If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube) Video Video of a cat in zero-gravity: where research, animal cruelty, and comedy gold merge as one   (youtube.com) divider line 261
    More: Video  
•       •       •

44124 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Dec 2007 at 8:59 AM (6 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



261 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-12-05 12:03:25 PM
Man, I really needed that. Farkin hilarious.

Good job subby!

/fark on...
 
2007-12-05 12:05:45 PM
Plainly, the truth about the manned space program hurts. One has to ask, whose ox is gored?

BTW, the highly-touted spin-offs from manned space exploration turn out to be rather, let's say, more modest than many assume when closely examined. NASA itself has backed way off many of its claims about these supposed earth-shaking spin-offs, and leaves the touting of them to assorted flag-wavers, pencil-necked zoomies, and dork Trekkies.

Let's face it: Manned space exploration is a Cold War propaganda relic with very limited objective benefits. The unmanned program actally yields significant scientific information and provides immense service mainly through Earth sensing.

Manned space flight? Not so much.

But, hey: Jackass astronauts get to torment cats in vomit comets, so it's all worth it to some people! Har-dee-har!
 
2007-12-05 12:13:28 PM
ClintBartonWannabe: So THAT's how they are going to power the missions to Mars. Cats wrapped in copper wire floating in a ring of magnets.

DING DING DING DING!!!

WINAR!

K/H D
 
2007-12-05 12:21:32 PM
ju66l3r: How did this lipstick get on the ceiling!?!

lol
 
2007-12-05 12:31:11 PM
After I finished laughing, I felt really bad for the cat.
 
2007-12-05 12:31:52 PM
Who knew animal cruelty could be so funny!
 
2007-12-05 12:32:44 PM
Actually, I can see the intent of throwing the cat around (aside from it being hilarious.) It would be a good way to test whether cats right themselves while falling through an inborn mechanism (like an internal gyroscope) or whether they right themselves according to environmental clues gathered through the senses.
 
2007-12-05 12:37:31 PM
Cardinal: It makes no sense that that jerk in the vid was flinging the cat against the wall, repeatedly. What did we learn?



"Flinging the cat" in freefall like that is little different than the experiments done on the ground which involved dropping cats to watch how they land. Gravity provides the downward accelleration.


Speaking of failures in the public education system, do you know what happens to an object when you let go of it in a (simulated or otherwise) 0-G environment? It "floats" there. In order to view how the cat reacts to a "fall" you have to provide the accelleration.

You are aware we have also dropped cats in the name of science, yes? Over and over again at different heights to see how they react in a fall? We film it, then watch the tapes frame-by-frame for hours to see what we learn. Seeing as how both of these experiments are *years* old I can only assume you were outraged about those as well?


And to the folks whining about NASA- the video was from the USAF.


This is the video I really want to see, though:

And prior to (the) Mercury (program) we hadn't any real experience at all. We flew transport planes in parabolic courses that might give as much as 30 seconds of almost-zero-g, and that was all we knew. I will not soon forget some of our early low-g experiments. Some genius wanted to know how a cat oriented: visual cues, or a gravity sensor? The obvious way to find out was to take a cat up in an airplane, fly the plane in a parabolic orbit, and observe the cat during the short period of zero-g.

It made sense. Maybe. It didn't make enough that anyone would authorize a large airplane for the experiment, so a camera was mounted in a small fighter (perhaps a T-bird; I forget), and the cat was carried along in the pilot's lap. A movie was made of the whole run.

The film, I fear, doesn't tell us how a cat orients. It shows the pilot frantically trying to tear the cat off his arm, and the cat just as violently resisting. Eventually the cat was broken free and let go in mid-air, where it seemed magically (teleportation? or not really zero gravity in the plane? no one knows) to move, rapidly, straight back to the pilot, claws outstretched. This time there was no tearing it loose at all. The only thing I learned from the film is that cats (or this one anyway) don't like zero gravity, and think human beings are the obvious point of stability to cling to...


--A STEP FARTHER OUT, Jerry Pournelle, 1979
 
2007-12-05 12:46:59 PM
Lumoclear: Too bad we couldn't get weightless dog, weightless cat, and weightless barfing girl into the same plane.

Weightless Barfing Girl one more time


DUDE. Not Cool!
 
2007-12-05 12:48:55 PM
canyoneer: Let's face it: Manned space exploration is a Cold War propaganda relic with very limited objective benefits. The unmanned program actally yields significant scientific information and provides immense service mainly through Earth sensing.


xbox.advancedmn.com

Disagrees.
 
2007-12-05 01:08:28 PM
LaMune: to call ANY of that "an experiment" dignifies it beyond any reasonable limit.

And frankly, yes, I lose all sense of humor when careless or intentional human actions are at the expense of an animal who can't choose to be there -- whether it's this thread or hundreds of other examples.

Say what you will about the animal welfare movement -- it's the reason so much of the apparent "pleasure" taken by the cro magnons in this thread is acknowledged to be "guilty." There's been a big change in that social norm over the last fifty years -- and a lot more to be done, obviously.

If sentient life matters ethically, and it does, then this vid is a p.o.s. in suggesting that farking with an animal is acceptable, whether it's feeding them drugs or getting them drunk, or throwing them against a wall. It's not.
 
2007-12-05 01:10:19 PM
That poor little kitty cat.

/yes, I laughed
 
2007-12-05 01:13:03 PM
That was AWESOME!
 
2007-12-05 01:15:34 PM
Thus proving that similarly to the idea of attaching toast to a cat, a cat could be placed in a zero-g environment and its rotational energy harnessed.
 
2007-12-05 01:17:01 PM
They should try this experiment with a baby.
 
2007-12-05 01:26:06 PM
Spider cat, spider cat, does whatever a spidercat does. Does he spin from a web. No he can't, hes a cat. Oh, he's the spider cat.
 
2007-12-05 01:34:15 PM
www.killorn.com
 
2007-12-05 01:42:51 PM
Ha, Ha
// what's Jstacat larfn aboot?

\\ this looks just like the human race is gonna look
coping with lots of bad weather... exactly...

and i do larf me arse off at that..
i6.tinypic.com

we been waitn...
 
2007-12-05 01:44:03 PM
Zero gravity cat = funny

LSD cat = sad

Acid dog = Where'd that dumba*s keep his stash, on the floor?
 
2007-12-05 01:45:48 PM
I'm sure it's been said but: "I can haz gravty?"

Seems more cruel than funny to me, but I'm dealing with a terminally ill cat right now so my sense of cat-related humor is broke.
 
2007-12-05 01:47:49 PM
canyoneer: Innismir: "Because nothing good came out of the manned space program."

Nothing has come out of it that couldn't have come out of basic research programs on the ground for less money. Don't you think it's a little convoluted to solve problems by spending billions sending toilets and oxygen tanks and test pilots and teddy bears into orbit? For the same money, you could get ten times as much research done without the Rube Goldberg poop-in-a-tube astronaut mechanism.

I have no problem with space exploration by robots and remote sensors, but sending people out of the atmosphere to float around and look out the window is a waste of money, and is actually robbing funds from productive space programs. How many satellites and deep space probes and robot landers could be built and launched with the money we've pissed away on the Shuttle and ISS?


While I actually generally agree with you and believe you've made some valid points, you still come across as a sort of unimaginative and uninspired prig.

I personally am pleased that there are real flesh-and-blood human beings going into space--even if it really isn't the most cost-effective way to gain knowledge and explore space. The space program inspires a lot of people in many ways and I think the relatively small percentage of our country's wealth that's spent on it is generally money well spent.

In the end, life can't be simpy reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis.
 
2007-12-05 02:16:12 PM
That sucks.
 
2007-12-05 02:16:30 PM
Watching "LSD cat" did something weird to me. The part of my brain that triggers laughter definitely clicked, but absolute pity seemed to block any actual laughter. I think I chuckled, but it was weird. Oh, and then the empathy kicked in..... much empathy for that poor beast.
/need some vitamin C - no flashbacks please.
 
2007-12-05 02:20:22 PM
canyoneer:
TastyEloi:
While I actually generally agree with you and believe you've made some valid points, you still come across as a sort of unimaginative and uninspired prig.

I personally am pleased that there are real flesh-and-blood human beings going into space--even if it really isn't the most cost-effective way to gain knowledge and explore space. The space program inspires a lot of people in many ways and I think the relatively small percentage of our country's wealth that's spent on it is generally money well spent.

In the end, life can't be simpy reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis.


THIS 1,000%

I "FLY" Satellites for a living and we're not getting shorted financially at all.

K/H D
 
2007-12-05 02:21:07 PM
TastyEloi: I personally am pleased that there are real flesh-and-blood human beings going into space--even if it really isn't the most cost-effective way to gain knowledge and explore space. The space program inspires a lot of people in many ways and I think the relatively small percentage of our country's wealth that's spent on it is generally money well spent. In the end, life can't be simpy reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis.

You know what CAN be reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis? Space programs.

I'd rather we spent the money on real science. Planetary probes are fascinating. We're learning a lot from them, too. But, you know, they don't give YOU that warm fuzzy feeling the way that humans in space do, so we don't do them.

Now I know who watches those shiatty "human interest" pieces on the teevee news.
 
2007-12-05 02:58:14 PM
You know, I figure there is a very small probability that humans will one day colonize space. The problem of ionizing radiation has no obvious solution, and to be useful, such colonies would have to be self-sustaining. If one starts counting all of the "externalities" of survival provided by our Earthly environment, the task of constructing a truly self-sustaining settlement off planet looks more and more improbable.

Nonetheless, anything is possible.

Therefore, it seems to me that it would behoove us to understand outer space and the planets extremely well before such a colonization effort is launched. For example, we would want to know how to build shelters and where to find water and where material could be found to "construct" soil to grow food and how to mine and refine minerals and how a manufacturing facility could operate in low gravity or no gravity situations and what energy sources are available and practical and so on. After all, the very basics of day-to-day survival would have to be proven and all factors accounted for. There are a million things to find and analyze and prove or disprove before contruction of say, a lunar colony, could commence.

Therefore, it seems to me that the biggest bang for the buck in this endeavor would be using robot explorers to answer all these questions, conduct all the surveys, find all the raw materials, and prove or disprove different concepts. IOW, it seems to me that thorough unmanned exploration is the precondition to actual human colonization of outer space and other bodies in the Solar System. Furthermore, such an effort would lead to great leaps in the design and construction of the robots which inevitably would be key to any space colonization effort.

It seems to me that the proponents of colonization would recognize this and want to get on with it, rather than backing wasteful propaganda stunts that actually delay the attainment of their goal. It seems to me that manned flight is today a distraction from the serious business of space exploration and exploitation.

Don't you think?
 
2007-12-05 03:02:01 PM
/and animals in general for that matter.
 
2007-12-05 03:03:17 PM
sseye: TastyEloi: I personally am pleased that there are real flesh-and-blood human beings going into space--even if it really isn't the most cost-effective way to gain knowledge and explore space. The space program inspires a lot of people in many ways and I think the relatively small percentage of our country's wealth that's spent on it is generally money well spent. In the end, life can't be simpy reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis.

You know what CAN be reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis? Space programs.

I'd rather we spent the money on real science. Planetary probes are fascinating. We're learning a lot from them, too. But, you know, they don't give YOU that warm fuzzy feeling the way that humans in space do, so we don't do them.

Now I know who watches those shiatty "human interest" pieces on the teevee news.


And I think you are missing the real point of it all: Eventually, man will go out there, the question is how soon and how will he be prepared? I see nothing wrong with doing both - using machines to do the early work and determine what, if anything is worth following up with human visit.

I for one would dearly love to see a manned mission to the Gas Giants in my lifetime. I want to know that we sent MAN if only to see it up close and personal.

We need to start thinking beyond the earth as a way to focus the energies of our people in constructive ways, what better way?

I would rather have kids looking up to astronauts than rappers and socialites. At least the Astronauts went to serious colleges.
 
2007-12-05 03:03:27 PM
sseye: TastyEloi: I personally am pleased that there are real flesh-and-blood human beings going into space--even if it really isn't the most cost-effective way to gain knowledge and explore space. The space program inspires a lot of people in many ways and I think the relatively small percentage of our country's wealth that's spent on it is generally money well spent. In the end, life can't be simpy reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis.

You know what CAN be reduced to a simple cost-benefit analysis? Space programs.

I'd rather we spent the money on real science. Planetary probes are fascinating. We're learning a lot from them, too. But, you know, they don't give YOU that warm fuzzy feeling the way that humans in space do, so we don't do them.

Now I know who watches those shiatty "human interest" pieces on the teevee news.


Sorry, but you fail.

I'm the last one to watch or follow the "kid who fell in the well" or "pretty young woman who was murdered" news stories. I'm not quite sure where you came up with that.

Actually, most of the space research that interests me is done by automated probes and orbital telescopes. But, yeah, I do still get a "warm, fuzzy feeling" from manned space flight--and don't apologize for it.

In the end, just about everything humans do is to make us feel a certain way. The knowledge efficiently gained by robotic probes is of great value, but so are the human insights gained by the astronauts who traveled to the moon and who currently fly into space.

I've never understood the people who complain that something like the Apollo program was a waste of time and money. Yeah, I can see the logic that says perhaps the program was very costly and the money might have been better spent, but still, you'd really have to be some kind of uninspired drone to not think that walking on the moon is an amazing achievement. Most of the things that make life worth living aren't very practical if you evaluate them only from a "what's the payoff?" point of view.
 
2007-12-05 03:05:56 PM
I'm a little annoyed at all the people calling this a waste of nasa funding. This is clearly done on an airplane, the so-called "vomit comit" zero-G simulator. These planes are run by the air force, not nasa.

So, you can blame your waste of funding on our lovely defense department.
 
2007-12-05 03:09:36 PM
Lamune_Baba: For those of you animal lovers boo-hooing about a poor kitty:

PETA would have killed the cat and threw it in a dumpster. Because they love animals!

/get yer' Wednesday Morning hate on


Because everyone in favor of animal rights is a member of PETA!
 
2007-12-05 03:21:42 PM
Stratos

Are those bionic cats? As sketchy as that is, I'd like to think at one point we'll have that option available for humans. We've got to learn about it much more to get to a point where it'll be feasible to use on humans, and that means experimentation. On animals. Not the coolest, but I still support it.

/Call me inhumane
 
2007-12-05 03:22:21 PM
 
2007-12-05 03:22:32 PM
Stratos: Ya... cuz experimenting on cats is so farking funny...

Enjoy your bannination!
 
2007-12-05 03:23:18 PM
The vast majority of research done in the universe is via unmanned probes and telescopes. I'm betting humans would do it, but at this point it's impossible for us to get out there, let alone return.

The manned flights are always close to Earth, doing things that have to be done that our probes cannot do, such as construction and maintenence. The first hand expierence is exactly what's required to eventually build habitable stations in orbit. Collect all the data you can, but eventually we've got to run some 'tests'. It's more interest from the commercial sector that we need to see.

However I'm against going back to the moon. Without a habitable outpost of some sort on the rock, I don't see what good you'll get out of it in the long run or what's up there we don't already know about. I can't imagine the logistics and funding it would take to ferry workers and materials back and forth. It's a total PR move, and a bad one. I do however see AI and robotics advancing far enough to do this for us before it becomes cost effective to send flesh and blood people out that way (Mars too).

/cat was hilarious, I also wonder if it could adapt in time.
 
2007-12-05 03:24:06 PM
well that will be a Famous cat, advertising contracts...
humans have to pay big for a ride like that
i can imagine the paperwork..
who owns cat's royalties?
i20.tinypic.com

Yeah,... Hellooo Kitty :)
 
2007-12-05 03:30:07 PM
I think people eat them in Asia. AND in Flushing Queens.
 
2007-12-05 03:42:45 PM
Hank Rearden:

and ppl eat ppl 2
disgusting!
 
2007-12-05 03:45:12 PM
usera.imagecave.com
 
2007-12-05 03:46:32 PM
unremarkable asterisk: Enjoy your bannination!

Seconded. That was way over the top for in here.
 
2007-12-05 03:46:50 PM
canyoneer and other wankers biatching about manned space flight:

This took place in a plane, not in space.
 
2007-12-05 04:04:09 PM
Not funny. I frown on these shenanigans:(
 
2007-12-05 04:13:57 PM
Dammit I missed Stratos post.
 
2007-12-05 04:28:10 PM
He_Hate_Me

No sh*t? Thanks for the info, fella!
 
2007-12-05 04:29:30 PM
studebaker hoch: Stratos

Looked like dissected cats. Not unlike the "magnified meat" thread further up the list.
 
2007-12-05 04:57:48 PM
Wow... I didn't know that pic was against the posting rules. Oh well. (I wonder if I can even post right now. Never been banned.)

The pic was vivisection being performed on cats... but grainy and low res. Not really even bloody. Funny how pictures can be considered "offensive" but words are not. Nice double standard there Fark. (Oh, right, because we have a choice to read but not to see a picture?)

Asplenium - Not bionic. I explained here. If you want to be bionic... submit yourself for research. It's really that simple. (now recognize the uncomfortable feeling of not wanting to be experimented on and the relief of being able to choose not to. Now imagine not being able to choose. That's the position animals are in. And yes, animals very much have emotions.)

/nothing is offensive except the denial people live in to avoid being offended.
//realizes animal "testing" is an unfortunate aspect of life but easily 50% of it is unnecessary.
///more concerned with people wearing fur.
 
2007-12-05 05:11:07 PM
My profile has the link to the picture for those who want to see it. You have to copy and paste it yourself. I assume this is "okay" as people always post NSFW content in a link.

I am amazed that anyone actually thinks that was "over the top." (I get it's against the rules... I'm talking about something else I'm not supposed to talk about now that I'm intimately familiar with the rules.)

I'm going back to just lurking. Posting on Fark sucks now.
 
2007-12-05 05:26:26 PM
Stupid, short and very poor quality, and he's throwing the cat(just wrong).

Not funny in the least.
 
2007-12-05 05:28:04 PM
Video no longer available =(
 
2007-12-05 05:36:50 PM
i sent my dad to space camp on lsd

sorry, dad.

i mean, you're welcome
 
Displayed 50 of 261 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report