Science Fact not Fiction?

When Reality Seems Like Science Fiction to You, Maybe You Have Let Your Mind Get Too Narrow.

We think of most living things as male or female. When a baby is born, what is the doctor expected to say? “It’s a boy” or “It’s a girl”.

One or the other, not both or neither, not 95% boy or 80% girl.

Some languages go so far as to call all nouns “he” or “she”, not because anyone thinks of them as having gender, but like there is only “he” or “she” – no “it”, and only “his” or “hers” – no “its”.

So some languages have male TVs and female beds.

We are all taught to assume certain things, but sometimes these social assumptions are simply not true.

I have heard that alligator eggs are not genetically male or female, but that the temperature the egg is kept at before it hatches, determines if it the embryo becomes male or female.

I have seen mother aquarium fish become male. I have read that in some kind of eels, they are all born female, and the ones that live to be old, turn male.

But to read about birds that have several genders? Sounds so different.

I want to ask: “how come I have never noticed this?” But then, how often would a person actually look at wild birds enough to know which were male or female, and which ‘varieties’ were really third, fourth, or fifth genders of a the same species?

This is just so odd, I wonder why it hasn’t gone around the Internet?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender

From: http://darlingyouaredoingitwrong.blogspot.com
permission to cross-post

Read Full Post »

Kosher Ham?

I like the line in the comments about “God will understand”.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/12/16/how-shellfish-saved.html

It has been said that the best way to learn the sentence structure of your own language is to learn a second language.

Learning about other religions can shine a light on your own religion.

The secret is to approach the new religion with respect and an open mind.

——
Like “I know one way to get from here to New York, but there might be other paths that lead to New York City too. I think my route is the best, but other routes will eventially get you there too – so long as you don’t fall by the wayside and quit trying.

And maybe, from where you are at, your route is better for you. Wouldn’t make much sense for someone to bypass New York, just so they could get there on the same route that I would take.

—–
For example: I was told that the Christian old testament is the same as the Jewish bible. But then, I was told that it is not the same.

The Christian Old Testament speaks of God as “He” but the Jewish one doesn’t.

You find this idea embedded in the terminology of plants. “Perfect” flowers are both male & female, and the newer flowers, that are either male or female, are called “Imperfect”.

To be male or female is Imperfect, to be Hermaphrodite is Perfect, because God was said to be both male & female.

I claim no religious scholarship, just passing along what I heard.

Read Full Post »

Bigfoot & retrieverman

If a Bigfoot is standing in the road, and its mate walks up to it, are they Bigfoots or Bigfeet?

Or would that be the rare case where we could call them Bigfeets?

Sasquatch, sasquatchs, Sasquatches, sasquatchz?

Big hairy apes? No, that’s what you find in bars after work lets out. Like Harry and the Henderson’s, no matter how cute they are, you probably shouldn’t let them into your car, even if they are laying on the ground passed out.

I love retrieverman’s blog. It’s fun. He has dogs. He has knowledge and opinions on dogs but is still upbeat. He has fun history – not war history. He has bigfeet and cupracabras.

Most people NEED a little of the mystical in their lives. Fiction, fantasy, and bigfooters.

Wasn’t Chewbacca a Bigfoot?

See, that’s the interesting thing about speculation. We can discuss if Chewbacca was a Sasquatch or not.

We can compare heights, like: male Bigfoots are taller than what Chewbacca is, so was Chewbacca really a girl Bigfoot?

And people know the rules for such discussion, only a real wet blanket says “We can’t talk about if Chewbacca was a Bigfoot, because he was really an actor in a monkey suit.”

We know that we are talking in the abstract, about “what ifs”, and “what could be”.

And people often NEED that – they don’t just want it, they need it. People who don’t delve into the improbable and the “what ifs” of life, will sometimes mis-understand reality instead.

It is perhaps in our genes to sit and listen to the campfire stories instead of wondering the woods at night, because there were saber tooth tigers, and woolly mammoths. And in some parts of the world their still are big cats, wild canine packs, rabid animals, and monsters in the dark.

It is latent in us to feel these things, we do this with fantasy, or we risk these archetypes of the subcontious superimposing themselves onto reality.

In the books, Tarzan was not raised by gorillas or chimps, but by a tribe of Bigfoots, called the Mangani. They were described as tall bipedal apes, who spoke.

The Yeti, or Abominable Snowman, is another Ape Man.

http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/

Read Full Post »

Terrierman & the Vets

Reading terrierman daily dose, about veterinarians that rip people off:

I had a teacher who quoted:
“All professions are a conspiracy against the public.”

When people learn a skill, keep their knowledge among themselves, form unions or professional clubs, and prevent competition through licenses and laws – the public often becomes the sheep they shear.

Why would one think there would be whole professions who would be exceptions? Stereotypes?
IMO, honest professions, with ethics that the public expects them to have, are a minority.

I worked in a veterinarian office. I know what other people who worked for other vets said.

If you work for a repair shop that pads the bill, do you think that you can quit, and expect the next one to be honest – despite the fact that most of the other employees report the same type of things about the repair shop that they work for?

There is a difference between knowing the truth and telling the truth.
http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com

Read Full Post »

Friends

I use to breed dogs. There are lots of people who use to breed dogs. They got into it, and they got out of it.

Naturally, once you breed dogs, you meet other dog breeders, especially if you go to dog shows.

This really can make for odd relationships. There are people who always did see other breeders as competitors, no matter how friendly they might seem.

Without listing all the tricks, lies, intimidations, social pressures, scams, and things which should be illegal, let me say:

“These are your competitors, and there are people who can’t turn off their urge to compete when they leave the ring.”

Breeders often gang together in clubs.

Did you ever wonder why they call it a “club” like in the oldest of war weapons? the caveman’s club.

What really is a club? What about when a club is made up of people who deal in dogs for money? Does that make it a union?

I think of them as “gangs”.

Read Full Post »

Rat stews

How are you going to eat it, if you don’t kill it first?

I don’t understand. You can hunt kangaroo, but not kill a rat?

Kangaroos are native marsupials not found elsewhere.

Rats are rats. They are almost everywhere. And they are non-native to Australia.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_rat

I didn’t watch the show. Don’t care to watch rat eating.

I am against torturing rats, but I am not against killing them – they reproduce so fast, that if their population wasn’t kept down, they’d eat all the crops – the wheat, the corn, the apples – we would have nothing left, if rats were allowed to keep multiplying.

Read Full Post »

NBC today show, pedigree dogs exposed!

The part you want to watch about pedigree dogs exposed, is at the beginning of of the today show on NBC. The today show starts at 7:30 AM here.

Tonight is the whole show, but I don’t know what channel in everybody’s area. If you miss it, it is on video (6 parts) over on:

http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/

ps: I liked his article about networks pimping for they-who-we-don’t-name, but I question the “free” part. If I were a network, I would charge money to do a show from a dog show – network advertising is not usually free, so why would one assume that dog shows would be a special case?

Is there a clear money trail that says if the “freebies” are free or not?

Read Full Post »

Time Magazine

One of the best articles on buying a puppy or dog, what NOT to breed dogs for, and a general understanding of the problem. By Time Magazine.

And, no, nothing has been done to fix the problems in dog breeding.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,981964,00.html
A Terrible Beauty.

Read Full Post »

Not another pit bull attack.

For those of you who are tired of reading about yet another pit bull attacking people (http://www.dogsbite.org/) here is a read about someone being attack by a non-pit bull dog – but it was another molosser (parent category to which pit bulls belong).

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/unleashed/2009/11/colorado-sheepherder-guard-dogs-bicyclist.html

Flockbonders are suppose to emotionally bond to the sheep and protect them – they don’t herd the sheep – they just live with the sheep and protect them from coyotes.

But, as the article points out, if the sheep are grazed in a public recreational area with people in it – than the dogs should have been removed from the flock.

These are very large dogs. The show type males had big heads like mastiffs, not regular heads like Kuvaz.

If people have mean dogs, then the people must kept the dogs fenced in, or under control – you just can’t blame the dog.

Dogs can be bred to be more aggressive, and to hang on when they bite – that is the dog breeder’s fault.

Dogs can be loose when they bite people, or guests may be improperly protected from the owner’s dog – that’s the owners fault.

Read Full Post »

Irish Setters with no red hairs.

Just as adults often go for the unusual, children very very often will ignore the normal puppies in a litter and only play with the odd colored puppy or kitten.

This is because children have a very hard time learning to distinguish between one puppy and another. Children often look at patched colored puppies and just see them as a bunch of patched colored puppies – they don’t remember the shapes of the patches.

Even if you say “The puppy’s name a pupy after his markings, the child wont recognise the puppy when they see the other side of the puppy. And most children lack the patience to stand there and wait and look – they just want to run up and grab a puppy.

It is the same with kittens. I knew people who bred purebred cats, the children got use to there always being kittens around – but then, one of the kittens was born an off color (for that breed of cat) and the kids adored it. Why? Because they could recognise it from the other kittens.

The reverse happens in laboratories. The company deliberately uses mice, rats, guinea pigs, and rabbits that are all the same color albino. Because if the animals were distinctive then the experimenters would identify with the animals as individuals and the experimenters would feel sorry for a favored animal.

I knew of a litter of kittens where all the kittens were the same color but one. The children played most with the one different kitten – the other kittens had names – but which name went to which kitten? Only the odd colored kitten could be properly labeled.

The boy in this family was cruel and he would pick on the kittens who look alike. Worse, in my opinion is when you find a child who seeks out the unique puppy or kitten t pick on.

The unique or identifiable animal is one that the child can have a personal bond with. The other animals, like flocks of purebred chickens, or kennels of many purebred dogs and cats, are too similar for a child (and often adults) to tell apart.

Seeking out, and favoring, the distinctive animal is normal. Being more able to harm an animal when they all look alike is more normal. But hurting, especially seeking out to hurt, an identifiable animal is not a good moral sign.

Why some people want to breed dogs and cats to get groups where they all look so such alike, I don’t know.

Read Full Post »

Doing Dogs Right

I was browsing through retrieverman’s blogroll, when I came to a link to something in terrierman’s archives. I followed the link to this:

http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2005/04/guide-to-breeding-old-fashioned.html

Why would anyone want to breed “old-fashioned html”?

Jokes aside, this is a good article, although I haven’t ordered the book.

At first, I read it, thought it had good points, but was not what I was looking for, and clicked to go back to the blogroll on retrieverman, but while waiting for the connection, it dawned on me that this actually was what I was looking for.

What I thought at first was “This is about breeding better working dogs, and right now, I am looking for something to help breeders of showdogs to understand how to breed better pets”.

But then I realized that breeding for the right instincts in working dogs, is about the same thing as breeding to delete wolf and hunting/guarding/activity traits in pet housedogs!

Thanks for the link retrieverman, thanks for the article terrierman, and thanks to the author (Guy Gregory Ormiston) who wrote the book, and all the people between.

But I disagree with his idea on inbreeding. Instead of inbreeding because nobody near you has a purebred dog who looks like yours AND works like yours – be willing to travel far away to find what you want, or cross breed to a dog that doesn’t look like yours but works like yours.

I do agree with him that most people lack what it takes to train a dog, so breeders MUST breed dogs who already have the necessary instincts included and the unwanted instincts deleted.

It is even more true for housedogs than working dogs, because people who work their dogs often know something about training behaviors in, and suppressing unwanted instincts, but most people buying a pet do not understand. And they should not have to learn, because the breeder, who sells puppies as pets, should have bred them to be pets – dogs with the unwanted instincts deleted.

Which is exactly the point I was trying to make, that if you keep your dogs in concrete kennels, keep them all chained to dog houses, stack them in crates against a wall, or keep your dogs in cages in the basement or garage, then you don’t even know which dogs would be good housedogs, because the dogs don’t live free in the house.

You are raising dogs in one environment, and breeding them for that environment, but then advertising and selling the puppies as being good in an different environment that you don’t keep them in, and don’t know if they would be good in that environment or not.

Just because a dog is a good show dog or sheep herder, does NOT mean, that it is a good pet.

How do you know if your dogs are really good with children if you have 24 dogs in cages in the basement, and 8 more in the garage, and the dogs basically live in the cages?

A dog might be aggressive, but not bite when he is first let out of his cage because it is so rare for him. Or a usually friendly dog might bite when rarely let out of his cage – because everything is so new to him.

To judge if a dog is good with children, and if he would be a good house dog, the dog needs to be part of your family.

You say, you can’t let your dogs loose in the house because they try to kill each other, can’t be housebroke, tear up the furniture the moment you turn your back on them, and are not safe around guests or children? Then how can you sell their puppies as “pet quality”?

Maybe, although you have 20 or 30 something dogs, you don’t have any pet dogs, and don’t even know what a house dog is?

If you are looking for retrieverman’s blogroll, it is here:
http://retrieverman.wordpress.com/

Read Full Post »

Meat

When I first got out of high school, I went to hear a Holy man speak. He talked about, how just by breathing, we killed tiny living things, that every step squashed tiny living things. I wanted to know how I could avoid killing these tiny living beings without dieing or being miserable.

He said “You can’t, but you are automatically forgiven for killing them, because you must do so to survive.” At the time, that seemed so wise and kind. But, as he pointed out, there was nothing I could do about it – so what was the point of his talking about it?

But I did know one thing that I could do, I could become a vegetarian. So I quit eating meat.

I never knew that I was an obligate carnivore until I actually tried giving up meat.

I had dieted to lose weight before, but this was nothing like that. It was a hunger that changed how I felt. Like a hungry hawk in yauk, I become more alert.

I could feel myself paying more attention to the physical world. Books did not hold my attention, walking and watching the world were the things that I felt like doing.

To just say “I became more alert” does not tell it like it really is. If you do not feed a lion, he does not become a sheep – what you get is a hungry lion.

And you can often see, just by looking, if an animal is hunting or when it is full and content. I did not feel content even when I ate extra potatoes and bread.

I felt restless, I felt like roaming, I felt a craving.

Not just like “Oh, I could go for an ice cream, or I’d really like Chinese Food.” But a hunger with direction that I could not dismiss. The smell of a roast cooking – I just could not ignore it.

It was a very unpleasant feeling – unless you like going through life feeling hungry.

Some people have said that they gave up meat, and it never bothered them. But later, I read in a book on anthropology about a man who lived with a tribe in Africa, and wrote about it. He said they have two words for hunger, regular hunger for calories, and another word for craving meat. I decided that I was not alone.

I decided that, although I love animals, I was not made to be a vegetarian. You can not fault the tiger for needing meat to eat, no more than you can fault a deer for eating leaves. Each does what they can. Each lives as they were meant to.

I don’t think I could have survived without meat. I think I would have become malnourished if I had not realized that I could not continue on the meatless path.

I do know this: Without meat I feel more like a carnivore, than I had with meat.

That may sound strange, but how many of you have tried giving up meat?

To both those who think that there is no such thing as a craving for protein, and those who think that a carnivore can be content without meat, I ask why so many Americans would not think of giving up meat? Is it because they have felt a touch of malnourishment before?

Other might say, that in their country there are people who do not eat meat. And I have a relative who was a vegetarian for years – but gave it up to get married. And another relative who was a vegetarian for much of her adult life.

But, for me it did not work out.

So am I less for having tried but failed, than what I would have been had I not tried at all?

Or am I less for having tried at all? Depends on your point of view doesn’t it?

I respect the deer, but I respect the tiger too.

Read Full Post »

Playing on the Internet

The web is a great strange thing. Before the web, one had to listen to the “authorities” on a subject – and often they said whatever was best FOR THEMSELVES.

I like to read the points of view of regular people. So what, if they aren’t perfect or always right?

The authorities of the pre-internet era were often just as wrong, and the voices of the public, who were the true contact point between idea and application (product and it’s use), simply were not heard.

Wrong? Yes, the people who set national trends and policies have been known to sometimes be wrong.

How could a group of people, who were as wrong as wrong can be, control the media, have their ideas become the dominate theme of books on the subject, and put the public out of a right they had always previously had?

Before the internet, it was slow, but there just wasn’t a good way for unorganized people to speak up about an industry trampling their rights.

Like the right to breed an occasion litter of puppies or kittens.

Most pet puppies use to come from the mother dog that belonged to a friend or relative, not from a dog breeder or pet shop.

People wanted a puppy from a mother dog that was good with children and who was mannered.

Somehow dog breeders have convinced some people that to get a good pet puppy, you should skip buying a puppy from a pet, and buy a puppy left over from a show litter (puppies who were not bred as pets, but to be show dogs, but they weren’t showy enough for that).

I believe that breeding dogs to be good pets is an even better goal than breeding them so you can put them in shows. And I have personally watched efforts by an organized group to put the public out of the picture (through legal means).

Getting elbowed out of your spot is bad enough, but when people get lawmakers to pass laws that make the public have all the pet dogs and cats operated on so that they can not reproduce, but then the law gives an exemption to “fanciers”, show dog people, or people who breed cats for cat shows, then it at the point where if people don’t speak up, the situation will not be repairable.

I found this little gem over on terrierman (who is really good):
http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/2004/04/animal-rights-and-show-rings-rosettes.html

I have been browseing around the internet lately, and I have found so many things, like I found a photo of a famous person, who I had not heard much about, but who looks like so much like someone I knew that I wonder if they were closely related.

I have found lots of show dogs sites that say the same sort of things – the same things that I have been told by dog breeders at dog shows – about how great it is to breed dogs to try to win at dog shows, and how pet dogs are “just pets” and should not be bred.

Every once in a while, I find a site that I agree with, most of the time.

Read Full Post »

Snow Shepherds

Show winning German Shepherd Dogs have been know to have white furred puppies in their litter (I know a funny/very sad case about this issue). These puppies are often killed at birth by the breeder – the white puppies can’t be shown in dog shows.

If you haven’t hung around with the show shepherd breeders then maybe you have no idea just how much white people can hate white dogs.

I’m not a shrink, don’t ask me to explain it. I can’t.

But some people did not killed these newborns and have sold them as pets.
And some people have bred them and started their own breed.
Other people have kept the original papers (the dogs are purebred, just not showable) and have a line of white shepherds.

If you love verbal train wreaks just say something about wanting “one of those rare purebred white German Shepherd Dogs” on a show shepherd site.

I think Golden Retrievers might have started out like white shepherd dogs, but please don’t mention that to those breeder who kill white newborn shepherd puppies – I really don’t want to have to explain to them that they are doing it wrong (darling).

Read Full Post »

Size matters?

The (American version) Scottish Deerhound standard (if I remember right) says (or said) something about putting an upper limit on the size for males, because males could get too big to sprint after deer, but no upper limit was put on the female deerhounds because (the purebred) females did not grow too large to be clumsy and useless.

This implies that there is an ideal height, a point where (like in other things) the added height becomes a disadvantage because of the extra pounds per inch found in a taller animal.

From school you might have had a teacher lecture about how strong an ant is for it’s size, but if an ant were the size of a horse, it could not move. Same principle.

For each thing, size has an advantage up to a point, after which it becomes a disadvantage.

Going into a hole after a fox? A 6 inch high pocket dog would not get stuck in the tunnel – but it could be easily killed by the fox. A 20 inch dog would out power the fox, but how would you get him into the fox’s tunnel?

So important is the right size, not too big, not too, that I have read about terrierman who go for badgers (European badgers – our badger could kill dogs easily), who have different lines of dogs, some that fit into a female badger’s den, and other slightly larger dogs to fit into male badger’s dens.

Read Full Post »

Different is better than best.

IF eleven inches is the best size for a some kind of working terrier, . . .

(I’m guessing, not my breed and I don’t hunt – and I think they use chest girth, not wither height – but I need a number to use as an example)

. . . then the working terriermen are going to breed 11 inch dogs.

So how are we going to display that our show dogs are not like those dogs who work?

I will breed terriers over 12 inches, and you my show friend can breed the ones under 10 inches – that way, no one will mistake our dogs for working dogs.

Did anyone ever put this into words for terriers? I don’t know, but I do know (for other traits, not size) this type of separation was said to be a factor in show Border Collies or Aussies.

Read Full Post »

And never the twain shall meet

“Why?” you might ask would we do something that sounds so wrong?

I believe that, although it started as a way to create differences between basically alike breeds, we do it this way now out of tradition, and because the “desired type” has been codified into standards and therefor is harder to change because people often feel that if they improve something they are admitting that they weren’t 100% correct before.

When people become an authority, it can be hard for them to back down from their mistakes. And if you have been making the same mistake for 40 years of breeding, it becomes very hard to admit that you have been doing it wrong, (darling).

Read Full Post »

the gap where the gold was

I keep meaning to put a link to retrieverman at the bottom of my posts, because it is his post that I am commenting on, and I keep hitting “publish” before I think of it, so let me start off with the link:
http://www.retrieverman.wordpress.com/

The historical cases where there is a gap right where the most desired size is, can be found in sighthounds and earth going terriers. If you read terrierman at all, you will recall that one of his pet peeves is that show breeders breed dogs too big to fit into the tunnels they need to work in.
http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/

If you look at the sizes, you can also see that the toy terriers are bred to be a bit too small for the tunnels – that there is a gap, right where the desired size is.

In other words, we breed terriers too big and too small, but rarely just the right size for the work we use them for.

Read Full Post »

Breeding Rejects

I believe you will find that the histories of many breeds started with culls that were given away, instead of killed, and then became the foundation of a new breed.

The old breeders wouldn’t let them in because they were what was considered culls, so they often had to start their own breed, and, in tit for tat fashion, they then rejected dogs who fit the original standard.

It use to be common for breeders at dog shows to talk about breeding more differences into their breed so that it would not look like some other breed.

If you remember when the show club started showing Border Collies and Australian Shepherds? At that time, time both breeds had an assortment of different traits which would often be found in puppies in the same litter.

Some of the working sheepherding dogs (in both breeds) were medium sized, limber, pick eared, and others were larger, heavier, and drop eared. Both working breeds had some dogs who were shorthaired like a husky and medium haired like the show varieties today.

Breeders/breed clubs had to choose which traits were going to be in show dogs – if they didn’t we would still have this variation in show dogs of these breeds – and we don’t. The standards do NOT read: Ears: any; Size: smallish, medium, or large; Coat: short, medium or long, etc.

One of the breeders told me that the majority of their club had wanted to choose one of the varieties, but had chosen a different one for their standard, BECAUSE THE OTHER BREED ACCEPTED INTO THE CLUB BEFORE THEM, HAD CHOSE THAT TYPE FOR THEIR STANDARD.

Think of it like flags. If the country next to you chooses the flag that you were considering, you choose a different one. If the North and South split, they chose different flags that don’t look alike.

But in dog, there is a reason for the original type, and breeding to get more and more difference results in a gap, where the previously desired type was.

Read Full Post »

Perfection is BAD

Over on retrieverman today, you have probably read about early Golden Retriever Breeders rejecting the beautiful red-gold colored dogs, because they looked to much like the red setters (Irish Setters).

This is NOT at all unusual. I would call it standard practice in starting a breed of show dogs.

One group breeds the best dogs for some task, and this breed become popular.

Then some rogue comes in who admires that breed, but he wants to start up his own breed.

What can a person do to compete against perfection? Why they must breed imperfection, but call this a new and better trait.

Then the rogue breeder becomes popular, and the faults are considered THE HALLMARK OF THE BREED.

Read Full Post »