From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

from
https://phys.org/news/2025-02-planetary-evolution-favor-human-life.html

Does planetary evolution favor human-like life? Study ups odds we're not
alone
by Pennsylvania State University

A new model upends the decades-old "hard steps" theory that intelligent
life was an incredibly improbable event and suggests that maybe it
wasn't all that hard or improbable. The team of researchers said the new interpretation of humanity's origin increases the probability of
intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Credit: NASA
Humanity may not be extraordinary but rather the natural evolutionary
outcome for our planet and likely others, according to a new model for
how intelligent life developed on Earth.

The model, which upends the decades-old "hard steps" theory that
intelligent life was an incredibly improbable event, suggests that maybe
it wasn't all that hard or improbable. A team of researchers at Penn
State, who led the work, said the new interpretation of humanity's
origin increases the probability of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.

"This is a significant shift in how we think about the history of life,"
said Jennifer Macalady, professor of geosciences at Penn State and
co-author on the paper, which was published Feb. 14 in the journal
Science Advances.

"It suggests that the evolution of complex life may be less about luck
and more about the interplay between life and its environment, opening
up exciting new avenues of research in our quest to understand our
origins and our place in the universe."

Initially developed by theoretical physicist Brandon Carter in 1983, the
"hard steps" model argues that our evolutionary origin was highly
unlikely due to the time it took for humans to evolve on Earth relative
to the total lifespan of the sunrCoand therefore the likelihood of
human-like beings beyond Earth is extremely low.

In the new study, a team of researchers that included astrophysicists
and geobiologists argued that Earth's environment was initially
inhospitable to many forms of life, and that key evolutionary steps only became possible when the global environment reached a "permissive" state.

For example, complex animal life requires a certain level of oxygen in
the atmosphere, so the oxygenation of Earth's atmosphere through photosynthesizing microbes and bacteria was a natural evolutionary step
for the planet, which created a window of opportunity for more recent
life forms to develop, explained Dan Mills, postdoctoral researcher at
The University of Munich and lead author on the paper.

"We're arguing that intelligent life may not require a series of lucky
breaks to exist," said Mills, who worked in Macalady's astrobiology lab
at Penn State as an undergraduate researcher.

"Humans didn't evolve 'early' or 'late' in Earth's history, but 'on
time," when the conditions were in place. Perhaps it's only a matter of
time, and maybe other planets are able to achieve these conditions more rapidly than Earth did, while other planets might take even longer."

The central prediction of the "hard steps" theory states that very few,
if any, other civilizations exist throughout the universe, because steps
such as the origin of life, the development of complex cells and the
emergence of human intelligence are improbable based on Carter's interpretation of the sun's total lifespan being 10 billion years, and
the Earth's age of around 5 billion years.

In the new study, the researchers proposed that the timing of human
origins can be explained by the sequential opening of "windows of habitability" over Earth's history, driven by changes in nutrient availability, sea surface temperature, ocean salinity levels and the
amount of oxygen in the atmosphere.

Discover the latest in science, tech, and space with over 100,000
subscribers who rely on Phys.org for daily insights. Sign up for our
free newsletter and get updates on breakthroughs, innovations, and
research that matterrCodaily or weekly.

e-mail
Given all the interplaying factors, they said, the Earth has only
recently become hospitable to humanityrCoit's simply the natural result of those conditions at work.

"We're taking the view that rather than base our predictions on the
lifespan of the sun, we should use a geological time scale, because
that's how long it takes for the atmosphere and landscape to change,"
said Jason Wright, professor of astronomy and astrophysics at Penn State
and co-author on the paper.

"These are normal timescales on the Earth. If life evolves with the
planet, then it will evolve on a planetary time scale at a planetary pace."

Wright explained that part of the reason that the "hard steps" model has prevailed for so long is that it originated from his own discipline of astrophysics, which is the default field used to understand the
formation of planets and celestial systems.

The team's paper is a collaboration between physicists and
geobiologists, each learning from each other's fields to develop a
nuanced picture of how life evolves on a planet like Earth.

"This paper is the most generous act of interdisciplinary work," said Macalady, who also directs Penn State's Astrobiology Research Center.
"Our fields were far apart, and we put them on the same page to get at
this question of how we got here and are we alone? There was a gulf, and
we built a bridge."

The researchers said they plan to test their alternative model,
including questioning the unique status of the proposed evolutionary
"hard steps." The recommended research projects are outlined in the
current paper and include such work as searching the atmospheres of
planets outside our solar system for biosignatures, like the presence of oxygen.

The team also proposed testing the requirements for proposed "hard
steps" to determine how hard they actually are by studying uni- and multicellular forms of life under specific environmental conditions such
as lower oxygen and temperature levels.

Beyond the proposed projects, the team suggested the research community
should investigate whether innovations rCosuch as the origin of life,
oxygenic photosynthesis, eukaryotic cells, animal multicellularity and
Homo sapiensrCoare truly singular events in Earth's history. Could similar innovations have evolved independently in the past, but evidence that
they happened was lost due to extinction or other factors?

"This new perspective suggests that the emergence of intelligent life
might not be such a long shot after all," Wright said.

"Instead of a series of improbable events, evolution may be more of a predictable process, unfolding as global conditions allow. Our framework applies not only to Earth, but also other planets, increasing the
possibility that life similar to ours could exist elsewhere."

The other co-author on the paper is Adam Frank of the University of
Rochester.

More information: Daniel Mills, A reassessment of the "hard-steps" model
for the evolution of intelligent life, Science Advances (2025). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.ads5698. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.ads5698

Journal information: Science Advances

Provided by Pennsylvania State University

Explore further

Can the 'hard steps' in the evolutionary history of human intelligence
be recast with geological thresholds?





--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"a425couple" wrote in message news:SwysP.65882$r3gb.28020@fx39.iad...

Does planetary evolution favor human-like life? Study ups odds we're not >alone.

We aren't so alone on Earth. The currently broadcast episode of PBS Nova
shows remarkably intelligent and coordinated behavior of Orcas hunting
seals. A row of them races toward the ice floe the seal is on and dives
under it in a way that forms a wave large enough to wash the seal off the
ice. It began with a leopard seal agile enough to climb back on fast enough, though they wore it and the floe down eventually. Then they passed by a species they don't like as much to confront an easier Weddell seal, which
the mother repeatedly dragged out and released to teach her kids how to
hunt. The whales know they can communicate while the seal is on the ice and can't hear them but they remain silent when it's in the water and can. Their teamwork before and sharing after the kill was impressive. Amazingly they ignored the crews in the Zodiacs filming them up close, despite tipping
small enough ice floes to dump their tasty inhabitants into the water.

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/about-expedition-killer-whale/31975/

I taught my Golden Retriever to recognize and act on about 30 verbal
commands, none of which offended her dignity, she learned then refused to do those, even yawning on a subtle hand signal to deflate braggarts. She was popular enough to receive party invitations with me as plus one.

"Corner" meant to move to one to get out from under foot, they like to
attract attention and their color blends with my rug and wood flooring (and dry grass). I tried it at a party in a round Yurt as a test. She walked to
the wall, then all the way around looking for a corner. Finally she lay down beside a closet, which was worth a treat.

I suspect that early humans eliminated all competition more intelligent than apes. The Khoikhoi may be surviving remnants. In The Gods Must Be Crazy they were town dwelling actors portraying the director's idea of their lost culture.

Trained athletes are still physically challenging, in long races between runners and horseback riders the runners sometimes win. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_versus_Horse_Marathon

I met a hunter who claimed he could run deer to exhaustion. Our nearly bare skin helps us cool ourselves better. At the time I was a long distance
runner, though not that good. I was on the support crew for a long distance walking record attempt. After he finished we found that the running record
was considerably longer.

https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/80239/time-carl-akeley-killed-leopard-his-bare-hands

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"a425couple" wrote in message news:SwysP.65882$r3gb.28020@fx39.iad...

Does planetary evolution favor human-like life? Study ups odds we're not

I believe humans have a fortunate combination of abilities that other creatures may share singularly but not in our combination, though their
sight, smell, hearing, speed, strength may be better. Our body form may be only one of many capable of this.

Communication is vital, and not unique to us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talking_animal

Except for the thumb apes have hands similar to ours. The time-proven tools
we make to improve our grasp, pliers and tweezers etc, are similar to claws. https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/human-origins/understanding-our-past/living-primates/the-grasping-hand

A creature with six or more limbs can have two free to manipulate objects, insects and crabs for example. Our two legged balancing walk isn't essential or even optimal, just inherited from ancient forms with four limbs.

Fossils from the Cambrian period show what might have survived except for predators and random extinction events. https://www.thoughtco.com/strangest-animals-of-the-cambrian-period-4125717

Some modern species are nearly that old. https://www.livescience.com/animals/living-fossils-creatures-that-look-the-same-now-as-they-did-millions-of-years-ago

The Nautilus eye is a primitive missing link to the highly developed modern eye. It's not true that the eye is too complex to have evolved, intermediate stages survive today. Another science denial claim busted. https://archives.evergreen.edu/webpages/curricular/2011-2012/m2o1112/web/cephalopods.html

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

On 2/17/25 11:46 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"a425couple"-a wrote in message news:SwysP.65882$r3gb.28020@fx39.iad...

Does planetary evolution favor human-like life? Study ups odds we're not

I believe humans have a fortunate combination of abilities that other creatures may share singularly but not in our combination, though their sight, smell, hearing, speed, strength may be better. Our body form may
be only one of many capable of this.

Communication is vital, and not unique to us. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talking_animal

Except for the thumb apes have hands similar to ours. The time-proven
tools we make to improve our grasp, pliers and tweezers etc, are similar
to claws. https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/permanent/human-origins/understanding- our-past/living-primates/the-grasping-hand

A creature with six or more limbs can have two free to manipulate
objects, insects and crabs for example. Our two legged balancing walk
isn't essential or even optimal, just inherited from ancient forms with
four limbs.

Fossils from the Cambrian period show what might have survived except
for predators and random extinction events. https://www.thoughtco.com/strangest-animals-of-the-cambrian-period-4125717

Some modern species are nearly that old. https://www.livescience.com/animals/living-fossils-creatures-that-look- the-same-now-as-they-did-millions-of-years-ago

The Nautilus eye is a primitive missing link to the highly developed
modern eye. It's not true that the eye is too complex to have evolved, intermediate stages survive today. Another science denial claim busted. https://archives.evergreen.edu/webpages/curricular/2011-2012/m2o1112/ web/cephalopods.html

How many times has one wished for a third hand when doing some sort of manipulation task (say like soldering a couple wires together)? They
even sell tools called "third hands". Humanity might have been very
well served by having three or four arms/hands!

I've always felt there is some sort of feedback loop (besides survival
of the fittest) that makes evolution more focused than random chance and "let's try this" methodology.

Of course one thing that is difficult for people to get their minds
around is the very long time duration of evolution, although sometimes
it can be surprisingly rapid.


SMH


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message news:vp1u36$1mkfg$1@dont-email.me...

On 2/17/25 11:46 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

...

How many times has one wished for a third hand when doing some sort of manipulation task (say like soldering a couple wires together)? They
even sell tools called "third hands". Humanity might have been very
well served by having three or four arms/hands!

I've always felt there is some sort of feedback loop (besides survival
of the fittest) that makes evolution more focused than random chance and
"let's try this" methodology.

Of course one thing that is difficult for people to get their minds
around is the very long time duration of evolution, although sometimes
it can be surprisingly rapid.

SMH
----------------------------------------

There aren't a lot of cases to study, most life is well adapted. The struggling flight of turkeys and some beetles displays deficiencies that aren't fatal. Similarly sized raptors and water birds are excellent fliers. Albino tigers and leopards can survive though they are rare. Some poorly adapted creatures are known to have survived until the influx of more successful predators, such as cats and rats on islands. Invasive species
show rapid evolution in action today.

I suspect something with a good brain in a crab- or lobster-like body might
be capable of creating high technology.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decapod
Six walking legs give tripod stability while moving, leaving two strong and two agile claws for manipulation. Crabs can live underwater or on land. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coconut_crab

The octopus demonstrates that marine invertebrates can be intelligent. https://www.daisycrocket.com/octopus-intelligence/


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message news:vp1u36$1mkfg$1@dont-email.me...
On 2/17/25 11:46 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

...

I've always felt there is some sort of feedback loop (besides survival
of the fittest) that makes evolution more focused than random chance and
"let's try this" methodology.

SMH
----------------------------------

I wouldn't be surprised, there are phenomena I don't understand like my biological clock accurate nearly to the minute for waking up, meal times and turning on the start of weather broadcasts.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

On 2/18/25 05:42, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message news:vp1u36$1mkfg$1@dont-email.me...

On 2/17/25 11:46 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

...

How many times has one wished for a third hand when doing some sort of manipulation task (say like soldering a couple wires together)? --

Of course one thing that is difficult for people to get their minds
around is the very long time duration of evolution, although sometimes
it can be surprisingly rapid.

SMH
----------------------------------------

There aren't a lot of cases to study, most life is well adapted.

T
Well adapted, Yes.
But not easily categorized or explained, or put on
any chart or continuum.

I suspect something with a good brain in a crab- or lobster-like body might be capable of creating high technology. ---
The octopus demonstrates that marine invertebrates can be intelligent. https://www.daisycrocket.com/octopus-intelligence/

Your above reminds me of the very fertile brain of Arthur C. Clarke
and his "The Songs of Distant Earth". Earth and Sol are doomed and
humanity sends out colony ships. One sets up on a water planet
(similar to Hawaii or Ceylon), and the humans are beginning to come in
contact with an intelligent underwater species that has been gradually
evolving there. What will the future bring?.

https://www.google.com/search?gs_ssp=eJzj4tTP1TcwKi80MDNg9BIrzs9LL1bIT1NIySwuScwrUUhNLCrJAAC97guK&q=songs+of+distant+earth&rlz=1CAKOCV_enUS1128&oq=Songs+of+distant+earth&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqCggCEC4Y1AIYgAQyCggAEAAY4wIYgAQyCggBEC4Y1AIYgAQyCggCEC4Y1AIYgAQyCggDEC4Y1AIYgAQyBwgEEAAYgAQyCAgFEAAYFhgeMggIBhAAGBYYHjIICAcQABgWGB4yCAgIEAAYFhgeMggICRAAGBYYHtIBCjE1OTg2ajBqMTWoAgiwAgE&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

And, after mentioning Clarke, in a variety of his books and short
sorties his mind came up with a huge number of interesting
species that COULD evolve in a variety of challenging locations.
(Mercury, Venus, Saturn ----.

Intelligence, especially when we try to compare it
across species, is very hard to measure, or in any way compare.

I'd urge you to consider "The Parrot's Lament: And Other True Tales
of Animal Intrigue, Intelligence, and Ingenuity" August 1, 2000
by Eugene Linden Currently you can get it at many libraries,
or delivered to your door for under $6.00.

One primate species can be so inventive at ----, but totally
unable to go further. And then another is amazing at
something totally different.
Also under water animals, and even birds.

Which brings to mind what Jared M. Diamond (in "Guns, Germs,
and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies" 1999
discusses about domesticated species.
Either they can, or they can not be! Yes, we might think
that we "ought" to be able to use zebras or llamas as
domesticated work animals ----.
But close, DOES NOT COUNT.










--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

Intelligence, especially when we try to compare it
across species, is very hard to measure, or in any way compare.

-----------------------------

I relate intelligence to problem solving ability, as opposed to recalling an instinctive, learned or previous successful response to a situation. An article I read by a liberal arts major described her shock at becoming aware that they were taught to recall accepted facts while tech students learned
the tools to analyze, discover and validate new ones.

I've watched my dog solve a problem. She knew that "go around!" meant to
look for an alternate path around an obstacle. She learned and remembered
what it meant the first time she couldn't get through or over a fence and I said it and pointed toward the end. She understood pointing very well, as in go "sniff!" what I'm pointing to, like a burrow she hadn't noticed. The commands were all natural dog actions, not tricks.

On a river canoe trip we stopped for lunch where a huge pine tree had fallen horizontal like a dock, and apparently ice during spring high water had sheared off the upward-pointing branches. I didn't want her slipping and falling so I told her to stay off the bare trunk, instead she went
underneath but chose the wrong space between the angled main branches whose now vertical side branches formed barriers. A woman tossed bits of food that she had trouble catching, so the woman happened to call "go around!", then watched in wide-eyed, open-mouthed amazement as my dog trotted out to the
end of the branches and paused contemplating how to get in closer, then
found and returned in the gap that angled back under us.

Before I redefined "shake!" to mean shake off water, in the bathtub rather than the hallway, it was shake hands. I taught her to shake right to right
or left to left diagonally which confused her, she would swap paws several times before offering the correct one. A kid who had been playing with her came to me in surprise after he asked her to shake and she literally did.

People have trouble with handedness too. During a flying lesson the
instructor told me to turn right toward Mount Wachusett which was on the
left. He didn't say much afterwards. In the Army when someone messed up direction like that the response was "Your other right!"

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message news:vp6e73$2n232$1@dont-email.me...

She (dog) understood pointing very well, as in go "sniff!" what I'm
pointing to, like a burrow she hadn't noticed.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/dogs-understand-gestures-well-toddlers-flna1c9458078

"Dogs possess a 2-year-old child's capacity to understand human pointing gestures, with dogs requiring next to zero learning time to figure out the visual communication, according to two recent studies."

"Since chimpanzees and other non-human primates often flunk pointing gesture tests, the studies suggest dogs may understand humans better than even our closest living animal relatives do."

I hung a bird feeder from a clothesline off the raised deck behind the house to keep squirrels and raccoons off it. On laundry days I moved the feeder
back into the woods to keep birds from perching on the line and fouling the laundry.

While I was hanging clothes a nuthatch perched on the nearest branch and
shook and rattled its wings to get my attention, obviously looking for the missing feeder and knowing I was associated with it. I pointed toward it and the bird immediately raced off in that direction. I call that a good indication of problem-solving intelligence.

Once wild rabbits learn I'm not a threat they will come quite close to feed
or watch me work, maybe to protect themselves from hawks. It's unclear if
they understand the pointing gesture when I'm walking toward them but will turn short of them. Some will let me get pretty close, 5-10 feet. They recognize my voice and will stop running when I speak if I my approach startled them, I can be as invisible (tree-like pant legs) to them as they
are to me if they are moving and I see them first and freeze. I spoke as one walked by and it jumped, ran a few yards, stopped to glance back and gave me
a disgusted oh-it's-only-you look before it continued walking. I don't consider them to show much intelligence compared to dogs and birds.


--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

On 2/20/25 9:35 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Jim Wilkins"-a wrote in message news:vp6e73$2n232$1@dont-email.me...

She (dog) understood pointing very well, as in go "sniff!" what I'm
pointing to, like a burrow she hadn't noticed.

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/dogs-understand-gestures- well-toddlers-flna1c9458078

"Dogs possess a 2-year-old child's capacity to understand human pointing gestures, with dogs requiring next to zero learning time to figure out
the visual communication, according to two recent studies."

"Since chimpanzees and other non-human primates often flunk pointing
gesture tests, the studies suggest dogs may understand humans better
than even our closest living animal relatives do."

I hung a bird feeder from a clothesline off the raised deck behind the
house to keep squirrels and raccoons off it. On laundry days I moved the feeder back into the woods to keep birds from perching on the line and fouling the laundry.

While I was hanging clothes a nuthatch perched on the nearest branch and shook and rattled its wings to get my attention, obviously looking for
the missing feeder and knowing I was associated with it. I pointed
toward it and the bird immediately raced off in that direction. I call
that a good indication of problem-solving intelligence.

Once wild rabbits learn I'm not a threat they will come quite close to
feed or watch me work, maybe to protect themselves from hawks. It's
unclear if they understand the pointing gesture when I'm walking toward
them but will turn short of them. Some will let me get pretty close,
5-10 feet. They recognize my voice and will stop running when I speak if
I my approach startled them, I can be as invisible (tree-like pant legs)
to them as they are to me if they are moving and I see them first and freeze. I spoke as one walked by and it jumped, ran a few yards, stopped
to glance back and gave me a disgusted oh-it's-only-you look before it continued walking. I don't consider them to show much intelligence
compared to dogs and birds.

Humans and dogs have evolved together for so long that dogs have built
in wiring that enables them to actually manipulate humans (to some degree).

It was evolutionarily beneficial to understand humans as well as possible.



--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message news:vp9v8r$3dj6e$1@dont-email.me...

Humans and dogs have evolved together for so long that dogs have built
in wiring that enables them to actually manipulate humans (to some degree).

It was evolutionarily beneficial to understand humans as well as possible.

----------------------------------------------
Dogs are very good at evaluating and manipulating each other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_hierarchy

This Soviet experiment suggests that dogs expressed and amplified canine traits that were unfavorable in the wild though not enough to be lost. https://scienceblogs.com/thoughtfulanimal/2010/06/14/monday-pets-the-russian-fox-st

https://fieldethos.com/bubba-the-tiger/

My sister took in a rescued dog that tried to be the boss. It's (no longer he/she) slowly learned to follow orders.

A friend had a black Lab that liked to nip at my legs when I visited. He didn't bite, just showed he could have. Finally I reached under his jaw and squeezed his lips between his teeth, making him realize that I could defend myself against his main weapon. Immediately he accepted me as superior, stopped challenging and obeyed whatever I wanted him to do. I took him out
for a walk in the woods as a test, out of sight to not embarrass his owner
who hadn't trained him. The Lab was more instantly obedient than my Golden, who had a mind of her own and sometimes needed persuasion or negotiation to
a compromise.

Lysenkoism's goal was to create a proletarian New Soviet Man amenable to communism, essentially a docile serf/slave class like the horse in Animal Farm. Lenin had been forced to concede that the normal run of humanity
isn't, and leftist pride couldn't accept being proven wrong. Naturally the "elite" that promoted and lived off running communism wouldn't lower themselves to the hard work necessary to support a society. So it is with socialist professors who train students to willingly support them. We have a dominance hierarchy too.

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

On 2/21/25 11:08 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

"Stephen Harding"-a wrote in message news:vp9v8r$3dj6e$1@dont-email.me...

Humans and dogs have evolved together for so long that dogs have built
in wiring that enables them to actually manipulate humans (to some degree).

It was evolutionarily beneficial to understand humans as well as possible.

----------------------------------------------
Dogs are very good at evaluating and manipulating each other. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_hierarchy

This Soviet experiment suggests that dogs expressed and amplified canine traits that were unfavorable in the wild though not enough to be lost. https://scienceblogs.com/thoughtfulanimal/2010/06/14/monday-pets-the- russian-fox-st

https://fieldethos.com/bubba-the-tiger/

My sister took in a rescued dog that tried to be the boss. It's (no
longer he/she) slowly learned to follow orders.

A friend had a black Lab that liked to nip at my legs when I visited. He didn't bite, just showed he could have. Finally I reached under his jaw
and squeezed his lips between his teeth, making him realize that I could defend myself against his main weapon. Immediately he accepted me as superior, stopped challenging and obeyed whatever I wanted him to do. I
took him out for a walk in the woods as a test, out of sight to not embarrass his owner who hadn't trained him. The Lab was more instantly obedient than my Golden, who had a mind of her own and sometimes needed persuasion or negotiation to a compromise.

Lysenkoism's goal was to create a proletarian New Soviet Man amenable to communism, essentially a docile serf/slave class like the horse in
Animal Farm. Lenin had been forced to concede that the normal run of humanity isn't, and leftist pride couldn't accept being proven wrong. Naturally the "elite" that promoted and lived off running communism
wouldn't lower themselves to the hard work necessary to support a
society. So it is with socialist professors who train students to
willingly support them. We have a dominance hierarchy too.

That Soviet experiment with foxes was very interesting. I think PBS had
a bit about it on their Nature program concerning dogs and domestication.

My Irish Setter will still get up on my bed at the pillows at night just
to test if he can take over the bed or not. I send him to the foot of
the bed but he'll try again in a few days or weeks to "take over the pack".

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.fan.heinlein

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message news:vpchrp$3uomv$1@dont-email.me...

On 2/21/25 11:08 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:

...

That Soviet experiment with foxes was very interesting. I think PBS had
a bit about it on their Nature program concerning dogs and domestication.

My Irish Setter will still get up on my bed at the pillows at night just
to test if he can take over the bed or not. I send him to the foot of
the bed but he'll try again in a few days or weeks to "take over the pack".

-----------------------------------
Yes, always testing their limits.

My first Golden would lie on the sheepskin rug beside the bed and I had to
be careful not to step on her as she looked almost the same.

My second one, which had lived wild for a while, knew how to turn a doorknob to get into the bedroom. The evidence was scratches on the wood and the open door I was sure I had closed. He also knew exactly how far a skunk could spray.

Dogs have similar, less obnoxious scent glands. That may be why they smell each others' butts.
https://myvetanimalhospital.com.au/anal-glands-in-dogs/

--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2