being hu'man is what we do.

[Hobbes' Choice]

When, exactly did the government designate no-shoot zones?

I don't know, but I'd guess it was some time in the post WWII era.

It was a rhetorical question.
Long enough for the population to polarise without the need for an inter-duck communication system.
And not long enough for the duck swarms to evolve a system to warn their duck-hive-mates.

[Hobbes' Choice]

They figured it out and spread the word amongst their brethren. If I put my mind to it I could find you literally hundreds of similar examples and I'm quite certain that a proper animal behaviourist could probably list thousands more. That this is common knowledge is not a phrase I particularly like using but in this case there is no better one. This is fucking common knowledge, Hobbes.

You are talking complete bollocks.

Idle and childish specualtion.
I note you have abandoned your confused musings on Transcendent immanent linear. nonlinear causality .

How and why would a duck warn another duck not to go to shooting areas?

First you say that it all happened in a couple of years, then you tell me the zones were designated after WW2. Make up your mind. You are looking silly.
I've given you the only explanation you need. ducks that inhabit shooting areas, die, others get scared off, and end up in the safe areas.
Generations are annual and so the change happens within a short time.
But you prefer that ducks can communicate a complex massage AND want to tell everyone to come to the safe zones.
Worse still you imply that they are doing this intentionally to 'spread the word'. Where is your evidence?

[Obvious Leo]

When, exactly did the government designate no-shoot zones?

I don't know, but I'd guess it was some time in the post WWII era.

It was a rhetorical question.
Long enough for the population to polarise without the need for an inter-duck communication system.
And not long enough for the duck swarms to evolve a system to warn their duck-hive-mates.

Good. We're agreeing with each other. (Sort of). This is a behaviour which has evolved via the dissemination of information about the external environment of the duck and this can happen very quickly. I don't see much point in anthropomorphising this scenario and speculating about the precise nature of this information transfer but whichever way you slice it the word gets out that in the protected reserves is the place to be. I can't see why you would balk at calling this inter-duck communication. That's what the animal behaviourists call it and in deference to Occam's principle I can't see any need to call it anything else. Birds communicate with each other and that's all there is to it. I live in the bush and you ought to hear the racket here first thing every morning. These creatures have a lot to say to each other and just because I don't know what they're banging on about this doesn't make it any the less so. They probably reckon I just talk gibberish too.

I note you have abandoned your confused musings on Transcendent immanent linear. nonlinear causality .

No I haven't. You're just getting your topics mixed up.

How and why would a duck warn another duck not to go to shooting areas?

HOW is anybody's guess but WHY is rather obvious. Wouldn't you let your mates know if there was a lunatic running around with a shotgun?

I've given you the only explanation you need. ducks that inhabit shooting areas, die, others get scared off, and end up in the safe areas.

You're forgetting something. The population in the protected areas goes up dramatically before the shooting season even begins.

Generations are annual and so the change happens within a short time.

Most duck species mate for life and if you're going to suggest that this is a genetically heritable trait then you're even more confused than you seem to be. This is a culturally inherited trait.

Worse still you imply that they are doing this intentionally to 'spread the word'.

The notion of "spreading the word" is my own anthropocentric construction of the evidence and is not intended to be taken literally. The fact is that the word gets out and neither how it gets out nor how it is disseminated is relevant to the central point. It just does.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I don't know, but I'd guess it was some time in the post WWII era.

It was a rhetorical question.
Long enough for the population to polarise without the need for an inter-duck communication system.
And not long enough for the duck swarms to evolve a system to warn their duck-hive-mates.

Good. We're agreeing with each other. (Sort of). This is a behaviour which has evolved via the dissemination of information about the external environment of the duck and this can happen very quickly. I don't see much point in anthropomorphising this scenario and speculating about the precise nature of this information transfer but whichever way you slice it the word gets out that in the protected reserves is the place to be. I can't see why you would balk at calling this inter-duck communication. That's what the animal behaviourists call it and in deference to Occam's principle I can't see any need to call it anything else. Birds communicate with each other and that's all there is to it. I live in the bush and you ought to hear the racket here first thing every morning. These creatures have a lot to say to each other and just because I don't know what they're banging on about this doesn't make it any the less so. They probably reckon I just talk gibberish too.


No I haven't. You're just getting your topics mixed up.

How and why would a duck warn another duck not to go to shooting areas?

HOW is anybody's guess but WHY is rather obvious. Wouldn't you let your mates know if there was a lunatic running around with a shotgun?

I've given you the only explanation you need. ducks that inhabit shooting areas, die, others get scared off, and end up in the safe areas.

You're forgetting something. The population in the protected areas goes up dramatically before the shooting season even begins.

Generations are annual and so the change happens within a short time.

Most duck species mate for life and if you're going to suggest that this is a genetically heritable trait then you're even more confused than you seem to be. This is a culturally inherited trait.

Worse still you imply that they are doing this intentionally to 'spread the word'.

The notion of "spreading the word" is my own anthropocentric construction of the evidence and is not intended to be taken literally. The fact is that the word gets out and neither how it gets out nor how it is disseminated is relevant to the central point. It just does.

This thread is moribund, and now you seem to be deliberately ignoring what I am saying.
The phenomenon you describe needs no other explanation than the parsimony that I have already described.
I do not submit to any kind of interduck warning system as ducks and their flocks compete with one another and there is no interest in a duck warning a duck from a different area to join them in the safe areas.
what I offer here is enough.

You shoot duck in area A, and leave ducks in area B

Next year there are more ducks in area B

Learning is irrelevant for dead ducks.

Ducks find the sound of guns scary and avoid the shooting areas.

Ducks in B are ducks in B or ducks from A that have fled shooting.

Interactive learning is not relevant. Communication of complex concepts not necessary.

[Dubious]

The notion that humans are the only animals on the planet with higher-order cognitive function and the complex language which goes with it has its origins in biblical theology. It has no basis in science, as I'm sure you'll agree.

It's impossible not to agree. Even if science were not invoked as confirmatory, careful observation alone would force one to this conclusion. I guess the Old Testament Prophets were too busy nation-building to notice... which is an over generous way of putting it.

[Dubious]

You shoot duck in area A, and leave ducks in area B

Next year there are more ducks in area B

Learning is irrelevant for dead ducks.

Ducks find the sound of guns scary and avoid the shooting areas.

Ducks in B are ducks in B or ducks from A that have fled shooting.

Interactive learning is not relevant. Communication of complex concepts not necessary.

...which goes to prove absolutely that live humans are smarter than dead ducks! I never doubted it.

[Obvious Leo]

Hobbes. Deal with this please.

You're forgetting something. The population in the protected areas goes up dramatically before the shooting season even begins.

[Walker]

We had crows roosting in the pine trees behind the house. They’re quite the polluters. So one evening when most of them had settled in to roost, I shone one of those laser pointers into the trees. Hundreds of them spontaneously burst out of the leaves with a lot of racket. They found other trees for that night.

I only had to do it a few times and they never came back. That was a few years ago.

Now the doves have moved in. They're also filthy beasts.

The thing is, only a few of the crows actually saw the light. The others heard, and remembered, and told the crow tale in their crow ways.

Research suggests that crows transmit specific information to other crows and offspring, and the offspring keep on telling the tale of the evil humans through generations.

Hitchcockian Crows Spread the Word About Unkind Humans

http://www.livescience.com/14819-crows- ... faces.html

[Obvious Leo]

I've personally witnessed a crow funeral, which is a truly a very spooky sight. I use the term "crow" somewhat loosely because that's what the native sub-species is commonly called in these parts. Strictly speaking this is inaccurate because they're actually a type of raven.

[Walker]

I've personally witnessed a crow funeral, which is a truly a very spooky sight. I use the term "crow" somewhat loosely because that's what the native sub-species is commonly called in these parts. Strictly speaking this is inaccurate because they're actually a type of raven.

I never heard of that. Looked it up. Very strange. What did you see? Did they make any noise, or an unusual noise?

[Obvious Leo]

I saw a bird being struck by a car and killed instantly. In less than a few minutes about 7 or 8 ravens had gathered around the body but they didn't seem to be doing much of anything except shuffling about gently from foot to foot. They weren't completely silent but they weren't their normal raucous and noisy selves either. Their vocalisations were something I'd never heard before and the closest I could get to describing it would be as a low-pitched "mumble". They didn't touch or peck at the body but rather just formed a rough circle around it. I didn't think to time how long all this took but I'm sure it would have been no more than a few minutes before they all took off simultaneously and headed off in different directions. It was a truly bizarre sight and one I'll never forget because bird behaviour is a subject of great interest to me.

[Dubious]

I've personally witnessed a crow funeral, which is a truly a very spooky sight. I use the term "crow" somewhat loosely because that's what the native sub-species is commonly called in these parts. Strictly speaking this is inaccurate because they're actually a type of raven.

I never heard of that. Looked it up. Very strange. What did you see? Did they make any noise, or an unusual noise?

At ~ the 43 minute mark in the URL I provided, and probably no one looked at, there's an example of what would appear to be a crow funeral. Not a lot of formality but there is certainly something in their behavior of acknowledgement to a fallen comrade. Their version of a moment of silence.

[Obvious Leo]

Their version of a moment of silence.

This is probably the simplest way to describe what I saw. Although I had nothing with me at the time to even take notes, let alone make a video recording, I did my best to remember the proceedings as I saw them. By all accounts there are a small number of other bird species which have similar rituals and such things have also been observed among some of the higher order mammals. I have no problem in accepting these phenomena at their face value and concluding that these creatures know what death is all about and that they have developed an element of symbolic culture in their behaviour to acknowledge the significance of it. To conclude anything beyond this would be a reach too far, in my view, but nevertheless I reckon that such knowledge grants us a more sophisticated understanding of how human behaviour evolved over time. We evolved as a collective.

[Hobbes' Choice]

The notion that humans are the only animals on the planet with higher-order cognitive function and the complex language which goes with it has its origins in biblical theology. It has no basis in science, as I'm sure you'll agree.

No one is saying that. But it depends on what y by "higher".
Ducks don't have complex language. But that also depnds on what you think "complex" is.
Its all just hyperbole.

[Hobbes' Choice]

I saw a bird being struck by a car and killed instantly. In less than a few minutes about 7 or 8 ravens had gathered around the body but they didn't seem to be doing much of anything except shuffling about gently from foot to foot. They weren't completely silent but they weren't their normal raucous and noisy selves either. Their vocalisations were something I'd never heard before and the closest I could get to describing it would be as a low-pitched "mumble". They didn't touch or peck at the body but rather just formed a rough circle around it. I didn't think to time how long all this took but I'm sure it would have been no more than a few minutes before they all took off simultaneously and headed off in different directions. It was a truly bizarre sight and one I'll never forget because bird behaviour is a subject of great interest to me.

And to what do you attribute this behaviour.
What sort of bird?