About the wet nose of the dog (and other animals), and how the direction of the wind affects the survival of animals that rely on a sense of smell
Man these days does not usually need the sense of smell for his survival, what is more, he is unable to identify the sources of the smell and its direction. It is certainly possible that in earlier times when man was in his simian form, his nose was shaped in a different way that helped him survive the harsh conditions in which he was exposed to many dangers in nature.
Sensitive noses that meet the category of identifying the direction of the wind exist in nature in predatory animals and are preyed upon for their survival, i.e. escaping from danger or obtaining water and food (also predation) - "the fit survive" as Darwin defined it.
In nature, the ability to survive determines life or death. Correctly identifying the location of an enemy or food is of utmost importance. The sense of smell is extremely important in a thicket of concealment, at night and from a distance, and its advantage is also its disadvantage, it is effective only in a certain direction, and that is the direction of the wind. A smell without knowing the direction it comes from is not helpful, confusing and dangerous. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to know the direction from which the wind blows.
The dog has at his disposal a number of essential means for his survival, where his wet-moist nose is the most important detector used both to characterize the smell and to characterize the direction it is coming from. The dog's nose is very sensitive - about 40 times that of a human - and reacts with coolness on the side from which the wind blows, due to increased evaporation on the windward side, which causes a local decrease in temperature. Dogs tend to turn their faces away until symmetrical or frontal coolness with their noses, then they are facing the source of the smell.
The upper part of the nose is also wet and this is in order to detect a wind blowing from behind, for this purpose the dog lifts its nose upwards at an angle and above all parts of its body, in this position the upper part of the tilted nose is exposed to a rear wind.
The smell carried by the wind sometimes carries molecules - different pheromones - attract, repel, protect, signposts and sex pheromones. Dogs even lick their noses in order to add additional moisture to the nose, to taste the odor molecules that have stuck to the moist nose and to clean the nose of old odors and in preparation for absorbing the new odor.
Certain animals in the wild that hunt for prey turn out because of me, other animals should hide their original scent and try to approach their victim by hiding quietly and against the direction of the wind, and this for two reasons, on the one hand the victim does not smell the predator and on the other hand the predator smells the victim and is in control of his place. This example comes to illustrate the importance of smells for the survival of animals and the importance of environmental conditions in general and wind direction in particular.
In scouting I learned that if I want to know the direction of the wind, I wet my finger and lift it up, the wind will cool the side from which the wind is coming, the dog's nose is much more sensitive than the finger and it is naturally adapted to its dual role - characterizing the smell and its direction.
The dog (or any other animal) first internalizes the direction of the wind, and later any scent that reaches its nose will be crossed with information about its direction.
59 תגובות
Most of the comments are not related to the article at all and should be deleted.
A. Ben-Ner:
Finally, the communication problems with Yoel Rek were resolved and below is his response regarding the relationship between human development and dog domestication - as it is described In the article you voted on:
It seems clear that the article was written by a die-hard dog lover (me too, by the way) who wants to give them more credit, much more, than they deserve. He sees dogs as directly responsible for the appearance and existence of modern Homo sapiens. The article is a legitimate theory (more of a nice story than a theory) that many of the facts in it simply have no grip on reality.
As mentioned, proposing a theory is legitimate, but the one presented before us is not convincing even if the arguments sound categorical and full of authority: "Would all this have happened without the domestication of the wolf and its transformation into the house dog? The answer of scientists[?] dealing with evolution is unequivocal - no!!!" ..."The opinion today[?] is that not only would the man of the type [species} Homo sapiens not have evolved into the modern man, but he would not have survived at all!!!"
The theory is not convincing because many of the facts are simply not true. The (also unequivocal) assertion that the origin of domesticated dogs is in an ancestor who lived 130,000 years ago is still fraught with many problems. At this stage what can actually be determined is that the domestication of the dog (probably there were several different locations and times for these events) happened between 130,000 years, as evidenced (perhaps) by the difference shown in their DNA, and 14,000 which is the physical - archaeological evidence of domestication. Either way (even if we accept the dating based on the variation of the DNA) it makes no sense to see these two dates as two separate points of reference (the archeological evidence is simply the earliest physical evidence of the connection between man and dog and nothing more) and try to narrowly connect them with human history.
The analysis of the anatomical differences between the modern man and the Neanderthal is also far from reality and accordingly the meaning attributed to these differences in relation to the nature of the modern man is also far from reality. There is, for example, no connection between the sense of smell and the sinuses. And what does the poor sense of hearing (where does this information come from?) have to do with the Neanderthal's survival? It is not clear to me where the information comes from: "From the evolutionary point of view, there is evidence that the Neanderthal man was more developed than the Homo sapiens, produced and traded tools made by his own hands with the Homo sapiens. They buried their dead [this is true] and put flowers on the graves, which at that time the Homo sapiens did not do!” Just not true. Also the claim that: "In the living world there is no bad example for man, who was in the beginning a creature without the senses necessary for survival [I assume the term for the sense of smell I touched on above], and survived against all odds [?]. What caused this?", has no grip on reality. Well, the modern man was equipped with his features to survive (mainly his sophisticated mind) just as the bat is equipped with his own features to survive (wings and a sonar mechanism for navigation) under conditions specific to him. This one survived thanks to what suited him and the other survived thanks to his qualities that suited him to his way of life. To attribute the qualities of man (which do not differ in quality from the qualities of any other creature that relies on them for its survival), to "an alliance with our furry friend - the dog!" It seems somewhat excessive even if we love the latter dearly.
Yanon Sharev, some ignorance and lies.
Go to brothels and see how full they are of ultra-Orthodox and religious people.
I used to work at Bodi Massage, as a secretary - to convince clients.
Guess what? At least 96% were ultra-Orthodox!!
Idle, miserable, repulsive and I wouldn't be surprised if they also throw stones sometimes.
The rest were traditional.
During elementary school, high school, the army - always, but always the traditional group was violent, repulsive, barbaric, devoid of any morals, disrespectful to others, deep contempt for everything that is not like them, flowery and vast ignorance. There was a very noticeable difference between them and the less traditional secularists, agnostics and atheists, most of whom were great humanists.
What kind of behavior is there in Bnei Brak?
Shouting on the bus about women's clothing?
Men who stare in secret, in a contemptuous and sickening way. In secular streets, even a dog is no longer interested in me...again, except for traditionalists and old men!
Falafel sellers in Bnei Brak are sly with a kippah, who see a woman who wants to buy and deliberately turn to a man just entering, to give him the right of way. Something that has never, ever happened to me in a secular street!!!
The number of criminals in the prisons - of course 95% with kippahs, great believers in the way of the Torah.
The religious are the same children who abuse animals. What kind of education did they receive at home?
Studies prove that men sexually desire covered women - more sexual thoughts.
Contrary to the religious view that claims that it is the bare clothing that brings sexual thoughts.
It's a fact that on nudist beaches - you won't find sex.
And to play sexual games - you have to wear something first!
Idleness leads to violence?
That's why all the religious patients of my psychologist sister tell about a terrible and terrible beating husband, a suffering family and terrible and silenced traumas.
And what about the disinformation in your press?
Not only are horrible cases being hidden, they are also telling retarded, gullible stories only for the weak.
Obviously, the head will be quiet, when not reading news.
The quality of life is in the sky, but the pedophilia and repression + silencing are also the same.
And what about countless rape rabbis?
It is revealed that the sources have the authority to determine according to which criteria a rabbi is chosen.
Challenges all your authority to choose a rabbi.
Your deceptive lie and horrible hypocrisy..
It exists at a horrifying level beyond any other group
You may see yourself as a criminal, and are unable to see yourself as someone who does not rape, steal and murder - without the Torah.
And fact, you hold the largest number of sexual assaults against minors!!
According to your religion, a man is allowed to rape a girl less than 3 years old and he is allowed to sell his house at a high price from the age of 12, or "consecrate" it from the age of 3.
And what is so terrible about thinking that your ancestors walked on trees?
Do you prefer a culture where girls' genitals are cut off and tied up with a hammer so that men can sleep in peace?
Islamic version
Or maybe deny a woman to sing, go out on the street, study, testify, receive an inheritance?
Rape 12-year-old girls so they can get married and spawn for you forever?
To stone rising women? Burn intelligent "witches"?
All monkey culture is superior to human culture.
And everything that is good in human culture, came from an anti-religious place, or at least anti-halachic.
It's very nice that you are interested in science, be skeptical, everything should be under scrutiny
Nothing is taken for granted including religious beliefs lost to sciences such as astrology coffee and more.
If I experience an experience that is beyond measure, I will be the first to repent and learn
I will pray and engage in practical Kabbalah and mitzvot until then God is great and all faiths
They are together in the legends section
Thanks
To my father
The article you brought is already a bit old, 2002!
One per day - the rate is constant. What are they so bored?
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/1040124.html
http://www.mynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3627153,00.html
linnon,
You probably didn't understand me.
I'm not polite and I don't want to avoid fights,
I just really don't care what you think about my life and I certainly don't care how you live
Your life and therefore I feel no need to respond.
By the way, Yanon, is according to the Torah 8=10?
This, as mentioned, is only a partial compilation from the very last days
Yanon:
All your claims are based on "what if" because you have no real things to say about what is really happening.
You know exactly what a secularist will do at every decision point in his life because you freed yourself from the obligation to talk about the secularists in reality and you are content with talking about the fake secularists in your mind.
You also tell me what would happen if you did something but you don't do it.
You have created a situation where when I see your name I already know in advance that I will only read nonsense.
You must be proud of that!
Sorry my messages 45,49.
Hahaha.. 8 from the last period:]
If I start bringing your cases I won't finish and I'm serious..
Forget about it..
You and I will see the newspaper Yediot for the next two days, Sunday and Monday.
We'll see where there will be more cases and then we'll talk =]
good week
http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/1038762.html
Yanon:
Some material - just from the very last time.
A voyeur, wearing a kippah, peeked at the female soldiers of the 2nd Army.
http://www.mynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3625992,00.html
He didn't want to be bored
You never get bored in Kfar Batya:
http://www.mynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3625747,00.html
They are not bored:
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3624994,00.html
And they don't have a bad moment:
http://www.mynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3624482,00.html
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3624614,00.html
http://www.news1.co.il/Archive/001-D-179590-00.html?tag=09-05-55
http://news.nana10.co.il/Article/?ArticleID=594851
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3622430,00.html
http://www.iba.org.il/media/?recorded=tv
Click on the link for the news on 13.11.08
to arrive at 14:00.
An article about a religious father who abuses children at school. They interview a religious parent who is angry with the head of the religious house
Then arrive at 19:00.
An article about an unfortunate Datia whose husband abused her. A shocking story. Hear what happened to her children.
Yanon:
Since your happiness is not on my mind, I will answer you whenever I want.
To explain a little more why giving an answer to your words is a lowering of the level in my opinion, it only means that responding to blatant lies that any reasonable person can see to be a lie has no point.
You invent all kinds of delusional claims about secularists of the kind that only exist in your fevered mind and slap them on the real secularists.
All your words are just one big rant and therefore not worth a serious answer.
Michael,
Suri, this is a level you can't rise to because you don't know how to react when you're wrong,
If you were as polite as Dan Shamir, you would respond exactly like him that he wants to avoid fights.
Therefore, I do not attach any importance to your response.
thanks and have a good week,
And I would be happy if you don't answer my comments anymore "so that you don't lower your level"
Thank you, my father.
This is more consistent with what I know and what is written on Wikipedia.
I still hope that I will be able to catch Yoel only at a relevant time and get his opinion on the articles that A. Ben-Ner sent.
look what I found
Dogs were domesticated in China 15 thousand years ago
A. Ben-Ner:
It is possible to refute (it is true that it cannot be refuted 🙂 ) the claim that Benizri did not speak about earthquakes in the entire universe, not on the entire earth, and not those that are so weak that they are not felt.
He talked about a local connection between a devastating earthquake and homosexual activity.
Well - there are also earthquakes on uninhabited islands (and there were earthquakes that created the Alps or the Himalayas and that occurred before there were humans, and also huge earthquakes that preceded the formation of any life, but the skeptics will of course not accept claims about the past as proof, so we will settle for those of uninhabited islands or those occurring in other planets).
Yanon:
I can't get down to your level.
To Michael
Even though I do not believe that homosexual activity causes earthquakes, as Benizri claimed, even though, from a logical point of view, your claim, as if Benizri's claim was refuted, is not true. As far as I understand, it is also not possible, logically, to make a claim out of nowhere, just as it is also not possible to prove it. More precisely, if we can create a situation in which all homosexual activity will stop completely according to the Act for a certain period of time, say for a week or a month or a year, and if, during this time, there will be
If there are earthquakes, then this would be a contradiction of Benizri's claim. As far as I know so far, this experiment has not yet been carried out and I am unsure if it can be carried out.
cool responder,
Appropriate response to a monkey!
Dan Shamir,
You're right, and I respect you for that.
Lenon Sharev, so you are probably a complete idiot
to A. Ben-Ner,
Dan Shamir is both the name of a basketball coach and my name.
Dan Shamir (the coach) was assistant coach of Maccabi Tel Aviv and acting head coach of Jerusalem
About two years and the truth is that I was very happy when he left Maccabi because Google upgraded my site to the top of the ranking in the search for the name in question.
linnon,
I see that it is really starting to deteriorate and therefore I will refrain from commenting so as not to be drawn into a stupid argument
And insulting each other has no place on this site.
To Michael and Dan Shamir
You didn't understand what I said!
I will explain this with an example,
I'm going to play soccer, the atheist boy will play until he gets tired, I, on the other hand, will play and stop the game before I get tired,
It will be difficult and I will do it because I know that I have an obligation, and it stands on the scale of priorities above playing, which will make me leave the game knowing that when I leave it before I get bored with it, the next time I play I will feel better, and even if I stop playing I He won't get upset, unlike someone who leaves the game out of disgust.
Maybe you don't notice but when I'm on a schedule I sign my life for myself, and when I'm fed up I leave I'm miserable and prone to bad moods looking for something that will bring me satisfaction,
And all of this is in complete contrast to the values according to the Torah and Judaism, that everything is conducted differently and there is a fence for everything, you do anything to a small extent, such as not eating too much, it is forbidden according to the Halacha,
In short, healthy from a health and mental point of view, to be religious:]
And Dan "I assure you that I and most of my fellow atheists are just as logical and moral as you and for some reason I tend to believe that even much more."
Dan you just fit into society,
If your girlfriend changes you will change with her,
Michael,
It seems to him that God is speaking to him, so he banishes his wife and son to the desert and then goes to slaughter his only remaining son."
Very simply, God's experience.
With the same degree of success I could write: "He is tired of reading the Torah so he is going to murder his son"
It's not the same degree, you really didn't understand as always I have to explain to you again.
Besides the normal life you and I live differently from you I have the Torah,
that I devote time to it, and make myself a little postponement of passions that makes me enjoy the thing much more than you, after postponing the act and returning to it in the limited free time,
And Michael, stop bringing a story from the Torah that you interpret in complete extremes,
And just so you know that many Jews among us are not Jews as a result of various things such as: assimilation.
And these people don't know it.
A true Jew is characterized by 3 things: humble, modest and reciprocating kindness.
According to the Torah, humility is the most important measure for God because it is the most difficult,
So it is obvious that those who have humility, the lighter qualities will have abundance,
And this is a person who will not act according to those eight before the last example.
Dan,
I'm in the library every day and I don't see people like you there =(
A. Ben-Ner:
Actually you are not far from the truth.
It turns out that he went to Vancouver a few days ago for a sabbatical.
His wife - who remained in Israel also told me that his email and phone number have not yet been arranged and it may take several more days before I can talk to him.
Yanon Sharab:
What can be refuted?
Any significant claim on the world!
What is a significant claim?
One who predicts something - one who says "if you do this - it will happen like this" or "if it happens like this - it will also happen like this".
For example, the Torah claim that if you look at a rabbit you will see that it is a ruminant can be refuted and indeed has been refuted.
For example, the Sage's claim that mice develop from the dead can be refuted and was indeed refuted.
For example, the claim of the sections of the instructions for the construction of the temple that it is possible to build a circle with a diameter of ten cubits and a circumference of thirty cubits can be refuted and was indeed refuted.
For example, Benizri's claim that earthquakes occur because of homosexual activity is disprovable and indeed has been disproven.
There is another type of refutation - one that is not based on observations but on an internal logical contradiction.
For example - the religion's claim that the Torah was handed down without interruption during the generations from Moshe Rabbinu to the present day is in contradiction with its claim that in the days of Josiah no one knew the Torah.
This is also in logical contradiction with the Mahbat argument that the people could not be convinced to believe this nonsense if there were not sixty witnesses to the giving of the Torah.
Therefore the religion has already been refuted many times.
It does not collapse because of the stubbornness of mankind to continue clinging to the lie and not because it has not been refuted.
Regarding your words about morality - they too, of course for everyone and certainly for you too - are demagogic.
With the same degree of success I could write: "He is tired of reading the Torah so he goes to murder his son" or "She is tired of praying so she starts dressing in blankets from head to toe and abuses her children" or "He is tired of a persecuting government so he is going to murder a prime minister " or "he thinks God is speaking to him so he banishes his wife and son to the desert and then goes to slaughter the only son he has left."
To Michael
I am indeed interested in knowing the opinion of your friend the paleontologist, I am concerned that he has not been found,
In the end it will turn out, perhaps, that he went abroad to a conference on the evolution of the dog.
Dan Shamir
Isn't that the name of a basketball coach?
linnon,
Which of these expressions is "refutable"
You can say about something that it can be refuted only after you have refuted it.
"Irrefutable facts" - a sentence based on a mistake.
A fact is a statement that is true, i.e. a statement that reflects reality as it is (Wikipedia)
In addition to the fact that the proofs specializing in evolution are so many and varied in every possible respect, you and your ilk only need one contradiction (verified, and not all kinds of nonsense)
To knock down the whole theory, I am just surprised that after 150 years in them it was not found
Such a contradiction, you still have the arrogance to say that I and others are wrong, well we all know
that faith does not hide with reason.
Father, even though the second part of Yanon's response was addressed to you, forgive me, but I would like to respond:
Yanon, where do you get this collection of nonsense.
"What I see every day."
"And I've been to a lot of clubs and parties, I've been around a lot of places"
Probably the reality you see every day is very superficial but please don't throw away
your reality on me or my father or anyone else.
You are guaranteed that a daily routine is completely different from the poor description you mentioned.
Maybe instead of hanging out at parties, you'll go see a show at the theater, or maybe you'll go read a little in the library, or wander through one of the art museums and you'll also see the glass as half full.
"I found a society devoid of religious values that behaves according to logical and moral values."
I assure you that I and most of my fellow atheists are just as logical and moral as you and for some reason I tend to believe that even much more.
Dan Shamir,
Facts cannot be refuted, and if I am not mistaken, if this were a fact, the religious system would collapse =(
We will also refer to the fact that scientific facts can be refuted [and this is a fact!]
Avi,
I won't give examples because of something I already said..
That is the basis!
Who has more values?
In which company is the temptation greater?
inaction causes violence,
Searching for the bland thrills due to the lack of a fence for passions, which make you finish the thrill to the end.
And I'll give you an example-
You watch TV until you get tired of it, you don't leave it,
After that you get bored of the TV, you go to the computer, from the computer you go out with friends because you're bored, you get bored at parties, you go to parties and then start beatings for nothing because you're bored!
This chain is a bit flawed because I skipped many steps, but it is a reality and I live it within the company that you actually represent on the website.
This education is defective! You're an adult, you don't know what's going on in society like me, with all the scientific proofs you bring me, they won't help, you're blind and my father, I'm not coming to fight with you, I'm just saying what I see every day.
And I've been to a lot of clubs and parties, I've been around a lot of places, and I haven't found a society without religious values that behaves according to logical and moral values.
I don't know what the ultra-Orthodox reason for doing this.
I know from my experience in life, that you are on one thing one day you start to become extreme,
And they are so about religion that they have become a bit extreme and deviated from the basic values.
The addition was added a few minutes ago at the request of the writer.
Whoops - no wonder. Rami K is probably Rami Keenan who also corrected the article.
Rami K
The other idea you brought up is written in the article.
Hello everyone
Later another idea came to me about the nose
Why is the upper part of the nose wet?
The top of the nose detects a tailwind when the dog lifts its nose upwards at an angle
Thanks and good evening
A. Ben-Ner:
I'm not an expert on the subject, but it turns out that according to Wikipedia - this is not the accepted opinion because, as mentioned, according to Wikipedia, the dog was domesticated only about ten thousand years after the death of the last Neanderthal.
I have been trying for several hours to get hold of my friend - Yoel Rak - a well-known paleontologist - to hear his opinion on the matter but for some reason there is no answer either at his home or at his office.
linnon,
"I believe that a potential personality like you has been influenced by this thought at the hands of ignorant people who appear to you to be great"
"Regarding you! [to you = people who lack the values of Judaism]"
"Sorry if I offended" !!!!
Are you schizophrenic by any chance?
To remind you, even if you don't like to think so, the human race as a collective is much more violent than any other species living on earth.
Man and monkey have a common ancestor and that is a scientific fact, and your personal beliefs have nothing to do with it.
If you have a contradictory scientific theory, I would love to hear it, as would the entire scientific community in the world
See the article by Dr. Amnon Til DAT
"Domestication of animals and animals" which also includes quotes
from studies by other researchers.
For Michael and anyone interested
I refer you to an article (in Hebrew) called:
"The domestication of modern man, the invisible paw"
By Dr. Mickey Bar-Dor. This is not the article I remember
I read it a few years ago, but it shows the same theory of human-dog seviosis that led to the victory of the homosfians over the Neanderthals.
To Michael, I will try to locate the above article. If I can, I will direct you to it.
A. Ben-Ner:
I cannot express an opinion on an article I have not read and in any case, despite my extreme age, 15000 years is before I was even born.
I can only rely on the findings accepted by the archaeologists and that is what I did when I quoted from Wikipedia.
Regarding the characteristics of the Neanderthal man, I assume you saw that the quote you gave has no support for what I claimed you had no support for - that is, your claims about their improved eyesight and their developed sense of smell.
Yanon, remember Yisrael Velas and the beating mother from Beit Shemesh, as well as the violence of members of the Chastity Guards. You may complain less, but the violence is really no less severe.
It is impossible to suspect the members of the Chastity Guards who do not know what Judaism is, they simply choose to observe only its violent mitzvot.
Ami,
I did not pay attention to your words for several reasons and I will share one with you,
In any society it is natural that there will be these or other things, but the percentages of violence with us are low and even zero in relation to you!
[To you = people who lack the values of Judaism]
sorry if i offended,
good evening,
To Michael
If my memory serves me well, the same article in which the theory of human-dog symbiosis was reported (also) appeared on the Hidan website. And in the same article it was stated that, in a study conducted in France, colonies of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals were discovered, separate but adjacent to each other.
As for the remains regarding the Neanderthal features, they derive from the study of the structure of the bones of the skull and jaws found in these archaeological sites. And the main ones:
The Neanderthal excelled in great physical strength, large and strong jaws and large respiratory organs, which made him, according to the rest, an excellent hunter and warrior. Homospians, on the other hand, were endowed with a larger and more developed brain and a developed speech and sound production system, which allowed him to perfect the social relationships within his society and his general intelligence. One of the manifestations of this intelligence is the development of the use of various external aids for his existence, such as work tools and domesticated animals. It is understood that this theory is not at a level of certainty because no scientist or doctor from the modern era has examined a living Neanderthal. At the same time, the theory is not Lacks support in archaeological findings and is logical and reasonable at the very least.
Incidentally, there is also no evidence that the Neanderthal saw, heard or smelled better than man.
He was stronger - that's true, but everything else is unknown.
He was probably less intelligent, and even the dog argument (which, as mentioned - is probably not true) is based on the fact that if the Neanderthal did not learn the dog from man, he probably did not excel in excessive intelligence.
Now the question arises:
If we accept that Homo sapiens was more intelligent - should we include the dogs in the story? Are there ways in which the residual intelligence gives an advantage?
A. Ben-Ner:
There is also no evidence of any war between Homo sapiens and Neanderthal man.
A. Ben-Ner:
The Hebrew edition of Wikipedia is simply blasphemy of Wikipedia.
The Hebrew edition of Wikipedia has a different wording
It is stated there, in section 4.1, that the findings based on DNA research raise the assumption that the age of development of the dog from the wolf is approximately 150,000 years.
At the same time, I admit that the information on Wikipedia cannot be considered in-depth and qualified enough to judge rivets (I hope this is a legitimate expression...)
There is also the possibility that the Homospiens succeeded in domesticating certain breeds of wolves and as a result there was an accelerated evolutionary process of dog breeds in favor of features that the Homospiens preferred and selected for its needs
A. Ben-Ner:
See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog
I quote the relevant sentence:
Based on DNA evidence, the wolf ancestors of modern dogs diverged from other wolves about 100,000 years ago,[12][13] and dogs were domesticated from those wolf ancestors about 15,000 years ago.[14] This date would make dogs the first species to be domesticated by humans.
I was wrong when I specified the number 15000 as the date of the split from the wolf, but this is not important for our purposes. The dog was domesticated only 15000 years ago
To Michael
I looked at Wikipedia about "dog"
It is stated there that according to the old explanation, the date of the split of the dog from the wolf is indeed estimated to be about 12000 years ago
years in Ram-ulm immediately after Michen it is stated there that in genetic tests it was found that the estimated date of the split
Today is about 150,000 years ago!!!
Regarding the question, does a dog have smell-sensing cells in the outer part of the nose as well? I admit that I have not yet found a qualified reference for my stay. And my remaining this comes solely from many years of observing my dogs and female dogs for generations.
A. Ben-Ner:
The claim regarding the advantage given by the dog to Homospines over the Neanderthals does not agree with the prevailing hypotheses today according to which the dog split from the wolf 15000 years ago, while the last Neanderthals lived no less than 24,500 years ago.
In other words - there was no overlap between the life of the dog and the life of the Neanderthals (in the chronological sense, because in other ways it is quite possible that the Neanderthals lived the life of a dog 🙂 ).
I don't have any information about the dog's ability to smell on the outside of the nose.
What do you base this claim on?
If it's about detecting direction, then this article explains why it happens without resorting to olfactory cells on the outside of the nose.
Have you read this somewhere or conducted experiments that confirm this?
Mr. Yanon Sharev,
Your words put a smile on my face.
You wrote like this: "It's horrible to me to think that my ancestors were hairy, uncivilized, throwing stones to satisfy their animal desires"
I remember the Bar Ilan road riots. Crowds of people, with long wigs (hairy) and uncivilized threw stones at cars and thus satisfied their animalistic desires. These are not even monkeys (who, as we know, are not uncivilized and do not throw stones - like some of the humans). It's interesting that you choose to use terms like culture, stone throwing, hairiness and animalistic instincts to describe the early evolutionary stage of the Homo sapiens.
This reminds me of the example when you want to say about someone that he eats everything, then they say "he eats like a pig". Pigs don't eat everything. Humans are perhaps the only animal that truly eats everything. Pigs, for example, do not catch fish or hunt elephants or drink cow's milk or do many other things that humans do. I find a lot of parallel between your words and the use of this common expression.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
rummy,
You brought us an interesting article,
And from the beginning of the article I realized that there are two types of people on this subject,
Me and those in my opinion who claim that I came from Adam and Eve who were created by God
And you and others like you who say you were created from the monkey,
It's horrible to me to think that my ancestors were hairy, uncivilized, throwing stones to satisfy their animal desires.
I'm not a monkey and I'm ashamed of you for giving yourself such an opportunity,
I believe that a potential personality like you has been influenced by this thought at the hands of ignorant people who to you appear to be great.
good evening.
L. A. Ben-Ner
Excellent response.
Your claim that the dog smells on the outside of the nose is very interesting. On the other hand, I'm not sure if dog packs didn't stick to Neanderthals as well. So the dogs are not the cause of the destruction of the Neanderthals.
good evening
Sabdarmish Yehuda
No. Ben-Ner,
Sounds strange, but sounds reliable
And what about the fur and the tail? They too can detect wind direction, even with less resources
I would add, to what was said in the article, this too:
As a dog owner I noticed that the wetness of the nose increases the
The resolution of the odor source identification. The dog perceives the smell also in the outer part of the nose and not only in the inner part of the nose, like the human. This causes both an increase in his sensitivity to smell, in general, and the fact that just as he detects the direction of the wind with the help of his nose, he also detects the direction of the smell. The dog's nose also has a FIN-TUNING mechanism (subtle and precise direction of the source of the smell) by the ability to tilt itself slightly to the right and to the left, of the nose only, even when the head is fixed, similar to the movement of the eyeball to the right and left.
In conclusion, I would like to point out that in an article I read several years ago, the theory was raised as if the relationship between man and dog is a truly symbiotic relationship, in the biological-evolutionary sense. According to the same theory, the "homospins" formed a symbiotic relationship with the dog. The dog became the "nose" and the "war soldier" in the service of the homospines in exchange for the homospines
Take care of the dog for food, care, a protected living environment and also enjoy the strategy of cultivating the wisdom, thought and speech that characterizes the homospines.
This symbiosis is what gave the Homospiens the advantage and the victory in its war with Neanderthals, even though the latter, in terms of its physical structure, surpassed the Homospiens in its strength, dimensions, and senses of smell and sight.
I have a hammer for cool noses. I touch my cats nose all the time and have taught them to come to me and give me a nose to nose kiss. It's very cute. Too cute I would even say.
Cold nose - warm heart.
Greetings friends,
Ami Bachar
Mowgli:
There is room for determination in the matter because he has many testimonies.
Those who do not enslave themselves to the religious dogma can also notice and understand them.
Those who have become enslaved to religion will not let the facts confuse them.
Nice to read such a well-written article.
"And reacts with coolness on the side from which the wind blows, and this is due to increased evaporation on the side of the wind that causes a local decrease in temperature." I would explain it in three sentences..
Dear Mowgli
What bothers you about the term "man in his ape form"?, would you prefer the term "man in his divine form"?, would that restore your faith in the writer's professionalism?
and Rami Keenan, the writer,
The article is interesting and professional about a problem that I did not consider important in my Dalmatian dog.
Good Day
Sabdarmish Yehuda
"Man in his ape form"!? This statement destroyed all the trust I had in the writer's skills.
Where does this determination come from? A little modesty.
Maybe yes, maybe not. Does this indicate the rest? I think so!