Dunkleosteus is among my most favorite of prehistoric creatures, and one I am sincerely afraid of. It's dreaded jaws did not actually have teeth. The "teeth" were actually extensions of its jawbone, forming a likeness to teeth that were sharp, strong, and deadly
@@hildabumagat2688life on our planet started production in like 2020. Dunks size was readjusted only recently. U think this documentary was all made in the last year? Dont be stupid
The giant dunk is based on the middle-upper end estimates for the largest specimen (which was thought to be 8-11 meters or so). The body shape is based on an earlier paper than the 2023 downsizing.
That study was done by someone with no qualifications in the field and many of his calculations don’t add up. It very likely was a different size than commonly depicted but nowhere near as small as his claims state. It’s likely going to be a while until concrete evidence shows up but until it does I wouldn’t take his claim seriously. Or at least not without extensive cross checking. Who knows it could be the next Great Theropod Lip Debate.
@@BBLeviathan-Gamingstill way more credible than this doc which have a reputation of still repeating outdated paleontology and jumanji level of uncanny valley.
@@BBLeviathan-Gaming to my knowledge Engelman’s has not been retracted so by all accounts it’s still considered valid. While there’s been some criticism about some of the assumptions he base his calculations on, I haven’t seen any expert step forward and tear it a part. This is probably because the bulk of his methodology seems pretty solid and the few criticisms that have arose are more nitpicking than anything that would seriously upend his conclusions in any meaningful way. Maybe something will come up in the future. Maybe people will adjust his calculations this way or that and refine them further, but as far as I can tell, it doesn’t look like the 9m Dunk is ever coming back.
@@Saurophaganax1931 fair enough. Like I said I don’t doubt it was smaller than commonly described but I do question the size estimate he gave. The sheer size of the head with that amount and density of bone would drag it down no matter how hard it swam. But I’m not an paleoichthyologist or an ichthyologist in general, so all I can give is my opinion. We’ll simply just have to wait until someone comes out with a study either confirming or denying the paper. Though I don’t think that invalidates the fact he doesn’t have the appropriate qualifications, at least that I’ve been able to find.
When seeing this it made me realize that nature is and always has been testing out animals and their effectiveness. Arms, legs, eyes, teeth, nose, skin, ears, claws, colors, and whatever else you can think of. It's like a testing ground, and nature throws in mixtures to see what it does, how it reacts and how effective it is, but always keeping things in balance just to get the best test results. We as humans on the other hand span out of control... why is that? Did mother nature gave us too much power? A will and conscience to rise above all others, and for what?
If I had to give an explanation for how mankind managed to emerge at the top of the animal kingdom it all boils down to one very simple answer... We evolved to throw things...
Dunkleosteus and Morgan Freeman. What could be better? There is a wonderful preserved head in a semi-local Palentological Research Institution that I visit on occasion as a pilgrimage. What a creature!
Notably, I believe these are a mother and children. While dunks did likely cannibalise other individuals on occasion, seeing as they likely gave birth to only a few live young at a time (as is evidenced by Materpiscis and others), *parents caring for their young probably isn't out of the question, although I'm no expert. *This part was edited btw
@@trilobite3120 It is EXTREMELY rare for marine fish to: 1. give live birth 2. give parental care 3. have their young live WITH them for any length of time. In fact, I cannot think of any one of the extant species of osteichthyians that meets all 3 criteria, and I'm an ichthyologist.
@@thomasneal9291 Reasonable point, but placoderms aren't bony fish. I do agree that it's unlikely they gave significant parental care, and I'm far from an expert on fish parental care, so I'm glad that an ichthyologist like yourself has decided to comment on this. I just remembered the whole r/K selection thing and that placoderms gave live birth to a small number of offspring, so I figured it would be relevant.
Even though modern estimates have pretty much halved the size of Dunkleosteus to about 4-5 meters I still wouldn't wanna be in the water with that thing if it were alive today
My problem with all these shows? The predators are always more successful than reality..In reality predators fail 9 times out of 10.If they didnt the prey would become extinct
@@cellularautomaton. yeah but if you listen to this particular incident it's like something just got dropped off by UFO on an unsuspecting population of defenseless creatures
Read around some more. You will find there is a distribution in predator success rates. Dragonflies are infamous for success rates above 89%, which flips your "9 out of 10" the other way around. The Cape Hunting Dog in Africa has success rates of around 80%, funnily enough using a historical human hunting method: Teamwork and endurance hunting, taking turns to run their prey to death.
Because success is more interesting and intense to watch. People don't want to watch a predator fail 10 times before succeeding, one creature hunting would be the entire episode. Instead shows typically only highlight a single failure and then a success, or just a success or failure. They then mention proper rates of hunts to kills in many cases.
@@Vastad Those are exceptions, not the norm. OP wasn't entirely wrong. Most predators do fail 9 times out of 10. Starvation, on average, is the most common killer of predators. I'm with OP. I'd like to see predators fail more as that was/is the reality. Herbivores generally are effective at staying alive but that rarely gets portrayed.
As Nigel Marven once said: "Those aren't teeth. Those are extensions of the jawbone. They're for shearing through the prey, and this thing has to punch through other armored fish."
I was hyper fixated on this critter for a while, and it dawned on me that the shape of it's "jaws" was identical to that of modern day puffer fish. These things would have had "lips" to help control pressure in their mouths, and draw in prey via depressurization. Given the dietary specs, their preferred food would have been crustaceans and shellfish, and maybe the random carcass or slow moving fish.
My favorite Devonian, and I think the only devoting in predator being appreciated as it should be dunkleosteus such a interesting animal to say the least
@@PalaeontologyResearchStationPersonally I thought the young were on their own after being born. After all, from what I’ve heard, Dunkleosteus were cannibals.
@cezannejimenez7164 This is quite possible, many fish species today take care of the eggs for a while at most until they hatch, probably even its own offspring would be suitable as food for an adult Dunkleosteus.
@@jaemotoo I don't think an orca-sized predator with sharp bony jaws and one of the strongest bite forces of any animal to ever exist is worthy of being called a big goldfish bud
ah so this is the world of 'make-believe' then, where you can just watch a factually incorrect video and pretend whatever you want about anything. Do some research
I heard somewhere everytime it bites down it actually sharpens it's jaws and actually had a really fast split second bite lunge. Not sure if its true just heard it
Actually, the Dunkleosteus has been disproven to be 9 meters long, and is now said to be around 3-4 meters long. Still big, but not as big as we once thought
@@disneydino7558If I'm not mistaken, the accurate model came out about a year before this documentary. Lazy filmmaking. If I am mistaken, however, disregard this comment
@@voltekthecyborg7898let’s just put them at 5 meters for now to settle the argument But 5 meters is still 16 feet. Big as a great white. Still something to not consider small. It’s massive. Who knows if there’s something as an oversized specimen like for example deep blue (great white) who’s 20 feet. Maybe there’s a dunkleosteus that’s about 20 feet long too. Weight and bite force stayed the same which is actually impressive for a fish that size
I love looking back at the track record of evolution and thinking about body parts that we take for granted now, even just jaws and teeth took millions of years to evolve. the fact that macro predation took time to evolve to, and its so long ago that you can't even really comprehend it without getting a headache from trying. Honestly I get why a lot of people just default to ''God made it'' because that is a hell of a lot easier to wrap your brain around then it is trying to piece together the puzzle of evolution.
As someone who loves science and spent my youth marveling at the wonders of the ocean and went on to get my doctorate in the sciences I wish it didn’t offend so many people to say that it saddens me that nature in all of its glory seems to suffer the fate of being subjected to a never ending ridiculous evolutionary fairy tale sales pitch. I just would love to see a recreation as true as possible to the known without so much make believe. This is still beautiful and interesting none the less.
@@theangrysuchomimus5163 I’ve regrettably come to expect roughly 10% intelligent responses on channels like this. Tell me: do you learn best by asking questions or by repeating what you are told to think?
And just think, there were other prehistoric fish bigger than this thing. That's why I say screw the ocean man, it's just full of tentacled, scaled, horrors that aren't afraid to eat you if given the opportunity
Ammonite and Dunkelosteus In a nutshell: Dunk: “Well I have speed!” Ammonite; “Well I have jet propulsion” Dunk: “Well I have strong teeth” Ammonite: “Nuh-uh my shell stronger” Dunk: “Nuh-uh my mom is stronger”
This Dunkleosteus 3D model looks cool and the music is great but the whole thing looks underwhelming. I don't think Dunkleosteus was particularly into ammonites, it mainly preyed on others placoderms and cartilaginous fishs.
David Attenborough should be given exclusive rights to narrate all nature documentaries. Morgan Freeman can have the rights to God roles in all movies, deal?
*Dunkleosteus had an average bite force of over 6,500 lbs per square inch even as juvenile and over 8,000 lbs per square inch as an adult...that's enough to crush a car. No shell on earth could ever withstand that. I really hate documentary bs like this.*
@@dynamoterror18 oh, so you wanna play the role - that's one you... you can put your faith in that coffeehouse Etch-A-Sketch who's agency is only actualized by a friggin grant, all you want......... but remember, you only get with that grant paid for. And can explain nothing more.
@@woodshed_moments For your information, dunkleosteus as a genus lasted from 382 to 358 million years ago. For the numerous faults and inaccuracies this show has, one of the very few things it did get right was the length of time in which dunky existed. Don't categorize me as some naive or blind loyalist to a corporate product that I'm fully aware isn't 100% scientifically authentic.
@t-rexstudioproductions781 lol but I dunno, I still wouldn't wanna be in the water with an armored guillotine-grouper, certainly not if there's a school of them ☠️
It was probably in production before the study about the size change was published, this explaining why they used the outdated information about dunkleosteus's size
This Creature is truly terrifying it terrorized the whole devonian during that time i think this is more scarier than megalodon because of its devastating massive jaw ,even larger fish has no match on this.
The dunkleosteus Is not inaccurate as we dont know for sure it could be 11 meters or again be 9 meters the only thing is true we dont know as the saying goes (the only constant id change).
Just so you know, 107 DOES NOT cover for this stolen piece of movie narrated by Morgan Freeman! That actually only covers NON COPYWRITED videos that YOU ACTUALLY ARE TALKING ABOUT OR COMMENTING ON. However, you are not doing anything other than copy and pasting this and you are also not giving credit to the actual documentary movie you copied this from!
Would've such stab to Paleontologists hearts if the fries adopted look of their "new" look while the adults kept the same outdated look. And honestly, I'd be okay with that.
![Quetzalcoatlus Challenging Tyrannosaurus [Prehistoric Planet]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zWGnlAQsRaE/mqdefault.jpg)
![Quetzalcoatlus Challenging Tyrannosaurus [Prehistoric Planet]](/img/tr.png)
Dunkleosteus is among my most favorite of prehistoric creatures, and one I am sincerely afraid of. It's dreaded jaws did not actually have teeth. The "teeth" were actually extensions of its jawbone, forming a likeness to teeth that were sharp, strong, and deadly
I think they are also estimated to have had a ridicolously strong bite force.
Wait for the coelacanth
Why does its name… remind one of… donut dunking….
You mean they didn’t have to go to a dentist?
Wow
Finally, my favorite prehistoric animal is shown in all of its glory.
Do you have the PNSO dunkleosteus model? It came out a year before this documentary which shows it bulkier but is still a nice model anyway.
Dunk was only 4.5 meters long. Not 9 meters.
Even if they nerfed them, I still like this bulky and armored fish
@@keepcalmlovedinosaurs8934yes I do
@nocturnalrecluse1216 I think it was made before the correction.
Can't imagine an adult Dunkle passing up a smaller one right in front of it to eat a tinier snailfish in that scenario,
Parental instincts
Exactly @@lazzie7495
@@lazzie7495 Modern marine fishes so rarely raise their own young as to be entirely discountable. I don't know where they got this fanciful idea from.
I think the same
It's thought they cannibalized each other. No food was off limits for them. They could crush any armor like butter.
The music for this scene is so good!!!
It is Power Struggle by Lorne Balfe ruclips.net/video/7LCXgQm9ch0/видео.htmlsi=Ds-hPhYDTCx9_-nm
Crunchy on the outside - chewy in the middle! My fav...
For some reason they massively oversized it but also gave it its proper modern, tuna-like anatomy.
I think this was made before Dunkle was shrunken down
@@mamboo0743m8 that was WAAAAAY after that
@@hildabumagat2688life on our planet started production in like 2020. Dunks size was readjusted only recently. U think this documentary was all made in the last year? Dont be stupid
@@hildabumagat2688 bro turned dunkie into a goldfish
The giant dunk is based on the middle-upper end estimates for the largest specimen (which was thought to be 8-11 meters or so). The body shape is based on an earlier paper than the 2023 downsizing.
I have a feeling they heard the news of the dunk's size change and pretended it never happened
That study was done by someone with no qualifications in the field and many of his calculations don’t add up. It very likely was a different size than commonly depicted but nowhere near as small as his claims state. It’s likely going to be a while until concrete evidence shows up but until it does I wouldn’t take his claim seriously. Or at least not without extensive cross checking. Who knows it could be the next Great Theropod Lip Debate.
@@BBLeviathan-Gamingstill way more credible than this doc which have a reputation of still repeating outdated paleontology and jumanji level of uncanny valley.
@@BBLeviathan-Gaming to my knowledge Engelman’s has not been retracted so by all accounts it’s still considered valid. While there’s been some criticism about some of the assumptions he base his calculations on, I haven’t seen any expert step forward and tear it a part. This is probably because the bulk of his methodology seems pretty solid and the few criticisms that have arose are more nitpicking than anything that would seriously upend his conclusions in any meaningful way. Maybe something will come up in the future. Maybe people will adjust his calculations this way or that and refine them further, but as far as I can tell, it doesn’t look like the 9m Dunk is ever coming back.
@@Saurophaganax1931 fair enough. Like I said I don’t doubt it was smaller than commonly described but I do question the size estimate he gave. The sheer size of the head with that amount and density of bone would drag it down no matter how hard it swam. But I’m not an paleoichthyologist or an ichthyologist in general, so all I can give is my opinion. We’ll simply just have to wait until someone comes out with a study either confirming or denying the paper. Though I don’t think that invalidates the fact he doesn’t have the appropriate qualifications, at least that I’ve been able to find.
the scene might've been in production before the study
When seeing this it made me realize that nature is and always has been testing out animals and their effectiveness. Arms, legs, eyes, teeth, nose, skin, ears, claws, colors, and whatever else you can think of. It's like a testing ground, and nature throws in mixtures to see what it does, how it reacts and how effective it is, but always keeping things in balance just to get the best test results.
We as humans on the other hand span out of control... why is that? Did mother nature gave us too much power? A will and conscience to rise above all others, and for what?
because i am handsome
If I had to give an explanation for how mankind managed to emerge at the top of the animal kingdom it all boils down to one very simple answer...
We evolved to throw things...
It's a false premise. This 'balance' of yours has been thrown out of order countless times throughout evolutionary history.
@@xergiok2322 It's not my balance and what has been throw out of balance?
@@lylesloth1275idotably
Dunkleosteus and Morgan Freeman. What could be better? There is a wonderful preserved head in a semi-local Palentological Research Institution that I visit on occasion as a pilgrimage. What a creature!
Dunkleosteus and David Attenborough. Dunkleosteus and Nigel Marven?
@@YodaOnABender The latter they actually did with Sea Monsters in 2003
I don't think Dunkleosteus is a social creature that lives in group. It was most likely a cannibal that preyed on anything that swim close to it.
Notably, I believe these are a mother and children. While dunks did likely cannibalise other individuals on occasion, seeing as they likely gave birth to only a few live young at a time (as is evidenced by Materpiscis and others), *parents caring for their young probably isn't out of the question, although I'm no expert.
*This part was edited btw
@@trilobite3120 It is EXTREMELY rare for marine fish to:
1. give live birth
2. give parental care
3. have their young live WITH them for any length of time.
In fact, I cannot think of any one of the extant species of osteichthyians that meets all 3 criteria, and I'm an ichthyologist.
@@thomasneal9291 Reasonable point, but placoderms aren't bony fish. I do agree that it's unlikely they gave significant parental care, and I'm far from an expert on fish parental care, so I'm glad that an ichthyologist like yourself has decided to comment on this. I just remembered the whole r/K selection thing and that placoderms gave live birth to a small number of offspring, so I figured it would be relevant.
@@thomasneal9291 Is that part of the reasons why all Placoderms went extinct?
Morgan Freeman Narrating anything is calming 💯
Even though modern estimates have pretty much halved the size of Dunkleosteus to about 4-5 meters I still wouldn't wanna be in the water with that thing if it were alive today
Really a shame that this spesific step went extinct. I mean, Goliaths groupers are a thing, but they hit different
My problem with all these shows? The predators are always more successful than reality..In reality predators fail 9 times out of 10.If they didnt the prey would become extinct
well, a more accurate perspective is that they prefer to show the times the predators succeed because that's more interesting
@@cellularautomaton. yeah but if you listen to this particular incident it's like something just got dropped off by UFO on an unsuspecting population of defenseless creatures
Read around some more. You will find there is a distribution in predator success rates. Dragonflies are infamous for success rates above 89%, which flips your "9 out of 10" the other way around. The Cape Hunting Dog in Africa has success rates of around 80%, funnily enough using a historical human hunting method: Teamwork and endurance hunting, taking turns to run their prey to death.
Because success is more interesting and intense to watch. People don't want to watch a predator fail 10 times before succeeding, one creature hunting would be the entire episode. Instead shows typically only highlight a single failure and then a success, or just a success or failure. They then mention proper rates of hunts to kills in many cases.
@@Vastad Those are exceptions, not the norm. OP wasn't entirely wrong. Most predators do fail 9 times out of 10. Starvation, on average, is the most common killer of predators. I'm with OP. I'd like to see predators fail more as that was/is the reality. Herbivores generally are effective at staying alive but that rarely gets portrayed.
Someday there should be a movie with it. There already have been quite a few movies with Megalodon so I think Dunkleosteus deserves a turn
Although it may carry measly lookin teeth, it is quite effective when applied to the jugular plates
As Nigel Marven once said: "Those aren't teeth. Those are extensions of the jawbone. They're for shearing through the prey, and this thing has to punch through other armored fish."
A seenanners “hunted by morgan freeman” quote
I was hyper fixated on this critter for a while, and it dawned on me that the shape of it's "jaws" was identical to that of modern day puffer fish. These things would have had "lips" to help control pressure in their mouths, and draw in prey via depressurization. Given the dietary specs, their preferred food would have been crustaceans and shellfish, and maybe the random carcass or slow moving fish.
If anyone has listened to the show’s soundtrack, what’s the title of the song for this scene?
Power Struggle: ruclips.net/video/7LCXgQm9ch0/видео.htmlsi=LKHWRobn6OQrAjVb
It's called "Power Struggle" by Lorne Balfe.
The link to that soundtrack is here: ruclips.net/video/7LCXgQm9ch0/видео.htmlsi=bZk7l-B4UcyYuf6R
Megalodon has exited the chat
The Megaladon hadn't entered the chat yet for about 300 million years.
Peak has returned
They are the strongest animals with strongest teeths and exoskeletons. Dunkelosteus is my favorite fish
My favorite Devonian, and I think the only devoting in predator being appreciated as it should be dunkleosteus such a interesting animal to say the least
why is it's sound track not released 😭
@@Swiiscompos tank you
Fucking glorious
Is there any reasoning behind the young staying alongside the adult, or is it just an artistic license/pure speculation?
I think it's speculation, although I wouldn't expect Dunkleosteus to take care of his offspring that much
Could be they just follow around like pilot fish
I don't think the parents would tolerate that
@@PalaeontologyResearchStationPersonally I thought the young were on their own after being born. After all, from what I’ve heard, Dunkleosteus were cannibals.
@cezannejimenez7164 This is quite possible, many fish species today take care of the eggs for a while at most until they hatch, probably even its own offspring would be suitable as food for an adult Dunkleosteus.
Wait what about the dunkleosteus update of it being short was it wrong Because the update came out before this documentary
The size maybe different (mako shark sized). But the bite still remains
"Watch this terrifying shark fail to kill a clam"
it's not a shark, and that was not a clam. thx for playing.
@@thomasneal9291 "thx for playing"
This would've been by far the most fearsome apex predator the world had ever seen up to this point and probably for a very long time thereafter
Dunkleosteus was basically a big goldfish. This video is very misleading concerning the size and shape of the fish
@@jaemotoo I don't think an orca-sized predator with sharp bony jaws and one of the strongest bite forces of any animal to ever exist is worthy of being called a big goldfish bud
ah so this is the world of 'make-believe' then, where you can just watch a factually incorrect video and pretend whatever you want about anything. Do some research
@jaemotoo have a lovely day good sir
@@jaemotoo lil bro thinks evolution is fake
One of my favorite prehistoric animals
Ammonites are basically like cuttlefish that has a snail shell
I heard somewhere everytime it bites down it actually sharpens it's jaws and actually had a really fast split second bite lunge. Not sure if its true just heard it
Is this it? ruclips.net/video/F4MH6DPURFc/видео.html
The music is way over the top but the visuals are nice
What’s the name of this piece of music?
@@cezannejimenez7164 "Power Struggle" by Lorne Balfe
@@cezannejimenez7164Power Struggle from episode 2 Soundtrack
What a wondrously terrifying creature! :D
is this show only available on Netflix ?
Yes.
Actually, the Dunkleosteus has been disproven to be 9 meters long, and is now said to be around 3-4 meters long. Still big, but not as big as we once thought
But that discovery wasn't made yet when they were making this series in their defense. So don't be too harsh on them for oversizing the Dunkleosteus.
@@disneydino7558 I'm not being harsh on the series, but I'm just saying we didn't know that God nerfed the thing
@@voltekthecyborg7898 OK sorry. I just like this series a lot and just found out that fact of Dunkleosteus today.
@@disneydino7558If I'm not mistaken, the accurate model came out about a year before this documentary. Lazy filmmaking. If I am mistaken, however, disregard this comment
@@voltekthecyborg7898let’s just put them at 5 meters for now to settle the argument
But 5 meters is still 16 feet. Big as a great white. Still something to not consider small. It’s massive.
Who knows if there’s something as an oversized specimen like for example deep blue (great white) who’s 20 feet. Maybe there’s a dunkleosteus that’s about 20 feet long too.
Weight and bite force stayed the same which is actually impressive for a fish that size
Underdog to top predators dang
I love looking back at the track record of evolution and thinking about body parts that we take for granted now, even just jaws and teeth took millions of years to evolve. the fact that macro predation took time to evolve to, and its so long ago that you can't even really comprehend it without getting a headache from trying. Honestly I get why a lot of people just default to ''God made it'' because that is a hell of a lot easier to wrap your brain around then it is trying to piece together the puzzle of evolution.
Really? I find it fascinating and invigorating to look back on.
As someone who loves science and spent my youth marveling at the wonders of the ocean and went on to get my doctorate in the sciences I wish it didn’t offend so many people to say that it saddens me that nature in all of its glory seems to suffer the fate of being subjected to a never ending ridiculous evolutionary fairy tale sales pitch. I just would love to see a recreation as true as possible to the known without so much make believe. This is still beautiful and interesting none the less.
What are you on about?
Amen. John 1
I like how you said "doctorate in the sciences" without specifying the field lol
@@theangrysuchomimus5163 I’ve regrettably come to expect roughly 10% intelligent responses on channels like this. Tell me: do you learn best by asking questions or by repeating what you are told to think?
Bro r u on drugs? What are you talking about?
a Dunkleosteus named Big Daddy and Big Momma
nice
Damn it almost looks like they sent somebody back in time to film this
This fish in in need of some serious dental work.
That would be unnecessary, because dunkleosteus in life wouldn't have true teeth but exposed extensions of its jawbone.
its a Dunkleosteus-eat-Dunkleosteus world out there!
The meanest killing machine in these waters. - Rocko, The Pebble and the Penguin (1995)
Dengs phish
Oh we got some water boys here.
And just think, there were other prehistoric fish bigger than this thing. That's why I say screw the ocean man, it's just full of tentacled, scaled, horrors that aren't afraid to eat you if given the opportunity
Ammonite and Dunkelosteus In a nutshell:
Dunk: “Well I have speed!”
Ammonite; “Well I have jet propulsion”
Dunk: “Well I have strong teeth”
Ammonite: “Nuh-uh my shell stronger”
Dunk: “Nuh-uh my mom is stronger”
This Dunkleosteus 3D model looks cool and the music is great but the whole thing looks underwhelming. I don't think Dunkleosteus was particularly into ammonites, it mainly preyed on others placoderms and cartilaginous fishs.
my favorite prehistoric fish
Wow I love @Morgan Freeman voice💕🥰
I would like to watch the whole documentary
I Watched This Serie! Its called Life on Our Planet
we've been paying big sushi ever since
David Attenborough should be given exclusive rights to narrate all nature documentaries. Morgan Freeman can have the rights to God roles in all movies, deal?
I wonder what will be roaming around on Earth 100 million years from now. Certainly not us.
Mosasaurus in life on our planet or no?
No
no, only pliosaurus for marine reptile
AKCHOOLY now they say the body size is way smaller than what previously thought. So it's like
>ツ> rather than >
Bro stole his meal
Dunkleosteus they live in devonian period
*Dunkleosteus had an average bite force of over 6,500 lbs per square inch even as juvenile and over 8,000 lbs per square inch as an adult...that's enough to crush a car. No shell on earth could ever withstand that. I really hate documentary bs like this.*
Okay, so how many million years ago? 🤔
374 million years ago.
@@dynamoterror18 and you are sure they are right about that?
@@woodshed_moments It says so at 0:05!
@@dynamoterror18 oh, so you wanna play the role - that's one you... you can put your faith in that coffeehouse Etch-A-Sketch who's agency is only actualized by a friggin grant, all you want......... but remember, you only get with that grant paid for.
And can explain nothing more.
@@woodshed_moments For your information, dunkleosteus as a genus lasted from 382 to 358 million years ago. For the numerous faults and inaccuracies this show has, one of the very few things it did get right was the length of time in which dunky existed. Don't categorize me as some naive or blind loyalist to a corporate product that I'm fully aware isn't 100% scientifically authentic.
Dunkleosteus.
Hey I just tamed one of these in ark.
can we get an f in the chat for Big Dunk 💔
(context: the size estimate was massively downgraded recently, making it more small and chunky)
F
Science ruined dunkie and turned it into a weak goldfish
@t-rexstudioproductions781 lol but I dunno, I still wouldn't wanna be in the water with an armored guillotine-grouper, certainly not if there's a school of them ☠️
Smaller yes, but the wholesome chonker idea is not proven
From shark-like beast to armoured orb with "teeth".
@@thenamesianna
More like a Weak goldfish
Didn't Dunkleosteus get shrunken by a few metres by a recent study? 9 metres is a bit dubious.
Isn't that oversized?
Yes
They probably made this before the size update.
@@Adog336
Except they also gave it the “fatter”, bigger-tailed tuna-like look from that update.
Yeah that was what I thought too that it got downsized to being only 4 meters now
It was probably in production before the study about the size change was published, this explaining why they used the outdated information about dunkleosteus's size
Aaaaasuuuum !
That new study about them being literally horizontally flattened, is ridiculously flawed.
Sorry for asking but can you explain why?
I searched for Maxine Waters & somehow I got to here.
This fish was only 11 to 14 ft long.
“Big Daddy”
Man of culture i see
We'd all be extinct if these animals were alive
Giant armoured fish
❤BSLAD didit❤
I would like to get dunkleosteus as a pet
Bruh how tf would u do that💀
Terrorizing...
Oy morgan get off sir attenboroughs gig😂😂😂😂😂
god explained about one of his creations
Dunkleosteous explains the phenomenon of SUVs increasing in size over time.
It would be awesome to see a Billy Carson and Morgan freeman collaboration
rip they didn't update the dunk's new size
Piranha: Grandpa?
🦈🐟🐬🐚🐙
This Creature is truly terrifying it terrorized the whole devonian during that time i think this is more scarier than megalodon because of its devastating massive jaw ,even larger fish has no match on this.
I've eaten those aminoids really there not worth the trouble
The dunkleosteus Is not inaccurate as we dont know for sure it could be 11 meters or again be 9 meters the only thing is true we dont know as the saying goes (the only constant id change).
Just so you know, 107 DOES NOT cover for this stolen piece of movie narrated by Morgan Freeman! That actually only covers NON COPYWRITED videos that YOU ACTUALLY ARE TALKING ABOUT OR COMMENTING ON. However, you are not doing anything other than copy and pasting this and you are also not giving credit to the actual documentary movie you copied this from!
Morgan freeman?
DEEvonian Era, not Duh-vonian
Would've such stab to Paleontologists hearts if the fries adopted look of their "new" look while the adults kept the same outdated look. And honestly, I'd be okay with that.
Once again I hear Morgan freeman absolutely butchering scientific names. You're not supposed to pronounce it with English rules of pronunciation.
wow even this one is inaccurate
Ok at the time this was made it was believed to be bigger
Thats a gross exaggeration of how they looked.
bu ne yaa çocukmu avutuyorsun.? git biraz olgunlaşta gel.
Since the world exists only just over 7 thousand of years , where from millions are?
I think one is following Darwinism.
And you're following a fictitious book
The world exists about 4 billion years not 7 thousand
Опять его изображают с чертами акулы. Ну почему? Есть подтверждение? Это же костная рыба. Эдакий карп с челюстями
Morgan Freeman..