What do they mean “ Recently, scientists in Japan were surprised to find a species of oval squid raised in captivity could change its coat, depending on whether its tank was clean or covered in algae.”…are they students, because I saw this described and demonstrated in 88 in my marine biology class in Hawaii….then we dissected it….then we cooked and ate it as a class. Interesting teacher.

Absolutely not the first time they’ve been “caught” doing this…maybe the first time with high definition cameras, in one specific laboratory condition, with that specific species, raised in captivity, but this is every day behavior for many cephalopods, including squid, and absolutely not a new discovery.

Let’s see them decipher the intense flashings, strobing, color waves, slow fades, etc that they use to communicate and hunt. That might be a first….but I doubt it. Others have studied their insane chromatophores and their amazingly mailable mantles and how they use them for decades if not longer.

This is a neat bit of biology, but to pretend they just discovered this is outrageously dishonest. Get real, people knew squid camouflaged themselves amazingly well long before that guy named Jesus was fathered by a forced pedophilic inception. Almost like saying scientists just discovered newts like it moist, or that water is wet.

know this was humor but if he was serious about security, could have used a catfish bait container (counterfeit packaging) to camouflage the goods. maybe even dip into the pseudo pint in front of her. might be funny.

like putting the alpo label on a can of refried beans. always get an 'ewww!' when i test it to see if it's still good.

"Free Speech Considered Support for Nazism"

Snide and factually wrong, it's his televised support for Nazis and their secret meeting gallery and the public perception that he is a Nazi himself because he supports them and doesn't denounce them that's considered support for nazis, not his sign, not free speech.

"Shows a man holding a sign saying ""the right to openly discuss ideas must be defended", in Hackney, England. Apparently this is not an acceptable sentiment these days; I guess classical liberalism had a pretty good run, but it may be over now."

Also snide and factually wrong. It's a blatant lie that the sentiment on his sign is what they find unacceptable, it's his support for what's seen as a secret nazi/white power meeting hall camouflaged as an art gallery in a neighborhood that doesn't want it, not an open discussion but a secret meeting hall for secret alt-right meetings without openness or discussion.

Clear enough?
I'm guessing not, because you would be forced to admit your mistake, something you seem incapable of doing, but I'll surely get over it.

Edit: seems I've been capable of an excess of civil disagreement...I'm incapable of civility with liars....and funny enough you didn't argue that you didn't lie, only that you didn't know you were snide, which title and description clearly are.

Second edit: I wonder if he supported the same gallery nay secret meeting place for secret invite only meetings for terrorist jihadists, would you still bend over backwards to say all speech matters and his support doesn't equate to support for terrorists? What's the difference?

Don't pretend to be so oblivious.
The gallery is one person making decisions on who to allow to hold private rallies in secret at her establishment, and she chooses Nazis and white power personalities. I thought you support taking individual responsibility.
The Nation of Islam, and I'm no fan at all, is a huge, multinational organization of millions I assume lead by some form of committee and encompassing a wide range of views and opposing extremes....They did not all choose to be associated with that one extremists nor did they all agree with him by far, then or now, only some did. That's similar to the same question but changing "nation of Islam" to "America". Obviously that's comparing apples to the president's drag queen makeup.

I won't comment much on Canada blm because I don't know them and don't choose to take the time needed to sleuth out some truths about them, but assuming what you say is correct it sounds like they have some racism in their midst that they should weed out before they become the monster they wish to destroy.

Brett Stevens, did you read any of the links? Or my quotes from them? Did you visit America.com, his website, or his blog amerika? (i won't) Do you have a clue who he is and the racist mass murderer he celebrates?

They have a right to speak, the crowd has a right to protest and take any civil legal action they choose to remove the soapbox from their neighborhood. I never said different. You must have confused me with the protesters.
They don't have a right to shout or hold their signs emblazoned with their stupid wrong things intended to provoke at a protest and attempt to spark violence, even if they cleverly camouflage it so on the surface their message seems agreeable, which is what I think was his intent. If successful, he would gain more fuel for the argument that the racists and Nazis planning a violent race war aren't the problem, it's the fascist liberal grandma shovers and sign thieves we should really be worried about....just like the boogaloos in America that caused many if not most of the riots, shot cops, and planned multiple mass murders and bombings all of which they intended to pin on blm.

They don't actually need any place to speak today, there's a soapbox in every cellphone.

But

This facility was holding their alt-right events in secret, hiding their speech itself. They wanted it hidden. You can't bemoan their voices being silenced while also defending their secret rallies which no one who might confront or correct them was told happened, can you?

And side note
The government isn't stopping them, so it's not censorship before that idea crops up.

Again, your bar for crying violence in this instance is subterranean. No one would ever be prosecuted for the level of violence without injury that he suffered, nor compensated for his miniscule loss of cardboard. Do you see him hit, kicked, punched, shoved hard, anything? Time stamp please. I'll change my tune if he was actually injured, I didn't see it anywhere, just his sign yanked after being slowly shoved away from one specific spot.

Could you honestly say ANY right wing event, especially any alt-right event infiltrated by a fairly quiet blm activist with a sign bemoaning police corruption would be as gentle and non violent? Edit: I doubt it.

The point of this video as presented is to pretend that's the case, that the shove from grandma is societies downfall, a direct attack on freedom not a rejection of a defender and facilitator of racists and Nazis (if he's not one himself). The Nazis and racists resurfacing and arming themselves (happening here in America) are nothing to be upset about or oppose....they're good people, not like disgusting anti free speech granny and those other freedom haters.
I'm astonished I'm apparently the only one willing to object to that long ago debbunked distortion of reality.

It's amazing how well the creature effects on Predator (and Aliens) have aged. Some of the other effects (the camouflage, the opening shot of the spaceship*) are obviously very 80s, but the creature itself still holds up.

*promote one of my all time favourite movies and a true legend in his field; Stan Winston.

* shouldn't have been in the movie!

Your video, Crab Carrying Jellyfish for Camouflage, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

If they really wanted to disguise the camera, why would they not camouflage it to look like a tree branch or something?
Obviously they're going to notice the monkey!!

I was laughing at the shitty camouflage job of the bicycle.

Then they admit it's camouflage and I think, ok, I guess it's OK then. I only noticed because of the jump cut so ya, I guess it would work.

Just a thought, if you anthropomorphize the planet...if you imagine that disease and other natural human limiting factors are a planets immune response...at what point do we become a virus. Just like in the video, it's horrifying to imagine an organism invading a cell and using it as camouflage. What type of virus do we become when we rewrite the genetic code of other organisms, resulting in our unchecked growth which eventually destroys the host?

I'm sure that malaria would think it unethical not to evolve in a way that would ensure the survival of future generations.

Set fire to one probably half that size on the farm once. Smaller sized nests are really common and quite well camouflaged, so you don't really notice them until you look carefully. They are often under grass at the top of banks, or under eaves, just in odd spots that you wouldn't normally look.

The big one we destroyed was just out in the open in the middle of the forest, I wonder how long something of this size takes to develop.

Is he painted in brick camouflage or something? That damn troll, lol! How you ever saw it to begin with is a story I have yet to hear, and I am sure it is a good one. Still can't believe I never found it noodle!

No, but the F-16 can out accelerate the P-51, but I don't think the F-35 can out accelerate the F-16, can it?

If the stealth tech worked every time, yes, it would have it nailed. I don't think it does, and even if it does, it's methods will be 'cracked' as soon as they're known and we'll need an entire new plane with new systems. You're right, when it goes as planned. It does not always go as planned, and we don't want to lose an F-35 every time we make a mistake in predictions, do we?

I think it's more like a camouflaged sniper hiding in the trees that's taken over the responsibility for also being an artillery brigade and a front line infantry brigade.
It can't do most of what it's designed to do, can barely do what it's best at, and if it's caught, it can't defend itself.

I really don't think there's a job they have for it that can't be done by the F-15, F-16, F/A-18, F-117, B-2, A-10, etc....meaning there's no need for it at all, and we could have had hundreds of those planes for the cost of the R&D done so far for a plane that doesn't yet work, and costs a mint when it is finally deployed, not just to build but for upkeep too.

I'm pretty sure a lot of pilots in WW2, and Korea, and Vietnam would disagree about dogfighting ending in WW1 and about it being all strategy and not performance. For instance, in WW2, we kicked ass largely because a zero was made of paper and couldn't take a hit while the mustang was a flying tank....or so I've read.

I can sure think of a bunch of other things the fed could have spent $1.3 Trillion on....we could all be traveling in tubes for that much money! The Republican's could make a camp to send all Muslims to on the moon for that kind of money.

The F-35 can't maneuver as well as an F-16. But F-16 can't maneuver as well as P-51 from World War 2.

There hasn't been a dog fight since the first world war. Even in WW2 it was about strategy, positioning and team work. It had very little to do with plane performance, expect for when there was a huge gap like the invention of the jet plane.

Air combat for the last 60 years has been about situational awareness first and foremost. And the F-35 has this nailed.

It's like saying that modern soldiers don't have any sword fighting skills. It's completely irrelevant. You wouldn't use a sword against a camouflaged sniper. The F-35 is a camouflaged sniper, hiding in the trees. Who would silly enough to run through an open field with a sword? Or even a pistol? The sniper will have killed you before you even know you are being targeted.


Now the people making the F-35 are probably incompetent in delivering a plane on time and on budget(either that or they are milking it). But the plane once finished, will be a winner.


The other thing is, the F-35's will always be part of a force of other planes in a large scale conflict. If for some reason it does come down to dog fighting - e.g. if there are just tons of cheaper planes going against it (with suicidal pilots) that they simply cannot carry enough missiles, then the rest of the enemies would be mopped up by F-15, F-16s , F/A-18s etc.

It could also say a lot about the quality of the camouflage of the larger mantis.