researchers explored the idea that parrots not only understand the concept of sharing, but the potential social benefits of it. griffin the african grey parrot was presented with four cups, with each cup’s color assigned a consequence. the green cup represented sharing, where both griffin and a human counterpart received a treat. the pink cup rewarded only griffin. the orange cup gave up griffin’s treat to the person, and the purple cup did not reward anyone. in the experiment, each round of the test began with griffin choosing a cup. student (human) subjects then echoed his choice. after several rounds, griffin understood he would gain a better outcome from sharing. earlier tests showed that when students chose to share with griffin, he was likely to reciprocate, but if the students chose the treat for themselves, griffin likely wouldn’t share.

(x)

there’s a difference between being a neglectful pet owner and a pet owner who made a mistake. fed your pet a brand of food that wasn’t as good as it should have been? didn’t know a certain toy could feed unhealthy behavior? didn’t know what part of your pet they didn’t like to have touched? those are all mistakes. part of animal husbandry, like anything else, is live and learn. that doesn’t mean you don’t try to learn. do all the research you can. if you kill or injure your pet over something that is basic knowledge that you could find in a google search about your animal, yes, you are irresponsible and you should think long and hard (and do your research) before you take care of another animal.

todaysbird:

birds are objectively better than people in every way

i think it’s ok to say “haha birds are better” like, once or twice, considering we have like. decimated the planet and stuff