Quote:
Originally Posted by
Nosu3 
#2 is about 2" long for reference. he said it was unlikely because the tooth doesn't have the jagged sides.
That's about what I thought. Your paleontology Guy apparently is not aware that sharks have different shaped teeth in various parts of their mouth, that fossils, especially aquatic ones, are prone to being smoothed over time, and that mako teeth are much smaller than two of the three teeth you have. Meg teeth aren't always serrated, sometimes partially, and frequently only serrated above the tip... which is the only surface you have to look at. Try someone else. Edit: So I just did a little research, and it turns out that I'm mistaken (surprise!). There was indeed an evolutionary transitional shark sometimes called the "Giant Mako" or
Isurus hastalis that fits the tooth profile and size of your fossils. There is some common thinking is that this shark was an evolutionary lead-in to the modern day Great White, which makes sense because those teeth are not
modern-day-Mako shaped, and they clearly have the Carcharodon profile. The size of those teeth is concurrent with the
Isurus hastalis, as well as the Megalodon, but those teeth are known specifically for having non serrated crowns. IMO the term is something of a misnomer because the shark in question's teeth bear little to no resemblance to any modern Mako. (and the fossil record on sharks is based 99.99% on teeth alone) I guess we learn something new every day.
Probably the same people who think the world was created 6000 years ago, it took exactly seven days to create, and that dinosaurs either coexisted with man, or are a satanic hoax to discredit God.
