Ancient Krakens Making Self-Portraits?
First time accepted submitter Sanoj writes "Strange patterns of ichthyosaur bones have been found on an ancient deep-water seabed. One paleontologist has put forward the theory that these could have been the work of giant cephalopods who were eating the swimming dinosaurs and then arranging the vertebrae to resemble their own tentacles. Sound far-fetched? Apparently, the modern octopus also does this."
The researchers are totally off base here. These aren't self-portraits; they're writing. When transliterated into the Roman alphabet, they read "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
A normal-sized octopus arranged these vertebrae into a giant tentacle pattern just to freak out everyone
This is why Science is so $#@%ing awesome. As Samuel Clemens put it best, “There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such trifling investment of fact.” This will be a very tough hypothesis to sell, but the researcher says his evidence is ready to take on all skeptics.
There are incredible stories waiting to be revealed in the fossil record and stories we have already uncovered. There's the footprints of Austrolopithecus, which were preserved in volcanic ash, large and small, male and female, close together as if they were huddling--perhaps the male had his arm around his mate, and the female's footprints lopsided as if she were carrying an infant. Imagine what it was like for them, walking fearfully across a landscape raining ash from a distant volcano... This story is drawn in this famous diorama.
Or the Taung child, whose skull bares the scars of an eagle attack. The child was carried away by a bird of prey. A story both fantastic and tragic at once.
Or the stories of Homo erectus , who was the velociraptor of our human ancestors. She was a total badass, which is why I love this statue of her at the Smithsonian Hall of Human Origins carrying a rotting caribou carcass across the Serengeti.
Science has thousands of these stories that we have already discovered, and an infinite supply of them in store for us if we keep exploring. Knowing this, I simply don't understand how people can be so impressed with a book covering a few hundred years of human history and consider it sacred. The sacred is all around us, written in the natural world waiting for us to read it.
i ~ Celebrating Science, Cyberspace, Speculation
"And, says McMenamin, there is one modern predator that does exactly this - the octopus. He suggests that the remains may indicate the existence of a giant octopus, similar to the Kraken of kegend."
I'm surprised their spell-checker didn't catch the mis-spelling of "legend", but my point is that he's talking about the possible existence of an undiscovered animal. If it hasn't been discovered, it hasn't been given a name, so it makes sense to compare it to something people can relate to. An octopus has no bones, so I'm not sure what kind of fossils we'd be able to find from an ancient giant octopus. Maybe a giant beak?
No, I'm very pleased with his ability to communicate in a way that is perfectly understandable to normal people. I don't see you complaining about his using the term "octopus" which is just as much a nickname as "kraken" since neither of them is the scientific name of the animal in question.
If someone discovers a large dinosaur that matches any of the various representations of dragons through the ages I'd have absolutely no problem with them calling by that name.
To be less snarky about it: Communicating scientific information to the public and to the press is always a tricky endeavor and there is a balance to be found between speaking 90% latin and between super-sensationalism. I thought this article struck a decent balance between the two.
There's an article on Wired on why this kraken "science" is complete bullshit and an indication of the sad state of scientific "reporting".
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/10/the-giant-prehistoric-squid-that-ate-common-sense/
A "Kraken" is not necessarily large. Even if it is just the size of my fist it is a Kraken. And you parent is not correct either, Octopus is an ordinary word to describe a Kraken, the other thing is a Calamar. Yes, those names likely are not "scientific", but this are the names comonly used by *germans* and I guess in other languages as well. So the most logical conclusion is: the original author is a non native english speaker and used words from his own language and "enlified" them.
Just google: http://www.google.de/search?q=picture+Krake+Paul
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
We have a big man-eating lizard on the planet called a "Dragon" already, and nobody who has seen one up close is bitching about it. They are too busy either running, shooting, or dying.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"