Slashdot Mirror

Well according to this
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/07 01_040701_oceantrap.html
many deep sea fish die simply in the process of being captured and transported to the surface due to changes in "temperature and pressure"

and according to this
http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?art icle_id=218391869&cat=1_1
at least one known fish has an enzyme which simply doesn't work at aquarium pressures (so it dies)

And according to this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_sea_fish
"These fish live at depths of several kilometres with pressures of several hundred atmospheres; as a result they cannot survive at sea level and any attempts to keep them in captivity has led to their death."

So raising them in captivity is probably a bit more complicated than simply turning down the lights and attaching a small refrigeration unit.

The basic answer: no one knows.

People are responding to different flavors of this question all over this post, and seemingly nobody realizes that squid of all sorts of species make a daily migration to and from deep water. As night falls, the largest migration known to us occurs: deep water critters, like squid, come up to shallower water. Sonar goes nuts with the sheer volume of animals that do this.

Giant squid have been encountered alive at the surface. One of the best stories involves Newfoundland fisherman who rowed out to what they thought was a big mass of wreck material at the surface, only to have it heave a huge tentacle up. A kid chopped the thing off. The assumption has always been that architeuthis was at the surface dying when encountered this way, but you know, nobody knows.

The more recently discovered "colossal squid" -- seemingly an even nastier item than architeuthis -- has been encountered at the surface aggressively feeding on Patagonian toothfish. Whether it too spends time in deep water isn't known.

Man, judging from those pictures, those giant squids must be 20,000 leagues long!

This one is my favorite. The only thing more satisfying to my aquatic geekiness than a giant squid is a giant squid fighting a giant sperm whale.

Oh come on, you know you've run that fight in d20, or will soon.

Not much more than I expected...but WOW. I wonder, though, if the tentacle break was an evolutionary trait to survive entanglement, or simply a fragile body part yanked off by the force of the line or something.

If someone/something mods parent down, I'll kill 'em.

National Geographic has some piccys
here...

Here they are!

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/09 27_050927_giant_squid.html

Here's some more pictures. Or maybe the same ones. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/ph otogalleries/giant_squid/

National Geographic has more pictures:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/ph otogalleries/giant_squid/index.html

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/ph otogalleries/giant_squid/index.html

Here's one at National Geographic

Well remember, DNA/prints are things that a person has to be able to give to law enforcement in most cases (at least if law enforcement wants to match the data to a person/name for someone who has not been arrested yet, and if they have been arrested the prints are already on file). It's not like the gov't can take it without you even knowing (99% of the time). They can grab your DNA off of the glass of water that you used but if they don't already know you then they won't have a name to match up with the data. This link http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/iafis.htm details what the gov't has so far as of the last update to the site (it's mainly static content). Basically there are around 47 million subjects in the database right now. The majority of those are criminal but some are civil (gov't employees, contractors, subcontractors). Also, for anyone who knows someone who subscribes to National Geographic there was an article about the fingerprint database in a recent issue (although it wasn't that good I thought; focused too much on fingerprints when the Division handles more than just those) http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0505/featur e7/ Unfortunately the full article is not on the actual website however I read it a while back when it first came out (someone is borrowing it and I can't look again right now) and it details the current count of fingerprints but I don't remember what it was without looking. So in summary, the gov't has a lot of prints on file but only for those people who have submitted them (either b/c of a crime committed or because of a background check needed for a job).

I'm not sure if you're kidding or not, but dogs have been trained to find cancers, so it's not that out of reach.

yeh like the daily show with jon stewart's evolution schmevolution saying we are 98.5% genetically similar to chimps even though that was an old estimate as the chimp genome was not mapped until a while back and we now know we're about 96% similar. and this info was readily available BEFORE the show was made yet they still said 98.5% as FACT. ugh people need to stop messing with science's credibility like that.

turkeys aren't as cute as cats, so there would be less of an outcry. otoh, compare this new automotive fuel to the fact that they've already powered trains with mummified humans

does anyone know how to email the daily show with jon stewart? they keep saying chimps and humans are 98.5% similar when we now know through the mapping of the chimp genome that we're actually 96%. this isn't an argument against evolution(i know the hypersensitive evolutionary zealots will try to say this). using bad or outdated estimates is alway harmful to science's credibility which is why they should correct themselves

I don't pretend to be an authorative source for meteorology or global climates....

First off, I don't believe we have the power to change the ocean temp by that much over such a large area.

Second, if we did, I think it would have some major effects on the ocean currents we RELY on (100%) for our climates around the world... (quick google link)

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/06 27_050627_oceancurrent.html

Why do we keep trying to stifle nature? It's been making hurricanes for YEARS. People have been try ing to control nature for the longest time. Might it occur to people that this is just the way the world works?

If we succeed in stopping hurricanes, it's possible that we would bring upon ourselves an early Ice Age. And that seems like a bigger problem to "fix".

Well, the Russian K-19 nuclear tragedy actually happened, but it wasn't a meltdown. http://www.nationalgeographic.com/k19/

The Microcephalin, OK it's advantageous, but it was riding this huge expansion of homo sapiens into the rest of the world. It got a big boost by just coming along for the ride.

ASPM -- now that one's remarkable. Started somewhere between 14,100 and 500 years ago, most likely 5,800 years ago, and is now around 50% of Europe? I hear the British have 80% the same genetics as they did 12,000 years ago. So this variant has come to dominate, without a new group of people as a whole coming to dominate.

If 1 generation is 25 years, 5,800 years is 232 generations. There were around 10 million people total 5,800 years ago. 1.066^^232 = 3 million which would be 30% of the population at that time (or if the population increased uniformly, 30% of our population today). But that assumes carriers never marry carriers, which isn't close to true. People usually marry people from the same community. Any further expansion relies on the rare people who marry outside their community. So I'm guessing the relative reproductive advantage is quite a bit more than 6.6%, either that or it started longer than 5,800 years ago. If it started 14,100 years ago, when the total population was 3 million, the advantage just has to be way more than 2.5%.

500 years ago, with a population of 400 million, way more than 154%, no way. I'm guessing it's towards the 14,000 year end. But even so, these advantages are something big enough that people can see them without doing statistical studies. It's probably something you can tell about a person by looking at them or talking to them.

The chances of such a storm hitting New Orleans in any given year are slight, but the danger is growing. Climatologists predict that powerful storms may occur more frequently this century, while rising sea level from global warming is putting low-lying coasts at greater risk. "It's not if it will happen," says University of New Orleans geologist Shea Penland. "It's when."

Did you know that National Geographic described this very scenario in an article from October 2004?

A snippet from the intro of the article 'Gone with the Water:

" It was a broiling August afternoon in New Orleans, Louisiana, the Big Easy, the City That Care Forgot. Those who ventured outside moved as if they were swimming in tupelo honey. Those inside paid silent homage to the man who invented air-conditioning as they watched TV "storm teams" warn of a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. Nothing surprising there: Hurricanes in August are as much a part of life in this town as hangovers on Ash Wednesday.

But the next day the storm gathered steam and drew a bead on the city. As the whirling maelstrom approached the coast, more than a million people evacuated to higher ground. Some 200,000 remained, however--the car-less, the homeless, the aged and infirm, and those die-hard New Orleanians who look for any excuse to throw a party.

[...]

Thousands drowned in the murky brew that was soon contaminated by sewage and industrial waste. Thousands more who survived the flood later perished from dehydration and disease as they waited to be rescued. It took two months to pump the city dry, and by then the Big Easy was buried under a blanket of putrid sediment, a million people were homeless, and 50,000 were dead. It was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States.

When did this calamity happen? It hasn't--yet. But the doomsday scenario is not far-fetched. "

Very freaky!

Article can be found here: http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/featur e5/

My point was that there seems to be no math, measurements or any scientific evidence demonstrated on the "Electric Universe" web site linked to above.

There is quite a bit of evidence for the current astrophysical theories, at least the ones that are considered more than just speculation. Go through the back issues of Scientific American for a good resource on the latest state of science, for one:
http://www.sciamdigital.com/browse.cfm?sequencenam eCHAR=item2&methodnameCHAR=resource_getitembrowse& interfacenameCHAR=browse.cfm&ISSUEID_CHAR=376F2051 -382E-4520-92AE-30C33349E8E&ARTICLEID_CHAR=6793D8D 9-7868-4714-B18D-2FBCDBAAB57&sc=I100322

Math predicting something in the physical universe, which is then measured to match the theory to several decimal places, that's called science, and some of us find it is a big deal.

Real Science has the potential to protect us from a very dangerous universe. Science predicted the devastation in New Orleans, but politicians decided they knew better.

This was reported by several media sources, here's one for reference:
http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/featur e5/index.html?fs=www7.nationalgeographic.com

You go ahead and be happy, I'd prefer that scientists keep studying this place and warn me when they predict trouble is on the way.
It's not helpful having crooks selling junk science to clutter up the discussion.

Yes, I also read that past Presidents have been making budget cuts, etc.

http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/featur e5/

http://eurota.blogspot.com/2005/09/us-left-all-str aws-clutched-every.html

"Judge not..." And now for something completely different...Just thought I'd throw that in for...no reason really. Must've been something I ate. An "undigested bit of beef", perhaps I see more evidence every day that free will is indeed an illusion. "The mind is what the brain does" --Nat Geo, March 2005 issue. It's quoted elsewhere, but that's where I first saw it. So...who's going to be the first to use the "parasite" defense in a murder case? The "twinkie" defense might have some merit after all. Some people do react rather intensly to suger alergies. Maybe all that soda pop you drink could actually make you crazy. Watch out Coca-Cola. There could be a lawsuit coming.

where is it??

here is the NGC link

Wrong. Because of tax cuts, war costs, and various other huge expenditures sapped the funds. The Bush admin balked at costs and slashed them significantly.

What was it, like 1 out of 3 LA Guardsmen are in Iraq along with their high water vehicles?

Frankly, the feds should have been moving into place well before this disaster or at least putting personnel on standby and preparing to move in. But no, they didn't. Not for FOUR DAYS.

Or how about Bush's little quip that no one expected the levees to be breached? Say that to my October 2004 Nation Geographic where in the first couple paragraphs it's practically word for word what happened. http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0410/featur e5/

Yeah,I was reading this a little while ago and it's amazing how prophetic it is.

Some historical background - "everyone" knew the hurricane with New Orleans written on it was coming:

October 2004 National Geographic Article about New Orleans getting whacked ... btw this site has been Drudged as opposed to Slashdot'd

October 2001 Scientific American article about New Orleans getting whacked

Informed discussion over at Belmont Club Blog

An obscure blog describes the hurricane's impact on YOU in Anywhere USA before the hurrican ever made landfall:

Most people have never heard of Port Fourchon, but it is the nation's premiere oil and gas support services facility--and right now it lies within 12 miles of Hurricane Katrina's CAT-3 or CAT-4 bullseye. Over 600 platforms and 75% of the Gulf's deepwater projects lie within a 40-mile radius of Port Fourchon. Unfortunately, Port Fourchon is a Louisiana island. An island that is connected to the mainland by a single two lane bridge...an old, single two lane bridge. This bridge is the only means of getting cargo and supplies to the Port. More than 1,000 cargo trucks go across this bridge each day, delivering materials to the Port for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) drilling rigs. If there's no bridge, there're no drilling parts and supplies.

"I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees." George W. Bush - August 31, 2005

"The Federal Emergency Management Agency lists a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the most dire threats to the nation, up there with a large earthquake in California or a terrorist attack on New York City." Article from National Geographic predicting this exact scenario back in 2004

Now remember Bush appointed a real-estate attorney to head FEMA, instead of someone actually qualified. And this guy, Brown, just blamed the victims for their own problems for not leaving when warned. When in fact he ignores that many don't have resources to leave, many have relatives in critical care in hospitals, many are disabled and cannot leave, etc etc.

No, the government has MUCH to blame for this happening, the war in Iraq being one such diversion of funds and manpower to handle this properly. The other being the administration sitting on their asses until DAYS afterwards to do anything worthwhile.

The buck apparently stops at the president, so then YES, I do blame Bush as being responsibile for just about everything done wrong in the fact of this disaster that could be done.

I posted this NG article in the previous story so it's a dupe, but a damn eerie one.

Thousands drowned in the murky brew that was soon contaminated by sewage and industrial waste. Thousands more who survived the flood later perished from dehydration and disease as they waited to be rescued. It took two months to pump the city dry, and by then the Big Easy was buried under a blanket of putrid sediment, a million people were homeless, and 50,000 were dead. It was the worst natural disaster in the history of the United States.

When did this calamity happen? It hasn't--yet. But the doomsday scenario is not far-fetched. The Federal Emergency Management Agency lists a hurricane strike on New Orleans as one of the most dire threats to the nation, up there with a large earthquake in California or a terrorist attack on New York City. Even the Red Cross no longer opens hurricane shelters in the city, claiming the risk to its workers is too great.

Sorry - I'm not content for you to say the example is not a good one and pick something that more fits your point of view. ;) Either we will be able to resolve this using the the example given or else not at all, I think. After all, I only require one case of a decision based on logic and not emotion to prove my point. And I believe that this is one such case.

First to clear up a couple of things that you rephrased and which I would like returned to their original form (and hence meaning):

Your stored knowledge already knew which one was correct, so that was not a decision.

Nope - not stored knowledge, but as I originally stated, logical deduction. I used logic to make the leap between what I knew (a sphere is a three dimensional entity) to something I could deduce (therefore the radius will act on properties in three dimensions).

It would be much more clear. It is difficult when we start viewing calculation as decision.

You have likewise decided that what I did was "calculation" which you feel is something that falls under a different definition to decision. I would say calculation is following a set procedure to derive an answer. My insight might not have been deeply profound, but it was certainly not calculation - it was a leap of insight born of logic. I do not have the difficulty with this that you do. And, no offense, I believe that the reason it is difficult for you and not for me, is that you are trying to fit it into your pre-formed belief that emotion is the basis of all decision. Remove this belief and there is no difficulty. Try it. (That's not rhetorical, by the way).

Your point that emotion formed the basis of my choosing to put the correct answer as opposed to the wrong one, has two problems with it.

Firstly, the emotional desire to choose the right answer does not assist me in actually doing so. Logic is the only factor that enabled me to decide between two possible answers. You have conflated the emotional decision to do well (one decision) with the logical decision to write r^3 (another decision). I.e. Two seperate decisions, and my original example, is the latter one. You can add as many other emotionally based decisions to the exciting story of H.'s maths exam as you like, but this decision in it remains a logical one.

The second problem with your point requires a slightly more epic explanation. You are stating that emotion is the required force behind all decisions of the concious mind. I would argue that this is not the case. I have frequently been in a state of mind where emotional factors in my actions are minimal, yet the concious factors are strong. Examples would include studying, playing chess, or playing a sport at school. Now you would tack on an emotional reason to each of these - the desire to succeed, to win, or get fit, but I would dispute it. I do not feel an emotional impulse in these examples. The concious mind is operating on its own and I'm in a state that actually feels quite emotionless. The emotional level has given up control to the concious mind in a very real way. It is erroneous to say that the concious-logical mind does not have it's own goals. Perhaps they have developed in accord with the emotions throughout the journey to adulthood, and perhaps they have in part their goal of ensuring that the human organism does not experience negative emotions, but the source and the purpose do not matter when the argument is that it is capable of operating without emotional guidance.

I hope both the above points are clear (and if you choose to address either, please address both), but if the second one is not, an illustration might be this man. You might argue that it was fear that drove him to cut off his own hand to save his life, but fear is a primitive emotion. How does fear say endure this agonizing prolonged pain as you sever nerves one by one? The climber hi

"We probably won't see another season like this for a hundred years," the meteorologist said. "The southeastern United States has been extremely lucky for the last 40 years or so, particularly Florida. In the period since 1966, the Florida peninsula was hit by only one major hurricane, Andrew, in 1992. This year, they had three. This is a rare statistical event."

Branded as impure from the moment of birth, one out of six Indians lives -and suffers- at the bottom of the Hindu caste system.

Discrimination against India's lowest Hindu castes is technically illegal. But try telling that to the 160 million Untouchables, who face violent reprisals if they forget their place.

In the lion situation, pain doesn't stop you "scooping up your intestines and running" as it were. The body can still do what it needs to even in immense agony. Read this.

A doctor friend of mine described for me in detail what was actually involved in this. He had to cut through each of the nerves one by one with a blunt knife. Twang...twang... twang....
Shudder!

I'd like to know if the threat of climate change has affected real estate markets in coastal areas. At some point rising sea levels will start imposing costs on homeowners in those areas, which will hurt the property values. Is that part of anybody's thinking today?

Arctic Melting Fast; May Swamp U.S. Coasts by 2099

As cool as ligers are, I really hope people get over them really quickly, simply because we are low enough on Tigers and Lions as it is.

Check out this article from National Geographic about them. I found the part where the drive-thru safari kept breeding ligers after 3 out of 24 they'd bred for show developed severe neurological problems.

I just have a problem with breeding animals specifically for profit. Often, it turns bad with the animals being abused or malnourished or worse. Please be careful what you wish for...

North America is no stranger to large, free roaming, wild cats. Most of the time, we get along just fine (read: leave each other alone).

Pumas aren't the only large cats in the US, here in Arizona we have recently started getting these guys . Around were I live in SE Arizona we have large populations of javelinas which are their natural prey species.

I think not.

In fact, the ENV is a fuel-cell powered motorbike, and it's coming to a store near you in 2006. It's expected to sell for $6000 to $8000, and runs for four hours with a top speed of 80 km/hour.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/08 02_050802_fuelcellcycle.html

Now let's go shopping for an equivalent electric motorcycle: http://www.electric-bikes.com/motorcys.htm

Hmm, see anything there with 320 km of range? They all seem to die after a maximum of 20-50 miles (32 to 80 km).

Of couse, no one I know has hydrogen to fill the ENV with, but I understand that you can buy a hydrogen generator that will fill the tank for 25 cents. Maybe these new-fangled fool cells aren't as far off as you think.

You're correct that Mars Express photographed an ice lake in a crater. However, the Mars Express Orbitor is run by the European Space Agency and the Italian Space Agency, not the British. The British did have a lander attached to Mars Express named Beagle 2, which crashed.

There's a better article article at: http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0508/featur e6/multimedia.html

Gotta love that Nat Geo. Life member since forever.

Ah, yes, the CSI Effect, by which laymen have come to expect instant miracles from forensics instead of a long, slow process of detection.

This dull go nowhere story gets on /. while my inspirational story about robot jockeys gets denied.

Original quote: The genetically successful male breeds with as many partners as he can, as often as he can.

Your response: This is bullshit. Evolutionary success depends upon producing the most children who go on to have more children, not to spread the most of your genetic material around. A well cared for child that receives proper parental attention, who grows into a stable adult, is a greater "success" and will likely breed more and better children than five kids who are malnourished and mentally underdeveloped without the interaction and protection of the father.

Tell that to Genghis Khan (or whatever senior officer it was in the Mongol horde that ravaged Central Asia, Western Asia and Eastern Europe) whose genetic material can be found in literally millions of people in those parts of the world and can be traced back to his successfully impregnating over 1,000 women during the Khans' armies progress west.

Yes, having a couple of well-raised children can mean your genetic material will be more likely to be passed on then a few maladjusted ones, but having a few maladjusted ones is hardly what the aim of that particular game is.

This BBC story seems to be a fresh rewrite of this old National Geographic piece: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/06 10_050610_robot.html ... which was blogged here in mid-month: http://icold.blogspot.com/2005_07_01_icold_archive .html The news event unfortunately did not make it to the robot expo's event site here: http://www-1.expo2005.or.jp/en/robot/robot_project _00.html If you search on co-creator "Hiroshi Ishiguru" you get little more than this story, however.

Imagine the outrage if she had purchased her son the August 2005 issue of National Geographic Magazine. There is a photo of a nude woman in it! We must start checking IDs on magazine purchases and institute a rating system at once!

While I was look at that post, I decided to look up a claim in it.

National Geographic is talking about the hoax!
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/11/11 20_021120_raptor_2.html
You come across as intelligent and trustworthy,but your opinions are usually flawed. Sounds like you're getting info from creationist websites.

for example, declaring the Vietnamese catfish as not being a catfish, to subsidize the US catfish industry

Indeed, iris recognition has been used in at least one high-profile case; see this National Geographic article.

The 150k years ago mark is a bit off it was alot closer to 75k if i remeber right they were able to date it on this show: http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/channel/blog/2 005/06/explorer_adam.html They dated it on a large pool of genes