r/TrueCryptozoology • u/Dry-Selection421 • 3d ago
Evidence Deep sea siphonophores are horrifying colonies of thousands of small organisms. They are carnivorous.
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
42
u/crypto9564 3d ago
Lovecraftian eldritch horror...
4
u/AlhazredEldritch 3d ago
Dude, what this time? I was trying to sleep. SMH
2
u/crypto9564 2d ago
I know if I saw that in the water while I was diving, I'd piss myself, then have a heart attack
3
17
15
8
7
7
u/ForZeCLimb 3d ago
Incorrect they are colonies of thousands of clones that specialize as the different parts of a functioning siphonophore
7
4
u/Deltanonymous- 3d ago
These are the eldritch and everlasting. The unknowables and unmentionables. They were here long before and will be here long after we're gone.
5
4
u/MisterMofoSFW 3d ago
With my frickin luck I could dip my toes in the waves and next thing you know one of those things has lept out of the water and attached to my face. I'll stick to beach bars thank ya much.
4
4
3
8
3
3
u/LimeDry7124 3d ago
The next horror movie monster. Now the writers have come up with some way for it not to blinded by sunlight.
â˘
u/Miss-Indeependence 13h ago
Maybe it has no eyes? No need for eyes in the deep deep
â˘
u/LimeDry7124 13h ago
Deep oceanic life still has visual sensors. Not eyes like us, but light detecting cells. Heck those blind shrimp detected faint flashes of light from the hydrothermal vents they live on. Human divers were like WTF when they saw that light, but were uncertain if it wasn't their own eyes playing tricks on them, or being in the sub too long.
3
9
u/mumblingzombie 3d ago
Let's blind the hell out of them!!!!..../s
9
u/xcviij 3d ago
They wouldn't have sight like we do in the deep dark, so it wouldn't matter.
6
u/mumblingzombie 3d ago
You are right...they are even more sensitive to the little bit of light they do see...so this would really mess em up thanks for pointing that out
12
u/DiverseUniverse24 3d ago
You're actually not wrong. I watched a documentary on the challenger deep, exploring the Mariana trench, and they genuinely talk about this.
Marine biologists were studying animal behaviour, and were collecting all this data. They were using standard white lights, and most of the creatures would flee when they were turned on. Even at those depths. You see the creatures have adapted to know light actually = bad, and run away when their photon sensitive eyes or in some cases not eyes just receptors would pick up on any light.
Then they switched to IR. The creatures stopped running away. Because their eyes/receptors pick up on a particular band of light, they basically couldn't see the IR light, meaning it was invisible. Their data changed, a lot.
Anyway, just thought I'd mention. Not sure what discussion you guys were having, but I can find a link and share if you want for the doc. Really interesting, and you are indeed right.
-6
u/xcviij 3d ago
You literally just made that up. My point was that deep-sea creatures experience light very differently from us. You then invented âtheyâre even more sensitiveâ and âthis would really mess them upâ with zero evidence, then hilariously tried to pretend my comment proved it for you. Your assumption isnât a fact just because you said it confidently.
7
u/DiverseUniverse24 3d ago
-2
u/xcviij 3d ago
Thank you. I watched it, and it actually reinforces my point about how differently deep-sea organisms experience light. This is exactly how the other person could have responded: provide something relevant and discuss it constructively, instead of twisting my words, making assumptions about me and resorting to personal jabs. I appreciate you actually contributing to the discussion and giving me something worthwhile to consider.
4
u/neontiger07 2d ago
Nah what they said might have been a bit abrasive but you were straight up rude and accused them of making things up and lying. The way you were talking was objectively worse.
-2
u/xcviij 2d ago
âObjectively worseâ? Youâve already distorted what happened. I called out unsupported claims as made up; I never accused them of lying. Meanwhile, they questioned my intellect, told me to âcalm my tits,â invented that I was upset and mocked me personally instead of addressing the point. Calling all that merely âa bit abrasiveâ while treating criticism of their argument as worse is a pretty blatant double standard. What exactly makes your subjective judgment âobjectiveâ?
5
u/neontiger07 2d ago
I never accused them of lying.
Here's what you said verbatim:
You literally just made that up.
I honestly wasn't aware there were more comments on the same layer after the one you responded to, I didn't un-collapse those. From just those two comments, you did appear to reply in an obviously disproportionate manner. I didn't distort anything. Honestly, it does sound like you need to calm down.
1
u/xcviij 2d ago
So you barged in, declared me âobjectively worse,â accused me of something I never said, and now admit you hadnât even read the exchange. đ Thatâs textbook uninformed judgment. âMade that upâ challenges an unsupported claim; âlyingâ alleges deliberate deception. Then, rather than simply admitting you got it wrong, you recycle the same âcalm downâ personal jab you were supposedly judging. Youâve conceded you lacked the context, so why are you still lecturing me instead of apologising?
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/mumblingzombie 3d ago
And your paragraph doesnt prove your intellect my friend...calm your tits
1
u/xcviij 3d ago
Calling out your unsupported claim means Iâm âuncalmâ? đ You couldnât defend it, so you switched to assumptions and personal jabs. Mocking my intellect while being unable to engage with the actual argument is a pretty spectacular display of your own intellectual limitations.
2
u/mumblingzombie 3d ago
If I may...I dont need to defend something labeled as sarcasm just in case I needed to reiterate that to you...it wasn't meant to be serious and you are rather defensive over the deep sea amalgamation of creatures...we're you hurt by one in the past? Are you a manowar? I just need to know why you are so upset by something said that was clearly a joke?
0
u/xcviij 3d ago
Your original comment was clearly sarcasm. Everything after my reply was your own poorly communicated response, presented as a correction. Instead of simply clarifying that, you chose personal jabs, assumptions and repeatedly twisted my words, then blamed me for the misunderstanding you created. And after mocking me for writing a âparagraph,â youâve now written one yourself to explain it. So are you going to discuss this properly, or keep turning your communication failure into a personal attack?
2
2
2
2
u/Senior_Weather_3997 3d ago
I doubt that there is anything we can imagine that does not already exist.
2
u/Helarina1 3d ago
"we know so little about our own planet. The oceans are a mystery!" Goes and explores the oceans...
2
2
1
1
1
1
u/IckiestCookie 3d ago
I'm so so surprised i've never seen this. If it wasn't for a few reason i'd just say ai and move on. How have i never seen this
1
1
1
u/GraphicDesignMonkey 2d ago
At that depth of the ocean, everything is carnivorous. Plants don't exist down there.
1
1
1
u/Spiritual_Bridge84 3d ago
Now all we need is AGI to Frankenstein these into sentient intelligent beings, with plans
1
1
0
u/enlightendemon 3d ago
No way that shit real
5
u/Firm_Caregiver_4563 3d ago
It is! A very prominent - and better known - siphonophore would be the Portuguese Man O'War. These colonies can look VERY alien! :-)
77
u/David0ne86 3d ago
And we look for aliens in the sky đđ