35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
Shark videos 7 years ago 2,536,617 views
Dave is searching for evidence for an enormous predator that he believes is lurking by Bremer Bay, Australia. Subscribe to Discovery UK for more great clips: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=DiscoveryTV Follow Discovery UK on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/DiscoveryUK
Advertising
The Ocean are so deep and you prove to me they dont Exist .!!
10. comment for 35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
20. comment for 35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
30. comment for 35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
There's some big ones out there no doubt.
50. comment for 35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
You, loved with grace
You, touched us all
With your expressionless face
Doby, oh Doby, I'll never forget thee
Double u x 3 dot not a virus is free socks dot com slash my mothers titties are milky and delicious
100. comment for 35ft Great White Shark Lurking in 'The Kill Zone' | Super Predator
This documentary (and its predecessor) is not affiliated with those pseudo-documentaries, but is based on highly questionable information making them just as untrustworthy.
Many people (falsely) speculated a megalodon was responsible for eating the tagged shark. The filmmaker Dave Riggs never suggested it. You can see the first documentary here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8dFMWmYuVo&t=483s In that programme it was concluded a 16 ft white shark was responsible. In the one this clip is from, Super Predator, Riggs postulates larger unknown white shark reside in Bremer Canyon.
So this documentary is some sequel to the megalodon show, and the guy has changed his mind and no longer thinks it exists?
This documentary does not promote the idea of megalodon's probable existence. Even in the clip (3.14) Dave Riggs clearly denies such an idea. He postulates a subspecies of larger white shark.
"...because they know full well that the shark that was eaten while it was diving was eaten by an orca as the tag's thermometer showed the temperature go way up after it was attacked..."
An orca's temperature would be around 35-36°C, as it is a mammal. The temperature recorded by the tag was around 25-26°C, the usual stomach temperature of a white shark.
" It's intentional deceit on a national television level to get ratings."
That does seem to be the case here.
Here's a short rundown, as all videos and media reports on this case contain false information:
1. In September 2003, during a shark tagging event in Australia, a 3m white shark was tagged with a pop-up tag by scientists from the organisation CSIRO.
2. The filmmaker Dave Riggs was hired to film this event.
3. A few months later the tag was found washed up on the beach and sent back to CSIRO.
4. Data from the fully functioning tag revealed that: a.) the shark took a normal, uneventful dive to 570m; b) about a week later the temperature rose to around 25-26°C/78° F (the usual stomach temperature of a white shark) and remained that way for about two weeks; c.) the tag failed to register sunlight in that time, d.) the tag kept on recording the swimming behaviour (typical for a white shark), until it surfaced and washed ashore.
5. Dave Riggs interpreted the data differently, becoming obsessed with the story for the next ten years until his first documentary Hunt for the Super Predator in 2014 with Smithsonian Channel. This clip is from the sequel Super Predator from 2015.
6. All media reports and videos are (loosely) based on Dave Riggs' version of events.
7. This is the (unheeded) response of CSIRO, the organisation that tagged the shark, to all the speculations about this incident: https://blog.csiro.au/busting-the-megalodon-myth-did-a-3m-shark-get-eaten-by-an-even-bigger-shark/ In all likelihood another white shark bit off the pop-up tag and ingested it. This explains the temperature and the swimming behaviour of the animal that had ingested the shark's tag (and not necessarily the tagged shark itself)
Check the link here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2vt9wh
Seriously?
3x the length of my bedroom?
Idk about that one.....
I mean you literally lie in the title and your discovery!
Just goes to show all these documentary channels are turning towards clickbaity reality shows cuz that's where the lowest common denominator lurks, its one of the reasons I don't watch this channel anymore after being a big fan as a child you punish me, waste my time so you can sell ad space when all I want to do is learn
It was almost definitely a white shark that ate the tag. They're claiming it ate the entire 9foot white shark which is ridiculous. They tag the dorsal fin and when big whites attack smaller whites the liver and the dorsal is where they attack. So the smaller shark could have very well survived if a big shark just took a bit at it's dorsal and managed to get the tag, or it did kill the 9 footer but it certainly didn't have to swallow it whole.
The temp recordings on the tag match the stomach of a white shark so orca is ruled out and it stayed deep for a long time so doubly so no orca.
A white shark anywhere from 10-20 feet long was the most likely culprit.
Call us when you "discover" something.
I’m taking this video with a grain of salt.
I want my 7:36 wasted watching this crap back thanks. What a waste of time!
I take it, this was meant as an answer to my question " What are you basing these 90% on? " Yes, I can understand the memory can be a tricky thing. Did you come up with the percentage yourself then? Or are you in fact referring to the detailed mapping of the ocean floor? (where these percentages usually come from) If so, may I ask what the detailed mapping of the ocean floor has to do with megalodon's conceilment and survival?
" All of what you said is all well and good."
In what way? I asked you questions with regards to your statements. 1.) Why should this shark be the exception to the rule? 2.) why would any of these animals be comparable to the greatest shark that ever lived? Could you please answer those questions.
The main question now , after reading your latest contribution, would be to ask: Why even presume this shark is dwelling in the depths of the abyss? You seem to try and answer that here, (after repeatedly assuming it could live and remains in the Abyss for no apparent reason):
"So unless you're 100% certain there are no Megalodons (which mind you if giant squids live in the abyss, that would be an AMAZING source of food for the Megalodon. Which may have even evolved to be able to function in the abyss in the millions of years it's been on this planet due to it's food source being more abundant there after it's original hunting grounds was no longer under water.)"
I am not quite sure I understand this somewhat garbled message. Could you please rephrase your argument?
"please do not make definitive statements that make the act of scientific study look like a wishy-washy half-assed profession."
Well, as you think so highly of the scientific process, please refer me to any scientific paper that argues or suggests megalodon is or could be still alive. And, whilst you are at it, please refer me to any other scientific paper on megalodon you have read to date , if time allows. Thanks.
Has he gone into the black abyss that no man nor machine has gone before and studied the entirety of the ocean floor and below for fossils to be able to say 100% that the Megalodon is extinct?
That answer is easy. NO. No he has not. The fact that you fail to recall that our oceans are way more vast than what we've ever seen... literally proves that you're not a person of science otherwise you wouldn't discredit the possibility as that man did.
Until we've scoured the entire ocean floor and studied absolutely every inch of the abyss, it isn't HOPE that will continue me and other's thinking this way. It will be the scientific facts that WE JUST DON'T KNOW.
It's stupid statements like what that man said and what you're saying that first said "Pluto isn't a planet, it's an asteroid" then "no wait, it's a planet" then "no wait it's neither, it's a "dwarf planet". So unless you're 100% certain there are no Megalodons (which mind you if giant squids live in the abyss, that would be an AMAZING source of food for the Megalodon. Which may have even evolved to be able to function in the abyss in the millions of years it's been on this planet due to it's food source being more abundant there after it's original hunting grounds was no longer under water.) please do not make definitive statements that make the act of scientific study look like a wishy-washy half-assed profession.
"Until otherwise proven, science will never dismiss all possibilities"
A number of reasons, starting with the fossil record, the lack of credible sightings, lack of other evidence (single fresh tooth, whale carcass with huge bite marks, etc), lack of impact on the eco-system such a large apex predator would have and so on. Then there are all its extinct predecessors (no one talks about as they don't know the names), its favourite prey and even its rivals - all gone the way of the dodo. Why should this shark be the exception to the rule?
"People have discovered previously thought extinct animals in deep forests/rainforests/islands that were previously untouched by humans... "
And why would any of these animals be comparable to the greatest shark that ever lived? It is no good just counting the hits and ignoring the misses either.
"and we still don't know what more than 90% of our planet's oceans hold"
What are you basing these 90% on?
"-- I think it's stupid to say 100% that it ISN'T a Megalodon because they've been deemed 'extinct'."
Hope dies last. if anyone wants to argue these shark may still exist they'll need a lot better arguments than the Lazarus taxon and doubt.
im annoyed
"What's that a$1000 ice cream scoop" lol.
But we do like to believe there’s some ancient huge mega shark lurking around.
What makes you think that? 99% of all animals have died out. There is nothing unreasonable to assume this large shark died out, same as all its predecessors, its prey and even rivals.
"Science tells us a bunch of bullshit it's a guessing...."
Could you please provide the scientific citations and sources you have used to come to this conclusion? Thanks
"Just like the Coelacanth ...found fossils and tell us they died out millions of years ago but yet still swim around in our oceans."
Is that the only reason you think coelacanths are comparable to megs? Because they also lived millions of years ago and were declared extinct, you think meg's chances of adaptation and survival are equally good and reasonable? Why?
Yeah maybe JUST MAYBE it was bitten while it was young..!
Discovery, Animal planet, History channel etc. They were all good. Now, they're all unwatchable nonsense. CEO of discovery networks: i hope bad things happen to you!
This clip is simply from another documentary by filmmaker Dave Riggs and it is a sequel to his first one In search for the Ocean's Super Predator, where he came up with the claim of a 16ft cannablistic shark.
I was here like....
hmmm what if it was bitten while younger when it was half the size lol
So unrealistic and adrenalin junkie based....
derp science
If the whale was bitter by a small shark when the whale was younger and smaller, would the bite scar grow ? As the whale grew
(yes i said skark)