From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: sci.misc
Subject: Re: Whale killing for "science" -- so for what?
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:48:59 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <STEINLY.92Jul20184606@topaz.ucsc.edu> steinly@topaz.ucsc.edu (Steinn Sigurdsson) writes:

>>From: magnus@jaist-east.ac.jp (Magnus Halldorsson)

Interesting how all of the people quoting one another here and
supporting Norway's war against the whales seem to have Scandinavian
sounding names.  I wonder... if one Norwegian died for every
whale, would they feel the same way?


>I refer to an article in New Scientist on 29 October 1988, pp.46-47,
>by Dr. Margaret Klinowska, described as a member of the "IUCN Species
>Survival Commission Cetacean Specialist Group". I quote:

Could identify the "IUCN" for us, please?  (Why would I not
be surprised to find out it's a whaling group?)


>  "The idea that the size and surface characteristics of brains are
>  related to the intelligence of their owners was popular among
>  neuroanatomists around the turn of the century....
>  The subject remained generally out of fashion until the 1960s when
>  John Lilly, a medical doctor by training, became fascinated by the
>  absolute size of cetacean brains. 

Already, Dr. Klinowska has made a collossal mistake (or tried to
slip in a lie).  She is comparing theories about the relationship
of brain size to intelligence *within* species to theories about
the relationship of brain size to intelligence *between* species.

No serious scientists doubts there is some relationship between
brain size and intelligence.  If there wasn't, there would surely
be at least one species of intelligent insect among the millions
inhabiting Earth.  And while geniuses may not have larger brains,
humans born with abnormally small brains do suffer severe mental
retardation.
 
>  For example, Giorgio Pilleri and his colleagues at the
>  Brain Anatomy Institute at the University of Berne in Switzerland made
>  and exhaustive study of brain size in relation to behaviour among
>  rodents. They concluded that intelligence, whether human or animal, is
>  too complex to characterise with a single numerical index. 

Again, she's tried to slip in another lie.  No one has ever claimed
that the intelligence of whales is proven by a "single numerical index."


>  They also found that cerebral quotients -- which express relative 
>  brain and body size -- provide no conclusive index of intelligence 
>  among mammals.

The fact that something is not conclusive does not mean that it's
not indicative.  The fact that a housepet fetches your slippers and
barks is not conclusive proof that the animal's a dog -- but it's a
pretty good indication.

  
>Dr. Klinowska mentions the lack of REM sleep in dolphins as a possible 
>reason for their relatively large brain size. 

So, after criticizing cetacean researchers for not having enough
evidence to support their theories, she introduces her own theory
with absolutely no evidence to support it.


Of course, the Nazis had "scientists" who published similar papers
about the Jews.
Newsgroups: sci.misc