Dolphin Asks Diver For help

[Ukeluthier]

Originally Posted by LakeSuperior

So... do you always cherry-pick your data sets?

Use an arbitrary 14 years instead of your arbitrary 12, and there is a pronounced upward trend.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by mottseng

Have you heard of GOOGLE and if so knock yourself out.

There are no cases of dolphins raping humans.

If you wish to make reduculous statements you need to back it up.

Otherwise all you posts appear to be utter total crap!

Originally Posted by mottseng
Despite their lovable appearance few know that they are responsible for raping over fourteen innocent people a year.

[mottseng]

In Canada there is no Rape law. There is however Sexual Assault levels 1 to 3. So I do agree using the word rape usually refers to penetration and that has not been the case with dolphins. However, there are cases of Sexual Assaults being committed by dolphins.

Don't see any crap in this.

Sexually Frustrated Dolphin Gets Frisky with a Couple of Scuba Divers (Video) : Discovery News

[mottseng]

Originally Posted by MarkJ

There are no cases of dolphins raping humans.

If you wish to make reduculous statements you need to back it up.

Otherwise all you posts appear to be utter total crap!

Really????????? ALL my posts are crap. Your comments are a crappy attempt at humour I take it.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by fozrunner

...
I must admit i was a bit disconcerted at the BC video recently that shows killer whales herding some dolphins and then devouring them!

Well they are not certainly worse then men: there are lots of cultures that eat other primates.

To the Op: Thanks for sharing. It is a fantastic movie!

[Aussiesuede]

Slayers:

Slayers deny any possibility of success in cognitive ethology. They sometimes conflate the difficulty of doing rigorous cognitive ethological investigations with the impossibility of doing so. Slayers also often ignore specific details of work by cognitive ethologists and frequently mount philosophically motivated objections to the possibility of learning anything about animal cognition. They do not see that cognitive ethological approaches can lead, and have lead, to new and testable hypotheses. They often pick out the most difficult and least accessible phenomena to study (e.g. consciousness) and then conclude that because we can gain little detailed knowledge about this subject, we cannot do better in other areas. Slayers also appeal to parsimony in explanations of animal behavior, but they dismiss the possibility that cognitive explanations can be more parsimonious than noncognitive alternatives, and they deny the utility of cognitive hypotheses for directing empirical research.

Slayers often base arguments on claims about the privacy of the mental or skepticism about other minds. But is ironic that these premises, which can only be defended in nonempirical, philosophical fashion, are produced by critics who would typically regard themselves as hard-nosed empiricists. Cognitive ethologists do empirical work, yet slayers who argue on such philosophical grounds rarely analyze that empirical work to see what it is designed to show and whether it in fact shows what it is designed to show. Instead, they base their arguments on claims that are at least as fraught with interpretive difficulty as the cognitive conclusions they wish to deny. This unwillingness to engage in debate about the actual empirical work of cognitive ethologists gives the impression that many slayers simply barge in, declare victory, and get out without genuinely engaging cognitive ethologists in a dialogue about their work.

[Saltyhog]

Originally Posted by Aussiesuede

Slayers: Slayers deny any possibility of success in cognitive ethology. They sometimes conflate the difficulty of doing rigorous cognitive ethological investigations with the impossibility of doing so. Slayers also often ignore specific details of work by cognitive ethologists and frequently mount philosophically motivated objections to the possibility of learning anything about animal cognition. They do not see that cognitive ethological approaches can lead, and have lead, to new and testable hypotheses. They often pick out the most difficult and least accessible phenomena to study (e.g. consciousness) and then conclude that because we can gain little detailed knowledge about this subject, we cannot do better in other areas. Slayers also appeal to parsimony in explanations of animal behavior, but they dismiss the possibility that cognitive explanations can be more parsimonious than noncognitive alternatives, and they deny the utility of cognitive hypotheses for directing empirical research.

Slayers often base arguments on claims about the privacy of the mental or skepticism about other minds. But is ironic that these premises, which can only be defended in nonempirical, philosophical fashion, are produced by critics who would typically regard themselves as hard-nosed empiricists. Cognitive ethologists do empirical work, yet slayers who argue on such philosophical grounds rarely analyze that empirical work to see what it is designed to show and whether it in fact shows what it is designed to show. Instead, they base their arguments on claims that are at least as fraught with interpretive difficulty as the cognitive conclusions they wish to deny. This unwillingness to engage in debate about the actual empirical work of cognitive ethologists gives the impression that many slayers simply barge in, declare victory, and get out without genuinely engaging cognitive ethologists in a dialogue about their work.

Yeah!!! What *he* said!

[David M]

I have seen my cat do some rather complex reasoning, (for a cat).

Awesome video! It made me feel good about humans and dolphins.

[Coops]

I started this thread because it is a video that is both amazing and a great example of interaction between species. Most folks enjoyed it for what it is and then as always, once a thread goes long enough, the ones who "know" better and see no joy, come along to extol their vast repertoire of internet "facts" for no other reason than either to cause a nuisance or to infer that they are smarter than the rest with outlandish claims.

Then the fanatical zealots of the pushers of the climate change barrow see an opening and zoom in.

It's a shame that the pleasure of humans and animals getting something out of each other has to be dragged down to this level.

I see more intelligence in the eyes of a dolphin than I sometimes see in the words of humans.

Coops.

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by David M

I have seen my cat do some rather complex reasoning, (for a cat).

Awesome video! It made me feel good about humans and dolphins.

Another cat reasoning video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvwHHMEDdT0

I used to think this "whisperer" stuff was BS, but a friend confided she did this for certain friends.
We asked her to have a session with our two cats who were deathly afraid to go with us on the boat.

During the session, she told us stuff that the cats had communicated to her that we knew but had never mentioned to anyone.

After the session with us and her, she let them know they would be safe on the boat even if they didn't enjoy it.
Sure enough, every time since then when we take them with us, they are mellow and take their sweet time getting off the boat when we return.

I'm a believer.

[DDabs]

Mottseng, do you have a dog?

[Coops]

Have a bit of a laugh at this one. It's ok, you can enjoy it, it's not real.(I don't think)

Funny orangutan will brighten your day. [VIDEO]

Coops.

[Blue Skye]

Originally Posted by Coops

I started this thread because it is a video that is both amazing and a great example of interaction between species. Most folks enjoyed it for what it is and then as always, once a thread goes long enough, the ones who "know" better and see no joy, come along to extol their vast repertoire of internet "facts" for no other reason than either to cause a nuisance or to infer that they are smarter than the rest with outlandish claims.

Then the fanatical zealots of the pushers of the climate change barrow see an opening and zoom in.

It's a shame that the pleasure of humans and animals getting something out of each other has to be dragged down to this level.

I see more intelligence in the eyes of a dolphin than I sometimes see in the words of humans.

Coops.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by mottseng

In Canada there is no Rape law. There is however Sexual Assault levels 1 to 3. So I do agree using the word rape usually refers to penetration and that has not been the case with dolphins. However, there are cases of Sexual Assaults being committed by dolphins.

Don't see any crap in this.

Sexually Frustrated Dolphin Gets Frisky with a Couple of Scuba Divers (Video) : Discovery News

I was sexually assaulted by a young male Manatee a few years ago.
No camera with me though.

[robert sailor]

And you have been wearing diapers ever since ??