Slashdot Mirror


"Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip Into Space Naked

Adam Korbitz writes "New Scientist and Science Daily are reporting the results of an intriguing experiment in which scientists launched tardigrades or 'water bears' — tiny invertebrates about one millimeter long — into space onboard the European Space Agency's FOTON-M3 spacecraft. After 10 days in the vacuum of space, the satellite returned to Earth and the tardigrades were recovered. The tardigrades survived the vacuum just fine, but exposure to the Sun's ultraviolet radiation proved deadly for most of the water bears. However, some did survive. The tardigrades are the first animals to have survived such an experiment, a feat previously achieved only by lichens and bacteria."

235 comments

  1. First Posters by sheepweevil · · Score: 5, Funny

    The next animals to undergo the experiment: First Posters.

    1. Re:First Posters by hclewk · · Score: 5, Funny

      Uh oh... Here comes PETA...

    2. Re:First Posters by way2trivial · · Score: 4, Funny

      Peta may be concerned about the treatment of all animals--
      http://blog.peta.org/archives/2008/08/six_flags_calls.php yes-- even cockroaches..

      but I think even they would draw the line at first posters

      --
      every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    3. Re:First Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So as a Frist Psoter, I'm safe?

    4. Re:First Posters by AdmiralWeirdbeard · · Score: 1

      clearly we just extent the experiment to peta members...

      --
      Come read my stupid blagablog. Rants and Giggles
    5. Re:First Posters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Frist Psoter, you will be first against the wall.

    6. Re:First Posters by Sorthum · · Score: 1

      Glad this worked out for 'em-- their second stage attempt on trying it on puppies was a dismal failure.

    7. Re:First Posters by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Cockroach eating contest? Good lord what has this world come to, that's repulsive.

      That being said, god knows how many regular german roaches I've accidentally eaten >:( little bastards will not leave my apartment.
      I kid you not, I was heating food just last weekend gone and one was walking on the inside of the microwave on the walls, seriously.

    8. Re:First Posters by bemo56 · · Score: 0

      We have a BBQ, the bloody things live under the hotplate. When you turn the BBQ on the they tend to run out and explode. It really puts you off eating!

  2. Fantastic.. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of the four water bears to survive the radiation in space, one is now invisible, one is really stretchy, one is on fire, and one is made of rocks.

    1. Re:Fantastic.. by hardwarefreak · · Score: 1

      There were actually five. The fifth turned into metal and absorbs electricity.

  3. You Fools! by necro81 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't you realize that, by exposing them to such strenuous conditions that kill off the weak, you are only working to select a superbreed of tardigrades? I'm sure all that radiation have caused mutations to make them stronger, bigger, with voracious appetites and mind-control powers.

    Pretty soon they'll be strong enough to challenge us! I say we launch a preemptive strike to eliminate all tardigrades immediately!

    [I'm not actually crazy, this is all tongue-in-cheek alarmism, which is all the rage these days]

    1. Re:You Fools! by PlatyPaul · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You do raise a valid point about panspermia theory, oddly enough: escaping life from an extraterrestrial source could actually evolve (or at least perform selection) en route to its final destination. Given sufficient distances to be traveled (and that some of the original life survives), the "hardened" life forms that landed would be more likely to be adaptable to the necessary conditions at the destination.

      One serious question to consider is: should we attempt to trigger artificial panspermia? Is it unethical?

      --
      Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
    2. Re:You Fools! by somersault · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't see any reason why a lifeform that has evolved to survive in space should necessarily be better equipped to then survive elsewhere - any species that suddenly transitions from one environment to a vastly different one is going to have a hard time surviving. When a species adapts it doesn't necessarily keep all of its old abilities as well as the new ones, otherwise we'd all be able to breathe underwater!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    3. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one welcome our new overlord mutant tardigrades!

    4. Re:You Fools! by William+Robinson · · Score: 1

      I for one welcome our new overlord mutant tardigrades!

      Is that you, Cypher?

    5. Re:You Fools! by pcgabe · · Score: 4, Funny

      Mind-control powers? That doesn't sound good. We actually deal with tardigrades at work and you're raising some serious concerns. I plan to... hold on, someone's at the door.

      IT WAS NO ONE. TARDIGRADES ARE NOT DANGEROUS. TARDIGRADES ARE OUR FRIENDS.

      --
      Don't put advice in your sig.
    6. Re:You Fools! by jemminger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's assuming the conditions at the destination are the same as during the journey. Suppose they adapted to constant UV bombardment during the journey only to be dropped into boiling oceans of sulfuric acid when they arrive.

    7. Re:You Fools! by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      One serious question to consider is: should we attempt to trigger artificial panspermia? Is it unethical?

      See THIS IS WHY WE HAVE SECRET GOVERNMENT AGENCIES.

      When the Aliens come we can say we knew nothing... now go about your business citizen.

    8. Re:You Fools! by timster · · Score: 1

      I'm quite certain that ethics do not apply to rocks of any size, even if they are big enough rocks to be rounded by their own gravity.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    9. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your point? Throughout the history of the Earth we have had lifeforms move to deadly environments. Occasionally there is a mutant that can survive and a new population emerges. While many extraterrestrial environments might be very deadly, the fact that life on Earth could transit from the oceans to the land means that there are some extreme environments of which certain organisms could take advantage. They key is sending enough of these organisms so that you better your odds.

    10. Re:You Fools! by allawalla · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It isn't just selecting those that can survive in outer-space but those that are more able to adapt to changing conditions.

    11. Re:You Fools! by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Some of us do. I, for one. And it is acquired because surely, I was not the first who invented breathing under the water using tubes sticking out of the water.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    12. Re:You Fools! by nasor · · Score: 1

      More likely the organisms would be optimized to survive in space, and so would have a much harder time surviving when they reach a planet.

    13. Re:You Fools! by PlatyPaul · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The selection isn't just for optimal traits; given significantly varied theats, it encourages a high mutation rate (as well as fast reproduction).

      --
      Misery loves company. Online misery loves unsuspecting random strangers.
    14. Re:You Fools! by Hatta · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do raise a valid point about panspermia theory, oddly enough: escaping life from an extraterrestrial source could actually evolve (or at least perform selection) en route to its final destination.

      Evolution requires reproduction. It's hard enough for organisms to merely survive in space, let alone reproduce.

      One serious question to consider is: should we attempt to trigger artificial panspermia? Is it unethical?

      Isn't artificial panspermia the entire point of the space program?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    15. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is artificial panspermia required for artificial insemination?

      If so, I, for one, welcome our naturally selected test-tube baby overlords.

      As an aside... just because a lifeform has been "hardened" or "selected" for space travel doesn't necessarily mean it has been adapted for life on a particular planet. Most planets don't have environments that mirror the conditions found in space.

    16. Re:You Fools! by somersault · · Score: 1

      My point was that just because an organism can adapt to survive well in space does not automatically make it better able to survive once it reaches another planet. I had thought that was fairly obvious.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    17. Re:You Fools! by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Funny

      Thank got this slashdot user was using an old teletype system, to post that message otherwise he could have just deleted his previous text and we would things are all hunky dory.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    18. Re:You Fools! by Man+Eating+Duck · · Score: 1

      Mind-control powers? That doesn't sound good. We actually deal with tardigrades at work and you're raising some serious concerns. I plan to... hold on, someone's at the door.
      IT WAS NO ONE. TARDIGRADES ARE NOT DANGEROUS. TARDIGRADES ARE OUR FRIENDS.

      Star Control II, I presume :)
      Good times!

      --
      Are you a grammar Nazi? I'm trying to improve my English; please correct my errors! :)
    19. Re:You Fools! by tnk1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One serious question to consider is: should we attempt to trigger artificial panspermia? Is it unethical?

      Depends on what your priorities are and what else you think is out there.

      I probably wouldn't be in favor of willy-nilly dumping terrestrial life out there, unless we had no other choice for the survival of life itself "as we know it". Call me sentimental, I guess.

      We should make some effort to preserve alien life, should it ever be found for a number of reasons, practical as well as aesthetic.

      However, if we found planets that could support our life and didn't appear to be currently occupied, I see no reason not to dump some bacteria on that planet and see what happens.

    20. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why oh WHY couldn't we send up all the USA politicians instead...if none survived, no one would care.

    21. Re:You Fools! by somersault · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I was going to mention that only species like humans that use tools and materials are able to survive in wildly different environments, but I thought that was superfluous. I've been SCUBA diving a few times myself, and have even been known to fly on occasion!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    22. Re:You Fools! by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 3, Funny

      I don't see any reason why a lifeform that has evolved to survive in space should necessarily be better equipped to then survive elsewhere - any species that suddenly transitions from one environment to a vastly different one is going to have a hard time surviving. When a species adapts it doesn't necessarily keep all of its old abilities as well as the new ones, otherwise we'd all be able to breathe underwater!

      That sound you just heard was the heads of a million comic book geeks exploding simultaneously.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    23. Re:You Fools! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Not really, the main point of the US space program, I'm assuming the other ones are similar, is to perform experiments in space and spur technological advances.

      A surprising number of technologies were first developed to travel to the moon or in space or were developed while orbiting the earth. Lithium Ion batteries spring instantly to mind as well as testing for the air purifying effects of house plants and the widespread monitoring of the earth's climate from space.

    24. Re:You Fools! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Could you pack these critters with other dna sets (lichen?), so that if they do survive a landing on another planet, and start to flourish, we might introduce a wider variety of life?

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    25. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      We can breathe underwater. You probably haven't tried it for long enough duration.

    26. Re:You Fools! by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Tardigrades have been found at the highest elevations and in the deepest ocean trenches.... I don't think the facts fit your argument.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    27. Re:You Fools! by somersault · · Score: 1

      My argument was about a creature adapting to survive in space not making it any more likely that it will be suitable for life on another planet - by the sounds of it this thing is already incredibly hardy. Killing off a few less 'hardy' ones could be useful natural selection, but it could also be getting rid of the ones that are better at surviving in an atmosphere? I just like playing devil's advocate is all :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    28. Re:You Fools! by street+struttin' · · Score: 1

      Yes, but think of all the tardigrades that have suffered for our own psychotic experiments. And to what gain? To see how many can survive in space? That's like seeing how many human torsos a bullet can go through at point blank range.

      Won't somebody think of the tardigrades?

    29. Re:You Fools! by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      > should we attempt to trigger artificial panspermia? Is it unethical?

      I don't know squat about ethics, but I heard it can make you go blind.

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    30. Re:You Fools! by EnOne · · Score: 1

      "In Antarctica the lion is a penguins bitch"
      Just because you are king of one environment does not translate well to a new environment.

      --
      Calvin:Do you believe in the devil? Hobbes:I'm not sure man needs the help.
    31. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      ALL HAIL LORD GOT!

    32. Re:You Fools! by eonlabs · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good point,

      Evolution is not the process of becoming 'better,' 'stronger,' or more able. It's the process of being
      more likely to reproduce in the current environment and is dictated by randomness. Any changes that have no
      effect on an entity's ability to reproduce (especially indirectly) may or may not survive. Truly junk DNA
      will change in a completely arbitrary fashion until it generates a phenotype that actually does matter to
      whether a creature can reproduce (or in other means ensure the propagation of their genes).

      It's important to realize that almost ANYTHING can contribute to the fitness function that determines whether
      something's genes will propagate. If people think having four fingers is gross, people with four fingers will
      have a disadvantage and be less likely to reproduce. No offense to people with four fingers. It's just an
      example. The same would apply to any trait. For the same reason, if an ability was useful at one point, and
      it no longer affects the fitness function for reproducability any more, it may evolve out. It may only evolve
      out of some of the species.

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
    33. Re:You Fools! by wormBait · · Score: 1

      It might actually select for a more stable organism that is resistant to mutations. Being in space and subjected to high levels of radiation might select for organisms that are much better at maintaining their DNA. It might also select for extremely slow reproduction to conserve resources (like organisms that live at the bottom of the ocean). This is not necessarily a bad thing, since if it mutated very rapidly to accommodate itself to space, it would be very ill-equipped when reintroduced to gravity and an atmosphere.

    34. Re:You Fools! by Warbothong · · Score: 1

      If there were a manned mission to another planet which lasted generations, then without very careful exercise, artificial gravity (centrifuge?), etc. the people arriving at the destination would most likely have such atrophied muscles that their hearts couldn't get their blood up to their heads. This happens right now for long stays on space stations, so being born in microgravity would certainly cause unwanted "evolution" for colonists.

    35. Re:You Fools! by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 1

      When a species adapts it doesn't necessarily keep all of its old abilities as well as the new ones, otherwise we'd all be able to breathe underwater!

      I breathe under water just fine. Breathing in water is the killer.

    36. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was obvious, AC is just a moron.

    37. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop giving them more ideas.

    38. Re:You Fools! by avandesande · · Score: 1

      It's more fun than arguing about politics ;)

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    39. Re:You Fools! by stefanb · · Score: 1

      All hail the Hypno Toad!

    40. Re:You Fools! by Hucko · · Score: 1

      In most cases two with similar mutations need to survive...

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    41. Re:You Fools! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't going to evolve in space. Their metabolisms are very low, nearly static, and they don't have their activating water around... Kind of like hearty sea monkeys. So there won't be any space breeding and mutation enroute.

    42. Re:You Fools! by ignavus · · Score: 1

      Damn. So now I have to add tardigrades to the list of new overlords that I must gladly welcome.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    43. Re:You Fools! by shermo · · Score: 1

      Please, tell us where these girls who find 5 fingered people attractive congregate so I can pass on the information to our Polydactyc members

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
    44. Re:You Fools! by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      Is artificial panspermia required for artificial insemination?

      If so, I, for one, welcome our naturally selected test-tube baby overlords.

      As an aside... just because a lifeform has been "hardened" or "selected" for space travel doesn't necessarily mean it has been adapted for life on a particular planet. Most planets don't have environments that mirror the conditions found in space.

      No, but being able to survive in space is a prequisite for panspermia. And you could imagine organisms that are able to go dormant in space would wake up once they hit the space like conditions of the upper atmosphere. So they wake up and breed there and gradual adapt to life on the surface over lots of generations.

      That said I don't think tardigrades are a good candidate for panpermia because they require oxygen. It seem to me that most planets that don't have life, i.e. the ones you're trying to seed, won't have oxygen. Something plant like and similarly hardy, like lichens or bacteria seems like a better bet.

      In fact seeding planets that already have life with animals could be considered to be a hostile act. Seeding barren planets doesn't seem like a problem.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    45. Re:You Fools! by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      Little fun fact: Our lungs are capable of extracting oxygen out of water in our lungs, the only problem for the lungs is getting the oxygenfree water out of there (not counting the other crap in the water that could be bad for your lungs though)

      I can't remember where I read/heard it though, but it sounded plausible to me.

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    46. Re:You Fools! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I say we launch a preemptive strike to eliminate all tardigrades immediately!

      That's easier said than done. Which is the whole point of the article. (BTW, tardigrades have LONG been known to be extremely tough ; which is precisely why they got the opportunity to breathe vacuum.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    47. Re:You Fools! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      And it is acquired because surely, I was not the first who invented breathing under the water using tubes sticking out of the water.

      Have you actually tried that? Get your lungs more than about 30 cm below the level of the water and you're going to have problems. The last researcher I heard of who tried it got a little over a metre down before he suffered heart problems. The heart damage eventually killed him (years later).
      (Note : I'm talking about pressure differential between inside the lungs and the bloodstream. I'm not talking about absolute pressure.)

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    48. Re:You Fools! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      You do raise a valid point about panspermia theory, oddly enough: escaping life from an extraterrestrial source could actually evolve (or at least perform selection) en route to its final destination.

      Evolution requires reproduction. Single organisms don't evolve ; populations evolve. Try this human thought experiment : as of tomorrow morning, all red-haired are going to suffer an evolutionary pressure by being garotted on sight by any other human. This will have a population effect of eliminating the gene(s) for red hair. But for the individual? Their genes don't change, just their vital status.
      Looking from the other end of the telescope ... changes in your genes that have significant effect are called cancer.
      If you've got a population that's going to evolve, you have to have reproduction. Which means that you either have to have quite a large environment, flying through space. Or you have to have each parent giving rise to just one descendant (otherwise the population starts to increase (1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21 ... Fibbonacci's rabbits). I one case, you've got a generation ship ; in the other case, you've got minuscule populations.

      Panspermia isn't impossible. But it is frightfully difficult. As a geologist, I find it easier to solve the problem of origin of life here on Earth, rather than facing the same problem on some other planet and adding the problems of panspermia.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    49. Re:You Fools! by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Ok. 40cm under the water is a useful trait. I doubt 3% increase of air pressure (30cm/10m) will do serious damage to your lungs.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    50. Re:You Fools! by RockDoctor · · Score: 2, Informative

      I doubt 3% increase of air pressure (30cm/10m) will do serious damage to your lungs.

      The experiments have been done ; no need for doubt or supposition.
      Look at either common design of Scuba regulator, or their commercial equivalents ("full face masks") ; where is the pressure regulator? Either between the shoulder blades (and so just a few cm vertical distance from the lungs) ; or at the user's mouth (so getting perhaps 15cm from the top of the diver's lungs) ; or on the diver's cheek (same comment).
      Very occasionally you'll see people using a twin-hose airset mounted at the waist, so with the regulator up to 40cm deeper than the lungs. This is strongly discouraged because of two hazards - kinking the hoses and air embolism. It's really a "don't do this" situation - only try it if you're definitely going to die otherwise. (I speak as a diver with a non-trivial log book of near-death experiences. Which is why I stopped diving.)

      People have an excessive confidence in the abilities of their bodies. Seriously, don't act on your "doubts" and suppositions. Speak to proper dive training organisations. The only substitute for learning from other people's experiments is doing it yourself, and possibly dieing.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  4. Planet Seeding begin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's start launching bits of debris with Water Bears on them. Hopefully at least one will make it to a planet suitable for life.

  5. Next step by MyLongNickName · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Allow these water bears to reproduce, and take them back up. Rinse lather repeat, and we will have creatures capable of surviving long durations in space.

    --
    See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
    1. Re:Next step by I+cant+believe+its+n · · Score: 1

      Allow these water bears to reproduce, and take them back up. Rinse lather repeat, and we will have creatures capable of surviving long durations in space.

      This is almost exactly how Microsoft Bob came to be.

      --
      She made the willows dance
    2. Re:Next step by gardyloo · · Score: 1

      Allow these water bears to reproduce, and take them back up. Rinse lather repeat, and we will have creatures capable of surviving long durations in space.

      Oh.... Good. Just what we (and they) need.

    3. Re:Next step by Tisha_AH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For most species survival of extreme conditions is not the same thing as flourishing. This is a very interesting experiment and does open up quite a few possibilities for future research.

      If scientists were attempting to encourage beneficial mutations to make it more likely to survive a space environment this can be done on the ground, in a laboratory. It is not difficult to create a vacuum environment, bathe it with UV light and high energy particle and put a petri dish in the middle of this environment.

      To me it all smacks of the comic book and recent movies of "The Fantastic Four". Superior powers and prowess does not appear suddenly when exposed to some variant of radiation from space. In most cases, biological life-forms either 1). Die, 99.999% the time 2). Mutate, leaving a sickly, short-lived organism 3). Mutate but in an unexpected manner.

      Scientists have been doing this sort of research of a century. It is the basis of many vaccines. (live-attenuated).

      From this we could end up with a bacteria that would tolerate a near-space environment like mars with it's much diminished atmosphere and non-existent geomagnetic field. But what have we accomplished in the end?

      Can we say that we created a bacteria that contaminated... err, colonized a different planet? I wonder if the same thought was in the head of primitive man when he threw the first coconut stuffed with a note in it, into the Pacific ocean.

      --
      Tisha Hayes
    4. Re:Next step by NoPantsJim · · Score: 3, Funny

      Also, the Zerg, in a manner of speaking.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zerg#Zerg

    5. Re:Next step by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 1

      This is almost exactly how Microsoft Bob came to be.

      Is there any before and after relationship between Microsoft Bob and Smiling Bob?

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    6. Re:Next step by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      To me it all smacks of the comic book and recent movies of "The Fantastic Four". Superior powers and prowess does not appear suddenly when exposed to some variant of radiation from space. In most cases, biological life-forms either 1). Die, 99.999% the time 2). Mutate, leaving a sickly, short-lived organism 3). Mutate but in an unexpected manner.

      Since you're looking for your radiation death machine to perform at five nines, I must dissuade you from running it on .NET. I've had reports from some of our operatives in London where their death machines failed to kill their subjects for up to seven hours at a time. May I suggest a Guild-approved Linux distro like Deviant or Cthulbuntu?

      Sincerely,

      Guild Operative 305-DD4

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

  6. "Water Bears" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Aquatic hairy gay men?

    1. Re:"Water Bears" by mother_reincarnated · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes

    2. Re:"Water Bears" by MPAB · · Score: 3, Funny

      With lasers

    3. Re:"Water Bears" by Kenshin · · Score: 1

      Frankie says relax.

      --

      Does it make you happy you're so strange?

    4. Re:"Water Bears" by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Frankie ain't been the same since he went to Hollywood.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    5. Re:"Water Bears" by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      Aquatic hairy gay men?

      Think Bill O'Reilly (Papa Bear) in a Speedo.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  7. Send them to Mars by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Over the generations gradually change their environment till it resembles mars. Send the survivors as first colonists.

     

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Send them to Mars by oldspewey · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Send lichens instead ... at least they can get a start on the soil and atmospheric composition while we sort out our own problems down here.

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:Send them to Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure those things require oxygen to survive... And that they were merely "in stasis", in space.

    3. Re:Send them to Mars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree with the parent that Lycans are a hearty species, but I think we should be very careful here. They hunger for manflesh on the full moon here on planet earth; how much greater will that hunger be when they A. are starving; and B. have TWO moons. Also, we may not ever have enough sway with the Vampire legion to get them to clean up trouble we create on Mars.

  8. The answer to Jim's question: by ikirudennis · · Score: 1

    So, it finally comes out, the water bear is best. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts9geuPWQvs

  9. Just One Question by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

    How do they taste?

    1. Re:Just One Question by Sique · · Score: 1

      Drink a sip of puddle water (their preferred habitat), and you know.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    2. Re:Just One Question by rbochan · · Score: 1

      How do they taste?

      Like chicken, of course.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    3. Re:Just One Question by zentinal · · Score: 1

      You probably already know. You've probably eaten tens of thousands so far.

  10. Oblig. by paintballer1087 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I for one welcome our new vacuum-resistant, microscopic, mutated overlords.

  11. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by Rie+Beam · · Score: 3, Informative

    The headline should really read "Tardigrades First Animals to Survive Exposure to Vacuum of Space". I mean, we've sent astronauts into orbit, and let them walk around, but usually not naked.

  12. Summary Focus by Azaril · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After RTFA /shock, the focus seems to be not on the fact they survived in space but more the fact that they survived being dosed repeteadly with huge amounts of radiation, without any apparent damage to the DNA structure.

    1. Re:Summary Focus by Huntr · · Score: 1

      Just don't make them angry. You wouldn't like them when they're angry.

    2. Re:Summary Focus by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      After RTFA /shock, the focus seems to be not on the fact they survived in space but more the fact that they survived being dosed repeteadly with huge amounts of radiation, without any apparent damage to the DNA structure.

      Given the low survival rate however, one wonders if that was merely chance.

  13. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by _merlin · · Score: 1

    They were all safely inside spacecraft that provided an atmosphere and radiation shielding. The waterbears actually survived in space.

  14. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by timothy · · Score: 1

    There. I added "Naked" to the headline; "Unprotected" wouldn't fit.

    Good call :)

    Cheers,

    timothy

    --
    jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
  15. Is Stephen Colbert aware of this?!?!? by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Sending bears into space, exposing them to radiation, making them stronger?!?! ARE YOU INSANE?!?!?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Is Stephen Colbert aware of this?!?!? by Joebert · · Score: 1

      Colbert sending his digitized DNA to the space station for "aliens" to "clone" was just a cover story.
      But now thanks to you everyone knows what the real reason was.

      Thanks elrous,
      The Berts

      --
      Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
    2. Re:Is Stephen Colbert aware of this?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      papa bear is already getting ready.

  16. It was a hairy bear by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

    It was a scary bear.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  17. The Article Does Not Describe... by techsoldaten · · Score: 4, Funny

    This topic uses a poor choice of source material to discuss the subject. The article does not go into detail about the metabolic affects of exposure for the water bears, or the fundamental changes that were observed after their return to the lab. There were significant fundamental reactions the sample set had to exposure to space which was observable immediately upon their return to Earth, as detailed in other articles on the subject.

    Scientists were surprised to observe the exterior of several of the water bears to be covered by a mineral substance and the creatures appeared to demonstrate increased resillence realitive to their size and mass. Several of the other specimens demonstrated exothermic reactions when exposed to air, a reaction that was described as actually burning the air around them. Other members of the specimen set were observed stretching to lengths beyond their normal length / width, in order of several magnigtudes, without any negative biological affects. Others developed a transparent biology when observed under an electron microscope, which appearently is not permanent in nature.

    Attempts to observe the creatures in detail were complicated by some sort of field irradiating the slide, which was thought to possibly be magnetic.

    M

    1. Re:The Article Does Not Describe... by trongey · · Score: 1

      OK. Where do I go to turn in my geek card.
      I couldn't figure out this reference until I saw "Fantastic Four" in another post.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    2. Re:The Article Does Not Describe... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although this reference has been made in comments before yours, none of them actually had me keep reading thinking you had something scientifically useful to say.

      Well played, well played...

  18. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by Setherghd · · Score: 1

    ...to survive the vacuum of space.

    A bit different, wouldn't you agree?

  19. Next time by Aussie · · Score: 3, Funny

    I propose they try it with lawyers next. I can provide a short list if they want.

    1. Re:Next time by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can provide a unending supply if they want. I'll start with every lawyer that works for the RIAA and MPAA first, then that scumbag that was my Ex wife's lawyer... Actually he goes first.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Next time by umghhh · · Score: 5, Funny

      What if they survive but be stronger than ever?
      What will you do than?

    3. Re:Next time by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 1

      What if they survive but be stronger than ever? What will you do than?

      Don't suggest this. Just don't. If lawyers become the only creatures able to talk in the vacuum of space there will be no shutting them up when they return to Earth.

    4. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what if they survive???

      Scary...

    5. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A longer list would be fine too. This is no time to limit our sample size.

    6. Re:Next time by kat_skan · · Score: 2, Funny

      Leave them in space and declare the experiment a resounding success?

    7. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call PJ.

    8. Re:Next time by Theolojin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I propose they try it with lawyers next. I can provide a short list if they want.

      I have a list of 535 lawyers who are available. Better hurry, though, so we have time to figure out which names to write in come November.

      --
      Life is short; think quickly.
    9. Re:Next time by robthebloke · · Score: 1

      In space, no one can hear you litigate....

    10. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Personally, I'd bring in Mariah Carey.

    11. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nuke their orbit from orbit?

    12. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Getting rid of the RIAA and MPAA lawyers would put half the remaining lawyers out of work anyhow.

    13. Re:Next time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what do you call a thousand lawyers floating in space ?

    14. Re:Next time by ignavus · · Score: 1

      Why would you want to try it on a *short* list of lawyers?

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    15. Re:Next time by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      Debris :)

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
    16. Re:Next time by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      What will you do than?

      Well, for one, we will welcome our aqueous ursine overlords.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  20. If by mapkinase · · Score: 1, Funny

    What if American space program would have employed not only Dr. Wernher von Braun, but also Dr. Mengele, who then would be the first vertebrate sent to space?

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    1. Re:If by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course Mengles data was involved too:
      Nazi Data and the Rights of Jews

    2. Re:If by zwei2stein · · Score: 1

      I am fairly sure he would be Jew.

      Is this what you wanted to hear, mr. Godwin?

      --
      -- Technology for the sake of technology is as pathetic as eschewing technology because it's technology.
    3. Re:If by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I was thinking of Homo Sapiens.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    4. Re:If by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      Why don't you look up what "Godwin law" means and when it applies?

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  21. Isn't that how the Blob was created? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shouldn't scientists be a bit more creative when making space monsters?

  22. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by Stooshie · · Score: 1

    RTFA?

    --
    America, Home of the Brave. ... .and the Squaw.
  23. Explosive Decompression by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 3, Funny

    I for one am upset and disappointed that the water bears did not gruesomely bulge to engorged proportions and then loudly(physics be damned) and spectacularly explode in a sanguineous shower of viscera, all while screaming "QUAAAIDD!!!". I think the experimenters could have done better.

    --
    May the Maths Be with you!
  24. Save the Water Bears! by homesnatch · · Score: 5, Funny

    I find it detestable that we are doing these kinds of experiments on water bears!

    We need to protest... I will start a campaign!

    --Nuke the Whales--

    1. Re:Save the Water Bears! by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 1

      --Nuke the Whales--

      Since they are actually tardigrades I believe the slogan you want is:

      --Nuke the Tards--

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  25. PETA inbox... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I smell PETA actions heading NASA way. More news at 11.

    1. Re:PETA inbox... by Narishma · · Score: 1

      NASA didn't have anything to do with this.

      --
      Mada mada dane.
  26. 7000 kJ m-2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the 0.5mm length of a water bear, and assuming it's square...it works out to 3.5 J per organism.

    That is, 1 kg mass moving at a velocity in excess of 2 m/sec. Imagine how many ants and croaches this can crush.

    Amazing.

  27. PETA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    PETA? Aren't you supposed to prevent this? If we allow this kind of testing to continue, we will have billions of water bears dying for no reason.

    I suggest you protect them just as you have protected stray dogs and cats.

    1. Re:PETA? by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      I suggest you protect them just as you have protected stray dogs and cats.

      Best of all there's no need to drive to a dumpster to uh...dispose of the ones that...died of natural causes...yeah.

      Save the tardigrades PETA! Look at their sad little faces! :(

      http://nai.nasa.gov/newsletter/05092003/tar_Heterotardigrade-Echiniscus-Head.jpg

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    2. Re:PETA? by umghhh · · Score: 1

      I do not know about you but to me they do not look sad at all. To me they look like successful invaders from outer space. The experiment just proves their capability.

  28. Oblig Farscape Reference by fatboy · · Score: 1

    The tardigrades are the first animals to have survived such an experiment, a feat previously achieved only by lichens and bacteria.

    Don't forget about Luxans.

    --
    --fatboy
  29. Naked Bears? by Rie+Beam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Suggested list of headlines that do not suck:

    "Tardigrades First Animals to Survive the Vacuum of Space"
    "'Water Bears" First Animals to Withstand Exposure to Naked Space"
    "First Animal to Survive the Vacuum of Space"

    Come on, Timothy -- Naked tardigrades? I trust you can do better than that...

    1. Re:Naked Bears? by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      I have the feeling one day we will discover that Timothy is not a name, but an acronym for Thousands of Imbecilic Monkeys On Typewriters Hell Yeah!

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Naked Bears? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he had no choice. Naked tardigrades sell really good these days, its the number one hype which is bound to get lots of attention!

    3. Re:Naked Bears? by kungfugleek · · Score: 1
      Could've been worse. He could have shortened 'tardigrades' to 'tards' and just had "Naked Tards Survive the Vacuum of Space".

      I'm saying that would have been worse.

    4. Re:Naked Bears? by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      The term "naked" ensures a 99% read rate from /.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    5. Re:Naked Bears? by nanter · · Score: 1

      Timothy took this headline from the major news outlets. They're the ones to blame for this poorly constructed headline.

    6. Re:Naked Bears? by Rie+Beam · · Score: 1

      "Timothy took this headline from the major news outlets. They're the ones to blame for this poorly constructed headline."

      Not true, check the comments -- the original headline excluded the word "Naked", which Timothy added after posting (Set to -1, check near the bottom).

  30. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by .orvp · · Score: 1

    Usually eh? So it has happened in the past?

    I'm not sure if I want to see this experiment run with spammers or with attractive members of the opposite sex (or same sex for some of you). On the one hand, the most likely result, the subject would end up dead, in which case, spammers are expendable. But on the other hand, a naked hot woman in space would be kind of sexy if she were to survive, but I see this as the less likely of the options.

    So perhaps we can send up a hot spammer naked?

    --
    My other sig is just as lame
  31. Perfect by BigBlueOx · · Score: 1

    Just perfect. Again science, devoid of morality, irresponsibly exposes us all to unknown and possibly fatal dangers in its maniac quest to unearth that which man is not meant to know.

    Our planet is 75% water so the Davrosian madmen send water bears into space to freely mutate into hideous Lovecraftian nightmares! What next? Sewer gators? Cactus spiders? Sand panthers?? Where does it end?? How long before the entire ecosystem of our planet has its entire precious essence sucked dry???

    We must stop these hellish experiments before it is too late for us all!!

    1. Re:Perfect by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 1

      Just perfect. Again science, devoid of morality, irresponsibly exposes us all to unknown and possibly fatal dangers in its maniac quest to unearth that which man is not meant to know.

      If we weren't meant to know it, how come we have the knowledge and compulsion to do so?

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:Perfect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if water bears mutated, they'd still be water bears. Evolution is only real on a small scale - we didn't come from apes! I came from Adam and Eve.

  32. Damn you evil conservatives by alta · · Score: 1

    First you think it's OK to kill polar bears with your global warming! You've destroyed their habitat and now you want to make them stressed out by putting up oil rigs! We had to go so far as to make faked pictures about drowinging polar bears and such. We even had Al do that stupid movie! Now out of spite you take out your venance on the poor innocent water bears! They're so cute and cuddly! My 4 year old has a stuffed water bear, and I had to tell him to keep it close or the evil conservitives will expose it to the vacuum of space and use the deadly UV rays they've invented on it.

    --
    Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
  33. It's time for the threatdown by aslvrstn · · Score: 1

    Colbert's not gonna be to happy about this. Bears being sent into space just before his DNA? Sounds like a grudge match waiting to happen...

  34. They must not be allowed to grow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gigashadow!

  35. What Else? by mrloafbot · · Score: 1

    My only question is, what else are they throwing out the airlock that is not surviving?

  36. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by somersault · · Score: 1

    I thought I was just going crazy and my brain has started to filter out the word 'naked'. You must have changed it in the time between me opening the front page and then clicking on the article..

    --
    which is totally what she said
  37. Water bears? That's a problem! by WheelDweller · · Score: 0

    In the latest hoax, Man Made Global Warming(TM), we learn that Ursilua nauticus, the polar bear is drowning in large numbers. Despite my bad spelling, these bears not only tend to float...they swim. Which is why their name means "Water Bears" or "Swimming Bears".

    The problem comes in where the name has already been used. :)

    --
    --- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
  38. this article needs to be tagged by WiglyWorm · · Score: 1

    "Seamonkeys"... no?

    1. Re:this article needs to be tagged by mdmkolbe · · Score: 1

      Different species. Even different philum (Sea-monkeys: Arthropoda; Water bears: Tardigrada).

  39. Sounds like the beginning of an sf story by Progman3K · · Score: 3, Funny

    Did these things

    - Create an army of the undead
    - Trigger a plague
    - Develop intelligence and a taste for human flesh?

    All kidding aside, it might reinforce the theory of panspermia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia

    --
    I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
  40. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by William+Robinson · · Score: 1

    I am just afraid of scaring those guys with telescopes, if I go 'Naked' in space:)

  41. Ken B. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome out tardigrades overlords

  42. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're not going read the article, not even the summary, but at least read the fucking headline.

  43. Water Bear-Man by BobSixtyFour · · Score: 2, Funny

    So... Did any of these scientists allow themselves to get bit by any of these radioactive Water Bears?

  44. I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In space, no one can hear you "KHAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNN!!!!".

  45. What a waste by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A vacuum pump and a UV lamp are all you need to perform this experiment on Earth... No rockets required. What lame "research".

    1. Re:What a waste by InfiniteLoopCounter · · Score: 2, Informative

      A vacuum pump and a UV lamp are all you need to perform this experiment on Earth... No rockets required. What lame "research".

      You do realize that they do a lot of experiments in this mission (Foton-M3) at once.

      The animals are only very small and I can't see them taking much room. Why not put them in if they fit?

      Plus, on Earth it is hard to simulate near zero-G effects that you can get with a satellite in orbit around Earth (okay it is not really zero-G because it is still near the Earth, but the trajectory induces similar conditions).

  46. I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by Kligat · · Score: 4, Informative

    There was a countdown of animals that had the most extreme survival conditions, and they outperformed cockroaches by quite a bit. They used computer software to show what the equivalent for a human would be under those circumstances, and visualized the radiation with drums of nuclear waste and bombs or something. Not only can they survive no pressure in the vacuum of space, but they can survive under thousands of pounds of water pressure in the ocean.

    One scientist had left a tardigrade in a miniature desert for 20 years, and it popped right back up when they just added water. They also can survive extreme heat, salt, and acid. The most amazing thing is that they can probably be found in your own backyard.

    1. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by drseuk · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of SCO executives.

    2. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The most amazing thing is that they can probably be found in your own backyard.
      Not that amazing, it is a hardy species that can survive most anything... So if they are a successful species then why wouldn't they be common in your back yard.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    3. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The most amazing thing is that they can probably be found in your own backyard.

      Now that's extremophilia!

    4. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by GleeBot · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not that amazing, it is a hardy species that can survive most anything... So if they are a successful species then why wouldn't they be common in your back yard.

      Well, I think you could be legitimately amazed. Being able to deal with extreme conditions imposes a cost on a species in terms of the biological machinery necessary to survive those conditions. Under mild conditions, such species are often out-competed by less hardy species, which may be more focused on more efficient feeding rather than surviving hard radiation, for example.

      In other words, specializing for the worst case often leaves you at a disadvantage in the common case.

    5. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by Xtifr · · Score: 1

      Being able to deal with extreme conditions imposes a cost on a species in terms of the biological machinery necessary to survive those conditions. Under mild conditions, such species are often out-competed by less hardy species...

      Careful there. You're going to destroy people's delusions that evolution is some sort of absolute linear scale, with "more evolved" creatures always beating the "less evolved". Without nonsense notions like "the ladder of evolution" climbing ever upwards. how will eugenicists and social darwinists spread their creeds? :)

      If the only way to be literally "more evolved" is to have a faster reproduction rate and/or use an r-selection reproductive strategy, then humans aren't the pinnacle of creati^H^H^H^H^H^Hevolution (in fact, cockroaches would rank higher), and we can't allow thinking like that, now, can we?

    6. Re:I saw tardigrades on Animal Planet once by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't have a backyard, you insensitive clod!

  47. let's genetically engineer HUMANS like them! by wisebabo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So if we could figure out what keeps them (relatively) impervious to ultraviolet/gamma radiation and allows them to survive direct exposure to vacuum, can we genetically engineer humans like that? Wouldn't space travel be a lot easier, safer and just plain more fun if all you needed was a face mask to breathe and maybe some sort of thin thermal suit?

    It probably won't be too difficult in a few decades to genetically engineer people like that, adding the ability to go into hibernation and, being able to freeze them without ice crystals forming in their blood/tissues (like some antarctic fish) would make long interplanetary/interstellar journeys practical. They probably wouldn't be able to breed with the "old-style" humans but it would sure help spread "human-like" life around. "Homo-Astra" (star man). What ethical dilemmas do you see?

    One problem might be if there ever was a war, it might be one of complete annihilation since even females would be worthless to the other side (very UN P.C. I know). And we'd probably lose.

    1. Re:let's genetically engineer HUMANS like them! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Riiiiiight. What could POSSIBLY go wrong?

    2. Re:let's genetically engineer HUMANS like them! by wisebabo · · Score: 1

      ok, I know this idea is a little "out-of-this-world" (groan) but if we've got all these great new genetic engineering technologies, let's go out and (ab)use them! Just read an article in sciencedaily.com where they're using genetic therapy to make congenitally blind people see; maybe we could eventually see in the UV or X-Ray. Besides it'll give the expression "sleeping under the stars" a whole new meaning!

    3. Re:let's genetically engineer HUMANS like them! by drseuk · · Score: 1

      Problem: Heinz would probably claim IP rights on Homo-Astra propulsion.

  48. Who posted the result? by misterooga · · Score: 1

    Because if the water bears posted using mind control, we are already screwed. Well, I for one, welcome the new water bear overlords.

  49. I'm calling it... by carambola5 · · Score: 1

    Stephen Colbert puts water bears as #1 on his threat down. How could he not?

    --
    IWARS.
    People, in general, disappoint me. Politicians even more so.
  50. No Water Bears Were Harmed In This Experiment by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    Oh... wait...

    Nevermind...

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  51. Bears. by machine321 · · Score: 1

    And the number one threat? WATER BEARS.

  52. Next subjects for experiments... by ciaran.mchale · · Score: 3, Funny
    Members of the general public were polled on what type of animals they thought should be used for the next "can it survive the vacuum and radiation of space" experiments. Some of the most common answers were:
    • Politicians and lawyers were voted by almost everyone.
    • Microsoft executives were voted by Linux fanboys.
    • Dapper Drake, Edgy Eft, Feisty Fawn, Gutsy Gibbon and Hardy Heron were voted by Microsoft fanboys.

    Interestingly, the RIAA was also a popular choice, but it was rejected on the basis that a multi-celled organism without a heart might not be alive. Some members of the public suggested it should be subjected to the "will it blend?" test to make sure.

  53. Which bears are best? by xonar · · Score: 1

    Question: Which bears are best?
    Reply: Water bears?
    Answer: False. The answer is black bears...

    1. Re:Which bears are best? by robthebloke · · Score: 1

      correction: care bears.

  54. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by ozbird · · Score: 4, Funny
    I am just afraid of scaring those guys with telescopes, if I go 'Naked' in space:)

    Obligatory:
    • "That's no moon..."
    • "... and isn't certainly isn't a heavenly body."
    • "Hey, I can see Uranus!"
    • "AARRGGHH! Okay, who's the wiseguy that put a water bear on my lens?"
  55. Not True. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    Arthur Dent and Ford Prefect were the first and they were not even in a dormant state.

    1. Re:Not True. by drseuk · · Score: 1

      After sleeping off a 120 year dehydrated hangover caused by a pissed Victorian scientist dunking him in ethanol the tardigrade awoke to find itself in a tunnel. He just had time to read the sign on the wall saying "Safer outside - LHC Safety Committee" before coming under attack in both directions from proton streams. Luckily, since tardigrade reflexes exceed the speed of light he was able escape via. the mini-black hole which was about to formed before it had. Such are the paradoxes of the tardigrade. Curiously the mice later informed him that human scientists had reported him dead as he carried out their hair-dressing in the new salon he had opened 65 million years ago after buying some cheap property on mouse-world since his timely escape.
      N, S, E, W?
      >

  56. Tardigrades In Spaaaaaaceeeeeee by SleptThroughClass · · Score: 1

    In this exciting episode, we see what happened when the tardigrades were first launched and released upon the universe. Queen Tardigrade's loyal bodyguards of course were the hardiest specimens of tardigradehood and protected her well...

  57. Correct Name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since these creatures are too small to have a brain, shouldn't they be called Retardigrades?

  58. Teraforming? by sckeener · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not that I'm interested in doing this yet because I'd like to see what is already on the planets in our solar system....however

    If they could last long enough in space, we could launch them at planets with the purpose of converting the planets to something more habitable.

    I think the really good targets for this would be planets with water...Mars...some of Jupiter's moons....etc.

    --
    "Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
    1. Re:Teraforming? by fireforadrymouth · · Score: 1

      I don't see how tardigrades are going to help terraform a planet by simply inhabiting a given source of water given that, on Earth at least, they have been found in numbers reaching 25,000bpL (bears per litre).

      Surely they need something to eat?

      Wouldn't we be better off using something along the lines of the genetically modified E. Coli that synthesises biofuel?

      PS ( Terra is Earth in Latin and Portuguese )

  59. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

    "I mean, we've sent astronauts into orbit, and let them walk around, but usually not naked."

    Homer dumped two neked bodies into space.

    --
    There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
  60. Panspermia; the universe is our Kleenex by damburger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We have for sure left viable life forms on the Moon, and have now shown reasonably complex animal life can be survive vaccuum.

    Before we continue to jizz terrestrial organisms over everything in sight like a fustrated teenager, perhaps we ought to consider the implications. If there is life elsewhere in the solar system, it is likely microbial life living underneath the surface of somewhere like Mars or Europe where there might be liquid water.

    Given that these extraterrestrial ecosystems are physically smaller and almost certainly have less energy to drive them, the organisms found there will probably be less primitive. If they encountered any of the microscopic monsters that 4 billion years of Earth evolution has produced they probably won't survive.

    --
    If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we shoot people for Apollo-related non-sequiturs?
    1. Re:Panspermia; the universe is our Kleenex by djp928 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Meteor impacts have already done more than we possibly could in the foreseeable future to "seed" the solar system. If there is life elsewhere in the solar system, it is likely to be Earth life, seeded by asteroid strikes that kicked up biological material in the distant past. Or, perhaps, life started elsewhere in the solar system and migrated here (the Panspermia hypothesis you mention).

    2. Re:Panspermia; the universe is our Kleenex by Zordak · · Score: 1
      Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. Of course, you meant to say:

      We have for sure left viable life forms on the Moon-simulation stage in the New Mexico desert where the Apollo missions were faked

      --

      Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
    3. Re:Panspermia; the universe is our Kleenex by i_liek_turtles · · Score: 1

      it is likely microbial life living underneath the surface of somewhere like Mars or Europe where there might be liquid water

      I knew those Europeans were aliens!

  61. Quite wrong! by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    Animals moved from a harsh environment to a more benign one might suffer, but many others will flourish.

    Here is New Zealand many introduced species (like the Australian Brush Tail Possum) do very, very well. Many introduced birds do far better than the native birds too.

    No doubt some of this is due to the fact than most introduced birds are more "street wise" and aggressive, as well as breeding faster, to survive in environments with more predators. They soon displace NZ birds which are tuned to very few predators, are far too trusting and breed far more slowly.

    Similarly, by being able to survive in harsher environments, the mutant water bears could survive more marginal conditions, giving them an edge on other water bugs.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
    1. Re:Quite wrong! by somersault · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wasn't thinking of simple things like moving to a different island, I was thinking more of moving to a completely different planet, with different atmosphere, pressures and gravitational pull. Since this organism can survive in a vacuum that suggests that it may not matter if you put it in an atmosphere that we would find poisonous, but then again who's to say that? What if it doesn't stand up well in a highly acidic atmosphere? What if during its trip to space it changes composition in such a way that it is crushed under its own weight when it is re-introduced to a planet with significant gravity? I don't know what these water bears need to survive, but perhaps if they need sunlight, so landing for example on the dark side of a planet that doesn't change its rotation with respect to its current star would kill them off? etc.

      Was just trying to point out that natural selection tends to make a creature better for a single environment, not all environments. I am not a biologist though, so meh.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Quite wrong! by Sj0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It should be noted that just becuase this species can SURVIVE exposure to space doesn't mean they can THRIVE in it.

      This species is capable of entering a state of suspended animation that renders it rather resistant to extreme heat and cold, dehydration and hard radiation.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    3. Re:Quite wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Introduced species tend to flourish in new areas because their predators are rarely introduced with them. Introduce a rat to an island with no rat eating animals and you lose all the ground dwelling birds, for example.

    4. Re:Quite wrong! by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Lets try it with cockroaches, and see if they survive in this space vaccum

  62. "Waterbear" song listeners are not surprised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For all of you who don't know Mal Webb, a fabulous musician:

    Waterbear song

  63. Fetal development by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    is a history of all the evolutionary changes that finally end up with current stage homo-sap

    we can 'breathe' underwater at certain stages of development-- they just now end before we reach independence from the host/parent.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:Fetal development by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
  64. And the #1 Threat to Planet Earth by ValuJet · · Score: 1

    Space dwelling Water Bears!

  65. Tradigrades? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they'd used cockroaches they not only would increased in number after 10 days they might have kicked the
    astronauts out when they got back to the spacecraft.

  66. Argh. Not water bears! by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    They're aquatic marauding, godless killing machines!

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  67. Weird Looking Animals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it strike as disturbing anyone else that these little vertebrates closely resemble the giant flying crustacean gunships used by the Combine in Half-Life 2?

    We just may have found a good basis for organic spacecraft. That's a creepy thought. I always kind of assumed that particular element of sci-fi would never be borne out.

  68. Chuck Norris by jerryodom · · Score: 2, Funny

    Chuck would totally own the Water Bears in the Space Survival challenge. I bet he wouldn't even tan.

    --
    For some reason I refuse to use either spell check or the spacebar properly.
  69. but... by MooseTick · · Score: 1

    This is all well and good, but will they blend

  70. Re: your sig. by znerk · · Score: 1

    http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2004/07/newspamemail.shtm

    uce@ftc.gov is no longer in service. The above link describes the new email address, spam@uce.gov
    Before you blast me for telling you about this new development, take a look at the date on the announcement (July 28, 2004).

    --
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
  71. Ha! Take that cockroaches.... by camg188 · · Score: 1

    you're not so tough.

  72. I for one by Is0m0rph · · Score: 1

    Welcome our new naked, space surviving water bear overlords!

  73. You are wrong by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think you are very wrong indeed, if you create vacuum, bathe it with UV light and bombard it with high energy particles you would find it very hard to put a petri dish in that spot.

    Personally, I would put the petri dish in first, then turn on the vacuum and radiation, saves you having to request yet another research assistent. You obviously never done paperwork.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:You are wrong by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      Why am I reminded of "We need another Timmy!" from Dinosaurs :D

      Loved that show

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
  74. Re: your sig. by WheelDweller · · Score: 0

    I wasn't aware I was using a sig! I'll look into it- thanks.

    --
    --- For a good time mail uce@ftc.gov
  75. I Hope Different Departments Talk to Each Other... by severoon · · Score: 1

    ...otherwise in a few months someone driving the Mars rover is going to crap themselves: OMG U GUYZ!!! I FOUND WATER BEARS ON MARS!!!

    --
    but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
  76. Offensive. by jwriney · · Score: 2, Funny

    Dang it, don't call them "tardigrades". That's demeaning and hurtful. The appropriate term is "mentally challengedigrades" or perhaps "differently abledigrades".

    --riney

  77. Wait, what?? by Real1tyCzech · · Score: 1

    How did they skip the creature, tribal and civilization phases?!??!

  78. Obligatory... by my_left_nut · · Score: 1

    All yuor tardigrades are belong to us!

  79. Re:Obama the "great" orator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're going to elect Bizarro Jimmy Carter this fall, then be sick of him in two years and elect another Reagan.

  80. Warter Bears? by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

    This is the most misleading name since Sea-Monkeys. I was well disappointed when saw the picture.

  81. Crumbling into Dust by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    I'll take the guy who's less likely to crumble into a pile of dust

    Hey, some folks are counting on that!

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  82. Mod parent down! by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    -5, disgusting.

  83. Re: "Water Bears" First Animals to Survive Trip In by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    So perhaps we can send up a hot spammer naked?

    Or a hot brain-dead politician?

  84. Bears from Space? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new water bear overlords...

  85. Sea Monkeys! by ml10422 · · Score: 1

    Really? Nobody has brought up Sea Monkeys yet?

  86. visions of seeding the universe by Ionized · · Score: 1

    Surely I am not the only one with this in mind...

    These tardigrades, along with lichen and bacteria, are known to be able to survive space. We take them and colonize many small satellites and launch them all up in the belly of a spaceship. Once it is free of Earth's gravity, shoot them all out across the universe.

    Think of it as a giant wad of planet spooge, impregnating the universe with terran life. Who knows how that could impact the next several trillion years out there in the big wide open.

    Heck, why stop with simpler forms of life. We could shoot up tiny balls filled with water or soil and other extremely long lived, extremely hardy organisms. If they ever crash in another environment with tolerable conditions, they can go forth from there.

    Is it geocentric of me to revel in the idea of spreading our own form of life throughout the universe, with no regard for what else is out there? If we assume that ET life is fairly rare or nonexistant, wouldn't it be neat to bump the odds up in life's favor?

    1. Re:visions of seeding the universe by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > If they ever crash in another environment with tolerable conditions, they can go forth from there.

      I don't believe their tolerance to atmospheric reentry has been tested... They might not survive the crash landing. Plus, throwing an unpowered ball of MUD -- even an extremely large one, by human standards, at any planet would take a heck of a lot of luck, even if that planet was in our own solar system. Throwing even thousands of them and having one reach another star system would be unbelievably unlikely.

  87. maybe you've just been playing too much spore... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    maybe you've just been playing too much spore...

  88. And there's even a song about it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's a song about everything, even tardigrades.

    Mal Webb is an Australian singer... well, he makes noises with his body, I guess you could call it singing.

  89. Your apparent ignorance is appalling... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Haven't you ever heard of Doomsday?

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  90. SPACE MONKEYS! by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Thats it. That is all I wanted to say.
    Didn't have the chance to use those two words together since Space Quest V.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens