designation without a fossil, their argument may nevertheless convince scientists of their claim if it is good enough. Its also interesting how the size of the hypothetical prehistoric Kraken is similar to that of colossal Octupi sighted in modern times (the monsterquest base measurements of the modern monster Octopus I think measured 100-200 feet in length or arm span).

Of course it should be noted that two Crypto-Krakens has already been discovered: the Giant and Colossal Squids

By: wolfatrest

wolfatrest — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:19:39 +0000

The problem DJ is that there isn’t enough evidence for this to be considered a theory. The way the bones were lying could be attributed to many causes all of which would be more likely than a undiscovered creature. From what I’ve read, it seems as if he looked at the bones and thought, hmmm, seems a lot like the sucker pattern of a squid. What if……… As far as us being skeptical, if we aren’t the most skeptical of all, then you end up with even more hoaxes than have been previously done.

By: djwcaw

djwcaw — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 20:47:19 +0000

Not sure why all the skepticism here…especially on a website dedicated to the ‘existence’ of hidden animals from arguably little scientific evidence spawning many and varied theories! *LOL* A new hypothesis is being offered based on the given fossil and geological evidence and has supplanted the ‘old’ 1950′s theory about the ichty’s all dying accidentally in shallow water or plankton bloom digestion. That’s how science works. New evidence (deep water) disproves the old hypotheses. I think it’s a very unique theory and I believe octopus fossils date back at least 300 mya whereby this formation is around 240-200mya. Was the ancestor to our cryptid giant squid around then? The theory will be tested as future and alternate hypotheses are developed and evidence is discovered.

By: watn6789

watn6789 — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:10:36 +0000

I have pictured the Kraken more like a giant squid as depicted in art... also @ericthegeek, got a laugh at 'hunt in packs'

By: ericthegeek

ericthegeek — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:35:00 +0000

Sounds like every other paleontologist out there. “Hey, I found this toe bone. It looks like this creature hunted in packs, lived in social groups, ate only small mammals and purple flowers from this extinct tree. They also like long walks and jazz music.”

I don’t trust many of them as far as I can throw them. Too much guess work based on nothing at all.

By: wolfatrest

wolfatrest — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:32:24 +0000

Gotta agree with Ragnar, there was absolutely no physical evidence to back up their claims. They had a hypothesis about the possibility of a creature that might have existed. What was amazing was how the media took this story and ran with it without ever bothering to get a second opinion from anyone.

By: Ragnar

Ragnar — Wed, 12 Oct 2011 09:37:52 +0000

I read about this yesterday. The team has no fossil evidence and appear to making some of the stuff up out of whole cloth.