An underwater adventure in search of living fossils. The island of New Guinea in the Pacific Ocean sits on the equator, where immediately next to a richly-colored coral reef, a sharp underwater cliff drops down to 1,000 meters. A long-awaited exploration down the little known depths of this tropical sea is finally about to start. NHK has teamed up with eminent marine biologist Mark Erdmann, discoverer of the coelacanth in Indonesia. The spherical transparent submarine, which successfully captured the world’s first moving images of a giant squid in its natural habitat, is used as the team encounters true living fossil species one after another. During their last dive, in the darkest depths of caves in the deep-sea cliff, the crew encounters a huge, unknown exotic fish…
Narrated by Sir David Attenborough.
For this shoot, the submarine was equipped with a cutting-edge 4K camera, for pristine images. Join the film crew on an exciting adventure into a deep sea never before seen by humans, captured on six cameras shooting multi-angles, creating a breath-taking underwater documentary.
Part 1: The Lost World Of The Pacific
The same submarine which successfully captured the world’s first moving images of a giant squid in its natural habitat is used for exploring the deep sea cliffs off the coast of New Guinea. The team encounters true living fossil species one after another. Join this exciting deep sea adventure!
This 80 million, 100 million, billion years old bullshit is ridiculousness... what does anyone have that they know is even 10 thousand years old??? What is being compaired in carbon dating??? Consider this... the 1300's were only 700 years ago... a far cry from even 10 thousand years... the number one million is extremely incomprehensible to the human mind... you all do know that 90 percent of science is theroy right??? And probably 90 percent deception also...
Not to take away from the awesomeness of the fish and other sea creatures... I will watch part two also... I have an open mind, which is why I question the reality of things being a billion years old and a million light years away... 👍😎👍
Haha, yea brother I second your vote for more HQ media on that subject. I would like you to try something tonight and reply back to satisfy my curiosity. I believe it has to be the immense distances that degrades quality. That I am sure of just by looking at photos and zooming on objects in the distance. When using a camera that I know takes HQ pictures.
What I was wondering is if anyone else notices when it is really dark; if their vision seems to have a grainy appearance. I notice it personally when it is almost pitch black.
Edit: I do not mean camera btw. I mean your literal vision. You know with your "gelatinous orbs" haha
But we have so many Sat's in space with cams and on the moon and Mars but just grainy vids it's a it funny but yes I agree I know there is a lot of R. O. V. But still we should be looking at moon dust in 1080p by now lol
I love the Ocean, was interested in being an oceanographer at one time in my life. I would love to have the position of being the narrator of these wonderful documentaries, therefore being such a part of it that my dream of being an oceanographer would at least be partly fulfilled.
What a great video but I knew it would be as soon as I saw the name Sir David Attenborough. A truly great man. Well enough about God, (sorry, i meant Sir David lol), this video was amazing. I'd love to be able to go down in one of those submersible and explore the deep. They do say that we know more about space than we do about our oceans and that's a shame. The creatures that live down there look out of this world. Wayne (From the U.K)
Maybe that's proof that the earth isn't as old as people keep saying. I'm just saying it seems like they just throw a number out there. This fosel is 100million years old, and this fosel is 800million years old ect. Look down here these sea erchants look just like our 4billion year old sea erchant fosels. And I'm not buying carbon dating bullshit i don't believe it at all.
GREAT DOC! Obviously this perpetually open-mouthed biologist was in the navy, army or played football in college with his constant exclamations of 'we nailed him'. And his often calling them weird fish. yes, when you go down 500m deep into the ocean, one usually finds 'Weird Fish'!! ( Also a great song by RADIOHEAD= "WEIRD FISH" :) )
Why is he speaking, when his wife, theoretically , was the one who found it? Of course, the fisherman was there before. "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's".
Thank You For Your Greatest Achievement Moments Sharing With The World. With Best Regards To You & Your Team For Your Work That Give More Knowledge & Eye Open To All That We Are Very Small In All Another Animal They Survive Without Damage Environment. If They Survive In Very Hard Environment In Very Easy Way So Why We Don't Try Like This. One New Think - That If You Are Slow You Survive More. If You Go Fast You Win Race But Survive Chance Less. The Creature - Elephant, Whale , Tortoise Etc.. Thanks Again. With Best Wishes To All.
I don’t know why scientists supposedly scientists talks about evolution and involving it’s so dumb of not see a monkey change to a man yet or fish to a man or anything else animal were created To their own kindI says Jehovah the Creator of heaven and earth
@Brian A Davis Exactly. Only now we're making those who would normally not be able to have kids able to have them. We're stopped natural selection and breeding is no longer a matter of being 'fit'. Worse socioeconomic's
actually promote breeding among those who shouldn't at the expense of those who should.
@Brian A Davis There is no difference from your genes perspective but the process are diametrically opposed in terms of how they work and their final result. Survival of the fittest is the natural way, survival of the unfit is the artificial way. Calling natural selection and artificial selection the same because they both involve 'selection' is such an over simplification it defies wonder. It's not the selection that is important but how that selection is made.
@Lensflare Deviant You certainly can discard it. However, I find it reasonable that all things must experience entropy (Lynch calls it genetic drift). Lets say: your and my alleles no longer replicate themselves after 80 - 100 years (about 1200 cycles); it follows that our sex cells will no longer replicate and our spices die out ... maybe 1200 cycles (aka generations).
Absolutely fantastic film.
DA is the best natural history presenter ever.
Obviously the Japanese have a specimen of the jelly nose in a jar. That's what they do; kill everything in the sea.
I can't think of another nation that causes as much damage to ocean fauna as the Japanese.
The asteroid theory has been thoroughly debunked. Even the Alvarez brothers are warbling. Intense volcanism due to India colliding into Asia caused the extinction which lasted over a thousand years, not overnight. The pebble that splashed into the ocean doesn't even line up with the fossil records. It's a Carl Sagan cold war anti-nuclear myth. It also shows that no matter what we do to avoid green house emissions, every time a volcano farts the world gets warmer. Like Trump says, we're all screwed anyway so lets keep driving Hummers, eating beef, and burning coal.
@Dave MacDonald I have never said there was no volcanic activity nor did I ever say it wasn't a contributing factor. I have only been saying that the impact theory has not been discarded or refuted in favor of any other theory single theory. This is just another example of your interpreting (or making up) facts that suit yourself and shows how you continue to play fast and loose with the truth. Since there is lots of evidence that both happened the current theories are utilizing both events. You have discarded that in favor of advocating for only one. "Anyway, even a year is too long an extinction period and we know it was longer than that." this statement is confusing. Extinction events tend to take generations to fully manifest why you would say a year is to long is.. baffling. Further your assertion that celestial events are somehow not part of the natural evolution of the planet is utter nonsense. We have evidence of many impact events including many very large ones. As for the rest.. Pot meet Kettle almost everything there I have already demonstrated applies far more to you than me. You shame yourself continuously.
You're funny. I like you. You'd be fun to get going over a drink. Maybe we could even play a game of asteroids. The flatearthers were actually the ones who held to an incorrect theory that the evidence so obviously contradicted. Nowhere in the 14th century literature was there any contradiction of the heliocentric universe accepted by the establishment until someone pointed out the obvious. Anyway, even a year is too long an extinction period and we know it was longer than that. And now you're admitting it might be volcanism triggered by an impact. Of course a butterfly's wings could have triggered the volcanism, but no one would say a butterfly brought down the dinosaurs. And if you're saying that it doesn't have to be all one or another, I would say that was wavering from the Alvarez position which of course they have never wavered from. Occam's razor, which is a simpler explanation: a process which occurs every day, or a celestial event. Love your simplistic, arbitrary, dishonest, pandering, quibbling, defective, superior, self-serving, idiotic, shameful, cowardly friend.
@Dave MacDonald The fossil record shows the extinction took.. time. How long exactly can not be determined but I would agree with the idea of hundreds or even thousands of years. This doesn't rule out a impact in anyway. The changes made by the impact (including the triggering of volcanism) didn't all take place in a single day. It was a lively day but your appreciation of how the impactor extinction works is very simplistic. The entire ecosystem went haywire. There was massive losses across the species spectrum including among marine vertebrates so where you got the notion that it didn't is beyond me. You're stating that the impact theory is wrong is simply not supported anywhere except by you. I can't find any published sources that say that it's a theory that has be discredited or discarded so it's appears to be a figment of your mind. You also seem married to the whole notion is that is has to be either one or the other which again isn't the opinion of the scientific community that I can find. More and more it's sounding like you simply found a source that convinced you and you've decided arbitrarily. That's dishonest. Again. Worse this is flat earther logic where the only 'truth' is that which panders to the belief with everything else being discarded. In matters with things so far in the past nothing is so cut and dried especially the ability to date any of the events with any precision. It's starting to feel that your quibbling more out of a wish to be 'right' more than 'correct' which is again the same defective logic system employed by the flat earth community.
Lastly if writing a reply is shameful why have comment sections at all? Why comment at all? To let dishonest statements stand unchallenged is your idea of superior? That's yet more self-serving logic and genuine idiocy. All you want is to be insulated from any contradiction of your OPINION. An opinion you shamefully try and pass off as fact. So you've moved into both cowardly and shameful.
What's shameful is a person who purports to be intelligent even writing replies on YouTube. Anyway, the fossil record shows the extinction occurred over the course of a thousand years, the time period over which the volcanic activity was at its worst. End of story, the asteroid theory is wrong. The marine life that should have been affected by the collision the most didn't die. End of story, the asteroid theory is wrong. The elements found in SOME areas of the world AROUND the same time can be explained by volcanic activity. I'm sorry, I didn't intend mockery and insult so much as humour. If you don't appreciate my sense of humour I'll refrain in future discussions. My diatribe does seem to have hit a nerve though, even if I am a dishonest, ignorant, self-exposed fool (and a troll ;) ).
@Dave MacDonald So much contradictory data? Such as? I suspect you know far less than you claim and your understanding of the situation is flawed. At least thanks to me you were able to at least get the relationship of the Alvarez's correct. The rest is still you just claiming one theory is more accepted than another because it's self serving not that you actually know anything. _"The rest of you should know that people defend a position more vehemently when they realize they were wrong."_ which explains why your reply starts with veiled insults and continues to mockery? The weakest for of debate from the weakest position. You both expose yourself and make a fool of yourself in a single step. Shameful.
at 14:50, its over 400 million years dated and no change what so ever to it? WTF, evolution get your fucking lazy ass over there and change that fucking lilly NOW!!!!! evolution needs time to show or notice change, you are embarassing our scientist that carbon dated that shit, and we said time is needed to see change, fuck you evolution
@Rick Quest That is what I said, or did I state that enivironment adapts? We are not born with everything, but evolution takes a long time. So, again, cave-dwellers have lost the use of eye-sight, though many of them have eyes. Many birds have wings, but they can't fly. Probably because there are no predators, or they are big and fast. You might call it "backwards evolution", since evolution is as much trial and error, as it is adaptation. But if you call evolution dogmatic, you have not understood the principles of it.....
@lassisvulgaris Are you listening to yourself? You're saying at first we were all born with "everything" and through the years lost use of the things we no longer use? Ridiculous. We adapt to our environment not the other way around. The dogma needs to end now.
Cult Film Collective and the Trylon team-up for a can’t miss for film fans Pedro Almodóvar 35mm Double Feature. [TIX] First Ave is insane this week, including the annual Rebel Rebel: Rock for Pussy David Bowie covers benefit for Feline… Continue Reading →
Quick Q+A: George McConnell + SUPERHERO.
As Captain America says in the under-appreciated Age of Ultron, “We have an enhanced in the field.” Not just the field, Cap. Everywhere you look these days Superheroes are flying or speeding or stretching by—in our films, in our art,… Continue Reading →
Whiz Bang Days Celebration.
Bird Town (as we know it) aka Robbinsdale (as you maybe know it) has a proud history of wrasslin’, so we shouldn’t be so surprised to see the high flyin’ brawlers and knuckle sandwich makers and #1 heel Darin Corbin… Continue Reading →
Sat // The Beer & Bacon Classic.
Previous beer fest experiences (and there have been many) indicate the snacklace is reaching an all-time high in sophistication—but you’ll want to leave it at home for this one. Consider it research for your next creation: the Bacon and Beer… Continue Reading →
Bell Museum Grand Opening.
The Bell Museum celebrates nearly 150 years of existence, 50 years of active learning programs, and 24 feet of woolly mammoth at its grand opening this weekend, which welcomes the public to experience its beautifully grandiose new digs in St…. Continue Reading →
Lumières Françaises + Bastile Day.
Did the MSP Film Society know France would be on the cusp of a World Cup win when they planned their week of independent French film? DID THEY? The smarties actually likely scheduled Lumières Françaises to coincide with Sat’s Bastille… Continue Reading →
Weds // TV Girl + Infinity Crush + Cheap Fantasy.
“Here in New York you don’t need excuses to dress like a girl.” The effortless hipster cool of TV Girl’s sound mixes a sunny produced pop, throwback to ’60s French yé-yé, with more relaxed late night beats and samples, making them… Continue Reading →
Thurs // The Summit Ratskeller’s Grand Reopening.