# For the fox lovers



## LLiz (Sep 19, 2010)

(Sorry if this has already been posted... I did do a search first, found nothing)

In Russia they're running an experiment in domestication, they've bred silver foxes to be tame like dogs, some of these foxes are SO cute, especially the white one. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRQbSdMXBk0

It is a little sad to see them in small cages though... 

I reckon they'd be ideal pets, they'd kill pests around the home such as rats, etc, while also being happy to see you, unlike a lot of cats out there.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

â™¥!

I want one


----------



## Glitch (Sep 19, 2010)

Aw!  <3


----------



## Thatch (Sep 19, 2010)

What is it with those goddamn foxes. Can't you just get a smaller dog?


----------



## Beach Fox (Sep 19, 2010)

they are so cute!! <3 but also quite expensive


----------



## foxacongrimmSP (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> What is it with those goddamn foxes. Can't you just get a smaller dog?


 Some people just like the idea of a fox pet more then a dog pet.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> What is it with those goddamn foxes. Can't you just get a smaller dog?


 
Because its a fucking fox!

Do you know how hardcore it would be to take a fox on a lash for a walk?

Get it a spiked collar too


----------



## Thatch (Sep 19, 2010)

foxacongrimmSP said:


> Some people just like the idea of a fox pet more then a dog pet.


 
Probably the same people who never saw a fox irl before.



cmrnmrphy said:


> Because its a fucking fox!
> 
> Do you know how hardcore it would be to take a fox on a lash for a walk?
> 
> Get it a spiked collar too



GIVE IT A TATOO TOO! THAT IS FUCKING HARDCORE :V


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> GIVE IT A TATOO TOO! THAT IS FUCKING HARDCORE :V


 
Dont tell me those things... Ill actually do it


----------



## The DK (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> GIVE IT A TATOO TOO! THAT IS FUCKING HARDCORE :V



you know if i could find someone that would do it i would


----------



## Thatch (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Dont tell me those things... Ill actually do it


 


The DK said:


> you know if i could find someone that would do it i would


 
Are you two for real, or do you just want to see a grown man cry? :V


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> Are you two for real, or do you just want to see a grown man cry? :V


 

Im just a prick, Ill make a grown man cry out of boredom

But in all seriousness no, i am not fo real yo


----------



## Aleu (Sep 19, 2010)

that's a good idea. Let's breed wild animals to be tame. That'll go over real well.


----------



## A10pex (Sep 19, 2010)

Awwww! I want one! 
I've always wanted a pet other then a cat or a dog


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

I want a pet chimp!

Oh wait, I like my face.


----------



## Thatch (Sep 19, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> that's a good idea. Let's breed wild animals to be tame. That'll go over real well.


 
It doesn't sound stupid unless you add the key "in a few years".


----------



## Alstor (Sep 19, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> that's a good idea. Let's breed wild animals to be tame. That'll go over real well.


 If you always breed the tamer ones for multiple generations like they're doing, it can work.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Dumb.  Dumb, dumb, dumb.

They're domesticating them to make furriers' jobs more profitable somehow.

What the fuck is it with people and the "D'AWWW I WANT ONE AS A PET, I SHALL DOMESTICATE THEM AND POTENTIALLY PUT THE WILD POPULATION IN DANGER" shit? People see something cute and they have to OWN it? Fuck, leave them be, observe from afar.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Dumb.  Dumb, dumb, dumb.
> 
> They're domesticating them to make furriers' jobs more profitable somehow.
> 
> What the fuck is it with people and the "D'AWWW I WANT ONE AS A PET, I SHALL DOMESTICATE THEM AND POTENTIALLY PUT THE WILD POPULATION IN DANGER" shit? People see something cute and they have to OWN it? Fuck, leave them be, observe from afar.


 
They selected the foxes from fur factories, so they're like saving the world and stuff here.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> They selected the foxes from fur factories, so they're like saving the world and stuff here.


 
...So fucking what? If domesticated animals escape captivity and breed with wild counterparts it can really screw up things.


----------



## Commiecomrade (Sep 19, 2010)

I've seen this before at an AC panel; the white coloration is a result of the domestication. The gene that creates an instinct of cautiousness is also somewhat responsible for the pigmentation of the fur in some areas, and also the rigidity of the ears. Breed that gene out, and you lose pigment in specific areas and rigidity of the ears, giving whatever canid animal you domesticate a dog-like appearence.



Alstor said:


> If you always breed the tamer ones for multiple generations like they're doing, it can work.


That is EXACTLY what is going on with this experiment.


----------



## Aden (Sep 19, 2010)

"Hello mister silver fox, we're gonna stick you in one of 5000 cages for most of the rest of your life, taking you out one or two times to fuck before you die. But don't worry, maybe your grandkid's kids will be able to be sold to some spoiled teenager in America that will d'aww over it."


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Aden said:


> "Hello mister silver fox, we're gonna stick you in one of 5000 cages for most of the rest of your life, taking you out one or two times to fuck before you die. But don't worry, maybe your grandkid's kids will be able to be sold to some spoiled teenager in America that will d'aww over it."


 
Goddammit I want the [this] button back


----------



## CynicalCirno (Sep 19, 2010)

Lolrussians

They will probably build bombs on them cute foxes


----------



## Willow (Sep 19, 2010)

People do realize that people already keep foxes and wolves as pets right? This isn't necessarily a new concept, they're just trying to make domestic foxes to sell. Instead of someone just taking pups from their moms or a sanctuary. 

Though even if you successfully domesticate them, they're still going to be somewhat feral. 

They're still pretty cute either way.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> ...So fucking what? If domesticated animals escape captivity and breed with wild counterparts it can really screw up things.


 
I know it's Russia, but if they cared at all they would cut the balls off of all any of the foxes that they sold, if they sell them at all, which they probably do because it is Russia.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> I know it's Russia, but if they cared at all they would cut the balls off of all any of the foxes that they sold, if they sell them at all, which they probably do because it is Russia.


 
They won't spay and neuter.  Are you fucking kidding? The money they could get from selling breeding pairs simply makes spay/neuter bad business for them.


----------



## RayO_ElGatubelo (Sep 19, 2010)

Damn it, why can't you guys just get Pomeranians? They're realy foxlike.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Willow said:


> People do realize that people already keep foxes and wolves as pets right? This isn't necessarily a new concept, they're just trying to make domestic foxes to sell. Instead of someone just taking pups from their moms or a sanctuary.



It's dumb when they do it that way, too.  Fennecs are adorable, but they don't belong in a domestic environment.



Willow said:


> Though even if you successfully domesticate them, they're still going to be somewhat feral.
> 
> They're still pretty cute either way.


 
That "feral" trait - that's "smarts".



RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> Damn it, why can't you guys just get Pomeranians? They're realy foxlike.


 
GAH LITTLE ANKLEBITING HAIRBALL


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> They won't spay and neuter.  Are you fucking kidding? The money they could get from selling breeding pairs simply makes spay/neuter bad business for them.


 
So they'll sell them to fox breeders who are certified with the Russian Kennel Club, and the breeders will cut their balls off.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> So they'll sell them to fox breeders who are certified with the Russian Kennel Club, and the breeders will cut their balls off.


 
You're trollan, nobody's this stupid.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> You're trollan, nobody's this stupid.


 
Who gives a shit? So the wild foxes will get tame and be easier to hunt, or maybe they'll be so adorable that people won't want to shoot them anymore.


----------



## Willow (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> It's dumb when they do it that way, too.  Fennecs are adorable, but they don't belong in a domestic environment.


True enough. Though sometimes it's not just because you want it I would imagine. We're America so playing the hero comes naturally to us .:V Helpless animal whose mother was just killed, do you leave it or save it? I find it funny that peopled freaked out because someone was killed by an orca. It was bred in captivity and all yea, but it's still a wild animal and people look way too much like seals. 



Tycho said:


> That "feral" trait - that's "smarts".


I always thought that the feral trait had something to do with aggression. 



Tycho said:


> GAH LITTLE ANKLEBITING HAIRBALL


This


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Willow said:


> I always thought that the feral trait had something to do with aggression.



He's right about that smarts thing. All domesticated animals have one thing in common: their brains are smaller than those of their wild counterparts. The same goes for the modern domesticated human, who has been losing brain mass ever since the beginning of civilization. Once you take survival of the fittest out of the equation, you can pretty much go back to being a dumb lazy fuck, and have a bunch of dumb lazy fuck kids, etc.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> He's right about that smarts thing. All domesticated animals have one thing in common: their brains are smaller than those of their wild counterparts.


 
I seriously doubt this. I mean, look at Border Collies.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Sep 19, 2010)

Thatch said:


> What is it with those goddamn foxes. Can't you just get a smaller dog?


 
Or a real dog?

Like a german shepard.  :|


----------



## Isen (Sep 19, 2010)

I had a dream last night that my grandmother bought a fox and it was adorable.  But yeah, actually owning a fox is bad news.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> I seriously doubt this. I mean, look at Border Collies.


 
This is a scientific observation, not an opinion. You have the internet, so look it up.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> This is a scientific observation, not an opinion. You have the internet, so look it up.


 It would've been easier for you to just link sources, no?

Cuz it's not my job to confirm your assertions.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> It would've been easier for you to just link sources, no?
> 
> Cuz it's not my job to confirm your assertions.



yeah, ok buddy


----------



## Whitenoise (Sep 19, 2010)

Looking at this thread I can't help but wonder if anyone actually watched the whole thing. Many of you seem to be confused about the purpose of this experiment.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Wouldnt also be incredibly hard to house brake them too?


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> yeah, ok buddy


 
However, a reduction in brain size does not necessarily make something dumber.

Humans have smaller brains than gorillas, but I don't see gorillas posting on the internet.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> yeah, ok buddy


 
I'm just going to assume whatever you're saying is invalid now.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> I'm just going to assume whatever you're saying is invalid now.


 
that too

Don't have to be rude to get your point across.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Sep 19, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> Looking at this thread I can't help but wonder if anyone actually watched the whole thing. Many of you seem to be confused about the purpose of this experiment.


 
I didn't read the OP.

Because.

...

Foxes  :|


----------



## Fay V (Sep 19, 2010)

If you guys don't like the russian domestication, here's something that will really make you rage. There are red fox breeders in America that have been breeding for a few generations and sell the pups. It is completely legal to own them in quite a few states. There are people that own red foxes for pets, they have their own forums and everything. 
these foxes have been bred for less time than the silver foxes in russia (isn't that program like twenty years old?).


----------



## Whitenoise (Sep 19, 2010)

Fay V said:


> If you guys don't like the russian domestication, here's something that will really make you rage. There are red fox breeders in America that have been breeding for a few generations and sell the pups. It is completely legal to own them in quite a few states. There are people that own red foxes for pets, they have their own forums and everything.
> these foxes have been bred for less time than the silver foxes in russia (isn't that program like twenty years old?).



Ugh :[ .

The experiment is 50 years old, and it's purely scientific. Watch the video, all of you >:[ .


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> that too
> 
> Don't have to be rude to get your point across.


 
Oh, being rude, huh? You're the one that created an argument based on nothing, and were too lazy to educate yourself. You know why I didn't post a link? Because I didn't get my information off the internet. I got mine from a professor of sociology. Stay in school. Don't do drugs.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Oh, being rude, huh? You're the one that created an argument based on nothing, and were too lazy to educate yourself. You know why I didn't post a link? Because I didn't get my information off the internet. I got mine from a professor of sociology. Stay in school. Don't do drugs.


 
Dude, the hell?

I posted "I seriously dobt that" which could have been prevented by you linking your sources. Ad hominem really add nothing to your argument. In fact, they just make you look like a prick.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Fay V said:


> If you guys don't like the russian domestication, here's something that will really make you rage. There are red fox breeders in America that have been breeding for a few generations and sell the pups. It is completely legal to own them in quite a few states. There are people that own red foxes for pets, they have their own forums and everything.
> these foxes have been bred for less time than the silver foxes in russia (isn't that program like twenty years old?).


 
Fucking idiots, all of them.


----------



## Jude (Sep 19, 2010)

My local Mr. Petman sells foxes (I think just little Fennec foxes though). My parents were strongly considering getting one last year, but they're usually $1000+ and have a tendency to run away.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> Dude, the hell?
> 
> I posted "I seriously dobt that" which could have been prevented by you linking your sources. Ad hominem really add nothing to your argument. In fact, they just make you look like a prick.



Did I not just say that I can't link to my sources because I didn't get my information from the internet?  Your requirement for internet proof to counter your argument against my original statement is the _original_ ad hominem in this case. Grow up. Also, I am a prick, and I have a bigger dick than you. 
/argument.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Did I not just say that I can't link to my sources because I didn't get my information from the internet?  Your requirement for internet proof to counter your argument against my original statement is the _original_ ad hominem in this case. Grow up. Also, I am a prick, and I have a bigger dick than you.
> /argument.


 Haha wow man.


I'm just gonna laugh at how insecure you are now.

Btw, I'm female.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> Haha wow man.
> 
> 
> I'm just gonna laugh at how insecure you are now.
> ...


 
Nice trollan. Well done.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Nice trollan. Well done.


 
wha

You know what, nvm.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

DrumFur said:


> My local Mr. Petman sells foxes (I think just little Fennec foxes though). My parents were strongly considering getting one last year, but they're usually $1000+ and have a tendency to run away.



Well of course their gonna run away.... they belong in the wild

Also do people really think that their dick instantly grows as soon as they are behind a computer screen?
/2 cents


----------



## FancySkunk (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> He's right about that smarts thing. All domesticated animals have one thing in common: their brains are smaller than those of their wild counterparts. The same goes for the modern domesticated human, who has been losing brain mass ever since the beginning of civilization. Once you take survival of the fittest out of the equation, you can pretty much go back to being a dumb lazy fuck, and have a bunch of dumb lazy fuck kids, etc.


You don't know how brains work. Small differences in brain size (by weight) have _nothing_ to do with intelligence. The capacity for intelligence can, in part, be measured from the brain's surface area (more wrinkles = more surface area = more intelligent person). If you're going to claim that more brain mass = more intelligent person, then you have to realize that you just said men are smarter than women, because it is a pure fact that men tend to have larger brains (by mass) than women. Since that's obviously bullshit, I hope you can extrapolate the data enough to see that your other point is bullshit, as well.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

NO.

Edit: The fox thing is kinda neat. I do see some scientific uncertainty with the comparisons they're making, sense they're using foxes instead of wolves, but interesting none the less.


----------



## Whitenoise (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Oh, being rude, huh? You're the one that created an argument based on nothing, and were too lazy to educate yourself. You know why I didn't post a link? Because I didn't get my information off the internet. I got mine from a professor of sociology. Stay in school. Don't do drugs.



http://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/are-dogs-smarter-than-wolves/  :V


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

FancySkunk said:


> You don't know how brains work. Small differences in brain size (by weight) have _nothing_ to do with intelligence. The capacity for intelligence can, in part, be measured from the brain's surface area (more wrinkles = more surface area = more intelligent person). If you're going to claim that more brain mass = more intelligent person, then you have to realize that you just said men are smarter than women, because it is a pure fact that men tend to have larger brains (by mass) than women. Since that's obviously bullshit, I hope you can extrapolate the data enough to see that your other point is bullshit, as well.


 
Thanks for your input, but you don't know how brains work. I'm not going to say this is a 100% true proven fact, but brain size is generally considered a good indication of intelligence. That is, brain mass relative to body mass. Since females tend to have less body mass, they can have less brain mass, but equal to that of males. No, I will not post a bunch of stupid google internet links. Take it or leave it, it's up to you if you want to have an intelligent discussion, or jump on the bandwagon and be an argumentative asshole


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> http://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/are-dogs-smarter-than-wolves/  :V


 
 So basically the more independent a dog is, the more likely it'll do stuff on its own. Neato.


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> http://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/are-dogs-smarter-than-wolves/  :V


 
/thoughtfulchinscratch

I still think wild animals possess a cunning that their domestic counterparts lack.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Thanks for your input, but you don't know how brains work. I'm not going to say this is a 100% true proven fact, but brain size is generally considered a good indication of intelligence. That is, brain mass relative to body mass. Since females tend to have less body mass, they can have less brain mass, but equal to that of males. No, I will not post a bunch of stupid google internet links. Take it or leave it, it's up to you if you want to have an intelligent discussion, or jump on the bandwagon and be an argumentative asshole


 
Intelligent discussion without reference and source material?

I think someone's doing it wrong.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> http://smartdogs.wordpress.com/2008/03/14/are-dogs-smarter-than-wolves/  :V


 
Thanks for the link with no explanation...? 
A wolf may not be able to interact with humans well, while a domesticated dog may not be able to survive in the wild. In the wild, the most intelligent animals are the ones who are able to survive to pass on their genes. In the world of domestication, survival of the fittest is negated, and it becomes survival of the cutest.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Thanks for the link with no explanation...?
> A wolf may not be able to interact with humans well, while a domesticated dog may not be able to survive in the wild. In the wild, the most intelligent animals are the ones who are able to survive to pass on their genes. In the world of domestication, survival of the fittest is negated, and it becomes survival of the cutest.


 
Depends on the breed of domesticated animal. Many toy breeds of dogs are absolutely useless (and moronic), while herding dogs could probably survive on their own.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> All toy breeds of dogs are absolutely useless



Fixed :v


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Fixed :v


 
Crap, you're right.

Whoopsie.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Fixed :v


 
Nu-uh! Papillions are smart (and adorable!)

Well okay, some of them aren't but still.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> Nu-uh! Papillions are smart (and adorable!)
> 
> Well okay, some of them aren't but still.


 
Toy dogs are all cuteness.. no use at all

Except for football, they are easy to punt


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Toy dogs are all cuteness.. no use at all
> 
> Except for football, they are easy to punt


;~;

But I _likes_ them.


----------



## FancySkunk (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Thanks for your input, but you don't know how brains work. I'm not going to say this is a 100% true proven fact, but brain size is generally considered a good indication of intelligence. That is, brain mass relative to body mass. Since females tend to have less body mass, they can have less brain mass, but equal to that of males. No, I will not post a bunch of stupid google internet links. Take it or leave it, it's up to you if you want to have an intelligent discussion, or jump on the bandwagon and be an argumentative asshole


If brain mass (relative to body mass) is an indicator of intelligence, then how is it that people with the same brain mass and body mass can be drastically different in terms of intelligence?

Here are some sources for you:
"The folds in the brain add to its surface area and therefore increase the amount of gray matter and the quantity of information                               that can be processed." - http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/brain_basics/know_your_brain.htm
"Its many folds and grooves, though, provide it with the additional  surface area necessary for storing all of the body's important  information." - http://kidshealth.org/parent/general/body_basics/brain_nervous_system.html
"Note that the cerebral cortex is highly wrinkled.  Essentially this  makes the brain more efficient, because it can increase the surface area  of the brain and the amount of neurons within it." - http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/kinser/Structure1.html
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/kinser/Int3.html (Directly goes against Brain mass/body mass)
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/kinser/Int4.html (Directly speaks of folding as a good indicator)

Provide me with a source saying brain mass matters, and I might consider that you have a valid point.


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Molly said:


> ;~;
> 
> But I _likes_ them.


 
Once I liked Bichon Frises.

Then I met one, the fucking bastard.


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Once I liked Bichon Frises.
> 
> Then I met one, the fucking bastard.


 
I met this Pomeranian once. He was an adorable, lovable bastard.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Toy dogs are like mopeds

They are fun until your friends find out


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Toy dogs are all cuteness.. no use at all
> 
> Except for football, they are easy to punt


 
They're good at making fertilizer.  :V


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> They're good at making fertilizer.  :V


 
And drawing blood.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> They're good at making fertilizer.  :V


 
So scratch my previous post

Toy dogs have uses.. just not when they have a heartbeat


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> So scratch my previous post
> 
> Toy dogs have uses.. just not when they have a heartbeat


 
Uhh, dogs need to be alive to poop.

I think.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

FancySkunk said:


> If brain mass (relative to body mass) is an indicator of intelligence, then how is it that people with the same brain mass and body mass can be drastically different in terms of intelligence?
> 
> Here are some sources for you:
> "The folds in the brain add to its surface area and therefore increase the amount of gray matter and the quantity of information                               that can be processed." - http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/brain_basics/know_your_brain.htm
> ...


 
Unless the brain structure is drastically different, brain mass will correlate somewhat with this surface area that you are bringing up. However, I am not that interested in continuing these semantics. I was only using brain mass as a reference for comparative purposes, not to go off on some internet argument tangent.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Uhh, dogs need to be alive to poop.
> 
> I think.



Oh wait... I thought he meant when the dog died

Good god im really going dark :X


----------



## FancySkunk (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> I was only using brain mass as a reference for comparative purposes, not to go off on some internet argument tangent.


In other words "I got proven wrong, so I'm now going to downplay the significance of what I was saying." It's not semantics. I have sources which say directly that folding and surface area are the primary factor for measuring intelligence. You have an argument based on "My professor said...."

Anyway:
Domesticated foxes seem interesting. I don't think I'd personally want one, though.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> Oh wait... I thought he meant when the dog died
> 
> Good god im really going dark :X


 
Yes.  Yes, you are.

You can make more fertilizer with a living toy dog than a dead one.  :c


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Yes.  Yes, you are.
> 
> You can make more fertilizer with a living toy dog than a dead one.  :c



I would think..

So obtain toy dog, feed it nothing but mexican, then your grass is FINALLY greener than the other side


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

FancySkunk said:


> In other words "I got proven wrong, so I'm now going to downplay the significance of what I was saying." It's not semantics. I have sources which say directly that folding and surface area are the primary factor for measuring intelligence. You have an argument based on "My professor said...."
> 
> Anyway:
> Domesticated foxes seem interesting. I don't think I'd personally want one, though.


 
Thanks for quote-editing the part out where I said brain mass correlates with surface area in order to downplay the fact that I basically just agreed with you. It is pathetic to go well out of your way to prove me wrong on some subcontextual point, then claim a false victory. 
I was making a comparison between domestic and wild animals, which I made, and then moved on. So, what exactly was _your_ point?


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Thanks for quote-editing the part out where I said brain mass correlates with surface area in order to downplay the fact that I basically just agreed with you. It is pathetic to go well out of your way to prove me wrong on some subcontextual point, then claim a false victory.
> I was making a comparison between domestic and wild animals, which I made, and then moved on. So, what exactly was _your_ point?


 
Mass does not relate to surface area.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

So... If i develop elephantiasis in my brain (if thats possible) then I will get smarter?


----------



## Thatch (Sep 19, 2010)

cmrnmrphy said:


> So... If i develop elephantiasis in my brain (if thats possible) then I will get smarter?


 
No, your skull cavity will be finall filled :V


----------



## FancySkunk (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Thanks for quote-editing the part out where I said brain mass correlates with surface area in order to downplay the fact that I basically just agreed with you. It is pathetic to go well out of your way to prove me wrong on some subcontextual point, then claim a false victory.
> I was making a comparison between domestic and wild animals, which I made, and then moved on. So, what exactly was _your_ point?


My point was that your point was wrong. You're accusing me of attempting to claim a false victory, but you are attempting a false association to avoid defeat. You can't suddenly attempt to say "but we're saying the same thing" when we're not. If you are agreeing with me, then you must accept that your initial premise of brain mass having nothing to do with intelligence. Do not attempt to agree with me while still maintaining your incorrect stance on the matter.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Mass does not relate to surface area.


 
Continuing on the semantics argument....  use whatever term you like, but I already made my point a long time ago. Maybe mass is the wrong word, but mass is somewhat related to size, which is somewhat related to surface area. Once again, what is your point on this lovely Sunday afternoon troll?


----------



## Fenrari (Sep 19, 2010)

I'm not going to lie... I kinda want one... Sadly I don't think the dogs in my neighborhood would like it...


----------



## Vriska (Sep 19, 2010)

I'm more of a dog person.

I guess this is cool, but not really.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

FancySkunk said:


> My point was that your point was wrong. You're accusing me of attempting to claim a false victory, but you are attempting a false association to avoid defeat. You can't suddenly attempt to say "but we're saying the same thing" when we're not. If you are agreeing with me, then you must accept that your initial premise of brain mass having nothing to do with intelligence. Do not attempt to agree with me while still maintaining your incorrect stance on the matter.


 
Brain mass does not have nothing to do with intelligence. If you had a brain, you'd know that. I'm not going to post a bunch of wikipedia links that say so, because it is such a basic concept. Brain size... mass... surface area... skull size... are all things that are related to each other, and to intelligence. Why do you insist on arguing semantics about such generally accepted idea?


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> Continuing on the semantics argument....  use whatever term you like, but I already made my point a long time ago. Maybe mass is the wrong word, but mass is somewhat related to size, which is somewhat related to surface area. Once again, what is your point on this lovely Sunday afternoon troll?


 
'Size' doesn't quite equate to surface area either.

Looking at mass, lets say you have a 4g 2x2x2cm cube. It has a surface area of 24cm squared.

Now, break that cube down into 8 smaller cubes, each having a mass of .5g and being 1x1x1cm. You now have total surface area of 48cm squared (8 * 6cm squared). And look, you still have a total of 4g.

As per 'size' (we'll just call this volume), I don't have a good example to illustrate this, but the surface area of objects with the same volume varies with shape.


----------



## Sauvignon (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> 'Size' doesn't quite equate to surface area either.
> 
> Looking at mass, lets say you have a 4g 2x2x2cm cube. It has a surface area of 24cm squared.
> 
> ...


 
What is this I don't even


----------



## Xenke (Sep 19, 2010)

Sauvignon said:


> What is this I don't even


 
Geometry, a real science.


----------



## Cam (Sep 19, 2010)

Xenke said:


> Geometry, a real science.


 
Totally this


----------



## Whitenoise (Sep 19, 2010)

Are you guys wasting your time trying to convince some spergy neocon otherkin that filthy hyooman loving dogs are as smart as glorious majestic wolves. I mean the guy's obviously a totally for real wolf trapped in a disgusting hyooman body, surely he knows more about this sort of thing than you :V .


----------



## Tycho (Sep 19, 2010)

Whitenoise said:


> Are you guys wasting your time trying to convince some spergy neocon otherkin that filthy hyooman loving dogs are as smart as glorious majestic wolves. I mean the guy's obviously a totally for real wolf trapped in a disgusting hyooman body, surely he knows more about this sort of thing than you :V .


 
Well, think about how well a dog would adapt to life in the wild.  Feral dogs manage reasonably well but they do so in close proximity to humans.  Take them out further away from humans and they're not going to do as well.  Instead of scavenging through human garbage and preying upon other domestic animals, make them hunt to survive.  They'll get a few rabbits and ground squirrels and such, but their pack-hunting abilities which require coordination and cooperation skills have been altered to serve mankind's various needs and are inferior to that of an animal that never forgot all the tricks to surviving sans-humanity.  Dogs are smart *when they're doing what they're bred to do*.  Border collies are brilliant herding dogs and arguably HIGHLY intelligent in their own right, but when they're not doing their tricks for food - singing for their supper, if you will - what do they have? What can they do?


----------



## Fay V (Sep 19, 2010)

Wow I missed the shitfest, damn. Mass has some correlation to intelligence, but not much. Generally we are looking to see if the size and mass of the brain leaves it enough room in order to have the frontal cortex, once we know that it comes down to folds and such. 

As for wild versus domestic intelligence. It is generally believed that wild animals are better at adaptation problem solving, and so on. They NEED to use their brains in order to survive. Dogs have been domesticated and will not use their brain as much because they don't have to. Working breeds tend to be more intelligent, particularly the ones that actually work. 
In the end however comparing wolves to dogs becomes a situation intelligence test. 
Compare humans historically. over 200 years there hasn't been significant change in the species involving brain size. If you put a modern 20 year old in the woods and told them to colonize, they would be fucked, the historical counterpart would seem like a genius in that situation. At the same time, take someone from the past and ask them to make a powerpoint and you will blow their frikkin mind. 





Tycho said:


> Well, think about how well a dog would adapt to life in the wild.  Feral dogs manage reasonably well but they do so in close proximity to humans.  Take them out further away from humans and they're not going to do as well.  Instead of scavenging through human garbage and preying upon other domestic animals, make them hunt to survive.  They'll get a few rabbits and ground squirrels and such, but their pack-hunting abilities which require coordination and cooperation skills have been altered to serve mankind's various needs and are inferior to that of an animal that never forgot all the tricks to surviving sans-humanity.  Dogs are smart *when they're doing what they're bred to do*.  Border collies are brilliant herding dogs and arguably HIGHLY intelligent in their own right, but when they're not doing their tricks for food - singing for their supper, if you will - what do they have? What can they do?



So umm This!


----------



## Gavrill (Sep 19, 2010)

Tycho said:


> Werds


 
I watched a special on feral dogs where they tranquilized one and put a camera on it. It was a huge German Shep mix, and it was in a pack of big, wolf-like dogs that hunted and scavenged (but scavenged more often because they lived near a dump). They brought down a deer on one occasion if I remember correctly. Basically what it boils down to is:
-How close to wolves the dog is on the evolutionary tree
-The size of the dog
-Whether or not it's in a pack
-If it was born feral or not
-Prey drive of the dog


My sister actually owned a dog that was very obedient to her, but when let loose he hunted and killed a fuckin deer. Along with various other animals.


----------



## mystery_penguin (Sep 19, 2010)

I'll name mine Kristaufferson!


----------



## BigHoof (Sep 20, 2010)

mystery_penguin said:


> I'll name mine Kristaufferson!


That movie was totally awesome.

Also, first post


----------



## LLiz (Sep 20, 2010)

Wow this topic took off, that'll learn me to post something and then not to come back for 24h. 



RayO_ElGatubelo said:


> Damn it, why can't you guys just get Pomeranians? They're realy foxlike.


 
A friend of mine has one of those dogs, it is just like this tiny hyperactive hairball!
They're not my kind of dog but it is hillarious. 

I personally wouldn't mind one as a pet, because I like all of the unconventional pets, such as rats and reptiles, etc. I am sure it'd be highly illegal to keep one as a pet where I am from, we already have enough problems with feral foxes.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Sep 20, 2010)

LLiz said:
			
		

> (Sorry if this has already been posted... I did do a search first, found nothing)
> 
> In Russia they're running an experiment in domestication, they've bred  silver foxes to be tame like dogs, some of these foxes are SO cute,  especially the white one.



Isn't this like 50 years old news or something?

EDIT: Yup, according to Whitenoise. This example is talked about like every time someone writes about evolution.


----------



## LLiz (Sep 20, 2010)

Yeah it is an old experiment, I heard about it ages ago but I've never seen a video about it, Radio Lab had a show where they talked about it, I think this is the show: 
http://www.radiolab.org/2009/oct/19/

Also, how is it used an example when people write about evolution?


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (Sep 20, 2010)

LLiz said:
			
		

> Also, how is it used an example when people write about evolution?



Cause the foxes are under selection for tameness, like dogs probably were, but even when just trying for that they found all sorts of other traits were coming along as well. If I remember correctly the foxes lost their pointed ears and got floppier ones, a bad thing in my opinion, and started having less of a smell. So it's good for showing changes over time and also that certain traits could be acquired without selection just because they happen to be linked to other traits.


----------



## foxmusk (Sep 20, 2010)

Foxes...were already domesticated in america...just not widespread. there's some zoophile on FA that has one.


----------



## 8-bit (Sep 20, 2010)

Let me know when they figure out how domesticate Hunters and Lickers :V

(I haven't made an RE post in awhile, so suck it)


----------



## Kit H. Ruppell (Sep 20, 2010)

There is a company that distributes these foxes in the US; they go for about 6k if I remember correctly.


----------



## Fay V (Sep 20, 2010)

aha I knew there was proof somewhere. It just so happened it was handed to me by my other job, hurrah universe. 
Anyway this article talks about wolves.
Wolves out perform dogs in following social cues


----------

