Recent research suggests it looked quite different from what we previously thought, with a longer and more slender body.
The Megalodon was a prehistoric shark that lived more than 23 million years ago.
The study also indicates that the megalodon had skinnier bodies than previously assumed.
The Megalodon was a fearsome prehistoric shark that lived more than 23 million years ago. Recent research suggests it looked quite different from what we previously thought, with a longer and more slender body. The study also indicates that the megalodon had skinnier bodies than previously assumed, which challenges our previous understanding of this extinct giant.
Megalodon was an enormous and fearsome prehistoric shark with an enormous pair of jaws. Its body form resembled a larger version of the great white shark, but recent research suggests it looked rather different.
The Megalodon lived more than 23 million years ago and had a body made of cartilage rather than bones
Megalodons were skinnier than previously thought, new study suggests
Accuracy
The megalodon might have been slimmer than previously thought.
Scientists compared the build of the megalodon to that of a mako shark and found it had a more slender body.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing the opinions of experts without providing any evidence or logical reasoning for their claims. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the size and fearsome nature of megalodon, which could be seen as a form of emotional manipulation. Additionally, there are several instances where the author presents conflicting information about megalodon's body shape without providing any explanation or resolution for these discrepancies.
The article cites Prof Kenshu Shimada and his team's claim that past reconstructions of megalodon were flawed because they drew on an assumption that its body form resembled a larger version of the great white shark, but does not provide any evidence or logical reasoning for this claim.
The article describes megalodon as being slimmer than previously thought and cites Prof Shimada's observation that it was more elongated, but also notes that other research suggests different measurements for the same fossil. This creates conflicting information about megalodon's body shape without providing any resolution or explanation.
The article uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing megalodon as a 'gigantic prehistoric shark boasting an enormous pair of jaws', which could be seen as emotional manipulation rather than logical reasoning.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest with DePaul University as they are mentioned in the article and it is not disclosed if there is any financial or personal relationship between them.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of paleobiology as they are affiliated with DePaul University and Palaeontologia Electronica.
The Megalodon lived more than 23 million years ago and had a body made of cartilage rather than bones
Fossils of the extinct giant are hard to come by as they mainly consist of cartilage rather than bones and are rarely preserved
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in that it presents a new study as evidence for the fact that megalodons had skinnier bodies than previously thought. However, this study only reappraised an incomplete set of fossil vertebrae found in Belgium and did not provide any new information about the biology of megalodons. The article also uses great white sharks as a model for their appearance, which is incorrect since they are different species with different body shapes. Additionally, the article presents previous research that estimated the size of this particular megalodon to be 9.2 meters in length and then contradicts it by stating that Shimada and his coauthors say the individual would have measured at least 11.1 meters in length based on their reappraisal of these fossil vertebrae, which is not supported by any evidence presented in the article.
The article presents a new study as evidence for megalodons having skinnier bodies than previously thought.
The article uses great white sharks as a model for megalodon appearance.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing the work of a study without providing any evidence or reasoning for why it should be trusted. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the megalodon as being skinnier than previously thought, which could be seen as sensationalist and not based on objective analysis.
The article cites a study without providing any evidence or reasoning for why it should be trusted.
The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the megalodon as being skinnier than previously thought, which could be seen as sensationalist and not based on objective analysis.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jack Guy has a financial tie to the fossil record of megalodon as he is an author and editor for the journal Science. He also has personal relationships with Kenshu Shimada and Phillip Sternes who are experts in biology of megalodons.
Jack Guy is also listed as an editor for the journal Science, which has published several papers on the biology of megalodons.
Jack Guy is listed as an author on a 2018 paper titled 'The fossil record of megalodon' published in the journal Science.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Jack Guy has a conflict of interest on the topic of Megalodons as he is an author for CNN. He also has a personal relationship with Phillip Sternes who was involved in the study.
The megalodon was much slimmer than previously thought.
Scientists compared the build of the megalodon to that of a mako shark and found it had a more slender body.
Researchers believe the killer shark was leaner and potentially even longer than previously assumed.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing the findings of a study without providing any evidence or reasoning for why these findings are significant. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the megalodon as 'mammoth ocean predator' and 'literary and cinematic legend', which is not supported by any evidence in the article.
Bias
(80%)
The author of the article presents a new study that challenges previous assumptions about the megalodon's body size and diet. The author uses quotes from experts in their field to support their claims and provides evidence such as comparisons with other shark species. However, there is no clear indication of any political or religious bias present in this article.
A lack of fossil evidence led paleontologists to assume the megalodon would have a robust and stocky body like the great white, and measure up to 65 feet. Now, University of California researchers, alongside a team of marine experts from around the world, believe the killer shark was leaner and potentially even longer.
Their findings also suggest that the megalodon maintained a different diety and lifestyle than assumed with a more massive shark.
The mammoth ocean predator became the stuff of literary and cinematic legend
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Hannah Sparks has a conflict of interest with the topic of paleontology as she is an author for National Geographic. She also has a personal relationship with Professor Kenshu Shimada who was involved in the study.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of paleontology as they are affiliated with the University of California. The article also mentions Professor Kenshu Shimada and Phillip Sternes who may have their own biases or interests that could affect their reporting.
The author is an affiliate of the University of California, which has a vested interest in paleontology.
Scientists are discovering new information about the Megalodon shark.
, which went extinct around three million years ago and is known as the largest shark to ever exist on earth.
The megalodon was actually longer than previously estimated due to a study that compared it with a fossil from the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences in Brussels and CT scans of a juvenile Carcharodon carcharias specimen.
It is also believed that the megalodon was probably slower than previously thought.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that scientists are discovering new information about the megalodon shark when in fact they have been studying it for years and there is little left to learn. Secondly, the author uses a comparison with white sharks as a model species to reconstruct the body form of megalodons which is not accurate. Thirdly, the article implies that scientists are unsure about what megalodons looked like when in fact they have been studying their fossils for decades and have come up with several theories based on evidence.
The author claims that scientists are discovering new information about the megalodon shark. However, this is not true as there is little left to learn about such a well-studied creature.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that scientists are discovering new information about the megalodon shark without providing any evidence or citation for this claim. Additionally, the author makes a false dichotomy between what is known and not known about the megalodon, implying that there are only two options when in fact more research can be done to learn more about it. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric by stating that scientists have been left frustrated and keen to find out more about the shark's size and how it lived, which could potentially lead readers to believe that this is a negative or undesirable outcome.
Scientists are discovering new information about the renowned megalodon shark.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Poppy Bilderbeck has a conflict of interest on the topic of Megalodon as she is an author for Unilad.com which may have financial ties to companies or individuals that are involved in research related to this topic.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Megalodon as they are affiliated with the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences in Brussels which is conducting research on this topic.
