Comments on: The Call of the Bloop http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop A collection of Damn Interesting things Sat, 13 Mar 2010 08:31:59 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: sulkykid http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25862 sulkykid Fri, 26 Feb 2010 03:29:24 +0000 #comment-25862 OK, cicadas do not use their lungs to make their sounds and many fish do make sounds. OK, cicadas do not use their lungs to make their sounds and many fish do make sounds.

]]> By: MacAvity http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25859 MacAvity Thu, 25 Feb 2010 02:55:27 +0000 #comment-25859 [quote]Bromm said: "The thing about organic sound is, more amplitude, more volume, requires size. Bull frogs are louder than toads. Elephants are louder than horses. Whatever it is, its big."[/quote] Kiwis are louder than ostriches. Cicadas are louder than sloths. Furthermore, for an organism to make loud sound by means known to science requires lungs. Fish are silent. Squid are silent. Whales are not. Therefore if, as you say, the creature must be big to make so loud a noise, it must be an extremely large beast that comes to the surface to breathe. Moreover, to make such a loud sound, it must have very large lungs, bigger even than those of a whale. Thus it must either refill those lungs very slowly, requiring it to stay at the surface for a very long time, or it must refill them quickly and violently, like to the spouting of a whale. Either of these actions would make it near impossible for science, folklore, casual sailors, and all human entities to have not stumbled across it at some point. Therefore I stick to my supposition - and believe it more firmly now than I did before - that the sound was made by a hitherto unknown creature of modest size with a hitherto unknown way of producing extremely loud sounds without the use of extremely large lungs. [quote]Bromm said: “The thing about organic sound is, more amplitude, more volume, requires size. Bull frogs are louder than toads. Elephants are louder than horses. Whatever it is, its big.”[/quote]

Kiwis are louder than ostriches. Cicadas are louder than sloths.

Furthermore, for an organism to make loud sound by means known to science requires lungs. Fish are silent. Squid are silent. Whales are not. Therefore if, as you say, the creature must be big to make so loud a noise, it must be an extremely large beast that comes to the surface to breathe.

Moreover, to make such a loud sound, it must have very large lungs, bigger even than those of a whale. Thus it must either refill those lungs very slowly, requiring it to stay at the surface for a very long time, or it must refill them quickly and violently, like to the spouting of a whale. Either of these actions would make it near impossible for science, folklore, casual sailors, and all human entities to have not stumbled across it at some point.

Therefore I stick to my supposition – and believe it more firmly now than I did before – that the sound was made by a hitherto unknown creature of modest size with a hitherto unknown way of producing extremely loud sounds without the use of extremely large lungs.

]]> By: Bromm http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25847 Bromm Tue, 23 Feb 2010 01:28:53 +0000 #comment-25847 A couple important points: 1. When they say it isn't mechanical or geological, they aren't guessing. Sounds can be processed like a fingerprint. They have thousands and thousands of samples to cross reference and computer-process. When they say they have eliminated a potential source, it is only after being sure they have in fact, eliminated it. 2. The sound in it's original form was well below the level of human hearing. Stop and consider what that means. If you were in the vicinity of whatever caused it, your body would have been shaken and violently, permanently crushed by a sound your ears would have never detected. 3. 300o miles was not a typo. The distances detected have been consistent in every article I have read about it. 4. If it was a pod of whales, they would have detected multiple voices. The equipment used for this kind of thing and people trained to use it are extremely precise. 5. The thing about organic sound is, more amplitude, more volume, requires size. Bull frogs are louder than toads. Elephants are louder than horses. Whatever it is, its big. A couple important points:
1. When they say it isn’t mechanical or geological, they aren’t guessing. Sounds can be processed like a fingerprint. They have thousands and thousands of samples to cross reference and computer-process. When they say they have eliminated a potential source, it is only after being sure they have in fact, eliminated it.
2. The sound in it’s original form was well below the level of human hearing. Stop and consider what that means. If you were in the vicinity of whatever caused it, your body would have been shaken and violently, permanently crushed by a sound your ears would have never detected.
3. 300o miles was not a typo. The distances detected have been consistent in every article I have read about it.
4. If it was a pod of whales, they would have detected multiple voices. The equipment used for this kind of thing and people trained to use it are extremely precise.
5. The thing about organic sound is, more amplitude, more volume, requires size. Bull frogs are louder than toads. Elephants are louder than horses. Whatever it is, its big.

]]> By: MacAvity http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25637 MacAvity Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:12:57 +0000 #comment-25637 I'm no marine biologist, but I do read National Geographic. Over the past year or so I have seen two mini-articles, just one page each, including pictures, about bizarre biological anomalies in the ocean. The barreleye fish has a transparent head and eyes completely unlike anything else's, I can't even describe. It's like they stare through the window in its head where its brain should be. And the much less exotic moray eel has a second set of jaws, in its throat, fully functional, independent of its normal jaws, again biologically unique. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/photogalleries/fish-transparent-head-barreleye-picture/ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070905-eel-jaw.html My apologies for my ignorance of how to hyperlink. Anyway, what I'm saying is, it seems more likely, considering the weirdness of life in general and ocean life in particular, that there's a beastie out there with a hitherto unknown way of generating sound than a beastie bigger than a blue whale and still in hiding. The grammar of that sentence was somehow wrong, I apologize. I’m no marine biologist, but I do read National Geographic. Over the past year or so I have seen two mini-articles, just one page each, including pictures, about bizarre biological anomalies in the ocean. The barreleye fish has a transparent head and eyes completely unlike anything else’s, I can’t even describe. It’s like they stare through the window in its head where its brain should be. And the much less exotic moray eel has a second set of jaws, in its throat, fully functional, independent of its normal jaws, again biologically unique.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/02/photogalleries/fish-transparent-head-barreleye-picture/

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/09/070905-eel-jaw.html

My apologies for my ignorance of how to hyperlink.

Anyway, what I’m saying is, it seems more likely, considering the weirdness of life in general and ocean life in particular, that there’s a beastie out there with a hitherto unknown way of generating sound than a beastie bigger than a blue whale and still in hiding. The grammar of that sentence was somehow wrong, I apologize.

]]> By: Bill Lang http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25487 Bill Lang Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:56:56 +0000 #comment-25487 It would be sweet to lead an expedition to go find it. And then when I did, I'd be starving because I ran out of food, so I'd have to kill it to find it. And then a thing would pop up that says "You shot 440255 pounds of food. Unfortunately, you can only carry 100 pounds of food back to your wagon". It would be sweet to lead an expedition to go find it. And then when I did, I’d be starving because I ran out of food, so I’d have to kill it to find it. And then a thing would pop up that says “You shot 440255 pounds of food. Unfortunately, you can only carry 100 pounds of food back to your wagon”.

]]> By: Theconpanysecret http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25452 Theconpanysecret Sun, 25 Oct 2009 04:49:30 +0000 #comment-25452 THIS ANIMAL IS THE LEVIATHAN!!!! It lives on the depths of the ocean. It lives on the dark It also spits fire, probably to keep worm knowing that the temperature of the water bellow 6 miles is darn cold. Its supposed to be a terrific animal in length, and the king above all beast. Plus its says in the bible that his "faith will be mocked" because nobody will believe in it. Well unfortunately for scientist, the bible happens to the depict the king of animals at the depth of the sea, rather than on land. Too much coincidence. Richard Dawkins must be nervous. THIS ANIMAL IS THE LEVIATHAN!!!!
It lives on the depths of the ocean.
It lives on the dark
It also spits fire, probably to keep worm knowing that the temperature of the water bellow 6 miles is darn cold.
Its supposed to be a terrific animal in length, and the king above all beast.
Plus its says in the bible that his “faith will be mocked” because nobody will believe in it.
Well unfortunately for scientist, the bible happens to the depict the king of animals at the depth of the sea, rather than on land.
Too much coincidence. Richard Dawkins must be nervous.

]]> By: ripper http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25108 ripper Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:30:01 +0000 #comment-25108 i know that it is a animal cuz i saw animal X monsters of the deep on youtube i know that it is a animal cuz i saw animal X monsters of the deep on youtube

]]> By: Tobias http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop#comment-25105 Tobias Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:55:57 +0000 #comment-25105 I joined this site to shed some light on questions many people have about how it could be alive, how we have never seen it (Or it's carcass), and how it is a life form at all. First, how could a creature like this survive at the bottom of the ocean? It's common for the largest organisms to survive on the smallest lifeforms. Although we known little about the ocean bottom, we do that know it is teeming with small lifeforms. Even though it would take a lot to sustain a creature of this size, we know from Blue Whales that it is possible. Second, how come we have never seen a carcass? This is easy to explain. Once an animal dies that far down the cold alone is enough to get it to sink to the bottom. If it were to die at the bottom, the cold would practically freeze it and keep it at the bottom. There would be nothing to float to the surface. Third, I honestly can't tell you anything about this that you can you quote me on. I am no expert on Sound or anything related to it. But what I do know is that there is a difference between Life form sounds, and random occurances in the ocean. If you have ever listened to an underwater volcanoe, or another underwater occurence, then you yourself can notice how this does not sound similar to those things. As far as my thoughts, I believe it's possible for something to be down there. Probable? I doubt it. There would have to be many of those things to keep them from going extinct. And I just can't see something that large living in such a small area, without us having heard anything more than once. I joined this site to shed some light on questions many people have about how it could be alive, how we have never seen it (Or it’s carcass), and how it is a life form at all.

First, how could a creature like this survive at the bottom of the ocean? It’s common for the largest organisms to survive on the smallest lifeforms. Although we known little about the ocean bottom, we do that know it is teeming with small lifeforms. Even though it would take a lot to sustain a creature of this size, we know from Blue Whales that it is possible.

Second, how come we have never seen a carcass? This is easy to explain. Once an animal dies that far down the cold alone is enough to get it to sink to the bottom. If it were to die at the bottom, the cold would practically freeze it and keep it at the bottom. There would be nothing to float to the surface.

Third, I honestly can’t tell you anything about this that you can you quote me on. I am no expert on Sound or anything related to it. But what I do know is that there is a difference between Life form sounds, and random occurances in the ocean. If you have ever listened to an underwater volcanoe, or another underwater occurence, then you yourself can notice how this does not sound similar to those things.

As far as my thoughts, I believe it’s possible for something to be down there. Probable? I doubt it. There would have to be many of those things to keep them from going extinct. And I just can’t see something that large living in such a small area, without us having heard anything more than once.

]]>