mq humboldt squid

[makaya325]

hey guys

im new to the jref. its an honor to see so many skeptics. heres my ques

i was watching mq the other day (i know, woo-woo) and i saw the footage of that monstrous squid at the bottom of it. it was estimated to be 108ft long, which is likely bs, but even skeptics agree it was huge.

do any of u guys have any suggestions for the size and species of this footage?

[The Atheist]

hey guys

im new to the jref. its an honor to see so many skeptics. heres my ques

i was watching mq the other day (i know, woo-woo) and i saw the footage of that monstrous squid at the bottom of it. it was estimated to be 108ft long, which is likely bs, but even skeptics agree it was huge.

do any of u guys have any suggestions for the size and species of this footage?

Someone missed a decimal point.

Here are the facts. (http://squid.tepapa.govt.nz/)

[makaya325]

it was on monsterquest, the squid filmed, how big was it? surely, it mustve been bigger than 10ft, which is a giant for a humboldt

[Biscuit]

I believe this is the footage you are looking for

http://www.history.com/content/monsterquest/videos


Click on the giant squid one. In the episode they used specs from the cameras manufacturer to estimates the squid at the very end to be around 108 feet.

I am not sure what to say about it other than its the only piece of evidence that show has ever produced that is even worth looking at.

[makaya325]

whatever it is, its big.

the mq on bigfoot is a little woo-ish, but its at least looking for it unlike armchair researchers

[The Atheist]

it was on monsterquest, the squid filmed, how big was it? surely, it mustve been bigger than 10ft, which is a giant for a humboldt

Yes, they get bigger than 10'; alive, they might be 15-20' long, but no more.

[makaya325]

a more conservative estimate on the size was put at 60ft long. im not sure, but whatever it was, it didnt look like the giant or colossal squid, since both of them dont inhabit the sea of cortez.

if u think a 5ft squid is dangerous, just imagine a 20 ft humboldt!

[GT/CS]

whatever it is, its big.

the mq on bigfoot is a little woo-ish, but its at least looking for it unlike armchair researchers

The makers of MQ are not seriously looking for bigfoot. They are just trying to throw together as many episodes as they can as fast as they can.

They will keep using and abusing bigfoot believers until the believers wise up. Iwouldn't be surprised if they have Henner on the next one.

[Frank Newgent]

Yes, they get bigger than 10'; alive, they might be 15-20' long, but no more.
Yup. Cool footage here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQXRIVqFhkc&feature=related)

[makaya325]

gt, i suggest somebody seriously look for it. either we will come away with a hoax that has evaded man for centuries without being exposed, or the largest primate to ever live (besides gigantopithecus). its interesting both ways. personally, i would love for it to exist, but i consider the opposition. also, can you please stop citing henner. ive known the man for 2 yrs, and he isnt what you would consider a kook. hes worked at the oregon primate research center and is a biologist

[LTC8K6]

There are already plenty of hunters, park rangers, biologists, campers, loggers, and sightseers, etc., roaming the woods.

If they find bigfoot, I'm sure we'll hear about it.

[Bob Blaylock]

Removed personal attack

[Miss_Kitt]

I'd love to see big Humbies, that would be a very cool "monster" indeed. I seriously question the ability to project size from a camera view with no fixed scale object for comparison, though. A lot can be skewed by even a small difference in angle or perspective. It's a nice idea for trying to film big squid, though.

I think we should be investing some research dollars in researching Humboldts, since they seem to be moving northward at a good clip. Maybe we've hunted down the numbers of the large fish that competed with them for food?

Saving all bigfoot comment for other threads, MK

[LTC8K6]

also, can you please stop citing henner. ive known the man for 2 yrs, and he isnt what you would consider a kook. hes worked at the oregon primate research center and is a biologist

I didn't consider him kooky until quite recently...

[LTC8K6]

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4166258#post4166258

Thread on Fahrenbach's descent into kookdom...

[makaya325]

ive known the man and have some "hair" sent to me, said to be of bigfoot. i looked at it under 1600x magnification, and its something very baffling. it similiar to human hair, but their are things that it shares with non-human primates.

look, i dont claim the above is bf evidence. i just thought it would be interesting to share with you.

[makaya325]

kitt, how big do you think the squid caught on footage in 2006 was?

[LTC8K6]

We can DNA test hair these days.

[makaya325]

lt, true, but we cant identify with certainty what they came from without a body. hair wont do it, only a body will

[Biscuit]

Wait a second... Are we seriously discussing the possibility that bigfoot and the giant squid are one and the same? It would make sense for the following reasons.

1. No one has ever photographed bigfoot and a giant squid together
2. If bigfootsquid had the ability to dive into water to hide from people it would be very difficult to find him
3. If bigfootsquid died in the open ocean than the bodies would decompose or be eaten by predators, thus no bodies

We might be on to something...

[makaya325]

biscuit, where do the woo's on mq come into play:D

[arthwollipot]

Can we get back to the squid, please? There's already many threads about bigfoot, and not enough about squid, and cephalapods are far more interesting than bigfoot.

[makaya325]

Oh, opps, my bad. I was talking about the possibility of giant humboldt squids living down in the sea of Cortez

[Biscuit]

To be fair, in the mq episode they had a biologist state it would be impossible for a Humbolt to get to be even 60 feet long yet alone over 100. It had to do with the genetics of the Humbolt.

From the footage they were unable to identify the species but did suggest the unknown squid could be an Architeuthis. They were not know to exist in the sea of cortez but one was found of the coast of California which isn't to far away.

I remember seeing a show about Architeuthis awhile back where an australian biologist was attempting to capture a baby Architeuthis to raise in a lab. I think he got one but it died. I will look for it.

[Cuddles]

it was estimated to be 108ft long

a more conservative estimate on the size was put at 60ft long.

When one estimate is almost double the other, this really tells us nothing other than that they have absolutely no idea how big it actually is.

It's also worth bearing in mind that although there have been reports of giant squid over 60 feet long, the largest ever to be confirmed was a colossal squid measuring 33 feet.

As with so many things like this, the only conclusion we can reasonably come to is that there is not enough information. Big squid certainly exist, and it's entirely possible that this is one of the biggest ever seen, but it's just not possible to accurately measure the size from this video. We can't dismiss it as outright woo, but neither can we consider it useful evidence of anything other than that there might be giant squid living somewhere we didn't know about. And since we actually know very little about them, that's not really all that amazing.

[makaya325]

Right on, Cuddles. The giant squid/colossal squid is one of the least known animals in the world. Even mainstream science has suggested that even bigger squids exist in deeper parts of the ocean.

[Miss_Kitt]

Makaya (et al):

I haven't an idea how big the squid in the video is; my point was simply that estimating sizes of things that swim in and out of light, without any fixed indicators, is nearly impossible. It's similar to the problem one has with identifying things in the sky: without "landmarks" to chart perspective and parallax with, it's hard to determine where on the "large-and-far" versus "small-and-near" spectrum something lies.

I personally would love for there to be really big squid in someplace I can foreseeably afford to visit! -- and where it would be easier to keep track of what researchers are doing that in, say, Japan. (No slam on Japanese biologists; it's just a lot harder to find people who read Japanese, and they seem to be less gabby than Western biologists.) I am fascinated by cephalopods, having once long ago wanted to specialize in them as a marine biologist. (That was after wanting to be a paleontologist and before wanting to be an engineer, for those of you scoring at home.)

I do think we really need to look into what's going on with the Humboldt Squid, as we have had numbers of them washing up on beaches even up in Oregon and Washington, which was previously outside their known range. It may be that they have taken over a former 'niche' of a large fish that humans have depleted, and are expanding through the oceans. As a sidebar, does anyone know whether Minke whales eat them? Minkes have been the real beneficiaries of the whaling ban, so much so that for the other toothed whale populations to rebound, we might have to cull the Minkes a bit...always a troubling question. Once a new equilibrium has been reached after human encroachment, should we try to force things back, or just let the adjustment process go on, recognizing that this means unknown changes across the food-web?

Maybe we can get PZ Myers to give a really entertaining lecture on cephalopods at a future TAM, they really are his passion and he has some wonderful resources available. Tying it in to the claims made on a TV show would be a nice connection, too; a lecture (or several) on How To Evaluate The Reliability of a TV Source would be good, I think.

YMMV, MK

PS Excuse any typing weirdness, I have a horrible cold and have phlegm-brain.

[makaya325]

The squid footage was the only bright light on monsterquest. The rest was for comic relief

[JcR]

I was looking for the video of the Sperm Whale critter cams.
I think it was from a National Geographic show.
But I found this...kinda neat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTUtCuSUJQQ

These underwater vehicles are cool.

[Shrike]

Saw this http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/312091/c367751b/alien_squid.html a while back, found it very cool.
Apparently, it's this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfin_squid.

[JcR]

Saw this http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/312091/c367751b/alien_squid.html a while back, found it very cool.
Apparently, it's this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigfin_squid.

H.G. Wells in the deep blue sea.

[godless dave]

gt, i suggest somebody seriously look for it.

Go right ahead. Make sure to learn basic wilderness survival skills first. And despite what any salesperson tells you, you really can't beat the basic Coleman backpacking stove for reliability and ease of use.


either we will come away with a hoax that has evaded man for centuries without being exposed,


Centuries? More like 50 or or 60 years, and it was exposed a long time ago when one of the guys who made the film admitted "Bigfoot" was a guy in a suit.

[makaya325]

Yes, dave, centuries. Reports from the 1800's are known to most. The natives knew about its existence all along, and before any white man landed in america

[godless dave]

Yes, dave, centuries. Reports from the 1800's are known to most. The natives knew about its existence all along, and before any white man landed in america


Are you sure about that (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=104878)?

Listen, this planet is full of weird and wondrous creatures, some of them barely known to science, and almost definitely some yet to be discovered. There's no need to make up ones that don't exist. Aren't the giant squids we've found in the bellies of whales impressive enough? Isn't the huge variety of existent primates enough? Is nature so mundane that we have to make up fictional animals to study?

[makaya325]

Godless, the planet is definitely full of amazing animals. I wouldnt jump the gun to conclude that certain ones are fiction. Nature is so mysterious that somethings dont make sense but are there.'

A possible reason why bf has allegedly been around for 50 or 60 yrs is that since man has approached the once then remote areas for construction, we see these creatures in their habitat

[godless dave]

I wouldnt jump the gun to conclude that certain ones are fiction.

I would, when there are very few reported sightings, none of them credible.

[Buckaroo]

Makaya (et al):As a sidebar, does anyone know whether Minke whales eat them? Minkes have been the real beneficiaries of the whaling ban, so much so that for the other toothed whale populations to rebound, we might have to cull the Minkes a bit...always a troubling question.

Minkes are actually baleen whales, not toothed, so they would only be able to munch on the Humboldt squid if the squid were in larval form.

Luckily, they fill a different niche than that of toothed whales, so no one needs to die. :)

[Cuddles]

Nature is so mysterious that somethings dont make sense but are there.

Could you present us with an example of an animal or plant that does not make sense?

A possible reason why bf has allegedly been around for 50 or 60 yrs is that since man has approached the once then remote areas for construction, we see these creatures in their habitat

Many things are possible. Most of them are not at all probable.

[makaya325]

True, cuddles. Take the platypus for example, how does that exist without any ancestor?

[makaya325]

Godless, i wouldnt say a couple 100 are a few # of sightings.

[Akhenaten]

True, cuddles. Take the platypus for example, how does that exist without any ancestor?


Like this:

Four species related to Platypus have been found in fossil deposits from Australia, including a complete skull of Obdurodon dicksoni and an opalised jaw fragment of Steropodon galmani. The latter is 110 million years old and represents one of Australia's oldest mammals. The only evidence that Platypus ancestors were once present outside Australia came in 1991, when a 61 - 63 million year old fossil tooth was found in Patagonia, in southern Argentina.

Australian Museum Online Factsheet (http://www.austmus.gov.au/factSheets/platypus.htm)

[makaya325]

Ak, opps! My bad

[arthwollipot]

True, cuddles. Take the platypus for example, how does that exist without any ancestor?Clearly, it can't. The platypus doesn't exist. :rolleyes:

[Biscuit]

Ak, opps! My bad

Makaya you are going to have be a lot more careful about the things you state on this forum. When I read your post about the platypus it took me less than a minute to disprove what you stated.

Where did you hear that platypus have no ancestors and why did you not take a few seconds to google "platypus ancestors"?

Its ok to be wrong or mistaken but when the information is so easily found it just looks like laziness.

[Miss_Kitt]

Can we please get back to squid? There are other crypto critter threads...I want more tentacles, radula and siphons, thank you!

[makaya325]

Miss kitt, speaking of squid, i dissected one in marine science today. It has incredibly complex internal organs

[Miss_Kitt]

The amazing thing about squid--well, one of the amazing things, anyway--is that they can opt to have binocular vision. I've seen the slow-motion footage where you can actually see one bend its head to get its eyes to align on the target fish. (They were studying squid strikes, so had nice cameras and distance-marked background behind the tank wall.) We hadn't thought about them using binocular vision when needed, since hard-skulled animals can't do it; it was a simple case of a solution not being thought of due to preconception.

I still smile every time I think about that discovery. What an amazing world we live on!

Miss Kitt

[makaya325]

The amazing thing about squid--well, one of the amazing things, anyway--is that they can opt to have binocular vision. I've seen the slow-motion footage where you can actually see one bend its head to get its eyes to align on the target fish. (They were studying squid strikes, so had nice cameras and distance-marked background behind the tank wall.) We hadn't thought about them using binocular vision when needed, since hard-skulled animals can't do it; it was a simple case of a solution not being thought of due to preconception.

I still smile every time I think about that discovery. What an amazing world we live on!

Miss Kitt


Hey kitt, there might be even bigger squid than we thought!

according to wikipedia:

In 1978, the "NOFOUL" rubber coating of the AN/SQS-26 SONAR dome of USS Stein (FF-1065) was damaged by multiple cuts over 8 percent of the dome surface. Nearly all of the cuts contained remnants of sharp, curved claws found on the rims of suction cups of some squid tentacles. The claws were much larger than those of any squid that had been discovered at that time.[5]

[Cuddles]

Hey kitt, there might be even bigger squid than we thought!

according to wikipedia:

In 1978, the "NOFOUL" rubber coating of the AN/SQS-26 SONAR dome of USS Stein (FF-1065) was damaged by multiple cuts over 8 percent of the dome surface. Nearly all of the cuts contained remnants of sharp, curved claws found on the rims of suction cups of some squid tentacles. The claws were much larger than those of any squid that had been discovered at that time.[5]

So you wouldn't say thatour ocean is 100% explored then? Interesting.

[makaya325]

So you wouldn't say that then? Interesting.

Im saying that most if not all of the large aquatic life have already been discovered. That doesnt mean their cant be even larger giant or collossal squid out there.

[arthwollipot]

I still smile every time I think about that discovery. What an amazing world we live on!The world is just awesome.

Boomdiyada!

[Hitch]

So you wouldn't say that

Originally Posted by makaya325 View Post
our ocean is 100% explored


then? Interesting.

Only for certain very low values of 100%

:D

[makaya325]

Only for certain very low values of 100%

:D

I am quite confident that there are no large unknown aquatic species left to discover. That doesnt mean there arent unknown smaller species.

When i said the ocean was 100% explored, i might not have told you what i exactly meant. I feel its 100% explored when it comes to unknown large species of aquatic life

[arthwollipot]

I am quite confident that there are no large unknown aquatic species left to discover. That doesnt mean there arent unknown smaller species.

When i said the ocean was 100% explored, i might not have told you what i exactly meant. I feel its 100% explored when it comes to unknown large species of aquatic lifeWhat is considered a "large" species? 20 inches (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/photogalleries/species-photos/)? Three feet (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0313_060313_shark.html)?

[makaya325]

What is considered a "large" species? 20 inches (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/photogalleries/species-photos/)? Three feet (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/03/0313_060313_shark.html)?

Something on the scale of 10ft and up

[xblade]

I am quite confident that there are no large unknown aquatic species left to discover. That doesnt mean there arent unknown smaller species.

When i said the ocean was 100% explored, i might not have told you what i exactly meant. I feel its 100% explored when it comes to unknown large species of aquatic life

But the much much much smaller Pacific Northwest hasn't been 100% explored when it comes to unknown large primates.

Interesting.

[makaya325]

But the much much much smaller Pacific Northwest hasn't been 100% explored when it comes to unknown large primates.

Interesting.

I NEVER said that the ocean isnt full of unknown species. It most likely is, but most if not all of them would be small. You really cant appreciate the size of the pnw, can you?

[arthwollipot]

Something on the scale of 10ft and upYou do realise that Japanese whalers scientists recently discovered a new species of baleen whale, right?

[makaya325]

You do realise that Japanese whalers scientists recently discovered a new species of baleen whale, right?

Why not a totally new animal? Nature suggests that a new genus of large species is IMPOSSIBLE

[RoboTimbo]

I NEVER said that the ocean isnt full of unknown species. It most likely is, but most if not all of them would be small. You really cant appreciate the size of the pnw, can you?

You also appreciate the relative size of the world's oceans to the PNW?

[arthwollipot]

Why not a totally new animal? Nature suggests that a new genus of large species is IMPOSSIBLEThis old tree never seems to grow any new trunks. It only ever produces twigs. Don't you find that interesting?

[makaya325]

You also appreciate the relative size of the world's oceans to the PNW?

70% of the world is water. There is nothing amazing about something that we see and drink every day

[RoboTimbo]

70% of the world is water. There is nothing amazing about something that we see and drink every day


My house is made of wood. Nothing mysterious about that. I'm pretty sure BF doesn't live here. I don't get the connection between the relative size of the world's oceans to the PNW and the fact that we drink water. Was there a point to it?

[makaya325]

My house is made of wood. Nothing mysterious about that. I'm pretty sure BF doesn't live here. I don't get the connection between the relative size of the world's oceans to the PNW and the fact that we drink water. Was there a point to it?

The possibilites of the ocean are over-hyped. More people spend more time at sea with bruskies, than looking for the big man in the remote cascades

[RoboTimbo]

The possibilites of the ocean are over-hyped. More people spend more time at sea with bruskies, than looking for the big man in the remote cascades


Cite please? People have learned not to take your word for anything.

[makaya325]

Cite please? People have learned not to take your word for anything.

Do you really think there is a site with the numbers of what people do at sea

?

[RoboTimbo]

Do you really think there is a site with the numbers of what people do at sea

?

So it came directly from your backside?

[arthwollipot]

Do you really think there is a site with the numbers of what people do at sea?Well, where did you hear this?

[RoboTimbo]

Do you really think there is a site with the numbers of what people do at sea

?

And I asked for a CITE, short for citation, not SITE, as in website. Or have you abandoned this thread for lack of knowledge?

[Akhenaten]

Can squids be re-introduced following decimation by trolling? Let's see:


In Mexico, they are called the "red devil" and "the beast" in Central America. They are jumbo squid: deadly, fast moving creatures with tentacles that can suck the life out of a human being.

Jumbo Flying Squids (http://cbs5.com/local/predator.jumbo.squid.2.918523.html)

[William Parcher]

Can squids be re-introduced following decimation by trolling?

No squids could survive in any thread that makaya has been trolling.

[makaya325]

No squids could survive in any thread that makaya has been trolling.

Trolling? What does the squid thread have to do with any other posts? Why do you have a stupid avatar of something you dont possibly consider it exists, and still argue over it?

[RoboTimbo]

Trolling? What does the squid thread have to do with any other posts? Why do you have a stupid avatar of something you dont possibly consider it exists, and still argue over it?

Parcherfoot exists. I've seen it as have many others here. Now, about that citation for your assertion as previously asked for...?

[makaya325]

Parcherfoot exists. I've seen it as have many others here. Now, about that citation for your assertion as previously asked for...?

WP and most members here believe BF couldnt possibly exist, yet they start dozens of threads and 1000's posts of something they dont even consider in the 1st place

[William Parcher]

I never said that Bigfoot cannot exist in North America. I have said that it does not exist. There is a difference.

[RoboTimbo]

WP and most members here believe BF couldnt possibly exist, yet they start dozens of threads and 1000's posts of something they dont even consider in the 1st place

You're in the wrong thread, this one is about MQ Humbolt Squid. Your citation showing that more people spend time in the ocean than searching the PNW for Bigfoot, please. And your source should also show the relative size of the world's oceans versus the PNW. Thanks in advance.

[GT/CS]

Mak is fun to have around. Not nearly as much fun as Corndog George or Historian but maybe if he keeps working at it.......

[makaya325]

Mak is fun to have around. Not nearly as much fun as Corndog George or Historian but maybe if he keeps working at it.......

Im fed up pretty recent, about bf, believers, skeptics.... i want to know what is the truth.

I dont find its ok for kitz to say what my people didnt and did see. I find it quite rude for people to call me trolls, even though i have not sweared, cursed, or posted anything innapropiate here. I think you need to realize that its ok for someone to believe: Its another thing to compare what someone believes to fairies, leprechauns, since that is damn rude and wise-ass -like

[RoboTimbo]

Im fed up pretty recent, about bf, believers, skeptics.... i want to know what is the truth.

It would be nice to get some from you first.

[makaya325]

It would be nice to get some from you first.

Get some what? The truth?

[arthwollipot]

I find it quite rude for people to call me trolls, even though i have not sweared, cursed, or posted anything innapropiate here.OT, but that's not the definition of "troll".

A troll is someone who makes a post that is intended purely to get a reaction from other posters. For example, someone who went to a Christian forum and posted "Jesus is dead" would probably be considered a troll. Trolls stir up trouble for the pure fun of it.

I don't think you're a troll by this definition. I think you have some ideas that you would like discussed. However, because this is a skeptics forum, those ideas have been challenged. Sometimes politely, other times notsomuch. I happen to think you're wrong, but I don't think you're a troll.

I think a lot of people are way too fast to call "troll".

[RayG]

I think a lot of people are way too fast to call "troll".

Nay nay. Calling makaya325 a troll is an insult to trolls.

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=1032102) is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Trolls delight in sowing discord on the forums...

A classic troll tries to make us believe that he is a skeptic. He is divisive and argumentative with need-to-be-right attitude, "searching for the truth", flaming discussion, and sometimes insulting people or provoking people to insult him. A troll is usually an expert in reusing the same words of its opponents and in turning it against them.

While he tries to present himself as a skeptic looking for truth ... his messages usually sound as if it is the responsibility of other forum members to provide evidence that what forum is all about is legitimate.

He (and in at least 90% of cases it is he) tries to start arguments and upset people.

Sometimes, he is skeptical, trying to scare people, trying to plant fear in their hearts. Sometimes, Internet troll is trying to spin conflicting information, is questioning in an insincere manner, flaming discussion, insulting people, turning people against each other, harassing forum members, ignoring warnings from forum moderators.


...The Contrarian Troll. A sophisticated breed, Contrarian Trolls frequent boards whose predominant opinions are contrary to their own. A forum dominated by those who support firearms and knife rights, for example, will invariably be visited by Contrarian Trolls espousing their beliefs in the benefits of gun control. It is important to distinguish between dissenters and actual Contrarian Trolls, however; the Contrarian is not categorized as a troll because of his or her dissenting opinions, but due to the manner in which he or she behaves:Here at the JREF, makaya325 pretends to be a bigfoot advocate and pokes at the skeptics, while over at Bigfootforums.com he pretends to be a skeptic and pokes at the advocates. He's been called a troll on both sites.

He also seems as uninformed, illogical, and immature here as he does there.

RayG

[Wolrab]

We can kill two birds with one stone if we all agree on the veracity of the PNW cephalopod.
http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
I haven't thought of it in years.

[Miss_Kitt]

I have been keeping tabs on the PNW Octopus sightings for some time now. The ever-enjoyable "Cephalopod News" page links to it, so it's easy to check in every month or so.
http://zapatopi.net/cephnews/

I have never made a sighting myself, but I think that there's a decent case to be made for the PNWO, given that we have found octopi in the Puget Sound, both presently and preserved remains from predecessors. This makes the PNWO at least as likely as certain other cryptozoological claims, which often involve leaps of faith as to the paucity of evidence.

I had heard about the scarred sonar dome before, but it's of limited usefulness. (I do wonder if any of those sucker-claws have been sent to Steve O'Shea for comparison to the Colossal Squid claws?)

I would not be surprised at all to discover new, large species in the depths of the oceans. We have learned that there are distinct layers of biological activity in the depths, similar to how the rainforest ecology has layers from the ground to the top of the canopy, with very different creatures in each zone.

Oceans, by their nature, don't tend to leave any evidence except what gets hauled up in a net. There's no ground to see tracks or excrement on; there are not bushes, tree branches, or grasses to catch hair or be bent by an animal's passage. We can't do aerial surveys to get a good idea of the general density of various creatures', or even plants', population. We can only observe activity by sea-dwellers for short periods of time, and in shallow waters, due to the lack of light and air to permit observation. Once you get more than a couple hundred feet down, anything with eyes is going to see a light long before you have any chance to see them. We only see what doesn't run away.

A similar, though less extreme, problem exists with land-based life at high altitude. Only recently have we gotten video footage of snow leopards hunting, despite knowing about snow leopards for more than a century. I'm sure there's still a lot we don't know about desert life, since the observers have to work hard to not die. (Thinking about the Sahara or about half the Aussie deserts, where you're time-limited by how much water you can bring with you.) For this reason, BTW, I think of all the rumored 'apemen', the most likely is the Yeti...assuming anyone can come up with a source of food and shelter for him at the altitudes he's said to appear at.

Just my thoughts, MK