So: Many experts now agree ... some birds use fire as a weapon. - Page 7

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by macdoc

You gather evidence, make a thesis, provide a potential explanation for the behaviour and search out additional evidence. The authors have done that and are activey searching for more evidence. That's good scientific method and your counter arguments are so far baseless.

This is a hypothesis, not a thesis. The authors do not yet have the necessary evidence to elevate it to a thesis. It could be argued whether or not their "method" really is good science. They didn't need to produce this paper ahead of acquiring the necessary evidence. It could have been a simple press release explaining what they believe is happening and that they are working on getting the necessary evidence to show that it really is happening. Such a thing does not require publishing in a journal.

Quote:

This behaviour is not in the least surprising to those who understand a bit about the ability of birds ....an especially raptors who as with most top predators have smarts.

This thread already includes birdwatchers and those who pay a lot more than just casual attention to birds and other animals. I'm included in that bunch.

I'm continually amazed at the intelligence of birds including their creativity. But at the same time I'm not willing to put my own intelligence and skepticism aside to simply accept claims that have been presented without the necessary supporting evidence.

You will get nowhere in this thread by loudly proclaiming that you people just don't know enough about and don't appreciate bird intelligence.

Reality Check · 7th February 2018, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by dann

I'm even aware that an alleged 40,000-year-long oral tradition is absurd!

The Aboriginal fire starting bird oral tradition exists today and seems to have existed for some generations but I have read no date of origin, especially 40,000 years. The tradition starting almost as soon as they arrived in Australia is extremely unlikely. So yes - that allegation would be absurd and it is lucky that no one is making it.

This tradition may only be hundreds of years old however thousands of years of preserving events is not out of the question:
Ancient Aboriginal stories preserve history of a rise in sea level

Quote:

In a recent paper we presented at an indigenous language conference in Japan, we analysed 18 stories from around Australia’s coast. All tell tales of coastal flooding. We argue that these stories (and probably many others) recall coastal inundation as sea levels reached their present level at least 6,000-7,000 years ago.

smartcooky · 7th February 2018, 02:21 PM

Oral traditions and folk tales of south-eastern Britain dating back thousands of years told of a land where plentiful crops grew, an island connected to the land where people lived and prospered. Mainstream archaeologists and historians dismissed these oral traditions as fantasy and storytelling, arguing that no such place could ever have existed.

Then Doggerland was discovered, and the thousands of years of oral traditions were shown to have a basis in fact (and quite a few dismissive archaeologists ended up eating crow).

Moral: Don't dismiss oral traditions and folklore with a handwave. There just might be some truth in what they say.

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

Moral: Don't dismiss oral traditions and folklore with a handwave. There just might be some truth in what they say.

I get it. And Bigfoot might really exist - we just have to wait and see.

All of the crypto-hominoids worldwide (Bigfoot, Yeti, Orang Pendek, Yowie, etc.) have oral traditions, folklore and even some "evidence". At this point, I don't think it's a handwave to be highly skeptical of their reality.

smartcooky · 7th February 2018, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

I get it. And Bigfoot might really exist - we just have to wait and see.

No, that is completely different

Bigfoot has been searched for over and over again, and there has never been any documented proof of their existence. The very fact that people have been searching for Bigfoot and not finding it is proof the oral traditions have not been ignored, and instead, have been shown to be false. In a manner of speaking, Bigfooters are doing the scientific community a favour... they are proving that it does not exist without science having to waste time, money and effort.

In the case of Doggerland, it was dismissed out of hand with no attempt to verify anything

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

No, that is completely different

It's amazing how similar they are. They are almost the same.

How would we show that the raptors really aren't starting fires? Will there be a time limit for providing the necessary evidence that they are starting fires? What happens if we find that decades or centuries pass and we still don't have proper evidence for these birds starting fires?

The similarities are right there in your face. We have an ongoing claim for existence of something which has not yet been shown to exist.

macdoc · 7th February 2018, 05:13 PM

False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof.
Bigfoot is such a claim.

Raptors starting fires by moving a burning stick to flush game is not an extraordinary claim 'cept in a few closed minds.
It's been seen by reliable observers...sufficient to prompt a paper.

Work in progress....

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by macdoc

False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof.
Bigfoot is such a claim.

Raptors starting fires by moving a burning stick to flush game is not an extraordinary claim 'cept in a few closed minds.
It's been seen by reliable observers...sufficient to prompt a paper.

Work in progress....

That slogan (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence) isn't really meaningful in science. Firstly, people will argue endlessly about whether or not a claim is extraordinary or ordinary in the first place. Then they will argue endlessly again about whether or not presented evidence is extraordinary or ordinary. But I think that what is most important is that any evidence is sufficient if that evidence supports (proves) the claim. The evidence can be quite ordinary if it really does serve the purpose.

The claim of finding a living prehistoric fish which was thought to be extinct (the Coelacanth) would seem to fit an extraordinary claim. But the necessary evidence was really ordinary. The fish was purchased in a seafood market.

Quote:

It's been seen by reliable observers

The observers are reliable. How was the factuality of that claim established? Is it an extraordinary claim and was the evidence for it also extraordinary?

smartcooky · 7th February 2018, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by macdoc

False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof.
Bigfoot is such a claim..

Exactly - the analogy is completely false...

Raptor's starting fires simply requires a raptor to pick up a stick smouldering at one end and move/drop it onto unburned grass. Its easy for people with anything approaching an open mind to accept this as a possibility, even if it was unintentional or by accident.

For Bigfoot to exist, there are has be a thousands of members of a whole, previously unseen species of humanoid roaming the forest of the North America.

The first requires only well known existing creatures to behave a certain way, ; the second require the existance of an unknown creature in the first place

The two claims are not even remotely similar

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 06:36 PM

Will we see any hoaxes? It's not that difficult to capture a kite and use some monofilament to tie a smoky smoldering stick to its foot. Release it near a brushfire and film it flying away. It wouldn't matter if you don't film the stick drop part because well the bird just kept flying and you couldn't catch up to it.

A hoax that wouldn't show the full claimed behavior but it absolutely would work for many people. It happens regularly with Bigfoot hoaxes.

smartcooky · 7th February 2018, 07:14 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

Will we see any hoaxes? It's not that difficult to capture a kite and use some monofilament to tie a smoky smoldering stick to its foot. Release it near a brushfire and film it flying away. It wouldn't matter if you don't film the stick drop part because well the bird just kept flying and you couldn't catch up to it.

A hoax that wouldn't show the full claimed behavior but it absolutely would work for many people. It happens regularly with Bigfoot hoaxes.

I think it would require clear footage of a raptor flying into an area where there is fire, picking out a smouldering/burning stick, dropping it on unburned grass and then waiting to see if a fire starts. If it doesn't, I would expect to see repeat behaviour until a fire starts, followed by it looking for and swooping on fleeing prey. Rinse and repeat with other birds

Of course, there will always be claims of CGI etc, but in that case, nothing can ever be proven because it can always be CGI. If you don't realise this, then you have never had the frustration of debunking Apollo/Space hoax claims. There are idiots right now claiming that the Falcon Heavy flight was all hoaxed - lift off, staging, second stage to orbit and the landing of the boosters... all done with CGI at the behest of The Illuminati/The Gubmint/NASA/CIA/FBI/NSA (delete as applicable).

William Parcher · 7th February 2018, 07:24 PM

Science will require visual documentation of the full behavior as well as repeatability. But the hoax I'm talking about isn't for the purpose of fooling science. It's for convincing the general public that it's a real thing no matter what science has to say about it.

Elagabalus · 7th February 2018, 10:19 PM

Expect some hurdles. Local laws, both about the birds and setting fires any old place. You'll also have to deal with the "Uncertainty Principle"- the more you try and observe a bird exhibiting the behavior you want the more it will be intimidated by your presence and not do it. Which leads to the Exclusion Principle where the birds exclude you, take the next thermal and **** off to the next ridge.

Time to set up a blind so they can't see you. Only the blind has to be fire proof. And speaking of setting fires, the "locals" may not be to "down" with you (or your team) setting fires to observe some stupid birds.

Myriad · 8th February 2018, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by dann

"They’ll be accompanied by volunteer birders with cameras and with drones...."
That is interesting. The article is from Feb. 5, 2018. Obviously, he didn't succeed in 2016 and 2017, but he hasn't given up getting actual footage of the alleged behavior.
I just hope that fire-starting birds aren't afraid of drones ...

With any luck, the birds will quickly learn to get rid of the drones by dropping burning sticks on them.

Elaedith · 11th February 2018, 02:39 AM

Originally Posted by Reality Check

Nice example of bird problem solving.
However examples do not tell us that the specific behavior in this thread exists. It is that point which has to be established first.

Think about birds that are not as good at solving problems. Would we conclude that birds are stupid and so this fire starting behavior cannot be correct? The answer is no. We would concede that various species of birds have various levels of skills and we cannot generalize between them. We need to learn more about the species of birds that may be involved in fire starting behavior and get better evidence of the actual behavior.

For example, ask an ornithologist: Do these species have problem solving skills in other areas?

Then there are the problems with anecdotal evidence:
Is there any selective reporting, e.g. are there unreported birds that drop the sticks into the fire?
Could it just be random? With many birds picking up burning sticks and dropping them at random, some of the sticks will fall outside of the fire.
Could it be visibility (we just do not see sticks being dropped into the fire because of the fire)?

It seems to be well established that corvids (crows) and parrots have exceptional cognitive abilities, superior to other classes of birds and even to some higher primates. They also have differences in brain anatomy, including higher encephalization quotient, compared to other classes of birds.
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.o.../1465/23.short
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...9.01644.x/full

Old world crows and Keas are classed as the 'brainiest' birds on innovations tasks, and also have the largest development of the forebrain. Crows typically outperform parrots, with the exception of the Kea, and parrots outform other classes of birds aside from crows. I don't know of any evidence that raptors have the problem-solving abilities of corvids or parrots, and they have lower encephalization quotients. Owls, for example, are apparently not very smart on problem-solving tasks, despite the symbolism of wisdom. However, there is some evidence that a species of hawk can perform well on at least one problem-solving task:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...ibi.12040/full

Since raptors generally don't show the same forebrain development or innovative abilities as parrots and corvids, their performance may depend on how similar the task is to specialised strategies typically used for food gathering.

macdoc · 11th February 2018, 04:22 AM

Good post.

I think that the article on pack hunting by that particular raptor provides enough parallel evidence of planning and anticipation of outcome to cover off "are they capable of it".

Nakani · 13th February 2018, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by dann

No (and I've mentioned that before in this thread). I'm even aware that an alleged 40,000-year-long oral tradition is absurd!

No one botherd them for that long. When you are not being oppressed or exterminated, culture stays intact. Where I live the Dene people enjoyed a similar run and still maintain an oral tradition dating back to the last ice age but I digress, this thread isn't about giant beavers.

Quote:

But you don't seem to find it odd that the fire-starting birds have never been filmed since film cameras were invented ...

Up here, the ravens will spot a bag of garbage in ten minutes and have it all over your yard in twenty. They won't touch a bag of leaves or paper only food, even of you put the two side by side. There won't be a peck on the bag of paper but the garbage will be ripped to shreds. To my knowledge no one here has ever filmed this.

It is not odd at all, even if we assume that the aboriginal people all rushed out to buy movie cameras. After 40,000 years, birds hunting was just old news.

Nakani · 13th February 2018, 02:22 PM

I am not understanding the Aborigines have a story about these birds so it's a myth angle. I think people are getting it backwards.

Observing the birds hunting came first then a story to explain it came after. The Dene tell similar storys for entertainment purposes . Everyone knows Tsugija didn't step on the ducks butt and make it flat, the story isn't true but that doesn't change the shape of a ducks arse.

Skeptic Ginger · 13th February 2018, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by dann

Dismissal of what animal behavior? Your alleged observation of purposeful behavior of raccoons "in order to 'turn out the light'" and based on its "clear knowledge" about fire, yes, I dismiss that.

Do you have a viable alternative hypothesis?

Your incredulity and obstinance are not arguments.

Originally Posted by macdoc

...
http://lh5.ggpht.com/0Ov-v_lAb58hxbF...uY__HaA=s285-c
...

That's friggin' gorgeous!

As for the Bigfoot analogy, that is a fail on many levels, the biggest one being that people have been looking for evidence of Bigfoot for a century and all attempts have failed. Give the firebird a bit more time before claiming it is analogous to something like Bigfoot.

William Parcher · 13th February 2018, 03:11 PM

What would be the method of falsifying the claim?

smartcooky · 13th February 2018, 05:01 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What would be the method of falsifying the claim?

That is up to the person trying to falsify it - its their job.

William Parcher · 13th February 2018, 05:39 PM

Originally Posted by smartcooky

That is up to the person trying to falsify it - its their job.

The researchers are obligated to provide a falsifiable hypothesis. It's their job. But it has not yet been shown to be true. So there is nothing to falsify anyway.

EHocking · 13th February 2018, 07:26 PM

Originally Posted by Nakani

I am not understanding the Aborigines have a story about these birds so it's a myth angle. I think people are getting it backwards.

Observing the birds hunting came first then a story to explain it came after. The Dene tell similar storys for entertainment purposes . Everyone knows Tsugija didn't step on the ducks butt and make it flat, the story isn't true but that doesn't change the shape of a ducks arse.

This is the crux of the matter. Verifiable observations. We have some stories, even from "ornithologists". An argument from authority that reminds me of the ornithologists sightings of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker that proved to be so . . . . . unproven.

Also the Australian aborigine creation stories are not really "just so stories" about how the elephant got it's trunk. As noted and cited upthread, in creation stories animals acted as men and were not meant as literal animal behaviours, but stories about the behaviour of men. Oh, and with over 900 different and distinct groups of aboriginal in Australia, even that is probably far from an accurate assessment, since there is great diversity there. The firebird "story" may not (probably not?) be an universal story at all.

But the crux of this thread is verifiable observations and falsifiable theories.

Skeptic Ginger · 13th February 2018, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by William Parcher

What would be the method of falsifying the claim?

If you expect to find evidence and you don't find it, you can prove negatives that way sometimes. Not always, because there isn't always an exclusionary evidence option.

We should have found evidence of the NW Bigfoot my now, for example.

But there is no exclusionary evidence to prove the absence of life in the Universe outside of the Earth, for example.

macdoc · 13th February 2018, 10:32 PM

The closest might be to determine that the species involved have an inherent fear of fire ( some animals have inherent fear of snakes ) and so they would be acting very much against their "nature" to pick up a burning stick,

Reality is these species come towards fire as a feeding potential and appear rather unconcerned by proximity.
Nice thermal source too

Elaedith · 15th February 2018, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

Good post.

I think that the article on pack hunting by that particular raptor provides enough parallel evidence of planning and anticipation of outcome to cover off "are they capable of it".

I'm not sure whether that's true. There are species of mammal that engage in sophisticated pack hunting, but don't show evidence of innovative problem-solving ability like crows and parrots.

My point is you can't generalise from crows and parrots to all birds. You have to look at each class individually. The cognitive abilities of corvids and parrots seem to resemble higher primates and dolphins more than they do other classes of birds. They are not just quanitatively smarter but qualitatively smarter - they can pass some cognitive tests that very few species of any type of animal can pass.

luchog · 15th February 2018, 08:28 AM

Originally Posted by Elaedith

My point is you can't generalise from crows and parrots to all birds. You have to look at each class individually. The cognitive abilities of corvids and parrots seem to resemble higher primates and dolphins more than they do other classes of birds. They are not just quanitatively smarter but qualitatively smarter - they can pass some cognitive tests that very few species of any type of animal can pass.

The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be. There was an interesting article on the subject of avian intelligence in a recent issue of NatGeo, which unfortunately I don't have handy. Something in the last few months, anyway.

macdoc · 15th February 2018, 02:30 PM

Quote:

The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be.

Exactly and predators as a "class" generally show very high intelligence - these are highly competitive raptors living in a harsh environment.

Did you actually read the article on pack hunting in raptors.?

This is likely the article - the cockatoo made this tool to solve a problem

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/m...birds-corvids/

Elaedith · 15th February 2018, 04:08 PM

Originally Posted by luchog

The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be. There was an interesting article on the subject of avian intelligence in a recent issue of NatGeo, which unfortunately I don't have handy. Something in the last few months, anyway.

The more animal intelligence is studied, the more we know that you can't just generalise across species simply because they share common ancestry. The article you refer to is almost entirely about corvids and parrots, as are the examples people keep referring to. If you want to know about the abilities of raptors, you need to look at raptors instead of going on about what parrots and corvids can do as though it proves what all birds can do.

macdoc · 15th February 2018, 08:00 PM

A corvid is a predator ..slicing and dicing to satisfy some arbitrary intelligence you have in mind is a fruitless pursuit....pardon the pun.
Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point.

I get no sense of a claim "what all birds can do" .....that's just weak polemics on your part since you have no case.

The claim is on raptors.

MikeG · 16th February 2018, 12:04 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

.......Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point......

No. Just no. This isn't clear at all. This is the point at dispute, and you don't just declare it to be fact without evidence.

There is every chance that the so-called observations were nothing more than confirmation bias: aboriginals seeing what aboriginal stories told them to expect. In the chaos at the front edge of a woodland fire it is easy to see how someone told to expect birds to be starting fires could be mistaken into thinking they had seen at least part of such a process. In this instance, non-trained observers in a dangerous situation and without recording equipment, should have their stories treated with some caution. It's an interesting claim, which should be followed up in a designed study by a team of animal behaviouralists doing a full professional observation regime, with recording equipment. This is my daughter's profession and training. Who knows, one day it might be her who confirms this story.......but at the moment, this is a story; a claim. It is not fact.

MikeG · 16th February 2018, 12:09 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

A corvid is a predator....

No, corvids are omnivores. Predation is a part of their diet, and usually amounts to nestlings, and small mammals such as mice and voles. They are also carrion eaters, insect eaters, seed eaters, berry eaters, and they eat human food waste.

Elaedith · 16th February 2018, 03:20 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

A corvid is a predator ..slicing and dicing to satisfy some arbitrary intelligence you have in mind is a fruitless pursuit....pardon the pun.
Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point.

I get no sense of a claim "what all birds can do" .....that's just weak polemics on your part since you have no case.

The claim is on raptors.

People have repeatedly posted videos and accounts of parrots and corvids solving multi-step problems as though it constitutes evidence that 'birds' can solve multi-step problems and by extension, raptors can solve multi-step problems. If you haven't noticed this you haven't been paying attention.

Nobody would do such as silly thing with mammals - posting evidence of what dolphins and chimps can do to support a claim made about the problem-solving abilities of a different species of mammal.

To show that raptors, and particularly this species can perform this behaviour, you first need to establish exactly what is required. The type of intelligence required is absolutely critical to establishing the case. There is a difference between learning based on association, and learning based on understanding cause and effect. You first of all need to establish whether the type of problem does require causal understanding and multi-step problem-solving rather than just associative learning. If it does you need to show that raptors, and this species in particular, has that capacity.

Cooperative hunting is observed in many species including large cats, but there is no evidence that all these species have the problem-solving abilities of corvids. Therefore, pack hunting, however intelligent, is not sufficient to establish this type of innovative problem-solving ability.

macdoc · 16th February 2018, 05:23 AM

Not much intelligence needed to conclude that moving fire results in more food.

It is not particularly innovative except in your mind.

It is "interesting behaviour" ....

and just to deconstruct your ...we wouldn't do it with mammals??

Quote:

Birds and primates share brain cell types linked to intelligence
Bird and reptile brains have a vastly different anatomy from mammalian brains, but contain cell types linked to mammalian cognitive abilities
Date:
February 15, 2018
Source:
University of Chicago Medical Center
Summary:
In a new study scientists show that some neurons in bird brains form the same kind of circuitry and have the same molecular signature as cells that enable connectivity between different areas of the mammalian neocortex. The researchers found that alligators share these cell types as well, suggesting that while mammal, bird and reptile brains have very different anatomical structures, they operate using the same shared set of brain cell types.
Share:

FULL STORY
Neuronal cell types in the brains of birds linked to goal-directed behaviors and cognition are similar to cells in the mammalian neocortex, the large, layered structure on the outer surface of the brain where most higher-order processing takes place.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0215141719.htm

Why you think this some sort of revolutionary behavior is entirely beyond me.
It says to me you view birds as some sort of automatons....they are not.

Quote:

Imprisonment
The Moroccan island of Mogador serves as a pit stop for Eleanora’s falcons, as well as many other migratory birds. This species subsists on a diet of mainly insects, but during breeding season, the other birds on the island become their prey of choice. Because the falcons raise their chicks at about the same time the annual migration hits its peak, there is a guaranteed plenitude of prey for the falcons to feed both themselves and their young. But there is a balancing act involved.

Bird Imprisoned by raptorThe falcons transition to hunting birds just a few days before they lay their eggs. But catching and killing prey before their chicks even hatch risks the food going to waste. Fortunately for the falcons, they’ve found a solution to this problem: keeping their prey alive through imprisonment.5

By stuffing live birds into tiny pockets amid rocks, the falcons prevent them from escaping. Some of the confined birds have even been found with their wing and tail feathers plucked out – the feathers needed for flight. By removing these feathers, the falcons prevent smaller birds from being able to fly out of the holes in which they’re trapped. The falcons keep the captured birds alive in their “prison cells” until their chicks are hatched and ready to be fed fresh food.

While this strategy of amputation and imprisonment may strike us as cruel, it gives insight into the intelligence and planning abilities of the raptors. In order to carry out this behavior, the raptors need to be able to plan ahead, and this is an ability we’ve only begun to find evidence of in a few species aside from our own.

http://www.animalcognition.org/2016/...ns-mind-games/

Compared to that...fire starting from burning twigs is very straight forward.

and here is your imprisoned bird

Quote:

“Studies of avian intelligence have been hampered by the old fashioned idea that birds are stupid, and not worth considering in terms of intelligence,” said Nathan Emery, author of the new book, Bird Brain: An Exploration of Avian Intelligence and senior lecturer at Queen Mary: University of London.

An in-depth look at recent research and fascinating lab experiments, the book published by Ivy Press overturns any notion that birds are somehow dumb. Instead, it argues with an overwhelming amount of evidence that a number of bird species should be considered more as “feathered apes.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...thics-chickens[/quote]

anything sound familiar there to your antiquated mindset?

MikeG · 16th February 2018, 05:32 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

......and just to deconstruct your ...we wouldn't do it with mammals??......]

Missing the point beautifully. The point is that you wouldn't mix up the abilities of, say, a bonobo and a hippo in the way you mixed up the abilities of various bird species.

No-one here is saying this behaviour is impossible. Some are saying it is unlikely. So what? That's just guessing. What actually counts is whether this behaviour actually happens, and at the moment there is nothing whatever to show that it does. Which leaves your unending advocacy for it looking something between premature and 'footeresque.

Cheetah · 16th February 2018, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

Not much intelligence needed to conclude that moving fire results in more food.

It is not particularly innovative except in your mind.

Not that much, which is why many bird species already know this. Just make the connection fire = food.
Finding a burning twig and figuring out that if you pick it up and carry it to an unburnt stretch of bush and then drop it there causes another fire that results in more food is much more complex behaviour, different ballpark altogether.

Elaedith · 16th February 2018, 06:38 AM

Originally Posted by macdoc

anything sound familiar there to your antiquated mindset?

Yes, it sounds exactly like a ridiculous strawman you and others keep constructing, pretending that anyone who doesn't agree with all your conclusions thinks that birds are dumb.

William Parcher · 16th February 2018, 09:15 AM

It's the first time I've heard about a falcon species imprisoning live prey. I'm really curious about details which are not explained in the link.

How does the falcon capture and manipulate the small birds without killing them? The talons are sharp needle points and bird blood does not easily coagulate when they have an open wound.

It's mentioned that feathers are sometimes removed to prevent the prisoners from flying out of the hole or crevice. But how would that prevent them from crawling or hopping as an escape?

How does the falcon extract the living prey bird from the hole or crevice?

macdoc · 16th February 2018, 10:35 AM

Their talons are amazing an big ...had red tailed hawk hit a starling literally 5' away from me when I was working upstairs near my big windows,

Had the window open and heard this crashing and there was a red tailed glaring at me with a starling dangling ....I suspect they just hit the small birds with their fist in flight and stun them - the can easily hold a small bird in a cage of talons.

I don't think they care if it's much alive coming out but their beaks are sharp too to yank on a neck.

small birds suck on land and if in a tight hole won't be very successful..they will always tend to hold their wings out which will keep them in.

macdoc · 16th February 2018, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Yes, it sounds exactly like a ridiculous strawman you and others keep constructing, pretending that anyone who doesn't agree with all your conclusions thinks that birds are dumb.

I have yet to see anything supporing your denial position. You've got lots of supporting docs from me dismissing your ??/"well their not mammals and maybe raptors aren't smart" nonsense from you.

So you are reduced to claiming "strawman" on info that supports the rather obvious conclusion that three species of raptors are using fire and have been observed doing so by a number of observers and have far and away enough mental ability to do that.

You have no supported argument against their observations and conclusions.
Bottom line ..raptors are smart and this is just one more example and not particularly extraordinary to anyone but you.

7th February 2018, 12:04 PM	#241
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Originally Posted by macdoc You gather evidence, make a thesis, provide a potential explanation for the behaviour and search out additional evidence. The authors have done that and are activey searching for more evidence. That's good scientific method and your counter arguments are so far baseless. This is a hypothesis, not a thesis. The authors do not yet have the necessary evidence to elevate it to a thesis. It could be argued whether or not their "method" really is good science. They didn't need to produce this paper ahead of acquiring the necessary evidence. It could have been a simple press release explaining what they believe is happening and that they are working on getting the necessary evidence to show that it really is happening. Such a thing does not require publishing in a journal. Quote: This behaviour is not in the least surprising to those who understand a bit about the ability of birds ....an especially raptors who as with most top predators have smarts. This thread already includes birdwatchers and those who pay a lot more than just casual attention to birds and other animals. I'm included in that bunch. I'm continually amazed at the intelligence of birds including their creativity. But at the same time I'm not willing to put my own intelligence and skepticism aside to simply accept claims that have been presented without the necessary supporting evidence. You will get nowhere in this thread by loudly proclaiming that you people just don't know enough about and don't appreciate bird intelligence.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 01:21 PM	#242
Reality Check Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: New Zealand Posts: 28,521	Originally Posted by dann I'm even aware that an alleged 40,000-year-long oral tradition is absurd! The Aboriginal fire starting bird oral tradition exists today and seems to have existed for some generations but I have read no date of origin, especially 40,000 years. The tradition starting almost as soon as they arrived in Australia is extremely unlikely. So yes - that allegation would be absurd and it is lucky that no one is making it. This tradition may only be hundreds of years old however thousands of years of preserving events is not out of the question: Ancient Aboriginal stories preserve history of a rise in sea level Quote: In a recent paper we presented at an indigenous language conference in Japan, we analysed 18 stories from around Australia’s coast. All tell tales of coastal flooding. We argue that these stories (and probably many others) recall coastal inundation as sea levels reached their present level at least 6,000-7,000 years ago.
	__________________ NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist!

7th February 2018, 02:21 PM	#243
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Oral traditions and folk tales of south-eastern Britain dating back thousands of years told of a land where plentiful crops grew, an island connected to the land where people lived and prospered. Mainstream archaeologists and historians dismissed these oral traditions as fantasy and storytelling, arguing that no such place could ever have existed. Then Doggerland was discovered, and the thousands of years of oral traditions were shown to have a basis in fact (and quite a few dismissive archaeologists ended up eating crow). Moral: Don't dismiss oral traditions and folklore with a handwave. There just might be some truth in what they say.
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass. Last edited by smartcooky; 7th February 2018 at 02:27 PM.

7th February 2018, 02:59 PM	#244
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Originally Posted by smartcooky Moral: Don't dismiss oral traditions and folklore with a handwave. There just might be some truth in what they say. I get it. And Bigfoot might really exist - we just have to wait and see. All of the crypto-hominoids worldwide (Bigfoot, Yeti, Orang Pendek, Yowie, etc.) have oral traditions, folklore and even some "evidence". At this point, I don't think it's a handwave to be highly skeptical of their reality.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 04:07 PM	#245
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by William Parcher I get it. And Bigfoot might really exist - we just have to wait and see. No, that is completely different Bigfoot has been searched for over and over again, and there has never been any documented proof of their existence. The very fact that people have been searching for Bigfoot and not finding it is proof the oral traditions have not been ignored, and instead, have been shown to be false. In a manner of speaking, Bigfooters are doing the scientific community a favour... they are proving that it does not exist without science having to waste time, money and effort. In the case of Doggerland, it was dismissed out of hand with no attempt to verify anything
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

7th February 2018, 04:37 PM	#246
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Originally Posted by smartcooky No, that is completely different It's amazing how similar they are. They are almost the same. How would we show that the raptors really aren't starting fires? Will there be a time limit for providing the necessary evidence that they are starting fires? What happens if we find that decades or centuries pass and we still don't have proper evidence for these birds starting fires? The similarities are right there in your face. We have an ongoing claim for existence of something which has not yet been shown to exist.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 05:13 PM	#247
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof. Bigfoot is such a claim. Raptors starting fires by moving a burning stick to flush game is not an extraordinary claim 'cept in a few closed minds. It's been seen by reliable observers...sufficient to prompt a paper. Work in progress....
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries}

7th February 2018, 05:38 PM	#248
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Originally Posted by macdoc False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof. Bigfoot is such a claim. Raptors starting fires by moving a burning stick to flush game is not an extraordinary claim 'cept in a few closed minds. It's been seen by reliable observers...sufficient to prompt a paper. Work in progress.... That slogan (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence) isn't really meaningful in science. Firstly, people will argue endlessly about whether or not a claim is extraordinary or ordinary in the first place. Then they will argue endlessly again about whether or not presented evidence is extraordinary or ordinary. But I think that what is most important is that any evidence is sufficient if that evidence supports (proves) the claim. The evidence can be quite ordinary if it really does serve the purpose. The claim of finding a living prehistoric fish which was thought to be extinct (the Coelacanth) would seem to fit an extraordinary claim. But the necessary evidence was really ordinary. The fish was purchased in a seafood market. Quote: It's been seen by reliable observers The observers are reliable. How was the factuality of that claim established? Is it an extraordinary claim and was the evidence for it also extraordinary?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 05:49 PM	#249
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by macdoc False analogy ....extraordinary claims require extra-ordinary proof. Bigfoot is such a claim.. Exactly - the analogy is completely false... Raptor's starting fires simply requires a raptor to pick up a stick smouldering at one end and move/drop it onto unburned grass. Its easy for people with anything approaching an open mind to accept this as a possibility, even if it was unintentional or by accident. For Bigfoot to exist, there are has be a thousands of members of a whole, previously unseen species of humanoid roaming the forest of the North America. The first requires only well known existing creatures to behave a certain way, ; the second require the existance of an unknown creature in the first place The two claims are not even remotely similar
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

7th February 2018, 06:36 PM	#250
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Will we see any hoaxes? It's not that difficult to capture a kite and use some monofilament to tie a smoky smoldering stick to its foot. Release it near a brushfire and film it flying away. It wouldn't matter if you don't film the stick drop part because well the bird just kept flying and you couldn't catch up to it. A hoax that wouldn't show the full claimed behavior but it absolutely would work for many people. It happens regularly with Bigfoot hoaxes.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 07:14 PM	#251
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by William Parcher Will we see any hoaxes? It's not that difficult to capture a kite and use some monofilament to tie a smoky smoldering stick to its foot. Release it near a brushfire and film it flying away. It wouldn't matter if you don't film the stick drop part because well the bird just kept flying and you couldn't catch up to it. A hoax that wouldn't show the full claimed behavior but it absolutely would work for many people. It happens regularly with Bigfoot hoaxes. I think it would require clear footage of a raptor flying into an area where there is fire, picking out a smouldering/burning stick, dropping it on unburned grass and then waiting to see if a fire starts. If it doesn't, I would expect to see repeat behaviour until a fire starts, followed by it looking for and swooping on fleeing prey. Rinse and repeat with other birds Of course, there will always be claims of CGI etc, but in that case, nothing can ever be proven because it can always be CGI. If you don't realise this, then you have never had the frustration of debunking Apollo/Space hoax claims. There are idiots right now claiming that the Falcon Heavy flight was all hoaxed - lift off, staging, second stage to orbit and the landing of the boosters... all done with CGI at the behest of The Illuminati/The Gubmint/NASA/CIA/FBI/NSA (delete as applicable).
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

7th February 2018, 07:24 PM	#252
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Science will require visual documentation of the full behavior as well as repeatability. But the hoax I'm talking about isn't for the purpose of fooling science. It's for convincing the general public that it's a real thing no matter what science has to say about it.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

7th February 2018, 10:19 PM	#253
Elagabalus Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 7,051	Expect some hurdles. Local laws, both about the birds and setting fires any old place. You'll also have to deal with the "Uncertainty Principle"- the more you try and observe a bird exhibiting the behavior you want the more it will be intimidated by your presence and not do it. Which leads to the Exclusion Principle where the birds exclude you, take the next thermal and **** off to the next ridge. Time to set up a blind so they can't see you. Only the blind has to be fire proof. And speaking of setting fires, the "locals" may not be to "down" with you (or your team) setting fires to observe some stupid birds.
Elagabalus Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 7,051

8th February 2018, 08:51 AM	#254
Myriad The Clarity Is Devastating Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Betwixt Posts: 20,161	Originally Posted by dann "They’ll be accompanied by volunteer birders with cameras and with drones...." That is interesting. The article is from Feb. 5, 2018. Obviously, he didn't succeed in 2016 and 2017, but he hasn't given up getting actual footage of the alleged behavior. I just hope that fire-starting birds aren't afraid of drones ... With any luck, the birds will quickly learn to get rid of the drones by dropping burning sticks on them.
	__________________ "*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote

11th February 2018, 02:39 AM	#255
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	Originally Posted by Reality Check Nice example of bird problem solving. However examples do not tell us that the specific behavior in this thread exists. It is that point which has to be established first. Think about birds that are not as good at solving problems. Would we conclude that birds are stupid and so this fire starting behavior cannot be correct? The answer is no. We would concede that various species of birds have various levels of skills and we cannot generalize between them. We need to learn more about the species of birds that may be involved in fire starting behavior and get better evidence of the actual behavior. For example, ask an ornithologist: Do these species have problem solving skills in other areas? Then there are the problems with anecdotal evidence: Is there any selective reporting, e.g. are there unreported birds that drop the sticks into the fire? Could it just be random? With many birds picking up burning sticks and dropping them at random, some of the sticks will fall outside of the fire. Could it be visibility (we just do not see sticks being dropped into the fire because of the fire)? It seems to be well established that corvids (crows) and parrots have exceptional cognitive abilities, superior to other classes of birds and even to some higher primates. They also have differences in brain anatomy, including higher encephalization quotient, compared to other classes of birds. http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.o.../1465/23.short http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...9.01644.x/full Old world crows and Keas are classed as the 'brainiest' birds on innovations tasks, and also have the largest development of the forebrain. Crows typically outperform parrots, with the exception of the Kea, and parrots outform other classes of birds aside from crows. I don't know of any evidence that raptors have the problem-solving abilities of corvids or parrots, and they have lower encephalization quotients. Owls, for example, are apparently not very smart on problem-solving tasks, despite the symbolism of wisdom. However, there is some evidence that a species of hawk can perform well on at least one problem-solving task: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...ibi.12040/full Since raptors generally don't show the same forebrain development or innovative abilities as parrots and corvids, their performance may depend on how similar the task is to specialised strategies typically used for food gathering.
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486

11th February 2018, 04:22 AM	#256
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	Good post. I think that the article on pack hunting by that particular raptor provides enough parallel evidence of planning and anticipation of outcome to cover off "are they capable of it".
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries}

13th February 2018, 02:09 PM	#257
Nakani Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Acho Dene Koe Posts: 1,036	Originally Posted by dann No (and I've mentioned that before in this thread). I'm even aware that an alleged 40,000-year-long oral tradition is absurd! No one botherd them for that long. When you are not being oppressed or exterminated, culture stays intact. Where I live the Dene people enjoyed a similar run and still maintain an oral tradition dating back to the last ice age but I digress, this thread isn't about giant beavers. Quote: But you don't seem to find it odd that the fire-starting birds have never been filmed since film cameras were invented ... Up here, the ravens will spot a bag of garbage in ten minutes and have it all over your yard in twenty. They won't touch a bag of leaves or paper only food, even of you put the two side by side. There won't be a peck on the bag of paper but the garbage will be ripped to shreds. To my knowledge no one here has ever filmed this. It is not odd at all, even if we assume that the aboriginal people all rushed out to buy movie cameras. After 40,000 years, birds hunting was just old news.

13th February 2018, 02:22 PM	#258
Nakani Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Acho Dene Koe Posts: 1,036	I am not understanding the Aborigines have a story about these birds so it's a myth angle. I think people are getting it backwards. Observing the birds hunting came first then a story to explain it came after. The Dene tell similar storys for entertainment purposes . Everyone knows Tsugija didn't step on the ducks butt and make it flat, the story isn't true but that doesn't change the shape of a ducks arse.

13th February 2018, 02:35 PM	#259
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,917	Originally Posted by dann Dismissal of what animal behavior? Your alleged observation of purposeful behavior of raccoons "in order to 'turn out the light'" and based on its "clear knowledge" about fire, yes, I dismiss that. Do you have a viable alternative hypothesis? Your incredulity and obstinance are not arguments. Originally Posted by macdoc ... http://lh5.ggpht.com/0Ov-v_lAb58hxbF...uY__HaA=s285-c ... That's friggin' gorgeous! As for the Bigfoot analogy, that is a fail on many levels, the biggest one being that people have been looking for evidence of Bigfoot for a century and all attempts have failed. Give the firebird a bit more time before claiming it is analogous to something like Bigfoot.

13th February 2018, 03:11 PM	#260
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	What would be the method of falsifying the claim?
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

13th February 2018, 05:01 PM	#261
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 23,587	Originally Posted by William Parcher What would be the method of falsifying the claim? That is up to the person trying to falsify it - its their job.
	__________________ What is Woke? It is a term that means "awakened to the needs of others". It means to be well-informed, thoughtful, compassionate, humble and kind. Woke people are keen to make the world a better, fairer place for everyone, But, unfortunately, it has also become a pejorative used by racists, homophobes and misogynists on the political right, to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

13th February 2018, 05:39 PM	#262
William Parcher Show me the monkey! Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 26,163	Originally Posted by smartcooky That is up to the person trying to falsify it - its their job. The researchers are obligated to provide a falsifiable hypothesis. It's their job. But it has not yet been shown to be true. So there is nothing to falsify anyway.
	__________________ Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

13th February 2018, 07:26 PM	#263
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,592	Originally Posted by Nakani I am not understanding the Aborigines have a story about these birds so it's a myth angle. I think people are getting it backwards. Observing the birds hunting came first then a story to explain it came after. The Dene tell similar storys for entertainment purposes . Everyone knows Tsugija didn't step on the ducks butt and make it flat, the story isn't true but that doesn't change the shape of a ducks arse. This is the crux of the matter. Verifiable observations. We have some stories, even from "ornithologists". An argument from authority that reminds me of the ornithologists sightings of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker that proved to be so . . . . . unproven. Also the Australian aborigine creation stories are not really "just so stories" about how the elephant got it's trunk. As noted and cited upthread, in creation stories animals acted as men and were not meant as literal animal behaviours, but stories about the behaviour of men. Oh, and with over 900 different and distinct groups of aboriginal in Australia, even that is probably far from an accurate assessment, since there is great diversity there. The firebird "story" may not (probably not?) be an universal story at all. But the crux of this thread is verifiable observations and falsifiable theories.
EHocking Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,592	__________________ Vote like you’re poor. A closed mouth gathers no feet" "Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke "It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite

13th February 2018, 07:47 PM	#264
Skeptic Ginger Nasty Woman Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 93,917	Originally Posted by William Parcher What would be the method of falsifying the claim? If you expect to find evidence and you don't find it, you can prove negatives that way sometimes. Not always, because there isn't always an exclusionary evidence option. We should have found evidence of the NW Bigfoot my now, for example. But there is no exclusionary evidence to prove the absence of life in the Universe outside of the Earth, for example.
	Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 13th February 2018 at 07:48 PM.

13th February 2018, 10:32 PM	#265
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	The closest might be to determine that the species involved have an inherent fear of fire ( some animals have inherent fear of snakes ) and so they would be acting very much against their "nature" to pick up a burning stick, Reality is these species come towards fire as a feeding potential and appear rather unconcerned by proximity. Nice thermal source too
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries} Last edited by macdoc; 13th February 2018 at 10:34 PM.

15th February 2018, 06:46 AM	#266
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	Originally Posted by macdoc Good post. I think that the article on pack hunting by that particular raptor provides enough parallel evidence of planning and anticipation of outcome to cover off "are they capable of it". I'm not sure whether that's true. There are species of mammal that engage in sophisticated pack hunting, but don't show evidence of innovative problem-solving ability like crows and parrots. My point is you can't generalise from crows and parrots to all birds. You have to look at each class individually. The cognitive abilities of corvids and parrots seem to resemble higher primates and dolphins more than they do other classes of birds. They are not just quanitatively smarter but qualitatively smarter - they can pass some cognitive tests that very few species of any type of animal can pass.
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486

15th February 2018, 08:28 AM	#267
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 16,202	Originally Posted by Elaedith My point is you can't generalise from crows and parrots to all birds. You have to look at each class individually. The cognitive abilities of corvids and parrots seem to resemble higher primates and dolphins more than they do other classes of birds. They are not just quanitatively smarter but qualitatively smarter - they can pass some cognitive tests that very few species of any type of animal can pass. The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be. There was an interesting article on the subject of avian intelligence in a recent issue of NatGeo, which unfortunately I don't have handy. Something in the last few months, anyway.
	__________________ When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

15th February 2018, 02:30 PM	#268
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	Quote: The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be. Exactly and predators as a "class" generally show very high intelligence - these are highly competitive raptors living in a harsh environment. Did you actually read the article on pack hunting in raptors.? This is likely the article - the cockatoo made this tool to solve a problem https://www.nationalgeographic.com/m...birds-corvids/
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries} Last edited by macdoc; 15th February 2018 at 02:38 PM.

15th February 2018, 04:08 PM	#269
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	Originally Posted by luchog The more we look at animal intelligence and behaviour, the increasingly less true that is appearing to be. There was an interesting article on the subject of avian intelligence in a recent issue of NatGeo, which unfortunately I don't have handy. Something in the last few months, anyway. The more animal intelligence is studied, the more we know that you can't just generalise across species simply because they share common ancestry. The article you refer to is almost entirely about corvids and parrots, as are the examples people keep referring to. If you want to know about the abilities of raptors, you need to look at raptors instead of going on about what parrots and corvids can do as though it proves what all birds can do.
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486

15th February 2018, 08:00 PM	#270
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	A corvid is a predator ..slicing and dicing to satisfy some arbitrary intelligence you have in mind is a fruitless pursuit....pardon the pun. Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point. I get no sense of a claim "what all birds can do" .....that's just weak polemics on your part since you have no case. The claim is on raptors.
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries}

16th February 2018, 12:04 AM	#271
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 24,804	Originally Posted by macdoc .......Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point...... No. Just no. This isn't clear at all. This is the point at dispute, and you don't just declare it to be fact without evidence. There is every chance that the so-called observations were nothing more than confirmation bias: aboriginals seeing what aboriginal stories told them to expect. In the chaos at the front edge of a woodland fire it is easy to see how someone told to expect birds to be starting fires could be mistaken into thinking they had seen at least part of such a process. In this instance, non-trained observers in a dangerous situation and without recording equipment, should have their stories treated with some caution. It's an interesting claim, which should be followed up in a designed study by a team of animal behaviouralists doing a full professional observation regime, with recording equipment. This is my daughter's profession and training. Who knows, one day it might be her who confirms this story.......but at the moment, this is a story; a claim. It is not fact.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

16th February 2018, 12:09 AM	#272
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 24,804	Originally Posted by macdoc A corvid is a predator.... No, corvids are omnivores. Predation is a part of their diet, and usually amounts to nestlings, and small mammals such as mice and voles. They are also carrion eaters, insect eaters, seed eaters, berry eaters, and they eat human food waste.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here. Last edited by MikeG; 16th February 2018 at 12:10 AM.

16th February 2018, 03:20 AM	#273
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486	Originally Posted by macdoc A corvid is a predator ..slicing and dicing to satisfy some arbitrary intelligence you have in mind is a fruitless pursuit....pardon the pun. Clearly three raptor species have been observed undertaking the behavior. Time to move off the point. I get no sense of a claim "what all birds can do" .....that's just weak polemics on your part since you have no case. The claim is on raptors. People have repeatedly posted videos and accounts of parrots and corvids solving multi-step problems as though it constitutes evidence that 'birds' can solve multi-step problems and by extension, raptors can solve multi-step problems. If you haven't noticed this you haven't been paying attention. Nobody would do such as silly thing with mammals - posting evidence of what dolphins and chimps can do to support a claim made about the problem-solving abilities of a different species of mammal. To show that raptors, and particularly this species can perform this behaviour, you first need to establish exactly what is required. The type of intelligence required is absolutely critical to establishing the case. There is a difference between learning based on association, and learning based on understanding cause and effect. You first of all need to establish whether the type of problem does require causal understanding and multi-step problem-solving rather than just associative learning. If it does you need to show that raptors, and this species in particular, has that capacity. Cooperative hunting is observed in many species including large cats, but there is no evidence that all these species have the problem-solving abilities of corvids. Therefore, pack hunting, however intelligent, is not sufficient to establish this type of innovative problem-solving ability.
Elaedith Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,486

16th February 2018, 05:23 AM	#274
macdoc Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Planet earth on slow boil Posts: 8,064	Not much intelligence needed to conclude that moving fire results in more food. It is not particularly innovative except in your mind. It is "interesting behaviour" .... and just to deconstruct your ...we wouldn't do it with mammals?? Quote: Birds and primates share brain cell types linked to intelligence Bird and reptile brains have a vastly different anatomy from mammalian brains, but contain cell types linked to mammalian cognitive abilities Date: February 15, 2018 Source: University of Chicago Medical Center Summary: In a new study scientists show that some neurons in bird brains form the same kind of circuitry and have the same molecular signature as cells that enable connectivity between different areas of the mammalian neocortex. The researchers found that alligators share these cell types as well, suggesting that while mammal, bird and reptile brains have very different anatomical structures, they operate using the same shared set of brain cell types. Share: FULL STORY Neuronal cell types in the brains of birds linked to goal-directed behaviors and cognition are similar to cells in the mammalian neocortex, the large, layered structure on the outer surface of the brain where most higher-order processing takes place. https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0215141719.htm Why you think this some sort of revolutionary behavior is entirely beyond me. It says to me you view birds as some sort of automatons....they are not. Quote: Imprisonment The Moroccan island of Mogador serves as a pit stop for Eleanora’s falcons, as well as many other migratory birds. This species subsists on a diet of mainly insects, but during breeding season, the other birds on the island become their prey of choice. Because the falcons raise their chicks at about the same time the annual migration hits its peak, there is a guaranteed plenitude of prey for the falcons to feed both themselves and their young. But there is a balancing act involved. Bird Imprisoned by raptorThe falcons transition to hunting birds just a few days before they lay their eggs. But catching and killing prey before their chicks even hatch risks the food going to waste. Fortunately for the falcons, they’ve found a solution to this problem: keeping their prey alive through imprisonment.5 By stuffing live birds into tiny pockets amid rocks, the falcons prevent them from escaping. Some of the confined birds have even been found with their wing and tail feathers plucked out – the feathers needed for flight. By removing these feathers, the falcons prevent smaller birds from being able to fly out of the holes in which they’re trapped. The falcons keep the captured birds alive in their “prison cells” until their chicks are hatched and ready to be fed fresh food. While this strategy of amputation and imprisonment may strike us as cruel, it gives insight into the intelligence and planning abilities of the raptors. In order to carry out this behavior, the raptors need to be able to plan ahead, and this is an ability we’ve only begun to find evidence of in a few species aside from our own. http://www.animalcognition.org/2016/...ns-mind-games/ Compared to that...fire starting from burning twigs is very straight forward. and here is your imprisoned bird Quote: “Studies of avian intelligence have been hampered by the old fashioned idea that birds are stupid, and not worth considering in terms of intelligence,” said Nathan Emery, author of the new book, Bird Brain: An Exploration of Avian Intelligence and senior lecturer at Queen Mary: University of London. An in-depth look at recent research and fascinating lab experiments, the book published by Ivy Press overturns any notion that birds are somehow dumb. Instead, it argues with an overwhelming amount of evidence that a number of bird species should be considered more as “feathered apes.” https://www.theguardian.com/environm...thics-chickens[/quote] anything sound familiar there to your antiquated mindset?
	__________________ _{Mainstream climate science sources • http://www.skepticalscience.com/empi...al-warming.htm • https://arstechnica.com/science/2021...cting-a-future} https://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...05/start-here/ _{Travelphotos >https://500px.com/macdoc/galleries} Last edited by macdoc; 16th February 2018 at 05:31 AM.

16th February 2018, 05:32 AM	#275
MikeG Now. Do it now. Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: UK Posts: 24,804	Originally Posted by macdoc ......and just to deconstruct your ...we wouldn't do it with mammals??......] Missing the point beautifully. The point is that you wouldn't mix up the abilities of, say, a bonobo and a hippo in the way you mixed up the abilities of various bird species. No-one here is saying this behaviour is impossible. Some are saying it is unlikely. So what? That's just guessing. What actually counts is whether this behaviour *actually happens,* and at the moment there is nothing whatever to show that it does. Which leaves your unending advocacy for it looking something between premature and 'footeresque.
	__________________ "The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.