The concept of evolution and speciation is strictly governed by the principle (at least at this point in time) that we cannot know every scenario of evolutionary biology because ANY ideology to put forthwith must have some physical evidence of truth as to their proposals. This is only true for physical realities, though. Not for faith-based realities, however. Those realities need only rely on faith.
Same evidence. Different interpretation philosophically. Words are the glue that hold any ideological hypothesis together. Thought, both rational and consistent, can be true or false.
Higher pressure + higher oxygen = bigger animals/plants. Check out some experiments done by scientists. Just search Yahoo/google. everything was bigger (tomatoes/Pirahana experiments). After the meteor, our atmosphere changed - we lost alot of it to space. The larger life forms couldn't survive because of the drop in oxygen levels. Life that required less oxygen (smaller) thrived. Certain animals that 'could've' survived lost thier food source though. Simple.
@dingorex and @poochz1: that's completely wrong and made up. There were numerous megafauna WAY after "the meteor" hit (I assume you mean the one that killed the dinosaurs and formed the K-T boundary). In fact, this video is almost exclusively animals that lived AFTER that time. I know it's a year late, but man, I had to say something, cuz you're acting like this is a real answer when it's just something you made up.
They weren't. They were just different species. A sabertooth tiger was not just an overgrown house cat, it was a separate species. Sharks are not giant goldfish. Dinosaurs were not just giant reptiles, most of them they weren't even like reptiles at all. Whoever posted this video has a very obvious misunderstanding of the fossil record.
It's not simplification. The species you show are not just giant versions of today's animals. They were seperate species, that just happened to be large. Not all animals in the past were large. Just like today, most weren't. Most of the animals you show were around in the Ice Ages, and died off fairly recently, within the last million years or so.
It just seemed like you were trying to say that in the past everything was bigger, which is not true.
How do you know what was fully mature or not from a speechless fossil record?
Anyway, I didn't say all flora and fauna were giants in the past. Most of these photos came from the internet and from Giants from the Past a book published by National Geographic for children. Wouldn't you like to know what makes some species larger than others? Does gigantism even cause you to think we may yet learn from the animal and plant kingdoms new, viable sources of foodstuffs?
Your right about certain varieties, I just have a hunch there is more to giant varieties existence than just natural selection, as if being larger was always beneficial. Did you see the largest woman in China video, she suffered from gigantism ? She had a tumor on her pituitary gland.
Simple... In the past the oxygen level was alot higher..... The higher the oxygen the bigger an animal can get....... The oxygen level through history keeps goin up and down....
It is interesting that the fossils of animals show that they were larger in the past. But the evolutionist would say these are different species than todays animals. I wonder if a chihuahua and a great dane were found fossilized would they say would they say that these were two different species?
But in the book Giants from the Past they are the direct ancestors of modern species and this was a National Geographic book,,More research on these giant that ruled the earth,not just reptiles,is needed.
The words descendant or ancestors is used very loosely now days. I am an ancestor of Adam. Also I am and ancestor or decendant of a pygmy or what is labeled a Neaderthal. Yet My size is between the two. We See some of the animals (though not all as some are extinct) roaming the earth today. In that sense these animals are descendants of those larger animals but because of environment they do not grow as large. I agree more research is needed. Why did they grow so large?
@iachodvisuals You have an excellent point. In fact, downright astounding. But if your point is an attempt to make evolutionists seem incredible then you must understand that evolution, as a science (or tangible and fact enabling based principle), is merely an attempt to understand and comprehend what is only proven to us in a physical and fact-based manner.
This video was devise by a 12 year old if not a kid then a complete ass wipe
MegaGod2 3 months ago
The concept of evolution and speciation is strictly governed by the principle (at least at this point in time) that we cannot know every scenario of evolutionary biology because ANY ideology to put forthwith must have some physical evidence of truth as to their proposals. This is only true for physical realities, though. Not for faith-based realities, however. Those realities need only rely on faith.
davidjbeals 9 months ago
@davidjbeals
Exactly!
Same evidence. Different interpretation philosophically. Words are the glue that hold any ideological hypothesis together. Thought, both rational and consistent, can be true or false.
dingorex 9 months ago
these are the real"giants"!.
tommyriantoro 1 year ago
o.o why isnt there any more giant animals >:O I WANT A GIANT TURTLE! lol
HeyItJayson 3 years ago
every thing was big in the old days even the food
khanimadshah 3 years ago 2
Higher pressure + higher oxygen = bigger animals/plants. Check out some experiments done by scientists. Just search Yahoo/google. everything was bigger (tomatoes/Pirahana experiments). After the meteor, our atmosphere changed - we lost alot of it to space. The larger life forms couldn't survive because of the drop in oxygen levels. Life that required less oxygen (smaller) thrived. Certain animals that 'could've' survived lost thier food source though. Simple.
poochz1 3 years ago
I just think the whole topic is worthy of up-to-date research from a variety scientific disciplines.
dingorex 3 years ago
@dingorex and @poochz1: that's completely wrong and made up. There were numerous megafauna WAY after "the meteor" hit (I assume you mean the one that killed the dinosaurs and formed the K-T boundary). In fact, this video is almost exclusively animals that lived AFTER that time. I know it's a year late, but man, I had to say something, cuz you're acting like this is a real answer when it's just something you made up.
dsenti 2 years ago
"Why were things so much bigger in the past?"
They weren't. They were just different species. A sabertooth tiger was not just an overgrown house cat, it was a separate species. Sharks are not giant goldfish. Dinosaurs were not just giant reptiles, most of them they weren't even like reptiles at all. Whoever posted this video has a very obvious misunderstanding of the fossil record.
bmdude7 3 years ago
Thanks for the imaginatively simplistic over-simplification. Better luck next time:)
dingorex 3 years ago
It's not simplification. The species you show are not just giant versions of today's animals. They were seperate species, that just happened to be large. Not all animals in the past were large. Just like today, most weren't. Most of the animals you show were around in the Ice Ages, and died off fairly recently, within the last million years or so.
It just seemed like you were trying to say that in the past everything was bigger, which is not true.
bmdude7 3 years ago
How do you know what was fully mature or not from a speechless fossil record?
Anyway, I didn't say all flora and fauna were giants in the past. Most of these photos came from the internet and from Giants from the Past a book published by National Geographic for children. Wouldn't you like to know what makes some species larger than others? Does gigantism even cause you to think we may yet learn from the animal and plant kingdoms new, viable sources of foodstuffs?
dingorex 3 years ago
"was fully mature or not from a speechless fossil record?"
scientists can tell they are different species. Like how we know gorillas are not just large chimpanzees.
"Wouldn't you like to know what makes some species larger than others?"
Natural selection. Some species earn a living by being faster, stronger, smarter, and some by being larger. But it is an interesting topic.
"Does gigantism..."
Gigantism is a disease that makes you bigger than you can your body can afford to be.
bmdude7 3 years ago
Your right about certain varieties, I just have a hunch there is more to giant varieties existence than just natural selection, as if being larger was always beneficial. Did you see the largest woman in China video, she suffered from gigantism ? She had a tumor on her pituitary gland.
dingorex 3 years ago
Why were things so much bigger in the past?
wpaxton 4 years ago
Simple... In the past the oxygen level was alot higher..... The higher the oxygen the bigger an animal can get....... The oxygen level through history keeps goin up and down....
Csdude123 3 years ago
It is interesting that the fossils of animals show that they were larger in the past. But the evolutionist would say these are different species than todays animals. I wonder if a chihuahua and a great dane were found fossilized would they say would they say that these were two different species?
iachodvisuals 4 years ago
But in the book Giants from the Past they are the direct ancestors of modern species and this was a National Geographic book,,More research on these giant that ruled the earth,not just reptiles,is needed.
dingorex 4 years ago
The words descendant or ancestors is used very loosely now days. I am an ancestor of Adam. Also I am and ancestor or decendant of a pygmy or what is labeled a Neaderthal. Yet My size is between the two. We See some of the animals (though not all as some are extinct) roaming the earth today. In that sense these animals are descendants of those larger animals but because of environment they do not grow as large. I agree more research is needed. Why did they grow so large?
iachodvisuals 4 years ago
@iachodvisuals You have an excellent point. In fact, downright astounding. But if your point is an attempt to make evolutionists seem incredible then you must understand that evolution, as a science (or tangible and fact enabling based principle), is merely an attempt to understand and comprehend what is only proven to us in a physical and fact-based manner.
davidjbeals 9 months ago
Comment removed
davidjbeals 9 months ago
Woah, what's 1:23? Lol @ 1:47
yourworstnightmare51 4 years ago
I know this is lame,but I'm trying to get something on YouTube--anything during these early fits and starts forgive my benighted attempts
dingorex 4 years ago
First to post,KEWL<i><b><u>What me comment on this video?</i></b></u>
dingorex 4 years ago
This is a pretty cool video. I really like seeing the photos of the real bones and just how big they are.
Favorited
sablechicken 4 years ago