Dogs recognize dog and human emotions

Dogs recognize dog and human emotions

Abstract

The perception of emotional expressions allows animals to evaluate the social intentions and motivations of each other. This usually takes place within species; however, in the case of domestic dogs, it might be advantageous to recognize the emotions of humans as well as other dogs. In this sense, the combination of visual and auditory cues to categorize others’ emotions facilitates the information processing and indicates high-level cognitive representations. Using a cross-modal preferential looking paradigm, we presented dogs with either human or dog faces with different emotional valences (happy/playful versus angry/aggressive) paired with a single vocalization from the same individual with either a positive or negative valence or Brownian noise. Dogs looked significantly longer at the face whose expression was congruent to the valence of vocalization, for both conspecifics and heterospecifics, an ability previously known only in humans. These results demonstrate that dogs can extract and integrate bimodal sensory emotional information, and discriminate between positive and negative emotions from both humans and dogs.

biology letters

How stupid is EPA air pollution ‘science’? (Part 2)

How stupid is EPA air pollution ‘science’? (Part 2)

Ever been to a hookah bar? Seen any dead bodies?

Yesterday, a study in Public Health Reports reported that a single hookah bar session can expose you to as much as 125 times the smoke of a single cigarette.

Now as a smoker may inhale somewhere between 10,000 to 40,000 micrograms (millionths of a gram) of fine particulate matter (called PM2.5) from a single cigarette, a single hookah bar session may then expose you to as much as 1.25 million to 5 million micrograms of PM2.5.

Now EPA maintains that there is no safe exposure to PM2.5 and that any exposure to PM2.5 may cause death within hours of inhalation. The average concentration of PM2.5 in U.S. outdoor air is 10 micrograms per cubic meter and, based on that, the average adult might inhale roughly 200 micrograms of PM2.5 on a daily basis.

While there are no examples of anyone dying from PM2.5 exposure in a hookah bar, the EPA says that outdoor air exposures to PM2.5 kill about 570,000 Americans per year — even though a evening in a hookah bar involves about 6,250 times the daily PM2.5 exposure in U.S. air.

Very stupid indeed

Why immigrants get confused

Why immigrants get confused

USC students required to detail sexual history before registering for classes

A mandatory online course at the University of Southern California (USC) asks students to disclose the number of sexual encounters they have had over the past three months and teaches students to ask for consent by saying “how far would you be comfortable going?” and “would you like to try this with me?”

In an email obtained by Campus Reform, students were told they must complete the Title IX training in order to register for courses in the spring.

“This course is mandatory, and you must complete it by February 9, 2016. If you do not complete the training by this date you will receive a registration hold until the training is complete,” the email stated.

Many universities require students to complete a course on Title IX, but some students at USC are worried the online course they are required to take is too intrusive.

“It was just full of super personal questions,” Jacob Ellenhorn, a student at USC, told Campus Reform.

Despite some students being uncomfortable with the content of the course, the campus-wide email assured students they would “enjoy the assignment.”

“We believe you’ll enjoy the assignment, and that this training is in line with our shared belief that Trojans care for Trojans. It is an innovative, engaging, and informative online course, created with students for students,” the email stated.

The course begins with a detailed questionnaire that asks students to reveal how often they are having sex and using drugs or alcohol. The survey also asks students to specify the number of sexual partners they have had in the past three months.

After revealing both the number of times they have had sex and with how many different people, students are then asked to state whether or not they used a condom.

<snip>

“It kept on saying that drunk people cannot give consent. In one scenario both the man and the woman were drunk but the video still blames the male for the assault. I found that a little confusing,” Ellenhorn said.

In a subsequent portion of the course, students are encouraged to “challenge gender stereotypes” and question the validity of “traditional thinking.”

“When someone’s appearance or behavior do not ‘line up’ with traditional thinking, how does traditional thinking ‘line up’ with everyone being born free and equal,” the course states, suggesting “traditional thinking” does not endorse ideas of freedom and equality.

The course also touches on the topic of sexual assault and offers tips to students who have been accused of sexual assault. The first tip suggests students admit they may have “crossed a boundary” even if they don’t remember the event.

Complete idiocracy

 

Lipophobia and the bad science diet

Lipophobia and the bad science diet

<snip>

The lipophobes, however, proved to be remarkably adept at bobbing, weaving and altering their message in the face of the challenges. The American Heart Association continued to find new ways to prosper from lipophobia. In 1988 it deleted the provision in its charter prohibiting product endorsements and began offering, for a fee, to endorse any food products that met its guidelines for fat, cholesterol and sodium. In final form, the AHA campaign sold the right to use a “Heart Check” symbol and say “Meets American Heart Association food criteria for saturated fat, cholesterol and whole grains for healthy people over age two.” For this, it charged fees ranging from the US$2,500 it cost Kellogg’s for each of the more than 50 of its products that qualified (including such nutritional dazzlers as Fruity Marshmallow Krispies) to the $200,000 that Florida citrus fruit producers paid for exclusive rights to the symbol, cutting out their competitors in California. The Florida producers now ran ads saying, “Fight Heart Disease. Drink Florida Grapefruit Juice.” In 1992–93 ConAgra, the hydra-headed giant involved in practically every stage of food production, gave $3.5-million to the AHA, ostensibly to make a television program on nutrition.

By the end of the 20th century, however, the AHA’s calls to reduce heart disease through diet were sounding rather threadbare. There was still no evidence that low-fat diets prevented heart disease. In 1996 the American College of Physicians came out against the AHA program of screening all people over 20 for high cholesterol. It said that it resulted in young people being put on low-fat diets that rarely reduced cholesterol. Others began pointing out that the AHA campaign to have people adopt low-fat, high-carbohydrate diets led to increased consumption of calorie-dense foods that contributed to obesity and diabetes, both of which were risk factors for cardiovascular disease. Then, in 2000, another fat panic gave lipophobia yet another boost. This time it was about trans fats, which were in the hydrogenated oils used in making everything from French fries to Doritos to granola bars.

<snip>

Then, in late 2008 came an apparently crushing scientific blow. A new theory claimed that the main culprit in heart disease was not fat, but inflammation. Statins were effective, it said, because they reduced levels of a protein, called high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (CRP), that contributes to inflammation in the body. The crucial risk factor for heart disease was therefore not cholesterol, but elevated CRP, which has nothing to do with fat in the diet.

In July 2009 another study tried to alter this theory by reducing CRP to the role of an indicator, not a cause, of heart disease. Inflammation remained a villain, but whether it was cause or effect was unknown.

With cholesterol’s role now unclear, it seemed highly unlikely that Keys’s diet-heart theory would ever be resurrected.

In February 2010, the press reported on a meta-analysis of 21 lengthy studies, comprising 347,747 subjects, that concluded that there was no association between saturated fat consumption and the risk of heart disease.

Lipomania

How stupid is air pollution ‘science’?

How stupid is air pollution ‘science’?

A friend of mine e-mailed me a November 2015 report from the European Environment Agency claiming that the air pollutant called PM2.5 causes 432,000 deaths in Europe every year. Is this plausible?

PM2.5 is very fine soot about 1/20 the width of a human hair.

Typical outdoor ambient levels of PM2.5 are on the order of 10 to 20 micrograms (millionths of a gram) per cubic meter of air. For ease of calculation, a typical adult inhales about a cubic meter of air each hour, meaning that a typical adult inhales about 240 micrograms of PM2.5 over the course of a day. The EEA report claims that this level of PM2.5 kills 432,000 nonsmokers per year. These deaths are supposedly caused by heart or lung ailments, not cancer.

Now consider that in Europe, it has been estimated that smoking kills 695,000 per year. Based the American experience, about 62% of these deaths (i.e., about 434,000) can be assumed to be heart-lung related.

So smoking kills 434,000 per year while plain, ordinary, outdoor air-breathing kills 432,000 non-smokers per year.

But the juxtaposition is more astounding when you consider the PM2.5 reality of smoking.

In breathing fresh air, the typical adult inhales about 1 microgram of PM2.5 every 6 minutes.

But a smoker will inhale somewhere between 10,000 to 40,000 micrograms of PM2.5 from one cigarette… that is, in that same 6-minute period. So in the same brief time period, a smoker will inhale 10,000 to 40,000 times more PM2.5.

Somehow though, despite the much greater inhalation of the supposedly deadly PM2.5, only 2,000 more smokers die annually from PM2.5-related heart-lung causes that non-smokers — according to air pollution “science” anyway.

Junkscience

Sea Level Rise Postponed

Sea Level Rise Postponed

Geologist Dr. Sebastian Lüning recently sent a letter to daily Potsdamer Neueste Nachrichten (PNN), which earlier had reported on dramatic “ice loss” in Antarcticaand resulting dangerous sea level rise – the typical bogus climate alarm story we’ve become accustomed to hearing from the Truth Media.

Sadly, the PNN presented only the doom and gloom perspective of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK), and so Lüning sent a letter to set the record straight. In his letter he presented by 5 very recent papers that “clearly contradict such a dramatic ice melting at the South Pole.”

Seaside Real Estate saved

Soft Hair on Black Holes


if you want to pretend you can discern this from paranormal mumbojumbo please raise your hands so i can have a good laugh

physics4me

Stephen W. Hawking, Malcolm J. Perry, Andrew Strominger
It has recently been shown that BMS supertranslation symmetries imply an infinite number of conservation laws for all gravitational theories in asymptotically Minkowskian spacetimes. These laws require black holes to carry a large amount of soft (i.e. zero-energy) supertranslation hair. The presence of a Maxwell field similarly implies soft electric hair. This paper gives an explicit description of soft hair in terms of soft gravitons or photons on the black hole horizon, and shows that complete information about their quantum state is stored on a holographic plate at the future boundary of the horizon. Charge conservation is used to give an infinite number of exact relations between the evaporation products of black holes which have different soft hair but are otherwise identical. It is further argued that soft hair which is spatially localized to much less than a Planck length cannot be…

View original post 27 more words