Blobology

G

Guest

Guest
You probably know you need to register to view NYT articles, but it's free and worth it. I've put the url at bottom cos there are interesting pics. - Perdita

Ogre? Octopus? Blobologists Solve an Ancient Mystery - WILLIAM J. BROAD, NYTimes - July 27, 2004

The world far beneath the waves has always been dark with menace. One sinister word for it, abyss - from the Greek, a ("without") byssos ("bottom") - perfectly evokes the dark infinities and the primal chaos. The deep is a blank slate for the expression of human fears and insecurities, an estuary for paranoia. And enough scary creatures abide in the depths to give credence to all that fear.

These beasts often have enormous mouths and needlelike fangs. Their names say everything - dragon fish, devilfish, viper fish, gulper eels, blacktail netdevils, ghost sharks. And then there's the repulsive triplewart seadevils, covered with spines and furrows and warts, their large mouths set in a perpetual frown.

But they all seem tame compared to the mysterious whiteish blobs that for decades arose from the sea and from time to time washed ashore on beaches across the world. What were they? They could be anything. For more than a century, scientists and laymen who examined the tons of that protoplasm filled in the glaring gaps in knowledge of blob anatomy by imagining eyes, mouths and slimy tentacles long enough to sink cruise ships. Warnings were issued. Perhaps the blobs were remnants of living fossils more fearsome than the dinosaurs. In 1972, a jittery analyst wondered if one particularly enigmatic blob was the decomposing body of a giant alien from outer space.

Last summer, a gelatinous blob as long as a school bus washed up in Chile. While experts oohed and aahed over what appeared to be fragments of its huge tentacles, the Internet buzzed over news of the monster and the BBC pronounced it perhaps the remains of a lost species of giant octopus. Other experts suggested it was a giant squid or perhaps an entirely new kind of sea creature unknown to science.

But now a team of six highly skilled, if somewhat whimsical biologists centered at the University of South Florida has applied DNA analysis to the blobs and, alas, solved the mystery. The answer is all too mundane: The blobs are old whale blubber.

"To our disappointment," the scientists wrote last month in The Biological Bulletin, "we have not found any evidence that any of the blobs are the remains of gigantic octopods, or sea monsters of unknown species." Richard Ellis, author of the 1994 book "Monsters of the Sea," an exploration of some of the world's most bizarre fauna, called the DNA finding convincing and devastating.

This does in fact appear to be the end of the great blob story, a tale that began in late 1896 near St. Augustine, Fla., when two boys found a gigantic lump of white, rubbery flesh, 21 feet long, 7 feet wide and weighing perhaps 7 tons. Local doctors, naturalists, photographers and journalists thought they could discern the remains of a head, eyes, mouth, tentacles and a tail.

Dr. Addison Verrill of Yale, the nation's foremost expert on cephalopods, pronounced it a remnant of an unknown species of massive octopus, and gave it a scientific name - Octopus giganteus. "When living," he wrote, "it must have had enormous arms, each one a hundred feet or more in length, each as thick as the mast of a large vessel, and armed with hundreds of saucer-shaped suckers, the largest of which would have been at least a foot in diameter." By contrast, the largest reliably known octopus measured about 20 feet from arm tip to arm tip.

Chunks of the monster were hacked off and shipped to the museum that later became the Smithsonian. To be honest, a few experts wondered even then if the oddity was just so much decaying whale flesh. The samples languished for decades.

In 1971, there was a sudden surge of interest in the mystery, with three articles in Natural History magazine discussing what one called the "Stupefying Colossus of the Deep." In another, Dr. Joseph F. Gennaro Jr., a cell biologist at the University of Florida, told of how he got a sample of the blob from the Smithsonian and examined it closely under microscopes and polarized light. In his article, "The Creature Revealed," he declared the specimen part of a true ogre. "The sample was not whale blubber," he wrote. "The evidence appears unmistakable that the St. Augustine sea monster was in fact an octopus, but the implications are fantastic."

Even as the Florida blob became a symbol of the unthinkable, new examples were washing ashore to baffle and enthrall investigators. Fleshy globs appeared in Tasmania, New Zealand, Bermuda, Nantucket and Newfoundland.

In the early 1990's, Dr. Sidney K. Pierce, then at the University of Maryland and later at the University of South Florida, became fascinated with the topic and managed to get samples of both the Bermuda and St. Augustine blobs. He and three colleagues used light and electron microscopes, as well as biochemical methods, to examine the tissues. They then compared the blob samples to octopus and whale parts. Their verdict was unanimous.

The blobs were made of almost pure collagen, the fibrous protein found in connective tissue, bone and cartilage. The scientists concluded that it had come not from giant squids or octopuses or any other kind of mysterious invertebrates. Rather, the Bermuda blob arose from a fish or a shark, and the St. Augustine one from a whale. The Florida sensation, they said, had probably consisted of a huge whale's entire skin.

"With profound sadness at ruining a favorite legend," they wrote in the April 1995 issue of The Biological Bulletin, published by the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass., a distinguished research institution, "we find no basis for the existence of Octopus giganteus."

Mr. Ellis, the author, had gotten a manuscript of the paper and criticized it in "Monsters of the Sea," saying the findings raised more questions than they answered. How, for instance, did known animals use such vast quantities of collagen? "We must conclude," he wrote, "that the mysteries remain unsolved." Over the years, Dr. Pierce pressed ahead, expanding his collection of gelatinous samples to a total of five, including one from the Chilean blob that came ashore last summer.

Joining with experts from Indiana University, the University of Auckland in New Zealand and the University of Maryland, he zoomed in on the specimens with a new battery of microscopes, chemical tests and, for the first time, DNA technology that, even more than fingerprints, can cast powerful light on issues of identity.

The results, Dr. Pierce and his five colleagues wrote last month, unequivocally demonstrate that the Chilean blob and all the rest of the mysterious finds are simply deteriorating whale blubber, in particular, the collagen matrix that holds it together. "It is clear," they said, "that all of these blobs of popular and cryptozoological interest are, in fact, the decomposed remains of large cetaceans."

In an interview, Mr. Ellis, who lives in New York City, conceded defeat. "I'm crushed," he said. "It's a blow for people who continue to want there to be great and scary monsters out there." Then he cheered up. "It may be the requiem for blobdom," he said. "But there are other possibilities" in the sunless depths of the sea. We have yet to see a living adult representative of our friend the giant squid," he said of the shy creature whose very long tentacles are thought to writhe like a nest of snakes. "So there's hope for monster watchers."

article w/pics
 
perdita said:
"I'm crushed," he said. "It's a blow for people who continue to want there to be great and scary monsters out there." Then he cheered up. "It may be the requiem for blobdom," he said. "But there are other possibilities" in the sunless depths of the sea. We have yet to see a living adult representative of our friend the giant squid," he said of the shy creature whose very long tentacles are thought to writhe like a nest of snakes. "So there's hope for monster watchers."

There's hope indeed.

Colossal Squid
 
Thank you, rg, I love these articles. Did you enlarge the pics on that site?

Perdita :)
 
so.. when we do go out deep sea fishing right off the continental shelf.. there IS a reason why i dont like to jump out and swim..

seriously.. weve seen many large animals wash up.. not squid.. but whales and even a great white off the main beach ..

they keep finding new species the deeper they look.. ive no doubt there are things i just dont wanna know about. atleast now while im able to swim in the ocean.

thanks P
 
You know, I sneezed one time and.......................................
 
Please don't hijack my thread until all the serious people have read it. Maybe in one or two more posts.

Wisearse, snobby Perdita :p
 
perdita said:
Please don't hijack my thread until all the serious people have read it. Maybe in one or two more posts.

Wisearse, snobby Perdita :p

I'm sorry mom, lets get back to seriously discussing this?

But now a team of six highly skilled, if somewhat whimsical biologists centered at the University of South Florida has applied DNA analysis to the blobs and, alas, solved the mystery. The answer is all too mundane: The blobs are old whale blubber.
 
perdita said:
You probably know you need to register to view NYT articles, but it's free and worth it. I've put the url at bottom cos there are interesting pics. - Perdita

Ogre? Octopus? Blobologists Solve an Ancient Mystery - WILLIAM J. BROAD, NYTimes - July 27, 2004

The world far beneath the waves has always been dark with menace. One sinister word for it, abyss - from the Greek, a ("without") byssos ("bottom") - perfectly evokes the dark infinities and the primal chaos. The deep is a blank slate for the expression of human fears and insecurities, an estuary for paranoia. And enough scary creatures abide in the depths to give credence to all that fear.

These beasts often have enormous mouths and needlelike fangs. Their names say everything - dragon fish, devilfish, viper fish, gulper eels, blacktail netdevils, ghost sharks. And then there's the repulsive triplewart seadevils, covered with spines and furrows and warts, their large mouths set in a perpetual frown.

But they all seem tame compared to the mysterious whiteish blobs that for decades arose from the sea and from time to time washed ashore on beaches across the world. What were they? They could be anything. For more than a century, scientists and laymen who examined the tons of that protoplasm filled in the glaring gaps in knowledge of blob anatomy by imagining eyes, mouths and slimy tentacles long enough to sink cruise ships. Warnings were issued. Perhaps the blobs were remnants of living fossils more fearsome than the dinosaurs. In 1972, a jittery analyst wondered if one particularly enigmatic blob was the decomposing body of a giant alien from outer space.

Last summer, a gelatinous blob as long as a school bus washed up in Chile. While experts oohed and aahed over what appeared to be fragments of its huge tentacles, the Internet buzzed over news of the monster and the BBC pronounced it perhaps the remains of a lost species of giant octopus. Other experts suggested it was a giant squid or perhaps an entirely new kind of sea creature unknown to science.

But now a team of six highly skilled, if somewhat whimsical biologists centered at the University of South Florida has applied DNA analysis to the blobs and, alas, solved the mystery. The answer is all too mundane: The blobs are old whale blubber.

"To our disappointment," the scientists wrote last month in The Biological Bulletin, "we have not found any evidence that any of the blobs are the remains of gigantic octopods, or sea monsters of unknown species." Richard Ellis, author of the 1994 book "Monsters of the Sea," an exploration of some of the world's most bizarre fauna, called the DNA finding convincing and devastating.

This does in fact appear to be the end of the great blob story, a tale that began in late 1896 near St. Augustine, Fla., when two boys found a gigantic lump of white, rubbery flesh, 21 feet long, 7 feet wide and weighing perhaps 7 tons. Local doctors, naturalists, photographers and journalists thought they could discern the remains of a head, eyes, mouth, tentacles and a tail.

Dr. Addison Verrill of Yale, the nation's foremost expert on cephalopods, pronounced it a remnant of an unknown species of massive octopus, and gave it a scientific name - Octopus giganteus. "When living," he wrote, "it must have had enormous arms, each one a hundred feet or more in length, each as thick as the mast of a large vessel, and armed with hundreds of saucer-shaped suckers, the largest of which would have been at least a foot in diameter." By contrast, the largest reliably known octopus measured about 20 feet from arm tip to arm tip.

Chunks of the monster were hacked off and shipped to the museum that later became the Smithsonian. To be honest, a few experts wondered even then if the oddity was just so much decaying whale flesh. The samples languished for decades.

In 1971, there was a sudden surge of interest in the mystery, with three articles in Natural History magazine discussing what one called the "Stupefying Colossus of the Deep." In another, Dr. Joseph F. Gennaro Jr., a cell biologist at the University of Florida, told of how he got a sample of the blob from the Smithsonian and examined it closely under microscopes and polarized light. In his article, "The Creature Revealed," he declared the specimen part of a true ogre. "The sample was not whale blubber," he wrote. "The evidence appears unmistakable that the St. Augustine sea monster was in fact an octopus, but the implications are fantastic."

Even as the Florida blob became a symbol of the unthinkable, new examples were washing ashore to baffle and enthrall investigators. Fleshy globs appeared in Tasmania, New Zealand, Bermuda, Nantucket and Newfoundland.

In the early 1990's, Dr. Sidney K. Pierce, then at the University of Maryland and later at the University of South Florida, became fascinated with the topic and managed to get samples of both the Bermuda and St. Augustine blobs. He and three colleagues used light and electron microscopes, as well as biochemical methods, to examine the tissues. They then compared the blob samples to octopus and whale parts. Their verdict was unanimous.

The blobs were made of almost pure collagen, the fibrous protein found in connective tissue, bone and cartilage. The scientists concluded that it had come not from giant squids or octopuses or any other kind of mysterious invertebrates. Rather, the Bermuda blob arose from a fish or a shark, and the St. Augustine one from a whale. The Florida sensation, they said, had probably consisted of a huge whale's entire skin.

"With profound sadness at ruining a favorite legend," they wrote in the April 1995 issue of The Biological Bulletin, published by the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole, Mass., a distinguished research institution, "we find no basis for the existence of Octopus giganteus."

Mr. Ellis, the author, had gotten a manuscript of the paper and criticized it in "Monsters of the Sea," saying the findings raised more questions than they answered. How, for instance, did known animals use such vast quantities of collagen? "We must conclude," he wrote, "that the mysteries remain unsolved." Over the years, Dr. Pierce pressed ahead, expanding his collection of gelatinous samples to a total of five, including one from the Chilean blob that came ashore last summer.

Joining with experts from Indiana University, the University of Auckland in New Zealand and the University of Maryland, he zoomed in on the specimens with a new battery of microscopes, chemical tests and, for the first time, DNA technology that, even more than fingerprints, can cast powerful light on issues of identity.

The results, Dr. Pierce and his five colleagues wrote last month, unequivocally demonstrate that the Chilean blob and all the rest of the mysterious finds are simply deteriorating whale blubber, in particular, the collagen matrix that holds it together. "It is clear," they said, "that all of these blobs of popular and cryptozoological interest are, in fact, the decomposed remains of large cetaceans."

In an interview, Mr. Ellis, who lives in New York City, conceded defeat. "I'm crushed," he said. "It's a blow for people who continue to want there to be great and scary monsters out there." Then he cheered up. "It may be the requiem for blobdom," he said. "But there are other possibilities" in the sunless depths of the sea. We have yet to see a living adult representative of our friend the giant squid," he said of the shy creature whose very long tentacles are thought to writhe like a nest of snakes. "So there's hope for monster watchers."

article w/pics


I'm speechless, and the thread is back on track, sorry P.
 
perdita said:
In an interview, Mr. Ellis, who lives in New York City, conceded defeat. "I'm crushed," he said. "It's a blow for people who continue to want there to be great and scary monsters out there." Then he cheered up. "It may be the requiem for blobdom," he said. "But there are other possibilities" in the sunless depths of the sea. We have yet to see a living adult representative of our friend the giant squid," he said of the shy creature whose very long tentacles are thought to writhe like a nest of snakes. "So there's hope for monster watchers."

article w/pics

I'm with RG on this. I've always engoyed thinking that there are still many things to discover on the earth. Granted that there is not much on dry ground, but under the sea is another matter.

So little is known about the deep parts of the ocean. It's absolutly fascinating to me. Man has been sailing the oceans for thousands of years but until the last hundred years he has never really know what was down there with the exception of what he could drag to the surface. So the sea always had a certain mystery and danger about it. Once we find out all there is to know about it, much of that mystery will be gone.

Personally I'll miss the mystery so I'm glad they don't know everything yet. :)
 
Re: Re: Blobology

cheerful_deviant said:
Personally I'll miss the mystery so I'm glad they don't know everything yet. :)
Cheerf: I think you need to go to the philosophy thread.


Lisa, you are excused from the table. Mum :heart:
 
Re: Re: Re: Blobology

perdita said:
Cheerf: I think you need to go to the philosophy thread.


Lisa, you are excused from the table. Mum :heart:

I promise to be good, let me and the duck stay. It was just that SOMEBODY made me mad by joking about my virginity. I agree with cheerful duckie.
There are amazing things in the deep parts of the ocean that have never been studied much, cause of the pressure an all.
This is on topic and I was stumpified, if the blobs are whale blubber what happened to the rest of the whale. I mean, I could see a dead whale washing up containing a big blubber blob, try saying that 5 times fast, but why does the blubber wash up by itself? Who, or what, took the blubber out of the whale?
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: Blobology

Originally posted by Lisa Denton
I promise to be good, let me and the duck stay. It was just that SOMEBODY made me mad by joking about my virginity.

Sweetheart, you do not have to be good (whatever the fuck that means) all the time, just let Mummy's threads get some exposure before you and your little animal friends start playing. (And if anyone ever jokes about your virginity again, call me first.)

Who, or what, took the blubber out of the whale?

That is a very good question. I'm so proud of you.

Mum :kiss:
 
Ewwwww! Fascinating read, however. Reminds me of something I read earlier today about "bone worms" of the deep.

One of the more interesting characteristics of these creatures is the fact that the male of the species live inside the female. One female can support many males. Worm bigamy?

:D

Article
 
Great articles. Giant squids have their uses...Well actually it's an octopus.

Awabi Fisher and Octopus, Katsushika Hokusai
 
Last edited:
I was going to ask the same thing as Lisa.. What is causing the whale blubber to wash ashore by itself.. It is an interesting thought.

Maybe its like a cat's hairball :p
 
I appologise for my spelling in advance, my "IEspell" died.


A sick or seriously injered whale wuold be attacked by sharks, orcas, and other marine preditors. During a feeding frenzy these prediters are not neet, they leave scraps.
 
Thanks, Old Man. That was my thought, though I don't have the inclination to research it. Just makes sense.

Perdita
 
Scraps that are larger than a school bus? That have no skin left on them at all, that are purely derived of blubber.. The chance that something that large is ripped out of a whale, and to contain no tracable link to where it came from, other than a DNA trace, seems unconcievable to me..
 
Tolyk, this isn't an arguement cos I honestly don't know, just my guess. Now we are talking whale here, so blob size is not the issue. I would imagine the dead carcass is attacked by all sorts of hungry sea critters, none of whom seem to care for the blubber, theyd want flesh (meat). After a time I'd presume just the blubber is left. Skin would peel away, organs would be let loose (if not eaten), bones would fall away, etc. With certain timing the blubber blob would drift ashore. Doesn't that make sense? P.
 
I don't know, I'm not sure how the blubber of a whale is shaped really. Or what areas it protects/conforms around, if any.

You would think that with as many of these blubber blobs as washed ashore, that chance would have it that at least one bone would be stuck in a piece of one, or something else pertainable to a whale, is all I'm saying.. to give these scientists a helping hand, that they could've solved this elusive mystery before 1995 with the help of a DNA analysis..

I know it isn't an arguement, I'm simply seeing if others know the answers I'm pondering about :) Tis a good topic of discussion, not every discussion is an arguement ;)
 
Back
Top