Living 80 million year old shark species captured

Scientists from Portugal's Institute for the Sea and Atmosphere (IPMA) have dubbed the catch a "living fossil", after using techniques to identify the animal that indicates the species dates back almost 80 million years.
Source

Reminds me of the living coelacanth being caught a few years ago. It's not surprising that we find new things in the ocean as we've only explored something like 3% of it, but to find a living shark that was supposed to have gone extinct 80 million years ago is pretty awesome. Well... Crocodiles and coelacanths still exist, so who knows what else is still out there.

a reply to: trollz

And here I thought this was going to be a thread about Hillary being captured in the Ocean? Pretty scary stuff, including the Shark.






Amazing how we are still discovering new things.

Caught from 1/2 mile down in the ocean, that doesn't surprise me.
I'd bet there's several more species dwelling in the deep that time has pretty much left alone for millions of years.
The advantage of living so deep is even asteroids hitting the Earth wouldn't wipe out the species.

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: trollz

And here I thought this was going to be a thread about Hillary being captured in the Ocean?

So at this point it's pretty much impossible to have a thread that isn't infected by political garbage? Sad.

As for the Op, very awesome! I wonder what else is down there?

a reply to: trollz

Am I the only one wondering if Megalodons are still active?

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

They found the megamouth.
I think that one was presumed extinct.

Wasn't there a species of frilled shark found a few years back which was thought to be a goner too?

Evolution almost got it right first time with sharks so they may not have changed as much as many other species over time.

Pretty cool.

80 million years unchanged by evolution?

Fascinating

a reply to: Wide-Eyes

Oh they are active buddy. Ever read Moby Dick? Was actually a Megaladon.

a reply to: trollz

More evidence that perhaps skeptics should be a little more open to not blanketly refusing to accept possibilities due to reasons that keep being proven wrong with more and more exceptions. I mean with exception after exception proving the rule wrong perhaps they should ease off on treating eye witnesses and their testimonies as pure lunacy.

a reply to: trollz

This makes me suspicious of dating methods. The earth isn't that old!

originally posted by: Milkweed
a reply to: trollz

This makes me suspicious of dating methods. The earth isn't that old!

You know this how?

a reply to: Jefferton

Well of course I don't know. Neither do you. I just don't think it's that old.

Wonder if that was the last one? Wouldn't that be something? They should have thrown it back in.

a reply to: Milkweed

I'm curious as to what exactly you're you basing your supposition on that leads you to this conclusion. It's not as if the margins of error in radioactive decay aren't understood or can't be independently corroborated.

Why isn't it Megalodon?

originally posted by: Wide-Eyes
a reply to: trollz

Am I the only one wondering if Megalodons are still active?

I remember reading a national geographic about giant squid and sperm whales.

Basically it was about how the only predator of the giant squid was the sperm whale, and the squid pretty much dominate the deeper parts of the oceans and killed off entire species, or forced them to speciate (evolve) through means of survival, hence why the sperm whale is it's only predator because it clearly evolved to survive and hunt.
It showed a cool picture of like 10 squid and 5 whales having a massive battle in the deep ocean. Captivated my teenage mind knowing there's a war of giants beneath the blue waters of the world.

a reply to: trollz

Bottom picture in source looks like a big ass salamander!

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: Milkweed

I'm curious as to what exactly you're you basing your supposition on that leads you to this conclusion. It's not as if the margins of error in radioactive decay aren't understood or can't be independently corroborated.

I'm guessing they belong to the 6000 year old club.

a reply to: Jefferton

I believe they have known about frilled sharks for years? So, this isn't a new discovery? Maybe the first captured?

~Winter

a reply to: Milkweed

This makes me suspicious of dating methods. The earth isn't that old!

The Earth is 4.54 ± 0.05 Billion years old. This creature is 80 million years that's 1/56th the age of the Earth.