-
x

Meet New Friends!

Recommended friends are based on your interests. Make sure they are up to date.

Friends
Kidzworld Logo

Animals of the Ice Age

If you think you winter walk to school is cold, just imagine what it was like living in an ice age! During an ice age, sheets of ice could cover most of North America, Europe and Asia and temperatures plummet. You might think that nothing could survive that type of weather, but you'd be wrong. Take a look at just a few of the animals that lived through an ice age!

Saber-toothed Tiger

The Saber-toothed tiger, or smilodon, weighed about 450 lbs (200 kg) and had 7 inch (17 cm) fangs. They lived in North and South America and were one of many types of saber-toothed cats that roamed the planet. The Saber-toothed tiger had short legs, a bobbed tail and lived in shrubby grasslands. It was a carnivore and may have preyed upon animals as large as mastodons!

Sabertooth TigerSabertooth Tiger

Mastodon

The mastodon may have looked like a wooly mammoth but it was a completely separate creature. This relative of the modern elephant first appeared about four million years ago and became extinct about 10,000 years ago. The mastodon was most common in the ice age spruce forests of the eastern United States. They had cone-shaped teeth that they used for eating leaves off the tops of trees. They also had huge tusks that could grow to be up to 16 feet (5 m) in length!

MastodonMastodon

Woolly Mammoth

The woolly mammoth had a thick undercoat that the mastodon didn't have and its tusks were curved, unlike the straight tusks of the look-a-like mastodon. It lived in North America, Northern Europe and Siberia and lived on grasses, shrubs and other low-lying plant life. While most woolly mammoths became extinct 12,000 years ago, some managed to survive on Wrangel Island, a Russian island in the Arctic Ocean, up to about 4,000 years ago.

Woolly MammothWoolly Mammoth

Megatherium

This elephant-sized ground sloth must have been a sight to behold! It was one of the largest mammals to walk the earth and walked mostly on its hind legs. The megatherium had such long claws that it couldn't put its feet flat on the ground, and instead had to walk on the sides of its feet to move around. This relative of the modern tree sloth was thought to have only lived in South America but recent evidence shows it probably lived in North America as well.

MegatheriumMegatherium

Cave Lion

At about 25 percent bigger than today's lion, this was not a cat to mess with. The cave lion (AKA the European or Eurasian cave lion) was one of the largest cats of all time. A male could way up to 700 lbs (320 kg) and a female could way up to 385 lbs (175 kg). Some of the largest fossils found of the cave lion were nearly 12 feet (3.5 m) long! The first cave lions walked the earth about 300,000 years ago and disappeared nearly 10,000 years ago - though there are signs that some survived up to 2,000 years ago. They lived across Europe and Asia, from the UK all the way to the farthest reaches of Kazakhstan.

Cave LionCave Lion
Related Stories:

 

2 Comments

Related Stories

Micro_newspecies-micro
Each year, scientists and researchers discover new species of animals from all over the world. Ge...
Micro_zoo-micro
There's an ongoing controversy about zoos out there; are they places where animals are just put o...
Micro_ice-age-continental-micro
Kidzworld checks out some fave prehistoric critters in “Ice Age: Continental Drift”!
Micro_ice-age-dawn-dino-micro
Let the prehistoric party continue! Manny, Sid, Scrat and Ellie are back for more fun in Ice Age:...
Micro_lion-micro
Lions and tigers and bears… well, just lions for now! Lean all about Lions on Kidzworld!
The Ice Age 2 movie is coming to theaters but you can download the Ice Age 2 video game for free ...
Ice-age-poll

What's Your Favorite Ice Age Animal?

  • Manny the mammoth
  • Sid the sloth
  • Crash and Eddie the possums
  • Scrat the little quiet squirrel

Random In The Forums

-Gwen9--
-Gwen9-- posted in Debating:
"AlphaT" wrote: "donteatcarrots" wrote:​no. it's mainly the people who are given the guns that need to be properly checked. the guy who killed 49 people in orlando had mental health problems and trouble with the fbi was still given a gun. this doesn't make sense at all to me. yeah he probably has knives and stuff at home which could do just as much harm- so is the gun necessary in the first place? No one is given a gun. A person has to acquire a permit, and then has to buy a gun for themselves.  Okay, yes, mental health is an obvious issue. But it needs to be for specific mental health problems. It can't be just because someone has a mental illness, because many mental illnesses won't effect the operation and use of a gun, or make it more likely for a person to hurt someone else with a gun. I support background checks which would include mental health history, but only if it's done right. Similarly, the guy who killed 49 people in Orlando was taken off the FBI watchlist. This tells me that there are flaws with the way that the watchlist is currently being used. Once that system is redone, then we can restrict those on it from buying firearms. But at its' current success rate? Not a chance.  And it's not about what's necessary...well to an extent it is, but hear me out. Weapons are used for self defense. No matter how many gun laws you have, criminals will still use firearms in their crimes. Citizens require at least an equal amount of protection that criminals use to break the law.  In other words, if you were to be the victim of gun violence, would you rather have with you a knife or a gun? Would you honestly bring a knife to a gun fight?  First of all, I agree with you. Mental health is definitely an issue! But together these issues can be addressed!!!! And as I said earlier, we can control our weapons. The government can create a harder way to get a gun or any weapon. Look at criminal records!!!! Even before getting a permit, or a license, CHECK THE RECORDS!!! This will help prevent these mass shootings.
reply about 2 hours
Hoellu
Hoellu posted in Debating:
"-Gwen9--" wrote:The second amendmant in the United States Constitution is the right to bare arms. If they take away our weapons, then they take away the second amendmant. The amendmant is there for a reason. Weapons are useful for protection. Protection is going to keep us alive. The human population, as a nation, and as a world! If we take away our weapons now we are all dead! We don't want that.  Now, killing 50 people in the Orlando shooting. That is just not right at all. It was not the gun's fault, it was the person. Same thing with the death of Christina Grimmie. Now, I personally believe that we should not take guns away, but we should find a harder process into buying a gun or some other weapon, and we should be trained properly! Look at people's criminal records, look at their other records. I don't care! As long as we still have protection, but less mass shootings! Omg, so true.
reply about 2 hours
AdeleQxeen
AdeleQxeen posted in Electronics:
I have one. I got it for my birthday last year, it's a Samsung Core Prime.
reply about 2 hours
Hoellu
Hoellu posted in Debating:
If there are polices, why are there weapons for almost anyone?Or at least they should have an special permission.
reply about 2 hours
AlphaT
AlphaT posted in Debating:
"donteatcarrots" wrote:​no. it's mainly the people who are given the guns that need to be properly checked. the guy who killed 49 people in orlando had mental health problems and trouble with the fbi was still given a gun. this doesn't make sense at all to me. yeah he probably has knives and stuff at home which could do just as much harm- so is the gun necessary in the first place? No one is given a gun. A person has to acquire a permit, and then has to buy a gun for themselves.  Okay, yes, mental health is an obvious issue. But it needs to be for specific mental health problems. It can't be just because someone has a mental illness, because many mental illnesses won't effect the operation and use of a gun, or make it more likely for a person to hurt someone else with a gun. I support background checks which would include mental health history, but only if it's done right. Similarly, the guy who killed 49 people in Orlando was taken off the FBI watchlist. This tells me that there are flaws with the way that the watchlist is currently being used. Once that system is redone, then we can restrict those on it from buying firearms. But at its' current success rate? Not a chance.  And it's not about what's necessary...well to an extent it is, but hear me out. Weapons are used for self defense. No matter how many gun laws you have, criminals will still use firearms in their crimes. Citizens require at least an equal amount of protection that criminals use to break the law.  In other words, if you were to be the victim of gun violence, would you rather have with you a knife or a gun? Would you honestly bring a knife to a gun fight? 
reply about 2 hours