Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by anstro76, Oct 1, 2019.
Your Dog Isn't That Special, According To Science...
Picture of so-called "scientist"
Yeah, I don't expect dogs to be "special" when they're compared to other very intelligent animals. Compare me to a UF grad, and I'm nothing special. Compare me to a FSU, Georgia, or Tennessee grad, and I'm a super-genius.
Good luck with this story in our dog crazy country.
More people hate Michael Vick than Aaron Hernandez.
I think part of the reason is that Hernandez killed someone doing gang shit, while Vick was fighting, killing, and torturing innocent animals.
My dog is dumb. Super sweet and loyal but in ten years he hasn’t figured out the fake throw, ball behind the back routine. A wolf would have gone for my neck by now.
From the article linked:
During our work it seemed to us that many studies in dog cognition research set out to ‘prove’ how clever dogs are,” Stephen Lea, a professor at the University of Exeter and the study’s lead author, said in a press release. “They are often compared to chimpanzees and whenever dogs ‘win,’ this gets added to their reputation as something exceptional. Yet in each and every case we found other valid comparison species that do at least as well as dogs do in those tasks.”
To come to this conclusion, the researchers looked at 300 papers on animal intelligence, reviewing sensory cognition, physical cognition, spatial cognition, social cognition and self-awareness. Their findings were published last week in the journal Learning & Behavior.
Read more: Cats Are Actually Nice, Scientists Find
Scientists have used dogs in psychological studies for decades; Pavlov’s conditioning experiments are just one popular example. They make good research subjects because they don’t have to be held in captivity, are accessible, and have been bred for generations to respond to human commands and to perform tasks.
Cats are actually nice? - read no more. "Science" is obviously not perfect.
Yeah, sure. Fair enough. But my point stands - we're looney for dogs.
I know someone that recently interviewed for a management role at a manufacturing company. In the interview process they basically told her they were an exceptionally dog-friendly company and she may not work out if she didn't like dogs. She does and she took the role, but damn. 3.5 UE and you'd discount quality candidates because they don't like dogs?!?!? It's not even related to veterinarian anything.
The examples go on and on.
Don't get me wrong; I don't hate dogs or anything. We have one... But we've lost our blooming mind over pets - to the tune of $70B/year
I'm not sure I've ever met a person that pursued dog ownership because dogs are intelligent (or to whatever extent their intelligence may have been perceived). That's never been what makes dogs so special.
No way am I letting my dog read that article.
But dogs do have a special life. They get to lay around all day and don't have to work. People feed them and they have sex with the first bitch in heat that comes along. They don't have to court her, they don't have to date her, they don't have to buy her dinner, they just hump her whether she wants it or not.
Now the whole neutering thing sorta sucks but other than that a dogs life is great.
Stop being a helicopter dog parent, you're turning them into snowflakes, dogs were better and more respectful when there were only like 2 dog names, Fido and Rover, and they all ate the same dog food made out of ground horse bits and cardboard.
That is their job!!
Dogs are smart because they are the species that are best able to ingratiate themselves to mankind and in doing so gain dominance over every other species on Earth save for mankind. There has gotta be something said for that. Cats are a DISTANT second.
No, no, no, no, no Gators dominate Dogs.
In fairness, he did say dogs...not DWAGS!
There is evidence man played a significant role in domesticating dogs through selective breeding. In the 1950s a Soviet geneticist began an experiment in guided evolution. He wanted to show how domestication works by selectively breeding foxes. He had remarkable success. Within a few generations he had a tame fox.
National Geographic details his procedures in 2 articles linked here. It's a fascinating read.
Taming the Wild
Published March, 2011
Mavrik, the object of Trut's attention, is about the size of a Shetland sheepdog, with chestnut orange fur and a white bib down his front. He plays his designated role in turn: wagging his tail, rolling on his back, panting eagerly in anticipation of attention. In adjacent cages lining either side of the narrow, open-sided shed, dozens of canids do the same, yelping and clamoring in an explosion of fur and unbridled excitement. "As you can see," Trut says above the din, "all of them want human contact." Today, however, Mavrik is the lucky recipient. Trut reaches in and scoops him up, then hands him over to me. Cradled in my arms, gently jawing my hand in his mouth, he's as docile as any lapdog.
Except that Mavrik, as it happens, is not a dog at all. He's a fox. Hidden away on this overgrown property, flanked by birch forests and barred by a rusty metal gate, he and several hundred of his relatives are the only population of domesticated silver foxes in the world. (Most of them are, indeed, silver or dark gray; Mavrik is rare in his chestnut fur.) And by "domesticated" I don't mean captured and tamed, or raised by humans and conditioned by food to tolerate the occasional petting. I mean bred for domestication, as tame as your tabby cat or your Labrador. In fact, says Anna Kukekova, a Cornell researcher who studies the foxes, "they remind me a lot of golden retrievers, who are basically not aware that there are good people, bad people, people that they have met before, and those they haven't." These foxes treat any human as a potential companion, a behavior that is the product of arguably the most extraordinary breeding experiment ever conducted.
It started more than a half century ago, when Trut was still a graduate student. Led by a biologist named Dmitry Belyaev, researchers at the nearby Institute of Cytology and Genetics gathered up 130 foxes from fur farms. They then began breeding them with the goal of re-creating the evolution of wolves into dogs, a transformation that began more than 15,000 years ago....
.... Miraculously, Belyaev had compressed thousands of years of domestication into a few years. But he wasn't just looking to prove he could create friendly foxes. He had a hunch that he could use them to unlock domestication's molecular mysteries. Domesticated animals are known to share a common set of characteristics, a fact documented by Darwin in The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication. They tend to be smaller, with floppier ears and curlier tails than their untamed progenitors. Such traits tend to make animals appear appealingly juvenile to humans. Their coats are sometimes spotted—piebald, in scientific terminology—while their wild ancestors' coats are solid. These and other traits, sometimes referred to as the domestication phenotype, exist in varying degrees across a remarkably wide range of species, from dogs, pigs, and cows to some nonmammalians like chickens, and even a few fish.
What DNA From Pet Foxes Teaches Us About Dogs—And Humans
PUBLISHED AUGUST 6, 2018
For nearly 60 years, Russian scientists have bred foxes to be tame—or aggressive. A new study looking at the genomes of the two groups shows that the experiment has changed the animals’ DNA in surprising ways. The research has relevance for understanding social behavior across animals and even humans.
It took a while to get to here. In 1959, a man named Dmitri Belyaev began an experiment designed to understand how dogs became domesticated. Belyaev and other biologists believed that domestic dogs were descended from wolves, but did not yet know how all the anatomical, physiological, and behavioral differences between the two animals could arise.
But Belyaev had a hunch. He suspected that the key component was the dog's tameness. Perhaps, he hypothesized, the biological changes in domesticated animals—white spots, curled tails, floppy ears, shortened skulls—were the result of an evolutionary selection process over behavioral traits rather than anatomical ones.
Fearful and Friendly
Belyaev believed that by breeding the friendliest foxes with each other, perhaps he could domesticate them, artificially mimicking the millennia-long process through which wolves became dogs. He bought up a group of silver foxes from a Canadian fur farm and got to work at his lab in the Soviet Union.
And the BBC with their take on foxes in Great Britain:
A Soviet scientist created the only tame foxes in the world
"Meanwhile, Britain's urban foxes are often described as being bold and brazen around humans, compared with their countryside cousins. They will stand and stare at passers-by on the streets and even approach people with food.
"It is possible that human behaviour in towns and cities has altered the behaviour of individual foxes: if a fox grows accustomed to being fed by hand by one person, it may be more likely to approach another. However, this does not qualify them as tame.
"So pet foxes are not generally a good idea. Unless, that is, the fox is from the only tame population in the world, an extraordinary scientific experiment that started life in Soviet Russia."
The BBC article continues to detail Belyaev's selection process
A more recent Nat'l Geo article (July, 2019) on the process of domestication.
Domesticated animals, explained
Y’all can take your dog science and stick it.
This is what I know.
I have a HS and college degree. My dog doesn’t.
I have to go to work to make a living. My dog doesn’t
I have to pay bills and taxes or I won’t have electricity and water, I’ll lose my house to foreclosure and maybe go to jail for tax evasion. My dog doesn’t.
When I roll over on my back nothing happens. When my dog does, his belly gets scratched.
If I hump a female I go to
Jail and get placed on the sexual predator list. My dog doesn’t.
It goes on and on.
Lastly, I Support my dog with a home, food, water, vet visits, chew toys, etc.
Now,,,, who’s the smart one?