Crow Cam Lets Scientists See Intelligence at Work
Ever want to fly like a bird? Now you can do the next best thing: get a tail-feather view of what it is like to fly from branch to branch. University of Oxford scientists attached a small video camera to the underside of a New Caledonian Crow to watch it in the wild, reported PhysOrg. The BBC News report includes video clips you can watch. National Geographic News said this is one of the first uses of this ultra-light camera technology. It will allow us to follow small animals around in their own world.
New Caledonian crows fascinate scientists because of their exceptional tool-using ability (see 02/23/2007, 08/09/2002). The camera-equipped crow did not disappoint. It not only used tools made out of grass stems; it stored its best ones for later use.
Noting that this species of crow appears to be the only non-primate animal known to use tools, the BBC article said, “The team is using its video footage to investigate why New Caledonian crows might have evolved their tool-using abilities. One idea was that “the behaviour may have evolved in response to food shortages.”
Can we please just enjoy these amazing animals without making up myths that a drought made them invent intelligence without primate help?
The Necessity-is-the-Mother-of-Invention theory of evolution leaves unexplained how the right genetic mutations converged on combinatorial solutions to a problem, nor what intelligence is, nor why many creatures go extinct in a drought instead of inventing intelligence. Evolution provides only useless speculation that does no heavy lifting in scientific explanation.
Birds are wonderfully designed animals. Evolutionists cannot even explain beak length, let alone the whole bird (08/24/2005). Look at the Darwinians violate their own principles: they phrased the sentence “crows might have evolved their tool-using abilities.” Well, then, they might not have evolved them, too. Why is this prospect never considered?
If they are assuming evolution to find out if evolution occurred, they are begging the question. Their wording doesn’t make any sense. A bird would have to have intelligence to decide to evolve it, if it even could. What did these birds do, for crying out loud, mutate their own genes for the purpose of trying to find a brain capable of tool use? Using the word evolved as a purposeful word violates Charlie’s core principle that natural selection be unguided and purposeless. Only the presupposition of creation tolerates a proposition about The Purpose-Driven Bird (04/20/2006, bullet 3).