What the fuck? Why was there a mega fauna version of almost every animal?
Animals lived longer before the flood
>>4215681Which of the billions of localized floods over the billions of years are you talking about
>>4215711The big one
>>4215675To be fair, there's never been a bigger animal alive than now with the blue whale, so we should at least take solace in that. As for land mammals, most of the largest animals of their kind lived with humans before we wiped (or helped helped wipe) them out. That being said, there were an awful lot of extinctions at the extinction of the Pleistocene for larger megafauna and it really sucks.
>>4215711The one that covered an area of approximately 5.5 million square miles
>>4215675>OP doesn't know what megafauna isevery time
>>4215720Do you talk about the mega tsunamis, caused by the Chicxulub metoer ? It really effected the coast Iines on the entire planet
>>4215747I only know about floods in fiction that large
More oxygen in the air
>>4216077>how did animals get so big?>more oxygen!>how do we know there was more oxygen?>because animals got so big!retards
>>4215675It's just statistics. If there have been hundreds of variations of every existing species, with only a few surviving to modern times, we should expect that many extant species have a larger counterparts among those that went extinct.
>>4215675now consider: megasapiens>>4216108this
>>4216108There's geologic evidence that there was more oxygen
>>4216112>There's geologic evidence that there was more oxygenno, there's geological evidence that there was LESS oxygen.
>>4216112when geologists say there was more oxygen we're counting both O2 and CO2. Only one of these things is helpful for animal growth.Giant insects and arthropods evolved during a time of elevated O2. Giant vertebrates evolved during times of greatly reduced O2.
>>4215675>Why was there a mega fauna version of almost every animal?Cope's Rule combined with the principle that specialization results in extinction. Then you got the odds of your existence at the same time as any giant specialist, and the fact that smaller generalists of any animal survive the extinction.
>>4215675The simple reason is 99% of species are extinct, so the chances of there being an extinct species bigger than its modern counterpart is almost guaranteed with only a few exceptions like blue whales
>>4215675Giant humans where
>>4216110>now consider: megasapienshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meganthropus#Meganthropus_A/Sangiran_6
>>4215711>>4215823Can you stop being like this. You're so obnoxious you could convert someone just by virtue of them not wanting to be around you.
>>4215675I don't really understand why I should believe any of these things actually existed. Human error or even greed seems like a more reliable explanation
>>4216108Because you can meassure it from the rocks. But ironicly did for example in most of the age of dinosaurs had the earth less oxygen than today
>>4215681>>4215720>>4215747>>4216541Noah's Flood did not happen.
>>4216349>tfw no 8 foot tall retard ape gf
>>4215675Generally speaking when an animal is well adapted to its environment it will tend towards evolving a larger and larger body. I forget the "law" this is called but it has to deal with larger individuals being less susceptible to predation as well as being more capable of winning in intrasexual competition(I.E. competing for a mate or territory).
>>4217078>I forget the "law" this is called>>4216140>Cope's Rule
>>4217119Thanks, anon. Unfortunate name considering how memed the word 'cope' is now.
>>4216140Giant animals are usually not specialists
>>4216077More oxygen was only a thing during the Carboniferous, it was lower during the Mesozoic. Vertebrate lungs are good enough that the oxygen content doesn't matter a whole lot anyway. >>4215675Not super complex, there's been 540 million years of large animal life and enough different niches to allow a lot of different fauna to get to sizes larger than what they are today (doesn't hurt that a lot of the large fauna on Earth from the past ~400,000 years recently went extinct because of humans+end of glacial period).
>>4217131>Giant animals are usually not specialiststhey specialize in being largethis specialization exposes them to greater extinction risks because their populations are smaller and more spread out, and they reproduce more slowly than smaller animals.
I don't understand why they don't live birth or adopt a more seal like body plan.
>>4215675Most of what you're familiar with is from the Late Pleistocene. Animals just used to be larger before humans killed all the big ones.>>4215720Ah, the one that washed away all your IQ points. Tragedy.>>4215722The largest Sauropods were larger than the Blue Whale. Mammals are nothing but pretenders to the throne of the Dinosaurs.>>4216077No. Never this. This is bullshit.>>4216112There is literally no body size limitation put upon lifeforms by oxygen. This is made up bullshit in the life sciences community that I'm sure one retard really liked and everyone jumped all over his dick, because that's what always happens.>>4216140You're still just assuming mass extinctions aren't caused by humans.
>>4215675>Why was there a mega fauna version of almost every animal?Bigger trees makes more oxygen which makes bigger fauna
>>4215675we just came out of a minor extinction event and a string of ice ages caused by major temperature fluctuations, so the easy answer is a lack of food, which is why megafauna still exist in a large tropical region. whatever megafauna that was left over got wiped out by humans.
>>4218463Wrong. The megafauna in the tropics didn't run out of food anymore than the ones in the boreal regions. Mastodons, for example were specialists on spruce foliage, though they didn't necessarily require it. The Late Pleistocene megafaunal extinctions hit the entire planet. And they hit each region at the same time humans arrive there, not in any other pattern.
>>4218476your meme graph with no sources is ignoring island populations that went extinct despite a lack of human contact.
>>4218477You mean island populations like the mammoths of Wrangel Island? The mammoths that survived long past all the others because humans didn't know they were there and then immediately went extinct? Or like the pygmy mammoths of Santa Rosae? That also went extinct as soon as humans touched down? Name an island with extinct megafauna not due to humans and I'll name an island with an incomplete anthropological record.
>>4218476Human migration to those continents might have also been the result of climate change (either pushing humans out of their ancestral lands or simply granting them access to new lands) which would have had it's own impact on animal speciesI don't understand how no matter how many times "correlation does not equal causation" is echoed throughout the internet there's always some retard who looks at a graph with two variables and figures that's the whole story
>>4218360>The largest Sauropods were larger than the Blue WhaleThe mass of the animal is what counts. Some Sauropods might be longer than a Blue Whale, but the whales are several times heavier than the largest of sauropods.
>>4216349Bigfoot if he real
>>4218720>Human migration to those continents might have also been the result of climate changeIt wasn't. You can't just blame everything on the hot stupid trend of the moment.
>>4218723We are talking mass.
>>4218972>trend of the momentThe current trend is anthropogenic climate change, climate change in general has been happening since the formation of our planet
>>4218720You know what, your comment really pissed me off. So congratulations on your ebin troll. Why does "correlation equal causation" but only when (You) want it to and why does it only work when it agrees with current pop sci and authoritarian bullshit? The fact is, every single time you look at a Late Pleistocene regional extincion, you find evidence of human hunting. EVERY.SINGLE.FUCKING.TIME."It wasn't humans! Overkill is a myth!" is the largest cope in all of human history.
>>4218979My post doesn't deny that human hunting wasn't a factor, I'm saying there's a multi variable model at play here, you trolled yourself with your schizo personality and poor reading comprehension
>>4218979And let me be ABSOLUTELY CRYSTAL FUCKING CLEAR. In these situations, when the species are doing well, no humans are present yet or they've just arrived. As soon as humans arrive and start hunting, the species vanish within a few thousand years. And not 10s of thousands of years. Like 2000 or less.Overkill is real. You don't have to like it. You will pay for it. End of story. Good bye, disgusting chaos primates. And good riddance.
>>4218972if "humans killed all the megafauna" is true, why are there still megafauna in india? you can claim that megafauna still live in africa because humans came from there, but humans didn't come from india. realistically, humans should have killed them all.truth is, india and africa are equatorial regions with more stable climates, that are less affected by ice age climate swings. humans are tropical animals that migrated as the ice age warmed, which lined up with all the megafauna being negatively affected by said climate change. this allowed humans to contribute to their extinction, because they were already having trouble surviving, but humans alone didn't drive them extinct. you can see this on the graph you yourself posted, where humans caused a dip in megafauna species in africa, but didn't kill them all. because they were healthy in their environment, and humans were just a hindrance, not a crisis.
i think megafauna came about through adaption of climate conditions during the ice age. generally larger animals maintain heat better and therefore better expend energy. as the climate changed to become warmer during the end of the ice age animals adapted into the smaller versions we see today. i think the reason why its "everything" is because the only reason we see animals today is because they were able to adapt.