Article View: sci.misc
Article #70Re: Whale killing for "science" -- so for what?
From: Edward V. Wright
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:48
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 17:48
67 lines
3763 bytes
3763 bytes
In <STEINLY.92Jul20184606@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes: >>From: magnus@jaist-east.ac.jp (Magnus Halldorsson) Interesting how all of the people quoting one another here and supporting Norway's war against the whales seem to have Scandinavian sounding names. I wonder... if one Norwegian died for every whale, would they feel the same way? >I refer to an article in New Scientist on 29 October 1988, pp.46-47, >by Dr. Margaret Klinowska, described as a member of the "IUCN Species >Survival Commission Cetacean Specialist Group". I quote: Could identify the "IUCN" for us, please? (Why would I not be surprised to find out it's a whaling group?) > "The idea that the size and surface characteristics of brains are > related to the intelligence of their owners was popular among > neuroanatomists around the turn of the century.... > The subject remained generally out of fashion until the 1960s when > John Lilly, a medical doctor by training, became fascinated by the > absolute size of cetacean brains. Already, Dr. Klinowska has made a collossal mistake (or tried to slip in a lie). She is comparing theories about the relationship of brain size to intelligence *within* species to theories about the relationship of brain size to intelligence *between* species. No serious scientists doubts there is some relationship between brain size and intelligence. If there wasn't, there would surely be at least one species of intelligent insect among the millions inhabiting Earth. And while geniuses may not have larger brains, humans born with abnormally small brains do suffer severe mental retardation. > For example, Giorgio Pilleri and his colleagues at the > Brain Anatomy Institute at the University of Berne in Switzerland made > and exhaustive study of brain size in relation to behaviour among > rodents. They concluded that intelligence, whether human or animal, is > too complex to characterise with a single numerical index. Again, she's tried to slip in another lie. No one has ever claimed that the intelligence of whales is proven by a "single numerical index." > They also found that cerebral quotients -- which express relative > brain and body size -- provide no conclusive index of intelligence > among mammals. The fact that something is not conclusive does not mean that it's not indicative. The fact that a housepet fetches your slippers and barks is not conclusive proof that the animal's a dog -- but it's a pretty good indication. >Dr. Klinowska mentions the lack of REM sleep in dolphins as a possible >reason for their relatively large brain size. So, after criticizing cetacean researchers for not having enough evidence to support their theories, she introduces her own theory with absolutely no evidence to support it. Of course, the Nazis had "scientists" who published similar papers about the Jews.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<ewright.712000139@convex.convex.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!apple!news.oc.com!convex!ewrightReferences:
<phfrom.160@nyx.uni-konstanz.de> <heine.711372713@barsoom> <ewright.711656521@convex.convex.com> <STEINLY.92Jul20184606@topaz.ucsc.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!apple!news.oc.com!convex!ewright
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Re: Whale killing for "science" -- so for what?
Message-ID: <ewright.712000139@convex.convex.com>
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:48:59 GMT
References: <phfrom.160@nyx.uni-konstanz.de> <heine.711372713@barsoom> <ewright.711656521@convex.convex.com> <STEINLY.92Jul20184606@topaz.ucsc.edu>
Sender: usenet@news.eng.convex.com (news access account)
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
Lines: 67
Nntp-Posting-Host: bach.convex.com
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
not necessarily those of CONVEX.