Reptile & Amphibian Forums

srry that its so long. im turning 20 at the end of this month, and ive been keeping snakes for a better part of my life, because my father. after keeping so meny diff types, and just so meny. i came to relize a wile ago that there as much an individual as ne of us. last year i bought a brazilian rainbow boa. what im really wandering is do u think that snakes are accually capible or reconizing there owners. if i walk into my room wile my BRB is out and about she will come to the front and lean on the door until i walk out of the room or take her out of her cage. but if i stand in my door way wile someone else is in my room then i wont see her come to the front, or if i tell someone to go in and i ask them if she came to the front, they will say no she never moved from the spot she was in. is this just by chance, or do u think that some of these snakes (as individuals or specieas) are accually smart enough to tell there owner form another. or do u think that im just a compleat wacko? lol
thanx to ne one that replies
nevin

Snakes have an amazing sense of smell, and humans smell different from each other to my nose, so there's no doubt that they can distinguish individuals. I think that snakes can not only distinguish humans from each other, they also can probably tell which laundry detergent you use and what you had for breakfast. Snakes with heat pits can also theoretically tell what sort of mood you're in.
The big question is whether or not they care .
-----
"The serpent crams itself with animal life that is often warm and vibrant, to prolong an existence in which we detect no joy and no emotion. It reveals the depth to which evolution can sink when it takes the downward path and strips animals to the irreducible minimum able to perpetuate a predatory life in its naked horror."
Alexander Skutch

Of course snakes can tell people apart. This is how my ball python nariko reacts to everyone in the family.

Me: He used to pull his head away from me and hide it sometimes when I picked him up, but after I lost him for a couple of months and found him again he stopped doing that. I think he's capable of reasoning. Somewhere in that little snake brain he knows that I'm the one that makes his life comfortable and that he shouldn't be afraid of me.

Dog: He was terrified of my dog at first, but got used to him quicky.

Sister: He always tries to slither away from my sister, but doesn't recoil from her hand. He's not afraid of her, but he doesn't like her either.

Dad: Nariko is totally relaxed when my dad holds nariko, but my dad is indifferent to snakes. In the wild, an indifferent observer of a snake is much less likley to eat it. I think nariko can sense when people are watching him closely.

Mom: He always jerks his head away and usually tries to escape when my mom walks by, but he doesn't do that when I walk by, or my sister. My mom thinks snakes are creepy so nariko hasn't had a chance to learn that she's not a threat.

but I would hope my snakes can spell better than that!

or do u think that im just a compleat wacko?

Interesting typo.....
complete = absolute or total
compleat = being an outstanding example of a kind; quintessential

PS - if English isn't your first language, then color me embarrased.
-----
Chris Harrison

Do you mean not particulary intelligent compared to other cold-blooded vertebrates, or compared to Kingsnake forum posters?
-----
"The serpent crams itself with animal life that is often warm and vibrant, to prolong an existence in which we detect no joy and no emotion. It reveals the depth to which evolution can sink when it takes the downward path and strips animals to the irreducible minimum able to perpetuate a predatory life in its naked horror."
Alexander Skutch

As you may detect in my other ramblings on this topic, I don't regard evaluating the intelligence of snakes as a pertinent avenue of investigation. Human intelligence in snakes is about as useful as a forked tongue would be in humans. Snakes don't lack intelligence because they are stupid, they lack intelligence because they are snakes.
-----
Chris Harrison

I don't know about you, but I think a forked tongue would be awesome. If I had a forked tongue, wings, and a prehensile tail I'd pretty much be set.
-----
"The serpent crams itself with animal life that is often warm and vibrant, to prolong an existence in which we detect no joy and no emotion. It reveals the depth to which evolution can sink when it takes the downward path and strips animals to the irreducible minimum able to perpetuate a predatory life in its naked horror."
Alexander Skutch

>>I don't know about you, but I think a forked tongue would be awesome. If I had a forked tongue, wings, and a prehensile tail I'd pretty much be set.
>>-----
>>"The serpent crams itself with animal life that is often warm and vibrant, to prolong an existence in which we detect no joy and no emotion. It reveals the depth to which evolution can sink when it takes the downward path and strips animals to the irreducible minimum able to perpetuate a predatory life in its naked horror."
>>Alexander Skutch
-----
Chris Harrison

That is downright rude..Not everyone is great at spelling but it doesnt mean they are less intelligent..I have a 15yo son who has alot of trouble and spells just like that, yet he no dummy and might even know more than you about some things..talk about narrow minded thinking...

I agree that knowledge and intelligence are two very different things. Not knowing how to spell doesn't make you unintelligent, dpeending on the circumstances. However, your son knowing a lot about certain things isn't any more an indication of him being more intelligent than him not knowing how to spell makes him unintelligent. How long did it take him to learn what he knows, and how great a mind does it take to grasp those concepts? Please don't get me wrong, I am not in any way saying anything negative about your son. Just your argument. Forums are here for us to argue, too - so long as we can keep it above the name-calling elvel. (Well, most of the time, anyway.)

And, rude, though it may be, it was entertaining. It's a message board for god's sakes. Lighten up. The person posting was almost twenty. If he gets that upset over a comment on a message board, sobeit. From reading the original post, I notice he INTENTIONALLY mispelled some words, too. I doubt he really cares what we think of his grammar.

First of all, my statement was made largely in jest.

I really did not intend to imply that the person was less intelligent that a snake or Albert Einstein. I simply was making a point about the atrocious spelling in the original post. In hindsight, it was probably inappropriate.

From my experience, that is, more often than not, a reflection of apathy on the part of the presenter. If I am wrong and this 20 year old really has trouble communicating in a more intelligible way, then I certainly hope someone will help him acquire the skills to do so.
-----
Chris Harrison

Snakes can't be compared to other reptiles because we know so little about how most animal brains work. Animals like dogs and dolphins are have been studied a lot, but there’s a lot of animals we don't know the intellectual potential of. It used to be said that parrots can't learn more than 100 words, but I read an article the other day about a parrot with a 950 word vocabulary. One really interesting thing about the parrot is that it says "flied" instead of "flew," proving that it puts the meanings of "fly" and "ed" together in its brain, instead of mindlessly imitating human speech. Most people think parrots just imitate noises without knowing what they're saying, but they're wrong. I'm way off topic now... the point is it's going to be a long time before we know how good snakes are at distingusing people and recognizing patterns, because people like to do experiments on little fuzzy cute things like mice more than snakes.

is that our measures of intelligence are actually measures of how much like us they are. A chimpanzee that can use sign language is seen as some sort of miraculous example of chimp intelligence, but have you ever stopped to consider what value this actually has to a chimpanzee? If a human learned to remove termites from their mounds using a stick the way chimps do, would you be equally impressed?

We regard snakes as intelligent when they can recognize us. Why? Is that a useful or "good" attribute in a snake. Why wouldn't the ability of a pit viper to distinguish two objects that differ in temperature by less than 0.02°C be considered amazing? Is somehow recognizing you from your sister a more impressive feat? No, it is a more "human" feat.
And you assume a snake is recognizing you. Maybe it learns to recognize the scent of your shampoo, detergent, soap, deodorant, etc. If I used your shower and your washing machine would the snake confuse us? Probably so.

If you can teach a seal to count to 7 and a chimp to use a telephone, which one is more intelligent?

I always thought if odontocete cetaceans were really intelligent, they would refuse to perform all those asinine tricks at Sea World and go on a hunger strike until they are freed from their concrete prisons.

Interesting that we are amazed at the ability of the parrot in question to formulate the word flied for flew. If a poster her on the forums ever showed the same ability we would mock them for their inability to use the English language (not that anyone here would ever criticize another's spelling/grammar!)

OK, I'm rambling....but the topic of "intelligence" in snakes really sets me off! Thanks for your patience. LOL.
-----
Chris Harrison

"is that our measures of intelligence are actually measures of how much like us they are."

Fine, you don't like the method that's used to measure intelligence and you think intelligence cannot be measured, but if everyone was like you we'd still be hitting children with whips, because we wouldn't think it's possible to get an idea of how a childs brain works and figure out what's best for the children.

"A chimpanzee that can use sign language is seen as some sort of miraculous example of chimp intelligence, but have you ever stopped to consider what value this actually has to a chimpanzee? If a human learned to remove termites from their mounds using a stick the way chimps do, would you be equally impressed? "

It's impressive if anyone does anything that's beyond what we used to consider their ability. Any human would be expected to be capable of sticking a stick in the ground, but if a human developed the ability to eccolocate that would be impressive.

Humans are supposed to think and reason. It's amazing that a parrot says the word flied because most people don't think of a parrot as a being that's capable of understanding complex ideas.

You accuse me of not thinking, but how could you think that an advanced ability to communicate is NOT useful to a chimp? I'm not even going to explain that, you should consider it youself instead of trying to convince me that I'm not considering it.

"We regard snakes as intelligent when they can recognize us. Why? Is that a useful or "good" attribute in a snake."

Yes, a good ability to distinguish very useful. If a wild corn snake climbed up a certain tree and was attacked by a bird living there, it would be more likley to live if it could distingush that tree from the others and remember not to climb that tree again.

"Why wouldn't the ability of a pit viper to distinguish two objects that differ in temperature by less than 0.02°C be considered amazing? Is somehow recognizing you from your sister a more impressive feat? No, it is a more "human" feat. "

I don't think I ever said that a snakes ability to recognize people is the most amazing thing in the world and that everything else about snakes is less interesting.

"And you assume a snake is recognizing you. Maybe it learns to recognize the scent of your shampoo, detergent, soap, deodorant, etc. If I used your shower and your washing machine would the snake confuse us? Probably so. "

I am assuming my snake is recognizing me, but I know I don't have proof. You don't either. You're assuming I'm wrong. I really doubt you've tested your theory. I'm not saying it's a bad theory, but there probably won't be any good tests on snake psycology for another 50 years or something, that's what I'm frustrated about. I want to know how my snakes brain works.

"If you can teach a seal to count to 7 and a chimp to use a telephone, which one is more intelligent? "

I don't think scientists give every animal on earth some sort of intelligent test and rank them from smartest to stupidest, I just think there should be more information avalible on what animals are capable of. There's been lots of research on seals and chimps, but not enough people care if boring animals like squirrels can count to 7 or not.

First off, I am not sure why you seem to have found my flippant remarks on this oft argued question so objectionable, but please understand it wasn't in any way targeted towards you or anyone else.

That said, I think a few words in my defense are in order.....

Fine, you don't like the method that's used to measure intelligence and you think intelligence cannot be measured, but if everyone was like you we'd still be hitting children with whips, because we wouldn't think it's possible to get an idea of how a childs brain works and figure out what's best for the children.

Sounds like you have some issues here. I am actually fairly familiar with current and older measures of intelligence, their applications, and their flaws from several college level classes in Psychology and Ethology as well as spending the last 10 years living with a professional psychological counselor who has extensive training and research experience with methodologies of measuring "intelligence".
To imply that I feel that most measures of animal intelligence are anthropocentric means I think that corporal punishment is an appropriate tool in the upbringing of children as pathologically absurd.

Any human would be expected to be capable of sticking a stick in the ground, but if a human developed the ability to eccolocate that would be impressive.

This would require massive modification of anatomy and physiology of the brain and sensory organs. That would be impressive, but have nothing to do with intelligence.
And, come to think of it, humans echolocate every day. In planes, boats and submarines.

You accuse me of not thinking

I did no such thing. In fact, I didn't even read your posts before I posted my response to the original post. Don't take things so personally.

but how could you think that an advanced ability to communicate is NOT useful to a chimp? I'm not even going to explain that, you should consider it youself instead of trying to convince me that I'm not considering it.

Who is he going to talk to using sign language? Other chimps? They already communicate effectively. People? To what end?

Yes, a good ability to distinguish very useful. If a wild corn snake climbed up a certain tree and was attacked by a bird living there, it would be more likley to live if it could distingush that tree from the others and remember not to climb that tree again.

Absolutely. But what does that have to do with ability to distinguish between two individuals of motile organisms in a different class of vertebrates?

I am assuming my snake is recognizing me, but I know I don't have proof. You don't either. You're assuming I'm wrong. I really doubt you've tested your theory.

I actually base my hypothesis on what little we know about the visual acuity of snakes. I don't believe they have optical or brain power to resolve differences in the appearance of human faces. That's why I don't believe my snakes can tell me from anyone else by sight.

As and aside and as for proof...I am a trained scientist. You don't prove theories. You can gather data that doesn't falsify them, but you can never prove them. That is the strength of the scientific method. (No one has ever proved that gravity exists, yet I am pretty comfortable with its existance!)
-----
Chris Harrison

"First off, I am not sure why you seem to have found my flippant remarks on this oft argued question so objectionable, but please understand it wasn't in any way targeted towards you or anyone else. "

You're right. Looking back at this, I was in a bad mood yesterday.

I think a good point has been stated here. What is intelligent about animals behaving the way we want them to? I remember as a kid two horses on a farm. One came over and was friendly and got petted. The other watched from avbout halfway accross the pasture. The farmer pointed out that the one in the field was smarter because he knew to stay away. The "friendly one" always was always being used for the farm work because he was easy to catch.

Wrestling gators quickly learn what is expected of them in gator shows-they adapt.

I am also reminded of the Black racers that use to come and stare in my window. They obviously were not seeking prey...so what was going on there???

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

It's not weather an animal chooses to behave how we want it to, it's weather it's capable of doing so. We teach chimps how to talk because we make them want to learn how. Wanting to do what people say isn't a factor.

The horse could be smart, or it could just be more selfish and lazy.

I'm not sure what you're saying about the gaters.

Snakes like food, it helps them survive. Awareness of their surroundings also help them survive, so they like to watch you. No animal is dirt simple, snakes need intrests other than food to survive, and some horses are concerned less about avoiding work than others.

The hose mentioned was young and strong. My point was it was too smart to tricked into subserviance. Calling it selfish and/or lazy is a human additude directed towards the animal not doing what we want it to. Besides...To be selfish and lazy, one has to be intelligent enough to have those (less desirable)qualities.

The gator on the otherhand, was smart enough to understand that if it went "through the act" it would be left alone after.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

My C. Imperator definitely knows the difference between myself and others. Intelligence, at least IMHO, is the ability to learn, and the ability to deduce. If the snake can tell that I am not a threat (because of my detergent or whatever his senses allow give hime to recognize me by) but isn't so sure about my gf (and all others who have't worked with him much), then I'd say he learned something. He doesn't consider me a threat because I handle him all the time, and haven't hurt him. Certainly his "natural" reaction to either of us should be caution. Instinctual responses are not learned, at least in my understanding.

However, I have not "proved" that the only reason he is cooler with me, is not simply because he can sense that I am calm. That could be an instinctual repsonse, not a learned one, meaning the snake is no different than he was when I aquired him.

The fact that many people tell you that you can "train" your snake to think food is coming when he/she hears the cage open, leads me to believe that they are capable of learning. At the very least, I know they lern to recognize certain familiar things. Add something to a tree boa's cage, and watch how long it is before the snake will approach it. Once it has learned that it is not a threat, ti will slither over it, freely.

I see no difference between human intelligence and any other sort. We made up the word, and the definition, which of course are human, like us. We are given instincts, just like most (if not all) other more complicated forms of life. Strength is strength, intelligence is intelligence, at some basic level.

A living thing is really more likely to have more instincts if it's more complicated. Smarter animals have more emotions. People think emotions are animal like and are supposed to be suppressed indefinitely, but instincts give you more control over life, not less. Trees don't have instincts, they don't make decisions. Trees do lots of things, but there's no decisions for them to make, just automated responses to forces beyond their control, like the sun.

I agree that the more intelligent forms of life are more likely to have emotions. I am not really well studied in this area, but I understand that an emotional repsonse is a chemical reaction in the brain. (If I remember correctly, various chemicals are generate which fit different receptors in the brain, causing a certain "Feeling".)Since plants do not have brains, I would find it difficult to believe that they have emotions, at least in the same context as we understand them. Let the theologians ponder that one.

I do not necessarily see a direct link between emotions and instincts. Some instincts trigger an emotional response. "Fligt or Fight" for instance. However, it is also instinct for a frog to eat flies, and for a snake to eat mice. I do not see any emotional correlation there. I believe an instinct is genetically perdermined behavior which may or may not trigger an emotional response.

Keep the posts coming!

I'm not well studied either, I'm 15, and that makes me a moron. Anyway, I don't think you have a bad understanding of emotions. I'm really complaing about other people, people who say things like violent tv shows are bad for kids. Violence and anger is essential to every normal childs development. It doesn't seem like emotions are connected to instinct, but they're really similer, because they're beyond our control. There's no logical thought process going on in my brain that tells blue should make me feel better than green. Emotion and instinct are pretty much the same thing, because emotions help use to make judgements and and we don't choose what our emotions will be. Like instincts, emotions sometimes aren't directly related to our lives, but they aided our survival in the past. Using the violent tv show example again, anger makes people more likley to want to hunt for food, eat, and survive. Humans buy their food at the store now, but there's still violence in us. Emotions can be influenced, but so can instincts. You can't really change an instinct or emotion, but you can suppress it with another one.

The concern here is that some people (not necessarily kids) seem to be unable to separate the emotions generated from watching violence from the reality of their own lives. The experience of violence is necessary, but it can also be a drug (remember the Romans).

It is I feel important to channel the emotion through sports or some safe medium while making sure that separation is understood. What most of us are concerned about is not the violence but the explisit gore that has come to be associated with it in movies and TV.

Look at the news with all the death and gore-No one really reacts. But let a Popstar expose a BOOB.....and the world freaks. Something wrong there....

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

So if we ban violence in movies, people will stop killing each other? We've been killing each other for a long time before we had movies. Anyone who comitted a violent act because they watched amovie already had problems. There are a million excuses for everyhting, and they only make matters worse. Bottom line - if you don't like violence - don't watch it. Le the rest of sadist wackos watch what we please.

PS I liked the BOOB shot, myself. Best halftime show in a while.

Okay this has nothing to do with snakes, unless we're talking about that movies "Anaconda" (Which I've never seen, by the way...)

I personally watch/and enjoy violent movies (big fan here of Errol Flynn and John Wayne movies...and Clint) and I haven't murdered anyone I know of. My objection was with the heavy and totaly unnecessary gore that goes with most of these movies today.

The Roman society built it'self on the concept of strength. The gladiator shows began as fights between trained warriors. Skill mattered. Eventually it degenerated into shows designed for maximum gore impact to feed the mob. There is a difference. Sports are controlled violence. I loved playing football.

Also,I also have a concern that children see death in movies and some of them don't get the idea that death is perminent, because they see the "dead' stars in other films.

Why do you think so many children kill? Where do they learn it? Without the proper teaching or parental supervision they are learning violence as a solution to their problems, without understanding the consequences. As I am writing this a 14 year old is in jail for slitting his Best Friend's throat. Explain that as you sit and watch JasonXX.

Oh. The Jackson thing was disapointing. She was wearing a pastie. It would have been better if she and all the dancers were nude....But that is one man's opinion.

For the record, I'd much rather my kids saw a bare breast...than a decapitation.

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

I agree that gore is not suitable for small children. That shows a lack of parenting abilities. At fourteen, I clearly understood the implications of murder. A child who does not at that age,clearly has some problems, and I don;t think you can blmae a movie for that, thousands of other kids say the same gore. I personally enjoy horror movies of all sorts, but tend to frown on the "slash-hackers," as well. I am against any restraint on that sort of thing, though. If people didn't enjoy gore, it wouldn't sell. Maybe it's unhealthy. So are a lot of other things.

As a background, I watched such movies as Carrie, Phantasm, A Nightmere on Elm Street, etc, as a very young child, which was poor parenting on my father's part. (i'm in my 20s, now. ) However, my mother making a big deal out of the movies made the impact considerably worse than it would have been if it'd been "Yeah, that's just a movie, and it's no big deal. ife is much Real life is different." I'm sure many differ with me on this, and honestly that really depends on the individual child in question. No two minds are alike. I haven't gone on a killing spree yet. (But I came close a couple of times when I was commuting in the San Jose area. Does ANYONE down there know how to drive? )

Honestly, I feel the problem is more about poor parenting, than anything else. A child should have a sound sense of morals inbedded in their psyche from their parents, not the TV. Perhaps if more of us had healthy childhoods, then we would be sickened by that sort of thing, rather than enthralled with it. From the psyche I had in college, I learned that most of the mind develops at a very young age, considerably younger than fourteen. Not to say that 14-yr-olds are the only ones in question, of course.

I am about to leave and will not have access to e-mail for a few days. I have enjoyed this conversation very much. Have anice weekend!

np
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

My sister is 13 and she seriosuly doesn't understand death. Her reality has been distorted by tv, but she has problems and she never had a good grip on reality in the first place. I can't put the blame on tv, she was labled with pervasive development disorder at a very young age, and normal kids won't develop abnormally because of violent media.

I also agree there's a lot of gore on tv, but they wouldn't have it if many people didn't enjoy watching it.

I ment to reply to the post above the one I replied to, wasn't paying attention.

of learning. If they weren't they'd never be tamer than wild snakes and they'd never see lab mice as a food source. It's not saying much because bees and octopuses can learn too. I think most animals that actually have brains can learn on some level. As for reasoning and problem solving... maybe they can do that on some level and maybe they can't. I'm just happy that they all don't chew me up the first chance they get (even if some of them do).
-----
"The serpent crams itself with animal life that is often warm and vibrant, to prolong an existence in which we detect no joy and no emotion. It reveals the depth to which evolution can sink when it takes the downward path and strips animals to the irreducible minimum able to perpetuate a predatory life in its naked horror."
Alexander Skutch

One might say that it is basic reasoning to become tamer. (i.e, he didn't kill me the last 20 times he touched me, so he probabyll won't this time...) I see your point, though...

hey, u guys all make very good points. the biggest problem is that when ppl blame violance on violent movies, i beleave it is the care takers fault for not watching what there children watch, and saying hey c how Jason just killed that person, thats bad, violance is wrong, thats not real. so all and all i blame all that on the parents. for the 15 yr old ur a testament to the clame u dont need to b old to b wise. ohh and one more thing, my fred majorly inhanced the photo of janet. the paisty is accually a nipple ring.

nevin

i wanted to add one more thing. my sister is 7 years old. she knos killing is rong, violence is wrong, she does like to wrestle and all, i mean she does beat on me all the time, but she knos wen to stop and she knos not to do somthing if its goin to hurt someone else. i go back to the statement i made befor, i blame it on the parents for not teaching there kids right from wrong. she asked to go c alien wen it was reraleased, it never came out where we live so i couldnt take her to c it, wanted to c feddy vs jason and i took her to c it. the first horror movie she seen was preditor. she went with me to c underworld on opening nite, and now kate beckinsale, the lead vampire is her favoirte actress. last week she was jumping up and down wen she found out that alien vs preditor comes out around her birthday. if u ganna kill someone cause the seen it in a movie, then ur too f***** up to b watching that movie.

no offense to ne one
nevin

Parents should be careful of what their kids watch and explain that movies aren't real, but it isn't always the parents fault. It probably is in most cases but some kids can't see cause and effect very well.

Also, not all murderous children are simply incapable of understanding death, even if we'd like to think so. I read about a case where an 8 year old girl poisoned and killed her father because he made her skip dinner as a punishment for not doing homework. The judge decided that she was too young to know what she was doing, but they realized she was a criminal when she poisoned her mother in the same way a few weeks later. Crime is complicated, all the violent crimes in the world can't be blamed on any one thing.

Some zoos and croc/alligator farms are now using behavioral conditioning on their larger and more dangerous reptiles eg Crocs, Alligators, large monitors and even some of their venemous snakes. Using food rewards and commands to teach them to move where they're wanted and be crated and transported etc. Its working too.. each gator this one farm works with on this recognized their name.. the commands for forward, water.. stay.. etc. One zoo has their komodos trained to rotate at a certain cue to rotate which ones are on view and which ones aren't. Its rather fascinating cause it does prove that these animals do have the ability to recognize their names and commands...
-----
Lucien

1.1 Columbian Redtail Boa (BCI)(Sutekh and Isis)
2.2 Leopard geckos (2 Blizzards (Caine and Goliath), 1 het Blizzard (Lilith) and 1 Tangerine Albino (Tequila Sunrise ...Tiki for short))
0.1 Savannah Monitor (Kiros)
13 rats
5 Gerbils
2 Dogs (Loki and Storm)
2 cats (Sahara and Hercules)

Do you have any links? That is very interesting. I haven't really properly experiemented, nor do I have the number of animals required to conduct a valid study of the animals' behavior. Nonetheless, I find it interesting, and would like to read more about what the above zoos are doing. Thx 4 the post.

What zoos are doing that?

wow i didnt expect such a strong resopnse. the main reason i posted that was to c what other ppl thought about narrow minded ppl saying that snakes have such tiny brains, that only tell them to eat. i hear it all the time, how can snakes b pets, all they do is sleep, slither, and eat. im kinda tired of hearing that kinda stuff. i really just wanted to prove it to my self by other ppls opinions thats snakes are more then just mindless eating macheanes, and i thank u all cause it did prove it to me. srry to not specify a little more on the subject or intelligence. second, i wanna thank any one that answered. third, to one of the first posts, im 20, im in collage for criminal justace, and i have a high enough gpa to b wanted to by several police forces. my spelling has nothing to do with any thing, iv failed spelling since i was in 2nd grade it was never one of my strong point.

thanx for reading this, and the original post
nevin

I wish there where more people like you, most people don't understand that spelling isn't an indication of intelligence. It's like saying all short people are chinese or something. I'm a bad speller, I'm pretty ok now but I used to be really bad for my age.

thank u for the complament, and i put one for u under the conversation of about the hole violence and movies thing.

I view intelligence as the ability to take information and draw logical conclusions from it....Problem solving. I have seen some people post here that couldn't spell their way out of a shopping bag, that had a better grasp of concepts, than some of the more "educated" people here. It is not so simple as having knowledge. There are different types of knowledge and ability.
My wife is very organized and is great at Calculus and any form of knowledge that involves hard fact and statisics. Myself, I tend to have talents in the arts and seem to be pretty good at abstract concepts...A creative type. The point being, we excell in our own areas.
But getting back to the issue. It cannot be blamed specifically on TV or any other part of the media. When children see that problems can be solved by violence (a popular theme)and no one explains the basic concepts of life, right and wrong...etc, they will use the morality that is most persuasive and they don't have to be mentally disturbed for it to have an effect. That is why the Gangsa culture and Gothic have such big followings. Not an easy situation to solve.

On another note...I have got to beef up my TV. Nipple ring?????

Frank
-----
"The luxury of not getting involved departed with the last lifeboat Skipper..."

That has been one of the most intellectually stimulating threads that I have read for quite some time. Thanks for the great post, Nevin. BTW, if I didn’t use Microsoft word, NO ONE would be able to understand a single post I type. Hey, if you do become a police officer, try not to arrest too many people who happen to have a certain plant in their pocket.LOL And Chris, I don’t think that you were out of line, I too made a comment a day or so ago that might have offended some people, but that was certainly not my intention, I just hope I never get in a quarrel with you.LOL Hope everyone is doing well-Brett

hey no wrries bout the arrest wen all my frends found out about my classes there first words were "omg profesional rule breaker gone uniform", and cris i no wrries to u i wasnt all that offended by ur first post. so alls cool
once again thanx to any one that had ne thing to do with this conversation
nevin