tree pede

[Venom]

Did some math on that tree pede. If the branch it's on is 5" wide, then the centipede is 19.3" long, not including the final pair of legs. And that is simply amazing.

 

[greensleeves]

Originally posted by Venom
Did some math on that tree pede. If the branch it's on is 5" wide, then the centipede is 19.3" long, not including the final pair of legs. And that is simply amazing.

Wow, that just blows me away... And it looks likely that the branch could be 5".

Greensleeves

 

[danread]

I think that calculation is well off. If you look at the scale of the second photo, i reckon thats not all that far off life-sized. Which would make the pede approximately 8" or 9", a big pede, but in no way the giant you've just described

Cheers,

Dan.

 

[Venom]

The picture cuts out well before the end of the pede. Also, look at the branch, and the proportion of the leaves to the branch. It has to be a sizeable branch to show bark crackling, and also, if those leaves are more than 1" , then the branch must be proportionately larger. I measured the branch at 3.5 cm, as it appears on my screen. It is reasonable that the branch is approximately 5" in diameter. I then measured the visual length of the centipede 9 how long it is, exactly as my screen shows it - 15cm. ( I beleive I measured it at 15cm, going by memory here. ) Then I used a proportion setup to solve for the actual length of the centipede.

3.5 / 5 = 15 / x

solve the proportion for x, and you get 19.28"

 

[Phillip]

For starters a branch or tree for that matter doesn't have to be any set size for bark to crack that way. Some trees just do that regardless of size. Secondly a 19.28 inch pede would be far larger than anything seen so far and is a bit hard to believe. I could be mistaken but the largest have ever heard accounts of would be in the 15 inch at best range.

Phil

 

[danread]

No, i still think that the calculation is well off the mark. Look at the second photo, and look at the size of the smaller side branches coming off the main trunk. It gives you an idea that the second photo is approximately 1:1 scale, which would make the pede a maximum of 12", but more than likely less.

Dan.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

That tree branch is obviously (to me) a good 4 to 5 inches in diameter and it wouldn't surprise me at all if that pede were at least 15 inches long from tip of tail to the head, possibly even nearly 20 inches long. Sorry if this was already mentioned but what was the origin of this photo, etc.? Keep in mind that just because we don't see something like this in the hobby doesn't mean it does not exist in the wild.

Peace,

Paul

 

[pediepablo]

My guess would be that the branch is no more than three inches in diameter... as for the centipede? 10 inches... 12 tops. I definitely wouldn't mind owning one that big.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

If the pede is an inch thick, then the tree branch is around four inches thick below the area of the knot (on the left side). Also, if the pede is an inch thick, it's at least 12 inches long, not counting it's back legs.

Peace,

Paul

 

[Wade]

There is no way to reliably estimate how big around that branch is, especially since we haven't even determined what type of tree it is.

Without an object of known size for comparison, that pede could be anywhere from 5" to three feet!

Admittedly, the shape of the animal indicates a big pede, 8-12 inches wouldn't be surprising.

Wade

 

[Steven]

let's just say,.... it's a big <stinker>,....

hope you'll have taken a good look at the picture cause i was asked to remove it,.... it's not mine and i can't remember from wich site i've found the picture. so i can't give any credits for it either,....

i guess it's the right thing to do,... so any moderator should take his responsibility and remove the pictures i've posted.

i'll do my best to track down the owner of this pictures so i can legally post it again for your viewing pleasures



take care

 

[Phillip]

Understanding of course that everything in existance hasn't made it into the hobby I still feel that if one of these monster 20 inch pedes were indeed out there some mention of it would have been made. As many folks as there are stomping around through the jungles studying animals and such it's hard to believe none have turned up so far.

Phil

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Originally posted by Phillip
Understanding of course that everything in existance hasn't made it into the hobby I still feel that if one of these monster 20 inch pedes were indeed out there some mention of it would have been made. As many folks as there are stomping around through the jungles studying animals and such it's hard to believe none have turned up so far.

Phil

Dude, do you realize how much unexplored jungle and other territory there is out there? How many pieces of bark and leaf litter, how many stones, how many rotten logs and regions of jungle/forest that have not been stepped upon for God knows how long? There may be a lot of deforestation going on but there are HUGE plots of unexplored jungles and rainforest out there, thank God.

Obviously none have turned up so far that are 20 inches, however, that doesn't mean they aren't out there, and it doesn't mean they are, either. It just means it's a possibility. There use to be centipedes way bigger than that, so it's not THAT much of a stretch to imagine there might be some undiscovered VERY large pedes out there.

 

[Phillip]

Yes ( dude ) I do realize that there is much unexplored country out there. I also realize that some folks believe in Bigfoot and Nessie. While the possibility does exist I would have to rate it as very slim. Another thing to factor in is the ol eyes make it bigger syndrome that humans are so bad about. If you only knew how many times I have had folks tell me to come get this monster 8 foot snake out of their garage, garden, backyard, etc. only to come upon some snake that hits 4 feet at best. Same way with all the 12 inch spiders that mysteriously no one can ever provide a picture of. Bottom line human eyes tend to eggagerate size.

Phil

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Originally posted by Phillip
Yes ( dude ) I do realize that there is much unexplored country out there. I also realize that some folks believe in Bigfoot and Nessie. While the possibility does exist I would have to rate it as very slim. Another thing to factor in is the ol eyes make it bigger syndrome that humans are so bad about. If you only knew how many times I have had folks tell me to come get this monster 8 foot snake out of their garage, garden, backyard, etc. only to come upon some snake that hits 4 feet at best. Same way with all the 12 inch spiders that mysteriously no one can ever provide a picture of. Bottom line human eyes tend to eggagerate size.

Phil

That's right, I'm a dude, dude. You ARE a dude, right? Phil isn't short for Phillipina is it? I would be terribly embarrassed if it is!

Belief in Bigfoot and Nessie in particular have nothing to do with a 15 or 20 inch pede. Poor comparison. Apples and oranges.

Did you know they have found fossilized remains of centipede like creatures with 5 foot long legs? They've also found fossils of centipede-like creatures that were five feet long and a foot wide!

I agree that humans have a tendency to exagerrate in more ways than just through their vision. I still don't see what this has to do with the possibility of a gargantuan pede out there as yet undiscovered. There are already species of pede that grow to 25". Namely, Scolopendra galapagoensis. So to me a 15 or 20 inche pede isn't all that much of a "Bigfoot" or "Nessie."

Peace,


Paul

 

[Phillip]

Yes I would be considered a dude if folks still used the term I guess some still do.

And when there is documented proof of the fabled 25 inch scolopendra I will believe it. Until then it is only speculation and man made fable.

Phil

 

[Steven]

is there any other picture to be found of a Scolopendra galapagoensis besides the one who's been posted here several times? (the one in the pineapple-tree and with the banded leggs?) why does everybody just takes this picture to be def. a galapogoenis scolopendra?

concerning the picture with the lizard:
is that a picture taken at the galopos islands?
that lizard is a Leiocephalus,... a species that doesn't lives at the galopos, so can anybody say with 100% proof that that picture was taken at the galopos? if so,... maybe scolopendra galapogoensis doesn't have those banded leggs,....

just a few things that make me confused.

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Originally posted by Phillip
Yes I would be considered a dude if folks still used the term I guess some still do.

And when there is documented proof of the fabled 25 inch scolopendra I will believe it. Until then it is only speculation and man made fable.

Phil

Hi Phil,

Whether anyone uses the word or not, it IS in the dictionary. And I don't see "archaic" anywhere in the definition. Here's the def:

dude
PRONUNCIATION: AUDIO: dd, dyd KEY
NOUN: 1. Informal An Easterner or city person who vacations on a ranch in the West.
2. Informal A man who is very fancy or sharp in dress and demeanor.
3. Slang a. A man; a fellow. b. dudes Persons of either sex.
TRANSITIVE VERB: Inflected forms: dud·ed, dud·ing, dudes
Slang To dress elaborately or flamboyantly: got all duded up for the show.
INTERJECTION: Slang Used to express approval, satisfaction, or congratulations.
ETYMOLOGY: Origin unknown.
OUR LIVING LANGUAGE: Cowboys and the Wild West are indelibly set in the minds of many as typical of America—an association borne out by several common Modern English words that originated in the speech of the 19th-century western United States. One is dude, now perhaps most familiar as a slang term with a wide range of uses (including use as an all-purpose interjection for expressing approval: “Dude!”). Originally it was applied to fancy-dressed city folk who went out west on vacation. In this usage it first appears in the 1870s. The origin of the word is not known, but a number of other cowboy terms were borrowed by early settlers from American Spanish. These include buckaroo, corral, lasso, mustang, ranch, rodeo, and stampede. Buckaroo, interestingly, is an example of a word borrowed twice: it is an Americanized form of Spanish vaquero, which also made it into English as vaquero, a cowboy.

I was using it in the category of 3a.

Anywho, you are basically calling the scientist who reported the finding a liar. That's fine by me. I personally have no reason to doubt that the guy did see one that size.

S. gigantea has been known to reach 16 1/2" as well.

While S. galapagoensis is more commonly known to reach the size of S. gigantea and larger (15"-17" long and 2" wide), specimens much larger have been reported. Amongst the diet of these monsters is ground dwelling birds! S. galapagoensis occurs along the western/Pacific Coast of South America from Ecuador to southern Peru, in the Galapagos Islands, and Cocos Island.

While it's a "rumor" that it reaches this size, Todd Gearheart claims that the report is an authentic one.

Anyway, considering there are pedes that are known to reach 17 inches, a 15 to 20 inch pede does NOT surprise me. Would be an awesome pet!

Peace,

Paul

 

[phoenixxavierre]

Originally posted by gongyles
is there any other picture to be found of a Scolopendra galapagoensis besides the one who's been posted here several times? (the one in the pineapple-tree and with the banded leggs?) why does everybody just takes this picture to be def. a galapogoenis scolopendra?

concerning the picture with the lizard:
is that a picture taken at the galopos islands?
that lizard is a Leiocephalus,... a species that doesn't lives at the galopos, so can anybody say with 100% proof that that picture was taken at the galopos? if so,... maybe scolopendra galapogoensis doesn't have those banded leggs,....

just a few things that make me confused.

The picture was taken by Ian McCutcheon. From what I understand it WAS taken on the Galapagos Islands. S. galapagoensis is found in other areas aside from the Galapagos Islands.

I've also seen it spelled Scolopendra galapagensis.

Best wishes,

Paul

 

[Phillip]

Never called anyone a liar best as I remember here. I merely pointed out that over eggageration is a common trend. I also don't recall ever seeing a pic of one alive or dead next to any sort of measuring device whatsoever and until I do sorry but a guesstimate is not a measurement.

Phil