For some context check it out.

That's a pretty small space for it to fly in, how well does a monarch fly in such a small space with gravity?

They may think they have trapped THE MONARCH, but they are mistaken!

Sadist.

Also, what about all those miniature asteroids it has to avoid?

>> ^rougy:
Sadist.

you can't be serious..

I was rooting for the guy.

Poor guy. Suddenly nothing makes sense.

Hmmm. I agree with Tiver, I can't imagine it flying gracefully in that little space no matter what gravity was doing.

>> ^aceofkidneys:
>> ^rougy:
Sadist.

you can't be serious..


Not only am I serious, I am at this moment on the phone with the ACLU.

>> ^gwiz665:
They may think they have trapped THE MONARCH, but they are mistaken!


!!! I don't get the reference!!!!

>> ^ForgedReality:
>> ^gwiz665:
They may think they have trapped THE MONARCH, but they are mistaken!

!!! I don't get the reference!!!!



Venture Brothers

FAIL EXPERIMENT!

A butterfly on the surface in a box that big will do the SAME DAMN THING.

Give it room, then say it screws up.

>> ^Payback:
FAIL EXPERIMENT!
A butterfly on the surface in a box that big will do the SAME DAMN THING.
Give it room, then say it screws up.


Exactly what I thought.

"OMGZ LOOK AT CERAZY BEEFLY. IT DUN KNOW WHICH WAY YUP. SILLY BEEFLY"

Up the ante fill the box with bees.

Then make them fight. IN ZERO GRAVITY!

That's the kind of experiments I would run.

I think flutterby is a way better name for them

>> ^Payback:
FAIL EXPERIMENT!
A butterfly on the surface in a box that big will do the SAME DAMN THING.
Give it room, then say it screws up.


Screen shot or it never happened.

>> ^Samaelsmith:
Also, what about all those miniature asteroids it has to avoid?


Sir, the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately 3,720 to 1.

>> ^DrivelsAdvocate:
>> ^Samaelsmith:
Also, what about all those miniature asteroids it has to avoid?

Sir, the possibility of successfully navigating an asteroid field is approximately 3,720 to 1.


Never tell me the odds!

What did they expect? it would gently push off from the side and glide in tiny circles?

This is why we don't have a Moon base - because of stupid scientists wasting money on experiements in space where the outcome is OBVIOUS.

But wait - we might see what it does to their physiology?
I say: who gives a shit! are we planning to fly to Mars on giant moths? It's hardly relevant to human exploration.

>> ^raverman:
What did they expect? it would gently push off from the side and glide in tiny circles?
This is why we don't have a Moon base - because of stupid scientists wasting money on experiements in space where the outcome is OBVIOUS.
But wait - we might see what it does to their physiology?
I say: who gives a shit! are we planning to fly to Mars on giant moths? It's hardly relevant to human exploration.


Wrong. Nature long invented a lot of science/technology well before humans "invented" it. Dismissing nature for the advancement of human science is inconceivable. Also to all you "obvious" people, what if it flew? what if it flew perfectly and elegantly? Hmmm could it be grounds for study in to improving our movement in low gravity? Everything is obvious in retrospect, thanks.

I'm glad there are scientists out there who don't listen to naysayers and actually try new things. Black swan people, black swan, will we ever learn?

Why is it assumed the butterfly wasn't doing that on purpose?

*length=56

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 56 secs - length declared by bareboards2.