Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Oil Exploration Leads To Video of a Mysterious Elbowed Squid

Posted by timothy on Thu Nov 27, 2008 05:41 PM
from the that-is-one-freaky-cephalopod dept.
eldavojohn writes "A rare glimpse from Shell Oil of a giant squid brings to light the strange relationships some deep sea marine biologists have with drilling companies. The video of the squid (Magnapinna) is very rare as this creature remains largely a mystery to science. While some are concerned of a conflict of interest, biologists and big oil sure make for strange bedfellows. The video is from 200 miles off the coast of Houston, TX and about 4,000 feet down." Looking at this creature gives me the willies, frankly.
+ -
story

Related Stories

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Nice animal (Score:5, Interesting)

    by KasperMeerts (1305097) on Thursday November 27 2008, @05:44PM (#25911575)
    Damn, mother nature is really infinitely more inventive than every sci-fi movie director or write in the world. I mean, this is something I would expect to find on some alien planet or something.
  • Really? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Entropy98 (1340659) on Thursday November 27 2008, @05:45PM (#25911581) Homepage

    biologists and big oil sure make for strange bedfellows
     
    Really? I would think that they (deep sea drillers and deep sea biologists) have learned quite a bit from each other over the years.
    --
      IP address Finding [ipfinding.com]

    • Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The Mighty Buzzard (878441) on Thursday November 27 2008, @07:37PM (#25912231)

      Seriously. Environmentalists need to set the jihad switch to off and try rational discussion with the deep sea outfits for a change.

      I'm fairly sure they'd be quite happy to load all of their deep sea platforms up with tethered, submersible, camera-wielding drones and drastically increase the amount of deep water footage and readings scientists are able to gather.

      • Re:Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by DeathElk (883654) on Thursday November 27 2008, @10:19PM (#25913071) Homepage
        Not while there's the risk of discovering an endangered species, thus threatening their drilling rights.
          • Re:Really? (Score:5, Informative)

            by RockDoctor (15477) on Friday November 28 2008, @01:16AM (#25913935) Journal

            Why would it threaten drilling rights? Unless the fish are living in the rock what's the problem?

            Three things occur to me : (in decreasing order, probably) drilling mud coating the surface of rock cuttings discharged over the side ; unstable and/ or soluble minerals as part of the rock cuttings themselves ; heat from the cuttings. If you're using oil-based mud (technically, invert emulsion drilling fluid with a low-dielectric continuous phase and a high-dielectric discontinuous phase ; the chemical nature of the continuous phase is varied but it is universally some degree of bad news for any skin it encounters ; I've got the chemical burns to prove it.) then it's unsurprising that dumping tons of it onto the seabed can cause problems in the surrounding areas. Less obviously, throwing tons of rock salt or anhydrite or unstable clay minerals has potential to do various degrees of nasty to water chemistry. There's also the other additives in the mud to consider - barytes is often associated with lead mineralisation, for example, raising the possibility of other forms of pollution. Finally, the rocks that come up from drilling are generally hot to some degree, and while the sea does have significant cooling power, when many tons are dumped into the sea in short order, it's within the bounds of credibility to change temperatures for a while, particularly within the seabed.

            All of which is why discharge of cuttings coated with "oil" (natural or synthetic) is now forbidden in a number of areas. Which simply prompted the development of a range of "skip'n'ship" solutions which are loathed by drillers, but allow drilling to continue to use oil-based muds.

            Well, you did ask!

  • by ColdWetDog (752185) on Thursday November 27 2008, @05:47PM (#25911593) Homepage

    While some are concerned of a conflict of interest, biologists and big oil sure make for strange bedfellows. The video is from 200 miles off the coast of Houston, TX and about 4,000 feet down."

    Research is research. The data doesn't 'care' who paid for the camera. Besides it is in Shell (or whomever's) interest to understand as much as possible about the location they plan on dumping large amounts of money on.

    What happens if there is an alien colony down there? Wouldn't you like to know? Don't go expecting Shell to fund a study of these things, but why wouldn't they show it to people. Looks pretty cool actually.

    And didn't the camera say about 7500 feet (not 4000 as in TFS)?

    • by jd (1658) <imipak AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:00PM (#25911661) Homepage Journal
      The data doesn't care, but oil drillers are unlikely to give information that harms their potential to drill, and can afford to be "selective" on what they provide. They also have more than enough technical equipment and expertise to "improve" the data, if it is in their interests to do so. That is why it is generally bad science to get information from those who have a vested interest in your conclusions being what they want them to be. It has nothing to do with the camera and everything to do with the eyes far behind it.
      • by vux984 (928602) on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:12PM (#25911747)

        The data doesn't care, but oil drillers are unlikely to give information that harms their potential to drill, and can afford to be "selective" on what they provide.

        The conflict is potentially deeper than that. The oil drillers, by providing the hardware, may be able dictate the direction science takes.

        Its no different really than the cigarette companies providing the labs for cancer research. Any scientist working in the lab who finds that 'cigarettes cause cancer' is out of work... any scientist who finds that cigarettes and cancer is unrelated gets increased funding and access to better equipment.

        THAT is the real potential conflict of interest here.

      • by TapeCutter (624760) on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:14PM (#25911755) Journal
        While I am as cynical as the next slashdotter about corporations, Shell have donated submersible time for researchers to gather their own information at this (and other) sites. Without that generous donation the researchers concerned would have squat.

        This video was just something the oilmen spotted and thought was interesting enough to film.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        They also have more than enough technical equipment and expertise to "improve" the data, if it is in their interests to do so.

        Ah, that would account for the 30-odd (sometimes very odd) video editors, graphics artists and CGI programmers I see occupying the 4 spare bedspace on a normal drilling rig.

        Sure, the oil industry can hire all the graphics expertise that it needs, when it needs it. And when they're no longer needed ... well that's the difference between "contractor" and "core crew". (I say this with

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          So you believe that atmospheric pollution, oil spills and groundwater contamination are myths and hysteria? Perhaps incidents like the Bhopal disaster [wikipedia.org] and the Exxon Valdez spill [wikipedia.org] could demonstrate that the risk to human and animal survival is very real, and based in observed fact.

          Dude really, you're on the wrong forum. Perhaps www.RavingPsychoticIndustryDrones.com would be more to your liking.

          • by Tenebrousedge (1226584) <tenebrousedge@@@gmail...com> on Thursday November 27 2008, @10:16PM (#25913047)

            The Exxon spill may not be the best example. The cleanup efforts were probably more harmful than the spill itself, and the environment has completely recovered since then. My authority on the subject comes from having lived in Valdez, AK for nearly my entire life; I can provide further sources if need be.

            This criticism should not be taken as arguing against your point in general.

            • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

              by Anonymous Coward
              I fish commercially in Alaska during the summers. (Caught 112 000 lbs of fish last summer with three other guys.) Valdez's salmon run is still completely destroyed in some places. I don't know how things are on land, but out on the water fishermen have lost their trade from that oil spill.
        • by gyrogeerloose (849181) on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:48PM (#25911947)

          The oil drillers actually believe in science

          The oil drillers believe in science as long as it supports their worldview. That is, drilling for more oil. As soon as a scientific finding conflicts with what they want, however, you can bet said belief wavers considerably.

        • by TapeCutter (624760) on Thursday November 27 2008, @07:14PM (#25912105) Journal
          "The oil drillers actually believe in science...unlike the environmentalists with their superstition

          Warning, this [bbc.co.uk] could cause your politically biased head to explode.
  • Hmm yeah... (Score:5, Funny)

    by cjfs (1253208) on Thursday November 27 2008, @05:48PM (#25911599) Homepage Journal

    This is why I don't eat creatures from the ocean.

    Hopefully they'll return the courtesy.

  • by imbaczek (690596) <imbaczek.poczta@fm> on Thursday November 27 2008, @05:54PM (#25911635) Journal
    using nothing but my keyboard and mouse!
  • by Tablizer (95088) on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:01PM (#25911677) Homepage Journal

    Looks like a giant virus:

    http://50milesmore.blogspot.com/2008/03/prepare-to-be-assimalated.html [blogspot.com]

    Squiddy will give you a flu like no other.
         

  • by TrickFred (231420) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `derfkcirt'> on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:12PM (#25911749) Homepage

    Someone tell Zack Snyder, maybe he can get some budget footage for the Watchmen movie, give it a proper ending.

  • Truth/Fiction (Score:5, Informative)

    by Digital End (1305341) <<excommunicated> <at> <gmail.com>> on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:33PM (#25911865)
    You never hear the full quote, but it is so much better then the shortened version:

    Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.
  • Oh Shit (Score:5, Funny)

    by CraigoFL (201165) <slashdot@kanoo k . n et> on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:37PM (#25911887)
    Still not as scary as Dolphins with Opposable Thumbs [theonion.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 27 2008, @07:36PM (#25912225)

    Damn, a giant squid, a robot submarine AND big oil!
    Now if only;
    * The robot ran BSD, but formerly ran Vista
    * The MAFIAA was claiming copyright on the film
    * On close inspection, the squid had a google logo but was in fact an alien species
    * Some jerk had just been granted a lame patent for 'swimming at great depths with tentacles'

    We'd never need another!

  • I've seen at least three different shows on Discovery Channel about these squid that until a few years ago were considered by most biologists to be nothing by a myth.

    One was about the first ever captured specimen of a Giant Squid -- it was almost microscopic and they couldn't keep any alive.

    Later, one was about actually getting fleeting video of one in the wild.

    Most recent was one about another kind of giant squid that's even bigger and was caught in a net accidentally. The fishing trawler was smart enough to quickly freeze it. In the show, they were able to thaw it carefully and do a dissection. Apparently one of the problems with scientists working with these is that thy decompose extremely rapidly.

    Oil exploration is pushing serious camera time deeper than ever. At the same time, an awareness of the value to science of creatures that we don't know about is making inroads into fishing crews in even the most remote places where in the past such a find might simply have been discarded as waste.

    There is a LOT of volume in the oceans, and we're far from understanding it in the kind of depth we one day will.
     

  • by gordguide (307383) on Thursday November 27 2008, @11:59PM (#25913585)

    Truly awesome video and a truly awesome creature visible for the first time. Awesome might even be a bit understated.

    But, the manner in which it was discovered? As ordinary as dirt. Face it ... imperial expansion, military exercises and exploration of the furthest corners of the earth, and beyond, and below, are all pretty much the province of the miner, the soldier, the geologist, the imperialist paying those salaries. There is nothing new about how this was found ... it's how EVERYTHING is found. The hunter finds the range and extent of the animals in the local area. The mapping of America was done by fur traders and those seeking treasure. You could go on and on.

    There are those who oppose commercial enterprise, who oppose war and the exercises that preparation for war entail, who find man is essentially unkind to both man and the world he lives in. But, they learn from the adventures and the wallets of the "Bad Man".

    That Shell released this video is hardly a surprise. Our entire knowledge of the world around us is essentially paid for by those like Shell Oil and those who came before them. Shell Oil is as interested in advancing our knowledge as anyone; perhaps more so because they intend to live in this world where this particular creature was found.

    To imply evil intent is really off base ... they have plenty of opportunity to be evil the markets, on Capital Hill, at the UN, or the WTO. Note that few endangered species are likely to be found in those places, that is the environment of man, and is also the place where you are most likely to encounter the environmentalist, PETA, and the like.

    They don't go a mile or more under the ocean's surface ... Shell Oil does, though.

    I have never met anyone who works in the field for companies like Shell who is not far more aware of the world around them than those who occupy the cities and rail against the destruction of our environment. They have tremendous respect for the environment and the absolute wonder of the world we live in. Those who sit at their computers or write letters about banning plastic bags have no concept of the outdoors, usually. In fact, they rarely go about exploring the very city they live in.

  • is that the same anatomies keep getting reinvented for various reasons: environment, food source, etc.

    so you have dolphins mimicking the body plans of fish

    you have bats mimicking the body plans of birds

    you have the herds of grazers during the dinosaur age and the predators who track them, and you have the herds of grazers in our age and the predators who track them

    the same bodyplans and anatomical features and feeding strategies keep getting reinvented

    and here, you have a squid, who has evolved to live like a jellyfish

    • Re:Size? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Takichi (1053302) on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:02PM (#25911683)

      Based on analysis of videos not unlike the one captured at the Perdido site, scientists know that the adult Magnapinna observed to date range from 5 to 23 feet (1.5 to 7 meters) long

      From the second page of the article.

    • by jd (1658) <imipak AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday November 27 2008, @06:03PM (#25911691) Homepage Journal
      This is clearly a new branch of Homeland Security for Cthulhu. Tired of people carrying around copies of the Necronomicon to dispell him, he has invested in an army of multi-jointed drifters to act as a lynch mob should any deep sea fish try to exchange knowledge of his whereabouts for a reduction in EU tuna quota.