Goshawk
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,451
...er... your linkie takes me to story about Bush's fanny pack mike. 
Try this one?
She apparently collected hair and fecal samples for DNA analysis, but either it's taking a long time to get them done, or the results were not what she wanted and she has yet to call a big press conference to announce an Emily Latella-style "...never mind..."
Initial tests, however, done last summer, indicate that they are from chimpanzees. Possibly another sub-species of chimp, but still "chimps".
This story also details the obsession that photographer Karl Amman has had with these mystery apes since 1996. He was the one who brought them to Science's attention, but he too has never been able to take pictures of them, except for one or two (which seems odd to me--he's a professional photographer, he's supposedly been stalking these animals for 8 years, and he only has a couple of photos?)--other than that, he too has only footprints, hair and fecal samples, and nests.
This link also has a photo of her holding one of her plaster casts of the enormous footprint. Maybe it's just me, but I immediately flashed on the various Bigfoot and Yeti plaster casts I've seen over the years. They're "enormous", too. And similarly, the scientist/explorer/adventurer holding those ALSO insists every time, "It's SO BIG, it MUST be a new species..." Like that proves something.
Shelly Williams is described as a "primatologist", but her doctorate is in experimental psychology. She is also in some articles described as a primatologist "with" Georgia State University in Atlanta, and in some articles as an "independent primate researcher". In 1994 she was listed as teaching "learning and communication" in the GSU Language Research Center, Psychology Department, with a focus on primate research. In 1996 she was listed as teaching the same thing. In 1998, ditto. By 2000, she is no longer listed.
She is not listed in the GSU's Psych Department Faculty Directory, unless she's using a married name. Nor is she listed on the faculty of the Language Research Center. The LRC, famously, is the home of Kanzi the Chimp and the lexigrams.
So, what I'm hearing here is someone who describes herself to magazine reporters as being "with" Georgia State, and by inference "with" the Kanzi the Chimp project, and as a primatologist--but who isn't really.
And I find myself wondering just how much field experience she actually has. She only has a few moments of video, and from the sound of the articles, she didn't spend *that* much time actually tracking and observing the animals. This article says she spent two months looking into this. Now, I'm familiar with other accounts of the fieldwork done by serious primate researchers, and it's full of a nearly overwhelming amount of tedious and frequently frustrating tracking and patient observation that goes on for months, if not years. But this sounds like she hung around just long enough, guided by Karl Amman, who took her to exactly where the "lion killers" lived, to get a few glimpses of them, and collected her samples, and then came home.
And excitedly filed her story ("dibs" on the discovery), and started holding up her big plaster cast for magazine photographers.
Try this one?
No, actually, there are five possibilities: A, B, and C, above, plus:
This is also old news--she press-released this a year ago. No idea why the Beeb is re-running it.
She apparently collected hair and fecal samples for DNA analysis, but either it's taking a long time to get them done, or the results were not what she wanted and she has yet to call a big press conference to announce an Emily Latella-style "...never mind..."
Initial tests, however, done last summer, indicate that they are from chimpanzees. Possibly another sub-species of chimp, but still "chimps".
This story also details the obsession that photographer Karl Amman has had with these mystery apes since 1996. He was the one who brought them to Science's attention, but he too has never been able to take pictures of them, except for one or two (which seems odd to me--he's a professional photographer, he's supposedly been stalking these animals for 8 years, and he only has a couple of photos?)--other than that, he too has only footprints, hair and fecal samples, and nests.
This link also has a photo of her holding one of her plaster casts of the enormous footprint. Maybe it's just me, but I immediately flashed on the various Bigfoot and Yeti plaster casts I've seen over the years. They're "enormous", too. And similarly, the scientist/explorer/adventurer holding those ALSO insists every time, "It's SO BIG, it MUST be a new species..." Like that proves something.
Shelly Williams is described as a "primatologist", but her doctorate is in experimental psychology. She is also in some articles described as a primatologist "with" Georgia State University in Atlanta, and in some articles as an "independent primate researcher". In 1994 she was listed as teaching "learning and communication" in the GSU Language Research Center, Psychology Department, with a focus on primate research. In 1996 she was listed as teaching the same thing. In 1998, ditto. By 2000, she is no longer listed.
She is not listed in the GSU's Psych Department Faculty Directory, unless she's using a married name. Nor is she listed on the faculty of the Language Research Center. The LRC, famously, is the home of Kanzi the Chimp and the lexigrams.
So, what I'm hearing here is someone who describes herself to magazine reporters as being "with" Georgia State, and by inference "with" the Kanzi the Chimp project, and as a primatologist--but who isn't really.
And I find myself wondering just how much field experience she actually has. She only has a few moments of video, and from the sound of the articles, she didn't spend *that* much time actually tracking and observing the animals. This article says she spent two months looking into this. Now, I'm familiar with other accounts of the fieldwork done by serious primate researchers, and it's full of a nearly overwhelming amount of tedious and frequently frustrating tracking and patient observation that goes on for months, if not years. But this sounds like she hung around just long enough, guided by Karl Amman, who took her to exactly where the "lion killers" lived, to get a few glimpses of them, and collected her samples, and then came home.
And excitedly filed her story ("dibs" on the discovery), and started holding up her big plaster cast for magazine photographers.
Goshawk
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,451
...I would also have to question the natives' characterization of these apes as "lion killers".
Just a couple of hits:
"Lions do not live in heavy forests and jungles..."
"There have been reports on predation on chimpanzees by large carnivores. In Mahale, at least 4 chimpanzees were eaten by lions in 1989, when lions visited and stayed in the home range of a study group (1). In a rain forest habitat, where lions are not common predators, only leopards are potential predators on chimpanzees."
"Lions visited and stayed." If your predator only visits occasionally, you don't evolve techniques as a group, as a race, for surviving attacks by them.
Lions live in open savannah. Apes live in heavy forest.
I think it's more likely that the natives told the credulous Swiss photographer what he wanted to hear, perhaps speaking rhetorically, or metaphorically (the ability to kill lions being powerful symbolism in lion country), "Oh, yes, sir, these apes are strong enough to kill a lion!" And he, wishing to believe it true, took it seriously. And Williams also took it seriously.
Just a couple of hits:
"Lions do not live in heavy forests and jungles..."
"There have been reports on predation on chimpanzees by large carnivores. In Mahale, at least 4 chimpanzees were eaten by lions in 1989, when lions visited and stayed in the home range of a study group (1). In a rain forest habitat, where lions are not common predators, only leopards are potential predators on chimpanzees."
"Lions visited and stayed." If your predator only visits occasionally, you don't evolve techniques as a group, as a race, for surviving attacks by them.
Lions live in open savannah. Apes live in heavy forest.
I think it's more likely that the natives told the credulous Swiss photographer what he wanted to hear, perhaps speaking rhetorically, or metaphorically (the ability to kill lions being powerful symbolism in lion country), "Oh, yes, sir, these apes are strong enough to kill a lion!" And he, wishing to believe it true, took it seriously. And Williams also took it seriously.
Anyone ever read "Last Chance to See..." by Douglas Adams?
It's a great book about Adams' travels to see endangered species. Highly recommended.
In it he recounts a meeting with a gorilla expert (I can't remember where he was exactly, but they were in the jungle looking for Mountain gorillas).
In it, the expert was wearily describing how the native guides would respond to questions about who would win in a fight between a lion and a gorilla.
They would tell exciting stories about how the gorillas would wrap the lions in jungle plants and then stamp up and down on them to crush them.
The actual truth, that, er, they don't meet, what with living in different environments was a lot less exciting so they never bothered mentioning this to the tourists.
Exciting stories instead of boring truth, hmm... sounds familiar. Where's my PKE detector...
It's a great book about Adams' travels to see endangered species. Highly recommended.
In it he recounts a meeting with a gorilla expert (I can't remember where he was exactly, but they were in the jungle looking for Mountain gorillas).
In it, the expert was wearily describing how the native guides would respond to questions about who would win in a fight between a lion and a gorilla.
They would tell exciting stories about how the gorillas would wrap the lions in jungle plants and then stamp up and down on them to crush them.
The actual truth, that, er, they don't meet, what with living in different environments was a lot less exciting so they never bothered mentioning this to the tourists.
Exciting stories instead of boring truth, hmm... sounds familiar. Where's my PKE detector...
One last minor point:
Although this doesn't defend her pretty basic errors in credulity of stories and the rather suspicious absence of follow up material like DNA results.
Maybe it's like photos - you can get the expensive quick turnaround or the cheaper 'send it off and get them back years later' service. Plus they sometimes send you someone else's Skiing holiday DNA results by mistake.
I myself have a degree in Experimental Psychology and it is pretty heavy on animal behaviour and primatology. If you specialised in your Masters and Doctorate studies it would be a pretty fair claim to say you were a primatologist.
Although this doesn't defend her pretty basic errors in credulity of stories and the rather suspicious absence of follow up material like DNA results.
Maybe it's like photos - you can get the expensive quick turnaround or the cheaper 'send it off and get them back years later' service. Plus they sometimes send you someone else's Skiing holiday DNA results by mistake.
Based on examination of faeces.MRC_Hans said:
There is an article about it in this week's (not next week's as the Beeb story states) New Scientist, which includes a still from Williams' video. The article is a good deal more ambivalent about the possibility of these being a new species (or even sub-species of chimpanzee) than the BBC story.
The DNA was being analyzed at the Henry Doorly Zoo in Omaha.
http://www.n2.net/prey/bigfoot/articles/mysteryapedna.htm
If you go to their genetics research section they have a Great Ape Project but the link is not working:
http://www.omahazoo.com/ccr/index.asp?page=/ccr/genetics/genhome.htm
http://www.n2.net/prey/bigfoot/articles/mysteryapedna.htm
If you go to their genetics research section they have a Great Ape Project but the link is not working:
http://www.omahazoo.com/ccr/index.asp?page=/ccr/genetics/genhome.htm
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Well, I suppose we'll just have to wait and see. After all this is not like bigfoot or something, this is in an area where the discovery of a new species, even a large one, is possible. We must also allow for the possibility that it is a new species or subspecies, but that the mentioned characteristics are exaggarated or over-estimated.
Hans
Hans
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2002
- Messages
- 24,961
Well, I have made turds the size of which were suggestive of a gorilla from time to timeJamesM said:
. Still, a lot of zoological research is actually based on studying excrement, so....
Perhaps we could coin a phrase: Show me what you (censored), and I'll tell you what you are
.Edited to add: For instance, in relation to Claus' misplaced link, a lot of studies of politicians could metaphorically be termed excrement research
.Hans
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2003
- Messages
- 28,209
Seems to have vanished from the BBC science an nature page although the page is still showing stories from as far bck as oct 8th
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/default.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/default.stm
Goshawk
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,451
Oh, okay, thanks for clarifying that.Ashles said:
I did kind of wonder how someone who was really only a psychologist could get away with so blatantly claiming to be a primatologist, but we've seen other woos claim to be various sorts of specialists in this-that-n-the-other-thing, so I just thought it was more of the same.The full story of this case is out in The New Scientist and I will try and briefly summarize.
First of all this is a serious, well documented find that many people are taking very seriously. The results of the DNA testing and it was only mtDNA testing, indicates that these over-sized animals (estimated from photos at 50% over the weight of a normal full grown chimp) are the common chimp subspecies, schweinfurthii. The magazine shows a recent photo and an early photo of one of these animals (apparently killed) being held up between two Africans. They have been seen, documented and photographed since the 1930s. Because of decades of
civil war in the areas where they occur, no work was done on them after genetic testing came into being until now.
The Center for the Reproduction of Endangered Species at the San Diego Zoo also conducted mtDNA analysis from hair. The team at the zoo in Omaha used mtDNA from fecal samples. Mitochondrial DNA cannot give the full story since it only represents what is inherited maternally. A team at the University of Amsterdam will conduct an analysis of nuclear DNA using samples provided by Karl Ammann who journeyed to the area to observe and photograph them. This is pending. Extracting nuclear DNA from fecal material is difficult and may prove impossible.
So far the mtDNA evidence says they are chimps but theories still abound regarding their size and black face: gorilla-chimp hybridization (not ruled out thru mtDNA), a new subspecies, a new species of chimp and so on.
First of all this is a serious, well documented find that many people are taking very seriously. The results of the DNA testing and it was only mtDNA testing, indicates that these over-sized animals (estimated from photos at 50% over the weight of a normal full grown chimp) are the common chimp subspecies, schweinfurthii. The magazine shows a recent photo and an early photo of one of these animals (apparently killed) being held up between two Africans. They have been seen, documented and photographed since the 1930s. Because of decades of
civil war in the areas where they occur, no work was done on them after genetic testing came into being until now.
The Center for the Reproduction of Endangered Species at the San Diego Zoo also conducted mtDNA analysis from hair. The team at the zoo in Omaha used mtDNA from fecal samples. Mitochondrial DNA cannot give the full story since it only represents what is inherited maternally. A team at the University of Amsterdam will conduct an analysis of nuclear DNA using samples provided by Karl Ammann who journeyed to the area to observe and photograph them. This is pending. Extracting nuclear DNA from fecal material is difficult and may prove impossible.
So far the mtDNA evidence says they are chimps but theories still abound regarding their size and black face: gorilla-chimp hybridization (not ruled out thru mtDNA), a new subspecies, a new species of chimp and so on.
Jeff Corey
New York Skeptic
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2001
- Messages
- 13,714
"...only a psychologist"?Goshawk said:Oh, okay, thanks for clarifying that.
Mercutio, what do you think?
Most psychologists are, in fact, primatologists. The primates happen to be people.
I was going to question that myself.
A lot of people think psychology is a 'soft' science with a lot of unproveable mumbo-jumbo (thank you very much Mr Freud).
But psychology has a lot of hard data which is well repeatable in any clinical trials.
Experimental psychology has discovered many aspects to brain mechanism, structure, process, analysis of stimuli, repeatable behaviours... basically loads of stuff (he concluded scientifically).
The scientific analysis of behaviour is absolutely fascinating and can be analysed in many ways with every degree of accuracy as other scientific fields.
The confusion comes with trying to analyse a person as a whole which is, of course, very erratic.
It's like knowing how clouds are formed, how static electricity forms lightning, how condensation and evaporation work, how pressure differentials affect wind currents, how water heats air, how convection, conduction and radiation all work, but then trying to predict weather patterns for the next ten years.
Psychology isn't a woo subject, but some practitioners do make it seem like it.
It's not magic and anyone who claims to know "the real you" will always be wrong because it's just too complex. However it is possible to make educted guesses from a relatively small amount of information. That's when psychology crosses over with cold reading.