Squidbirth

It's beautiful and entirely, gloriously, perfectly NATURAL.

Hey, good point.

Can you explain what's going on there? What's that giant membrane she's holding on to (for complete lack of a better description)?

Also, my homeostasis prof was lecturing on the differences between our and squids' nervous systems (i.e. the relative merits of myelin). Can you talk about that sometime?

Ditto #2: Was that an egg mass? How did she produce something that large and not get eaten in the process? Why weren't there any other fishes there scooping up the eggs? My diving experience is all in shallow water off of islands or coasts, but if there's food in the water, one gets all sorts of hungry critters coming around for a taste.

For those just tuning in, the actual squid starts after about three minutes of craptastic new age music and nothing to see but blue, so skip ahead.

Wow! That is so cool!

How many does she have at one time, a couple of thousand? How many of them live for more than a couple of days? (I'm assuming here that they're attractive prey.) And does she jettison that whatever-it-is or does she pull it back in? What does she look like before she pushes that thingy out? Can you tell she's pregnant just by looking?

Enquiring minds want to know. :-)

(And BMurray is right - there was a lot of waste at the beginning.)

That was beautiful... but I also have to admit a great deal of ignorance. Can you tell us more?

J. Daley,

Check out PZ's earlier post on the subject here. I don't know if this answers your question, but it's a good start.

Agreed with the "please give more info for us unenlightened beings who don't know cephalopod spawning terribly well" - and also - what's with the top flaps/wings/things on the (for lack of a better word) crown. I can see how it would be useful underwater, but, mate, I'm sure there's a story worth a post about how that came to be.

See what you've done? You've made cephalopods interesting to the rest of us! What were you thinking?

Thank you Mr Pundit, for answering J Daley's question and part of m own even as I was typing.

Awesome vid.

And for some reason, momma squid reminded me of Marge Simpson.

Magically Natural !!!!

Far more eerie, ethereal and beautiful than anything from fiction, that's for sure.

Beautiful. Thanks for turning the lay person on to the wonders, and mystery of nature.

Let's be natural.

PZ Myers said, "It's beautiful and entirely, gloriously, perfectly NATURAL."

And gross. Never underestimate the power of gross to enthrall the witness. :D

That was incredibly beautiful. Not that I've ever eaten squid, but it's hard to see them as food animals after that.

Also, my homeostasis prof was lecturing on the differences between our and squids' nervous systems (i.e. the relative merits of myelin). Can you talk about that sometime?

Squid have some "large bore" (wide across) nerve fibers (axons), which allow nerve signals to conduct fast down the length of them, particularly such as when the squid need to escape. So squid get good conduction velocity of these nerve signals by having those large bore axons.

What us humans do is to get good conduction velocity by having our axons electrically insulated. Insulation (in the form of myelin, a wrapping made of other cells) helps to increase conduction velocity too, for reasons having to do with how voltage spreads down the length of any cable (and an axon is basically a cable).

See here for more.

That was unbelievable, I'm speechless........do explain

It's beautiful and entirely, gloriously, perfectly NATURAL.

Sure. Does anyone have either an example of something UNNATURAL or a good working definition of the word "natural"?

I don't.

I think this was quite amazing, and I resent BMurray and Chakolate for their unnecessary detractions. Think of the presentation as a music video rather than as something meant to gratify exactly your personal expectations.

ABSOLUTELY MEZMERIZING. GORGEOUS.

I just hope that our first contact with alien beings isn't conducted by humans bigoted by an excessive "eeeyooo/ick/yuck' reflex. That kind of response could be potentially disasterous: the visitors might decide to destroy Earth as not worth bothering with.

Wait - maybe that's why they haven't revealed themselves yet, because they already know most of us can't handle novelty in each other, let alone from nature (yes, even in one of our own, a denizen LIVING IN OUR OWN OCEANS).

Say they're advanced enough to have been watching us for millions or even billions of years - advanced enough to have all the time in the universe and therefore be infinitely more patient than we are. Maybe they're just waiting for us to winnow ourselves down to a relative few survivors who aren't afraid to face whatever else nature can evolve. Maybe they figure that's what it would take for us to "grow up"...or permanently shut up. What would they care? They could conceivably be monitoring millions of worlds graced with life. To them we'd be just another tiny point example of an incredibly vast diversity of ways nature evolves to make a living.

If so, and they're monitoring us in any detail, I'd like to take this semi-formal opportunity to make a simple plea right now:

"HELP!!!"

After all, if they've managed to survive that long without knocking themselves off, they would obviously be in posession of a vital ingredient we lack. We desperately need an infusion of that. (I think its an abiding attention to and respect for nature, and the only means of acquiring knowledge of nature is through science - it must be universal, since nature's operations must be the same for every creature that may evolve anywhere).

Ah, but they'd surely understand how complicated that would be. Besides transfiguring our way of life (such as that mess is) far beyond our feeble imaginations, any overture of assistance would immediately bring on a foaming display of religious passion that would make the current joke look like a severe case of dry-mouth.

Those silly humans...damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Bah, of course it can be described as "gross!" There's plenty in nature that's repulsive or icky. Just because one has a naturalistic worldview doesn't mean you have to pretend not to find things like gelatinous sacks gross. Come on! Are we scientists or hippies???

Amanda says, "Bah, of course it can be described as "gross!" There's plenty in nature that's repulsive or icky. Just because one has a naturalistic worldview doesn't mean you have to pretend not to find things like gelatinous sacks gross. Come on! Are we scientists or hippies???"

Oh my. In case you aren't being sarcastic (its entirely possible, its often hard to tell):

Item: Ugliness, as well as beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It is not "gross" at all from my perspective. Sorry you apparently have such a childish aversion to such wonders: such an attitude is absolutely guaranteed to hinder you from learning more about the gross world you necessarily must live in. What a shame. You're missing out on SO MANY INTRICATE DETAILS, which is a beautiful circumstance in its own right.

Item: Yes, there's lots of ickiness in nature. Most of what I see which is most repulsive in that respect in my estimation is associated with humans. Lots of the ickiness they indulge in they even do on purpose. Double ick! I hesistate to even go there for examples, the gag reflex is so bad.

But just to give you a running start, you may start a very very long list with...hmmm, lesseee...how about Britney Spears?

(Oh, dear me, I just threw up...EEEYOOO. I really hate when that happens)

Item: There is no "pretending' whatsoever on my part - and I suspect very rarely if at all on the part of other admirers. Why would anyone who is THAT revolted bother pretending they can stomach it? Just to demonstrate manly courage? The latter are always more "effective" at demonstrating that by stepping on a worm or a slug to show who's boss.

They're also likely to step in their own feces...metaphorically speaking.

Item: What have you got against "hippies"? I know lots of scientists who are "hip". They are also some of the sharpest geeks and nerds I know.

Come on! Break a smile when you fart. Its ok. Really. It is natural and it IS beautiful. Just don't overdo it.

TheBrummell asks, "Does anyone have either an example of something UNNATURAL or a good working definition of the word "natural"?

I don't."

Everything's necessarily "natural", yes. Even thoughts and beliefs inside human heads that poorly correspond to the stuff that goes on outside of their heads.

That good enough?

Arnosium, it sounds as if you rather missed Amanda's real point. She said: "Bah, of course it can be described as 'gross!'" Your argument seems to be that it doesn't have to be described as gross. Naturally, I agree with both of you, and I think most other people would, too.

Just because something is wholly natural, I do not relinquish my right to consider it magical, gross, both, or neither (nor to describe it as such in public fora).

Brian - thanks for catching my meaning where Arnosium seemed to've missed it.

But to flesh out my point a bit more: Those working in the sciences or those who simply have a naturalistic worldview are human beings with likes and dislikes, aesthetic leanings and irrational behaviors. Doctors smoke and drink despite seeing the harm it can do every day. Botantists still have favorite flowers, zoologists think certain animals are cuter than others. And though I'm studying medical anthropology, I dislike public breastfeeding in America. I mean, if being rational seeped into every cranny of our lives, all scientists would be boring automatons. And we aren't! I know some cool ones!

Does that make any of us less than professional? Not unless the doctor encourages his patients to smoke and not unless I refrain from teaching someone in Mali how to breastfeed correctly. Is that gonna happen? Highly doubtful.

And I still think that squid birth was revolting.
In your face!!