Tags for this video have been changed from 'Volcanic, killer, lakes, magma, gas, mammoth' to 'Volcanic, killer, lakes, magma, gas, mammoth, national geographic' - edited by kronosposeidon

>> ^MaxWilder:
If I ever own a restaurant, the drinks will come in three sizes: Huge, Massive, and Gargantuan.

What, no Mammoth? Bladder Buster? How about Oh Shit!

That's what I want for Christmas: A cloned woolly mammoth calf.

>> ^MycroftHomlz:
>> ^charliem:
<insert mammoth rebuke here>


Foot-in-mouth syndrome n)
Characterized by incoherent rambling and spewing of thought stream without regards to the contents of the message.

By "they", I was referring to scientists working purely for exploration research purposes. None of those achievements could be possible without a basic understanding of the underlying principles of how the laws of physics, which govern their operation, work.

They didn't start out with an idea to create an imaging machine without a foundation of understanding field theory, maxwells equations, EM theory etc.

Somewhere down the line, it had taken an exploratory researcher the time and grant money to figure out those basic laws. Without which, we wouldn't have anywhere near the amount of amazing tech available to us today.

Any argument that says "bah, its only theoretical, it cant benefit us at all" and uses it as an excuse to cut/reduce funding, needs their heads examined.

The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 is not so simple as to summarize with a video of one man standing in front of a tank. To understand the full scope of the incident, it will require a bit of a history and government lesson. Although the cause for the protest was noble, against totalitarian government policy, corruption, and call for democratic reform, the way in which the protests were executed is not acceptable. The crowd that gathered in the square was there for over two weeks, starting in early May, picketing major government institutions, essentially shutting down the central government. It's a wonder that any country's government has so much patience to deal with a situation like that (would love to go picket the white house). Their patience finally ran out and they called in the army on the night of June 3rd. However, the prospect that this was a peaceful demonstration is grossly misinterpreted. The protest had already broken into rioting and looting on the streets. Both soldiers and civilians were killed in the clash, exact death tolls are unknown. Many civilians were simply stomped to death from the massive crowds rushing down the streets, soldiers known to have been beaten and then burned alive, on streets lit with molotov cocktails and burning wreckage. In such a chaotic environment, it's no surprise that many people would die. Where i'm quoting from? I have relatives who were there.

It is generally accepted in China today that the incident was a mistake in both the government and the people's part. It is in my belief that in the same scenario, any other government would have done the same, if not worse. Chinese are quite a riotous people, the smallest incidences when uncontrolled could to balloon into huge ones with rioting and pillaging, you cannot simply compare with protests in America with people holding up signs yelling at each other.

I'm not applauding the Chinese government for being some benevolent one, they have some serious problems. In fact, they have ALOT of problems, but I can still sympathize towards their mammoth duty of running perhaps the most difficult nation in the world to govern. Too much diversity, too many people, too many disagreements. Therefore governance requires a great deal of power to keep the country from going into anarchy, it has been true there since the imperial ages. Honestly, a true democracy in China would be as realistic as true communism, it wouldn't last a year without destroying itself. We here in the US give up certain liberties for "security", the Chinese give up certain freedoms for stability, 'tis the same principal.

Perhaps I can be that one individual who stands against the army of people who upvoted this video. Let this wall o' text be a lesson that every country have their own issues, and we have no right to be judgmental about others when we have so many problems of our own to fix.

PS:
I'd love to see the source which suggests people get shot for trying to leave China. They probably shoot people who try to get in though
Now boycotting the olympics in the name of politics is extremely naive. The whole point of the olympics is for people of the world to temporarily forget their differences and compete in an even playing field.
The censorship does suck though, they need to fix that :-/

Reporters covering the Olympic games can't get decent internet access because of the heavy censorship. Chinese soldiers still shoot people for trying to LEAVE the country. So I posted this in hopes that more people will boycott the Olympics.

Yeah, that's a great fossilized set of skin and tendons etc. Which certainly is pretty amazing for showing us that they really did have skin that was scaly as thought, however, it's not like the T-Rex or the Mammoths where the soft tissue is actually still soft. The soft tissue in the case of the hadrosaur has been turned into rock, it's amazing just for the fact that usually it rots before it can get anywhere near that state.

In reply to this comment by RhesusMonk:
I found one other article about a hadrosaur. I was at the AMNH a few months ago, fittingly for a lecture on paleogenomics, and I'm sure I saw exhibits on other examples. The lecture was about mastodon sequencing, and the lecturer (whose name I can't fucking remember OR find online--grrr) didn't talk about dinos. Here's an article about the hadrosaur:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071203-dino-mummy.html

From a brief look around, there would seem to be only one case of soft tissue from a dinosaur being found http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html

Some soft tissue from inside the leg bone of a T-Rex. Which is pretty frigging amazing in my mind, they re-hydrated the stuff and could get out flexible, transparent material... stunning... stunning stuff to find from 65 odd million years ago.

But I was talking of a whole body like these Mammoths, being preserved... it'll never happen, and the things in La Brea tarpits are much more recent aren't they? Mammoth age and the like, Sabre Tooth tigers and the like, the age of man, not the age of Dinosaurs.

Still, amazing stuff... I guess since seeing Jurassic Park I've actually wanted to see it actually happen... minus the maiming and killing of course.

In reply to this comment by RhesusMonk:
In reply to this comment by spoco2:
And also, you see that large one in the diarama they show near the end... that's a friggen real stuffed adult Mammoth.

Makes me wish there was a T-Rex or Brontosaurus frozen in permafrost somewhere than can be found... imagine actually finding a dinosaur with skin, organs etc... it'd be incredible.

There are actually quite a few dino fossils that have preserved tissue other than bone. There are some at the AMNH that have skin and partial internal organs intact; and I believe the La Brea tarpits in LA are home to some extremely well preserved tissues as well.

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
And also, you see that large one in the diarama they show near the end... that's a friggen real stuffed adult Mammoth.

Makes me wish there was a T-Rex or Brontosaurus frozen in permafrost somewhere than can be found... imagine actually finding a dinosaur with skin, organs etc... it'd be incredible.

There are actually quite a few dino fossils that have preserved tissue other than bone. There are some at the AMNH that have skin and partial internal organs intact; and I believe the La Brea tarpits in LA are home to some extremely well preserved tissues as well.

[edit]: Seems I was wrong. La Brea houses fossils only as old as OIS 2 (the last ice age--about 11,000 years ago). The articles about other preserved dino tissues can be found here:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071203-dino-mummy.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html

Thanks to spoco for the correction and the second link.

In reply to this comment by spoco2:
And also, you see that large one in the diarama they show near the end... that's a friggen real stuffed adult Mammoth.

Makes me wish there was a T-Rex or Brontosaurus frozen in permafrost somewhere than can be found... imagine actually finding a dinosaur with skin, organs etc... it'd be incredible.

There are actually quite a few dino fossils that have preserved tissue other than bone. There are some at the AMNH that have skin and partial internal organs intact; and I believe the La Brea tarpits in LA are home to some extremely well preserved tissues as well.

And also, you see that large one in the diarama they show near the end... that's a friggen real stuffed adult Mammoth.

Freaks me out that they actually have a stuffed animal that's tens of thousands of years old. (the stuffing of it was done recently, not that long ago) Makes me wish there was a T-Rex or Brontosaurus frozen in permafrost somewhere than can be found... imagine actually finding a dinosaur with skin, organs etc... it'd be incredible.

Mmm, 37k year old mammoth veal

In reply to this comment by dystopianfuturetoday:
I make my living as an artist, and part of my income comes from royalties, but I am very much opposed to current copyright and patent laws. The record industry isn't suffering because of piracy. The record industry is suffering because it is bloated, stagnant and boring.

The film makers and songwriters who are popular enough to be mass downloaded are too busy sniffing coke off a hookers ass through thousand dollar bills to give a fuck (Maddona and Lars excepted). The film makers and songwriters who are not popular enough to be downloaded would kill for the amount of exposure mass downloading would provide. This issue isn't really about the artists. It's about record execs who need a third yacht or a summer home on the French Riviera.

When the major record labels die, I will dance on their grave.

I also have a major problem with the concept that certain combinations of notes and words can be claimed as property by individuals. I have an even bigger problem with medical patents that allow drug companies to hold a monopoly on life saving drugs, allowing them to play extortionist or executioner to the misfortunate of the world. Our concept of economics is completely out of whack.

I have to respectfully disagree. Firstly, the sheer fact that major record/distributing institutions have survived is because they are an unfortunate necessity. Smaller artists simply cannot pull off a Radiohead/NiN and distribute their work single-handedly. The onerous costs and social networking involved in trans-continental product proliferation and promotion far exceed the capacity of a group of twenty-something year olds out of high school. Perhaps sometime not too far ahead in the future when high speed internet subscription reaches a certain level globally, file sharing promotion may play a pivotal role but as of now any such capacity is all too evidently dwarfed by the lucrative publicity big record companies can offer. If anything, traditional distribution companies will likely be replaced by online counterparts such as iTunes which will make previously culturally segregated media available to the world. In addition to that big record companies also act as financial lending institutions to unrealised artistic talent, usually in return for exclusivity deals and nowadays further encroaching upon merchandise and concert returns for years to come.

I think the real question should be, are record companies abusing the leverage in a predominantly oligarchic industry structure? I wholeheartedly agree that the methods being used by the RIAA and their associates are counter-productive, but I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that these measures have come about due to affluent corporate executives scouring for additional earnings.

As for medical patents, again an even more apparent necessary evil. The costs involvement in clinical research and in particular testing and safety verification are exorbitant. Extortionate, even for the mammoth pharmaceuticals industry. Were it not for the presence of patents, then nobody would undertake such an 'investment' and medical breakthroughs would stagnate.

They must be tapping their inner mammoth.

But arsenault185, you seem to be of the steadfast opinion that evolution states that if ANYTHING comes along that is better, then it WILL become the dominant form for that given being. Not so... there have been many cases where some animal/human had a change which was for the better, and did make them improved compared to those around them, but that alone doesn't mean it'll become dominant. If it alone doesn't make for a good enough change then they can be killed off just like any other one of their tribe/group/herd.

It's only when some change happens and it is also passed on to enough children and those children keep passing alone said trait (ie. it has to be the sort that can be passed along), that it will start to become dominant.

And again, just because beings in one particular area starts developing in some way because that suits their climate/habitat/conditions better, it doesn't mean that all of those beings across the globe have to at one time... that's how we have different species and types of all sort of animals. African vs Indian Elephants, White vs Black Rhinos... black people vs white people vs small and hardy vs tall and lanky.

The same initial population of an animal spread all over the world and given enough time apart, will become a collection of different each animals better suited to their individual areas.

It's really not a case of... "Right... Monkeys came first, then People, so all monkeys must now be dead because we're better."

And it's not a case of "Everything about us is better than everything in those beings before us"... some things just became less important during some part of our evolution and just weren't needed. Elephants used to be Mammoths, used to have hair... because they lived in an ice age. Now they don't because they live in hotter areas... but that's not to say if you put an elephant in the cold it wouldn't do better if it had hair, but that's not where elephants live, so they no longer have it.

If Mammoths weren't hunted/killed off then they may still be around along with Elephants... two species related but not the same.

You seem to have interest in evolution, but haven't really given the time to look into it properly, I suggest you do, there are many great books out there that go into wonderful detail but in a very entertaining way...

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

My 6-year old's comment: "they're not real, except for the wooly mammoth- but maybe it might not be real either."