5 Mystery Fish - The Untouchable Bathysphere Fish - Are they Real or Fake?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 бер 2024
- Check us out on Patreon:
www.patreon.com/user?u=90710607
In 1932, William Beebe and Otis Barton descended to over 3000 feet for the first time. The species they saw on that dive have never been seen again. In this video we're looking at the mystery of the Untouchable Bathysphere Fish and hearing the theories that try to explain them.
Music:
Avenoir
Mathilda Skonare Karlsson
www.epidemicsound.com/track/Z... - Домашні улюбленці та дикі тварини
When I was a child of 12 in the 1970, I was obsessed with this topic. Fishes of the deep. Now here I am a child of 62, and still obsessed! I remember pictures of these same fish in a book that I had. Now we have ROVs and little by little we see what is down in those vast and seemingly endlessly black places. Even with those we see surprisingly little. More fascinating than space exploration, ar at least equal to, is the science of these deeps.
I feel like the fish described weren’t way too out there, I can totally imagine them existing. Two people hallucinating the same, not insanely unbelievable fish at the same time seems a little unbelievable, but man that air must have been insane. The evocative language I feel like could come out of a sense of passion and wanting to describe the journey in as much detail as possible. Also, it’s not like the guy is up-and-coming and needs to make his first discovery to get recognized. Deep sea fish have a tendency to be very illusive and mistaken identity is very possible so that’s the theories I feel is most plausible.
12:40 The name Abyssal Rainbow goes hard ngl
Ikr, perfect band name right there.
I CALL DIBS ON IT!!!!
Two questions:
1. Have people went back to William Beebe's dive location?
2. Even if they aren't real, have Else Bostelmann's illustrations on those creatures been used as a basis for people in creating their own artwork on speculative marine & abyssal biology (similar to the Rhinogrades or Dougal Dixon's works)?
I doubt Beebe was lying, as some of the other descriptions he has made of his dives were doubted at the time but have been since then confirmed. The deep sea is also still unknown enough that new species are still being found pretty much all the time and several species are only known from a single specimen. However, the illustrations are based on second-hand accounts and what Beebe could actually see would have been quite limited, so mistaken identity is likely. In some cases it's possible we've actually already found the fish but the real animal looks different enough from the illustration that it isn't obvious, and in others it might be that Beebe was actually seeing an animal other than a fish but since he couldn't see it clearly and he was most familiar with fish biology he assumed it was a fish and his mind filled the blanks (the fish #2 in particular seems to me like he might have seen the lights on a comb jelly and assume they belonged to a fish). The most suspect is the infamous bathysphere dragonfish, mostly because if his description was accurate it would have been gigantic for a dragonfish. In this case I do believe he really did see a dragonfish, either an undescribed species or one known to science by now, as aside from the size nothing in the description strikes me as unusual for dragonfish, and he admitted himself that he couldn't see all the details (which means the real fish might look different from the illustration). However, he probably misjudged the size of the fish (an easy thing to do considering he would have been looking at the animal against a black background with nothing that could act as an easy reference for scale) and the real animal is almost certainly considerably smaller.
Personally, I'd go with the mistaken theory; he probably had a limited and distorted perception from the small-scaled window and what he saw could've been an abyssal squid, a ctenophore, a distorted dragonfish, some kind of wolftrap anglerfish and a small group of multicolored abyssal needlefish... Then again, that's my view on the topic, the ocean is vast and truly unexplored, so who knows... maybe Beebe was telling the truth and those fish are still deep beneath, waiting for their eventual rediscovery, possibilities are endless.
I think early science fell victim to all of these theories. Sickness/mental illness, lack of knowledge, and improper equipment can all play a role in scientific observations and findings. In 20 years, we will look back on the technologies and discoveries that fascinate us today and think "Oh how little we knew!"
@@YouDontGnomeMein 20 years society will have collapsed
@@YouDontGnomeMe Indeed, the fact we only explored five percent of the entire ocean constasting both Mars and the Moon that got a higher surface percentage that has been mapped and studies truly explains a lot.
Well one thing that bothers me about the deep sea is it relies on nutrition from above especially whale falls. Whales were far more abundant just look up estimated whale numbers before humanity killed most for oil and perfumes. That lack of nutrition due to whale population declines could have elected the deep sea in ways we will never know making it an even more inhospitable place.
@@YouDontGnomeMe indeed we will!
The fact I made a noise of audible excitement and they know what these guys are says something
I sure hope all these guys were real and are still alive
The "rainbow garfish" to me look very similar to shrimpfish or even a pipefish. Fascinating though. Most likely? Mistaken identity but these illustrations don't seem that far off of existing fish so is it really that crazy that these variations of fish do/did exist deeper in the ocean.
There are definitely crazier looking fish we've discovered.
Love to hear stories like this 😊
I wanted to suggest the Untouchable Bathysphere Fish for one of your seen once then never again videos! Excellent video!
I think the fish are still out there. Great video.
The first one sounds like a squid and the second fish sounds like comb jelly
The problem is that comb jellys dont produce light so it shining one color doesnt make alot of sense. Also he said it turned to its side and it was thin bodied and had big eyes which is a description of ALOT of small bodied deep sea fish not to mention hachet fish have the same description but the light producing organs are on the bottom of their bodies. Only one I think is fake is the giant dragon fish due to lack of a real description and the focus on naming it. I think that one was made up because they saw a bunch of small fish and needed something big to grab attenion
the second fish looks like a comb jelly isnt it?
yrah that brown fish haa gotta be
That's one of the proposed species, Trey the explainer also did a video on this
Yeah, not the only or first one to make that connection
This was a dope video :)
Another amazing video, so well researched and produced. I love having found this channel, always top content
great video!
Fantastic video. Right up my alley.
I hope these are all real and still out their cause they sound so cool and pretty
The 5 Constellation could be a comb jelly, as they look similar and “round”
Could you make a video about the Kouprey? It is a very sad history and not that known for the public. DNA samples confirm that it was a different bovid species and not an hybrid as it was suggested so its extinction (it is most likely extinct) is really sad.
The first two seem like mistaken identity, being a squid and comb jelly respectively.
The giant dragonfish could be a now extinct abyssal apex predator.
The angler fish would be an interesting find, but he could have also mistaken the extra lures.
The needlefish strike me as a hallucination, their rainbow appearance, stillness, and locked movement all sound like light illusions I have personally seen in surface life.
They’ll find most of them eventually. The ones they don’t will remain tantalizing mysteries.
Fake or not, man didn’t have to go so hard with those names. Like I wish I could come up with something that cool
That second one looks like a jelly fish or octopus maybe miss identified
Great vid aan!
What was the exact location of the dive in which these fish were spotted?
Has anyone attempted to recreate the dive to verify the conditions could cause error or reencounter the reported fish?
Why hasn't the dive been replicated or if it has then what were the results?
Lotta unanswered questions.
I remember from Trey the Explainer's video on the same topic that this dive occurred around Nonsuch Island.
awesome video! i love this topic, i definitely learned some stuff! i never actually knew the details that weren't fish-related!
i'm going to college to become a deep sea ichthyologist so it's only natural i'd find this fascinating. as someone more knowledgeable on the topic than most other people (but not an expert! always take the word of an expert above mine, i just started college after all), definitely i think he was mistaken. i'd be mistaken in this situation too; imagine being the first person down there and to see these fish alive; i couldn't blame him for being excited.
i think the pallid sailfin was probably a squid or bobtail eel. i don't see anyone talk about that second theory actually despite the posterior end similarities.
really, the constellationfish just sounds like a ctenophore. beroe is very laterally compressed and maybe the "eye" is just something it ate. how cool it would be to have a fish that evolved mimicry, though!
that anglerfish just sounds like a classic case of camouflage working as intended. some anglerfish, like footballfishes and some whipnoses to name a couple, have elaborate esca with many filaments. who's to say it wasn't one illicium with three notable glowing portions?
i'm not familiar with many skinny deep sea fish but animals like cyttomimus, neoscopelids, and hell even stomiiformes and some aulopiformes (plus way more) are iridescent. maybe they were just barracudinas or another skinny fish i'm not familiar with; these guys especially i'd love to know the identity of!
On a Forum someone remarked how similar the Pallid sailfin's description was to Rebellatrix Divaricerca a extinct species of coelacanth , coelacanth are incredibly ancient fish once thought to be extinct there are only two remaining species of coelacanth , so perhaps the pallid sailfin could be possibly be a third species of coelacanth that has yet to be rediscovered .
@@JcoleMcthat's a really interesting theory! definitely a cool one, however with coelacanths being lobe-finned fishes (aka having defined fleshy fins), i imagine beebe would report on that haha. super cool theory nonetheless, i'd love to see a fish like that rediscovered!
@@nuniyoa Would be hard to make out such details with his lighting condition , so he pointed out the most prominent features ,a fork tail with the remaining body ending in a small knob and a fairly sized mouth and eye .
First description was likely a squid
I think that two might have been a misidentified squid and combjelly, the other three seem far more likely though
The mistaken identity theory is probably the most plausible, which could've of course paired with the hallucination theory.
I'm going with Theory number 5.
In my opinion, theory number 3 and 4 are both equally most likely.
Theory 2 or 5 seems most likely to me. Either way I think the method does not hold up to scientific scrutiny - so in my mind these should not be considered actual species unless rediscovered.
I feel sure that they are still out there.
i don`t understand one thing: why this fish is untouchable?
Oh, since it (actually them) were never seen again I guess
The something,something abysal gar is probably a species of snipe eel
I bet there was some exaggeration, but not all pure fabrication - I bet in time “quite similar” to some of them will be found.
It could be a mixture. One or more of the fish could have gone extinct. One or more could have been case(s) of mistaken identity or less-than-perfect observation. Statistically, these fish could simply NOT be common or simply not be seen again yet. By the end he COULD have been hallucinating (I'm not convinced of that...I think that last one looks like a pipefish.) But there is another possible explanation: mutation. He could have seen an unusual specimen or mutation of some known species. On that dive he just found the winning ticket and happened to describe some animals that are uncommon, rare, or that simply haven't been found yet.
FYI: I have a friend named Beebe, and it's pronounced BEE-bee :-)
Like a BB gun.
The first one seems more like a squid he mistakenly tried to pin as a fish. The second seems like the bioluminescent jellyfish common at those depths.
I wouldn't like to say for certain that he was either lying, mistaken or hallucinating, given his reliable track record of identifying new species on other expeditions.
Rainbow fish my grand father describe them differently in color and brought some to see and taste witch was some sweetest and the end with salty heads when fry and eaten hall rare fish not soo only your head my grandfather was pacific deep fishermen all his life till his death in a hurricane
❤❤
Is either still out there or it’s extinct🤷♂️🤔 you and me are going to figure this out together
it looks a lot like a needlefish
Could you talk about the story of the killer whales Hugo and Lolita?
Michael malice sent me here
Interesting. Did he mention this topic or did he mention my video? Just curious.
I think there extinct
I don't mean to be annoying, but I'm pretty sure his name (Beebe) is pronounced "Bee-bee"
This is why I’ve never understood why the government spends trillions exploring dead space and virtually nothing on exploring the oceans that are teeming with life.🤔🤷🏼♂️
Can't get funding for finding fish, easy to get funding to look technologically advanced, advance Intel and develop a means of 'advancing the saving of humanity'. Its sad but governments care more about looking good than doing it.
@@lewisbeer6156 Yep, about right.🤬
Yeah, it kind of makes me wonder but who knows what exoplanets we might encounter that might harbor life. It’s a shame we can’t take a closer look at the planets and what life forms exist there.
It's mainly about pressure!
"The pressure increases about one atmosphere for every 10 meters of water depth."
This makes it very difficult to explore the deep ocean. Meanwhile, outer space has very little pressure which makes it easier to explore.
What sophiv said. It’s actually easier to explore space than to explore the bottom of the ocean. Not only is it the pressure, but also oxygen if you send people down and remote controller subs aren’t the greatest
5:55 Beep-Beep! My bullshit detector just went off due to his highly unscientific language. He was probably trying to raise funding for further explorations…
**Masterful literary potential ensues**
@@andocoolxd5158 … although strictly speaking, „potential“ can’t „ensue“ - something needs to be manifest to „ensue“.
The closest thing #3 sounds like is an oar fish