do yall think earth's oceans has undiscovered aquatic species like sea monsters in it.?
482748
Architeuthis, the giant squid has already been found. We are finding new lifeforms on the ocean bottom on a daily basis.
145836
No, I don't think we will find a TOTALLY new animal. Sure, people find new species of animals that are already classified. For instance a person could find a new undiscovered spider with unique markings on it's back and a brand new never before seen coloration, but it's still a spider and we know that spiders exist. I don't think people will find an animal that has to be put in a new kingdom, or subkingdom, or phylum (or whatever) unto it's own.
37114
Most sea monsters like Loc Ness are only myths that started long ago to explain odd happenings. But there are lagre creature that do ocupy the ocean and other deep bodies of waters. There are Giant Squids (Architeuthis dux)and other creatures that have adapted to live deep in the oceans. Usually the can live in high pressure and low light conditions and are generally not too cute looking in you are interested you could try this web site http://www.extremescience.com/deepcreat.htm
689193
We've been to the bottom of the Marianas Trench more than we have the moon.  We are in the middle of a life survey of the oceans that has brought pictures and samples of many previously undocumented ocean species recently.  Between the military, the fishing industry, and mineral explorers, there is scarsely a place on the globe that hasn't been scrutinized to some degree.  I think this may have been true a few decades ago, but it now belongs in the same dustbin as the myth that we only use 10% of our brain.  That is not to say that we know it all, but we know a lot more than we do any other planet.  Don't confuse the lunar and mars landers and reconnaisance missions with a fuller understanding than we have of earth, they are a drop in the bucket to what we know of earth.
123576
How could someone name oceanlife animals if they themselves don't know? Do you mean rare species? I am not very sure but search it on the internet. Happy Valentine's Day!
233423
Maybe not in the way we think they did. but yes i think they did. maybe back when there where dinosaurs. i think those are the closest to "dragons".
788407
This is only a theory, no amount of evidence has proven it fact. The only way scientists verify it is through fossil records which show the existence of marine creatures and plants existing at one point in the middle of the dry land continents that we see today. Also, scientists believe that the continents were once one huge land mass that came into existence similar to the way Hawaii did (aka. with a lot of volcanic activity).
389285
no-we humans would then build large floating continents to live on- and yes ive seen water world- but i dont think thats possible- it would take millions of years for such an evolution to occur and in the movie the other humans are still the same- for this to happen the costner characters early ancestors should ahev spent their whole lifetime in water(while they still dint have gills)- and i dont see how they could have survived like that.
741152
I've never even found a ship - I've always looked on land.\n\nThe odds against mst be high, but it would be wonderful if we found a whale or shark.  You can see cars so you ought to be able to see them if they were on the surface.  I don't think you'd be able to see just a shark's fin though.\n\nintel_knight has a point, though.  Different places on land do have different degrees of resolution and they won't have put as much emphasis on the sea.  Maybe if you look near the coast in places where you know there are a lot of whales?
997050
Sure there are. There are many as-yet undiscovered species within out own world. Remember also, that we are but one of thousands of "species" living on the earth. While not provable at this point, given the vastness of our universe, it is likely that there are other forms of life elsewhere. I'd not imagine "little green men" as much as simple-cellular forms.
335673
The "Leviathan" in the bible was a large whale, its breath was spouting from its blowhole. There's all manner of enormous creatures in the ocean- giant squids, giant eels, giant sharks, giant whales. They can grow that large because of abundant food, and the water's buoyancy. Animals can't get that big on land because they couldn't support their own weight. \n\nDragons are another story. They were "real" also- that is, there were actual creatures, like the Komodo Dragon, that were sighted, and just got larger and more exaggerated with each re-telling. The Komodo Dragon does have foul breath (it never brushes its teeth, ever) it just wasn't fire.
85097
I do not beleive their is a differance between Aquatic or Marine animals.
16446
Since 70% to 75% of the Earth's surface is water, I would think it would make less of an impact than if they were just left on land.  There are so many billions of ocean creatures that would flourish off the food supply that would be provided by such a terrible catastrophe.
170773
Oh great another question with multiple answers by people who have no fricken’ idea what they are talking about.\n\n>>>>How come there are an abundant found\n>>>> species of snakes in Australia, but no snakes\n>>>>> in Hawaii?\n\nFirst off lets clear up the common misconception that there are no snakes in Hawaii. There are no LAND snakes in Hawaii. There most certainly are sea snakes in Hawaii.\nThere are no LAND snakes in Hawaii because Hawaii has only existed for the blink of an eye in geological time. Because it is so new all the animals and plants in Hawaii have had to arrive there by travelling across the ocean from nearby landmasses. Hawaii is far too far away from the nearest landmass with snakes for land snakes to be able them to swim that distance.  \n\nFor the same reason Hawaii also has no native land reptiles, amphibians or land mammals of any kind.  Several species of reptiles and mammals have hitched rides with people or been deliberately introduced to the islands, but so far no snakes.\n\nIn contrast Australia as old as any landmass on Earth. snakes evolved in or near Australia when it was still part of the supercontinents. \n\n______________________\nGuelph said “During the last ice age, sea levels were low enough that\n>>>>>>> the Indonesian islands formed a virtual landbridge to Australia.\n\nThere was no land bridge, virtual or otherwise. More importantly snakes and their ancestors have been present in Australia since before it split from Gondwana. No land bridge was needed or used.\n\nKari said “Snakes may have been brought into Australia”. This is total rubbish. There are no exotic snakes living in Australia outside of zoos. No snakes have been brought into Australia. They have more than enough of their own.\n\nCeciel who is obviously a graduate of the Simpson’s school of biological control, is clearly planning to release Himalayan Mountain gorillas to Hawaii deal with the mongooses.\n\nKnowlegdeSeeker said " Colubrids, the progenitors of modern >>>>>> snakes started to show up about 36M years ago."\n\nColubrids are NOT the pregenitors of modern snakes. \n\nColubrids are one of the three major types of modern venomous snakes, the other being the elapids and viperids (See link 1 below.)Colubrids are not a very significant part of the Australian snake fauna and restricted mostly to the northern parts of the continent (see links 2 below). For that reason they are indeed believed to be fairly recent immigrants (See link 3 below).\n\nThe first snakes show up in the fossil record some 100 million years ago in South America, when, as the website you posted shows, Australia was still very much part of Gondwana. In fact the best early snake fossils all come from Gondwana (including present day Australia) and snakes were widepread across that supercontinent by the mid cretaceous, well before it broke up (See remaining links for details).\n\nAfter that the record gets patchy. In fact snakes are amongst the worst represented of all the vertebrate groups. But the general consenus amongst palaeontologists is that snakes evolved in Gondwana and radiated from there to the rest of the world. As a group they never moved into Australia unless it was form South America when the two landmasses were still connected. No land bridge required.
1000513
Hurricanes, earthquakes, mud-slides...natural disasters. Not to mention, we think we're the biggest, badest things on earth. The top of our food chain. Yeah. Right. Go swimming in the ocean w/ sharks. That's a really good way nature teaches us we aren't all that.
337093
Possibly. Since there are lifeforms on the bottom of the seas, and these creatures could have boichemistry taht produces effects on hostile cells in their bodies, it seesm more than likely that some treatments for concer could be found in the ocean.\n\n Lots of useful or potentiallly useful pharmaceuticals come from the ocean.
453231
They exist.  They acan be seen on Animal Planet's shows.