Comments on: The Call of the Bloop http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/ A collection of Damn Interesting things Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:45:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: dexdragon7 http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/#comment-26763 dexdragon7 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 12:57:46 +0000 #comment-26763 What if its not a whale and we asume anything, In October 2008, members of the networking website Bebo beamed A Message From Earth, a high-power transmission at Gliese 581. Now what if we assume that years ago another highly developed planet did the same. What if the bloop is a disorded transmission from another planet or maybe even a transmission in a different language from another planet. Do you think this is possible? What if its not a whale and we asume anything, In October 2008, members of the networking website Bebo beamed A Message From Earth, a high-power transmission at Gliese 581. Now what if we assume that years ago another highly developed planet did the same. What if the bloop is a disorded transmission from another planet or maybe even a transmission in a different language from another planet. Do you think this is possible?

]]> By: yeefoong http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/#comment-26566 yeefoong Tue, 05 Jul 2011 23:22:47 +0000 #comment-26566 Theres is a recent documentary in Animal Planet about the truth of the mermaid. The biologist believe that this "bloop"are made by the mermaid. Just type in "Animal Planet mermaid" and you can enjoy the whole 8 videos. Theres is a recent documentary in Animal Planet about the truth of the mermaid. The biologist believe that
this “bloop”are made by the mermaid. Just type in “Animal Planet mermaid” and you can enjoy the whole 8
videos.

]]> By: DocDeKing http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/#comment-26394 DocDeKing Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:55:01 +0000 #comment-26394 I would like to make a suggestion. Bear in mind this is one of the first things that popped into my head while I was analizing the bloop. Maybe the bloop was not caused by a huge sea monster the likes of which was never seen or heard before maybe the curious sound was made by a group of whales or or things that coincidentally made their sounds at the same time comining to make the bloop we know today. The sound has never been heard again. This could be an example of the coincidentally of all the sounds combining. I myself highly doubt that it was made by a sea creature we never saw before. This theory does not in any way rule out the possibility of there being more undiscovered creatures in the sea. Thanks for reading. I would like to make a suggestion. Bear in mind this is one of the first things that popped into my head while I was analizing the bloop. Maybe the bloop was not caused by a huge sea monster the likes of which was never seen or heard before maybe the curious sound was made by a group of whales or or things that coincidentally made their sounds at the same time comining to make the bloop we know today.

The sound has never been heard again. This could be an example of the coincidentally of all the sounds combining.

I myself highly doubt that it was made by a sea creature we never saw before.

This theory does not in any way rule out the possibility of there being more undiscovered creatures in the sea.

Thanks for reading.

]]> By: Aresdotexe http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/#comment-26129 Aresdotexe Thu, 05 Aug 2010 19:37:26 +0000 #comment-26129 It's Cthulhu! That is the only explanation! It’s Cthulhu! That is the only explanation!

]]> By: zbeeblebrox http://www.damninteresting.com/the-call-of-the-bloop/#comment-26075 zbeeblebrox Tue, 15 Jun 2010 21:14:33 +0000 #comment-26075 Mentioning Cicadas brings up a different point: most locust-type creatures have life cycles where they're only active one year in seven or one year in ten, etc. I think there are groups that remain dormant for as long as twenty-five years. Compared to this sound, which has only been "dormant" not for 13 years, and who knows, maybe that's just a drop in the hibernation bucket of these lifeforms' lives. On another note, while the blue whale is the largest mammal, it is not the largest lifeform. For that, we need to look at the plant kingdom, whose Aspen "groves" (the trees are actually all 'stems' of a single seed) and the great barrier reef both take the top spots. Now, one thing I know about plant life is that it's creepily good at mimicking shit when it needs to. Also, carnivorous plants, unlike carnivorous animals, rarely need to feed. Indeed, they could feed in a way similar to cicadas, minus the literal hibernation part. Thus, the sound *could* have been made by a lifeform many times larger than the blue whale. Not an animal lifeform, but a plant. One that, like a pitcher plant, would benefit greatly from mimicking something that the animals around them find desirable. Since they can't emit smells easily, and color/shape is useless that deep, where vision is less important, sound is the next logical option. The scientists shouldn't be looking for some whale or squid, they should be looking for underwater venus fly traps. Mentioning Cicadas brings up a different point: most locust-type creatures have life cycles where they’re only active one year in seven or one year in ten, etc. I think there are groups that remain dormant for as long as twenty-five years. Compared to this sound, which has only been “dormant” not for 13 years, and who knows, maybe that’s just a drop in the hibernation bucket of these lifeforms’ lives.

On another note, while the blue whale is the largest mammal, it is not the largest lifeform. For that, we need to look at the plant kingdom, whose Aspen “groves” (the trees are actually all ‘stems’ of a single seed) and the great barrier reef both take the top spots. Now, one thing I know about plant life is that it’s creepily good at mimicking shit when it needs to. Also, carnivorous plants, unlike carnivorous animals, rarely need to feed. Indeed, they could feed in a way similar to cicadas, minus the literal hibernation part.

Thus, the sound *could* have been made by a lifeform many times larger than the blue whale. Not an animal lifeform, but a plant. One that, like a pitcher plant, would benefit greatly from mimicking something that the animals around them find desirable. Since they can’t emit smells easily, and color/shape is useless that deep, where vision is less important, sound is the next logical option.

The scientists shouldn’t be looking for some whale or squid, they should be looking for underwater venus fly traps.

]]> 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”.

]]>