The Giant Prehistoric Bird Thread

Galvasean wrote: »

Seems like a lot to extrapolate based on one incomplete bone. I'm sure they could deduce it was avian and most likely related to Pelagornis, but to state the exact genus seems a bit over reaching to me.

Yeah, well, you know they do that a lot

Rubecula wrote: »

Right or wrong it does make you think that perhaps these creatures had a lifestyle perhaps similar to a wandering albatross. (Which goes to sea for 10 years before returning to land to breed.)

Something that big must have had a similar method of flying I think.

Indeed, and so it is possible that they didn´t have a very definite distribution- they could probably fly enormous distances and show up anywhere in the globe, as has also been suggested for some giant marine pterosaurs :>

Rubecula wrote: »

Coconuts?

Could be... apparently coconuts and coconut-like fruits were already around by then but, have any been found around where Gastornis lived? If it had been specialized on that they should have been very abundant...

Been looking at its skull and comparing it to living birds that have somewhat similar beaks, btw:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/08/130829214559.htm

Galvasean wrote: »

I really wish news outlets wouldn't wouldn't refer to Gastornis as a 'terror bird'. It just gets people confusing them with the phorusrhacidae.

I agree. Now people will think actual terror birds are vegetarian

I'm not going to start defending the predator theory now that evidence is piling up against it, BUT... I always thought the footprints were very poor evidence. I mean, there are no flightless raptors nowadays, and no predatory birds of that size. That means we really have no reason to expect sharp talons in a creature like Gastornis; I would expect its claws to be blunt and worn out, same as those of most large theropods- after all the feet would be busy carrying the creature around while it did all the dirty work with its beak...

I think the word is herbivory :B

And true; now that I think about it, the secretary bird kills most of its prey- venomous snakes included- by trampling them :>

http://www.livescience.com/42076-giant-moa-loses-weight.html

Powerful enough to eat people if old Maori stories are to be believed :cool:

Kess73 wrote: »

Would tend to believe that the Haast Eagle was capable of taking down very large prey.

Modern day Golden Eagles have been confirmed as having attacked and killed adult swans, adult foxes, adult badgers (American and Eurasian), adult reindeer, adult sheep, and even young cattle up to about 100kg.

Cannot think of any reason why a large Haast eagle could not have attacked and killed a human. The initial strike from such a large raptor would leave a grown man in no position to be able to defend himself.

A golden eagle could kill a human, if motivated enough. In central Asia golden eagles are trained to hunt wolves, which may not be as heavy as the cattle you mention, but are surely more dangerous game. The eagle uses one talon to shut the wolf's jaws close, and the other to hold it still. Apparently the hunters usually try to get to the wolf before the eagle can do much damage to the skin, but I think I do remember reading about the eagle itself doing the kill. In Africa, children have been mauled by crowned eagles and the skulls of babies/toddlers have been found in their nests (which would make them the only bird of prey that still see us as prey).

We also tend to forget that there was another eagle as large as the Haast's eagle in North America- it may have encountered humans as well, and was probably more similar to the golden eagle as it was used to hunting in open spaces, rather than forested areas like the Haast's.

Manach wrote: »

Well as Aeschylus discovered to his cost, all eagles have to do is to divebomb using turtles.

Wasn´t that a bearded vulture?

Manach wrote: »

Subject to factual revision, AFAIR when I was learning his works, t'was an eagle what that did him in.

I believe it was Pliny who identified the "eagle" as a bearded vulture (it's been called an eagle in the past). Considering they are known to kill turtles by dropping them, and that they were quite common in southern Europe at the time, I guess it still would be the best guess.

Rubecula wrote: »

Most important question regarding the Moa?

Has to be, how do you get in the oven and how much stuffing do I need?

Merry Christmas you ould fossils you.

Hope you had a great time :B

PS- Re: to the first question... you just have to get the elephants out first. (Bet there's one with elephants in the oven, right?)

Try melting them, then they taste just like peanut butter :cool:

Was a 30 kg bird from New Caledonia.

http://www.eartharchives.org/articles/the-giant-chickens-of-new-caledonia/

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-41002562?SThisFB

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Kiwi's are small , but they have HUGE eggs.

Oddly enough though the Kiwi is more closely related to the Roc of Madagascar


The closest living relative to the Roc is the Tinamou of South America

Which happens to be the bird that makes the eerie sounds at the very beginning of Jurassic Park, as well as the one that lays some of the most colorful eggs in the world.

Dodo stories are always sad
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/04/180421180509.htm

Until now, the title of largest bird of all times was usually given to either Dromornis or Aepyornis (the latter being the famed "elephant bird" of Madagascar). Now it is announced that some specimens believed to be Aepyornis are actually from an even larger kind of elephant bird, named Vorombe titan, which would've weighed up to 800 kg- that is, as heavy as a Sumatran rhinoceros.

https://www.livescience.com/63675-worlds-largest-bird-is-vorombe-titan.html