Throwing Stones
Rodjk #613
If non-human primates could be arrested, Santino the chimp might be
behind jail bars for throwing stones and handcrafted weapons at zoo
visitors, since a new study found his cleverly orchestrated attacks
were premeditated.
The discovery, published in the latest issue of Current Biology,
provides evidence that chimpanzees can plan for a future, rather than
a current, mental state. This, in turn, implies "advanced
consciousness and cognition traditionally not associated with
animals," according to Mathias Osvath, who conducted the study.
Staff at the Furuvik Zoo in Sweden first became suspicious in 1997
when they spotted multiple stone piles at the park's "chimpanzee
island" where Santino lives, explained Osvath, a Lund University
researcher in the field of cognitive science.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
A caretaker performed surveillance by hiding herself behind a blind to
investigate what was going on.
She observed that "on five consecutive days, before the zoo opened,
the chimpanzee gathered stones from the water and placed them in
caches." Later on each of these days, Santino was seen throwing the
rocks at unsuspecting zoo visitors.
"Stone throwing toward a crowd of people has an instant and dramatic
effect," Osvath wrote, "and was a way to evoke reactions across the
water moat that enclosed the chimpanzee."
In 1998, Santino tweaked his method by adding pieces of concrete to
his ammunition. In order to do this, he had to detect invisible weak
areas in concrete rock structures located at the center of the island.
"The chimpanzee was observed to gently knock on the concrete rocks,
from time to time delivering harder blows to break off the detached
surface in section in discoidal pieces, and sometimes breaking these
into further smaller fragments," Osvath explained, adding that "these
manufactured missiles were often transported to the caches at the
shoreline."
Since Santino's behavior was first noticed, Osvath and various zoo
staff have observed him gathering stones on at least 50 distinct
occasions, and manufacturing concrete "missile" discs around 18 times.
Santino is the lone male on the island, which he has shared with
multiple females over the years. The females "seem to show little
interest in the stone caches and concrete disc manufacturing."
The chimp's calculating behavior began one year after the group's
dominant male died, and appears to somewhat mirror primate dominance
displays in the wild. Due to weather and other restrictions, the
chimps are only on public display for 25 percent of the year, so the
Swedish chimps may be less accustomed to human gawkers than are
chimpanzees housed at other zoos.
Chimps may not even be the only animals that feel compelled to attack
humans with rocks from time to time.
Antonio Moura, who conducted research while in the Department of
Biological Anthropology at the University of Cambridge, observed
capuchin monkeys at Serra da Capivara National Park in Brazil. Moura
noticed that whenever he approached, the monkeys would move to higher
ground and search for a loose stone, which they would then hit on a
rock surface several times.
This activity not only led to a disturbing noise racket, but it also
dislodged other stones that could hit Moura, or any other approaching
individual, from below.
Scientists at the Primate Research Institute in Kyoto have
additionally documented Japanese macaques making noise with stones, as
well as throwing them.
"The recent emergence of a unique behavior, stone throwing, may serve
to augment the effect of intimidation displays," concluded
primatologist Michael Huffman and his colleagues. "Research on such
transformation may shed light on the evolution of stone-tool use in
early hominids."
(c) 2009 Discovery Channel
Rodjk #613
David H.
"nmp" <add...@is.invalid> wrote in message
news:49b5654f$0$191$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
> Rodjk #613 wrote:
>
>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29596932/
>>
>> If non-human primates could be arrested, Santino the chimp might be
>> behind jail bars for throwing stones and handcrafted weapons at zoo
>> visitors, since a new study found his cleverly orchestrated attacks were
>> premeditated.
>
>
> (in fact I think his situation is probably quite sad)
>
>> The discovery, published in the latest issue of Current Biology,
>> provides evidence that chimpanzees can plan for a future, rather than a
>> current, mental state.
>
> known that for years. One would have to be blind not to recognise that.
>
>> This, in turn, implies "advanced consciousness and cognition
>> traditionally not associated with animals," according to Mathias
>> Osvath, who conducted the study.
>
>
> Why does the good Mr. Osvath feel he has to defend the notion that
> animals can be clever?
>
> Yes, I have read creationists who maintained that "animals" (they seem to
> mean everything non-human that doesn't have roots in the ground) have no
> mind processes at all. No thoughts, no emotions, et cetera: just
> robotlike "instincts". No matter if they are fish, birds or elephants.
> This view has always struck me as primitive and lacking in empathy and
> imagination, and even just plain bad observation.
>
> [..]
>
>> "The recent emergence of a unique behavior, stone throwing, may serve to
>> augment the effect of intimidation displays," concluded primatologist
>> Michael Huffman and his colleagues. "Research on such transformation may
>> shed light on the evolution of stone-tool use in early hominids."
>
> cousins does something mildly clever, someone always says something along
> those lines. It's true of course, but to me it is beginning to sound like
> we can now only justify further studies into other species if we can
> somehow relate it back to our own.
>
> As if the chimpanzees et al are not interesting in their own right.
>
Yes, clever, but do they have church?
That would drive these creationists bat-shit crazy.
Allen
69ea37...@j35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
This article reminded of an event I saw about 35y.a. at the North carolina
State Zoo. The zoo was small then, one building and an outside petting zoo.
Not many animals on display. In the building there was a glass-walled two
room "cage" for a Gorilla Gorilla Gorilla, a magnificent black male about 4
years old. GGG had a 15 minute (more or less) routine. He ignored everyone
watching him, apparently disinterested in them. He would go into the left
hand room and swing on the tire swing for a few minutes, then go to the
back to the room and sit down for a few minutes. Them he would go into the
right hand room and climb a small "tree" and sit on a branch. Finally, he
would launch himself at the glasswall, teeth bared, growling, arms upraised
and smash into the glass, scaring everyone watching him. The screams from
the humans seemed to entertain him, you could see him smile, and after a
moment he would go the the left hand room and start over waiting for a new
crop of humans.
I stood there watching him for about an hour and he repeated this routine
four times. I guess anything for kicks when you're in prison.
A couple of years ago I went back to the zoo. There's no more excitement
with the gorillas. They have a nice "natural habitat" outdoor enclosure.
Allen
[M]adman
> Rodjk #613 wrote:
>
>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29596932/
>>
>> If non-human primates could be arrested, Santino the chimp might be
>> behind jail bars for throwing stones and handcrafted weapons at zoo
>> visitors, since a new study found his cleverly orchestrated attacks
>> were premeditated.
>
>
> (in fact I think his situation is probably quite sad)
>
>> provides evidence that chimpanzees can plan for a future, rather
>> than a current, mental state.
>
> have known that for years. One would have to be blind not to
> recognise that.
>
>> traditionally not associated with animals," according to Mathias
>> Osvath, who conducted the study.
>
>
> Why does the good Mr. Osvath feel he has to defend the notion that
> animals can be clever?
>
> Yes, I have read creationists who maintained that "animals" (they
> seem to mean everything non-human that doesn't have roots in the
> ground) have no mind processes at all. No thoughts, no emotions, et
> cetera: just robotlike "instincts". No matter if they are fish, birds
> or elephants. This view has always struck me as primitive and lacking
> in empathy and imagination, and even just plain bad observation.
>
> [..]
>
>> serve to augment the effect of intimidation displays," concluded
>> primatologist Michael Huffman and his colleagues. "Research on such
>> transformation may shed light on the evolution of stone-tool use in
>> early hominids."
>
> cousins does something mildly clever, someone always says something
> along those lines. It's true of course, but to me it is beginning to
> sound like we can now only justify further studies into other species
> if we can somehow relate it back to our own.
>
> As if the chimpanzees et al are not interesting in their own right.
That is a deliberate lie. The only thing i have read from creationist is
that animals should be doing MORE of this type of behavior if we are so
closely related.
Obviously we are not if these cases of behavior are so fewly documented.
Steven L.
> Rodjk #613 wrote:
>
>>
>> If non-human primates could be arrested, Santino the chimp might be
>> behind jail bars for throwing stones and handcrafted weapons at zoo
>> visitors, since a new study found his cleverly orchestrated attacks were
>> premeditated.
>
>
> (in fact I think his situation is probably quite sad)
>
>> provides evidence that chimpanzees can plan for a future, rather than a
>> current, mental state.
>
> known that for years. One would have to be blind not to recognise that.
>
>> traditionally not associated with animals," according to Mathias
>> Osvath, who conducted the study.
>
>
> Why does the good Mr. Osvath feel he has to defend the notion that
> animals can be clever?
>
> Yes, I have read creationists who maintained that "animals" (they seem to
> mean everything non-human that doesn't have roots in the ground) have no
> mind processes at all. No thoughts, no emotions, et cetera: just
> robotlike "instincts". No matter if they are fish, birds or elephants.
Not just them.
When I took Psych 101 in college, my professor was a Skinnerian
behaviorist. Not only did he believe that all these non-human animals
are just mechanistic automata, but he also believed that newborn human
babies were just mechanistic automata too. He believed that human
babies cannot feel pain, babies cannot think creatively, etc.; that all
those behaviors are conditioned by the parents.
There were a number of female students in class who were moms, and they
sharply disagreed with this professor that their babies were mechanistic
automata that are incapable of feeling pain.
--
Steven L.
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
Steven L.
Sure. Just ask Zaius.
VoiceOfReason
Cites?
> Obviously we are not if these cases of behavior are so fewly documented.
Quite a number of cases of animal intelligence have been documented,
so by your reasoning, obviously we *are* closely related. And since
other apes approach human-style intelligence more than other animals,
they must be our closest relatives in the animal world.
heekster
That would be a very short drive, possibly even retrograde, for some.
heekster
An imbecility. Behavior does not determine relatedness.
>Obviously we are not if these cases of behavior are so fewly documented.
>
Another imbecility. Documentation does not determine relatedness,
either.
Get an education.
Alan Jeffery
their keepers were a bunch of anthropomophizing idiots.
Fancy describing an ape as "anti social" because he hifs stones at humans.
Hell, in the wild, he'd rip their faces off. At the least. Perfectly
natural.
Alan J
"Rodjk #613" <rjk...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:75e5a148-9210-4a04...@j35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
[M]adman
Hell VOR. They should be eating with a fork by now.
[M]adman
Behavior is a strong link.
Of which, the apes have few.
VoiceOfReason
Some do.
http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpescape01-odd.html
Now how about those cites?
VoiceOfReason
> Well, they carstrated him. I sent an email to the zoo telling them I thought
> their keepers were a bunch of anthropomophizing idiots.
>
> Fancy describing an ape as "anti social" because he hifs stones at humans.
> Hell, in the wild, he'd rip their faces off. At the least. Perfectly
> natural.
How could he be anti-social? Humans aren't part of *his* society.
Besides, maybe he was just bored.
(BTW, please bottom-post on Usenet. Makes responses easier to read in
context.)
Kent Paul Dolan
> Behavior is a strong link.
> Of which, the apes have few.
Oh really?
Google Scholar says concerning research papers found:
Results ... about 34,900 for
+(chimpanzee OR gorilla OR bonobo OR orangutan) +behavior.
[Notice how I cleverly left out humans.]
[As long as we're talking about you lying through
your teeth...]
And speaking of you and dishonesty:
We know your posts are lies, you don't need to
tell us.
Lies like:
Claiming the actor Paul Newman was a
creationist....
Claiming that "Dr." Kent Hovind has made
lots of *scientific* discoveries...
Claiming wars have been fought because some
scientific finding discredited some facet
of some religion...
Claiming to have a "higher education" than
most posters to this news group....
Claiming to understand how geologists
determine the age of any given sample of
rock...
You need to face up to these lies, they are not
going to go away.
xanthian.
[M]adman
They should be way more evolved and much more like us
>
> http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpescape01-odd.html
>
> Now how about those cites?
What cites?
[M]adman
> [M]adman wrote:
>
>> Behavior is a strong link.
>
>> Of which, the apes have few.
>
> Oh really?
> Google Scholar says concerning research papers found:
>
> Results ... about 34,900 for
> +(chimpanzee OR gorilla OR bonobo OR orangutan) +behavior.
>
> [Notice how I cleverly left out humans.]
>
> [As long as we're talking about you lying through
> your teeth...]
>
> And speaking of you and dishonesty:
You are a crazy person
VoiceOfReason
>
> > Now how about those cites?
>
> What cites?
"That is a deliberate lie. The only thing i have read from creationist
Devils Advocaat
[snipped for brevity]
> They should be way more evolved and much more like us
>
Why?
>
Chris
Based on that reasoning, we should see hummingbirds diving for fish
(since they're related to ducks) and fruit bats eating insects in the
middle of the night (since they're related to Microchiropteran bats).
Of course, no one who knows anything about evolution says that should
happen.
Chris
Chris
> "nmp" <addr...@is.invalid> wrote in message
Isn't it enough they mourn their dead?
Chris
Louann Miller
69ea37...@j35g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
> "The chimpanzee was observed to gently knock on the concrete rocks,
> from time to time delivering harder blows to break off the detached
> surface in section in discoidal pieces, and sometimes breaking these
> into further smaller fragments," Osvath explained, adding that "these
> manufactured missiles were often transported to the caches at the
> shoreline."
Caught knapping, was he?
Louann, because when will I get to use that pun again?
Chris
Wow! Did anyone get a license plate number on that goalpost? That
sucka was moving!
Chris
>
>
> >http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpesc...
VoiceOfReason
So someone who catches you lying is crazy? That's a curious
definition.
Boikat
Well there's your problem. Why in the hell would you look for *real,
honest, and valid* information concerning *anything* of a scientific
nature from a bunch of dishonest anti-science wankers who don't know
diddly squat about real science? No wonder you are a pig-ignorant
drooling fool.
<snip>
Boikat
unrestra...@hotmail.com
They are every bit as evolved as we are. Once again you demonstrate
that you are arguing against some cartoon you have running in your
mind, not evolutionary science.
Why should they be more like us than they are?
>
>
> >http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpesc...
>
> > Now how about those cites?
>
> What cites?
The ones that establish that evolutionary theory says other ape
species should be more like us.
Should crows be more like parrots? Why or why not?
1. What makes you think we are some standard that other animals are
measured by?
2. What mechanism could possibly "push" chimps to be more like humans?
For bonus points show that you understand our accusations: you don't
know what you're talking about.
Kermit
Ye Old One
Some do, and some even make a better job of it that some humans.
--
Bob.
Ye Old One
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
Why?
>
>>
>> http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpescape01-odd.html
>>
>> Now how about those cites?
>
>What cites?
Well Mudbrain, you can start with ones to back up your claims like:-
Claiming the actor Paul Newman was a creationist....
Claiming that "Dr." Kent Hovind has made lots of *scientific*
discoveries...
Claiming wars have been fought because some scientific finding
discredited some facet of some religion...
Claiming to have a "higher education" than most posters to this news
group....
Claiming to understand how geologists determine the age of any given
sample of rock...
Do I need to keep reminding you?
--
Bob.
Ye Old One
enriched this group when s/he wrote:
This from someone claims that "Dr." Kent Hovind has made lots of
*scientific* discoveries...
--
Bob.
Kent Paul Dolan
> Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
>> [M]adman wrote:
>>> Behavior is a strong link.
>>> Of which, the apes have few.
>> Oh really?
>> Google Scholar says concerning research papers found:
>> Results ... about 34,900 for
>> +(chimpanzee OR gorilla OR bonobo OR orangutan) +behavior.
>> [Notice how I cleverly left out humans.]
And forgot a few of our more distant ape relatives.
>> [As long as we're talking about you lying through
>> your teeth...]
>> And speaking of you and dishonesty:
> You are a crazy person
Well, yes, I am, diagnosed so in 1985, and released
then from the hospital labeled "improved, not cured".
But you see, I know about myself that I am an acute
monopolar depressive, and take needed steps and meds
to make the effect of that illness on my life as
small as possible.
But you don't seem to recognize your own acute
insanity your and addiction to attention at any cost.
Now, what does me being crazy have to do with you
being a persistent liar and unwilling either to
recant your lies or to support them believably?
xanthian.
TheBicyclingGuitarist
> "nmp" <addr...@is.invalid> wrote in message
>
> news:49b5654f$0$191$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ah, but this chimpanzee cast the first stone! He must be without sin!
All praise to the chimp, the holy one!
Devils Advocaat
But what was that chimp's name Simus?
If so we had better watch out. :P
Devils Advocaat
> that animals should be doing MORE of this type of behavior if we are so
> closely related.
>
So because something is rarely documented it becomes irrelevant does
it?
Imagine the number of different instances of things that went
undocumented in the past.
Could it be that in your interpretation of the world, if it isn't
written it isn't true?
Devils Advocaat
documentaries?
>
> >http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2008/07/01/20080701chimpesc...
>
> > Now how about those cites?
>