Readers’ wildlife photos

April 26, 2015 • 7:30 am

First, let’s check on Stephen Barnard’s eagles.  He’s reported now that there are at least two chicks: he’s seen a pair and there may be more.  However, we don’t yet have a photo. But we do have a picture of parental care with Stephen’s caption:

Getting everything just right. Watch out for the kids!

I don’t know how one can observe the ubiquity of solicitous parental care across vertebrates and still deny that evolutionary psychology has anything to say about human behavior! Whether it be in eagles or humans, parental behavior can be considered a product of either individual selection or kin selection, and it’s really a whole complex of behaviors. Eagles built nests; we favor our kids over other people’s.

RT9A1949

And reader Bob Lundgren sent cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus)!

Attached a some photos my wife and I took of a cheetah hunting with her cubs one morning while we were in the Ngorogoro Conservation Area in Tanzania.
The first two photos show our initial encounter in a savanna area near a dry lake. Our guide was quite certain the cheetah mother was going to hunt because he said her belly looked empty. In the second photo she is waiting for her cubs to catch up. They were playing and dilly-dallying around and we couldn’t get all three in one frame. The giraffes are clearly interested but don’t have to worry.
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
The third photo shows all three down by the edge of the dry lake. They have spotted a herd of gazelles grazing on the other side of the lake and mom spent nearly an hour patiently waiting for an opportunity.
003
The fourth photo is not an ad for a safari company (although it is a good one). The gazelle herd has been moving toward the left as they graze. One of the gazelles is lagging behind the group and a gap is opening up. Mom has seen this and has moved up behind the vehicle to use it as cover while she waits. Her cubs have been sent into the cover of some brush to watch.
004
In the fifth photo mom has moved away from the vehicle and is slowly and smoothly making her way out toward the lake bed.
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
The sixth and seventh photos are stills from a video I took of the chase. It was fascinating to watch. Mom slowly accelerated from a walk to a trot to a run toward the gap between the gazelles until the straggler made the fatal error of bolting to the right instead of toward the herd. The gazelle was now isolated and the cheetah lit the after chargers, turned on a dime and made the kill. The seventh photo shows the trail of dust and the doomed gazelle.
006
007
The eight and ninth photos show the result. It all happened very quickly after the patient wait for opportunity. We expected that this sort of thing might be gruesome to watch, but it was actually quite fascinating, exciting and just the way things work. We were definitely cheering for the cheetah.
008
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA
The last photo is another still from a video and is a bit fuzzy. After the kill mom hauled the gazelle into the shelter of a bush, proceeded to open its belly and let the cubs go at it.  She laid down in the shade and ignored them.
010
Finally, moving to colder climes, here are two photos of arctic foxes (Vulpes lagopus) from my FB friend Ivan Kislov, who takes amazing animal photos from Siberia. (Ask to be friends; you’ll see unforgettable photos.) Ivan’s a miner who does nature photography in his spare time; see my earlier post about his work here.
His caption is this:
Чукотка – белое на белом.
Translation, anyone?
10628411_851090224969727_1024456973669252694_n
Notice the short ears that to conserve heat; and compare to, say, the ears of desert foxes like the kit fox or fennec, which function as head radiators.

Sunday: Hili dialogue

April 26, 2015 • 5:27 am

It is Ceiling Cat’s Day, so the weenies will goof off and the rest of us will work. At least it will be sunny instead of chilly and rainy here, as it was yeterday. And meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili contemplates evolutionary history. Does this mean that she’s becoming less solipsistic? I doubt it!

Cyrus: Are you asleep?
Hili: I’m thinking.
Cyrus: What about?
Hili: What did dinosaurs sleep on?

P1020593

In Polish:
Cyrus: Śpisz?
Hili: Myślę.
Cyrus: O czym?
Hili: Na czym spały dinozaury?

Squirrely restroom signs

April 25, 2015 • 2:00 pm

Reader Dennis D. sent me a pair of restroom signs involving SQUIRRELS. They’re from Dewey-Humboldt, Arizona and are a bit off color, but funny. His notes:

I found those signs is a little sandwich shop called Gabriel’s Deli-Mart that is part of a gas station.  They make a pretty good hot & spicy sub there.  The gas station is famous for having been robbed by a woman using a toy penguin instead of a gun.
Men’s room:
1020141408-01
Ladies room:
1020141408-00
There must have been some incursions into the ladies loo!

 

The Argument from Embryology: Discovery Institute flacks say that development proves God

April 25, 2015 • 12:30 pm

Here’s Discovery Institute Fellow Paul Nelson—who lives in Chicago and sometimes creeps me out by depositing Intelligent Design propaganda in my departmental mailbox—using a novel (but stupid) argument for Intelligent Design, aka God’s Handiwork. It’s based on embryology and teleology. Have a look at this 9.5-minute video on nematode development, which distorts the cool developmental biology of the worm (work that garnered a Nobel Prize) to make it seem like evidence for Design.

All the biology is accurate up to 4:58, although a bit repetitive, but that’s where Nelson begins to slip off the rails and argue that development can’t be explained by evolution because embryology looks like it has foresight—ergo Jebus. As he says, “The case for design could not be made more explicit.” But the argument for “design” isn’t even very sophisticated, and can be refuted with only an elementary knowledge of evolution.

I’ll leave it to the readers to educate each other on this one—it’s an exercise in using what you’ve learned about how evolution works to address creationist distortions . Do post below the reason why Nelson’s argument is fatally flawed. And watch the movie first. It’s a slick production, full of sophistry.

I know that Nelson reads this site, so let me ask him this: Really, Paul? Do you believe this kind of garbage that you’re using to pollute the minds of people, all so they’ll ultimately accept Jesus? Are you really so thick that you can’t see right through the argument that you’re making in this video?  And Paul, since bird behavior shows foresight, too, as they begin migrating south before the winter comes, is that also proof of God? In the end, wouldn’t it be easier to stand on the street corner, cut out the biological middleman, and just shout the Good News about God?

God, I despise Liars for Jesus. They should be mocked, reviled and refuted. Be my guest in the comments.

h/t: Ursula

EU mandates homeopathy for sick animals on British organic farms

April 25, 2015 • 11:15 am

Since Europe is less soaked in religion than is the U.S., I always think of Across the Pond as a more rational and humane place than my own country. And yet I’m repeatedly disappointed. They may be less religious over there, but they have their own special forms of woo, and one of them is homeopathy. When I lived in France, I was continually amazed at the profusion of homeopathic pharmacies and the number of scientists who dosed themselves with homeopathic water.

And now the Muscles in Brussels, otherwise known as the EU, is indulging in homeopathy to the extent that its administration has become law. Law, that is, as a means of treating sick animals on organic farms. As yesterday’s Torygraph reports:

British organic farmers are being forced to treat their livestock with homeopathic remedies under new European Commission rules branded ‘scientifically illiterate’ by vets.

Although homeopathy has been branded as ‘rubbish’ by the government’s Chief Medical Officer Dame Sally Davies, organic farmers have been told they must try it first under a new EU directive which came into force in January.

The regulation means that animals could be left diseased or in pain for far longer than necessary and organic meat could end up containing higher levels of bacteria, vets have warned.

. . . The directive states that: “it is a general requirement…for production of all organic livestock that (herbal) and homeopathic products… shall be used in preference to chemically-synthesised allopathic veterinary treatment or antibiotics.”

. . . The Department for Food and Rural Affairs admitted that organic farmers were bound by the new regulations but said they could resort to other means, such as antibiotics, without losing their ‘organic’ status if homeopathic remedies proved to be ineffective.

And this is the sickest part:

It even emerged that the British government had voted in favour of the new rules.

Yet there’s support for this in other quarters of the UK as well:

The Soil Association, one of the leading bodies certifying organic produce in the UK is broadly supportive of homeopathy.

Natasha Collins-Daniel, the Soil Association’s press officer, stressed that while the use of homeopathic treatments was “not mandatory” to gain an organic certification, it could be effective.

“We have significant collective experience from livestock farmers and vets showing that herbal treatments and homeopathic approaches can help them care for their animals,” she said.

Seriously, EU and UK? What is that about? Are “organic” cows and pigs supposed to be treated with “organic” (i.e., stupid and ineffective) remedies? In the face of overwhelming evidence that homeopathy is quackery, the EU is still ordering British organic farmer to Try Water First. Or maybe they think that what doesn’t work on humans might just work on animals. No matter what, it’s just insane. This follows a story from 2011 that the EU spent €1.8 million for research on the effectiveness of homeopathy on farm animals.

Now let me give a caveat here: the story appears to have originated in the Torygraph, and has been taken from that report by other venues. So there’s a possibility that this is bogus. Stay tuned.

But the stalwart Brits are fighting back:

John Blackwell, President of the British Veterinary Association, said: “We should always use medicines which have a strong science base and homeopathic remedies are not underpinned by any strong science.

“Disease is painful and farmers have an obligation to reduce that pain and not allow their animals to suffer so this regulation is troubling. It may lead to serious animal health and welfare detriment.

“If animals are not treated promptly it could lead to an underlying level of pathogen which could mean that the animal was no longer fit for human consumption.”

I’m hoping this is a mistaken story, for it bespeaks a profound stupidity on the part of the EU and the Soil Association.

h/t: Robin

Canadian court comes to its senses, mandates chemotherapy for leukemia-afflicted child

April 25, 2015 • 10:00 am

The long story of the Canadian courts allowing First Nations children to die out of respect for their useless “traditional healing practices” has had a happy resolution—at least in one case. When 11-year-old Makayla Sault was dying of leukemia after abandoning chemotherapy for “traditional medicine” (including a bout of “nontraditional” treatment at the quackish Hippocrates Institute in Florida), another 11-year old, “J. J.”, also with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, was also allowed by a Canadian judge to abandon chemotherapy for “traditional” healing. Makayla didn’t make it, and J. J.’s leukemia wasn’t cured by native healing or by the Hippocrates Institute (surprise!!).

When J. J.’s leukemia recurred, the parents apparently had a change of heart, and so did the judge who overruled chemo in the first place.  You can read the whole story in posts by two readers: Diana MacPherson’s discussion at Canadian Atheist, and reader Sean’s piece at My Secret Atheist Blog.

What happened, apparently, is that after J. J.’s leukemia recurred, the plaintiff in the original suit (McMaster Children’s Hospital), J. J.’s family, and the judge worked out a deal to avoid an appeal, which would have taken a while and allowed the cancer to advance further. J. J. is at last undergoing chemo, and one hopes that her original 90% chance of cure has not diminished.

But there’s still a lot of lip-service to “traditional medicine” being bandied about by all parties, and some hypocrisy, too. As MSAB points out (the quote in italics is from the CBC):

All of this seems related to a clarification ruling on Friday by Judge Gethin Edward which — after J.J.’s cancer returned — makes the child’s well being paramount to any case. I’m having some trouble parsing the words, but I think it means that the child’s health should be ‘balanced’ with the desire to use traditional medicine vs or alongside science-based medicine(?), but it’s all rather foggy to me.
It is a “significant qualification” of Ontario court Judge Gethin Edward’s November 2014 ruling, according to one legal expert, which means the child’s well-being has to be balanced against rights to traditional medicine.Nick Bala, a law professor at Queen’s University, says the clarification “walks back” the original ruling that put First Nations constitutional rights as the major factor to be considered in the care of the child.
You would think that the child’s well being would have always been considered paramount. This is precisely what I’ve been asking for all this time. The only thing which could obscure this obvious goal would be decades of institutional abuse and belief in unproven traditional medicine over evidence-based treatments — along with politics. It seems very much like the judge believed in this medicine as well and is now backpedalling.
Diana also points out that the original J. J. ruling contradicted an earlier court decision about a child of Jehovah’s Witnesses, a sect that refuses blood transfusion based on wonky interpretations of two Bible verses:

I found this ruling outrageous because it clearly put a “constitutionally protected right” above the health of a child and this was not only ethically questionable but also inconsistent with Canada’s top court, which in 2009 dismissed a Jehovah Witness girl’s case claiming her rights were violated when she was forced to receive a life-saving blood transfusion. Indeed, the

Supreme Court ruled that such medical interventions are constitutionally sound, striking a balance between the choice of the child and the state’s protection of the child.

Diana also notes the precise “healing regimen” J. J. was getting for her leukemia: “a positive attitude, a raw diet and health shakes, something Wayne K. Spear, himself an aboriginal, rightly called a mixture of Christianity, alternative medicines, New Age dabbling, and traditional herbs.” And that’s just nuts.

What bothers me most about this is the self-congratulatory attitude of everyone, as if they’d forged a consensus in which two forms of healing could be applied side by side (unless those damn herbs impede the chemo!), and cultural sensitivity appeased.  But time has passed, and it’s possible that J. J.’s chances of surviving would be higher had the courts not “respected” that form of healing in the first place.

Yes, if native practices don’t conflict with or impede scientific treatment, then of course they can be used. But Canada should decide, once and for all, that those practices should never be allowed to replace proper medical treatment for children. Faith healing may be religious, secular, or “ethnic,” but unless it’s been tested scientifically, it’s quackery.

 h/t: Chris, Diana, Sean, Stephen

 

Caturday trifecta: Squirrel buries nuts in a d*g, ode to Spot, and cats mess up bed

April 25, 2015 • 9:00 am

Aren’t you lucky? We have another three cat-related items today. (While perusing my draft posts, I realized that they number 905 (many of them with cats), and most will never see the light of day. Some day I must winnow the bad ones and put up the good ones.

Anyway, we have three videos. In this one, a squirrel (an Honorary Cat™), tries to bury its nuts in a dog’s fur! I have no doubt that this is what the befuddled rodent is trying to do, as the burying behavior is classic. The dog, of course, is bemused:

*******

I believe a reader posted this Ode to Spot last week, and, inquiring of one of my friends who is a Trekophile (but not a Trekkie), I learned that Spot was the cat belonging to the android Data on four Star Trek series. As the “Memory alpha” Wiki page on Spot notes, the animal was played by six cats:

Spot first appeared in “Data’s Day” as a male, long-haired Somali cat. In subsequent appearances, Spot was seen as a more common American short-hair orange tabby, but still as a male. It was only in the seventh season episode “Force of Nature” that Spot was first referred to as she. In “Genesis“, she even gave birth. The Star Trek Encyclopedia jokingly suggests that Spot may be a shapeshifter or the victim of a transporter malfunction.

Spot was played by unknown long-haired Somali cats in his first two appearances and trained by Gary Gero and Scott Hart from Birds & Animals Unlimited. Spot’s appearance was changed into an orange tabby cat beginning with the sixth season when Rob Bloch from Critters of the Cinema took over the animal casting and training. During his time on The Next Generation, Spot was then played by Monster, Brandy and Bud and later also by Tyler, trained by Rob Bloch and Karen Thomas-Kolakowski.

There’s a lot more than the above on the Wiki page (including three pictures of Spot, one in which he’s turned into an iguana); and I once again realized how obsessed these fans are! At any rate, my Trekophile friend sent me a link to a video with many appearances of Spot, and below that I have added the famous poem.

 

Ode to Spot

Felis catus is your taxonomic nomenclature,
An endothermic quadruped, carnivorous by nature;
Your visual, olfactory, and auditory senses
Contribute to your hunting skills and natural defenses.

I find myself intrigued by your subvocal oscillations,
A singular development of cat communications
That obviates your basic hedonistic predilection
For a rhythmic stroking of your fur to demonstrate affection.

A tail is quite essential for your acrobatic talents;
You would not be so agile if you lacked its counterbalance.
And when not being utilized to aid in locomotion,
It often serves to illustrate the state of your emotion.

O Spot, the complex levels of behavior you display
Connote a fairly well-developed cognitive array.
And though you are not sentient, Spot, and do not comprehend,
I nonetheless consider you a true and valued friend.

*******

Finally, if you have a cat and a bed, you’re liable to have encountered this situation:

 

h/t: John, Joyce