From the poster on YouTube. I think the dog was okay, @MikesHL13

Actually, Gladys was not trained for her session with the Milk Pants. The idea evolved from the fact that Gladys was completely obsessed with the baby goats, she licked them from the moment they were born, & accompanied us to bottle feed them 3 times a day – never missing a session. She cleaned all the little dribbles of milk as they drank & just adored them, lying super still on the ground while they pounced on her when they were small & running with them as they got bigger & bouncier. cont'd
FetchingTags 1 week ago

We joked that she would love to feed them herself, if only there was a way for her to hold the bottles. Practice for the video consisted of a failed attempt with a rigged bottle harness – she was too short & bottle angle was wrong, & what you see in the footage. She was less than a year old, & the words stand/stay were not in her vocabulary. She just stood on the hay & wore the pants while we taped & arranged goats.
FetchingTags 1 week ago

Bull Terriers are certainly not known for doing things that they don't want to. . .
FetchingTags 1 week ago

Tags for this video have been changed from 'cat, rabbit' to 'cat, rabbit, pounce, chase, hunt' - edited by littledragon_79

The way it moves is fantastic. I've seen a few vids of these suits now and I love the direction they're going with them. The way you can see the person so clearly, and the costume is good, but not brilliantly detailed you'd think it would be a bit lame. The magic is in the way it moves. It's such a light suit it really can pounce at the kids and it moves so fluidly it becomes far more real than even the most detailed servo controlled model. Great work and what a great day for the kids

Even when the target is being held in one place, the cat whiffs.

>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^Chaucer:
that cat isnt a very good aim.

I was thinking the same thing but, then I realized it's target was being pulled away when it pounced...

>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

>> ^Chaucer:
that cat isnt a very good aim.

I was thinking the same thing but, then I realized it's target was being pulled away when it pounced...


Still, it is quite adorably inaccurate.

>> ^Chaucer:

that cat isnt a very good aim.


I was thinking the same thing but, then I realized it's target was being pulled away when it pounced...

Listening and pouncing like that are exactly how they catch mice in crusty snow. I wonder if he was doing that instinctively, or if he saw mom, dad, or another fox doing it.

In reply to this comment by joedirt:
explain to me why anyone would ever promote this?


/me waits in the bushes to pounce on Ants Down vote.



This reminds me of when we would make Mavis beacon woman say whatever we wanted, when text to voice was first coming out. hahahhahahahah

I don't want to step on toes or flat out prove why you are wrong. I would rather link this and let your own Smart Mind absorbe why I would promote this ( if I wanted to spend the "game tokens" )

I enjoy your avatar, although it doesnt represent your "point of view "
you seem more of a country woodsman from "deliverance" making fat city boys squeel.

/me waits in the bushes to pounce on Ants Down vote.



This reminds me of when we would make Mavis beacon woman say whatever we wanted, when text to voice was first coming out. hahahhahahahah

Tags for this video have been changed from 'dog, laser, pointer, collar, chase, happy, pounce' to 'dog, laser, pointer, collar, chase, happy, pounce, dachshund, limousine dog' - edited by djsunkid

Yeah, it would have been better if it pounced.

>> ^demon_ix:

I was excited, but the ending disappointed!

@ qwiz and rottenseed.
i think maybe my point got lost in my rant.
so let me clarify:
i never agreed with choggies tactics,i found them to be abrasive and confrontational,but i did agree wholeheartedly on his intent.
which was to promote discussion by way of stirring the wasps nest.
i had told him that may be a counterproductive tactic but that was him..meh../shrugs.
so please do not take my rant as a "choggie is my savior".
it is not.
i just liked him and his quirky ways.
i am also not diminishing nor marginalizing those who have had bad experiences with choggie.the private messages and enflammatory comments directed at a particular person.that was their experience and they feel the way they do based on those experiences..who am i too judge the validity of their emotions?
what i WAS addressing however was how i was watching,and not for the first time,people putting blame on the chogster for certain trends and tendencies of this site.
that is a falsehood.
many good people.interesting and unique people left not due to choggies antics but rather the ever-increasing group-think that has permeated this site more and more.
you may disagree and that is your right but it also another discussion and one i welcome gladly.i think i could make a pretty strong case.
i totally agree with you qwiz on the points of popularity and the ebb and flow of users.
you will get no argument from me but that wasn't my point.
while the sift still retains a colorful dynamic that dynamic is nowhere near as diverse as it used to be.
because the group-mind sees any deviation from what they perceive as true and righteous as an affront to their sensibilities.
so anybody with a different voice,opinion or view is quickly pounced on and berated.
that me be done politely,even cordially but it is still done and it is usually done enmasse.
what i find so sad is that many here dont even realize this.
they dont see it.
i am not pointing this out not to be confrontational.
i am just stating an observation..not a judgment.
THIS is what choggie was fighting against.
detest his methods but understand his motivation.
i engage in a different way...
i vote up a video that i know the groupmind will ignore totally.i may not,and many times do not,agree with the content but if it offers a different voice..a different perspective then i will vote it up..even promote it if i have the PP's.
choggie fought against a collective myopia.
others..and we are few..(you know who you are)do the same but use different tactics.
so what if he sounded like don rickles on a crystal meth bender,at least he was entertaining and original.
but a deal is a deal and choggie broke that deal.
ok...those be the rules.
and rottenseed is spot on.
choggie has to be choggie and some here are far too sensitive to look past his abrasive nature (hurtful PM's aside)because they have no understanding the reasons for his words and actions.
this is why i stated "look to yourself before you place blame on another".
because just like you felt attacked by choggie on your posts or on your page many and i mean MANY felt the same way when they tried to share their religion,or their politics or philosophy.
all it takes is that first person to start in and the rest chime in like parrots,sqawking the same line.
just because you may not have been as vitriolic as choggie or abrasive and confrontational does not mean the very SAME results occured to them as choggie made YOU feel.
and there lies the hypocrisy.

as i stated in my previous comment.
i love this place and that still remains true.
i came to this site for three years everyday until i finally decided to share and archive.
i do not regret that decision.
there are some great people here.interesting and unique.even the members who,in my opinion,are part of the collective i like..i may disagree with them and the mental coma i perceive them to be in..but i still like them as people.
choggie was nemesis.
i wonder how many here who villified him will find that dynamic something they will miss?
real easy to think you are right when nobody is punching holes in your premise..
choggie drove a truck through.
i will miss my friends voice here on the sift.

There is nothing in these articles about men acting logical and going into problem-solving mode, rather that they have a more activated fight or flight response and women a more empathetic response. Read the article and you will see that you are going way too far in your conclusions (http://www.cfn.upenn.edu/perfusion/stress.pdf).

A quote from the article:
"Similarly, the present finding of greater prefrontal and limbic activation in males and females respectively should not be implicated with the sex stereotype in lay culture for the “emotional women” and “rational men”. As suggested by several studies, the gender difference in emotionality per se may be an ill-posed question (Barrett et al., 1998; Fischer, 1993)." (p. 18, Wang, et al, unknown year).

The stress test was also counting backwards from 1600 by subtracting 13. Not very similar to sitting in a car when a tornado comes. As a bonus there were no differences in performance between women and men, meaning men did not perform better! Don't quote popular science bro. Go straight to the source

That said there are obvious differences in our brains, but we do not know enough yet to claim what you do. >> ^LarsaruS:

>> ^Jinx:
>> ^LarsaruS:
My really long post...

Women of the sift. Does this offend you more or less than Westy's comment. Vote now, cos I think it might be close.

I was not out to put down females and if my comment came across like that then I was not clear enough, my bad.
I was simply talking about the biological differences in how males and females think, see links (first 3 things I found but there is a lot of research on this subject being done), due to being different, biologically, and having evolved with different pressures acting on us. It is not strange that we think differently and it isn't necessarily a bad thing. Why do males go into "problem solving mode" and not "feeling mode" IMO? For example when a sabre toothed tiger pounces you you have to act rationally and solve the problem, if you cower in fear you get eaten. Evolution favoured the clearheaded, fast thinking and problem solving minds of the male hunters over the ones who were slower on the uptake or felt first and acted second.
Different roles (think hunter/gatherer times) --> Different brains --> Different thought patterns.
Otherwise every single person in the world would think exactly the same way.
http://www.newhorizons.org/neuro/diamond_male_female.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051201165615.htm (2005)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2008/0403-men_are_from_mars.htm (2008)
(even has a video but I can't seem to embed stuff, oh well)

>> ^Jinx:

>> ^LarsaruS:
My really long post...

Women of the sift. Does this offend you more or less than Westy's comment. Vote now, cos I think it might be close.


I was not out to put down females and if my comment came across like that then I was not clear enough, my bad.

I was simply talking about the biological differences in how males and females think, see links (first 3 things I found but there is a lot of research on this subject being done), due to being different, biologically, and having evolved with different pressures acting on us. It is not strange that we think differently and it isn't necessarily a bad thing. Why do males go into "problem solving mode" and not "feeling mode" IMO? For example when a sabre toothed tiger pounces you you have to act rationally and solve the problem, if you cower in fear you get eaten. Evolution favoured the clearheaded, fast thinking and problem solving minds of the male hunters over the ones who were slower on the uptake or felt first and acted second.
Different roles (think hunter/gatherer times) --> Different brains --> Different thought patterns.
Otherwise every single person in the world would think exactly the same way.

www.newhorizons.org/neuro/diamond_male_female.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051201165615.htm (2005)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2008/0403-men_are_from_mars.htm (2008)
(even has a video but I can't seem to embed stuff, oh well)

I couldnt tell man, is that on me or the guy who finds the internet to personal ?

I said business attire,school uniforms, anywhere its mandated the basics of what must be worn, it creates a different environment to all be dressed the same, in the sense of business, everyone wear suits and such to be "professional" I dont see how other guy didnt get that parallelism it all has to do with being told what to wear... hahahha I never ever thought that thread would get so much response, I laugh when I see that.

In reply to this comment by Matthu:
It's not business attire either, hypocrite.
>> ^burdturgler:
>> ^BoneRemake:
So I was thinking, I don't see why this would go to a provincial level. Institute a basic dress policy as they have in business or in private even public schools. It is well within the schools/institutions right to have one. No I don't hate Muslims but I do religions; I 100 percent agree with the ideal that you accustom YOURSELF to the countries customs not the other way around.
burdturgler, you where a douche for pouncing on dudes g/f, she was referring what I said about Sikh knife, and it has everything to do with this story because it involves individual religious beliefs, if you are not up to speed on that story from a couple years back I can inform you of it.

This concept "that you accustom YOURSELF to the countries customs not the other way around" ... Does said country not include rights to religious freedom and the ability to worship and peacefully express those beliefs? Yes? It's sickening reading some of these posts. Is there some government mandate that says what business attire someone should wear? No. You 'hate religions', so you're a bigot and have no respect for other peoples rights. I'm a douche for "pouncing" on the knife thing? You're a douche for making it a part of this conversation. This video has nothing to do with that. A scarf is not a knife.