A cat-themed post today, in response to the story that cats can ‘exploit’ humans by purring! The discovery was made by researchers at the University of Sussex. They have found that cats use their ‘soliciting purr’ to overpower their owners and garner attention and food.
What I find most interesting is the information that:
Unlike regular purring, this sound incorporates a ‘cry’, with a similar frequency to a human baby’s.
The team said cats have ‘tapped into’ a human bias – producing a sound that humans find very difficult to ignore.
The investigation was lead by Dr. Karen McComb, who was inspired set up the investigation by her own cat! She said that aafter a little bit of investigation, she discovered that:
There are other cat owners who are similarly bombarded early in the morning by this insistent purr that was really rather annoying.
I have 2 cats at home (well… one – the other goes hunting during the day), and I’ve known for months that they ‘exploit’ and manipulate our family to get what they want.
However this is the first scientific evidence. In my opinion, it shows that cats have evolved whilst living and interacting with humans. That is a good thing… because it shows that humans have not ‘stopped’ the course of evolution, but have become a part of it.
Of course, you could argue that it is impossible to change the course of evolution; any change is part of it.
If you’d like to read more, visit the BBC News website. The image used is one taken of my own cat taken during the week of snow we had earlier this year. You may not use it in your own work.
I can’t help but notice how your statement about your image (“You may not use it in your own work.”) directly contradicts your site license: (“Fred Hart Online by Fred Hart is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-Share Alike 2.0 UK: England & Wales License.”).
You could be more clearer with the copyright restrictions on posts and images on your website.
Also, while not illegal, it does kinda defeat the spirit and ethos of creative commons.
That is where you are wrong!
The Creative Commons licenses are intended only as a basic declaration of a user’s rights, allowing the owner to change the terms and conditions of the license (for all or part of the licensed work) to suit their needs.
In this case, I have chosen to remove the right to re-distribute this particular image. It is not defeating the spirit of Creative Commons; the whole purpose of the organization is to let users know their rights, which is what I have done.
In addition, I should point out that Creative Commons licenses are not copyright restrictions. As it says on their website, Creative Commons is only based on copyright.
http://wiki.creativecommons.org/Frequently_Asked_Questions#How_does_a_Creative_Commons_license_operate.3F
I hope this answers your question.