Posted on 11/08/2015 2:32:15 PM PST by BenLurkin
The species would have looked similar to modern rats but ranged in size from about 1.5 kilograms to five kilograms.
Researcher Julien Louys said the creatures were probably herbivores and became extinct suddenly about 1,000 years ago.
He said they were the largest known rats to have ever existed and acknowledged some people thought they sounded terrifying.
"Most people seem to think that," Dr Louys said.
"But I think they would have been, well not cute, but certainly they would have been fascinating to see them in the flesh."
He said it appeared the rats were a popular meal for early humans.
"Everything from the very earliest deposits, which were around about 46,000 years old all the way up to about 1,000 years ago, we find them in deposits and there's evidence of chewing marks," Dr Louys said.
"A lot of the remains are burnt as well so they're obviously cooking them up in the fires and eating them.
"They must have been delicious because everywhere we go there are giant rats to be found."
(Excerpt) Read more at abc.net.au ...
When did kilograms become a measure of size?
They were shrews.
Maybe extinction isn’t so bad.
Yes, I noticed that — but, it’s not what was in the headline or lede. This is just a pet peeve of mine, so I probably tend to over-react. Still ...
Why are “football fields” a unit of measurement in the media; when we already have acres or hectares? (BTW, when used as a unit of measurement, does the “football field” include the end zones? Canadian football fields are about 50% bigger than American fields — how is a Canadian supposed to know which “unit” of area is being reported?) Why are larger areas said to be so many “Rhode Islands” (the comparable Canadian unit is “Prince Edward Islands”), rather than sq. miles or kilometers? Because we’re all too dumb to understand standard units of weights and measures.
At least football fields and states (or provinces) actually have standardized, fixed sizes — but, what is a “dog” as a unit of measurement? If you own a Great Dane, you would be disappointed to learn how small these ancient rats were in comparison.
I concede that these sorts of comparisons sometimes make some sense. For instance, the “Astronomical Unit” has actually become a standardized measure of great length. Of course, none of us have ever travelled between the Sun and the Earth; so we can’t exactly relate intuitively to an AU any better than “miles”, or “light minutes”.
Clearly they’ve never been to New York City.
Correction — the weight in kg was in the lede.
WILLARD is the one I took my date, now my wife of 44 years, to see.
Bowman Twin. Tulsa OK.
***A relative of the great white rat of Sumatra?***
Nah, those were killed off by the SUMATRAN VAMPIRE RATS.
Largest? The capybara, the largest living rodent in the world, weighs 35 to 66 kg and is about 25 inches tall and 53 inches long.
Maybe that’s what Reiner was going for but those were the fakiest looking critters I’ve seen in a movie since the 50’s
Ernest Borgnine was it that one, playing to type -in your face. Sort of like if Donald Trump was the district manager visiting a White Castle restaurant.
Woops! I meant the SUMATRAN RAT-MONKEY!
well the info was in the 1st line of the excerpt. I think the headline was fine.
Please see my #26.
Conceivable. :-)
Hah, I saw them that big in Vietnam
I thought they were big dogs at first but the tails were longer.
Came up to my knee at least.
Sometimes you’d see them dragging
Parts of well,lets just say meat.
And they’re dead, which means they all vote democrat.
yeah well in prehistoric times they had armadillo’s that were as large as V.W. bugs.
Ya think todays version tear your yard up, how about dealing with these
Thanks BenLurkin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.