*dead -- "Video unavailable
This video contains content from Discovery Communications, who has blocked it in your country on copyright grounds".

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.

The issue is the wrong guy, a dishonest blowhard trying to cover his own failures, claimed this early on with absolutely zero evidence. It was a clear dodge, his normal MO. Refusing any responsibility for ending the international pandemic response team that would have been able to actually say when and where the outbreak started, and likely be able to keep it relegated to one small area in China. By blaming it on a Chinese lab, actually saying it was intentional, he deflects from his abject failure to protect America from a clear, obvious, incontrovertibly deadly threat on the horizon….or any time after it’s discovery.
Were the Chinese studying Covid, yes, so were we. That’s not an indication of where it came from. There’s no evidence it came from any lab, only supposition at best.

Edit:Even if the guess that it came from a Chinese lab is correct, it doesn’t excuse one second of Trump’s (lack of) response and outright denials for months-years. The origin has nothing to do with the danger level, in fact, if it WERE enhanced/created in a lab as he claimed, that’s more reason to consider it MORE dangerous, not reason to claim it’s just a cold or mild flu and will disappear like magic in a few weeks. Granted, it was fun to see him (only after his trade deal fell apart) blame this deadly virus on the Chinese as an unforgivable deliberate act of germ warfare and accuse them of minimizing the danger and hiding the size and severity of the outbreak and in the same breath claim it’s nothing to worry about, not dangerous, probably not deadly, not worth any action to protect against, and just a minimal annoyance soon to disappear….but also disappointing to see how easily so many Americans glossed over the two faced hypocritical responsibility shirking stance he took.

This guy claims most, nearly all viruses can’t both infect people and be transmitted….what utter nonsense. If that were true, there would have never been epidemics, pandemics, not even outbreaks. Credibility destroyed.

I guess he didn’t hear about swine flu, or bird flu, or flu, or colds, or any transmittable virus. 🤦‍♂️
I guess they haven’t heard new mutations are far less deadly (but more transmittable) than earlier versions, so they are getting less dangerous, contrary to his claim.

Not transmitting well outdoors means it’s not natural?! Bullshit, animals nest together. Many natural viruses require close contact to transmit.

DNA testing proved early on that this is not a man made virus. Is it possible a Chinese lab made a natural virus more dangerous, then a lab mistake released it? Yes, but there’s no evidence that’s the case, even these people who’s livelihood relies on people accepting “the lab hypothesis” (hypothesis=guess) admit it’s all conjecture, there’s no evidence, certainly no proof. It’s not the lab theory because it’s unproven.

Duh.

BTW, this couple are married, anti vaxers, Ivermectin proponents, and were thrown out of Evergreen College, and are now both now discredited and disgraced. Their main source of income is now their anti vax, pro Ivermectin, Covid isn’t dangerous podcasts loved by morons like Joe Rogan, and a source of much of his misinformation that’s getting him removed from his platform.
“Bret Weinstein is one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation out there,” says Dr. David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and professor at Wayne State University who also debunks quack remedies as managing editor at a website called Science-Based Medicine. “Weinstein can be ‘credited’ with playing a large role in popularizing the belief that ivermectin is a miracle cure or preventative for COVID-19, that the vaccines are dangerous, and that the disease itself is not. Why are Rogan and Maher attracted to his messages? Contrarians and conspiracy theorists tend to be attracted to each other.”
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/09/16/bret-weinstein-and-heather-heying-go-unvaccinated-take-ivermectin/

Downvote discredited shills who profit from misinformation. No surprise at all, considering who posted this dishonest propaganda from discredited propagandists.

One of the best characters/actors on Star Trek Discovery is Michelle Yeoh as Philippa Georgiou. This looks like it will be pretty good.

It wasn’t so much a discovery as a realization, no one told me…I never believed in magic, the supernatural, or mythological monsters, so the first serious examination of what Santa allegedly did was enough to understand it was just a cultural fantasy. I’m embarrassed it took me so long to consider….I might have even been 6.

Eventually I forgave them, but at the time I remember telling them I was very disappointed in them for lying to me, especially over something so dumb.
They were surprised, I think they apologized, and explained they were just trying to make things fun, not trick me somehow. I reminded them of the part about coal and switches if I was bad, and Santa knowing everything. I don’t remember their response to that, but I imagine on some level they were proud I figured out it was really about behavioral control at that young age.

@vil: Well, it's actually Bell herself that has a similar opinion:

https://jila.colorado.edu/~ajsh/astr2030_12/sn/Bell.html

It has been suggested that I should have had a part in the Nobel Prize awarded to Tony Hewish for the discovery of pulsars. There are several comments that I would like to make on this: First, demarcation disputes between supervisor and student are always difficult, probably impossible to resolve. Secondly, it is the supervisor who has the final responsibility for the success or failure of the project. We hear of cases where a supervisor blames his student for a failure, but we know that it is largely the fault of the supervisor. It seems only fair to me that he should benefit from the successes, too. Thirdly, I believe it would demean Nobel Prizes if they were awarded to research students, except in very exceptional cases, and I do not believe this is one of them. Finally, I am not myself upset about it – after all, I am in good company, am I not!

When the paper was published the press descended, and when they discovered a woman was involved they descended even faster. I had my photograph taken standing on a bank, sitting on a bank, standing on a bank examining bogus records, sitting on a bank examining bogus records: one of them even had me running down the bank waving my arms in the air. Look happy dear, you've just made a Discovery! (Archimedes doesn't know what he missed!) Meanwhile the journalists were asking relevant questions like was I taller than or not quite as tall as Princess Margaret (we have quaint units of measurement in Britain) and how many boyfriends did I have at a time?

It would have been a rare occurence indeed for the head of a science project to share the accolades with a student. She was second on the original paper.

Also remember this is a Nobel prize for physics, so it is very much to be had for the scientist who starts the project, creates the equipment, sets goals, is reserved when the student finds something new but then listens to her, the hypothesis and confirmation part is important and was not ms. Bells work...

So yes, the astronomical observation and discovery of the first two pulsars is hers.

The Nobel prize for physics for the discovery of pulsars went to the two scientists that contributed the most to the confirmation of the rotating neutron star hypothesis. IMHO rightfully.

Could a student have been included, man or woman? Unlikely.

Kind of, but the head of department is morally and ethically obligated to make note of the subordinate who made the actual discovery or breakthrough and usually shares the prize at least if it doesn’t go directly to the discovery maker alone. This is especially true when the head misinterprets and discards the data and denies any discovery was made until the discoverer, on their own, forms a hypothesis, tests it, and repeats it, all without the head of department’s involvement.

In this case, one person made the discovery and the department head dismissed it, then that subordinate on her own continued her investigation and formed her own hypothesis, tested and verified it, and only then her department head became convinced, then took ALL credit for the discovery with no mention of her. That is NOT how scientific teams work.

This wasn’t just her discovery, she figured out what it was too…her hypothesis and her testing, her repeating the discovery, almost certainly her writing it up. If she were a man, she definitely would have gotten credit for both the discovery and the hypothesis, and for confirming her hypothesis. She might not have been given the “prize” individually, but she would have definitely gotten the credit and shared in the accolades. (I think a male in the same position would have shared the prize at a minimum, and had the department head claimed credit as they did here, would have publicly disgraced the department head by proving they not only had nothing to do with the discovery, they had dismissed it when shown and added nothing at all to the hypothesis or testing it, and they would have been drummed out of the scientific community for plagiarism and theft of intellectual property).

When he dismissed her findings completely, he removed himself from the discovery and she became group leader of her own separate project. She deserves both prizes, both monetary awards, a public apology from the man who stole her work without giving her credit, and a serious civil judgement against him for any bonus, advancement, raise, accolades, or paid engagements he received based on his lie that he discovered pulsars. That’s her money that he stole.

OK I will take a risk on this one. Every scientific breakthrough is supported by scientific personnel who run experiments and collect data. The head of the laboratory or institution gets to interpret the data and get the Nobel Prize. That is how teams work in science.

Its even in the video, getting the discovery discovered is a lot of tedious work, someone has to find the anomalous signal, that is great, someone else then gets to state a hypothesis about what it means, which when it proves to be right gives them the prize. Seems fair. Even if its just one on one student and professor, unless the student comes up with a fundamental concept, just noticing an anomaly does not make a Nobel Prize laureate of the student. Even if his line of search is originally against the opinion of the professor.

Now arguably in this case Ms. Bell made a bigger contribution than just collecting data and if you juxtapose that with how women were treated back then, its a nice story. But if she were a man in the same position there would be no Nobel Prize either. And possibly no compensating prize years later.

And yes she deserves her prize, I believe.

USSC Discovery One

"Just when I thought I knew everything."

personally, anytime a new discovery is made, if it's unused for a bit, it can fade. be forgotten. if rediscovered...the old espial becomes new again. waiting to be lost again.

a neverending treadmill of education.

anyway, she never said anything about not using the strip feature on a live wire. but maybe that's something no one ever forgets?

Stink Flipper? Yeah, I thought that was total bullshit until I saw it on some Discovery Channel show. Yipes.

I guess you're ignorant of the fact that all three networks have said clearly and repeatedly that they have ZERO evidence of these bat shit crazy, false, stupid, verifiably wrong claims by Trump and his sycophants.
Not
One
Word
Of
Evidence.
They've retracted their claims, but too late, and won't have these Trumptards on anymore because they have to spend the entire segment stopping them from speaking and talking over them with disclaimers stating they have no evidence at all to verify these claims.
We all await discovery, because this time NOT having proof, like every other case tossed out for lack of proof, will mean they're guilty.

You're right, there's still a .00000000001% chance Rudy is right and everyone else in the world is wrong....but it's more likely solid gold monkeys will fly out of people's assets and save the economy from the Trumpandemic economy.

Wait for the reply!? You've gotten the reply....it was a retraction by everyone but Rudy and Trump.

LMFAHS. Bob, you haven't made a claim in 5 years that wasn't a lie. Truth from the right is in extremely short supply, but you have a massive glut of lies. That happens when you follow a consummate and constant liar blindly. Well over 30000 lies from the oval office in one term is not just a record, it's a record by a factor of 100 or more.
He's the best at lying (which doesn't indicate his lies are good or believable, just that he's prolific), the best at crime (again, not the most successful, but more convictions than any three administrations combined), best at swamp cultivation (pardons for sale, ndas for all ex employees, loyalty tests, pardons for anyone who went to prison for him, totally allowed his cabinet members to be lobbyists for industries they regulated after swearing they couldn't ever, pardons for those who lied to the FBI, congress, courts, irs, charities...and he lied to all of them too.....and to you, daily.)

Thanks for the laugh. You're a good clown, Bob. Maybe take it up as a career.

Excellent,
Nothing says intimidation like 2.7 Billion.
This will bring discovery.


Each side gets a say.Just because 1 bring a suit doesn't necessarily mean it 100%true.
It could include a PR wording, intimation wording. The other side gets a say. Lets wait for the reply.


Lies are from the left also in great supply.

The first one in Utah was a covert art installation (imo) which was installed sometime in 2016 (satellite images)* without discovery until now. It was soon removed by some adventure types https://www.instagram.com/p/CIQ-CErDstp/ . Looks like the one in Romania is a cheap copy cat someone slammed together. I'd guess the one in SLO is also a copy cat. Seems they are not trying vary hard to hide the recent ones.
SLO news story https://ktla.com/news/california/mysterious-monolith-erected-in-san-luis-obispo-county-similar-to-the-one-that-appeared-in-utah/

*John Green talks about whos art it may have been and that it was in 2016 due to satellite imagery. https://youtu.be/dG9A6_ijSIM?t=140