# What is owning a theraphosa like?



## salsalover (Feb 25, 2011)

I know, it is probably a dumb question to most of you guys but i do not own a theraphosa however they look so adorable and seem so smart i am beginning to wonder what owning one is like. Anyone care to share?


like all my posts pics ARE welcome!


----------



## Najakeeper (Feb 25, 2011)

Itchy......


----------



## Sleazoid (Feb 25, 2011)

salsalover said:


> I know, it is probably a dumb question to most of you guys but i do not own a theraphosa however they look so adorable and seem *so smart* i am beginning to wonder what owning one is like. Anyone care to share?
> 
> 
> like all my posts pics ARE welcome!


You can't really call any tarantula smart...


----------



## salsalover (Feb 25, 2011)

> You can't really call any tarantula smart...



lol well i HAVE seen some smart enough to sense who their owner is,poop in one spot and some are smart enough to move things around in their cage ....so...yeah thats pretty smart compared to some animals


----------



## DemonAsh (Feb 25, 2011)

Najakeeper said:


> Itchy......


I second this...


----------



## Jacobchinarian (Feb 25, 2011)

Its hard until you find a way to keep humidity way up. Also get a roach colony because my t stirmi eats 17/20 of all my crickets.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Feb 25, 2011)

salsalover said:


> lol well i HAVE seen some smart enough to run straigh to their owner,poop in one spot and play games....so...yeah thats pretty smart compared to some animals


Seriously?? :wall:

You are sadly mistaken. 

No tarantula can recognize their owner or "play games."


----------



## salsalover (Feb 25, 2011)

> No tarantula can recognize their owner or "play games."


that's a pretty broad statement i know a few owners who keep toys in their tarantulas cage and use them to interact with the tarantula and some tarantulas do go in the same spot every time i mean just because you haven't heard of them doing any of the things i described doesn't mean i haven't seen them and it doesn't mean it's never happened any time in history that's pretty bold to say "oh it's never ever happen before it won't ever happen and 100% of all tarantulas in the world don't know how to do it" granted they aren't dogs but some owners interact with their tarantulas so much that they DO run to the owners when let out of the cage and some do like crawling ontheir owners i never said that this would be the general behavior for all tarantulas i expected people to know that i meant SOME


----------



## Spiderdan24 (Feb 25, 2011)

I kinda understand what your saying my rose hair always dumps left over food in its water bowl. I changed the tank round and guess what she still dumped it in her water bowl cos she know it annoys me lmao


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Feb 25, 2011)

salsalover said:


> that's a pretty broad statement i know a few owners who keep toys in their tarantulas cage and use them to interact with the tarantula and some tarantulas do go in the same spot every time i mean just because you haven't heard of them doing any of the things i described doesn't mean i haven't seen them and it doesn't mean it's never happened any time in history that's pretty bold to say "oh it's never ever happen before it won't ever happen and 100% of all tarantulas in the world don't know how to do it" granted they aren't dogs but some owners interact with their tarantulas so much that they DO run to the owners when let out of the cage and some do like crawling ontheir owners i never said that this would be the general behavior for all tarantulas i expected people to know that i meant SOME



Some tarantulas do go in the same spot to keep poo from being all over the place. That's instincts. 

What your perceiving as "playing games" and interacting with toys is not them "playing a game". My Ts will frequently roll water dishes around. They aren't playing with it, they just don't like where it's at. 

As for tarantulas running to their owners... Give me a break. You can't be serious. Tarantulas are near blind, they don't "see" you. They can sense vibrations. And since they don't know what we are, they can't perceive you as their "owner" or even like you.  And that's for ALL tarantulas not just some. 

And please, use punctuation.


----------



## Suidakkra (Feb 25, 2011)

I think that tarantulas may have a small perception of pattern recogination at best. Their brains are rather small and primitive, only large enough for survival instincts. Basically all tarantulas are biological robots with basic programming. Eat, mate,survive. 

They may be able to recoginize a pattern but only in the simplest terms.


----------



## Rob1985 (Feb 25, 2011)

Personally, the Theraphosa genus to me is just another terrestrial NW, but really big!  lol


----------



## Mez (Feb 25, 2011)

Its awsome. I only own a little 10-12cm T. apophysis, shes made a huge hill/burrow at the back of the tank, all i need to to is drop a cricket at the front and she will run straight out at it almost hitting the front of the tank!


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Feb 25, 2011)

Tarantulas aren't stupid. Therefore, they are smart. There is no in between. Now calculating the level of intelligence is another subject matter. Fact is, if you watch your Ts very closely as many claim to do there is no way to dispute this. 


Now owning a Theraphosa which was the initial topic is very appealing. They are always out and about, (some of which try climbing as I've filmed mine climbing a tree once) and can be fairly entertaining Ts to say the least. They will also break your pockets on feeding if you don't have colonies of some sort. I use Goliath Horned worms, fuzzy rats, and Dubia roaches for my girl. And as another comment stated, yes they can be very itchy. 

I wouldn't say it's a must have, but they are in my book, a great have when you do decide to purchase one. Or two. Or three.


----------



## Suidakkra (Feb 25, 2011)

Maudua said:


> Tarantulas aren't stupid. Therefore, they are smart. There is no in between. Now calculating the level of intelligence is another subject matter.


You cancelled out your own statement. You state there is no in between, yet you state the possibility of calculating the level of intellegence. So therefor, you technically cannot calculate a level if there is no middle number, only stupid and smart.  


I wanted to venture into owning a Theraphosa, but I have a really bad reaction to my Lasiodoras urticating hairs, so I can only assume what it would be like to have a reaction to the U-hairs of a Theraphosa. They are large and beautiful, however, but the more I research, the further I get from acquisition. To many molt issues, hair issues, and the upkeep is above normal when it comes to feed, humidity, enclosure size later on. Will have to continue my inquiry further until my mind is made.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 25, 2011)

> Some tarantulas do go in the same spot to keep poo from being all over the place. That's instincts.
> 
> What your perceiving as "playing games" and interacting with toys is not them "playing a game". My Ts will frequently roll water dishes around. They aren't playing with it, they just don't like where it's at.
> 
> ...


1.  it can be argued that that's considered smart compared to a canine that poops all over your house and has to be trained to poop in one spot in the end it all comes down to criteria in this case it's apparent that we have different standards regarding what makes a pet intelligent and what doesn't even if it is just instinct my definition of intelligence in this case is :they know how to survive in the wild some have instinct that leads them to poop in the same place therefore they are smart i'm not asking you to agree with me but i'm asking you to respect what i define as intelligent in terms of the topic at hand

2. again it all comes down to perception i've seen a few owners on here admit they have toys in their T's  cage for example i remember one chick on here basically said she keeps little toy skeleton parts in her T's enclosure she went on to say that her T moves the skeltons into the water bowl on a daily basis in MY OPINION this is considered smart mainly because it requires incorporating routine which even some humans have a hard time with as well as some pets of course  not only that but if a T has the sense to move a waterbowl because it doesn't like where the water bowl is located it still reflects a form of common sense and some means of organization lkike i said before it's clear that we have different perceptions and we'll mos likely never agree on this claim


3. mreh i beg to differ they have to be able to differentiate vibrations so they can tell what's prey and what's not agreed they don't have good eye sight but i've seen youtube videos where some T's have recognized the difference between just some person and the owner and some pets do have that instinct as crazy of a comparison as it is im going to go out on a limb and make the comparison i know the animals are totally different but here goes: even birds have a natural instinct of who the owner is and whos not before the owner even walks through the door and yes i know it's true because i've had a bird before and  i can whole heartedly say i did experiment to see if the bird could tell the difference but anyway back to the T if tarantulas didnt have a natural sense of who their owner was and who their owner wasn't some of them wouldn't act as fiesty when they just arrived in the package even rob mentioned that he saw an H.gigas act more docile at it's owners place than his so no you can't really tell me that ALL Ts are too stupid to differentiate an owners aspects for another individuals


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 25, 2011)

salsalover said:


> 1.  it can be argued that that's considered smart compared to a canine that poops all over your house and has to be trained to poop in one spot in the end it all comes down to criteria in this case it's apparent that we have *different standards* regarding what makes a pet intelligent and what doesn't even if it is just instinct _my definition of intelligence_ in this case is :they _know_ how to survive in the wild some have instinct that leads them to poop in the same place therefore they are smart i'm not asking you to agree with me but i'm asking you to respect what i define as intelligent in terms of the topic at hand
> 
> 2. again it all comes down to perception i've seen a few owners on here admit they have toys in their T's  cage for example i remember one chick on here basically said she keeps little toy skeleton parts in her T's enclosure she went on to say that her T moves the skeltons into the water bowl on a daily basis in MY OPINION this is considered smart mainly because it requires incorporating routine which even some humans have a hard time with as well as some pets of course  not only that but if a T has the sense to move a waterbowl because it doesn't like where the water bowl is located it still reflects a form of common sense and some means of organization lkike i said before *it's clear that we have different perceptions and we'll mos likely never agree on this claim*
> 
> ...


First of all, all of the things you said that have any sliver of credibility can be explained by instinct. 
Now to address the bold statements:
Your "standards" and definition of intelligence are irrelevant to fact. Tarantulas don't know anything, period. Next statement: Your perception is once again, irrelevant. 
Moving on:
Tarantulas were around for millions of years before humans, and it hasn't been very long that they have been kept in captivity. They are wild animals that have no sense of being owned or loving/knowing their owner. Ownership is a purely human concept (with a few exceptions). That H. gigas that Rob got probably was pissed off at being shipped, not at being away from it's beloved owner.  
Finally: *Use punctuation!!* We can't understand what you are trying to say in the first place, and when you totally butcher the English language, no one is going to take you seriously (not that they are anyways). Humans are capable of intelligence, or at least I thought so until I read your last post.

--Dan


----------



## harmroelf (Feb 25, 2011)

DemonAsh said:


> I second this...


I third this


----------



## salsalover (Feb 25, 2011)

> First of all, all of the things you said that have any sliver of credibility can be explained by instinct.
> Now to address the bold statements:
> Your "standards" and definition of intelligence are irrelevant to fact. Tarantulas don't know anything, period. Next statement: Your perception is once again, irrelevant.
> Moving on:
> ...



1. like i said before it does have a lot to do with perception in the way that some people do relate instinct to how intelligent some animals are and they have every right to do so no one can tell another person that they can't see something differently than someone else if you choose to be against perception and other people's views that's fine but don't try to go as far as to be a social rapist when someone presents their own standards and criteria 

2. wow....really?how does perception not define intelligence or standards?and news flash, it's virtually impossible to not know anything if they truly didn't know anything they wouldn't know how to do certain things thus not doing them in the first place

3. i never claimed that they LIKED their owner i just said that generally any animal has an innate sense that tells them who they interact with the most which is just general knowledge this conversation is over i'm not changing my mind you're clearly not going to change your mind and you've resorted to being rude just because you can't force your generalizations on me and like i said before i don't partake in conversations with social rapists anything else you have to say will be ignored the purpose of this thread was to get to know one another and be open and perceptive and you are clearly incapable of that


----------



## Fran (Feb 25, 2011)

I did not want to get into into this, but I cant help it.

Salsalover:

One can have an opinion totally different than another. I like Red, you like blue. I think this woman is  pretty and you think she is not. That is a personal perception of the world around us and theres no right or wrong there.Correct.
*NOW*, a tarantula can not identify anyone as its owner. PERIOD. That is here, in Mars, or in the Popular Republic of China.
What you are implying is an absurd scientificaly speaking. Theres no other way to look at it, and wheter you think they know who you are or they play with toys, that is is fantastic but is still an absurd.

Im free to say gravity doesnt apply to my tarantulas, and someone with a minimun knowledge  of physics is also free to say im out of my mind.


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 25, 2011)

salsalover said:


> 1. like i said before it does have a lot to do with perception in the way that some people do relate instinct to how intelligent some animals are and they have every right to do so no one can tell another person that they can't see something differently than someone else if you choose to be against perception and other people's views that's fine but don't try to go as far as to be a social rapist when someone presents their own standards and criteria
> 
> 2. wow....really?how does perception not define intelligence or standards?and news flash, it's virtually impossible to not know anything if they truly didn't know anything they wouldn't know how to do certain things thus not doing them in the first place
> 
> 3. i never claimed that they LIKED their owner i just said that generally any animal has an innate sense that tells them who they interact with the most which is just general knowledge this conversation is over i'm not changing my mind you're clearly not going to change your mind and you've resorted to being rude just because you can't force your generalizations on me and like i said before i don't partake in conversations with social rapists anything else you have to say will be ignored the purpose of this thread was to get to know one another and be open and perceptive and you are clearly incapable of that


I apologize that I am not able to be open to irrationality. If you are going to ignore the people here that are trying to broaden your measly understanding of tarantula behavior, then I guess this conversation is over. 

--Dan


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Feb 25, 2011)

Suidakkra said:


> You cancelled out your own statement. You state there is no in between, yet you state the possibility of calculating the level of intellegence. So therefor, you technically cannot calculate a level if there is no middle number, only stupid and smart.
> 
> 
> I wanted to venture into owning a Theraphosa, but I have a really bad reaction to my Lasiodoras urticating hairs, so I can only assume what it would be like to have a reaction to the U-hairs of a Theraphosa. They are large and beautiful, however, but the more I research, the further I get from acquisition. To many molt issues, hair issues, and the upkeep is above normal when it comes to feed, humidity, enclosure size later on. Will have to continue my inquiry further until my mind is made.


 I didn't say calculating *as *measuring *the intellect*... I said calculating as being the *make-up* of intellect. They do things making calculated judgements. This is intellect. You misunderstood me. I don't cancel out my statements. And I don't want to get caught up in this kind of debate because arguing opinions is futile. Thanks


----------



## micheldied (Feb 26, 2011)

salsalover said:


> 1. like i said before it does have a lot to do with perception in the way that some people do relate instinct to how intelligent some animals are and they have every right to do so no one can tell another person that they can't see something differently than someone else if you choose to be against perception and other people's views that's fine but don't try to go as far as to be a social rapist when someone presents their own standards and criteria
> 
> 2. wow....really?how does perception not define intelligence or standards?and news flash, it's virtually impossible to not know anything if they truly didn't know anything they wouldn't know how to do certain things thus not doing them in the first place
> 
> 3. i never claimed that they LIKED their owner i just said that generally any animal has an innate sense that tells them who they interact with the most which is just general knowledge this conversation is over i'm not changing my mind you're clearly not going to change your mind and you've resorted to being rude just because you can't force your generalizations on me and like i said before i don't partake in conversations with social rapists anything else you have to say will be ignored the purpose of this thread was to get to know one another and be open and perceptive and you are clearly incapable of that


1. You can perceive a tarantula's intelligence in any way you like, but the fact, which can not be changed, is that tarantulas do not have the ability to recognize their owners, do not "play" with anything, and just because they poop in the same spot all the time does not make them smarter than a dog. Feed your tarantula, and ask your friend to feed your tarantula, is it going to tell the difference between whoever is feeding it? It probably doesn't even realize that SOMETHING is feeding it.
All tarantulas act on is instinct. They move things, because they do not feel comfortable with it being there, or move things that interfere with the way they've laid out whatever territory they have.

2. YOUR perception does not affect an animal's intelligence. If I said my roach could do math, could it do math? Even if I believed really hard, it can't. Standards are what you make of them, no one can deny you that. And as stated before, they "know" things, because it is programmed into them. If they knew they were being fed, kept in a box, and sheltered, why would they continue making burrows, webbing the hide, when there really is no threat?

3. I am the only person to feed my Dubia roaches, they run and hide when I open the container. If someone else opened the container, they would do the same. These roaches are not going to run out and beg for food when they "sense" me. Same with tarantulas. What we are telling you are NOT generalizations, they are facts. If a box is made of plastic, it will not turn into glass no matter what anyone says, or believes. Oh, and by the way, this thread was asking about peoples' experiences with the Theraphosa genus.

To the OP, I only have two T. Apophysis, which are no larger than 5 inches at the moment, but I must say they are the most enjoyable New World Tarantula I've had thus far. They tackle prey like linebackers.;P
Also, I just felt their urticating hairs for the first time yesterday, and I think my fingers are still slightly swollen as of now. All part of the fun.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 26, 2011)

ok, apparently the people in this thread have a misunderstanding of the purpose of this thread the purpose of this thread was NOT to start a debate the purpose of this thread was literally to discuss what owning a tarantula is like and somehow it became "hey lets all gang up on OP" i meant what i said earlier when i said this conversation is over i choose to believe that all pets have a natural instinct of who their owner is or isnt because that was my experience and perception does play a huge role in what fact is or isnt there are plenty of standards we use to determine what facts are true individually for us and i honestly don't think it's as black and white as people make it out to be this thread isn't for philosophical debate and as the OP i have every right to end a conversation if it isnt fulfilling the original purpose that i wanted it to have case closed our minds will never work the same way therefore we'll never agree on the concept of fact even and now because of this little flame war people are getting confused and they're starting to think this thread is to start a fight like i said before any attempt to change my opinion at this point is pointless because we just have different experiences that shape what we know and no one else can tell me what i have or havent seen which is why im choosing to end this conversation because it ID becoming social rape in the way that you guys are trying to force your idea of fact onto me im glad you've explained your individual facts and perceptions but we will always have different belief systems regarding how the concept of fact works just like in this instance i've made it known that i don't necessarily believe in concrete fact or a concrete reality and i think there alot of assumptions based off one little phrase i made if you guys had just respected the fact that it was my opinion or my perception in the first place we wouldnt be having this pointless argument that is clearly not going to change my mind to me tarantulas are smart in the way that  they have a routine system which in this case is my criteria for intelligence regarding insects but no one bothered to ask what my criteria was and instead you all made assumptions that were 100% wrong and the sad part is the thread is ruined for people that actually wanted to talk about the actual topic 


so like i said before case closed because now random people are starting to get involved in a pointless conversation







> didn't say calculating *as measuring the intellect*... I said calculating as being the make-up of intellect. They do things making calculated judgements. This is intellect. You misunderstood me. I don't cancel out my statements. And I don't want to get caught up in this kind of debate because arguing opinions is futile. Thanks



apparently this is the only person that understands what i actually meant and the only person that understands that even in debate and argumentation classes arguing opinion and values are considered pointless like i said before you guys wont change my mind because we have different opinions of what intellect is it's already clear to see that we will NEVER agree about what intellect is so (i didn't wanna say this but you guys leave me no choice) JUST SHUT UP IF YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE ASSIGNED TOPIC!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## micheldied (Feb 26, 2011)

salsalover said:


> ok, apparently the people in this thread have a misunderstanding of the purpose of this thread the purpose of this thread was NOT to start a debate the purpose of this thread was literally to discuss what owning a tarantula is like and somehow it became "hey lets all gang up on OP" i meant what i said earlier when i said this conversation is over i choose to believe that all pets have a natural instinct of who their owner is or isnt because that was my experience and perception does play a huge role in what fact is or isnt there are plenty of standards we use to determine what facts are true individually for us and i honestly don't think it's as black and white as people make it out to be this thread isn't for philosophical debate and as the OP i have every right to end a conversation if it isnt fulfilling the original purpose that i wanted it to have case closed our minds will never work the same way therefore we'll never agree on the concept of fact even and now because of this little flame war people are getting confused and they're starting to think this thread is to start a fight like i said before any attempt to change my opinion at this point is pointless because we just have different experiences that shape what we know and no one else can tell me what i have or havent seen which is why im choosing to end this conversation because it ID becoming social rape in the way that you guys are trying to force your idea of fact onto me im glad you've explained your individual facts and perceptions but we will always have different belief systems regarding how the concept of fact works just like in this instance i've made it known that i don't necessarily believe in concrete fact or a concrete reality and i think there alot of assumptions based off one little phrase i made if you guys had just respected the fact that it was my opinion or my perception in the first place we wouldnt be having this pointless argument that is clearly not going to change my mind to me tarantulas are smart in the way that  they have a routine system which in this case is my criteria for intelligence regarding insects but no one bothered to ask what my criteria was and instead you all made assumptions that were 100% wrong and the sad part is the thread is ruined for people that actually wanted to talk about the actual topic
> 
> 
> so like i said before case closed because now random people are starting to get involved in a pointless conversation
> ...




Sorry, but I didn't realize YOU were the OP.
As the OP, I guess you are entitled to say whatever you want (within the forum's boundaries).
Though you did begin the topic of tarantula's intelligence.

Also, if you used punctuations I'm sure a lot of people would be more understanding of what you're trying to say.

I'll end with this: You won't regret getting any Theraphosa. (Just my opinion)


----------



## Suidakkra (Feb 26, 2011)

Fran said:


> Im free to say gravity doesnt apply to my tarantulas, and someone with a minimun knowledge  of physics is also free to say im out of my mind.


Fran, your Tarantulasaurs cannot be explained by physics, lol.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 26, 2011)

> Fran, your Tarantulasaurs cannot be explained by physics, lol.


now that made my day lol


yeah sorry for yelling guys but i get easily offended and it seemed like you guys were trying to team up on me


----------



## BobGrill (Feb 26, 2011)

salsalover said:


> that's a pretty broad statement i know a few owners who keep toys in their tarantulas cage and use them to interact with the tarantula and some tarantulas do go in the same spot every time i mean just because you haven't heard of them doing any of the things i described doesn't mean i haven't seen them and it doesn't mean it's never happened any time in history that's pretty bold to say "oh it's never ever happen before it won't ever happen and 100% of all tarantulas in the world don't know how to do it" granted they aren't dogs but some owners interact with their tarantulas so much that they DO run to the owners when let out of the cage and some do like crawling ontheir owners i never said that this would be the general behavior for all tarantulas i expected people to know that i meant SOME


Tarantulas are not dogs and do not play with toys.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 27, 2011)

BobGrill said:


> Tarantulas are not dogs and do not play with toys.



and yet some people put toys in a tarantulas cage,there's nothing new under the sun and for the last time this thread is about discussing what our favorite kinds of theraphosa are therefore your comment about the previous discussion was never welcome


----------



## Robertb (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> I know, it is probably a dumb question to most of you guys but i do not own a theraphosa however they look so adorable and seem so smart i am beginning to wonder what owning one is like. Anyone care to share?
> 
> 
> like all my posts pics ARE welcome!



I got my 7" female Sub-adult Theraphosa Stirmi 2 weeks ago and i love her to death. she is a great eater and quite hungry might i add. Im fattening her up a bit since she had to be a little slim for the shipping when i bought her. She will hold 3-4 super worms in her fangs at once! Its so awsome. She haired me for the first time the other day which honestly wasn't bad since it was a light kicking. She was just letting me know " hey stay back while im eating" She is easily one of my favorite Ts her and my  L. Parahybana


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> Seriously?? :wall:
> 
> You are sadly mistaken.
> 
> No tarantula can recognize their owner or "play games."


haven't read through all the posts yet but I have to interject here. Tarantulas are absolutely capable of learning to differentiate between people. I know this from personal experience, and witnessed on repeated occasions.

---------- Post added at 12:04 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:00 PM ----------




Chris_Skeleton said:


> Some tarantulas do go in the same spot to keep poo from being all over the place. That's instincts.
> 
> What your perceiving as "playing games" and interacting with toys is not them "playing a game". My Ts will frequently roll water dishes around. They aren't playing with it, they just don't like where it's at.
> 
> ...


If it were instinct, it would be ALL tarantulas, not just SOME.


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

....


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> I did not want to get into into this, but I cant help it.
> 
> Salsalover:
> 
> ...


I could be wrong here but I think salsalover is being misunderstood. I think they are trying to say that a tarantula can differentiate between the person who feeds, waters, and handles them on a frequent basis, and someone who doesn't. And I back up that idea, because I have personal experiences which attest to it.


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> I could be wrong here but I think salsalover is being misunderstood. I think they are trying to say that a tarantula can differentiate between the person who feeds, waters, and handles them on a frequent basis, and someone who doesn't.* And I back up that idea, because I have personal experiences which attest to it.[/*QUOTE]
> 
> 
> Im sorry to sound rude, but that is simply not true.
> ...


----------



## Hamburglar (Feb 27, 2011)

You can stick your hand in any of my Theraphosa sp. enclosures.  I am sure they would bite you all as promptly as they would bite me..   

In my experience with the genus, I have found them to be one of my more defensive and/or flighty spiders.   Any disturbance and they will stick their butts up in the air and start flicking like crazy.  They skip around their enclosures very quickly and are very happy to take a meal.   

I don't have a very bad reaction to their hairs......... Yet.

ETA: Mine are still relatively small.


----------



## Najakeeper (Feb 27, 2011)

The eye sees what brain wants to observe. Don't turn your animals into things that they simply are not. What they are is more than enough.


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> phoenixxavierre said:
> 
> 
> > I could be wrong here but I think salsalover is being misunderstood. I think they are trying to say that a tarantula can differentiate between the person who feeds, waters, and handles them on a frequent basis, and someone who doesn't.* And I back up that idea, because I have personal experiences which attest to it.[/*QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> I don't appreciate you speaking to me as if I'm uneducated.


Well, theres no other way to say it but by sounding somewhat rude.  I did not mean to imply you are uneducated, but what you are suggesting is something an uneducated  individual would suggest. A tarantula having the capability to differenciate its owner from other people.

If someone is pointing out facts to me   about the M Theory, and I tell him to step outside the box because there are way over 11 dimensions in the Universe because I "feel them"...
Then well, I can believe what I want but obvioulsy Im sounding uneducated.


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> Well, theres no other way to say it but by sounding rude.  I did not mean to imply you are uneducated, but what you are suggesting is something an uneducated  individual would suggest.
> 
> If someone is pointing out facts to me   about the M Theory, and I tell him to step outside the box because there are way over 11 dimensions in the Universe because I "feel them"...
> Then well, I can believe what I want but obvioulsy Im sounding uneducated.


Think outside of the box for a change. You didn't imply I was uneducated, you assumed I am. And your idea of an educated and an uneducated statement seems very limited. 

I'm not talking about a "feeling" I had, I'm talking about observable results in a controlled environment.


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> Think outside of the box for a change. You didn't imply I was uneducated, you assumed I am. And your idea of an educated and an uneducated statement seems very limited.
> 
> I'm not talking about a "feeling" I had, I'm talking about observable results in a controlled environment.



Please,come on here... What observable results? What controlled enviroment?
Its simply your particular  perception. That in science means nothing.
You need to read about what the Scientific method is.

If you are implying that an invertebrate such a tarantula can differenciate its owner from other people,then we are done here. Not to sound rude, again. 
But that is an absurd.


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> Please,come on here... What observable results? What controlled enviroment?
> Its simply your particular  perception. That in science means nothing.
> You need to read about what the Scientific method is.
> 
> ...


So, it was YOU, YOU were that little fly on the wall watching my every move, sizing up the environment, just so you could come along later and BASH my comment, claiming you know as much as me about it! INGENIOUS! :worship:

I majored in experimental psychology in a state university. I know the scientific method and statistical probability analysis. All a controlled environment is, is an environment that is steadily controlled, which it was. Science does not have to be done in a laboratory. Scientific observation is often done out in the field. What is your real problem here?

If you claim that a tarantula cannot differentiate between chemical signatures or pheromones, sound waves, wind, temperature, etc., then you are really showing your ignorance and stubbornness here. That ability of theirs is fact, not a "feeling" or conjecture.


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> So, it was YOU, YOU were that little fly on the wall watching my every move, sizing up the environment, just so you could come along later and BASH my comment, claiming you know as much as me about it! INGENIOUS! :worship:
> 
> I majored in experimental psychology in a state university. I know the scientific method and statistical probability analysis. All a controlled environment is, is an environment that is steadily controlled, which it was. Science does not have to be done in a laboratory. Scientific observation is often done out in the field. What is your real problem here?
> 
> If you claim that a tarantula cannot differentiate between chemical signatures or pheromones, sound waves, wind, temperature, etc., then you are really showing your ignorance and stubbornness here. That ability of theirs is fact, not a "feeling" or conjecture.



I did 3 years of Physics, and I majored in Geography with a speciaty on geomorphology. So? You are implying an absurd, It doesnt matter what you went to school for.
It takes 2 to Tango, and Im not feeling too Argentinian.
We are done here.
*
But believing an invertebrate can differenciate its owner from another people is among the stupidest things I have read in a long time.*


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> I did 3 years of Physics, and I majored in Geography with a speciaty on geomorphology. So? You are implying an absurd, It doesnt matter what you went to school for.
> It takes 2 to Tango, and Im not feeling too Argentinian.
> We are done here.
> *
> But believing an invertebrate can differenciate its owner from another people is among the stupidest things I have read in a long time.*


Good for you. I didn't ask though, nor did I have reason to. I didn't assume you're uneducated. Just not thinking. Pat on the back for you, though I should point out that those sciences have little to do with the topic at hand. 

CHEMICAL SIGNATURES, can you wrap your brain around that? Are you saying that chemical signatures are all the same? Are you saying that sound waves are all the same? That IS what you're saying IF you say there's no difference between my voice and someone else's or between my molecular "scent" and someone else's. Not everyone has the same "smell". 

you can close your mind to possibilities and facts all you want. it doesn't help you on this topic or in life in general. You cannot argue against what I observed, UNLESS you're calling me a liar. It seems that you're just arguing with me to argue with me, otherwise you would've offered up what you thought to be another reasonable explanation for the behavior I described. 

I'm absolutely amazed that someone who took 3 years of physics can be so narrow-minded. 

And as far as being done, I'll be done when I'm done. Please don't speak FOR me. You aren't my representative. If YOU are done, that's fine by me. Have a nice day.


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran has offered his opinion, you just neglected to read the previous posts. All you are doing is yapping about thinking outside of the box and opening your mind. Outside the box is generally where we start comparing tarantula keeping to alien abduction...and no one wants to go there. To dispute your nonsense, there is a difference between knowing an owner, and preferring a certain vibration over another. As I said in a different post (not that you would know), ownership of other animals is a human ideal. The tarantula has no idea that it is owned by anyone. It doesn't have sense enough to realize that a human is anything other than a threat (why certain tarantulas tolerate humans more than others, i.e. Avics, is a topic for another thread). In a tarantula's world, there is only threat, food, and mate, period. 

--Dan


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

dannyboypede said:


> Fran has offered his opinion, you just neglected to read the previous posts. All you are doing is yapping about thinking outside of the box and opening your mind. Outside the box is generally where we start comparing tarantula keeping to alien abduction...and no one wants to go there. To dispute your nonsense, there is a difference between knowing an owner, and preferring a certain vibration over another. As I said in a different post (not that you would know), ownership of other animals is a human ideal. The tarantula has no idea that it is owned by anyone. It doesn't have sense enough to realize that a human is anything other than a threat (why certain tarantulas tolerate humans more than others, i.e. Avics, is a topic for another thread). In a tarantula's world, there is only threat, food, and mate, period.
> 
> --Dan


Ahh, I see we have another assumer/presumer amongst us. 

I read every post in the thread, so so much for your assumptions. Thanks for your opinion though. 

Thinking outside of the box means thinking creatively. I suppose that if you rule "thinking outside the box" out, then you are ruling out some of the greatest discoveries of mankind, which were acquired by paying attention to one's dreams. 

Your opinion that my post is nonsense is noted, along with your close-minded buddies (that would be your reference to "no one")

Now, I would appreciate it if you would point out anywhere where I posted the word "OWNER" as you imply that I did, or even talked of ownership. Perhaps you need to read the posts closer, or else point out to me where I wrote that. 

You're killin' me. How someone could be so daft is beyond me. 

As far as your last comment, there is more to the animal kingdom than threat/food/mate, FAR more.


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> *haven't read through all the posts* yet but I have to interject here. Tarantulas are absolutely capable of learning to differentiate between people. I know this from personal experience, and witnessed on repeated occasions.




Sorry, I didn't mean to assume something was fact when you said it.

I did not say that the only things in the animal kingdom are food, threat, and mate. I said, "In a tarantula's world, there is only threat, food, and mate, period."

Admittedly, you never used the word "owner." However, you did say that tarantulas can tell the difference between humans based on sound of voice. I agree that they can differentiate between vibrations/sound of voice. However, this in no way exemplifies intelligence. Their reaction to a vibration falls under a reaction to threat or food. That isn't learning!!!! :wall:  

You're killin' me. How someone could be so daft is beyond me. 

--Dan


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 27, 2011)

dannyboypede said:


> Sorry, I didn't mean to assume something was fact when you said it.
> 
> I did not say that the only things in the animal kingdom are food, threat, and mate. I said, "In a tarantula's world, there is only threat, food, and mate, period."
> 
> ...


Now you're making the illogical and narrow-minded assumption that I didn't go on AFTER posting that comment to read the remainder of the posts. It drives me nuts when people just assume crap without bothering to ask. 

A tarantula is in the animal kingdom. It is a complex biological entity (well, I suppose some may argue that it's not all that complex, however, in my opinion they are). There is surely more to them than threat, food and mate, regardless of how you wanna slice it.

What it DOES suggest is memory, and THAT suggests some degree of intelligence. I'm not the only one who feels this way either. I've spoken with people in the hobby who are excellent taxonomists, and they agree. So this isn't an uneducated idea. What we DON'T know about tarantulas far outweighs what we DO know. 

Intelligence is not just observed in animals, it is observed in plants as well. I think that perhaps you are OVER thinking this. Intelligence isn't as limited as what you're thinking it is.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Feb 27, 2011)

Hey guys, yesterday I walked in my room and my rose hair realized it was me and pulled out it's tennis ball to play fetch. It's awesome, it use to think of me as an owner, but now I think we are on a friend level. 

It amazes me what people say about tarantulas. 

Oh and Phoenix, your psychology major has just about as much to do with tarantulas as what Frans major was. 

Anyway, +1 to Fran and dannyboypede.

---------- Post added at 04:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:15 PM ----------




phoenixxavierre said:


> Intelligence is not just observed in animals, it is observed in plants as well. I think that perhaps you are OVER thinking this. Intelligence isn't as limited as what you're thinking it is.


Lol. Yeah we're the ones OVER thinking alright.


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 27, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> Now you're making the illogical and narrow-minded assumption that I didn't go on AFTER posting that comment to read the remainder of the posts. It drives me nuts when people just assume crap without bothering to ask.
> 
> *A tarantula is in the animal kingdom.* It is a complex biological entity (well, I suppose some may argue that it's not all that complex, however, in my opinion they are). There is surely more to them than threat, food and mate, regardless of how you wanna slice it.
> 
> ...


Tarantulas are part of the animal kingdom, however, they are not the animal kingdom. What more is there than threat, food, and mate? You have yet to convince me that they have a sliver of intelligence. Simply saying that there is more to them than we think, is not a very convincing argument. Again, what more it there?

--Dan


----------



## salsalover (Feb 27, 2011)

> Now you're making the illogical and narrow-minded assumption that I didn't go on AFTER posting that comment to read the remainder of the posts. It drives me nuts when people just assume crap without bothering to ask.
> 
> A tarantula is in the animal kingdom. It is a complex biological entity (well, I suppose some may argue that it's not all that complex, however, in my opinion they are). There is surely more to them than threat, food and mate, regardless of how you wanna slice it.
> 
> ...




You are absolutely  correct and the theory you have conveyed is the message i was trying to convey the entire time. I have a feeling we're going to get along just fine . The fact that the tarantula can differentiate someone who handles it regularly from a crowd shows  a level of intelligence and it's an innate sense all animals have animals aren't stupid they know who their owner is.

---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------




> Tarantulas are part of the animal kingdom, however, they are not the animal kingdom. What more is there than threat, food, and mate? You have yet to convince me that they have a sliver of intelligence. Simply saying that there is more to them than we think, is not a very convincing argument. Again, what more it there?
> 
> --Dan



That is the most closed minded statement i've heard any one make in a long time. To say that an animal is incapable of having intelligence simply because it's an animal is "absurd" mainly because no animal has proved to be stupid. In fact if anything being able to differentiate pheromone levels,soundwaves,vibrations...etc is a big feat for a creature that is practically blind not only that but she proved they had intelligence when she explained her personal experience because it proves they have a good memory which is an aspect of intelligence in general.


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> . The fact that the tarantula can differentiate someone who handles it regularly from a crowd shows  a level of intelligence and it's an innate sense all animals have animals aren't stupid they know who their owner is.


What fact. Do you know what a fact is?
 Please, tell me where did you find that written, point out to me where is the source.

Please lets educate ourselves a bit before posting about a science related _debate_.


----------



## AmbushArachnids (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> You are absolutely  correct and the theory you have conveyed is the message i was trying to convey the entire time. I have a feeling we're going to get along just fine . *The fact that the tarantula can differentiate someone who handles it regularly from a crowd shows  a level of intelligence and it's an innate sense all animals have animals aren't stupid they know who their owner is*.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------


When was this proven with science? Where is the scientific paper from and when was it published? :?  

Edit: You should try these out, they are free of charge.  . ,


----------



## salsalover (Feb 27, 2011)

> What fact. Do you know what a fact is?
> Please, tell me where did you find that written, point out to me where is the source.
> 
> Please lets educate ourselves a bit before posting about a science related debate.



Don't think you can treat me like an idiot just because pheonix wouldn't let it fly. I know what a fact is according to connotative and denotative meaning in this case I'm choosing to base my claim off of personal experiences which does directly tie into science int he way that the idea of science derived from a hypothesis in this case pheonix has conveyed that she..or he (i havent looked at their profile yet) has in a way tested a hypothesis regarding this subject matter if you're trying to go into the technical of debate you've picked n argument with the wrong person. There is a such thing as using personal experience to support a claim in a debate because there are different types of evidence in a debate i know for a fact because i've been on a debate team for 3 years and i've actually won debates by using personal experience. Not only that but like pheonix said before you're crazy if you think science can't take place outside a lab we test informal hypothesis everyday and draw conclusions from it and it's part of what makes up our intellect frankly im surprised that you can't be open minded enough or experienced enough in a feild you claim to know inside out unless of course you don't form informal hypothesis daily which....is ridiculous. Not ony that but if we're going into the technicals of debate then this is a debate of vale which means pheonixs' experience has priority over evidence because in a debate of value it's about our conotative definitions and how we would define the word intelligent in this case i define it as incorporating memory and routine and differentiating one individual from another which means in debate terms pheonixs' logic outweighs yours

---------- Post added at 06:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------




> When was this proven with science? Where is the scientific paper from and when was it published?



this is a debate of value which means evidence isn't permitted unless it is a personal experience which means pheonixxs' experience outweighs she has formed a hypothesis based on this topic and tested it first hand which as far as i'm concerned is more beneficial because we can conclude that there aren't anythird party sources getting involved to manipulate the result that and in this case we define crowd as a series of people so maybe you should read all of the posts before presuming what was said before and trying to jump into a topic


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> You are absolutely  correct and the theory you have conveyed is the message i was trying to convey the entire time. I have a feeling we're going to get along just fine . The fact that the tarantula can differentiate someone who handles it regularly from a crowd shows  a level of intelligence and it's an innate sense all animals have animals aren't stupid they know who their owner is.
> 
> ---------- Post added at 05:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:15 PM ----------
> 
> ...


I didn't say it couldn't be intelligent simply because it was an animal. I don't need someone else to put words into my mouth, I am fully capable of that myself...thanks anyways. There is a difference between memory/intelligence and developing tendencies based on surrounding conditions.  "Being able to differentiate pheromone levels,soundwaves,vibrations" is instinct. It does not demonstrate intelligence. It is true that they are incredible creatures, but this has nothing to do with mental capacity...because there isn't any. As far as my post being close minded, I really don't see how. 

--Dan


----------



## Fran (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> Don't think you can treat me like an idiot just because pheonix wouldn't let it fly. I know what a fact is according to connotative and denotative meaning in this case I'm choosing to base my claim off of personal experiences which does directly tie into science int he way that the idea of science derived from a hypothesis in this case pheonix has conveyed that she..or he (i havent looked at their profile yet) has in a way tested a hypothesis regarding this subject matter if you're trying to go into the technical of debate you've picked n argument with the wrong person. There is a such thing as using personal experience to support a claim in a debate because there are different types of evidence in a debate i know for a fact because i've been on a debate team for 3 years and i've actually won debates by using personal experience. Not only that but like pheonix said before you're crazy if you think science can't take place outside a lab we test informal hypothesis everyday and draw conclusions from it and it's part of what makes up our intellect frankly im surprised that you can't be open minded enough or experienced enough in a feild you claim to know inside out unless of course you don't form informal hypothesis daily which....is ridiculous. Not ony that but if we're going into the technicals of debate then this is a debate of vale which means pheonixs' experience has priority over evidence because in a debate of value it's about our conotative definitions and how we would define the word intelligent in this case i define it as incorporating memory and routine and differentiating one individual from another which means in debate terms pheonixs' logic outweighs yours
> 
> ---------- Post added at 06:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------
> 
> ...



I just read blah blah blah. Really. Nothing else. No proof , no source, no facts behind the chating.


----------



## Lolita (Feb 27, 2011)

Fran said:


> I just read blah blah blah. Really. Nothing else. No proof , no source, no facts behind the chating.



well it is tarantula chat  haha sorry bad joke i'll be good -looks innocent-


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> Don't think you can treat me like an idiot just because pheonix wouldn't let it fly. I know what a fact is according to connotative and denotative meaning in this case I'm choosing to base my claim off of personal experiences which does directly tie into science int he way that the idea of science derived from a hypothesis in this case pheonix has conveyed that she..or he (i havent looked at their profile yet) has in a way tested a hypothesis regarding this subject matter if you're trying to go into the technical of debate *you've picked n argument with the wrong person.*


I think we have picked an argument with the wrong person.... because I can't understand where your sentences end and others begin. No punctuation, and no capitalization.


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> Don't think you can treat me like an idiot just because pheonix wouldn't let it fly. I know what a fact is according to connotative and denotative meaning in this case I'm choosing to base my claim off of personal experiences which does directly tie into science int he way that the idea of science derived from a hypothesis in this case pheonix has conveyed that she..or he (i havent looked at their profile yet) has in a way tested a hypothesis regarding this subject matter if you're trying to go into the technical of debate you've picked n argument with the wrong person. There is a such thing as using personal experience to support a claim in a debate because there are different types of evidence in a debate i know for a fact because i've been on a debate team for 3 years and i've actually won debates by using personal experience. Not only that but like pheonix said before you're crazy if you think science can't take place outside a lab we test informal hypothesis everyday and draw conclusions from it and it's part of what makes up our intellect frankly im surprised that you can't be open minded enough or experienced enough in a feild you claim to know inside out unless of course you don't form informal hypothesis daily which....is ridiculous. Not ony that but if we're going into the technicals of debate then this is a debate of vale which means pheonixs' experience has priority over evidence because in a debate of value it's about our conotative definitions and how we would define the word intelligent in this case i define it as incorporating memory and routine and differentiating one individual from another which means in debate terms pheonixs' logic outweighs yours
> 
> ---------- Post added at 06:06 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------
> 
> ...


All I can say is: USE PERIODS

All I got from that was that now you are making us follow rules that denounce the use of scientific data simply because someone came along and offered a silly personal experience that really doesn't prove anything (other than my point).

--Dan

p.s. the thing after the sentence that lets the reader know that the next sentence is coming, is called a period


----------



## AmbushArachnids (Feb 27, 2011)

salsalover said:


> this is a debate of value which means evidence isn't permitted unless it is a personal experience which means pheonixxs' experience outweighs she has formed a hypothesis based on this topic and tested it first hand which as far as i'm concerned is more beneficial because we can conclude that there aren't anythird party sources getting involved to manipulate the result that and in this case we define crowd as a series of people so maybe you should read all of the posts before presuming what was said before and trying to jump into a topic


Ok its a debate, he proved nothing. Now i will prove nothing as well and you tell me who is more logical..

 I have a 5.5" F H. lividum that gives me anything from a huge threat (stridulation and biting the ground).. To sitting normal stance not moving a muscle. Even when touched with a paint brush she doesnt move. Is she inviting me for play time since she isnt threatening me? NO! IMO Its her instincts telling her not to move so she can avoid a confrontation with a preditior. Its also my opinion her instinct tells her to show preditors how big and scary she is. Eventually when put in a hopeless situation she calms down.(when i am in control of her life while holding her.) Why bite when i might bite back?  That is my logic on her behavior. Does that sound so rediculous? 

 They are built for the wild, not a cage with someone to interact with. They could care less the different chemical signal of a preditor. Anything other than a mate is a threat to her existance!

This whole debate is rediculous to me. How does every other wild and aggressive animal act tward humans?  H. lividum is not docile and has no time to "understand how" to survive or interact other than threaten, mate or eat. (as stated so well by Danny) Alot of times its in that order.


----------



## billopelma (Feb 27, 2011)

I think a lot of the disagreement here is based on nothing but nit picking of terminology, at least I hope so. 

While I look at it as rather obvious a T has no concept of the terms 'ownership' or 'who', it also seems obvious that they can correlate a set of sensory parameters and equate/remember a given group or sequence of such with a 'good' or 'bad' outcome ('food' or 'smashed toes'). I further find it likely that a T could correlate a set of those parameters to equate them to the presence of a specific person, they certainly have the sensory 'hardware' necessary to do so. I doubt they perceive this set of correlations into a mental picture of a human but relatively speaking it's easiest for us to look at it this way for purposes of conversation.

I know many claim T's are scientifically proven to be incapable of 'learning' or 'thinking'( doing mazes and such), that they can only be 'conditioned' to exhibit a particular behavior and 'respond' to the particular stimuli. More nit picking, as far as these types of casual discussions are concerned the terms are more or less interchangeable, it's not like this is an academic conference...

I mostly will give someone the benefit of doubt when they say they're T 'knows' them and responds a certain way to them specifically, that they realize it's not 'knowing' in a human sense but 'knowing' relative to how a T would 'know' and that it's just been 'conditioned' to responding to a set of stimuli in the way it's instinct has it wired to do. When some get all ruffled about 'intelligence' applying or not to T's, it's really all about whether the term is being used in a strict scientific definition or as a relative term to place the T somewhere on a scale between a cat and a nematode as far as interpreting stimuli goes.

I see T 'learning/conditioning' all the time, for an easy example many T's are picky about types of food. When I throw in pretty much anything that moves the majority of hungry T's used to getting what they like will give an immediate feeding response, regardless of the type of prey. As soon as they realize it's, say, a type of roach they don't like, they quickly loose interest.
If I keep giving them the undesirables, it doesn't take long before they stop responding. When I then throw in the preferred type of (roach, cricket, worm, whatever), at first I see the same lack of response, but after a small number of times they 'figure out' it's now 'the good stuff' again and go back to the immediate response. After many months/years of this they seem to get better at determining the desirability of what is tossed in on a more or less immediate basis (and act accordingly), rather than the old extremes of 'pounce now, figure out what it is later' or 'ignore it even if it crawls on me'. 

 I tend to think of this as 'learning', but I guess *technically* it's 'conditioning' and guaranteed someone will jump all over me for using one term but not the other, even though it's pretty clear I mean the same thing either way. So be mindful of how those questions and observations are worded or be ready for the nit pickers...



Bill


----------



## Redneck (Feb 27, 2011)

Oh, guess what Rosie (My G. rosea.), just did! She tapped on her lid, asked me to get her out, lay on the bed, & cuddle with her... 

I think our relationship just made the move to the next level! 

How awesome is that?!


----------



## AmbushArachnids (Feb 27, 2011)

Redneck said:


> Oh, guess what Rosie (My G. rosea.), just did! She tapped on her lid, asked me to get her out, lay on the bed, & cuddle with her...
> 
> I think our relationship just made the move to the next level!
> 
> How awesome is that?!


Dont turn this into a crossbreeding thread Tommy!


----------



## salsalover (Feb 27, 2011)

> I just read blah blah blah. Really. Nothing else. No proof , no source, no facts behind the chating.



kind of funny considering you didn't name a source once in this entire conversation all you did was put on an elitist charade and tell everyone they were wrong without any points to support your claim

---------- Post added at 08:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:45 PM ----------




> All I got from that was that now you are making us follow rules that denounce the use of scientific data simply because someone came along and offered a silly personal experience that really doesn't prove anything (other than my point).
> 
> --Dan


well what i got from that sentence is that you have some reading comprehension problems because you missed the main idea of the personal experience explained

P.s. i don't have to use periods if i don't want to because im not writing an essay right now


----------



## AmbushArachnids (Feb 28, 2011)

salsalover said:


> P.s. i don't have to use periods if i don't want to because im not writing an essay right now


It would help us understand you much better. This is also the responce i would hear from a 5 y/o.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> I didn't say it couldn't be intelligent simply because it was an animal. I don't need someone else to put words into my mouth, I am fully capable of that myself...thanks anyways. There is a difference between memory/intelligence and developing tendencies based on surrounding conditions. "Being able to differentiate pheromone levels,soundwaves,vibrations" is instinct. It does not demonstrate intelligence. It is true that they are incredible creatures, but this has nothing to do with mental capacity...because there isn't any. As far as my post being close minded, I really don't see how.
> 
> --Dan


first off if it was truly instinct then that would mean 100% of all animals had the ability and they actually don't  different animals have different ways of  differentiating the person who cares for them from another person which is the thing you fail to consider not only that  but it's closed minded in the way that you describe the tarantula as a drone simply because it has a unique  system and different aspects of intelligence and you interpret those unique aspects as drone like behavior when in all actuality even psycologists will tell you part of having appropriate cognitive function is having an active memory and in this case differentiating one individual from another without sight is an impressive feat for an instect then you have the fact that in order for any creature to have intelligence there has to be a level of cognitive function because it requires analyzing certain features of a person or a thing and storing them in  long term memory

---------- Post added at 09:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:09 PM ----------




> It would help us understand you much better. This is also the responce i would hear from a 5 y/o.


and that's a comeback i would hear from a five year old and the way you spelled the word RESPONSE is definitely infantile come to think of it your entire argumentation tactic is infantile it's no different than social rape in the way that you feel the need to not only act elitist but it parallels child like behavior in the way that you refuse to accept the fact that my point of view will never be the same as yours as a result you began using ad homs as a way to try and change my mind not only that but at this point what you're doing is harassment because i've asked you to stop and yet you continue ruining my thread


----------



## AmbushArachnids (Feb 28, 2011)

I cant read your sentances without punctuation. Its almost painful, and i think others will agree with that.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> I cant read your sentances without punctuation. Its almost painful, and i think others will agree with that.


i feel the same way about your spelling and your argumentation tactic so yeah im going to take the harsh road now and tell you to shut up since asking you nicely to leave me alone isn't working

---------- Post added at 09:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 PM ----------




> Ok its a debate, he proved nothing. Now i will prove nothing as well and you tell me who is more logical..
> 
> I have a 5.5" F H. lividum that gives me anything from a huge threat (stridulation and biting the ground).. To sitting normal stance not moving a muscle. Even when touched with a paint brush she doesnt move. Is she inviting me for play time since she isnt threatening me? NO! IMO Its her instincts telling her not to move so she can avoid a confrontation with a preditior. Its also my opinion her instinct tells her to show preditors how big and scary she is. Eventually when put in a hopeless situation she calms down.(when i am in control of her life while holding her.) Why bite when i might bite back? That is my logic on her behavior. Does that sound so rediculous?
> 
> ...



all you did was rant about how tarantulas have different personalities it doesn't mean that they can't tell who their owner is all it means is they some are more defensive than others 

P.s. you making random generalizations is whats really ridiculous and if you truly thought this debate was ridiculous you wouldn't be participating in it


----------



## Creepy Crawler (Feb 28, 2011)

So, UM...What is owning a theraphosa like?   LOL


----------



## Redneck (Feb 28, 2011)

AgentD006las said:


> Dont turn this into a crossbreeding thread Tommy!


But, what if she knows how to work them 8 legs, to get me into the mood? Im not saying its going to happen. Im just saying, 'what if'...


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> So, UM...What is owning a theraphosa like? LOL


lol thank you!!


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Feb 28, 2011)

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/marks/period.htm



			
				Article said:
			
		

> Use a period [ . ] at the end of a sentence that makes a statement. There is no space between the last letter and the period. Use one space between the period and the first letter of the next sentence. This goes against the grain for people using the typography instilled by generations of old-fashioned typewriter users, but modern word-processors nicely accommodate the spacing after a period, and double-spacing after a period can only serve to discombobulate the good intentions of one's software.
> 
> 
> See Quotation Marks and Parentheses for special placement considerations with those marks.
> ...


----------



## Scolopeon (Feb 28, 2011)

Theraphosa's are as others have said, itchy!

I used to come up in hundreds of tiny blisters that would leak when squeezed (they would be more raised if I scratched and the urge to not scratch is almost impossible) and I'd wake up at 3-4 am with insanely itchy fingers and have to run to the bathroom to scorch them under a hot tap.

Behaviour is more irratable than defensive, they will kick if the hiss and raising postures are not enough.

The hairs from this species made me sensitive to lesser urticating hairs from more docile T's.

They are interesting to watch because of their size and power.
The chelicerae are huge and the proportions are thick and chunky, but they act just like larger new worlds.

---------- Post added at 10:50 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 AM ----------




Scolopeon said:


> Theraphosa's are as others have said, itchy!
> 
> I used to come up in hundreds of tiny blisters that would leak when squeezed (they would be more raised if I scratched and the urge to not scratch is almost impossible) and I'd wake up at 3-4 am with insanely itchy fingers and have to run to the bathroom to scorch them under a hot tap.
> 
> ...


Mine grew to around 10.5-11'' and still remains the largest T I have owned, i'm hoping I can bring my Salmon Pink sling to a similar size.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

Theraphosa's are as others have said, itchy!


> I used to come up in hundreds of tiny blisters that would leak when squeezed (they would be more raised if I scratched and the urge to not scratch is almost impossible) and I'd wake up at 3-4 am with insanely itchy fingers and have to run to the bathroom to scorch them under a hot tap.
> 
> Behaviour is more irratable than defensive, they will kick if the hiss and raising postures are not enough.
> 
> ...



lol i didn't know owning a T could be such a task do you ever have to wear gloves or a mask when you walk into the same room as your T's if so do they help prevent the itching?


----------



## SpidSquid (Feb 28, 2011)

Thank you *Scolopeon* for that information! I'm really considering a T. blondi sometime, so it was nice to see some good info come out of this thread. :]


----------



## Falk (Feb 28, 2011)

*phoenixxavierre*: Theraphosids are extremly primitive animals and havent evolved for thousands of years. Dont give them to much credit for being intelligent I would also like to have the names of those "excellent" taxonomists you spoke of.


----------



## Titandan (Feb 28, 2011)

I've read through this thread and I'm kinda shocked at how rude some of you are.  Why can't you just answer the question without being condescending?

I don't own a Theraphosa so I can't answer the question.  But some of you seem to want to correct people and display your wisdom and knowledge like you're some type of T. expert.  I think most of you all can agree that our hobby is at its beginning stage and has yet to really take off.  Due to this and other issues, people don't have a wealth of experience with T's.  Theraphosas are rather expensive and higher maintenance.  Why not just answer the question in a friendly way instead of drilling him because of his ignorance?

All of us were ignorant in many ways at one point or another.  You can say the same thing but being gracious in your treatment of others can go a long way.


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 28, 2011)

Chris_Skeleton said:


> Hey guys, yesterday I walked in my room and my rose hair realized it was me and pulled out it's tennis ball to play fetch. It's awesome, it use to think of me as an owner, but now I think we are on a friend level.
> 
> It amazes me what people say about tarantulas.
> 
> ...


Chris, if you'd like to refute my statements, at least provide something to refute it with, instead of your mindless drivel, seeking a laugh. 

Psychology deals with human AND animal behavior, so actually it has a great deal more to do with intelligence of various life forms than does geology or geography. 

And I will repeat myself, intelligence is measurable in PLANTS as well as animals. What do you think is smarter? Your rhododendron or your tarantula?

It's funny you mention what you do about your tarantula, even though it's in jest as an attempt to make me appear unintelligent. This morning, MY G. rosea, a red color morph, WAS playing with a ball of peat, rolling it around, pulling it to himself, using it as something to prop his feet on for a while and eventually discarding it. His tank has a mixture of desert sand and peat, and he chooses to sit upon the sand. However, he does APPEAR to enjoy moving this ball of peat around, probably half the size of his abdomen, and does so on random (or seemingly random) occasion. I guess he's either hungry, wanting to run away but instead clutches in terror at the peat ball, or maybe he's thinking about eating it. It's likely something instinctual, right? Like maybe he thinks he's a female and is envisioning when he'll be a mother, gender confusion. Hmmm...


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> Chris, if you'd like to refute my statements, at least provide something to refute it with, instead of your mindless drivel, seeking a laugh.
> 
> Psychology deals with human AND animal behavior, so actually it has a great deal more to do with intelligence of various life forms than does geology or geography.
> 
> ...



AWWWWWW!!!!!!!! that's the most adorable thing i've ever heard offfffffffff   lol awww (not be littling the experience at all i truly do think that's the cutest thing i've ever heard of


----------



## dannyboypede (Feb 28, 2011)

salsalover said:


> AWWWWWW!!!!!!!! that's the most adorable thing i've ever heard offfffffffff   lol awww (not be littling the experience at all i truly do think that's the cutest thing i've ever heard of


Really? Because that is the most ridiculous that I have ever heard of. My       P. cancerides did the same thing when *burrowing.* Calling burrowing "playing," doesn't make it playing. When my T's eat crickets, I can call it cuddling, but it doesn't make it cuddling. I think I am going to abandon this thread and spend the rest of eternity crying in a dark hole somewhere...

--Dan


----------



## phoenixxavierre (Feb 28, 2011)

dannyboypede said:


> Tarantulas are part of the animal kingdom, however, they are not the animal kingdom. What more is there than threat, food, and mate? You have yet to convince me that they have a sliver of intelligence. Simply saying that there is more to them than we think, is not a very convincing argument. Again, what more it there?
> 
> --Dan


Humans are the primary animals upon which research is done as far as intelligence goes, so naturally, when people think "intelligence" they think of how we use that word in terms of human intelligence. HOWEVER, much research is done on animals in regard to intelligence, particularly cognitive ability. Mental abilities are studied within species and also in a comparative sense, between species. Included are studies of problem solving, mathematics, and language abilities. Do we discard the idea that an animal is intelligent merely because they are illiterate? After all, literacy is one measure of intelligence in human beings. No we don't. Instead, we compare mental ability across species. While it's true that we generally and primarily think of particular animals (aside from ourselves) as being intelligent, such as apes, chimps, dolphins, elephants, parrots, and ravens, there is no way to accurately measure such a thing. Without any accurate measurement, who's to say? 

There is a great deal of research on intelligence in cephalopods. They exhibit characteristics of significant intelligence, yet it's hard for anyone to fathom that since their nervous systems are so different from our own. Tarantulas aren't much different in this way. Just because something's nervous system is dramatically different than a mammal's or a bird's doesn't automatically bar them from possessing traits of intelligence. 

Some scientists argue that plants possess intelligence, merely because they can sense their environment and adjust themselves accordingly. 

I'm amazed at the opposition I'm hearing to the idea of intelligence in tarantulas, especially from people who spend hours observing their behaviors. I've seen multiple problem solving behaviors in tarantulas, haven't you? 

Have you never seen a tarantula remembering where their burrow once was, even following destruction of that burrow? Have you never seen a tarantula try more than one way to move a large piece of dirt out of their way? Have you never seen a tarantula who grows accustomed to the keeper's rituals, such as spraying or feeding, react to stimuli which is indicative that they are to be watered or fed, which suggests a certain amount of memory?

Tarantulas are amazingly mammal-like in some of their behavior. They care tenderly for their young, the spiderlings sharing food amongst themselves in a cooperative manner (this is fairly unique to arachnids), and this has been seen to occur in colonies where spiderlings even crawled onto another female tarantula that wasn't their mother in order to eat from the food she had captured, and she allowed them to. Some mother tarantulas will go without food to ensure that their young eat. They are also able to rapidly adapt to varying ecological challenges. In some species, males are able to peacefully cohabit with females without being cannibalized. And then there's the pokies who don't seem to mind living with one another. And the courtship ritual between males and females. 

There is undoubtedly a certain amount of awareness that tarantulas possess. And we, as hobbyists, have noticed that they all have their individual quirks. This difference in response to stimuli suggests there is more than merely instinct going on in their behavior. Tarantulas have been known to actually sort multi-colored fish gravel into piles with one color per pile. I personally have observed tarantulas when they're trying to explore beyond their captive environment, unscrewing their lids (if loosely tightened), or pushing up on their aquarium lids. 

I once had a L. parahybana who escaped her tank and made rounds of the large apartment I was living in at the time. I followed her trail of web throughout the entire upper floor, and amazingly it led back to her tank (which was set up on a water heater). I thought she had escaped but in actuality she had taken a stroll and returned to her tank while I was gone from the apartment!

And what about personality? Individual behavior responses. We know that different tarantulas of the same species react differently to being handled. 

Again, I'm surprised that people interested in tarantulas can easily neglect to at least consider these unusual behaviors and chalk them up to fight or flight, eat, breed, etc. The behaviors strike me as being far more complicated than that. 

Ever had a stubborn tarantula? One that no matter how hard you try to get it to go in a particular direction, it's absolutely determined that it wants to go where you don't want it to?

How about tarantulas that become accustomed to being handled or fed? They may at first react as if you're a threat but eventually they "learn" that you're a source of food or water. Eventually they may sit still despite all the commotion and noise one makes opening the tank and tossing in a cricket. They "learn" (for those who use clips to feed with) that the metal utensil contains food and ISN'T a threat. I use to feed my A. avics from my fingers. They would grab hold of my fingers and delicately pluck the cricket or fly from my fingers without biting me. 

I've seen tarantulas learn to avoid being stung by a bee or wasp, or bitten by a mouse. Once the prey (that they were initially unfamiliar with) attempted to defend itself, the tarantula "remembered" this and when the prey was introduced again, the tarantula would grasp the bee, turn its stinger AWAY from itself and sink its fangs into the upper body. Same with mice. The tarantula "learned" from previous prey and would grasp the mouse and turn it's face to where it could crush the skull. 

Learning to recognize what IS a threat and what ISN'T is also a sign of intelligence. Countless times I've been cleaning up a tank or doing this or that, and the tarantula would touch me with its feet, leaving them there for a bit, trying to determine what I was. Eventually, they became accustomed to my intrusions, some even getting in the habit of climbing up on me rather than staying in the tank. My very first tarantula was a mature male Aphonopelma, Rio Grande Gold, and he would spend hours trying to get out of his tank. I'd remove him and he'd sit peacefully on my hand, arm or chest for hours while I walked around the house. He actually PREFERRED to be out than to be in it's tank. But I suppose that's just instinct as well. 

And again, Phyllis, my cobalt blue female learned the sound of my voice and perceived me as a threat but was able to distinguish between my voice and other people's voices, and made no threat displays toward anyone but me (following that incident of dropping the lid on her feet). 

Why is it that people are reluctant to attribute intelligence to tarantulas? Because of their size? The size of their ganglion? Seems to me that it's taking the tarantula for granted, and much more so of the nature surrounding them. 

Personally, I think tarantula intelligence is an interesting area that has received very little research, and deserves much more!

---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 PM ----------




Fran said:


> What fact. Do you know what a fact is?
> Please, tell me where did you find that written, point out to me where is the source.
> 
> Please lets educate ourselves a bit before posting about a science related _debate_.


Tarantulas recognize CHEMICAL SIGNATURES. Their senses are that finely attuned to their surroundings. Humans possess DIFFERENT CHEMICAL SIGNATURES, on their hands. Tarantulas can likely recognize when there is a familiar or unfamiliar CHEMICAL SIGNATURE, thereby differentiating between two different people. And this isn't even going into the sound wave vibrational recognition they possess. Why is that hard for you to understand? Just wondering.

Anyone can MAKE a fact. I can say the sky is purple. Guess what? The sky is purple, that's a fact, until someone comes along and says, No, the sky is blue. A fact can be something that's said to be true or something that's said to have happened. Scientific facts are a bit different, but not a lot. Scientific observation, which can be done outside of a lab, such as in the field, or even in one's own home, can be considered FACT as well. Had to add that after reading salsalovers comment on Facts and Science.

---------- Post added at 07:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 PM ----------




AgentD006las said:


> When was this proven with science? Where is the scientific paper from and when was it published? :?
> 
> Edit: You should try these out, they are free of charge.  . ,


It's a known scientific FACT that tarantulas can distinguish between different CHEMICAL SIGNATURES. How else would they recognize road kill as being something that's edible?

---------- Post added at 07:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:38 PM ----------




dannyboypede said:


> I didn't say it couldn't be intelligent simply because it was an animal. I don't need someone else to put words into my mouth, I am fully capable of that myself...thanks anyways. There is a difference between memory/intelligence and developing tendencies based on surrounding conditions.  "Being able to differentiate pheromone levels,soundwaves,vibrations" is instinct. It does not demonstrate intelligence. It is true that they are incredible creatures, but this has nothing to do with mental capacity...because there isn't any. As far as my post being close minded, I really don't see how.
> 
> --Dan


Memory is an aspect of intelligence, in particular, one which assists in problem solving ability.

---------- Post added at 07:50 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:48 PM ----------




Chris_Skeleton said:


> I think we have picked an argument with the wrong person.... because I can't understand where your sentences end and others begin. No punctuation, and no capitalization.


Hmmm.... Must be an intelligence issue. I didn't have any problem reading and understanding what was written. 

---------- Post added at 07:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:50 PM ----------




dannyboypede said:


> All I can say is: USE PERIODS
> 
> All I got from that was that now you are making us follow rules that denounce the use of scientific data simply because someone came along and offered a silly personal experience that really doesn't prove anything (other than my point).
> 
> ...


Perhaps you should learn some basic logic. Salsa's talking about logic's use within debate. Science wasn't being denounced at all. 

If only you knew how some of the GREATEST scientists in history came up with their ideas, ideas which changed the course of human history!

---------- Post added at 07:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:54 PM ----------




billopelma said:


> I think a lot of the disagreement here is based on nothing but nit picking of terminology, at least I hope so.
> 
> While I look at it as rather obvious a T has no concept of the terms 'ownership' or 'who', it also seems obvious that they can correlate a set of sensory parameters and equate/remember a given group or sequence of such with a 'good' or 'bad' outcome ('food' or 'smashed toes'). I further find it likely that a T could correlate a set of those parameters to equate them to the presence of a specific person, they certainly have the sensory 'hardware' necessary to do so. I doubt they perceive this set of correlations into a mental picture of a human but relatively speaking it's easiest for us to look at it this way for purposes of conversation.
> 
> ...


Excellently put!

---------- Post added at 08:03 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:59 PM ----------




Redneck said:


> Oh, guess what Rosie (My G. rosea.), just did! She tapped on her lid, asked me to get her out, lay on the bed, & cuddle with her...
> 
> I think our relationship just made the move to the next level!
> 
> How awesome is that?!


Wow! Congratulations! But I'd watch yourself, you could end up with a bigger child support bill than even Bill Gates could handle! 

Let's see, what's $500 monthly times 300? OUCH

Thank GOD roseas don't usually throw double or triple sacs!

---------- Post added at 08:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:03 PM ----------




Scolopeon said:


> The hairs from this species made me sensitive to lesser urticating hairs from more docile T's.


That's interesting, the same thing happened with me. Following the horrible itching resulting from blondi hairs, I became extremely "allergic" to B. boehmei hairs. Prior to that I hadn't had a problem.

---------- Post added at 08:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:10 PM ----------




Falk said:


> *phoenixxavierre*: Theraphosids are extremly primitive animals and havent evolved for thousands of years. Dont give them to much credit for being intelligent I would also like to have the names of those "excellent" taxonomists you spoke of.


I'm certainly not saying they are geniuses. I sent you a PM.

---------- Post added at 08:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 PM ----------

I've kept many of these from spiderlings to adults, captive bred to wild caught, and I have to say that they're one of the funnest species to keep. Not hard to spot, enjoyable to watch, handle-able if conditioned to be handled (of course, that depends on the individual personality of the t, or should I say reaction, or instinct, I know better than to say "intelligence" or IQ). My boy used to love seeing these big "monsters", of course to him anything with 8 legs (back then) was a "spider"! 

I highly recommend these "bird-eaters" due to their sheer bulk, "hissing" ability, and growth rate, as well as their voracious appetite and willingness to eat just about anything you put in front of them! 

Of course, I like to keep these big ladies/gents in anything from a ten gallon to a 30 gallon container, the bigger the better in my opinion, when adults.


----------



## Fran (Feb 28, 2011)

You,Phoenixxaviere, are *CONFUSING and MIXING  *stimuli and instinct with a bunch of emotions and capabilities an arachnid simply does not posses.

You are mixing some* facts *with your hibba habba ''science".
You can keep on yapping, but it is all that. Nonsense yapping. You might have a copy of the DSM IV, but certainly you show  very little knowledge  on  animal behavior.

Stubborness, happyness,strong or week personality...Those are not qualities an arachnid posses. Now wether you want to comprehend it or not, its all up to you.


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Feb 28, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> As far as T. blondi, they, of course (being the largest theraposid) huge, and have horrible urticating hairs. I got in a shipment once of a dozen very large wild caught adults. I had to sex them in the bathtub as that was the easiest way to deal with them. After picking them up (all with varying degrees of resistance) and flipping them over to sex them, I moved them all to their new quarters until sale. The hairs were torture. I was itching for a half hour or more, even got in the shower it was so bad, trying to relieve the itching, but of course that didn't work, either. I had to wait for the itching to alleviate on its own.* I've found that T. blondi are particular conducive to conditioning. They learn that when you open up the tank, that means either food or water, and usually its food they're hoping for. If it's not tossed directly in front of them for them to grab, they search the tank for it, which suggests memory and a certain degree of awareness.* I've also bred and raised up this species, and they are very interesting to watch grow, and they start out pretty large a well, and grow quickly with a voracious appetite. One of the most interesting and pleasurable to keep tarantulas in the hobby in my opinion.


Incredible you can speak this. It is VERY true that tarantula seem to differentiate from certain vibrations. Here is my example to confirm this as well.

My B. boehmei rockets off anytime I open her enclosure. High tails it to her hide or the opposite end of the commotion. HOWEVER, my B. vagans sling used to do this early on, but now at 2" she simply sits put, or she's come over to where I opened her enclosure, and awaits the prey item. Even if it's just to remove a small embolus or refill her water dish she'll walk slowly to the area and watch closely. NEVER attacking or defending the area.

It's incredible and has me extremely attached to her moreso than my other T's. I've never tried to handle her, I simply respect her home, and it seems she respects what's being done around her. These tarantula are adapting. This is intelligence. If it's easy prey, no predator will run from it. 

If they do not understand it's not danger, they will flee however, but this is dependant on the amount of interaction, and the actually temperament of that particular spider. All of their attitudes vary, which is also indicative of intellect.

Very nice and informative post. I appreciate that.:clap:


----------



## Fran (Feb 28, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> As far as T. blondi, they, of course (being the largest theraposid) huge, and have horrible urticating hairs. I got in a shipment once of a dozen very large wild caught adults. I had to sex them in the bathtub as that was the easiest way to deal with them. After picking them up (all with varying degrees of resistance) and flipping them over to sex them, I moved them all to their new quarters until sale. The hairs were torture. I was itching for a half hour or more, even got in the shower it was so bad, trying to relieve the itching, but of course that didn't work, either. I had to wait for the itching to alleviate on its own. *I've found that T. blondi are particular conducive to conditioning. They learn that when you open up the tank, that means either food or water, and usually its food they're hoping for. If it's not tossed directly in front of them for them to grab, they search the tank for it, which suggests memory and a certain degree of awareness*. I've also bred and raised up this species, and they are very interesting to watch grow, and they start out pretty large a well, and grow quickly with a voracious appetite.
> .


First, I highly doubt they were Theraphosa blondi. But lets just leave that at rest.
Second, *you can not, by any means, prove the bolded sentence.*

When are you gonna understand that because you observed such behavior and *interpreted it* in such way, *does not mean * that is what in fact was?
How can you seriously tell us that *you know* that when you open the cage of your "T.blondi"  she *knows* fod or water is coming???
Thats is ridiculous!!!!

I have had hundreds of different  Theraphosa, all sizes and genders, so what?! 
Once you open the cage a bit toO strong, and they  kick hairs and hiss. Other times they just sit there. some other times react with violence towards the intrusive object....You cant possibly believe that* you know* what in the name of God they are "thinking"' or the nature of the particular reaction!
THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF VARIABLES THAT WILL TRIGGER ONE OR ANOTHER REACTION.

Are we serious here? Dont we really know how to differenciate what WE THINK IT IS from what IT ACTUALLY IS???????

Please seriously, if you truly think you know what are the meaning of  their reactions the way you are telling as you do,
please let me contact Rick West, Steve Nunn, Dr. Bertani, Perez Miles...Help them out, because they would really apreciate it.


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> First, I highly doubt they were Theraphosa blondi. But lets just leave that at rest.
> Second, you can not, by any means, prove the bolded sentence.
> 
> When are you gonna understand that because you observed such behavior and interpreted it in such way, does not mean that is what in fact was?
> ...



im fed up with you talking to us as if we're stupid just because we don't agree with your opinion you havent used any evidence at all fran so you can't lecture anyone  about proving any claim at all all you've done is say "nu uh" a series of times to refute every claim we've made you want to lecture us about infantile there's nothing more infantile than being as close minded and as rude as you're being right now and it's starting to upset me i made this thread for a purpose instead all you did was make random assumptions about what the thread may have been about as opposed to what it's actually about not only that but fact is derived from opinion as well as science it doesn't matter how you try to twist and turn it you can't just negate someones personal experience


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Feb 28, 2011)

There is far far too many opinions rampaging this site. It appears many people here claiming to be "oh so expert" on tarantula, have ZERO respect for them, or any animal for that matter. To say tarantula aren't intelligent is selfish and flat out stupid. And I'm not holding any punches with that statement. It's stupid and you are only keeping them in your homes to feel important over others who don't. You DO NOT fully understand the life or lives that you keep as pets.

Humans are egotistical, and refuse to use logic and reasoning. Using 7-10% of brain mass at any given time, that is the red flag that eludes us all, when thinking of intellect. Common sense is not what's being applied here. There are hundreds of different tarantula, all over the world. Anyone telling me that every single one of them all possess the same "lack of intellect" I'd tell you to your face, "you aren't very intelligent yourself."

I've read that tarantula brains are too small to endure any level of intellect. So with this petty logic, Dolphins and the Orca would prove THE most intelligent animals on the face of this Earth due to sheer size of brain mass and proven intellect. Also the Elephant would prove far smarter than humans. 

It's this kind of illogic that damages sites like this with such a sheer volume of traffic, and people seeking to learn. There has been facts presented in this thread, only refuted with trolling and childlike behavior because one doesn't want to learn from another. They'd rather parade around like some Elitist know it all, in some website tarantula fraternity. Common people.

We can learn from anyone. And instead of holding onto rumors and opinions, why not expand your level of thinking from someone willing to teach? I've read silly bashing of people saying Honeybees effect their T's in a positive manner, to bashing someone for feeding them certain prey, to bashing people for calling a Tarantula intelligent. This is absolutely ridiculous.

Phoenixx and Salsa have presented something new for many of you to study or look into with your T's, rather than the same ole nonsense many of you carry on about of feeding them once a week, or mating them for profit, or battling who has the better enclosure for them. 

RESPECT THESE ANIMALS! Learn from them, learn about them. Stop reading someone else's book and taking it as THE END ALL, when those people are simply sharing what they've learned, and are still learning as well. That was to Fran, when trying to tell someone to read a manual on tarantula. Why would he/she need to do that when they've informed to you already that they've raised, bred and cared for many T's over the years? This means they should write their OWN book. Or come on this site and share what they've learned through experience and study for themselves, which they were doing.

Is this so hard to comprehend for people? Must everything be an argument? A flame? A belittling? Must you present yourselves as "know it alls" in every single thread, just to have your names seen repeatedly? 

Once again, I respect what Phoenixx and Salsa had to offer in this thread, as far as the intellect was concerned. But at the end of the day, the OP was simply asking about *"Owning a Theraphosa."*:wall:


----------



## salsalover (Feb 28, 2011)

> There is far far too many opinions rampaging this site. It appears many people here claiming to be "oh so expert" on tarantula, have ZERO respect for them, or any animal for that matter. To say tarantula aren't intelligent is selfish and flat out stupid. And I'm not holding any punches with that statement. It's stupid and you are only keeping them in your homes to feel important over others who don't. You DO NOT fully understand the life or lives that you keep as pets.
> 
> Humans are egotistical, and refuse to use logic and reasoning. Using 7-10% of brain mass at any given time, that is the red flag that eludes us all, when thinking of intellect. Common sense is not what's being applied here. There are hundreds of different tarantula, all over the world. Anyone telling me that every single one of them all possess the same "lack of intellect" I'd tell you to your face, "you aren't very intelligent yourself."
> 
> ...



and i deeply appreciate all the ideas and facts you've contributed as well hun  it's nice to know that at least 2 people out of this entire thread are open minded enough and sweet enough to value and respect each others opinions and respectable enough to speak the truth about what's been going on in this thread it's funny how some people think manuals and books are written in stone when really the "facts" theyre referring to are just opinions supported by evidence and published in the form of a book and then they adopt it as their own and suddenly no one elses views matter and the author has the final say it's sad to how critical thinking has gone down the drain so quick and it's a pity to see the majority doesn't feel comfortable questioning some of these scientists news flash: scientists are human they are not the be all end all and i would think you guys would have enough intelligence to respect  someones opinion just because you don't see eye to eye with them


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> and i deeply appreciate all the ideas and facts you've contributed as well hun  it's nice to know that at least 2 people out of this entire thread are open minded enough and sweet enough to value and respect each others opinions and respectable enough to speak the truth about what's been going on in this thread it's funny how some people think manuals and books are written in stone when really the "facts" theyre referring to are just opinions supported by evidence and published in the form of a book and then they adopt it as their own and suddenly no one elses views matter and the author has the final say it's sad to how critical thinking has gone down the drain so quick and it's a pity to see the majority doesn't feel comfortable questioning some of these scientists news flash: scientists are human they are not the be all end all and i would think you guys would have enough intelligence to respect  someones opinion just because you don't see eye to eye with them


You tell those who rebut your opinions that they are "ignorant, rude, etc." but so warmly welcome the comments that support your ludicrous opinions.

While I agree that Tarantulas can be conditioned, over repeated actions(I've had Scolopendra Hardwickei, centipedes, begin searching for food everytime I open their containers, since I always move them and open them in the same way), but this does not mean they have the intelligence to recognize me as an owner that feeds and keeps them.
All they realize is that there is food coming, because they sense these vibrations.
But to say they can learn, like a dog or a cat, is just plain stupid.

These animals do what they do, only to survive, not to enjoy, play, or make owners happy.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> You tell those who rebut your opinions that they are "ignorant, rude, etc." but so warmly welcome the comments that support your ludicrous opinions.
> 
> While I agree that Tarantulas can be conditioned, over repeated actions(I've had Scolopendra Hardwickei, centipedes, begin searching for food everytime I open their containers, since I always move them and open them in the same way), but this does not mean they have the intelligence to recognize me as an owner that feeds and keeps them.
> All they realize is that there is food coming, because they sense these vibrations.
> ...



oh here we go another "nu uh" and yes i am going to welcome people who value my opinion  and respect my point of view as opposed to people who have called me all sorts of names just because i don't agree with them if anything you're guilty of the same thing with the opposing side you're valuing their opinion over mine simply because you agree with them and they agree with you and now to move on to your pathetic excuse for a rebuttal you make it sound like they're drones but the fact is  there is more to them than most people think pheonixx,maudua and i have repeated ourselves several times if you choose to limit your self to a scripted opinion go ahead but new ideas and observations are the two things that enable science theories to be updated


----------



## BobGrill (Mar 1, 2011)

phoenixxavierre said:


> Chris, if you'd like to refute my statements, at least provide something to refute it with, instead of your mindless drivel, seeking a laugh.
> 
> Psychology deals with human AND animal behavior, so actually it has a great deal more to do with intelligence of various life forms than does geology or geography.
> 
> ...


That does not mean it was playing.Ts will adjust their habitat to their liking on a regular basis. It's instinct not emotion. Arachnids simply do not posses complex emotions like humans.


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> oh here we go another "nu uh" and yes i am going to welcome people who value my opinion  and respect my point of view as opposed to people who have called me all sorts of names just because i don't agree with them if anything you're guilty of the same thing with the opposing side you're valuing their opinion over mine simply because you agree with them and they agree with you and now to move on to your pathetic excuse for a rebuttal you make it sound like they're drones but the fact is  there is more to them than most people think pheonixx,maudua and i have repeated ourselves several times if you choose to limit your self to a scripted opinion go ahead but new ideas and observations are the two things that enable science theories to be updated


LOL I don't think I ever called you anything.
In fact, I don't think anyone did. All we did was say that your OPINIONS are ludicrous, and are unsupported by science.

Of course, I do not know for sure, but I definitely agree more with Fran and such, simply because it is what we know about tarantulas so far.
If in the future tarantulas learn to drive cars and play table tennis, then you have every right to call me wrong, and I will accept it.

I really wish I could believe that tarantulas could play, and recognize their owners, and that my OBT would not try to rip my head off and that I could train it like a guard dog, but I can't.


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Mar 1, 2011)

micheldied said:


> You tell those who rebut your opinions that they are "ignorant, rude, etc." but so warmly welcome the comments that support your ludicrous opinions.
> 
> While I agree that Tarantulas can be conditioned, over repeated actions(I've had Scolopendra Hardwickei, centipedes, begin searching for food everytime I open their containers, since I always move them and open them in the same way), but this does not mean they have the intelligence to recognize me as an owner that feeds and keeps them.
> All they realize is that there is food coming, because they sense these vibrations.
> ...


This is hypocritical to a cosmic level. You stated that it doesn't mean they have intelligence, yet you say in the same sentence that the T RECOGNIZES that food was coming when you open the enclosure. LMAO Are you reading what you wrote hear? You are agreeing with Salsa and proving he/she correct. Your very statement indicated the Tarantula learned and therefore reacted accordingly. That is intelligence.

The problem here is a group of you, REFUSE to accept others knowledge of tarantula outside of what you THINK you know, or CLAIM to know and it eats you up inside to the point you bash and belittle them for no reason.

If you took the time to rationalize, you'd see you are actually agreeing and presenting facts from your experience to back it up.


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Mar 1, 2011)

Hey my G. pulchripes is pretty smart. Maybe she could teach you a thing or two about capitalization, punctuation, run on sentences and such.


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

Maudua said:


> This is hypocritical to a cosmic level. You stated that it doesn't mean they have intelligence, yet you say in the same sentence that the T RECOGNIZES that food was coming when you open the enclosure. LMAO Are you reading what you wrote hear? You are agreeing with Salsa and proving he/she correct. Your very statement indicated the Tarantula learned and therefore reacted accordingly. That is intelligence.
> 
> The problem here is a group of you, REFUSE to accept others knowledge of tarantula outside of what you THINK you know, or CLAIM to know and it eats you up inside to the point you bash and belittle them for no reason.
> 
> If you took the time to rationalize, you'd see you are actually agreeing and presenting facts from your experience to back it up.


WRONG, I never said they do not have intelligence, every animal and plant HAS intelligence. I said they do not have the intelligence to recognize individuals, nor the ability to LEARN like a dog or a cat can.

I said they could definitely be conditioned, after many repeated actions. And even so, many times they will act defensively and run. I only gave an example of conditioning, but I do not only keep one or two animals, and they do not all act the same way.

I do NOT agree that they can play with toys, or differentiate their owners from every other person.
Like I said, I wish I could accept it, but I cannot, not fully.


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Mar 1, 2011)

BobGrill said:


> That does not mean it was playing.Ts will adjust their habitat to their liking on a regular basis. It's instinct not emotion. Arachnids simply do not posses complex emotions like humans.


So according to this flawed logic, if my wife remodels the home, and I decide to move the furniture around, this is instinct correct? Since this isn't a sign of emotion. Also, this is from my wife OUTSIDE of this Forum, she asks, if tarantula doesn't have the capacity to present emotion, then how the heck can they show signs of "STRESS"? That's instinct? I can't believe I have stooped this low to ask things of such a simple nature. 

So many of you are arguing with Salsa, and continue to say things that basically agree.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> LOL I don't think I ever called you anything.
> In fact, I don't think anyone did. All we did was say that your OPINIONS are ludicrous, and are unsupported by science.
> 
> Of course, I do not know for sure, but I definitely agree more with Fran and such, simply because it is what we know about tarantulas so far.
> ...


and yet that's not the criteria we're using to define the word intelligence in this debate let's be clear about what science is before we say "it isnt science or it's not backed up by science" the whole root of science is a hypothesis without a hypothesis science cannot existt because it is soley based on a hypothesis being proved true or false pheonixx came up with a hypothesis and has observed the results science can be done outside a lab we come up with informal hypothesis everyday and we see the results people do informal experiments all the time a scientist is human just like evryone else they are not god they don't determine  exactly what occurs just because they state a claim and based on the fact that pheonixx has been doing this for a long time he could write his own book so i would think that you'd be decent enough to respect his opinion but apparently decency is dead and then you mentioned what we know about tarantulas so far but how can knowledge increase when you don't open yourself up to knew ideas maybe it's all you know so far because you attack anyone that doesn't agree with you and socially rape people for expressing an unrecognized idea


----------



## xhexdx (Mar 1, 2011)

Maudua said:


> So according to this flawed logic, if my wife remodels the home, and I decide to move the furniture around, this is instinct correct? Since this isn't a sign of emotion. Also, this is from my wife OUTSIDE of this Forum, she asks, if tarantula doesn't have the capacity to present emotion, then how the heck can they show signs of "STRESS"? That's instinct? I can't believe I have stooped this low to ask things of such a simple nature.
> 
> So many of you are arguing with Salsa, and continue to say things that basically agree.


What you're doing is called *anthropomorphizing*.  Comparing humans to tarantulas is what's flawed.

salsa - If you want anyone to take you seriously, maybe you could start by using some punctuation?  Just a friendly suggestion, as I'm not going to take the time to try and decipher your posts.  Sorry.


----------



## Fran (Mar 1, 2011)

Maudua said:


> So according to this flawed logic, if my wife remodels the home, and I decide to move the furniture around, this is instinct correct? Since this isn't a sign of emotion. Also, this is from my wife OUTSIDE of this Forum, she asks, if tarantula doesn't have the capacity to present emotion, then how the heck can they show signs of "STRESS"? That's instinct? I can't believe I have stooped this low to ask things of such a simple nature.
> 
> So many of you are arguing with Salsa, and continue to say things that basically agree.


This clearly is way over your knowledge on this subject,at least  based on what you just posted here.
You clearly dont know what stress means when talking about animals.


The only problem here is that those who claim to be open minded are in fact the ones with their minds blind. 

We are not dissrespecting this animals, neither we have less appreciation towards them, but we do seem to have more of a mature view of the facts and still keep them and take care of them even though we are educated enough to have a clear grasp of what an arachnid can and simply can not do.


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

Maudua said:


> *I can't believe I have stooped this low* to ask things of such a simple nature.


Eh? Who was the one running around yelling "ELITIST" not too long ago?

:clap: 

Thanks for the laugh. All of your posts are full of ignorance, stupidity, stubborness and a very conspicuous inability to appreciate irony.


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Mar 1, 2011)

xhexdx said:


> What you're doing is called *anthropomorphizing*.  Comparing humans to tarantulas is what's flawed.
> 
> salsa - If you want anyone to take you seriously, maybe you could start by using some punctuation?  Just a friendly suggestion, as I'm not going to take the time to try and decipher your posts.  Sorry.


Well since you took the time to Google a big word to describe my participation, could you do the same for chris_skeleton? Or is he part of the AB Tarantula Fraternity that you must be ritualed in to garner some human level of respect? It's like a huge gang war. Elitists vs the Humble truth seekers. LOL  It's crazy!


----------



## xhexdx (Mar 1, 2011)

There you go assuming things, and insulting my intelligence in the process.

Maybe you could actually start answering some of the questions I and others have asked you in this and the lost regalis thread?  All you're doing is talking smack and offering nothing of substance or value.

Troll.


----------



## DawgPoundSound (Mar 1, 2011)

Fran said:


> This clearly is way over your knowledge on this subject,at least  based on what you just posted here.
> You clearly dont know what stress means when talking about animals.
> 
> 
> ...


Fran you're doing what Salsa said you've done in the entire thread, and so far she/he is correct. You're "nu uh" rather than explaining. So please define fully what *stress* means, since it's so different concerning animals. Not that humans aren't animals or anything. No that can't be true right? It's over my head. I apologize for confusing humans with animals. I mean, who woulda thought?


----------



## Fran (Mar 1, 2011)

DawgPoundSound said:


> Fran you're doing what Salsa said you've done in the entire thread, and so far she/he is correct. You're "nu uh" rather than explaining. So please define fully what *stress* means


There you go, educate yourself:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7240033


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> This clearly is way over your knowledge on this subject,at least based on what you just posted here.
> You clearly dont know what stress means when talking about animals.
> 
> 
> ...



and you clearly have an elitist mindset fran and that's what we mean by a closed mind because you feel as if you know so much more than any of us to the point where you don't listen to anything we have to say let alone respect our views all you've done lately is demoralize and socially rape us you can't force your views on everyone and you clearly don't know what the word science even means considering you've used it so loosely and i would think you'd be smart enough to at least respect pheonixx since he's been working with Ts for a long time so long that he could in fact write a book or be a scientist but you're too close minded to even open yourself up to anything he has to say


----------



## Chris_Skeleton (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> And you clearly have an elitist mindset fran and that's what we mean by a closed mind because you feel as if you know so much more than any of us to the point where you don't listen to anything we have to say, let alone respect our views. all you've done lately is demoralize and socially rape us. You can't force your views on everyone and you clearly don't know what the word science even means considering you've used it so loosely, and I would think you'd be smart enough to at least respect pheonixx since he's been working with Ts for a long time. So long that he could in fact write a book or be a scientist, but you're too close minded to even open yourself up to anything he has to say.


Fixed. If you only you weren't raping punctuation.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> Fixed. If you only you weren't raping punctuation.



if only you could come up with something important to say rather than repeating yourself


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> and yet that's not the criteria we're using to define the word intelligence in this debate let's be clear about what science is before we say "it isnt science or it's not backed up by science" the whole root of science is a hypothesis without a hypothesis science cannot existt because it is soley based on a hypothesis being proved true or false pheonixx came up with a hypothesis and has observed the results science can be done outside a lab we come up with informal hypothesis everyday and we see the results people do informal experiments all the time a scientist is human just like evryone else they are not god they don't determine  exactly what occurs just because they state a claim and based on the fact that pheonixx has been doing this for a long time he could write his own book so i would think that you'd be decent enough to respect his opinion but apparently decency is dead and then you mentioned what we know about tarantulas so far but how can knowledge increase when you don't open yourself up to knew ideas maybe it's all you know so far because you attack anyone that doesn't agree with you and socially rape people for expressing an unrecognized idea


LOL the problem with your "hypothesis" is that it is rebutted by the majority of people who actually study tarantulas scientifically.

Now, how do you know that pheonix has done this for a long time? If so, why hasn't he written any books about tarantula behavior? Why not go against what people like Rick West have stated as fact?

I can be very open, but a line is drawn between what I can accept, with solid evidence to back it up, that is widely accepted, and what is absurd.
By the way, I am "attacking" no one, I am just as entitled to my opinion as you are. If you don't like being gone against, why not just tell the mods to close this thread?

You say we're saying these same things over and over?
What about you? Mr. "Social rape" and "Open to new ideas"?

By the way, your texts are like a train with no stations to stop at.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> LOL the problem with your "hypothesis" is that it is rebutted by the majority of people who actually study tarantulas scientifically.



you just contradicted your own sentence in the way that a hypothesis is the entire concept of science originated and pheonixx and maurduara have both studied tarantulas and science and they both agree with what im trying to convey to you and news flash:  just because the majority makes a claim doesn't mean it's right



> Now, how do you know that pheonix has done this for a long time? If so, why hasn't he written any books about tarantula behavior? Why not go against what people like Rick West have stated as fact?


if this statement isn't closed minded i dont know what is are you really telling me that you don't believe anything unless it's in the form of a book even though all it is as a claim supported by an  observation which is the exact same thing pheonixx presented you with he  explained his claim and backed it up with evidence based on an observation and all you've proven is that anyone can state anything as fact 



> You say we're saying these same things over and over?
> What about you? Mr. "Social rape" and "Open to new ideas"?



and it is social rape int he way that you accuse me of being absurd simply because i have different means of determining facts you've cointued to demoralize me and try to force your ideas on me by doing so if you were as msart as you claim to be you'd know the act of rape ins't an act of lust but it's an act of control social rape in this case can be defined as someone else trying to control another persons opinion


----------



## malevolentrobot (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover, please stop using the term social rape, its garnering you no sympathy in your argument.

the presumption is that tarantulas just simply do not have the capacity for intellegence that you claim. and since you liked to throw it out there, i've taken argumentation too, and so you and i both know it is you on the other side of the argument is the one that bears the burden of proof if you want to get technical.

you haven't really brought anything scientific to the table in your defense, imo. just a bunch of flimsy observations that could be interpreted differently by others.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> salsalover, please stop using the term social rape, its garnering you no sympathy in your arguement.
> 
> the presumption is that tarantulas just simply do not have the capacity for intellegence that you claim. and since you liked to throw it out there, i've taken arguementation too, and so you and i both know it is you on the other side of the arguement is the one that bears the burden of proof if you want to get technical.


and yet you make the presumption that im trying to garner sympathy when im being honest about how i feel i genuinly feel like people are trying to socially control me and they're getting angry because i refuse to agree with them and if you took argumentation you should know that there are some cases you just cant win and it's typical for a debate of value it's clear that we have different definitions of the word intelligence according to this context i've been asking people to stop it and get back to the original topic and yet people continue to prove mauduaras point by acting like some sort of elitist group that believes a book written by a guy that started out with a hypothesis is some sort of bible


----------



## malevolentrobot (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> and yet you make the presumption that im trying to garner sympathy when im being honest about how i feel i genuinly feel like people are trying to socially control me and they're getting angry because i refuse to agree with them and if you took argumentation you should know that there are some cases you just cant win and it's typical for a debate of value it's clear that we have different definitions of the word intelligence according to this context i've been asking people to stop it and get back to the original topic and yet people continue to prove mauduaras point by acting like some sort of elitist group that believes a book written by a guy that started out with a hypothesis is some sort of bible


er, okay. bring me something that doesn't involve you trying to put the burden of proof on my side's shoulders and we'll see what happens. all you just did was state personal beliefs, no science whatseover.

slightly even more offtopic, but... "maudua" aka. dawgpoundsound was a troll here a couple months back who deliberately took your side to help continue trolling. you really don't want to add any viewpoints made by that person to your argument, if you want people to take your points you are trying to make the least bit seriously.


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> i genuinly feel like people are trying to socially control me and they're *getting angry because i refuse to agree with them*


Isn't that exactly what you're doing, too?



salsalover said:


> i've been asking people to stop it and get back to the original topic and yet people continue to prove mauduaras point by acting like some sort of elitist group that believes a book written by a guy that started out with a hypothesis is some sort of bible


There is evidence to suggest, very strongly, that tarantulas do _not_ have the mental capacity you and your friends claim they do. Do YOU have any evidence to suggest otherwise? If you don't, then who are you to call others closed-minded, when your claims are baseless, and absolutely contrary to known facts?

P.S. - If you decide to go on and on about people "socially raping" you then don't bother. Either answer my (and everyone else's) questions, or don't bother, because I won't.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> Isn't that exactly what you're doing, too?



actually no im getting angry for numerous reasons 

1. my thread was hijacked when i said i wanted to know what owning a T is like i meant i wanted to know what owning a T is like

2.  people have starte using ad homs as a form of debate 

3. im tired of a series of people lecturing me and trying to change my mind at this point im literally just trying to defend myself 

4. people seem to be making random assumptions without any regard for people's feelings 




> There is evidence to suggest, very strongly, that tarantulas do not have the mental capacity you and your friends claim they do. Do YOU have any evidence to suggest otherwise? If you don't, then who are you to call others closed-minded, when your claims are baseless, and absolutely contrary to known facts?


and who are you to call us naive when you can't tell us what we experienced a claim can't be baseless if it's supported by first hand experience not only that but the scientists you praise so much are ordinary people that started out with a hypothesis and supported it with a first hand experience and thats why we're saying your close minded because you refuse to listen to people with first hand experience that have been working with T's for a long time possibly longer than you not only that but have you considered that maybe just maybe facts derived from opinions that were once persucted by the majority




> P.S. - If you decide to go on and on about people "socially raping" you then don't bother. Either answer my (and everyone else's) questions, or don't bother, because I won't.


p.s.-if you don't want me to use the term why do you continue trying to force me to agree with you and why do you avoid all of my questions


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> you just contradicted your own sentence in the way that a hypothesis is the entire concept of science originated and pheonixx and maurduara have both studied tarantulas and science and they both agree with what im trying to convey to you and news flash:  just because the majority makes a claim doesn't mean it's right
> 
> In what way was what I said contradicting? They have studied tarantulas? Guess what, anyone with Tarantulas has studied them. Sure, I agree that in some cases just because the majority says it's wrong, doesn't mean it is. I live in a place that's full of it. But in this case, I am not saying it is right, but it is what is widely accepted. And no one has actually proved it to be wrong. If you really think it is, why not take on a scientific study, write a paper, and prove us all wrong.
> 
> ...


Reply in RED.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> er, okay. bring me something that doesn't involve you trying to put the burden of proof on my side's shoulders and we'll see what happens. all you just did was state personal beliefs, no science whatseover.
> 
> slightly even more offtopic, but... "maudua" aka. dawgpoundsound was a troll here a couple months back who deliberately took your side to help continue trolling. you really don't want to add any viewpoints made by that person to your argument, if you want people to take your points you are trying to make the least bit seriously.



have you considered that maybe just maybe debating wasn't the original point of this thread? maybe you should read back to the original question which is "what is owning a therophosa like?" which people have yet to answer all because of one person who started a flame war over the phrase "tarantulas are intelligent" and at least maudua isn't just enother person in your elitist club or in this case the "nu uh!" club


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> actually no im getting angry for numerous reasons
> 
> 1. my thread was hijacked when i said i wanted to know what owning a T is like i meant i wanted to know what owning a T is like


Really? Remember this:



salsalover said:


> I know, it is probably a dumb question to most of you guys but i do not own a theraphosa however they look so adorable and *seem so smart* i am beginning to wonder what owning one is like. Anyone care to share?


?

You suggested that they "seemed so smart", so the discussions and debate over whether they actually are "smart" are actually ENTIRELY ON-TOPIC.



salsalover said:


> and who are you to call us naive when you can't tell us what we experienced a claim can't be baseless if it's supported by first hand experience not only that but the scientists you praise so much are ordinary people that started out with a hypothesis and supported it with a first hand experience and thats why we're saying your close minded because you refuse to listen to people with first hand experience that have been working with T's for a long time possibly longer than you not only that but have you considered that maybe just maybe facts derived from opinions that were once persucted by the majority


Uh...no. EXPERIENCES are personal, and are SUBJECTIVE. Scientific, *empirical* observations are OBJECTIVE.

I'll break it down for you.

"The sun is really bright today!" = a statement derived from an EXPERIENCE
"The sun produces _x_ [amount of light and heat] in a day." = a statement derived from SCIENTIFIC FACT

Do you see the difference?


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> No, I can accept a claim that is widely accepted by scientists as these studies are actually done on a scientific level, not some observation someone made at home. I haven't proven anything. All I'm doing is backing up those whom I agree with, same thing you, pheonix, and muaduara are doing


it is contradictory because the whole point of being a scientists is making the public aware of an observation inspired by a hypothesis and at this point i have to say it does feel like a personal attack because i've asked you guys once to stop and stick to the topic and if you know my opinion wont change why do you keep persisting why don't you just stop?since there's clearly no changing my mind and you can clearly see that you're starting to  upset me and at this point it feels like im being nagged and forced into an opinion just because the majority says its right not everyone is going to go with the majority


----------



## malevolentrobot (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> have you considered that maybe just maybe debating wasn't the original point of this thread? maybe you should read back to the original question which is "what is owning a therophosa like?" which people have yet to answer all because of one person who started a flame war over the phrase "tarantulas are intelligent" and at least maudua isn't just enother person in your elitist club or in this case the "nu uh!" club


you are talking circles. once again, bring some scientific proof like the numerous people here have kindly (and not so kindly) asked for to the table instead of falling back trying to claim offtopic where your thread has gone.



Draiman said:


> Uh...no. EXPERIENCES are personal, and are SUBJECTIVE. Scientific, *empirical* observations are OBJECTIVE.
> 
> I'll break it down for you.
> 
> ...


i couldn't have said it better.


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> p.s.-if you don't want me to use the term why do you continue trying to force me to agree with you and why do you avoid all of my questions


Nobody's forcing anything on you. All I'm doing is trying to understand your perspective, which is why I am asking you for evidence (personal experiences are NOT evidence; experiences are SUBJECTIVE and OPEN TO INTERPRETATION) to *support your view* on intelligence in tarantulas.

Me, avoiding your questions? I think you will find I addressed all of them. I am still waiting for answers from you...


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> You suggested that they "seemed so smart", so the discussions and debate over whether they actually are "smart" are actually ENTIRELY ON-TOPIC.


LOLOLOLOL no hun you guys are actually OFF TOPIC because the thread question i was asking was "whats owning a T like" not "are they smart?" if i wanted to start a debate about that i wouldve posted "are tarantulas smart or not?"  instead you guys felt the need to go off topic you just want an excuse to continue your off topic 




> Uh...no. EXPERIENCES are personal, and are SUBJECTIVE. Scientific, empirical observations are OBJECTIVE.
> 
> I'll break it down for you.
> 
> ...


and yet you assume that all experiences are meaningless in this case pheonixx did test his theory with an objective in mind the objective being "omg can my T really tell the difference between me and....." an experiment doesnt have to be inside a lab which is why pheonixx,maudua and i are saying you're close minded because you limit hypothesis' to a script based on your personal standards of what it should be when in all actuality scientists can't come to conclusions without experience or observation because some hypothesis' are inspired by experience which inspires observations for you to be little our opinions and limit us is unfair scientists are still flawed just like other people theyre not super humans and technically fact is derived and inspired by opinion it's just an opinion supported by observation which means that pheonixxs' story is technically legit


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

Alright, I think I'm done here.


----------



## Sleazoid (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> LOLOLOLOL no hun you guys are actually OFF TOPIC because the thread question i was asking was "whats owning a T like" not "are they smart?" if i wanted to start a debate about that i wouldve posted "are tarantulas smart or not?"


And the answer you would have gotten is no they are not smart.

My snakes have more of a brain than my tarantulas and they aren't capable of love either.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> you are talking circles. once again, bring some scientific proof like the numerous people here have kindly (and not so kindly) asked for to the table instead of falling back trying to claim offtopic where your thread has gone.



why should i when my thread initially had nothing to do with this topic in the first place?better yet why don't you bring me some evidence?lol and why should i even attempt to find evidence when there are people here that have provided you with objective observations?and more importantly what is the reason for you determining they're not intelligent we've stated our reasons and now it's only fair that you state yours

---------- Post added at 11:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 PM ----------




> And the answer you would have gotten is no they are not smart.
> 
> My snakes have more of a brain than my tarantulas and they aren't capable of love either.


and that's YOUR OPINION


----------



## Sleazoid (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> and that's YOUR OPINION


No, it is fact and science. If I am not mistaken tarantulas don't even technically have a brain, it is just a very primitive nervous system. If they do have a brain then it is very very primitive. Do you think an ant is capable of love towards a human being? No of course not, that would be dumb. Once again, my snakes have a larger brain than a tarantula, yet they don't feel love either. How of my sixteen years of keeping snakes I have never seen one try and love me or have affection towards me.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> Nobody's forcing anything on you. All I'm doing is trying to understand your perspective, which is why I am asking you for evidence (personal experiences are NOT evidence; experiences are SUBJECTIVE and OPEN TO INTERPRETATION) to support your view on intelligence in tarantulas.
> 
> Me, avoiding your questions? I think you will find I addressed all of them. I am still waiting for answers from yo


trying to understand my perspective? lmaorofl no no youre not and i can tell your not you know how because if you were you wouldn't be calling my perspective absurd or stupid not only that but i've explained my position to you several times  and since you want to know my perspective so bad let me sum it up for you: instead of lecturing me about what the majority believes and why i should believe it just respect my opinion 

there that's my perspective lol i think its funny that you THINK you answered my questions when all you really did was use ad hominems to avoid them and demand evidence from me even thoughy ou never provided any not only that but why should i apologize for having an opinion you're not going to change my mind and i've explained that to you before

---------- Post added at 11:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 PM ----------




> No, it is fact and science. If I am not mistaken tarantulas don't even technically have a brain, it is just a very primitive nervous system. If they do have a brain then it is very very primitive. Do you think an ant is capable of love towards a human being? No of course not, that would be dumb. Once again, my snakes have a larger brain than a tarantula, yet they don't feel love either. How of my sixteen years of keeping snakes I have never seen one try and love me or have affection towards me.



oh yeah because thats an affective way to learn things: dismiss things just because they don't sound like something a scientist would say dont even try to reason with the person and acknowledge that theyre a human with a view dehumanize them and treat them like an object to be manipulated and insulted 


once again IT'S YOUR OPINION just because the majority says something is right doesn't mean it is and scientists are flawed too which means as hard for you as it is to believe THEY DO MAKE MISTAKES and im sure there are other scientists who have been able to prove the opposition true

---------- Post added at 11:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 PM ----------

Like i said before i not changing my opinion so everyone needs to just stop im starting to get irritated this thread is now about what it's like to own a t i will not be answering anymore questions i will not be engaging in anymore of the offtopic conversation that was started by a troll 



*what is owning a t like?*


----------



## Canth (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> *what is owning a t like?*


It's much like owning a rock that requires very basic needs and will never show any appreciation for anything you do. 

Do you know what a period is?


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> It's much like owning a rock that requires very basic needs and will never show any appreciation for anything you do.
> 
> Do you know what a period is?


do you know what staying on topic and not being condescending is? it's people like you that are no longer welcome to this thread im sick and tired of you guys now i see what maudua meant and i agree with her 100 percent


----------



## Falk (Mar 1, 2011)

I totaly agrees with Fran, Chris.

To be ontopic how its like to own a _Theraphosa spp._:

It is just the same as owning other _Theraphosinae_ from rainforrest areas.

And lastly Salsa:barf::?:wall:


----------



## Canth (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> do you know what staying on topic and not being condescending is? it's people like you that are no longer welcome to this thread im sick and tired of you guys now i see what maudua meant and i agree with her 100 percent


You asked, I answered. Problem?


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

You have a strong opinion which goes against conventional wisdom and what is accepted in the scientific community to be true, and when people try to convince you of the truth you just go on and on with your very weak philosophical arguments such as _"just because the majority of scientists say this is so, doesn't mean it is!!"_. You are incredible. Are you saying you are correct while the many biologists and entomologists out there are wrong? Those are people who have studied tarantulas and other arthropods for years; written their thesis on, say, invertebrate neurology; dissected their study animals to look at their brains and neural systems and whatnot; and yet, you with your naive conclusions about tarantulas based purely on emotion and anthropomorphism are correct whilst they all are wrong?

Wow.


----------



## salsalover (Mar 1, 2011)

> And lastly Salsa:barf::?:wall:



right back at you,fran,chris and dan  for not only going off topic but being rude and refusing to respect my opinion

---------- Post added at 12:37 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:34 AM ----------




> You have a strong opinion which goes against conventional wisdom and what is accepted in the scientific community to be true, and when people try to convince you of the truth you just go on and on with your very weak philosophical arguments such as "just because the majority of scientists say this is so, doesn't mean it is!!". You are incredible. Are you saying you are correct while the many biologists and entomologists out there are wrong? Those are people who have studied tarantulas and other arthropods for years; written their thesis on, say, invertebrate neurology; dissected their study animals to look at their brains and neural systems and whatnot; and yet, you with your naive conclusions about tarantulas based purely on emotion and anthropomorphism are correct whilst they all are wrong?
> 
> Wow.



actually no i never at any point in the conversation said 100 percent of all scientists were wrong but im not going to even engage in this conversation maybe you should have read back to the post where i said this offtopic discussion is over for every scientist that has proved something there are other scientists that have proved otherwise your assumptions are your personal problem

---------- Post added at 12:40 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:37 AM ----------

thread closed if anyone is interested in actually answering the question in the title of the thread please pm me because i cannot take this anymore people are continuing to make random assumptions about everything i say and only 2 people out of the entire thread respect my opinion  so yeah thread closed


----------



## Draiman (Mar 1, 2011)

This thread isn't closed just because you say so.

Just sayin'.


----------



## malevolentrobot (Mar 1, 2011)

not attacking you, but just because we do not agree with your opinion doesn't mean everyone here is belittling you. a fair majority have not resorted to name calling and have simply refuted your viewpoint, possibly in the hopes you might look at scientific proof on the limited capacity of tarantulas before making baseless arguments against it using incredible subjective "evidence". your opinion is your own, correct. that does not make it _right_, just that it is _yours_.

so cute being so bossy with your thread and acting like a mod and "closing it". also love the huge font, btw.

okay that last part _was_ sort of attacking you, but good grief, you've had a horrible attitude the entirety of this thread and your level of anthropomorphism of these creatures is ... :barf: is right.


----------



## micheldied (Mar 1, 2011)

salsalover said:


> it is contradictory because the whole point of being a scientists is making the public aware of an observation inspired by a hypothesis and at this point i have to say it does feel like a personal attack because i've asked you guys once to stop and stick to the topic and if you know my opinion wont change why do you keep persisting why don't you just stop?since there's clearly no changing my mind and you can clearly see that you're starting to  upset me and at this point it feels like im being nagged and forced into an opinion just because the majority says its right not everyone is going to go with the majority


You're right, you've got a mindset that nobody's going to be able to change.
Sorry to "upset" you, I'm done here(though I will continue to enjoy reading through).


----------



## Hedorah99 (Mar 1, 2011)

*Moderator Note*

Hello Salsalover,

To answer your question, its like owning any other pet. They have basic needs that must be met to assure survival. I can also assure you, any intelligence or "signs of affection" are just assumptions, as they are pure instinct with little little to no capacity to learn or care.

And welcome to AB. As a kindly heads up, use some punctuation. Reading your posts is tiring because I need to figure out just where the hell the commas and periods should be.

Oh, yea, thread closed now.

Reactions: Like 1


----------

