3 ms·

You've got to remember that the first anatomical specimen of a platypus sent from Australia to London was considered to be a hoax. That was the scientific esta

by brc 12y ago

You've got to remember that the first anatomical specimen of a platypus sent from Australia to London was considered to be a hoax. That was the scientific establishment rejecting an actual specimen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus It's hardly surprising that mere sightings of a creature were treated with the same incredulity, particularly if it had originated as the stuff of sailors legends. Most people would associate it with Yeti sightings or similar. But as a lost airliner proves, people are too willing to think that searchability and knowledge about continents extends equally to the deep ocean. When the truth is that we probably know a lot more about what's in the solar system than what is in the deep oceans.

gwern 12y ago
'They laughed at Galileo. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.' The platypus is remembered because it was one of the many hoaxes which turned out to be real; the OP even lists a whole bunch of hoaxes and fakes! Similarly for the comment about rogue waves: are giant waves really that improbable? Now, how about giant ship-sized sea snakes? (What do they eat? Why haven't we gotten any real samples of their bodies, when they aren't even abyssal creatures? Why has the rate of discovery of sea-going reptiles been zero for decades when human populations, scientific research, travel, and sensor technology have all been increasing exponentially?) The OP links a short statistical analysis of discovery rates: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/182368464/2008-woodley.pdf https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/182368464/2008-woodley.p... What struck me was not that the most reasonable analysis, the logistic regression, estimates zero species remaining to be found, but the authors' list of lame discoveries in 'cryptozoology': stuff like moths, peccaries, and whatnot. Really? Really? That's your defense for the plausibility of giant sea snakes - moths and small land mammals in extremely remote locations?

by brc 12y ago

gwern 12y ago

'They laughed at Galileo. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.' The platypus is remembered because it was one of the many hoaxes which turned out to be real; the OP even lists a whole bunch of hoaxes and fakes! Similarly for the comment about rogue waves: are giant waves really that improbable? Now, how about giant ship-sized sea snakes? (What do they eat? Why haven't we gotten any real samples of their bodies, when they aren't even abyssal creatures? Why has the rate of discovery of sea-going reptiles been zero for decades when human populations, scientific research, travel, and sensor technology have all been increasing exponentially?) The OP links a short statistical analysis of discovery rates: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/182368464/2008-woodley.pdf https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/182368464/2008-woodley.p... What struck me was not that the most reasonable analysis, the logistic regression, estimates zero species remaining to be found, but the authors' list of lame discoveries in 'cryptozoology': stuff like moths, peccaries, and whatnot. Really? Really? That's your defense for the plausibility of giant sea snakes - moths and small land mammals in extremely remote locations?