TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Scientists KILL oldest living thing
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Scientists KILL oldest living thing

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306076,00.html

Well that sucks.

More than 400 years old, wow.
post #2 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,306076,00.html

Well that sucks.

More than 400 years old, wow.
Would it qualify me as a sick individual if I admitted that the title of the story made me chuckle?

<I have a warped sense of humor>
post #3 of 23
That makes me even more glad that I don't eat shellfish. Poor clam.
post #4 of 23
Thread Starter 
Cats, , it's okay.

Why do scientist have to always kill stuff FIRST?
post #5 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Cats, , it's okay.

Why do scientist have to always kill stuff FIRST?
Do you really think that if they KNEW it was 400 years old that they would have killed it? It seems to me that this was a bit of an "oops."
post #6 of 23
Thread Starter 
Yes, I think they would haVE. I think they would have killed it anyway to study it more in depth.
post #7 of 23
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7066389.stm

Quote:
The clam, nicknamed Ming after the Chinese dynasty in power when it was born, was in its infancy when Queen Elizabeth I was on the throne and Shakespeare was writing plays such as Othello and Hamlet.
The above just boggles the mind.
post #8 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post
The above just boggles the mind.
Yes it does!
post #9 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by catcaregiver View Post
Would it qualify me as a sick individual if I admitted that the title of the story made me chuckle?

<I have a warped sense of humor>
No, I laughed too. But then again I have a weird sense of humor.

IMO it's not like they could of asked the clam how old it was. I think it was more of a mistake than anything.
post #10 of 23
I don't think they would have killed it if they knew it was over 400 years old. That's just a real pity, to be honest.

I don't think they should have killed it if he was 4 yrs old, for that matter.
post #11 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcat View Post

Mine too. Wow. And now, poof, it is dead. Way to go scientists.
Kill first and ask questitons later.
post #12 of 23
Yeah, scientists are soooo evil.
post #13 of 23
I don't think they would've knownigly killed it if they knew how old it was!
post #14 of 23
Quote:
Only after researchers cut through its shell, which made it more of an ex-clam, and counted its growth rings did they realize how old it had been — between 405 and 410 years old.
It is unclear to me if they cut through the shell by accident and then counted the rings OR if they cut through the shell thinking it was a mere 200 years old on purpose to study it.
post #15 of 23
oops I think If they knew it was that old, they wouldn't have killed it
post #16 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockcat View Post
It is unclear to me if they cut through the shell by accident and then counted the rings OR if they cut through the shell thinking it was a mere 200 years old on purpose to study it.
I think they can't count the rings properly unless they cut through the shell. Like with trees, you can only count the year rings by sawing the tree in two.
post #17 of 23
The good news is that I'm sure it wasn't the only 400 year old clam. We still have a lot of ocean to host 400 year + clams.
post #18 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by GingersMom View Post
That makes me even more glad that I don't eat shellfish. Poor clam.
i hope that ate it after killing it,
but yea i posted that story in the other thread yesterday
post #19 of 23
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbjerkness View Post
oops I think If they knew it was that old, they wouldn't have killed it

You have much more confidence in scientists than I do.
post #20 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by GingersMom View Post
Yeah, scientists are soooo evil.
As a matter of fact -- the other night, at the evil scientist's meeting, there was a discussion of taking over the world!! But when they found that task too arduous, they settled on destroying a large clam.
post #21 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquarius View Post
As a matter of fact -- the other night, at the evil scientist's meeting, there was a discussion of taking over the world!! But when they found that task too arduous, they settled on destroying a large clam.
I missed that meeting, I was at the evil gay agenda meeting. (I serve punch there for a little extra cash).
post #22 of 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by HopeHacker View Post
I don't think they would have killed it if they knew it was over 400 years old. That's just a real pity, to be honest.

I don't think they should have killed it if he was 4 yrs old, for that matter.

I agree, they would have probably put it in muesums on lease and made some money off of it.
post #23 of 23
They wouldn't have known the age unless they cut through it and killed it. I don't know WHY they had to know the age of it though, or what they would have done if they had have managed to age it without killing it. I mean what do you do with a 400 year old clam??? If you put it in an aquarium or something like that I can't image anybody would be particularly excited - I can't tell a 400 year old clam from a 4 year old clam (and obviously neither can they...).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Scientists KILL oldest living thing