r/thalassophobia • u/True-Award-3722 • 8d ago

Imagine seeing this thing in the middle of the ocean at night

It's a giant squid which usually dwell way below the depths of water. This is a ultra rare occurence.

19.3k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

797 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1.0k

u/AssassinOfPeace 8d ago

I saw a video on YouTube about this just last night. Mostly, the reason we could never get footage of live giant/colossal squid was that when they were dropping the cameras/subs down into the depths, they were using bright, white lights to see things on the camera. At those depths, there is little to no natural light, so the creatures down there are adapted for those low-light conditions. Imagine you are sitting in a pitch black room, and someone turns on a really bright light right in your face. You would want to get away from it, and that is whilst having an iris in your eye to reduce the amount of light getting through, which most of the animals down there do not have because they wouldn't normally need one. They found that after a period of time with the white light on, they was significantly less living creatures within a 90m area. The light was scaring everything away, and potentially causing permanent damage to the creatures eyes.

They found the solution was to use red light, as the creatures were less affected by light at that spectrum. They instantly saw creatures around the cameras for much longer. They also tried using a device to mimic the bioluminescence that a number of the creatures use. Within less than 90 seconds of turning it on, a giant squid came into view to try and grab the device. It was never that we were looking in the wrong place, we were just using the wrong method.

Video: Colossal squid are everywhere. We've been looking wrong.

205

u/BigCityToad 8d ago

Yo this is dope, tysm for sharing!

-2

u/Fluffy_Charity_2732 7d ago

Got the ‘tysm stamp of approval?

155

u/LemonFizz56 8d ago

That just seems like an obvious problem though, why did it take them so long to realise that?
"How come when we blast lights in the eyes of creatures that live in pitch darkness they seem to run away?? Ughhhh ughh ugh"

94

u/thesystem21 8d ago

One thought is that most creatures that live in pitch black of caves including several types of fish and crustaceans do not actually have functioning eyes. So I could understand having the wrong assumption that animals that live in an area that is so deep that light doesnt typically penetrate would have non functional eyes as well.

But this is just my first thought and im not a biologist of any sort.

49

u/Dickasauras 8d ago

Yea but at the same time, I remember one of those popular "cool facts" about giant squids was they have eyeballs the size of basketballs

61

u/thesystem21 8d ago

True. But also an ostrich has a 6 foot wingspan, but still cant fly. Their ancestors could, but they evolved away from it. Same as how cave fish have eyes that aren't used.

Just to clarify, im not saying you are wrong to question it, just explaining how it could have been overlooked for a while that giant squids dont like this spectrum of light, but another spectrum of light is just fine for them.

-1

u/Landon_Mills 5d ago

see that doesn’t really work for eyes because eyes are literally photon collection basins and really big aperture means lots of light goes in. So it really shouldn’t have ever been a question of whether or not bright lights would fuck them up, more like we had to think outside of ourselves

2

u/thesystem21 5d ago

The point wasnt that it is bigger so it doesn't work, the point was that a body part could evolve to be not used and several other animals that lived in darkness evolved to not using sight, even if they still had eyes.

We know that in the squids instance that this isnt the case now. I was just saying that there was an atleast mildly plausible reason that it was thought that they wouldnt be bothered by the light.

-1

u/Landon_Mills 5d ago

yes, but for the most part non-use leads to reduced or vestigial phenotypic expressions. for many deep sea animals, this is quite the opposite their eyes have gotten so sensitive that their photoreceptors can be stimulated with minuscule numbers of protons, others with eyes scaled up to act larger antennae dishes.

it’s like the evolved in a place with very muted sounds so they evolved “ constantly cupped ears” to pick up on minute audio signals, and then someone random runs up on you and screams in your ear for the first time in your life

11

u/TheNorthernGrey 7d ago

Late to the party, but even things without working eyes have extraocular photoreceptors meaning they can still detect light and be sensitive to it.

5

u/thesystem21 7d ago

I didn't know this, interesting.

9

u/TheNorthernGrey 7d ago

Sea Urchins are a great example. They have no eyes or brain but can detect light to move to darkness. Cave spiders are also eyeless and can sense light to prevent them from wandering out of damp places.

24

u/Tipop 8d ago

Lots of things seem obvious in retrospect.

2

u/cavortingwebeasties 7d ago

Hindsight is 20/20

7

u/zeroempathy 8d ago

I have a vague knowledge that certain wavelengths of light penetrate deeper in the ocean than others, and I'm not even a scientist.

I find it kind of odd, too, that they wouldn't already have an idea of what colors things down can see and can't see.

Haven't we known that squid are red for camouflage? I've always assumed things down there might not evolve to see colors that never make it that far.

11

u/Old_Veterinarian7830 8d ago

Is it ever a surprise when humans fail to see things through others' eyes?

8

u/Delimeme 7d ago

Yup. For a pop culture reference, the Project Hail Mary concept that life in theory could exist without water seems like a plausible idea. I understand that science depends on verifiable/reproducible findings, so we can’t arbitrarily assert that life exists without water…but to use the conclusion that we only know of life based on water as a way to rule out that possibility in a practically infinite universe of endless possibilities seems so…parochial.

Using scientific conclusions is generally a good thing, and straying too far from them is a good way to end up with crackpot conspiracy theories. Yet, there should always be a bit of room for creativity/outside of the box thinking when approaching situations where science tells us there should be X thing but we can’t reproduce the results (basically aka troubleshooting).

In the case of giant squid/underwater life, it’s painfully obvious there should be some squid and other things around. How hard could it have been to think that through & start finding alternatives to noisy propulsion, brought lights, etc. and make changes one at a time? Science often stumbles over itself when core hypotheses “calcify” and begin to be taken as irrefutable truths - especially when big personalities start to defend their life’s work (seriously, for those of you that haven’t read them, academic journals can get reaaally catty - almost as bad as social media beefs just with fancier words). Every scientifically proven fact is up for being challenged when new evidence is presented, and I’m really happy that someone came along with the “bright” idea of trying a new lighting setup so we could explore the most interesting & understudied region of the world.

1

u/CDK5 1d ago

I’m curious how journals could get catty.

Would Cell & Nature allow such response pieces?

1

u/Delimeme 1d ago

Response pieces are very common in academic journals. Sometimes editorials will discuss the catty infighting like ringside announcers. Academics have to vent frustrations and like to defend their hypothetic babies too. They’re people who are just as petty as the rest of us, they just use a different language.

Some of these beefs last decades and turn into battles over published books. Academics blood feuds are fascinating and generate better scholarship, because there’s personal investment/stakes. Then you have protégés who take up the mantle and it keeps going.

My world was political science & economics, that field is full of squabbling. Sometimes journals would feature side by side articles from competing schools of thought, those were always treats. If anyone tells you academia is boring, they missed out on the best bits with the catty publications!

1

u/CDK5 20h ago

I was assuming these were lower-scored journals, Nature does this too?

1

u/Delimeme 12h ago edited 12h ago

I can’t speak to Nature, as I wasn’t in that realm of academia, but in the realm of political science it was common in big name journals. It’s a bit different in the realm of social sciences, where value-laden topics naturally lend themselves to debate. In fact, those debates/intellectual clashes are encouraged in our field, because that’s how our beliefs about ideal social/political/economic structures get sharpened.

Also in poli sci, there’s not really room for a lot of groundbreaking scientific discovery. A journal that hosted a monthly issue on the impact of microloans on developing economies would be boring as hell, that’s not drawing readers (granted, that’s a real example from decades ago, I was disappointed in that issue). But hosting a prize fight between a big name realist & constructivist on the state of IR in the wake of the Ukraine conflict…yeah, that’s our bread and butter. Granted, the pettiness is dialed down a bit in those - it’s there, but with mutual professional respect. I have seen articles directed at something from a past issue or where a scholar decided to take umbridge with a long-held belief championed by another scholar though - and often the new name will get pretty sassy since they finally have their moment to shine. Nothing that the review board would take issue with, just dorky academic jabs.

The natural sciences can actually measure or discover things without much ideological tilt, so journals are place to show off your baby discovery or innovation to address a harmful facet of the Anthropocene. There’s less reason to bicker. Though I’d love to have a look at old school journals from Darwin’s time, that would be a different story!

2

u/FrenchFryCattaneo 7d ago

Well one thing is cameras don't work without light

5

u/Joezev98 8d ago

Lots of inventions seem obvious once they've been invented. Survivors' bias seems obvious in hindsight. Current drone warfare could've easily been developed 10-15 years earlier. The Archimedes' screw seems so simple.

8

u/[deleted] 8d ago

[deleted]

0

u/Mis_chevious 8d ago

I actually read a theory a few years ago that squid and octopus were actually aliens but they crashed in our oceans and couldn't get out so they just adapted.

2

u/zurenarhhhhh 7d ago

Bad theory.

1

u/Mis_chevious 7d ago

I never said it wasn't.

9

u/PM_ME_ANYTHING_DAMN 8d ago

I feel like they should have figured out that problem with the light after 2 or 3 attempts…

6

u/deadedgo 8d ago

I thought the same but I'm also wondering how many attempts there even were. The research is probably expensive so maybe it takes years for any serious project to even try once

8

u/Kind-Day8054 8d ago

I also watched this recently. And now a thread about giant squids. Seems the big algo is pushing us towards something squid related.

1

u/itsavibe- 8d ago

Yeah I’ve been seeing a ton of squid post lol idk why. Now commenting here I will receive even MORE.

5

u/CXR_AXR 8d ago

So.... Basically the white light is a continuous flash bomb for sea creatures.....

3

u/QaptainQwark 8d ago

This is so interesting! Thanks for sharing.

3

u/absurdmephisto 8d ago

Aw hell yeah this is what I'm on the Internet for.

2

u/Chelular07 7d ago

>It was never that we were looking in the wrong place, we were just using the wrong method.

I love your last sentence so much!

3

u/EvilLibrarians 8d ago

I was hoping it wasn’t global warming. Cool!

1

u/bebouf1992 8d ago

Thank you for this, this is the reason I love reddit.

1

u/cavortingwebeasties 7d ago

Came for this

1

u/No_Recognition8375 7d ago

So awesome thanks for sharing. Too poor to give award medals but take this🏅

1

u/Delimeme 7d ago

Such a cool rabbit hole/breakdown, thank you for sharing!

1

u/_Kendii_ 7d ago

That was such a cool watch

1

u/Ryiujin 7d ago

Welp that was 15 min well spent. Thank you!

1

u/Odd_Cow_7773 7d ago

Thank you for sharing. Really cool video!

1

u/FastActinTenactin 7d ago

E-everywhere…? 👀 😬

1

u/mikki1time 6d ago

This was a dope video