The reporter did a good job of explaining how the view of extant salamanders as harmless, is very different than how these salamanders actually were. This was done by bringing in other experts to inform the readers about how fierce and vicious these animals really were. In addition, I think that the author portrayed how large and dominant M. algarvensis was by frequently comparing it to dinosaurs throughout the news article, and even mentioning how the mass extinction 201 million years that wiped out M. algarvensis was what allowed dinosaurs to become the new dominant species on earth. "It was as long as a small car and had hundreds of sharp teeth in its big flat head... It was the type of fierce predator that the very first dinosaurs had to put up with if they strayed too close to the water, long before the glory days of T. rex and Brachiosaurus" (paragraph 11). The report shows that there was no real bias when writing the article, other than the fact that modern salamanders and amphibians are not as gnarly, large, and fierce as they once were long ago. Nevertheless, it is quite impressive to realize that the current harmless, cute looking things that we catch in or around our ponds, were once animals that were as fierce and dangerous as alligators and crocodiles.
Link to News Article: Prehistoric super salamander was top predator, fossils suggest
-Bodi D. (4/6/15)
1 comment:
Not a salamander but a temnospondyl, which explains the large size and fearsome skull. While I get that the average reader might not appreciate the difference between a stem-amphibian and a salamander, I do wish that the reporter would have at least tried to explain the concept.
Post a Comment