Something to share.

www.msn.com...


Essentially what seems apparent is an effort of a Lemon Shark to secure assistance from human, which is really incredible under the circumstances.

It is interesting to consider that animals at this stage of development actually had the comprehension to relate cognitively as to what seemed to be happening.

originally posted by: Kashai
www.msn.com...


Essentially what seems apparent is an effort of a Lemon Shark to secure assistance from human, which is really incredible under the circumstances.

It is interesting to consider that animals at this stage of development actually had the comprehension to relate cognitively as to what seemed to be happening.

Man seems constantly amazed, in his ignorant insane vanity, that any other species is anything other than pretty, dumb, mobile window putty!

Anthropomorphism is akin to pareidolia. Shaky ground.

Was the animal seeking help, or stumbling about the bait, bumping into things as sharks are known to do as part of their sensory suite? Looks to me like the latter.

I'm glad the divers were able to remove the hook.

a reply to: Phage


Hate to put it this way but honestly if you end up with a fishing hook in your stomach the size of a screwdriver what would be your next step?

The lemon shark (Negaprion brevirostris) is a stocky and powerful shark. A member of the family Carcharhinidae, lemon sharks can grow to 3.4 meters (11 ft.) in length. They are often found in shallow subtropical waters and are known to inhabit and return to specific nursery sites for breeding. Often feeding at night, these sharks use electroreceptors to find their main source of prey fish. Lemon sharks enjoy the many benefits of group living such as enhanced communication, courtship, predatory behavior, and protection. This species of shark gives birth to live young, and the females are polyandrous and have a biennial reproductive cycle. Lemon sharks are not thought to be a large threat to humans.

en.wikipedia.org...

Smart Sharks.

a reply to: Kashai

Hate to put it this way but honestly if you end up with a fishing hook in your stomach the size of a screwdriver what would be your next step?

I would try to remove it.
I don't know what a lemon shark would do. But I've been around sharks. I've been around fish in general. They aren't very "smart" but their senses are amazing. Sharks bump into things. Even when they are not in distress.

a reply to: Phage


So do humans.

a reply to: Kashai

True.
Most often when inebriated though, not for sensory purposes.

Are these lemon sharks looking for help? Or a meal?

a reply to: Phage

A point would be that animals are more intelligent than human think they are, in general.

Further reading...

list25.com...

In my opinion....

"Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon involving a stimulus (an image or a sound) wherein the mind perceives a familiar pattern of something where none actually exists."

Numeracy

Main article: Number sense in animals

There a variety of studies indicate that animals are able to use and communicate quantitative information, and that some can count in a rudimentary way. Some examples of this research follow.

In one study, rhesus monkeys viewed visual displays containing, for example, 1,2,3, or 4 items of different sorts. They were trained to respond to them in several ways involving numerical ordering, for example touching "1" first, "2" second and so on. When tested with displays containing items they had never seen before, they continued to respond to them in order. The authors conclude that monkeys can represent the numerosities 1 to 9 at least on an ordinal scale.[92]
Ants are able to use quantitative values and transmit this information.[93][94] For instance, ants of several species are able to estimate quite precisely numbers of encounters with members of other colonies on their feeding territories.[95][96] Numeracy has been described in the yellow mealworm beetle (Tenebrio molitor)[97] and the honeybee.[98]
Western lowland gorillas given the choice between two food trays demonstrated the ability to choose the tray with more food items at a rate higher than chance after training.[99] In a similar task, chimpanzees chose the option with larger amount of food.[100] Salamanders given a choice between two displays with differing amounts of fruit flies, used as a food reward, reliably choose the display with more flies, as shown in a particular experiment.[101]

Other experiments have been conducted that show animals' abilities to differentiate between non-food quantities. American black bears demonstrated quantity differentiation abilities in a task with a computer screen. The bears were trained to touch a computer monitor with a paw or nose to choose a quantity of dots in one of two boxes on the screen. Each bear was trained with reinforcement to pick a larger or smaller amount. During training, the bears were rewarded with food for a correct response. All bears performed better than what random error predicted on the trials with static, non-moving dots, indicating that they could differentiate between the two quantities. The bears choosing correctly in congruent (number of dots coincided with area of the dots) and incongruent (number of dots did not coincide with area of the dots) trials suggests that they were indeed choosing between quantities that appeared on the screen, not just a larger or smaller retinal image, which would indicate they are only judging size.[102]

Bottlenose dolphins have shown the ability to choose an array with fewer dots compared to one with more dots. Experimenters set up two boards showing various numbers of dots in a poolside setup. The dolphins were initially trained to choose the board with the fewer number of dots. This was done by rewarding the dolphin when it chose the board with the fewer number of dots. In the experimental trials, two boards were set up, and the dolphin would emerge from the water and point to one board. The dolphins chose the arrays with fewer dots at a rate much larger than chance, indicating they can differentiate between quantities.[103] A particular grey parrot, after training, has shown the ability to differentiate between the numbers zero through six using vocalizations. After number and vocalization training, this was done by asking the parrot how many objects there were in a display. The parrot was able to identify the correct amount at a rate higher than chance.[104] Angelfish, when put in an unfamiliar environment will group together with conspecifics, an action named shoaling. Given the choice between two groups of differing size, the angelfish will choose the larger of the two groups. This can be seen with a discrimination ratio of 2:1 or greater, such that, as long as one group has at least twice the fish as another group, it will join the larger one.[105]

Monitor lizards have been shown to be capable of numeracy, and some species can distinguish among numbers up to six.

In July, 2012 during the "Consciousness in Human and Nonhuman Animals" conference in Cambridge a group of scientists announced and signed a declaration with the following conclusions:

Convergent evidence indicates that non-human animals have the neuroanatomical, neurochemical, and neurophysiological substrates of conscious states along with the capacity to exhibit intentional behaviors. Consequently, the weight of evidence indicates that humans are not unique in possessing the neurological substrates that generate consciousness. Non-human animals, including all mammals and birds, and many other creatures, including octopuses, also possess these neurological substrates.

en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Kashai

Did you look up anthropomorphism too?
Because that is actually the more appropriate term. I said it, like pareidolia, is shaky ground.

a reply to: Phage



Given that we evolved from animals it would make sense they are conscious.

a reply to: Kashai

I didn't say they aren't conscious.
What I said, have meant to have been saying, is that assigning human motivations to their actions is not necessarily an appropriate thing to do.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage


Both human and animals are motivated by survival.

a reply to: Kashai
I know.

Did a hook in the shark's skin threaten it's survival?

How did the behavior of the shark with a hook in its skin vary from the behavior of the sharks without hooks in their skin?

a reply to: Phage



Despite their constraints in so far as clogging a toilet with a stuffed animals toys? Animals share much in common with the ability to preform task equivalent to a child several years beyond the toddler stage of development.

The ones without a hook in their stomach did not turn belly up in front of a diver and so therefore exposing themselves.

a reply to: Kashai

I do not see the shark with a hook in its skin turn belly up (which to me, means upside down and would be remarkable). I see a diver pushing the nose of the shark upward so that he can more easily reach the hook.


Lest you think I lack compassion, you are talking to a man who has a pet rat.

a reply to: Phage


13 seconds into the vid the shark exposes is underside to the diver, its apparent. And of course a hook in one stomach is a threat to survival.

Exposing ones underbelly underwater to another is not the same.

Its getting late for me homey have a good night.

a reply to: Kashai

13 seconds into the vid the shark exposes is underside to the diver, its apparent.

We are clearly not watching the same video.

Exposing ones underbelly underwater to another is not the same.

Not the same as what? Seeing some shark bellies here (1:15 is a particularly good shot). And guess what, they're being fed. And guess what, no hooks.

a reply to: Phage


Not the same as my dog wanting her belly scratched unless she was underwater, in which case she my opt for a more vertical posture.

Besides there is also all the other stuff

a reply to: Kashai

Check the video I posted.
1:15 for the belly scratch.