Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Now I think the record caught is ~35 fight, but this is supposedly the largest yet filmed. Link to video in article

http://www.sfgate.com/news/us-world/article/New-video-released-of-biggest-shark-ever-filmed-6439617.php

New video released of 'biggest shark ever filmed'

By Joshua Fechter Published 6:21 am, Wednesday, August 12, 2015


Researcher Mauricio Hoyos Padilla has released new footage captured in 2013 of the gigantic great white shark "Deep Blue," thought to be the largest great white shark ever filmed. "Deep Blue," seen off the coast of Mexico's Guadalupe Island in the Pacific Ocean, is approximately 20 feet long and 50 years old.

Never go in the water.

Researcher Mauricio Hoyos Padilla has released new footage captured in 2013 of the gigantic great white shark "Deep Blue," thought to be the largest great white shark ever filmed.

"Deep Blue," seen off the coast of Mexico's Guadalupe Island in the Pacific Ocean, is approximately 20 feet long and 50 years old, GrindTV reports.

The shark may appear this large because she is pregnant, according to the Discovery Channel.

Padilla's previous video garnered for than 7 million page views on his Facebook profile.

As of Wednesday morning, the latest video has received more than 1.5 million views since it was published on Monday.

More reason to avoid the ocean.

Psh. Give me Megalodon. That bitch was 60-100 feet. Would swallow a tank whole. Now THATS a shark. Not the pansy ass 20 footer. Wimps.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, sharks are majestic. I want one as a pet.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Psh. Give me Megalodon. That bitch was 60-100 feet. Would swallow a tank whole. Now THATS a shark. Not the pansy ass 20 footer. Wimps.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, sharks are majestic. I want one as a pet.

Megalodon was about 40ft.

This shark was over 20ft though it was as tall as the man on top of the shark cage. Assuming he was a short 5ft it would be difficult for the shark to be 20ft./ Like Quint I call this one at 25ft.

Real monster though. Now we have to hope no one tries to trophy hunt her.

Every article I've seen on 'ol Meg has it out at 60-100. Not 40. That would be a baby Meg.

We're going to need a bigger boat.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Every article I've seen on 'ol Meg has it out at 60-100. Not 40. That would be a baby Meg.

I vaguely remember reading an average megalodon was 50-60 feet with the largest teeth assumed to belong to a shark estimated at around 65-75. There was also some guy in the 90s who claimed they could grow into the 80s while others were sticking with the 50-60 foot sizes.

As sharks age, they tend to not grow as much in length but grow fatter. So the larger specimens must have been really, really old to get to the large estimates like the 65-75 feet. And if they did get you to 100, the shark would be truely ancient.

Its a shame they didnt have bones to leave behind and we can only make assumptions based off similar species growth patterns relative to tooth size.

I have seen these numbers before and are just a variant of the photoshopped still images on YouTube.

I was jusdt yesterday looking at comparison silhouettes of colossal squid in the mainstream media, with estimates ranging from 7m to 60m.

Megalodon is almost as extreme with size ranges of 13m to 20m.

Then of course there are a plethora of gaiju images of both.

Wishful thinking is making marine mega-fauna much bigger than it in all likelihood actually was.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Every article I've seen on 'ol Meg has it out at 60-100. Not 40. That would be a baby Meg.

You do realize 100ft is as big as a blue whale? The maximum size I can find is 60ft. There appears to be some disagreement on two points. First, rounding. People are quoting 20 meters and then giving an exact measurement from that in feet, or 60ft and doing it the other way. Second, there is a little disagreement over how much larger they would get than what has been found and if great whites are an appropriate model to use. But either way 100ft is way off.

 Steve steveson wrote:

You do realize 100ft is as big as a blue whale?

Bigger if the proportions are preserved. Blue whales are rather sleek as whales go.

 Steve steveson wrote:

The maximum size I can find is 60ft. There appears to be some disagreement on two points. First, rounding. People are quoting 20 meters and then giving an exact measurement from that in feet, or 60ft and doing it the other way. Second, there is a little disagreement over how much larger they would get than what has been found and if great whites are an appropriate model to use. But either way 100ft is way off.

Maximum length I have found put in to numbers was 1200ft (not a typo). Mentioned to highlight that there is enough wishful thinking for even conservative estimates to want to round up.

60ft/20m is the size you can get to if you take the evidence, plus the wishful thinking and guestimate how big it might be able to get.

40ft/13m is what the evidence points to in practical terms.

The truth is likely to be between the two. 13m for an average Megalodon, considerably bigger for freak fish. It is not unreasonable that the 'Robert Wadlow' of Magalodons could be over 50ft long, you might even have a 'Goliath' of Megalodons that makes the 60ft marker, but if you believe in that do you believe in Goliath too. Many people will react to that, and either say that its political balloon report of the sighting of a notably big man and others will want to dismiss the entire source material on personal principle, yet when it comes to Megalodon or colossal squids have enormous faith, in some cases similar to believing in a literal Noah story. And to top it all, it must be still be living in the oceans today.

 Orlanth wrote:

Maximum length I have found put in to numbers was 1200ft (not a typo).

1200ft? Maybe not a typo on your part, but someone has made a cock up along the way...

Also, I did not realise there is some people who seriously think Megalodon still lives...

 Steve steveson wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

Maximum length I have found put in to numbers was 1200ft (not a typo).

1200ft? Maybe not a typo on your part, but someone has made a cock up along the way...

Also, I did not realise there is some people who seriously think Megalodon still lives...

I think it's possible. And here's my reasoning: we have only explored a portion of our ocean. We're finding new creatures every day, and we have deep trenches no human can get to yet. Who's to say a Meg family isn't swimming in one? And scientists claimed Meg died out millions of years ago. Then, a Meg tooth was found and carbon dated to be only a few thousand years old. Suddenly "millions of years ago" died out in an instant. If time changed from "millions of years ago" to "thousands of years ago"...why not?

I'm not saying Meg IS alive still. I'm just saying I believe it's possible and not to rule it out.

Kaiju are out there. Prove me wrong

 KingCracker wrote:
Kaiju are out there. Prove me wrong

Difference is that mine DID actually live and they have proof. Teeth only, of course. Do you have a Kaiju tooth? That has been scientifically proven?

I fething love great whites. I'd hug one.

One that is not hungry, not even the slightest bit.

Dropbear Victim wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Every article I've seen on 'ol Meg has it out at 60-100. Not 40. That would be a baby Meg.

I vaguely remember reading an average megalodon was 50-60 feet with the largest teeth assumed to belong to a shark estimated at around 65-75. There was also some guy in the 90s who claimed they could grow into the 80s while others were sticking with the 50-60 foot sizes.

As sharks age, they tend to not grow as much in length but grow fatter. So the larger specimens must have been really, really old to get to the large estimates like the 65-75 feet. And if they did get you to 100, the shark would be truely ancient.

Its a shame they didnt have bones to leave behind and we can only make assumptions based off similar species growth patterns relative to tooth size.

It depends on if the length calculations are true to the actual Megalodon. The length calculations assume it has the same relationship to size as a great white has with its teeth. Plus I don't think anyone has found a full set of Meg teeth from the same shark. They're all assembled from multiple doners usually IIRC. If they could find a full set from 1 shark we could probably get a better idea of their size.