> I read the article, and was disappointed at the amount
> of speculation it contained. I would expect better from
> New Scientist.
Science, IS speculation, Senorita Dahl. And it has roots
back to when Renee DesCartes used to cut open dogs and
watch them scream in agony, while "speculating" that the
"sounds" they made were not evidence of pain, like a human
would feel, but more of a mechanical reaction, as in a
machine making a noise when it was broken.
In some ways, scientists understandings of the way things
work is far beyond the average person's. And in some areas,
scientists need massive amounts of time, data, research and
contemplation to accept what is plain as day obvious to your
average second grader. The reason many scientists are thus
mentally handicapped has roots back to the aforementioned
French Mathematician, Philosopher, Scientist Speculator, Dog
I like the name New Scientist. Scientist who can acually
think without Descartes speculating over their shoulders?
Who'da thunk it?
This is Michael
> > The March 4 issue of New Scientist has an article on the "Mind of the
> > Dog" http://www.newscientist.com/features/features.jsp?id=ns22281
> > which is quite interesting. It cites research that indicates that
> > domestication (or at least genetic distinction from wolves) occurred
> > 135,000 years ago, much longer ago than previous estimates (14,000
> > years ago). Another claim is that dogs are better at certain
> > cognitive tasks than Rhesus monkeys, and have an emotional bond to
> > their owners which can be show experimentally to be as strong as an
> > infant's bond to its mother (or other primary caretaker).
> > I'd be interested in other people's views on this article. Are the
> > sources legit, or is this another Sheldrake?
> > Janet Gunn
> Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710
> Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com)