By Jeremy A. Kaplan (FOXNews.com)
A submarine exploring the ocean's depths recently returned with an unexpected visitor: a crablike critter called Bathynomus giganteus (commonly known as giant isopod) that has left many readers startled and horrified.
This giant isopod (a crustacean related to shrimps and crabs) represents one of about nine species of large isopods in the genus Bathynomus. They are thought to be abundant in cold, deep waters of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans.
Photo of Bathynomus giganteus courtesy of NOAA Vents Program
In a posting to social bookmarking site Reddit, a deep-sea technician detailed finding the Bathynomus giganteus, asking the site's readers to help identify what exactly the bizarre-looking creature was.
The post reads, "I work for a Sub-sea Survey Company, recently this beast came up attached to one of our ROVs. It measures a wee bit over 2.5 feet head to tail, and we expect it latched onto the ROV at roughly 8,500 feet depth.
"Unfortunately, the e-mail that these pictures were attached to came from a contractor, and the ship he was operating from (and therefore location) is unknown, so I can't tell you what part of the Earth this beast was living."
The pictures reveal Bathynomus giganteus to be a giant isopod, a large crustacean that dwells in deep Atlantic and Pacific waters. This particular creature is a deep-sea scavenger that feeds on dead whales, fish and squid.
The underside of a male giant isopod.
Photo courtesy of NOAA/OER.
Scientists have long remarked on the massive scale of Bathynomus giganteus.
C.R. McClain, writing about Bathynomus giganteus on ScienceBlogs, explained one theory for the size, that "deep-sea gigantism, for all crustaceans, is a consequence of larger cells sizes obtained under cold temperatures," citing a research paper from 1996.
He also speculated that "in crustaceans, bathymetric gigantism may also in part reflect decreases in temperature leading to longer lifespans and thus larger sizes in indeterminate growers."
Bathynomus Giganteus Post Inspires Curiosity, Horror
Responses to the original post ranged from the curious to the horrified.
One reader notes the connection between Bathynomus giganteus and a more familiar household pest: "The giant isopod is related to the "woodlouse"--turns out this is the common bug that I grew up calling a "roly poly"
or pillbug. Neat!"
Others were more disgusted with Bathynomus giganteus. "I remember watching some documentary (Blue Planet maybe?) with a time lapse of these things swarming a whale carcass. it was horrifying," writes one
reader.
Another reader saw nothing but dinner in the flesh of Bathynomus giganteus, writing "It could be because I really like seafood, but those isopods look tasty. Land bugs = ew! Sea bugs = mm mmm good."
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Bathynomus Giganteus: Terrifying Sea Beast Hauled Up
Link to source: http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/blogs/news/chiefeditor/2010/03/bathynomus-giganteus-terrifying-sea-beast.html
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Tea party anyone?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20827815.100-tea-party-luring-us-into-adventures-in-irrationality.html
Tea Party luring US into adventures in irrationality
12 October 2010 by Chris Mooney
Magazine issue 2781. Subscribe and save
For similar stories, visit the Comment and Analysis Topic Guide
Compared with what may be in store for the US, George W. Bush's administration looks positively friendly to science, says Chris Mooney
THE Tea Party isn't nearly as entertaining as it ought to be. It is still unclear whether this particular brand of patriotic extremism is a passing fad or something more. Come the US mid-term elections on 2 November, those of us who care about science and rationality may not be laughing.
On the surface, the movement seems impelled by the economic pain Americans are feeling. But look more closely and it's hard to miss what historian Richard Hofstadter called the "paranoid style" in US politics, marked by "exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy". An essential strand of that is anti-intellectualism and disdain for science.
Nearly every Senate candidate with Tea Party backing rejects the established reality of human-caused global warming, usually with gusto. "I absolutely do not believe in the science of man-caused climate change. It's not proved by any stretch of the imagination," Wisconsin candidate Ron Johnson has said. "I think it's far more likely that it's just sunspot activity, or something just in the geological aeons of time."
The most notorious Tea Party candidate, Delaware's Christine O'Donnell, rejects evolution and opposes stem cell research and, more creatively, chimera research - which with typical cluelessness she thinks means growing human brains in mice.
There is great uncertainty over just how influential the Tea Party will be. It may actually damage the Republicans; the unelectable O'Donnell, for example, beat an eminently electable moderate to win her Senate nomination. Alternatively, the momentum and sense of outrage that it has generated may swing the mid-term elections decisively in the Republicans' favour.
If that happens, there are serious implications for the Obama administration's attempt to forge a reason-based and science-driven presidency. The president has pledged to "restore science to its rightful place" in government, and minus the greatest prize of all - comprehensive climate and energy legislation - he has largely succeeded. The administration is staffed with distinguished scientific leaders and advisers, and Obama himself embodies austere rationality and deliberativeness, almost to a fault.
Now, though, the Democrats face the prospect of losing significant ground in the mid-terms, thanks to the Tea Party and general Republican mobilisation. If that happens, many aspects of the administration's agenda - particularly on climate change - will face stiffer resistance. I'm not looking forward to a Republican-controlled House of Representatives holding hearings on "climategate".
What the Tea Party ultimately shows is that you can have, simultaneously, a scientific Washington and an unscientific America. And it suggests the nation's adventures with irrationality did not end with George W. Bush.
If anything, Bush was genteel and moderate in comparison with the Tea Party. As a defender of science and reason, it feels odd to say it, but when surveying the Tea Party, I almost miss him.
Chris Mooney is co-author of Unscientific America: How scientific illiteracy threatens our future (Basic)
Tea Party luring US into adventures in irrationality
12 October 2010 by Chris Mooney
Magazine issue 2781. Subscribe and save
For similar stories, visit the Comment and Analysis Topic Guide
Compared with what may be in store for the US, George W. Bush's administration looks positively friendly to science, says Chris Mooney
THE Tea Party isn't nearly as entertaining as it ought to be. It is still unclear whether this particular brand of patriotic extremism is a passing fad or something more. Come the US mid-term elections on 2 November, those of us who care about science and rationality may not be laughing.
On the surface, the movement seems impelled by the economic pain Americans are feeling. But look more closely and it's hard to miss what historian Richard Hofstadter called the "paranoid style" in US politics, marked by "exaggeration, suspiciousness, and conspiratorial fantasy". An essential strand of that is anti-intellectualism and disdain for science.
Nearly every Senate candidate with Tea Party backing rejects the established reality of human-caused global warming, usually with gusto. "I absolutely do not believe in the science of man-caused climate change. It's not proved by any stretch of the imagination," Wisconsin candidate Ron Johnson has said. "I think it's far more likely that it's just sunspot activity, or something just in the geological aeons of time."
The most notorious Tea Party candidate, Delaware's Christine O'Donnell, rejects evolution and opposes stem cell research and, more creatively, chimera research - which with typical cluelessness she thinks means growing human brains in mice.
There is great uncertainty over just how influential the Tea Party will be. It may actually damage the Republicans; the unelectable O'Donnell, for example, beat an eminently electable moderate to win her Senate nomination. Alternatively, the momentum and sense of outrage that it has generated may swing the mid-term elections decisively in the Republicans' favour.
If that happens, there are serious implications for the Obama administration's attempt to forge a reason-based and science-driven presidency. The president has pledged to "restore science to its rightful place" in government, and minus the greatest prize of all - comprehensive climate and energy legislation - he has largely succeeded. The administration is staffed with distinguished scientific leaders and advisers, and Obama himself embodies austere rationality and deliberativeness, almost to a fault.
Now, though, the Democrats face the prospect of losing significant ground in the mid-terms, thanks to the Tea Party and general Republican mobilisation. If that happens, many aspects of the administration's agenda - particularly on climate change - will face stiffer resistance. I'm not looking forward to a Republican-controlled House of Representatives holding hearings on "climategate".
What the Tea Party ultimately shows is that you can have, simultaneously, a scientific Washington and an unscientific America. And it suggests the nation's adventures with irrationality did not end with George W. Bush.
If anything, Bush was genteel and moderate in comparison with the Tea Party. As a defender of science and reason, it feels odd to say it, but when surveying the Tea Party, I almost miss him.
Chris Mooney is co-author of Unscientific America: How scientific illiteracy threatens our future (Basic)
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Lucky day Monday?
So I had a three day weekend...Saturday, Sunday and Monday! So much fun. I didn't think about work for three days. Usually, even on my weekends, I am thinking about work. Forty-eight hours just isn't enough time for me to divorce my self completely from this thing we call work. And my typical work week is 50 hours plus. So it takes up a considerable amount of my time, and my mental well-being.
So the age old question of "what did you do with your weekend?" Well, Saturday I ran some errands, took the dogs to the river, and basically took it easy after that. Sunday I played roller hockey for the first time in 2 or 3 years, afterwards went to brunch with a friend and chilled out and recuperated the rest of the day. On Monday I met my mom for lunch and then went to visit friends at my old workplace, as well as running a few errands. So it wasn't really an exciting weekend. There weren't any big parties, or mornings after. It was just a nice, relaxing, forget about the job type of weekend.
Monday morning came much sooner than expected. Five thirty A.M. has a way of doing that. So I got up, hopped into the shower and began my day in the usual way. I started to get dressed. I pulled on a pair of khakis that I had laid out-smelling fresh from the laundry. I pulled them on and zipped up. The zipper comes off in my hand. Well, okay. It happens. I pull off the trousers and grab a second pair. I pull them on and zip up. The zipper separates while I'm zipping. Two zippers both gone in one morning. What are the odds?
I'm livid at this point, yet still amused. So I look around for another pair of trousers. I can't find any clean ones, since I neglected to do laundry whilst on my holiday. I grab a pair of bluejeans (which I rarely wear since they do tend to grab my butt and they also bind in front just a bit.) I pull them on and begin the ginger process of zipping up. After this particular "pantsing" is successful I load up the pockets and begin my day again.
Now I truly know what Mondays feel like for everyone.
So the age old question of "what did you do with your weekend?" Well, Saturday I ran some errands, took the dogs to the river, and basically took it easy after that. Sunday I played roller hockey for the first time in 2 or 3 years, afterwards went to brunch with a friend and chilled out and recuperated the rest of the day. On Monday I met my mom for lunch and then went to visit friends at my old workplace, as well as running a few errands. So it wasn't really an exciting weekend. There weren't any big parties, or mornings after. It was just a nice, relaxing, forget about the job type of weekend.
Monday morning came much sooner than expected. Five thirty A.M. has a way of doing that. So I got up, hopped into the shower and began my day in the usual way. I started to get dressed. I pulled on a pair of khakis that I had laid out-smelling fresh from the laundry. I pulled them on and zipped up. The zipper comes off in my hand. Well, okay. It happens. I pull off the trousers and grab a second pair. I pull them on and zip up. The zipper separates while I'm zipping. Two zippers both gone in one morning. What are the odds?
I'm livid at this point, yet still amused. So I look around for another pair of trousers. I can't find any clean ones, since I neglected to do laundry whilst on my holiday. I grab a pair of bluejeans (which I rarely wear since they do tend to grab my butt and they also bind in front just a bit.) I pull them on and begin the ginger process of zipping up. After this particular "pantsing" is successful I load up the pockets and begin my day again.
Now I truly know what Mondays feel like for everyone.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Soaring to new heights
The other day I was at a stoplight. I noticed a bird, not a hawk, nor an eagle, nor a condor, but a lowly turkey buzzard. They are ugly creatures when viewed in close, but the majesty of flight makes them beautiful, as with any soaring bird.
This buzzard was low, maybe 30-40 feet off the ground and looking for a thermal current to propel it upwards. It would flap it's wings a moment then glide, change direction and flap again. When it finally found the thermal, the buzzard stopped flapping and started circling. Within seconds the buzzard went from 30-40 feet to over 100 feet and climbing.
It was truly a zen experience.
I think there is a lesson to learn in seeing that experience. Probably many lessons.
This buzzard was low, maybe 30-40 feet off the ground and looking for a thermal current to propel it upwards. It would flap it's wings a moment then glide, change direction and flap again. When it finally found the thermal, the buzzard stopped flapping and started circling. Within seconds the buzzard went from 30-40 feet to over 100 feet and climbing.
It was truly a zen experience.
I think there is a lesson to learn in seeing that experience. Probably many lessons.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Well...
I don't really have much to say lately. I'll tell you why...
I've been busy being a consumer. That's what I've been doing: consuming. I'm not creating, I'm doing just the opposite.
I've been busy being a consumer. That's what I've been doing: consuming. I'm not creating, I'm doing just the opposite.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)