ball python sight and hearing.

i read that BP's can not hear like us, and my red heat bulb says invisible to reptiles.
i have on many situations found these to be false.
when i mist the bp's cage they hide from the sound of the mister bottle. not a single drop pf water would come within a foot of either snake, and the first squeaky squirt, both snakes will run and hide. they both hate wate misted on them, so whenever we mist teh cage they make a run for the hides. i took up to spraying only the back top of the glass and letting the water drip down, even then the snakes will hear the water bottle and hide, even though there is only water being sprayed directly on the glass no where near the snakes.
roswell seems to not only know when the heat lamp turns on and off, and adjusted his shceduale accordingly, he can see the "invisible" red light.
whenever i come home it when the heat lamps go on (heat pads on all day). roswell will always be waiting for me t o turn the lamp on. as soon as i do he looks straight at the buld, and flickers his tounge everywhere.
he always does this as soon as the bulb comes on. i have stood there, talked to him, tapped on the glass, and get no response, but the second the lamp comes on, he is aware, and getting in postion for basking. i do not think it is the heat he sences, cause within a split second isnt enough time for the lamp to heat p enough to get his attention. i can only assume he can see the light.

THough they do not have ears they can certainly sense vibration. It has even been posited that their lungs laying long and parallel to the ground act as "resonating chambers" of sorts and assisting in their sense of, for lack of a better term, "hearing". It's not the same thing we experience but they are anything but deaf.

On the red light issue - the infrared heat emanating from it paints everything "warm" the instant it is turned on - even blind folded you would be able to tell when it had been turned on and more than likely be able to hone in on the heat source. With their heat-sensitive pits it is really no surprise they can tell where the heat is coming from.
As sensitive as they are it CAN get their attention immediately.

We have to remember to avoid anthropomorphizing to too much a degree.

Definitely agree with gumby:

The "hearing" was vibration (yes, even through the air)

The "sight" of your red heat lamp is just your snake instantly sensing a source of concentrated heat being flicked on.

Quote:

---

We have to remember to avoid anthropomorphizing to too much a degree.

---

huh? whats that mean? you lost me...

It means animals aren't humans and we shouldn't try to treat them or interpret their behaviors as if they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marla

It means animals aren't humans and we shouldn't try to treat them or interpret their behaviors as if they were.

---

no, but humans are animals, and all animals show body language.. i like trying to figure out what is possibly going on inside of their tiny heads. i find it interesting that they can sence just a water spritz being sprayed into the air and gently falling on the ground. i love trying to read their body language, and even though a snake (with no arms or legs, or facial expressions) has no parts, they still have a deffinite body language.

People are animals ???


Personally, i dont think people are animals, i just dont like thinking of myself like that, i dont believe in evolution or anything like that.Animals are animals and people are people in my opinion,I believe god created the earth and the "Big Bang" theory is just a load of poo.

Just my 2 cents, kinda off topic, sorry

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon.O

kinda off topic

---

Quite an understatement there. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kontron

all animals show body language.. i like trying to figure out what is possibly going on inside of their tiny heads.

---

I agree. I was explaining Smulkin's statement for Jason, not assessing your post. Animals do generally have non-verbal communication that can be interpreted to some degree if studied. I don't think there's any question of that. But if someone tells me that his/her ball python prefers a certain bedspread or something, I'm going to guess it's a case of anthropomorphizing the animal. Trying to figure out what/how they hear and whether a response is triggered by vision, temperature, vibration, or other input is not anthropomorphizing, but the interpretation can be.

/rambling

Brandon O, I think anything that breaths, or is living is considered an animal.

Edit: Removal of brain fart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon.O

People are animals ???


Personally, i dont think people are animals, i just dont like thinking of myself like that, i dont believe in evolution or anything like that.Animals are animals and people are people in my opinion,I believe god created the earth and the "Big Bang" theory is just a load of poo.

Just my 2 cents, kinda off topic, sorry

---

Brandon:

Biologically speaking (evolution and religion aside, ain't no way i'm getting into that trap), we are animals. End of story. These labels are based entirely on our biological make-up (i.e., our vital organs, etc), not how our sociological behavior. It doesn't matter if you're talking about an ape, a whale, or a human, they're all animals, mammals specifically.

Reptiles are a classification of animals. They are animals. Mammals are animals, fish are animals, birds are animals, amphinians are animals, and reptiles are animals. And crustaceons, and arachnids, and insects.

Where in the bible is evolution explicitly denied?

I think the problem with the bible or any other religious text is that it is open enough for interpretation that certain interest groups are able to make of them what they want and push their interests onto others.

Originally, people denied that the earth revolved around the sun and used the bible to support their claim. We all know now (or at least I hope so) that the earth does indeed revolve around the sun, and that the bible was quoted out of context in that case.

It is possible for there to both be god and evolution. Microevolution in itself is verifiable. We do it all the time with ball pythons when we breed morphs. Macroevolution is a bit tougher to prove outright, but I don't think it's any coincidence that Chimpanzees and Humans share 99.4% of the same DNA. Not to mention, Chimpanzees are tested to have the equivalent IQ of a 4 year old child.

I mean after all, if it really did completely start with Adam & Eve, and incest is prohibited, shouldn't there be no sex at all even for procreation purposes since it would always be incest? Although I do not believe in god, I believe there are many wisdoms in religious texts like the bible. I think there's room for both faith and reason, and denying the latter only leads to fanaticism.

By Hurcules, this is getting into an area that I promise none of us should go. It is a forever unreconcilable argument, kind of like fighting between the peoples of the middle east, I am not even including this "war" :P I don't think we are on this site to convert people, there are other, more appropriate, venues for that. By "convert" I meant either and of the spectrum. There are times and places for that, and they have to co-incide. This is not the place. Insults and anger are for the weak and immature, which I know none of us are.

I personally think that anybody that cannot see the glaring similiarities between humans and the Great Apes is deluding themselves. Humans are really nothing more than a highly developed primate - a hominid. All this religious nonsense about how humans are supposed to be these wonderful little godlets "created in Gods image" is really a load of #@#!

The truth is that the majority of the human beings on this planet are incapable or simply do not want to face the truth of their existence. They prefer to stay in a fairy world and read their comic books ( the Bible ) because it makes them feel all warm and fuzzy inside. I myself am not a warm and fuzzy guy...Im a stone cold atheist.
EyeLashViper

And this all started with a question about bp sight and hearing... ;)

EyeLashViper, I know where you're coming from. I have to be around alot of those kinds of people every single gosh-darned day, but it's ok, no one has died yet :) I am a Satanist, and love the teachings of Anton LaVey, he is an awesome guy to listen to. And I hope you are warm because if you weren't, you would be kind of dead. And fuzzy since guys are, well, fuzzy... LoL
But anywho.
About the snake, I think they can see the flash of heat that turning on the lamp creates, and they undoubtedly can remember things, day/night cycles, the goings-on of their day. About the hearing, they cannot "hear" but can sense vibrations, as our ears do, and might be able to convert that into some sort of sound waves, like the auricles(bones) in our ears do. Who knows, they may just be able to pick up on sound waves and be able to differentiate them as to what is making that sound (our voice, someone else's voice, stereo, etc.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hhw

Originally, people denied that the earth revolved around the sun and used the bible to support their claim. We all know now (or at least I hope so) that the earth does indeed revolve around the sun, and that the bible was quoted out of context in that case.

---

actually the flat world theory was only a european thought. the rest of the world (at the time) knew the world was round. the indians, aztecs, myan's egyptians, chineese, and so forth have always known it was round. and show in it in history. why do you think the myan and aztec calanders were round.. they knew what was up.they also developed the 28 day calnder which is far more accurate to our man made clander (the 28 day calnder was based on solar cycles that they observed).
poor mis-informed europeans. only the masses in europe were fooled into thinking the world was flat, and the sun revolved around them. they also belived the same kings and religious leaders who said only they can speak directly to god. if you look at history, i will point out 4 figures that lived the exact same lives.
first there was mythra, the ancient greek god, then horus the egyptian god, and then krishna, (all before the story of jesus) and jesus. all were born to a virgin mother, all crushed the head of a serpant, and all were crucified. all died for 3 days then rose again, and all of these god raised someone from the dead in front of the masses. if you do not belive me then read your history books. christianity is just a recycled myth passed down from history.
In the end the need for order out of chaos and fear of the unknown is what drives people to accept something rather then question and seek out on their own the answers.
if you want some proof, and an interesting view of history and the origins of religion watch tis video.
http://www.pharmacratic-inquisition..../pharmacratic/

but back to the point at hand... PYTHONS ROCK!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kontron

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hhw

Originally, people denied that the earth revolved around the sun and used the bible to support their claim. We all know now (or at least I hope so) that the earth does indeed revolve around the sun, and that the bible was quoted out of context in that case.

---

actually the flat world theory was only a european thought. the rest of the world (at the time) knew the world was round. the indians, aztecs, myan's egyptians, chineese, and so forth have always known it was round. and show in it in history. why do you think the myan and aztec calanders were round.. they knew what was up.they also developed the 28 day calnder which is far more accurate to our man made clander (the 28 day calnder was based on solar cycles that they observed).
poor mis-informed europeans. only the masses in europe were fooled into thinking the world was flat, and the sun revolved around them. they also belived the same kings and religious leaders who said only they can speak directly to god. if you look at history, i will point out 4 figures that lived the exact same lives.
first there was mythra, the ancient greek god, then horus the egyptian god, and then krishna, (all before the story of jesus) and jesus. all were born to a virgin mother, all crushed the head of a serpant, and all were crucified. all died for 3 days then rose again, and all of these god raised someone from the dead in front of the masses. if you do not belive me then read your history books. christianity is just a recycled myth passed down from history.
In the end the need for order out of chaos and fear of the unknown is what drives people to accept something rather then question and seek out on their own the answers.
if you want some proof, and an interesting view of history and the origins of religion watch tis video.
http://www.pharmacratic-inquisition..../pharmacratic/

---

*slowly backs away from thread* :shock:

Kontron, what has anything you've said have to do with quoting the bible out of context, balancing faith with reason, or evolution?

And if we really want to get into history, in the earliest iterations of Christianity there were two gods and Mary was not a virgin mother; Jesus had older siblings. Therefore, the commonality of the virgin birth, crushed head of a serpent, or revival after 3 days can easily be attributed to the adaptation of new religions to pre-existing beliefs. So the myth in itself wasn't recycled but adapted to be that way.

I beg the pardon of anyone who finds any of the information in my posts offensive. My intention was not to call into question religion, but rather to suggest that religion and science can coexist, most notably in the case of creationism/evolution.

As I quoted from National Geographic in an earlier thread, 45% of U.S. adults believe that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so". In order to cling to such a belief, one would pretty much have to refute all archaeology, paleontology, and anthropology. The evidence for evolution is pretty compelling; there should be no doubts whatsoever on microevolution as we can witness this first hand through selective breeding. In several debates I had in college over evolution, it is normally macroevolution rather than microevolution that is refuted. However, genetic research is more and more strongly supporting macroevolution as well.

37% do believe that there is room for both God and evolution. I personally feel that this percentage would be much greater if more people were better informed.

If one denies evolution after reviewing all the information and that person disagrees with the sources of that information, that is perfectly justified. However, denying evolution without actually looking at any of the information available is simply ignorance (this is not an insult , but simply the definition of the word).

Anyway, like I've previously said, there is nothing wrong with faith, only fanatical faith and the division between the two is the emphasis on reason.

my point is religion is B.S.
the bible is b.s.
people need to stop going to fairy tails to explain away everything.
and recycled adapted.. same thing.
its the same story used over and over with a change of cast.
i was asking about ball pythons.. i in no way wanted this to turn into a debate about whos conception was right or wrong about god... like i said... back to the damn point.. PYTHONS ROCK!

Well, we are all alowed to have our differnt opinions. :) and im glad

Even tho i dissgree with alot of the stuff that has been said on this thread.

Im a firm believer in christ, i dont think we humans evolved from apes.

In the bible it says, god created man and then the animals so how could we evolve from apes if we were created first ??But its ok, i know some of you are not going to belive me since some of you have stated that you are satanist and think jesus and or religion is B.S.

If you look it up in the bible it makes alot of sense

Sorry, i think i made this thread go WAAAY too too off topic. I apologize

Whoa, we really need to not get into religious discussions on this board. This needs to stop.

I agree gen, thats what I was trying to say a few posts ago. So about ball pythons and thier hearing/sight abilities: Kitty definently knew when my ex boyfriends band was practicing, they were really loudn and Kitty's cage was on the floor across the hall at the time, so he felt those vibrations. After a couple time of that I started taking him out for his handling sessions during practice. His sight is not great, as with all balls, but the othre senses he has more than make up for that :)

I think it's great that we have diverse religious views here, and I enjoy a good discussion on the topic as much as anyone, but I don't think this is the place for it.

What ticking keg of dynamite, sir?

Hehe - thank you Marla for your earlier clarification of my post. Essentially yes - the realm of sensory experience and how that shapes consciousness and how we experience the world around us and all that other phenomonological stuff (i'd never be able to run for office dropping that many damn syllables) is for humans, unique to humans. There is no judgement inherent in that. It just is. Like crawfish or salamanders who have evolved over time in deep caves to the point they have only vestigal eyes or no sight at all and whose entire existence doesnt even touch on the senses of sight - yet their experience is to them quite complete - and anything "more" beyond that simply inconceivable.

It is very easy for us to can everything in terms of our 5 senses, it is after all what we are used to and nearly the sum total of all we know both as individuals and a species - and again all too easy for us to imagine that their experiences must be similar. This doesnt even begin to address functions of consciousness and sentience and cerebral functions (hell maybe even as shaped by sensory input). This stuff, frankly fascinates me and I as well want to know whether there are more cones than rods in snakes eyes, whether movement or color is more readily perceived etc, how their heat-sensing pits fit in with eyesight and olfactory organs i tracking a target, how this is "painted" in the mind of the snake etc. But I fully realize it is all conjecture and I am liable to impress my notions of perception into their physiology like an ungainly godlike cookie-cutter. Being fascinated by these creatures to such an extent this is even possible however is not difficult - they are far too entrancing and so seemingly enigmatic.


I'll walk carefully around the rest of that debate adding only that i think science is extremenly important as are the ideals of empricism (ie empirical science) in understanding our universe in a functional way.

Empiricism doesn't need to concern itself with spirituality nor spirituality with empiricism - opposite ends of the spectrum i'd expect could coexist peacefully.

Otherwise it is like judging a mathematical formula (a2+b2=c2) based on the color of the ink and the shape of the 2's (horrid horrid horrid analogy i know i know the phone wont stop ringing so I keep derailing my own train of thought).

I heartily admit to being an animal. :D
No one really knows how the heck we got here. That much is true. There are all sorts of theories out there, and of course everyone knows in their heart that they, themself, knows the truth... right? :)
I think this has gotten to be an interesting little thread; but I would fear that knowing each others' religious beliefs, could lead to some hard feelings later on that could potentially lead to advice not being heeded, and ball pythons suffering because of it. I really hope that doesn't happen.


To answer your original post, Kontron. I know that Bps cannot hear just like we do, they have no ears. I think that their little snakelike bodies gave up on the ear's evolution in favor of developing their sense of taste and heat-sensing capabilities.
What do I think goes on in their little reptilian brains? Well, here's my theory. Imagine being able to simply exist. Not needing to be anywhere at any set time. Not worrying what people thought of you. Not needing to wear clothes. Sure, a prey item might walk by, and you might want to eat it. And you may have to move around the tank until you get that proper temp gradient to digest that rat. But you;d do these things without real thought. Without having feelings.
Not having any thoughts toward any kind of morality or obligation. Not even any sense of good and evil! This would be the blissful life of the snake; an existance of simply existing.
(gee that sounded a bit poetic, huh?) :D

I know that I started another reply, but this is a different thought. I read a quote somewhere about why a person hated snakes. He said that the snake was this useless thing that simply existed and devoured meaningful, active life (as in, its rodential prey.) The mouse was seen as a bustling, thriving creature which had a life full of meaning; while the snake basically took away that meaning and fed off of it to nourish its own meaningless existance.
I think this quote was completely biased against snakes. The whole reason they developed into rodent-killers was to fill a niche in which they keep the rodent population down and contribute to the cycle of life. They do this without thinking, in my opinion. So I guess that to me, they really do not have thought processes like we do, so I cannot say what I think that they think.

I think I should get a prize for going off topic, but basically staying on topic!

Just one last off topic comment; I just believe that everyone should inform themselves as much as possible. I think every atheist should read the bible and every christian should read Marx and Russell. I don't think anyone should cling to any viewpoint without studying both sides.

Anyway, I remember reading when I was a kid that snakes have very sensitive jawbones, and are thus able to sense vibrations through them. I don't recall whether this pertained to a specific species, genus, or to all snakes though.

But as I've said in all my posts regarding feeding in separate enclosures, ball pythons perceive the world much differently than we do. Although it's very easy for us to recognize the opening of an enclosure as a specific phenomenon, a ball python may not perceive this event very clearly. After all, I doubt a ball python can comprehend whether an enclosure is in an open or closed state. It will try to escape either way, but simply meet success or failure through continuous trial without any consciousness of what state the enclosure is in.

Moo? Oh wait.. no... Baa? darnit, that's not it... *gurgle* Oops.. Nope not it either...


*yells tarzan sounds* Yay that's it ;)

Sorry, felt the need to lighten the topic..

! agree with what hhw just said, even tho you may choose to go with one "religion" i think its very important to educate yourselves about others

Ok thats the last off topis thing you will hear outta me (or rather....see)

Promise !!

thank u satanicintention!