Mummified Baby Mammoth Preserved in Ice | Titans of the Ice Age | Nature Bites

No one is entirely sure why the last of the world's woolly mammoths went extinct - but we know the ice age played a big part. What can scientists learn from this almost perfectly preserved baby woolly mammoth, encased in ice for thousands of years?
From "Titans of the Ice Age 3D": Titans of the Ice Age transports viewers to the beautiful and otherworldly frozen landscapes of North America, Europe and Asia ten thousand years before modern civilization. Dazzling computer-generated imagery brings this mysterious era to life-from saber-toothed cats and giant sloths to the iconic mammoths, giants both feared and hunted by prehistoric humans. The magic of the giant screen reveals the harsh and beautiful kingdom of these titans: an ancient world of ice, the dawn of our ancestors, a time when humans fought for survival alongside majestic woolly beasts.
Welcome to Nature Bites the OFFICIAL Nature Hub Channel. Bringing you closer to the remarkable animals that inhabit our natural world.
Subscribe for your nature fix here! - / @naturebites
#WoollyMammoth #IceAge #IceAge3D

[@tatsusama3192]

Glad to hear several voices from Skyrim are getting documentary work

[@georgiosvavliaras1066]

Lmaooo

[@autumnishotterthansummer]

Is this the guy in vvardenfell?

[@Clums_xx]

tell me ur not serious

[@tatsusama3192]

@@Clums_xx ?

[@ElysetheEevee]

This started out great, then it turned into a self-felatting piece of...media. Humans, we think way too much of ourselves at times. There is a time for being proud of our talents, but not at the expense of others. We most definitely survived the Ice Age in ADDITION to our minds, with the "help" of other animals. Domesticated animals didn't just pop into existence out of nowhere, either.

[@punk_floyd_8123]

i'm watching this, and listening to his voice, and i'm waiting for him to ask me to cast a ward spell xD

[@khurramkhurshed9427]

Interesting

[@CarlosBraga-jl2qs]

😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😊😮😮😮

[@-sanatanlogy2274]

wooooo

[@aldzcant1736]

o7

[@vandacarneiro980]

🤗🤗🤗

[@vandacarneiro980]

😲😲

[@vandacarneiro980]

🤠🤠🤠🤠🤠🤠🤠🤠

[@vandacarneiro980]

😂😂😂😂

[@vandacarneiro980]

🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡🫡😦

[@pedrocampos691]

Yeeeeeeees.

[@Spencerlayne]

I think these are just elephants. And today's elephants just lost their hair because it got warmer

[@travelinman70]

It's because you speak before thinking, why you make comments like this. unless you have PhD's you're not disclosing?

[@Spencerlayne]

@@travelinman70 aha 😂 just my opinion bro. I think 10,000 years is long enough to lose hair in the animal kingdom. I mean there were no white people 10,000 years ago. If it's plausible to lose all pigmentation, then it's plausible to lose all hair. Both to do with climate. 🤔😏😂

[@anthonyrodgers6613]

Sounds plausible now prove it..

[@pedrocampos691]

Uh ooooooooooook.

[@yowtfputthemaskbackon9202]

spencer layne. it is a very interesting thought, and on a very simple basis, yes, the hair was to allow them to live in colder climate, so you are correct in that regard, however, these are still a different group of animals. finds of them are relatively common so we can pretty much say with confidence on where they lived and when. the last of them lived in eastern siberia around the time humans started using copper tools, and after that, no more remains of them are to be found, while african and indian elephants existed throughout all that time, but of course, in africa and india. they are certainly relatives of modern elephants, but not ancestors. so there was a time where both of them lived side by side, even if they never met. C Doe. a PhD is not a neccesity to think and theorize. improving ones knowledge can certainly improve ones ability in coming to good conclusions, but it is not a ticket of passage to basic thought processes, or the ability to voice them, even if incorrect. he also clearly thought before speaking, and even if incorrect, entirely dismissing that thought is dishonest and impolite. a phd would also not apologize for it, if he had not done so. Neil Deep. you should not simply believe scientists, but rather try to understand the subject matter yourself, if you mean to make a confident opinion about it. you may of course use their work to do so, as providing that work as a resource for study is, rather simply put, a part of their job. i think it is also highly judgmental to directly dismiss somone based on that persons faith, or what you assume to be their faith. find fault in their ideas, not their person. Anthony Rodgers, i would have to disagree to its plausibility, but i second your optimism in requesting him to find evidence for it.