I think non human apes are beautiful!
Tarsier or loris ?
- Thread starter Onychorhynchus coronatus
- Start date
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
It is a little similar though isn't it ?
I mean the hypothesis is basically that the degree of a non living objects resemblance to a human being and yet its obvious differences stimulate an emotional response of unease and disquiet.
I don't know if there is a name for this kind of reaction / phenomenon out there specifically for human perceptions of animals / primates but it does sound somewhat like what some people experience with the tarsier IMO.
I think non human apes are beautiful!
Not a big fan of Common Chimps, although I recognize their vulnerability and support zoo programs for them (except for the AZA's generic program when we have so many homeless Bonobos that we have to keep sending them to Europe). Bonobos, gorillas, orangutans, and especially gibbons I quite enjoy, though.
~Thylo
I am personally fond of gorillas. You can tell by looking at a gorillas face, you can clearly tell what there thinking. I think with gibbons that is a little harder, but still love gibbons for what they are. Particularly their long arms, and their fur coats varying from species to species.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I don't like them either, they are the only animal that I frankly truly dislike (and I don't particularly like the academics I've met who study them either to say the least).
However, even so I root for success in their conservation in the wild and things like that.
You're definitely do not have a Jane Goodall connection with them.
I personally like chimps for what they are, and from a chimps perspective we look kinda strange too.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
You're definitely do not have a Jane Goodall connection with them.
Oh , I think that Jane Goodall is an amazing warm hearted woman and probably very nice to meet.
But the academics and PhD students I've met personally who study chimpanzees in the wild have always seemed to me to be as vile (if not more) than the animals that they study which somehow ultimately hasn't helped my already negative perceptions of chimps.
I meant that You probably don'y enjoy them as much as Jane Goodall.Oh , I think that Jane Goodall is an amazing warm hearted woman and probably very nice to meet.
But the academics and PhD students I've met personally who study chimpanzees in the wild have always seemed to me to be as vile if not more than the animals that they study which hasn't helped my perceptions of chimps.
And yeah of course, those PhD students I've heard do not treat there chimps very well.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Hmmmm , its less about the way they treat chimps that concerns me as the way that they treat their fellow human beings (which is very similar to the behaviour of the animals that they study IMO). But anyway I shall say no more about it.
Oh well I heard that they don't treat their chimps very well, and its all really more about study than a fondness with the chimps. But whatever. We shall leave it at rest.Hmmmm , its less about the way they treat chimps that concerns me as the way that they treat their fellow human beings. But anyway I shall say no more about it.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I shouldn't generalize but when it comes to PhD studies relating to animals and even conservation it is often more about research for the sake of research, publishing a paper and self advancement / ego (earning that all important little "Dr" status to put in front of their name and signall their superiority) then it is about the long term effort to conserve a species.
Typically, in many cases when these studies are over in 4 or 5 years everything is conveniently forgotten about despite all the platitudes mouthed during the course of the study and who cares about long term conservation when you've got your paper published and attained the rarified heights of being a "Dr" right ?
Yeah I totally agree. Its good.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Yeah I totally agree. Its good.
Anyway, thats the last thing I'll say on that particular subject as it gets complicated.
I 'd thought one last comment on tarsiers. What do you guys think of the recently discovered Niemitz's tarsier? Surely I nice addition to the Tarsius genus.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I think it is absolutely amazing how many tarsier species there are and potentially still are out there to discover by science (I personally think there are at least a couple more out there).
I also think Carsten Niemitz is incredibly lucky to have both described a new species and to have it named after him (I think it is infinitely cooler to have a tarsier named after you than a beetle, fly or parasite).
I also think he is incredibly lucky to still be alive to appreciate all of this because a lot of new species are only recognized as such long after the person who first discovered it is dead.
Isn't it highly frowned upon to name a species after yourself?
~Thylo
~Thylo
Yeah, Tarsiers are a little diverse family of primates, and they are charming species nonetheless. Having a species named after you is such a great honor, and I hope to have one named after me someday. And yeah, A tarsier named after you? Super cool.
Where did you hear that?
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
It is generally perceived to be a bit narcissistic to do this in science so a lot of people who discover a new species choose instead to name it after something or someone else (hence you get species names like Heteropoda davidbowie etc).
It's one of the rules of binomial nomenclature, or at least it's an unwritten one.
~Thylo