Good post. I'm not even going to touch the 'science vs captive husbandry' part of the discussion. That's got to a point where people don't bother reading what the others have actually said, but post a 'response' based on preconceived ideas of what they think the person means, and those preconceived ideas are flavoured by arguments they've had with that person in the past. It gets old, really quickly.



As far as the whole diurnal vs not debate, you've pretty much reiterated my thoughts as posted earlier:



"As far as the whole nocturnal/diurnal debate, part of the problem appears to be people wanting absolutes: diurnal animals should never be active by night and nocturnal animals should never be active by day. That's rarely the case with any animal. Monitors are referred to as diurnal simply because for every one sighted at night you'll make 500 daytime sightings. The reason everyone can quote a paper or documentary about night activity is that someone has bothered to write a paper or make a documentary about it because it isn't the norm. You don't see scientific papers with the title of 'Diurnal activity noted in a monitor' because it's commonplace for them to be active by day..."

[ Show Entire Thread ]