Science of love

How scientist look at love!

Login to rate this video.

You can place this video on your website by inserting the (X)HTML code below:

Options:
pixels
pixels
Embed code:
<iframe src="https://www.snotr.com/embed/6644" width="400" height="330" frameborder="0"></iframe>

You can email this video to your friends by entering their addresses below:

Your information:
Recipients:

add Add another recipient

Human verification:

People who liked this video also liked

Stephen Fry's milk trick in QI
How We Planned to go to Mars by 1982 - The early Manned Missions
Germany’s Insane Hover Jet Transport: The Do 31 Story
Rocket Bicycle World Record ? 333 km/h (207 mph)
Why is Stella mad?
An unusual crash for two race bikes

Comments

22 comments posted so far. Login to add a comment.

Expand all comments

Picture of datastreamdude26 achievements

+29 1. datastreamdude commented 9 years ago

pointless experiments, makes me sick.

like an educated man couldn't have guessed all that with using animals.

here's an idea, try studying them in the wild.
Picture of cameramaster55 achievements

+20 2. cameramaster commented 9 years ago

Ah, Love! could thou and I with Fate conspire
To grasp this sorry Scheme of Things entire!
Would not we shatter it to bits - and then
Re-mould it nearer to the Heart's Desire!

-- Omar Khayyam
Picture of sitaauk47 achievements

+12 3. sitaauk commented 9 years ago

#1 I totally agree with you. This is insane that these poor things are held in captivity for this kind of stupid experiments- it doesn't even save any lives - it does nothing. All it says is that he misses his mum.
Picture of ranger9838 achievements

+11 4. ranger98 commented 9 years ago

Why are young monkeys separated from their mothers and experimented by frightening the shit out of them? This is such a stupid thing to do. Try that with your kids, mad scientists. :S
Picture of YetiGrowl38 achievements

+6 5. YetiGrowl commented 9 years ago

no hearted bastards.
Picture of Platonic66 achievements

+17 6. Platonic commented 9 years ago

#2 thought he was a mathematician.
excellent words!!
i agree with every comment...until now
Picture of Penak19 achievements

+14 7. Penak commented 9 years ago

i eat my food in kitchen but afterwards i still go to soft sofa.
Picture of Baboon39 achievements

+14 8. Baboon commented 9 years ago

#6 Omar Khayyâm is a persian Poet and mathematician

#2 very nice thank you
Picture of Humes17 achievements

+11 9. Humes commented 9 years ago

#1 and more: They were not pointless. "Guessing" the outcome, even how educated you are is not what you call science or "a proven fact". Go ahead and have all educated men and women guess the outcome instead of actually finding out and we'll see how accurete science you'll find. There are many examples in history where educated people have guessed the outcome and been completely off the map so yeah, I think I'd rather see experiments.

These tests are old and were done in 1963-1968. I agree they are crule and inhumane but they are not pointless, pretty much the opposite, we've learned a great deal from them when it comes to behavior and learning.
They would never have passed the rules of ethics scientists have today.

I do not support they way this experiment was executed, and I agree its crule and unethical. But it wasen't pointless. And no, if you want to call it science and proven knowledge you can't just have educated people taking a guess.

#3 If that is your conclusion then Im afried you totally missed what they found out doing this experiment.
Picture of Hades47 achievements

+11 10. Hades commented 9 years ago

I agree with all of you but remember that this experiment has been done several years ago, and despite its questionable use of animals, I think it has been quite useful to understand also how we behave, and not just monkeys. You should also ask yourself how long that baby monkey have been kept away from its real mother.
However, I'm happy we don't need those experiments anymore, or at least we can find other ways to do them.
Picture of Cat-Woman22 achievements

+11 11. Cat-Woman commented 9 years ago

for those that think that's cruel,probably never heard about Sergei Brukhonenko experience whit a dog...that's really sick...at least these monkeys were not hurt...
Picture of nooitaf40 achievements

+6 12. nooitaf (admin) commented 9 years ago

Picture of Mellow14 achievements

+4 13. Mellow commented 9 years ago

Wow..!
Why is this video rated so low.. This is truly an amazing experiment. Jet so simple.
Picture of Mellow14 achievements

-3 14. Mellow commented 9 years ago

Yo!!! Please delete the spamer above! Befouling our most beloved snotr. Pf...!

The experiment.. I think.. Is a bit skewed.. The feeder and the "mother" shouldn've been on the opposite sides of the cage..

!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSrIkUXwsNk&feature=player_detailpage

Your right!
That is even more... unconventional.
Very interesting and amazing.. Could've never guessed it ;)


#1
Your shallow.

#3
Your eighter young or a woman.

#4
I can see that you are a dog.

#5
Oh yeh.. Those evil evil scientist..
Well.. you know.. That's what they do.. They are evil.

#7
Your gay.

#9
Spot on.

#10
Ah.. you..
Your so much more tolerant than me.

#11
Yeh.. You're right. I hadn't. Glad I did. That's amazing.
Picture of nomaddaf22 achievements

-4 15. nomaddaf commented 9 years ago

Oh my god when did we all become such big babies? How many times do you think wild monkeys get scared crazy? Daily I would think. And then not from false stimulus,but from things that often in fact do kill them. They are often killed by their own fathers, and are orphaned. This guy says "boo" and you all lose your minds. Grow up. These animals have a different life,but just as good as wild. And will most assuredly die a better death than in the wild.I have seen film of one group of monkeys killing the young of another group and then eating it but leaving the skin. Then the mother holding the skin as if the baby might wake up. Nature is a harsh place. At our worst we are more kind than nature. Go hug a tree. I hear they need affection !!!!!!
Picture of datastreamdude26 achievements

+4 16. datastreamdude commented 9 years ago

9. Humes - we've learned a great deal from them when it comes to behavior and learning.

err please, what did we learn here mate, that if ya scare it shitless, it will run to its mum, please explain?

14. Mellow - so im shallow, because i care for the welfare of others?


animal experiments are disgusting, most of you seem to enjoy them, good luck to you, and you wonder why the world is the way it is, cunts.
Picture of FatalBaboon25 achievements

0 17. FatalBaboon commented 9 years ago

You guys are quite amusing, and conveniently entirely missed the point, in order to say it's useless.

The key here is that they were trying to prove that affection (love) is as primary a need as food, not just a secondary thing you could live without.

Where do you think scientists began, when they barely knew anything? how do you think your medicine got tested? And it's damn normal, we're a dominant species.
Picture of Mellow14 achievements

0 18. Mellow commented 9 years ago

#16
YEah! :)
I think you just got us all figured out.
Well yes.. :) I careD for animal welfare and feelings as well. Throughout the 90's.
Ok. But Derek FOreal now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilxddEKXO8E
I said that it is so interesting because it proves that in a primates mind (so a good reason to think that in a homo's apien's as well) - there is a cognitive distinguishment in the developmental process of the process of feeding and of process of affection. Hence although there might be an affection to conceptional things - there is a distinguishable (by a conductible experiment) affection to the understanding of mother/or all of that that is Not connected to feeding. Hence for the next experiments the scientists will take into account that a dog would have a separate feeing that could be called affection (by touch.. by sound.. by a combination) and that that particular feeling/cognitive process is not the same as mere feeding process.

+ A lof of things can be deduced.

+ But than.. I don't personally get how can they state that going from the fact that when scared he ran to the metal mama!? I mean.. I see how that proves than there was an affection.. but I don't see how does that equate it with feeding. :(|) <3

So.. Ok. I do agree that the thing learnt is really small.. ...
No I don't really. I think your a big baby who needs to hug a tree :D #15

#15 and #17 - Spot on!

#16 - We cultivate animals - that's why we have space travel.


Btw -
An experiment showing effects of touch http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7304831465595157022# About 06:40 about withdrawal from mother and touch.

::(|)
Picture of makbeth36 achievements

+1 19. makbeth commented 9 years ago

the cloth surrogate is a closer likeness to its own mother/species, so obviously the baby will cling to it instinctually for security.
its probably scared enough without the crazy monster machine. The food machine probably doesn't register as a being the way the surrogate does to the baby.
For a more accurate result try the same with a good replica of the mother and the cloth surrogate.
This does not have anything to do with "love", just instinct.
Picture of Humes17 achievements

0 20. Humes commented 9 years ago

#16 check #17 comment.
Picture of Petra12 achievements

0 21. Petra commented 9 years ago

Very interesting experiment.
Picture of cripplecog16 achievements

0 22. cripplecog commented 9 years ago

They could just ask me.
I like to eat when I'm hungry, and snuggle when I'm not.