But.....Bruhathkayosaurus might have been between 40–44 m (131–144 ft) in length and 175–220 tonnes in weight according to some estimates.
Certain rorquals from the Pliocene possibly rivaled the size of modern blue whales.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruhathkayosaurus

It's worth considering there were likely many yet undiscovered large marine animals who either were Chondrichthyes (cartilagenous, no bones) or lived in deep seas where any skeletal remains are still hidden.

It seems so
Blue Whale
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_whale
Largest Dinosaur
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentinosaurus

Congratulations! Your video, Killer Whales Charge Blue Whale (Rare Drone Footage), has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 121 Badge!

Your video, Killer Whales Charge Blue Whale (Rare Drone Footage), has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 269 Badge!

I think because it's meant to go along with their article, not to be watched on it's own.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn27413&utm_campaign=youtubesuperstrongrobot

The details are pretty amazing though.

"The most impressive feat of strength comes from a ground bot nicknamed μTug. Although it weighs just 12 grams, it can drag a weight that's 2000 times heavier – "the same as you pulling around a blue whale", explains David Christensen – who is in the same lab."

He said an average of 150 times larger. That seems ... unlikely. 150 percent, maybe -- and still a statistically significant increase.

A quick google search suggests yellowfin tuna commonly range from 40-150cm long, and up to 70kg in weight/mass. If they are close to the "average" of 150 (times? or percent?) larger, the species would have started out at about a half kilogram MAX (more like a small trout) if "size" is determined by mass. Or about 1/4 to 1 cm long (like half a guppy) if determined by length.

Both of those make more sense if it was 150% -- that would be early tuna in the range of 50kg (by mass) or 26-100cm (by length).


And then there was the "maximum size increased by 100,000 times" line. By mass, that is like the trout evolving into a blue whale. Yeah, I am guessing that is a percent again. Still means 1000 times bigger, which is massive.


I tried searching YouTube comments to see if anyone else brought this up, but they are YouTube comments. Hah! Silly me, thinking that YouTube comments on something like SciSchow might be at least partially exempt from the "sanity free zone" that pervades YT.

"The idea that your cat is the Creator of the Universe has no explanatory power. To have an argument that your cat is the Creator you need to provide positive reasons for it. The Universe is finely tuned: if design is an explanation than I wouldn't need to disprove anything and everything as being a potential Creator, I would simply need to examine the evidence for design to make a determination as to what kind of being this must be, and using Occams razor I could come to some definite conclusions about it."

And I would posit that any same test applied to the Judeo-Christian god would fail the test equally (given that "god did it" isn't a theory, it's a construct). For that matter, so would any other god you want to throw out there. Assuming an intelligent creator pre-dating the universe created the universe calls into question "How did this dude himself go about getting created?". That question can only basically be answered with "It's turtles all the way down".

How do you know that a Universe governed by laws isn't the signature of a Creator?

How do you know my cat didn't create it? Equal empirical evidence (none) of both constructs.

Why would you expect to see a grand cosmos such as this, with such awesome beauty, whirling away with mechanical precision? The mere fact of its existence let alone its operation and stability is something too grandiose to be automatically regulated to some accident.

Really? We happen to live in a time period called the Stelliferous Era in which stars exist. Too far in the past, they couldn't form; too far in the future, they will no longer form. So oddly enough, given that the conditions are at this particular time are favorable to life, life came into being and evolved. So if it's your belief that god created this universe to be human friendly, why'd he wait so long for the conditions to be right for us to exist? Why not just do it on Day 1? Or why didn't he wait longer? Why did the universe have to be human-friendly in the first place? He's god -- he can do anything, so why are humans bound to all these rules of math, physics and chemistry, like every single other bit of life from bacteria to Blue whales?

How do you know that a Universe governed by laws isn't the signature of a Creator?

How do you know it's not my incredibly clever, and possibly deific, cat? Again, same empirical proof (none).

Why would you expect to see a grand cosmos such as this, with such awesome beauty, whirling away with mechanical precision?

We live in a time where the universe is able to support life. Outside of this neatly-ordered era, we'd be plasma or neutrons.

Like a great blue whale
After many great journeys
My carcass devoured

I keep waiting for one of these guys to dethrone the blue whale (unlikely, I know): Dreadnoughtus was nowhere close. About half the mass. The other tantalizing "guesses" he mentions could be in the ballpark, but who knows with so little to go on.
Awesome find!

Jesus! Someone call a marine biologist, it's a talking blue whale! And it's the head of a mining company! This is incredible!

*promote the great blue whale

Yeeees, that would kind of be the point of the joke...

In reply to this comment by johncusick2:
In reply to this comment by Lithic:
Holy crap cakes!! That would have freaked me the F#%K OUT! I would have paddled like a little loon going "please don't eat me, please don't eat me", and the fact that I know full well they only eat plankton would have been SOD ALL HELP because it's freaking HUGE AND UNDER WATER AND OBVIOUSLY OUT TO GET ME!!!



get some education, no reason for it to harm you or even that it would

In reply to this comment by Lithic:
Holy crap cakes!! That would have freaked me the F#%K OUT! I would have paddled like a little loon going "please don't eat me, please don't eat me", and the fact that I know full well they only eat plankton would have been SOD ALL HELP because it's freaking HUGE AND UNDER WATER AND OBVIOUSLY OUT TO GET ME!!!



get some education, no reason for it to harm you or even that it would

Wouldn't the call of a blue whale at that distance at least burst your eardrums?

>> ^nock:

Aren't these things protected by the Marine Mammal and Endangered Species Acts? Pretty sure you aren't supposed to get within a certain radius. I'm also pretty sure he's within that radius.


I don't know the specific law in the US, but in other countries the rule has been that you are not allowed approach the animal, but once it approaches you, you're fine.