11-09-2003, 07:02 AM
|
|
|
Snakes in the Garden - herpetology, philosophy lessons
(paghat) wrote in
news
landscape confuse them on their journeys. And a salamander's idea of
(or response to) a landmark might be wildly different from yours or
mine.
That's true.
Since their bodies generate no heat (pythons excepted -- they do have
a little-understood body-warming mechanism & have even been observed
regulating egg temperatures with their bodies, rather like broody
hens), snakes certainly wouldn't warm each other up. The possibility
of masses of snakes cooling down more slowly might explain why old
dens do become increasingly populated until some include thousands
upon thousands of snakes. They do also shelter singly or in small
My thinking is that while they won't generate any heat, they will
gradually lose some of the heat they brought with them. However, with a
bunch of snakes at the same temperature, the heat transfer will be slow.
numbers, however, very effectively. Some garter snakes can even be
frozen solid & thaw out in spring perfectly all right, yet they
cluster in dens by the thousands -- so their ability to survive
freezing seems to have little to do with mass-denning behavior
practiced by snakes of many species that share few other behaviors in
common.
I heard about that, didn't remember until you mentioned, though. I
dunno, they may come out of it alive, but I imagine it can't be too good
for them. At any rate I still think the survival chances are better en
masse. I mean (if you're the snake) who knows when it'll be warm enough
to thaw out. You'd be like, oh shit here's a badger thinking 'snake
popsicle' play dead play dead. Wait, I can't move.
For some people, that response is to cats, though to me a fear of
kitties is absurd. For others, its to rats, which are so much like
small puppies in their intelligence & loving behavior, that too seems
irrational to me. I happen to have that response spiders, even knowing
I guess I have the same type of aversion towards insects. I'm not really
scared of them, but I'll be damned if I'll let one touch me. The only
insects I'll willingly touch are mosquitoes and only to crush them. I'll
also attempt to flick houseflies to hell with my fingernail if I can
sneak up on one. Other pests I'll have to use gloves or some other
indirect method.
Yet there is very little snake-mythology that is entirely devoid of an
element of fear -- even Chinese serpent mythology which assumes a
profound nobility is also edged with powerful authority -- so though
it makes little sense to me, it's clear that it is indeed much more
common to be scared to death of snakes than of shirt buttons.
I'm not that familar with Chinese serpent mythology, only "Legend of The
White Snake", but the rest seems to cast snakes unfavorably. There's
also some Greek myths favorable to snakes, not sure I remember then
correctly, but one is Aesculapius (the physician) getting the "gift of
tongues" by having snakes lick his ears. There's also the episode in
the Iliad where Lacoon (?) and his kids (?) get eaten by giant serpents
at the altar. Good if you're a Greek, not so good if you're a Trojan.
When you see vegetarian gorillas delicately handling & admiring small
animals in the wild with curiosity & affection but never harming them
(as captured on nature shows), then compare that to omniverous chimps
wacking the same beasties & fighting over the pieces, our own
omniverous behavior in wrecking everything we encounter in nature
seems indeed an omniverous trait. That some of us have the same
hmm, I've seen some of the shows you might be talking about, especially
with Jane Goddall and some of her chimpanzee studies. But I keep
thinking about bonobos (but I don't know if they are omnivorous, but
being nearly identical to chimps I would say so). The shows I've seen
make bonobos out to be the hippies of the animals world. Additionally,
pandas are omnivorous, and while they can go mental on you, seem to be
content to sit around. Still more, adolescent elephants, clearly
herbivorous, have been known to kill rhinoceroes for no good reason
(Cynthia Moss). When they brought in some older elephants to serve as
role models, the rhino killing stopped. There are some other examples of
elephants going on rampage, but those acts seem more retributive than
wanton.
Technology is an explanitory advantage only if one regards the
cleverness in chasing buffalos off a cliff a "technological," or
digging a hole too big for a mammoth to get out of, the shovel being
the extent of that technology. But as toolmaking or tool using has
turned out not to be exclusive to humans, I'm not sure technology is
the overriding factor. That we've taken it vastly farther than other
species of tool-users seems to be to our DISadvantage, unless
supplanting all of nature with concrete really does have some
long-term advantage for our species as we warm up the planet, melt the
polar caps, toxify our immediate environment, drive all other species
to extinction, eradicate all forests, & by means of rapid travel
introduce new terrible diseases into our populations with increasing
regularity. I've a sneaking suspicion that when technology has run its
course, we'll have killed ourselves.
Well that's the rub. Technology gives people power to do things that
they could not every possible hope to accomplish by themselves. But
eventually when Mephistophles comes to Faust for payment, things will
have come full circle.
- ST
|