Stupidest thing you saw today

[GenesisNemesis]

If you call yourself alpha male then you're dumb enough to believe in anything.

Well, there are alpha males and alpha females.  But I just read the back end of Scientific American and a page discussed that.  The idea was that Alphas engage in zero-sum competition (I win, you lose) in some businesses and often succeed for a while, but cooperative companies are more successful in the long run.

It's been debunked and the the original researcher who made the claim has since rejected the concept. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/no-such-...le-2016-10

[TheGentlemanBastard]

Imagine 1. Being dumb enough to believe this and 2  Wasting your money on such bullshit.

Apparently the initial issue is sold out. P.T. Barnum was right.

I would imagine there are thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of buy-bull belt rednecks who blew their life savings to get two or three of these "cards."

[Cavebear]

Well, there are alpha males and alpha females.  But I just read the back end of Scientific American and a page discussed that.  The idea was that Alphas engage in zero-sum competition (I win, you lose) in some businesses and often succeed for a while, but cooperative companies are more successful in the long run.

It's been debunked and the the original researcher who made the claim has since rejected the concept. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/no-such-...le-2016-10

You are basing that on a paper published 30 years ago.

I am basing my understanding of it from newer ones.

https://www.livingwithwolves.org/portfol...lpha-male/

https://wolffacts.org/wolf-pack-hierarchy.html

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

I do acknowledge there is debate.  

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

But the most numerous and authoritive sources I can find suggest there are alpha males.  Even close observers can differ, I suppose. Personally, I hesitate to question 'Scientific American'.

[GenesisNemesis]

It's been debunked and the the original researcher who made the claim has since rejected the concept. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/no-such-...le-2016-10

You are basing that on a paper published 30 years ago.

I am basing my understanding of it from newer ones

https://www.livingwithwolves.org/portfol...lpha-male/

https://wolffacts.org/wolf-pack-hierarchy.html

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

I do acknowledge there is debate.  

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

But the most numerous and authoritive sources I can find suggest there are alpha males.  Even close observers can differ, I suppose.  Personally, I hesitate to question 'Scientific American'.

It is not a matter of debate, it's just wrong and based on a misunderstanding.  You could either acknowledge that, learn something and move on or continue to accept bullshit. Up to you.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

One of the cousins decided that wear copper was such a good idea that eating it must be that much better. He died ugly.

[jerry mcmasters]

You are basing that on a paper published 30 years ago.

I am basing my understanding of it from newer ones

https://www.livingwithwolves.org/portfol...lpha-male/

https://wolffacts.org/wolf-pack-hierarchy.html

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

I do acknowledge there is debate.  

https://www.nps.gov/articles/life-of-a-wolf.htm

But the most numerous and authoritive sources I can find suggest there are alpha males.  Even close observers can differ, I suppose.  Personally, I hesitate to question 'Scientific American'.

It is not a matter of debate, it's just wrong and based on a misunderstanding.  You could either acknowledge that, learn something and move on or continue to accept bullshit. Up to you.

GN your first cited article is poorly argued and wrong ("Business Insider" may not be the best source for zoology info).  It debunks the Alpha Male concept only in wolves and roosters- that is too small a sampling to prove "there really isn't any such thing" as AMs in nature.  Wikipedia lists several species.

List of dominance hierarchy species
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_do...hy_species

Gorillas form social groups with a dominance hierarchy, often topped by a large silverback male.
Dominance hierarchies occur in many social animals.

Primates
Researcher M. W. Foster investigated primates and found that the leaders were more likely to be those who did more for those around them instead of being determined by strength.[1]
Baboons
Alpha male baboons monopolize resources and mating access to females, and they are also more likely to suffer from stress.[2] Lower status males must expend more time and energy for mating opportunities. Alpha males may sometimes allow subordinate males to have access to mating, so the subordinate males can serve as "spare dads" and protect their offspring from other alpha males.[3]
Capuchin monkeys
A study on the association of alpha males and females during the non-breeding season in wild Capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella nigritus) examined whether alpha males are the preferred mate for females and, secondly, whether female-alpha status and relationship to the alpha-male can be explained through the individual characteristics and or social network of the female.[4] The results indicated that alpha male Capuchin are the preferred mate for adult females. However, only the alpha females had strong interactions with the alpha males by virtue of a dominance hierarchy among the females in which only the most dominant and strong females were able to interact with the alpha male.[4]
Chimpanzees
Common chimpanzees use strength, intelligence, and political alliances to establish and maintain alpha position.[5] There have been rare cases where a group has killed the alpha male.[6][7] Common chimpanzees show deference to the alpha of the community by ritualized postures and gestures such as presenting their back, crouching, bowing, or bobbing.[8][verification needed] Chimpanzees lower in rank than the alpha male will offer their hand while grunting to the alpha male as a sign of submission.[9] Bonobo society on the other hand is governed by alpha females. Males will associate with females for rank acquisition because females dominate the social environment. If a male is to achieve alpha status in a bonobo group, he must be accepted by the alpha female.[10] Female bonobos use homosexual sex to increase social status. High-ranking females rarely interact sexually with other females, but low-ranking females interact sexually with all females.[11]
Gorillas
Gorillas use intimidation to establish and maintain alpha position. A study conducted regarding the reproductive behavior of male mountain gorillas (Gorilla beringei beringei) found further evidence that dominant males are favored to father offspring, even when there is a greater number of males in a notably enlarged group size. The study also concluded that mating access dropped off less steeply with status, so that non-dominant males had mating success more similar to the alpha male than had been expected.[12]
Mandrills
Adult male mandrills with alpha status display vivid coloration on their skin, while those with beta status are more dull in colour. Both types of males engage in mating, but only the dominant alpha males have the ability to produce offspring. Male mandrills sometimes fight for breeding rights which results in dominance. Though conflicts are rare, they can be deadly. Gaining dominance, that is becoming the alpha male, results in an "increased testicular volume, reddening of sexual skin on the face and genitalia, and heightened secretion of the sternal cutaneous gland".[13] When a male loses dominance or its alpha status, the reverse happens, although the blue ridges remain brightened. There is also a fall in its reproductive success. This effect is gradual and takes place over a few years.[14][15][16] When beta males mate-guard a female, the competition between them allows the alpha males to have a greater chance of producing offspring,[17] since betas outnumber alphas 21 to 1.
Carnivora
Seals
undefined

Male elephant seals fighting at Piedras Blancas, California
Dominant male elephant seals arrive at potential breeding sites in spring, and fast to ensure that they can mate with as many females as possible.[18] Male elephant seals use fighting, vocal noises, and different positions to determine who will be deemed the dominant male.[18][19] When males reach eight to nine years of age, they have developed a pronounced long nose, in addition to a chest shield, which is thickened skin in their chest area.[18] They display their dominance by showing their noses, making loud vocalisations, and altering their postures.[18][19] They fight each other by raising themselves and ramming each other with their chests and teeth.[18]
When females arrive, the dominating males have already selected their territory on the beach.[18] Females cluster in groups called harems, which could consist of up to 50 females surrounding one alpha male.[18] Outside of these groups, a beta bull is normally roaming around on the beach.[18] The beta bull helps the alpha by preventing other males accessing the females.[18] In return, the beta bull might have an opportunity to mate with one of the females while the alpha is occupied.[18]
Canids
In the past, the prevailing view on gray wolf packs was that they consisted of individuals vying with each other for dominance, with dominant gray wolves being referred to as the "alpha" male and female, and the subordinates as "beta" and "omega" wolves. This terminology was first used in 1947 by Rudolf Schenkel of the University of Basel, who based his findings on researching the behavior of captive gray wolves.[20] This view on gray wolf pack dynamics was later popularized by the researcher L. David Mech in his 1970 book The Wolf. He later found additional evidence that the concept of an Alpha male may have been an interpretation of incomplete data and formally disavowed this terminology in 1999. He explained that it was heavily based on the behavior of captive packs consisting of unrelated individuals, an error reflecting the once prevailing view that wild pack formation occurred in winter among independent gray wolves. Later research on wild gray wolves revealed that the pack is usually a family consisting of a breeding pair and their offspring of the previous 1–3 years. In the article, Mech wrote that the use of the term "alpha" to describe the breeding pair adds no additional information, and is "no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha." He further notes the terminology falsely implies a "force-based dominance hierarchy." In 13 years of summer observations of wild wolves, he witnessed no dominance contests between them.[21]
In some other wild canids, the alpha male may not have exclusive access to the alpha female.[22] Other pack members as in the African painted dog (Lycaon pictus) may guard the maternity den used by the alpha female.[23]
Birds
Chiroxiphia
undefined

Alpha male Chiroxiphia manakins have full male colors, whereas beta males retain female-like plumage.
Male Chiroxiphia manakins can typically be designated alpha and beta, since there is a clear dominance relationship between them. There is only ever one alpha male, but, depending on species, there may be one or two beta males. Beta males are sometimes sub-adults - easily recognized, as their plumage retain female-like characters. Only the alpha male is ever seen to mate with the female.[24]
Montezuma oropendolas
Webster et al. observed that males defend sexually-receptive females, suggesting that Montezuma oropendolas have a female-defence mating system. While the females nest, the males fight and fend off one another, and the males were ranked depending on the outcome of each fight. The alpha male eventually pushes out all other males until he is the only one left. When the alpha males leave the others come back and defend females until he returns. This type of mating system is similar to that of polygynous mammals, not birds.[25]
Pale chanting goshawks
Normally, female pale chanting goshawks mate with a single male (monogamy), but in "broken veld" vegetation (a prey-rich habitat in the Little Karoo), a female and two males may form a polyandrous trio.[26] In these cases an alpha male and female will be assisted in raising the young by a beta male. The alpha male copulates with the female 31-5 days before laying while the beta male copulates 5-3 days before laying.[27] Subordinate co-breeding males may have reproductive fitness benefits by assisting the alpha female with nest defense and prey provision.[28] Non-breeding individuals from previous broods may remain in their natal territory and form part of the breeding group.[26]
Fish
Cichlids
Aggressive behavior in cichlids is ritualized and consists of multiple displays used to seek confrontation while being involved in evaluation of competitors,[29] coinciding with temporal proximity to mating. Displays of ritualized aggression in cichlids include a remarkably rapid change in coloration, during which a successfully dominant[29] territorial male assumes a more vivid and brighter coloration, while a subordinate or "nonterritorial" male assumes a dull-pale coloration.[30] In addition to color displays, cichlids employ their lateral lines to sense movements of water around their opponents to evaluate the competing male for physical traits/fitness.[31] Male cichlids are very territorial due to the pressure of reproduction, and establish their territory and social status by physically driving out[32] challenging males (novel intruders)[33] through lateral displays (parallel orientation, uncovering gills),[34] biting, or mouth fights (head-on collisions of open mouths, measuring jaw sizes, and biting each other's jaws). The cichlid social dichotomy is composed of a single dominant with multiple subordinates, where the physical aggression of males becomes a contest for resources[32] (mates, territory, food). Female cichlids prefer to mate with a successfully alpha male with vivid coloration, whose territory has food readily available.
Moon wrasse
undefined

The alpha male moon wrasse is brightly colored.
Some moon wrasses live in groups consisted of a dominant male, and a "harem" of about a dozen other wrasses, some female and some male.[35] The alpha male is more brightly colored, and at every low tide hour, changes from green to blue, and goes into a show of attacking and nipping all the other wrasses. This is his way of showing his dominance to the rest of the males and keeping the females in check. During breeding season and before high tide, the alpha male turns completely blue, gathers up every single female, and the spawning frenzy begins.
Mozambique tilapia

Another good basic description is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominance_hierarchy

Your second article is specific only to wolves.  It does include that the originator of the term, upon further examination, no longer thinks it applies to wolves (this is confirmed in bold by Wiki, above) but makes no claim about the concept of AMs in other species.  Certainly a thin reed to allow you to wave your hand and say there is no debate about the reality of AMs in the animal kingdom.

Because the terms (alpha, beta, etc) are so fraught with poison and misogyny when used in social media in reference to male humans, I get that it makes us recoil and want to deny the very reality of the concept itself.  But the concept exists, nature is wide and varied, and right now there are probably some male elephant seals somewhere battling for supremacy.

[Vera]

I forget, are we wolves or are we lobsters? Are we wrasses or, much more likely, asses? The right-wing nutters can't even keep their own stories straight. NO ONE is denying - or unaware - that we, and many other animals are hierarchical creatures (having differently functioning hierarchies because, guess what, we are not sea lions or termites). The entire point of this exchange was not whether we are hierarchical animals (which even children know at this point) but the fact that the "alpha male" terminology comes from a flawed study *and* transferred onto humans doesn't make much sense, regardless of the validity of said study.

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses... though in this case the ship has not just sailed, it crossed the globe, ran aground ages ago and is now slowly and inexorably turning to rust.

[GenesisNemesis]

I forget, are we wolves or are we lobsters? Are we wrasses or, much more likely, asses? The right-wing nutters can't even keep their own stories straight. NO ONE is denying - or unaware - that we, and many other animals are hierarchical creatures (having differently functioning hierarchies because, guess what, we are not sea lions or termites). The entire point of this exchange was not whether we are hierarchical animals (which even children know at this point) but the fact that the "alpha male" terminology comes from a flawed study *and* transferred onto humans doesn't make much sense, regardless of the validity of said study.

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses... though in this case the ship has not just sailed, it crossed the globe, ran aground ages ago and is now slowly and inexorably turning to rust.

Yeah the alpha male concept is *drum roll* based on the original research on wolves. That was the first time the concept was used. Because the wolf researcher coined it. That's why I brought up the wolf research, because the whole thing is based on... you know what, forget it. 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

endangeredwolfcenter.org

[Dom]

I have observed Alpha qualities in my dogs. For many decades and generations. Of course, they are not wild, and as stated above, not usually related. But there are some that are just naturally dominant, and some who are naturally subordinate. The subordinates seem to be generally happier, they got nothing to worry about, the dominant ones are always nice to them. Two dominants can be a huge problem, while two or more subordinates are just fine. There can be a group of subordinates, and no one claims dominance. Currently, the tiny Lhasa Apso is dominant, and the Great Dane subordinate. It has nothing to do with size or prowess etc., it seems to be that way from birth.

[jerry mcmasters]

I forget, are we wolves or are we lobsters? Are we wrasses or, much more likely, asses? The right-wing nutters can't even keep their own stories straight. NO ONE is denying - or unaware - that we, and many other animals are hierarchical creatures (having differently functioning hierarchies because, guess what, we are not sea lions or termites).  The entire point of this exchange was not whether we are hierarchical animals (which even children know at this point) but the fact that the "alpha male" terminology comes from a flawed study *and* transferred onto humans doesn't make much sense, regardless of the validity of said study.

No, his implication was that because the concept (alpha males in nature) is flawed and doesn't actually exist it doesn't make much sense transferring it onto humans.  It is (I assume) true that use of AM doesn't make sense when applied to humans, but NOT because the concept and term is not real.   AM is a term that is used properly within the context of certain animals that are hierarchical creatures (see my numerous citations).

[jerry mcmasters]

I forget, are we wolves or are we lobsters? Are we wrasses or, much more likely, asses? The right-wing nutters can't even keep their own stories straight. NO ONE is denying - or unaware - that we, and many other animals are hierarchical creatures (having differently functioning hierarchies because, guess what, we are not sea lions or termites). The entire point of this exchange was not whether we are hierarchical animals (which even children know at this point) but the fact that the "alpha male" terminology comes from a flawed study *and* transferred onto humans doesn't make much sense, regardless of the validity of said study.

Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses... though in this case the ship has not just sailed, it crossed the globe, ran aground ages ago and is now slowly and inexorably turning to rust.

Yeah the alpha male concept is *drum roll* based on the original research on wolves. That was the first time the concept was used. Because the wolf researcher coined it. That's why I brought up the wolf research, because the whole thing is based on... you know what, forget it. 

In your exchange with Cavebear you are stating that the concept itself is invalid ("debunked"), not just invalid in the particular case of wolves and humans.  Hopefully you understand that the concept and term are very real and are properly used to describe certain other animals.

[GenesisNemesis]

Yeah the alpha male concept is *drum roll* based on the original research on wolves. That was the first time the concept was used. Because the wolf researcher coined it. That's why I brought up the wolf research, because the whole thing is based on... you know what, forget it. 

In your exchange with Cavebear you are stating that the concept itself is invalid ("debunked"), not just invalid in the particular case of wolves and humans.  Hopefully you understand that the concept and term are very real and are properly used to describe certain other animals.

The concept itself originated from the research on wolves, and so the same assumptions used in the research on wolves is being used for other animals as well. What don't you get about that?

[jerry mcmasters]

In your exchange with Cavebear you are stating that the concept itself is invalid ("debunked"), not just invalid in the particular case of wolves and humans.  Hopefully you understand that the concept and term are very real and are properly used to describe certain other animals.

The concept itself originated from the research on wolves, and so the same assumptions used in the research on wolves is being used for other animals as well. What don't you get about that?

What don't you get about the assumptions being correct on some animals and not on others?  Do you not understand that the invalidity of the term when applied to wolves does NOT mean invalidity of the term when applied to elephant seals and gorillas?

[Dānu]

Where is Jack Hannah when you need him?

[c172]

I want to sub to a whole YouTube channel of Donald Trump Jr. coke rants.

[Dom]

The concept itself originated from the research on wolves, and so the same assumptions used in the research on wolves is being used for other animals as well. What don't you get about that?

What don't you get about the assumptions being correct on some animals and not on others?  Do you not understand that the invalidity of the term when applied to wolves does NOT mean invalidity of the term when applied to elephant seals and gorillas?

There may also well be a big difference between wild and domesticated animals. All life evolves over time. And evolution bestows lots of different traits, the ones that prove useful, persist. There are many things that are useful for one type of animal, and not another.

[jerry mcmasters]

I have observed Alpha qualities in my dogs. For many decades and generations. Of course, they are not wild, and as stated above, not usually related. But there are some that are just naturally dominant, and some who are naturally subordinate. The subordinates seem to be generally happier, they got nothing to worry about, the dominant ones are always nice to them. Two dominants can be a huge problem, while two or more subordinates are just fine. There can be a group of subordinates, and no one claims dominance.  Currently, the tiny Lhasa Apso is dominant, and the Great Dane subordinate. It has nothing to do with size or prowess etc., it seems to be that way from birth.

Another variable I read about while rabbit-holing the topic is that the Alpha role can on occasion be thrust upon a creature by chance.  Don't have the site to quote, nor do I even remember the animal cited (let's say baboons) but observers had identified the hierarchy in a group but then the group was attacked by some big predator, and the alpha and the next couple high ranking baboons were killed in the struggle.  So the females all started giving their attention to this one definitely not-alpha baboon.  The observers described this neo-Alpha as not quite knowing how to react, at first.

[jerry mcmasters]

Where is Jack Hannah when you need him?

Probably busy scrubbing his Twitter history of sexist zoology words.

[Vera]

Oh screw this, it's not worth the brain cells...


In other news:

[Szuchow]

Oh screw this, it's not worth the brain cells...


In other news:

Did he step down? 

[GenesisNemesis]

Oh screw this, it's not worth the brain cells...


In other news:

Did he step down? 

He did not. Truly, a man of great conviction.

[Szuchow]

Did he step down? 

He did not. Truly, a man of great conviction.

Nobody expected different outcome I wager.

[Vera]

Did he step down? 

Blamed the bots (which he apparently had gotten rid of. Truly, a mystery for the ages). Also, his mommy came to his rescue and told the other boys that her son is a good boy and they should play with him.  




I've never liked him, he's always struck me as rather... sleazy... Actually felt bad about not liking him and joked that it might be the mustache (as I don't like mustaches)... it didn't help at all that I tried watching one of his documentaries and it was.... embarrassingly bad. Like, obviously, documentaries are for the lay public (of which I am one) and they simplify things, but Sagan almighty, that one was ridiculous. He'd give you the simplest possible scientific fact and then you get a five-minute animated bit about, say, Galileo. *Might* have been a good little film for really young kids... for a serious documentary it was laughable.

So, after his Elon boots' licking I actually read a bit more about him... turns out, he really is... unpleasant - arrogant, sexual-assaulty (most likely) and just... unpleasant (someone was telling the story of meeting him once and being all excited because he was a fan... and apparently Tyson started lecturing him (incorrectly) on that person's area of expertise (something with chemistry, I forget exactly).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Snowpocalypse predicted, maybe 3 (7.62 cm) inches of snow. Serious run on the grocery stores. OMG!!!