io9 
Enter your username and password.
San Francisco, 1:12 AM
Sun Dec 20
11 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Annalee Newitz |
News Editor:
Charlie Jane Anders |
Associate Editor:
Meredith Woerner |
Assistant Editor:
Lauren Davis |
Weekend Editor:
Graeme McMillan |
Contributors:
Joshua Glenn
Stephen Goldmeier |
Ed Grabianowski |
Austin Grossman
Paul Hogan |
Lauren Davis |
Chris Hsiang |
Lynn Peril |
Ann VanderMeer
Alasdair Wilkins |
Graphic Designer:
Stephanie Fox |
Interns:
Tim Barribeau |
Julia Carusillo |
Alex Eichler |
Cyriaque Lamar |
Caitlin Petrakovitz |
Mary Ratliff |
Josh Snyder |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
Right, I'd say it again.
12/09/09
12/10/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
Sounds like SyFy has 2 new movies in the works. You're welcome.
12/09/09
Damn I love conservation!!
12/09/09
12/10/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
I knew those prickly bastards were up to no good.
12/09/09
Well, gotta nuke somthin' [shrugs].
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
For example, the NE had an article about a man who farted himself to death in his sleep. It went on to mention a (real) illness of the intestines that causes excessive flatulence, and then went on to talk about how this man filled his entire insufficiently-ventilated bedroom with methane while he slept because of his ceaseless flatulence, and eventually suffocated on his own passed digestive gasses. They explained that normally this can't happen, but under just the right circumstances (obese man with sleep apnea, poorly ventilated tiny room, rare disease what makes you fart a lot) it can indeed kill you.
Of course, this is complete bullshit. No, you can't fart yourself to death. You'd need to be in an airtight container to begin with and you'd die of suffocation long before you had the chance to fart yourself to death besides, nevermind the biological impossibility of the whole thing.
And yet, in that bigfoot article, we have quotes like this one:
"If animal remains were so easy to find, the forests of Maine would be so filled with moose and deer antlers each year from those dropped by the thousands of animals shedding their pairs, hunters and hikers would not be able to move around without tripping over mountains of discarded antlers."
This is the same logic at work.
So for the record: No. That isn't how it works. For starters, porcupines are just as likely to go after plywood or roadside rock salt used to melt snow than they are to go after bones. According to Wikipedia, they're also prone to enjoy salt-encrusted dirt, spare tires, wiring, or even urine-soaked objects.
For seconders, there's a lot more at work than just some porcupines as far as getting rid of the bones of deceased animals. Decay itself will chew those up eventually. Most creatures don't have bones of adamantium; bones decay. Slower than flesh, sure, but if bones lasted long enough that "hikers would not be able to move around without tripping over mountains of discarded antlers" well, we'd have a lot more than antlers to worry about. Nature's pretty good about taking out the trash, even the calcium-based type, and it doesn't need porcupines to help. Sorry man.
While I'm not saying we shouldn't maybe dig through some bone scavenger type animal's lairs to see what they've got, I *am* saying that the odds of an unknown species' bones being hidden in this one spot this whole time is, er...Slim.
12/09/09
Common sense, logic, and science ftw.
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
12/09/09
If interested, read the details here:
[blogs.suntimes.com]
I have another, more polished, version but it's in my personal website and I'd rather not publicize my real identity online unless I have a really good reason.
A warning: it might unintentionally offend some people's sensibilities.
Oh, I forgot to mention that the issue of bones is an important part of my "theory" and that's why this article reminded me of it. You'll understand it if/when you read it.
12/09/09
And I can only assume that this "issue of bones" refers to the bone I get every time I see his glorious mullet.
12/09/09
12/09/09
That a lot of porcupine caves full of bones.
Seeing as we can locate species that have 13 members in the whole world and we still haven't found Bigfoot...
The old guys chances are getting pretty small.
These guys do some great skeptic work -
[monsterscience.org]
12/01/09