( I personally believe this supports the creation theory.. Because how is it exactly that allllllllll these species crawled out of the ocean but only ONE evolved to the human state????) there is only ONE homo Sapien class.. There are hundred of primate classes, several classes in the family of anthropoids, amphibians, reptiles.. Only one homo Sapien class.. But on THAT subject I digress, we all know we disagree on that part.. Sliiiide....
Within taxonomy, Class has a specific usage. In the case of humans, our "class" is mammalia, which we of course share with a lot of other animals. We are in Order primate, Family hominidae, Genus Homo and Species sapien. There have been other members of the Genus Homo, which are now extinct. There has even been another sub-species of Homo sapiens, also now extinct. Prior members of the hominidae family also existed.
Given what defines a species scientifically, it's pointless to say that there is "only one homo sapien" - because by definition there can be only one. Any others would be a different species, and those have existed.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
( I personally believe this supports the creation theory.. Because how is it exactly that allllllllll these species crawled out of the ocean but only ONE evolved to the human state????) there is only ONE homo Sapien class.. There are hundred of primate classes, several classes in the family of anthropoids, amphibians, reptiles.. Only one homo Sapien class.. But on THAT subject I digress, we all know we disagree on that part.. Sliiiide....
Within taxonomy, Class has a specific usage. In the case of humans, our "class" is mammalia, which we of course share with a lot of other animals. We are in Order primate, Family hominidae, Genus Homo and Species sapien. There have been other members of the Genus Homo, which are now extinct. There has even been another sub-species of Homo sapiens, also now extinct. Prior members of the hominidae family also existed.
Given what defines a species scientifically, it's pointless to say that there is "only one homo sapien" - because by definition there can be only one. Any others would be a different species, and those have existed.
Thank you for that break down. I honestly should have looked at that a bit deeper eh? ;-)
"What if Humans Aren’t the Most Intelligent Creatures on the Planet?"
We'd be in luck - if you haven't noticed, we're not doing so hot. Most other beings can live in balance with their environment and we can't even manage to achieve what amounts to maintaining the status quo. We may be 'intelligent' in our ability to temporarily upset the natural course of things, but is it intelligent to continue to do so? It seems to me our ability to 'cheat' the natural balance is temporary and nature will eventually rebalance things. It's difficult for me to believe our continuing to live as we do is a sign of intelligence.
As to animals not acting on emotions or possessing intellect - watch "Blackfish" (I think that's the name of the documentary?). Killer whales were observed protecting their calves from capture (I believe it was Sea World attempting to capture them - could be wrong) by having a few adults move in one direction as a 'pod' and discretely sending their calves in the other direction accompanied by just a couple of adults, to conceal them in a nearby bay area. Amazing stuff.
"What if Humans Aren’t the Most Intelligent Creatures on the Planet?"
We'd be in luck - if you haven't noticed, we're not doing so hot. Most other beings can live in balance with their environment and we can't even manage to achieve what amounts to maintaining the status quo. We may be 'intelligent' in our ability to temporarily upset the natural course of things, but is it intelligent to continue to do so? It seems to me our ability to 'cheat' the natural balance is temporary and nature will eventually rebalance things. It's difficult for me to believe our continuing to live as we do is a sign of intelligence.
As to animals not acting on emotions or possessing intellect - watch "Blackfish" (I think that's the name of the documentary?). Killer whales were observed protecting their calves from capture (I believe it was Sea World attempting to capture them - could be wrong) by having a few adults move in one direction as a 'pod' and discretely sending their calves in the other direction accompanied by just a couple of adults, to conceal them in a nearby bay area. Amazing stuff.
Cool article - thanks for sharing!
Protecting the calves is survival instinct not emotion.
I guess in a common understanding, peoe often mistake instinctual actions as emotion. Some people SWEAR their dog is whining because they know you just lost a loved one. Not quite. The dog feels your distress, but does not fully comprehend its origins.. The whining is excitement brought on by this imbalance. I truly in my Heart of hearts bieve the excitement is drawn from Frustration, because let's face it.. We all build an emotional bond to Our pets. However where people get messed up, is we are far deeper involved emotionally than the dog. Ghe dog is frustrated because he can't figure out on a simple level Why you are experiencing such remorse, he only knows you do. Again, I will define acting on emotion.
If the whale poachers were to kill the calf, the pod would continue to defend the dead calf until the actual blood 'dies'. ( ceases to release the pheromones released that trigger the defense response). Once that occurs they move on to mourning. Once that is done, they move on.. Period. Had they the ability to act on emotion, and they were capable of the realization, that the boat was the cause of the death, they would then attack the boat; exacting vengeance. But they don't. It is not in their thought program to react that way. The most efficient route to survival for the pod as a whole, (Which is consistent with elephants.. They are a distinct family unit) is taken instead.. This route is to move on. This is officiated by the mother of the dead calf reverting back into her estrous cycle again. So that a new life may be formed. Punching a wall is acting on Emotion. Telling someone to go fuck themselves ( you know who you are!) is acting on emotion. Herding a calf away from danger is instinct.
Again animals HAVE emotions, they just don't act on them.
I guess in a common understanding, peoe often mistake instinctual actions as emotion. Some people SWEAR their dog is whining because they know you just lost a loved one. Not quite. The dog feels your distress, but does not fully comprehend its origins.. The whining is excitement brought on by this imbalance. I truly in my Heart of hearts bieve the excitement is drawn from Frustration, because let's face it.. We all build an emotional bond to Our pets. However where people get messed up, is we are far deeper involved emotionally than the dog. Ghe dog is frustrated because he can't figure out on a simple level Why you are experiencing such remorse, he only knows you do. Again, I will define acting on emotion.
If the whale poachers were to kill the calf, the pod would continue to defend the dead calf until the actual blood 'dies'. ( ceases to release the pheromones released that trigger the defense response). Once that occurs they move on to mourning. Once that is done, they move on.. Period. Had they the ability to act on emotion, and they were capable of the realization, that the boat was the cause of the death, they would then attack the boat; exacting vengeance. But they don't. It is not in their thought program to react that way. The most efficient route to survival for the pod as a whole, (Which is consistent with elephants.. They are a distinct family unit) is taken instead.. This route is to move on. This is officiated by the mother of the dead calf reverting back into her estrous cycle again. So that a new life may be formed. Punching a wall is acting on Emotion. Telling someone to go fuck themselves ( you know who you are!) is acting on emotion. Herding a calf away from danger is instinct.
Again animals HAVE emotions, they just don't act on them.
Best example I can give: if animals were able to act on emotions, ggey could have suicidal thought patterns. But they can't. So animals just get up, regardless of their situation and face the day.. Feeling sorry for themselves is not an option.
It seems rather disingenuous to reduce an animal's will to protect its offspring to mere survival instinct. Animals mourn the loss of their mates and their offspring - some allow themselves to starve by lying next to their lost mates... that's hardly allowing them to survive. I suppose we're forced to limit our /'full' understanding of anything to a 'human understanding' - unless you (or anyone else) were to speak whale, dolphin, or dog.
It seems rather disingenuous to reduce an animal's will to protect its offspring to mere survival instinct. Animals mourn the loss of their mates and their offspring - some allow themselves to starve by lying next to their lost mates... that's hardly allowing them to survive. I suppose we're forced to limit our /'full' understanding of anything to a 'human understanding' - unless you (or anyone else) were to speak whale, dolphin, or dog.
No but they are my field of study. Animal behavior is what I work in. And yes there are instances where animals starve themselves out of grief. But that is based in lack of comprehension. They are honestly and earnestly await ting a change in circumstance. While they 'know' or recognize the absence of life, they cannot grasp the concept that their peer or offspring won't return. The most common of these cases are found in either young or elderly animals. First time mother's, or mothers that have raised young before, and can't understand why 'his one' is so different. And what of the case of the lioness and the baby antelope?? She defended it til she turned her back for ONE moment too long, and a male lion killed it. She herself almost died of starvation because she feared leaving it. That was grief borne. So again they dooooooo feel and experience emotions, there is no doubt in that what so ever.. But they don't act on emotion.. ( in other words, they don't make decisions based purely based on emotion)
Another good example: what if all the animals that surrogate other animals? Cats nursing ducklings and the like? Those are mortal enemy factors.. Until maternal Instinct kicks in. It has nothing to do with emotion, ( feeling sorry for them) it has to do with the animal responding to a deep seated instinct to 'mother'. I had a wolf dog that used to 'bring home' everything from snakes to cats, to other dogs, because I did those things. ( I was running an animal rescue) he mimicked what I did.. That's all. When people start trying to humanize animals we disrupt their state of balance.. This is terribly unfair to them. It's the equivekany of us living on a treadmill at full speed for our lifetime. When we think that they think and process info like we do, and treat them as if they can, we fuck them up mentally. Animals cannot be human.. They can't think as complexly as we do, and they can't equate emotion to action like we do.. Period. Believe me.. Until I took up this field of study I was just like you.. I wanted to think that too.. All my animals now are much happier that I am able to recognize that my dog will always only ever be a DOG.. Etc. it's just what it is.
And again.. ( back to thread integrity) to say that humans are smarter than any creature is not a relevant statement, because the intelligence required to perform Human function, is far different than what intelligence is required for any one group set of animals to function.
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
I think you have an extremely valid point in that as humans we are capable of processing several different forms of information, requiring SEVERAL different intellectual mind sets, at one time. As far as my research has gotten, only Elephants and Whales even come close, and even they are a ways off due to instinct overriding sense. But you're right it is an interestingly complex subject. Studying animal psychology is what made melon into Human psychology, the differences are nearly as astounding as the similarities!
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
We really are capable of great things, Thirty, and it is good to remember especially because our finer traits are worth counting, promoting, encouraging.
As far as our impact, like (I think it was) Speedy mentioned, so much of what we can do is all about the thumbs. I'm just not sure that makes us more intelligent or more complex. Rupert Sheldrake is mentioned in the article (linked at the head of this topic) and his work has revealed some very incredible and complex abilities of animals that we are just now beginning to understand. I don't think it wise of us to assume to much about things we don't fully understand.
It's a fascinating subject and I hope research in this field is allowed to continue. And I say "allowed" in response to Sheldrakes presentation on TED Talk being banned. I found that amazing and a bit disturbing. Like, really? Why?
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
We really are capable of great things, Thirty, and it is good to remember especially because our finer traits are worth counting, promoting, encouraging.
As far as our impact, like (I think it was) Speedy mentioned, so much of what we can do is all about the thumbs. I'm just not sure that makes us more intelligent or more complex. Rupert Sheldrake is mentioned in the article (linked at the head of this topic) and his work has revealed some very incredible and complex abilities of animals that we are just now beginning to understand. I don't think it wise of us to assume to much about things we don't fully understand.
It's a fascinating subject and I hope research in this field is allowed to continue. And I say "allowed" in response to Sheldrakes presentation on TED Talk being banned. I found that amazing and a bit disturbing. Like, really? Why?
The cool thing is, 26 years ago when I first started studying the psychology of horses, it was believed that animals DIDN'T have emotions, regardless of research written upon it at length by Darwin, Pavlov, and many others. It was initially perceived that we reflected upon them our emotions. Now days, this fid has been upturned by the realization the they DO have emotions. However again, instinct will almost always trump emotion in an animal because it is just how they are programmed. It amazes me the idiocy of human beings that think owning an animal Like a Tiger for example can be accomplished if enough affection and 'training' is involved. It is literally fascinating to me, that humans can't comprehend that it can't love you back. Can they feel affection towards you? Can it express surreal loyalty towards you ( dogs running into burning buildings to save their owners, or waiting at grave sites in mourning) ??? Yes. But can it love you.. I want to say yes to some degree, but realistically, the Toger probes what I know when they kill you.. No they can't instinct over rides emotion, 9 times out of 10. Do in reality, I can't see this comparison type study dying out any time soon, because we are learning more and more everyday about himans and animals.. So I think it has a nice long shelf life ahead!
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
We really are capable of great things, Thirty, and it is good to remember especially because our finer traits are worth counting, promoting, encouraging.
As far as our impact, like (I think it was) Speedy mentioned, so much of what we can do is all about the thumbs. I'm just not sure that makes us more intelligent or more complex. Rupert Sheldrake is mentioned in the article (linked at the head of this topic) and his work has revealed some very incredible and complex abilities of animals that we are just now beginning to understand. I don't think it wise of us to assume to much about things we don't fully understand.
It's a fascinating subject and I hope research in this field is allowed to continue. And I say "allowed" in response to Sheldrakes presentation on TED Talk being banned. I found that amazing and a bit disturbing. Like, really? Why?
The cool thing is, 26 years ago when I first started studying the psychology of horses, it was believed that animals DIDN'T have emotions, regardless of research written upon it at length by Darwin, Pavlov, and many others. It was initially perceived that we reflected upon them our emotions. Now days, this fid has been upturned by the realization the they DO have emotions. However again, instinct will almost always trump emotion in an animal because it is just how they are programmed. It amazes me the idiocy of human beings that think owning an animal Like a Tiger for example can be accomplished if enough affection and 'training' is involved. It is literally fascinating to me, that humans can't comprehend that it can't love you back. Can they feel affection towards you? Can it express surreal loyalty towards you ( dogs running into burning buildings to save their owners, or waiting at grave sites in mourning) ??? Yes. But can it love you.. I want to say yes to some degree, but realistically, the Toger probes what I know when they kill you.. No they can't instinct over rides emotion, 9 times out of 10. Do in reality, I can't see this comparison type study dying out any time soon, because we are learning more and more everyday about himans and animals.. So I think it has a nice long shelf life ahead!
On the subject of tigers, I read a book, The Tiger, which was awesome.
It spoke to the intelligence of the animal and told a story that can only be appreciated reading the book.
First thing I thought of was Koko, how he learned a new language, communicated so well through it. And that time with Robin Williams - tickling each other and laughing, both of them - and Koko expressing grief when learning of Robin's death. I think there are many others who have that similar capacity.
I'm more intelligent that any other living organism on the planet except the wise owl. Only the wise owl knows how many licks it takes to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop.
Mr. Cow doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Cow
Mr. Fox doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Fox
Mr. Turtle doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Turtle
Only Mr. Owl knows. Mr. Owl is the shit. Behold his powers!
I'm more intelligent that any other living organism on the planet except the wise owl. Only the wise owl knows how many licks it takes to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop.
Mr. Cow doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Cow
Mr. Fox doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Fox
Mr. Turtle doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Turtle
Only Mr. Owl knows. Mr. Owl is the shit. Behold his powers!
Our arrogance will always prevail in a conversation such as this. We can allude to countless items that would lend great support to our superiority in this debate, but nothing can ever be scientifically proven; therefore, a solid discussion topic.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
We really are capable of great things, Thirty, and it is good to remember especially because our finer traits are worth counting, promoting, encouraging.
As far as our impact, like (I think it was) Speedy mentioned, so much of what we can do is all about the thumbs. I'm just not sure that makes us more intelligent or more complex. Rupert Sheldrake is mentioned in the article (linked at the head of this topic) and his work has revealed some very incredible and complex abilities of animals that we are just now beginning to understand. I don't think it wise of us to assume to much about things we don't fully understand.
It's a fascinating subject and I hope research in this field is allowed to continue. And I say "allowed" in response to Sheldrakes presentation on TED Talk being banned. I found that amazing and a bit disturbing. Like, really? Why?
The cool thing is, 26 years ago when I first started studying the psychology of horses, it was believed that animals DIDN'T have emotions, regardless of research written upon it at length by Darwin, Pavlov, and many others. It was initially perceived that we reflected upon them our emotions. Now days, this fid has been upturned by the realization the they DO have emotions. However again, instinct will almost always trump emotion in an animal because it is just how they are programmed. It amazes me the idiocy of human beings that think owning an animal Like a Tiger for example can be accomplished if enough affection and 'training' is involved. It is literally fascinating to me, that humans can't comprehend that it can't love you back. Can they feel affection towards you? Can it express surreal loyalty towards you ( dogs running into burning buildings to save their owners, or waiting at grave sites in mourning) ??? Yes. But can it love you.. I want to say yes to some degree, but realistically, the Toger probes what I know when they kill you.. No they can't instinct over rides emotion, 9 times out of 10. Do in reality, I can't see this comparison type study dying out any time soon, because we are learning more and more everyday about himans and animals.. So I think it has a nice long shelf life ahead!
On the subject of tigers, I read a book, The Tiger, which was awesome.
It spoke to the intelligence of the animal and told a story that can only be appreciated reading the book.
As I said.. This field is growing everyday.. So as far as I myself have ever seen no there is no cases of revenge in the animal world. Does that mean it can never happen?? No. Like I said 26 years ago when I started this field of study, science as a whole stated point blank that animals don't HAVE emotional experiences. Now we know we do. As for this book, I would love to read that, because I have worked with big cats of many species, but have never been do lucky as to work with a Tiger, so I would love to read about the possibly only record of revenge being sought out by an animal. ( not being sarcastic.. I just WORK in this field and have NEVER heard of this). Again, just because myself or my peers haven't heard of it, doesn't mean it hasn't ever happened. There are always exceptions to every rule!
"What if Humans Aren’t the Most Intelligent Creatures on the Planet?"
We'd be in luck - if you haven't noticed, we're not doing so hot. Most other beings can live in balance with their environment and we can't even manage to achieve what amounts to maintaining the status quo. We may be 'intelligent' in our ability to temporarily upset the natural course of things, but is it intelligent to continue to do so? It seems to me our ability to 'cheat' the natural balance is temporary and nature will eventually rebalance things. It's difficult for me to believe our continuing to live as we do is a sign of intelligence.
As to animals not acting on emotions or possessing intellect - watch "Blackfish" (I think that's the name of the documentary?). Killer whales were observed protecting their calves from capture (I believe it was Sea World attempting to capture them - could be wrong) by having a few adults move in one direction as a 'pod' and discretely sending their calves in the other direction accompanied by just a couple of adults, to conceal them in a nearby bay area. Amazing stuff.
Cool article - thanks for sharing!
Great example of animal intelligence! Thanks! Will check out that documentary, for sure.
“The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man [or woman] who lives fully is prepared to die at any time.”
Comments
Given what defines a species scientifically, it's pointless to say that there is "only one homo sapien" - because by definition there can be only one. Any others would be a different species, and those have existed.
We'd be in luck - if you haven't noticed, we're not doing so hot. Most other beings can live in balance with their environment and we can't even manage to achieve what amounts to maintaining the status quo. We may be 'intelligent' in our ability to temporarily upset the natural course of things, but is it intelligent to continue to do so? It seems to me our ability to 'cheat' the natural balance is temporary and nature will eventually rebalance things. It's difficult for me to believe our continuing to live as we do is a sign of intelligence.
As to animals not acting on emotions or possessing intellect - watch "Blackfish" (I think that's the name of the documentary?). Killer whales were observed protecting their calves from capture (I believe it was Sea World attempting to capture them - could be wrong) by having a few adults move in one direction as a 'pod' and discretely sending their calves in the other direction accompanied by just a couple of adults, to conceal them in a nearby bay area. Amazing stuff.
Cool article - thanks for sharing!
Heart of hearts bieve the excitement is drawn from
Frustration, because let's face it.. We all build an emotional bond to
Our pets. However where people get messed up, is we are far deeper involved emotionally than the dog. Ghe dog is frustrated because he can't figure out on a simple level
Why you are experiencing such remorse, he only knows you do. Again, I will define acting on emotion.
If the whale poachers were to kill the calf, the pod would continue to defend the dead calf until the actual blood 'dies'. ( ceases to release the pheromones released that trigger the defense response). Once that occurs they move on to mourning. Once that is done, they move on.. Period. Had they the ability to act on emotion, and they were capable of the realization, that the boat was the cause of the death, they would then attack the boat; exacting vengeance. But they don't. It is not in their thought program to react that way. The most efficient route to survival for the pod as a whole, (Which is consistent with elephants.. They are a distinct family unit) is taken instead.. This route is to move on. This is officiated by the mother of the dead calf reverting back into her estrous cycle again. So that a new life may be formed. Punching a wall is acting on Emotion. Telling someone to go fuck themselves ( you know who you are!) is acting on emotion.
Herding a calf away from danger is instinct.
Again animals HAVE emotions, they just don't act on them.
Another good example: what if all the animals that surrogate other animals? Cats nursing ducklings and the like? Those are mortal enemy factors.. Until maternal
Instinct kicks in. It has nothing to do with emotion, ( feeling sorry for them) it has to do with the animal responding to a deep seated instinct to 'mother'. I had a wolf dog that used to 'bring home' everything from snakes to cats, to other dogs, because I did those things. ( I was running an animal rescue) he mimicked what I did.. That's all. When people start trying to humanize animals we disrupt their state of balance.. This is terribly unfair to them. It's the equivekany of us living on a treadmill at full speed for our lifetime. When we think that they think and process info like we do, and treat them as if they can, we fuck them up mentally. Animals cannot be human.. They can't think as complexly as we do, and they can't equate emotion to action like we do.. Period. Believe me.. Until I took up this field of study I was just like you.. I wanted to think that too.. All my animals now are much happier that I am able to recognize that my dog will always only ever be a DOG.. Etc. it's just what it is.
Human function, is far different than what intelligence is required for any one group set of animals to function.
As much as I hate what we are capable of... I love what we are capable of. I'm not sure their is an animal as complex as us and that alone speaks to our superior levels of intelligence.
My comment isn't about bragging rights as much as it is reality.
As far as our impact, like (I think it was) Speedy mentioned, so much of what we can do is all about the thumbs. I'm just not sure that makes us more intelligent or more complex. Rupert Sheldrake is mentioned in the article (linked at the head of this topic) and his work has revealed some very incredible and complex abilities of animals that we are just now beginning to understand. I don't think it wise of us to assume to much about things we don't fully understand.
It's a fascinating subject and I hope research in this field is allowed to continue. And I say "allowed" in response to Sheldrakes presentation on TED Talk being banned. I found that amazing and a bit disturbing. Like, really? Why?
Like a Tiger for example can be accomplished if enough affection and 'training' is involved. It is literally fascinating to me, that humans can't comprehend that it can't love you back. Can they feel affection towards you? Can it express surreal loyalty towards you ( dogs running into burning buildings to save their owners, or waiting at grave sites in mourning) ??? Yes. But can it love you.. I want to say yes to some degree, but realistically, the Toger probes what I know when they kill you.. No they can't instinct over rides emotion, 9 times out of 10.
Do in reality, I can't see this comparison type study dying out any time soon, because we are learning more and more everyday about himans and animals.. So I think it has a nice long shelf life ahead!
It spoke to the intelligence of the animal and told a story that can only be appreciated reading the book.
First thing I thought of was Koko, how he learned a new language, communicated so well through it. And that time with Robin Williams - tickling each other and laughing, both of them - and Koko expressing grief when learning of Robin's death. I think there are many others who have that similar capacity.
That's all I've got for now at this early hour.
www.headstonesband.com
Mr. Cow doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Cow
Mr. Fox doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Fox
Mr. Turtle doesn't know. Fuck Mr. Turtle
Only Mr. Owl knows. Mr. Owl is the shit. Behold his powers!
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
www.headstonesband.com
Indeed! And debating/discussing rather than arguing/fighting...
Till there aint nothing left worth taking away from me.....