Okay 4chan I need all the scientists, biologist, archaeologists,

Not gonna happen.

People would rather throw money at pitbulls and pot, no one cares about this stuff they are just waiting on their welfare check to come in the mail.

Too many shitty people in this world with no priorities.

>>2447112
you're asking an engineering question. you basically need to design submarines that can stay underwater for weeks while being highly maneuverable (so no bulky military subs) with the capacity to dig and secure fossils. Basically someone needs to make deep sea exploration much easier and accessible sort of like what musk and spacex is trying to do for space exploration/travel.

>>2447112

You make a series of incorrect assertions.
Marine life fossilises more readily than any other, so the marine fossil record is better known than any other.
The fossils found in your back yard may well have died on the floor of a deep sea millions of years ago - tectonic uplift does the rest.
Oceanic life is a little less well known, but aside from deep-sea specialists, most oceanic life finds its way into continental shelf deposition zones, so is far from unknown. Whale fossils - some of very large species are well-known, for example.
Deep-sea specialists tend to be rather archaic groups that have retreated there due to evolutionary competition, so their ancestors are often well-known in the fossil record.
The geology of ocean floors is actually geologically young since most oceans are the result of tectonic plate spreading, there is comparatively little sediment due to distance from sediment sources, so sea floor geology is mainly igneous with a thin veneer of youngish sediment. Oceanic crust is also pretty thin compared with continental crust.
There are known limits to organism size in different environments that are unlikely to have been *significantly* surpassed by as yet undiscovered forms.
HTHs

>>2447133
You are limiting your self and false, depends on where you live would then it be a fossil in your backyard which once was in an ocean...Which you are most likely referring to Asia and India collision! Also. I think you are wrong in your assertion that I'm saying oceanic fossils are less kept preserved/condition. What I'm saying is that less is known about the oceanic fossils compared to the ones of land!

>>2447145

What you're saying - "English is very much not my first language."

What you appeared to be saying in your OP *won't* happen - not because of logistical difficulties - but because you are wrong in every point you make.

But feel free to fantasise, I only have 21 years as a geologist and palaeontologist who's set foot on every continent except Antarctica (goddamit!) under my belt, so what would I know?

>>2447151
Credentials please

>>2447180
Lol. OP, your idea is shitty. Just deal with it. Where is your dumbass certification? Can I see it?

>>2447180
Just curious, but how can anon show credentials without doxing themselves?

>>2447189

OP is an idiot, with the persistence typical of the breed! Naturally I can't prove my assertion via an imageboard, but not sure what my motivation would be to lie - hardly the most prestigious job imaginable, and I've in any case been out of employment in that role since 2013!

>>2447151
Are you the anon who used to make dinosaur threads until you were asked too many times what a dinosaur vagina looked like?

Or maybe you still do I haven't lurked /an/ regularly in years.

There are no massive creatures, water has very low oxygen carrying levels

Why do you think our biggest ocean animals are air breathing whales? Mammals didn't come prevalent till recently too

>>2447255
Swiss get pretty big desu

>>2447244

God no, after 21 years of it, I prefer to fap to traps on /b/ or wind-up stancefags on /o/. I mainly come on here to troll bugguy about the whole fucking fleet of outdoor cats I have...

Sadly, no-one knows what dinosaur copulatory mechanisms were like - probably an awful lot of shapes and sizes of bird-like cloacas I'd imagine.

>>2447283
>>2447151
Nothing is worse than a faggot who needs to Larp in a shit thread

Probably the same shit we get from other fossil beds.

And like those, there is most likely things we are missing. Not everything fossilized. Maybe some species we don't know of is under the ocean but who the fuck is going to spend money on something so inaccessible? And for what? Just to find an extinct species of new starfish or shark? Even if you pulled out a complete, giant fossil of an undiscovered marine reptile it's not going to cover your losses.

File: Butthurt_intense-butthurt.png (161KB, 462x431px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 462x431px

>>2447288

Hello OP

>Truth is we have very little data on oceanic fauna from any other time period
well that's wrong
>finding the fossil of a prehistoric land dweller is far easier than finding the fossil of an ancient reptile that lived on the Atlantic
no, no it's not
>Finding a bone in your back yard after digging maybe 10ft is not the same as finding a bone 10,000ft under the atlantic ocean, and after digging maybe 100ft of sedimentary sand. The latter just won't happen.
thank god all the work has been done for us
>Those ancient sea's were not that deep, and you don't find blue whales in shallow sea's.
they were and you most certainly do
>Imagine the possibilities of MASSIVE fossils and "crazy/bizarre" creatures that may have once existed!
the ocean is not the place to look for them
>INPUT!
you're retarded

>>2447300

I liked that OP was at least using his imagination a little, just a shame he didn't also use his ears and brain. A stoner, I'd guess.

>>2447112
>Truth is we have very little data on oceanic fauna from any other time period; finding the fossil of a prehistoric land dweller is far easier than finding the fossil of an ancient reptile that lived on the Atlantic because of logistics.

Actually the field of paleontology and the realization that large land areas had been in times past submerged were born from the abundance of remnants of marine life that one could see on mountains

That doesn't mean that there couldn't be huge discoveries to be made beneath the current sea floor, which is essentially uncharted territory for paleontologists.

And the further from land regions we get, the more likely a search may result in undreamed fauna/flora.

File: 1468397945944s.jpg (4KB, 124x102px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 124x102px

>>2448514

*PLEASE* stop being a moron and go back and read what's already been written on this topic: oceanic floors have very little sedimentation, so slow is it, that organic material falling to the ocean floor isn't buried fast enough to be preserved - it decays and is scavenged, bones and all. There are entire faunas which have evolved to do just this!

There's no question that new discoveries remain to be found in more conventional rocks (though those are likely to be theme-and-variation upon what we already know), just not in mid-ocean regions - even if they were accessible.

Your fantasy ocean-floor mega-beasts don't exist, never have existed, never will.

Now fuck-off to /x/ where your simpleton imaginings belong.

>>2447283
As far as I am aware we only have one example of a dinosaur cloaca, unforntuately it's hard to find any discussion about that fossil outside just the pigments of the preserved skin. Really an amazing fossil

>>2447112
>sea's
Oh I see it's just another moron thread