Pit Bull Experts: scientifically unimpressive and technologically worthless

In 1960, Louis Leaky sent a secretary with no college education into the Africa bush to study chimpanzees. Despite the objections of "experts" Leaky persevered. Leaky felt that someone with little formal training would be more likely to describe what they were seeing rather than what they thought they should be seeing. 

I think everyone will agree that hiring Jane Goodall for the job was a brilliant move. 

Keep Jane Goodall in mind while you watch this video, The Trouble With Experts, then continue reading.

Pit bull advocates make a lot of noise about their "experts" and tout the perceived consensus among "experts" as proof that "pit bulls" are not the problem, owners are. Here are four of the more impressively credentialed "experts".

PETER L. BORCHELT


The ASPCA cited BORCHELT in their anti-BSL position statement and BORCHELT was called upon to provide his "expert" opinion in favor of pit bulls when a NYC council member sought to ban them:

A Brooklyn-based animal behaviorist who opposes a citywide pit bull ban, Peter Borchelt, said strong dogs such as pit bulls, Rottweilers and German shepherds are generally safe, if they are "raised like pets." You get into trouble when the dog is not trained to be nonaggressive," Mr. Borchelt, who has a doctorate in animal behavior, said. "They can become dangerous when they're thrown behind a fence and allowed to become overly protective. You just have to take a few extra steps to make sure the dog is friendly, affectionate, and well socialized."
PETER L. BORCHELT, PhD and "expert" for hire.

BORCHELT provided the above "expert" opinion about the safety of pit bulls AFTER he was sued for a million dollars for providing his "expert" opinion to a retired fire fighter about the safety of a pit bull that he was in possession of. The pit bull attacked the retired fire fighter. Despite the fact that the pit bull had a known documented history of previous aggression, BORCHELT assured the retired fire fighter the pit bull was safe. During the civil trial, BORCHELT testified under oath that the pit bull was not vicious. Yeah. Just in case you missed the colored text above indicating an external link, click here.

PETER BORCHELT is a member of an elite club known as Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists. According to the civil lawsuit article, he charges $300 an hour to fix your dog's problems. You can find his fee schedule here. BORCHELT'S gun for hire, er uh I mean "expert" witness page is conveniently malfunctioning.

IAN DUNBAR

If I were asked to recommend a dog, say for a children's psychiatric ward, my first choice would be a pit bull. When children pull their tail, if they have one, or poke them, the dog's like... he doesn't care. With a good owner, you have the most fantastic breed of all.  
IAN DUNBAR, DVM, PhD

Poor Ian. Yet another dupe of proof of assertion. Apparently he has yet to receive the memo regarding the official revocation of nanny dog status. 

Hot shot Dunbar does not appear to offer services for problematic or dangerous behaviors. Smart move.

 RICHARD POLSKY

No other breed has been maligned or vilified as much as the pit bull terrier. One commonly finds negative publicity about this breed, despite the fact that many honorable Americans have kept pit bulls as pets, including Franklin Roosevelt and Thomas Edison. 
RICHARD POLSKY, PhD and "expert" for hire.

Poor Richard. All of that money and all those years spent studying to acquire impressive degrees was no guarantee that he would be able to demonstrate critical thinking skills. He still fell prey to the common fallacy known as Proof of Assertion. It is a documented fact that President Roosevelt's "pit bull" was a dangerous menace. It is a documented fact that Edison did not own Nipper and there is no documented proof that Thomas Edison ever owned any pit bull. 

The pit bulldog's long legacy of vilification is well earned and well documented.

POLSKY'S fee schedule is available on demand. I suspect it is one of those cases where if you have to ask, you probably can't afford it.

JAMES HA

DR JAMES HA, animal behaviorist at the University of Washington in Seattle and "expert" for hire.
The reason we're focusing just on pit bulls is that we hear so much about them, and that is not because of the breed difference, the genetic difference - that's because of the way they've been raised.

That quote is from a 2010 KOMO news interview. Compare that to HA'S blog post in 2008, where HA cited research that stated red and golden cocker spaniels were more likely to display aggressive behavior than black cocker spaniels and that yellow labs were "significantly more likely to be reported with aggression problems" than the black or chocolate variants, yet JAMES HA promotes the crazy notion that dogs artificially selected for violence only require a loving gentle family.

Also in the 2010 KOMO interview, DR HA stated that mastiffs, chows, shepherds, rottweillers and dobermans are "all more genetically aggressive than" dogs that had been artificially selected for combat for 200 years. HA goes on to add that genetics is roughly 20-30% responsible for temperament. YET, at the roughly 4:00 minute mark of his presentation on "Behavioral Genetics" DR HA stated that in studies of selected dog breeds, none were gripping breeds btw, for defence behaviors ie, guarding, attacking, biting there is a 14 - 20% heritability rate "which in genetics world is important". He immediately followed up with "there are different genetic predispositions in different breeds." Towards the end of this 2011 youtube video, HA states that 30-50% of behavior is genetics. My head was spinning just trying to keep up with all his facts.

DR JAMES HA is a member of an elite club known as Certified Applied Animal Behaviorists.
HA offers a variety of services ranging from $75 - 250 plus travel fees.


One unspoken assumption among early behavior geneticists, an assumption that was shared by most for many years, was that some psychological traits were likely to be significantly influenced by genetic factors, whereas others were likely to be primarily influenced by shared environmental influences. Most behavior geneticists assumed that social attitudes, for example, were influenced entirely by shared environmental influences, and so social attitudes remained largely unstudied until relatively recently. The evidence now shows how wrong these assumptions were. Nearly every reliably measured psychological phenotype (normal and abnormal) is significantly influenced by genetic factors. Heritabilities also differ far less from trait to trait than anyone initially imagined. Shared environmental influences are often, but not always, of less importance than genetic factors, and often decrease to near zero after adolescence. Genetic influence on psychological traits is ubiquitous, and psychological researchers must incorporate this fact into their research programs else their theories will be ‘‘scientifically unimpressive and technologically worthless,’’ to quote Meehl again.
Genetic Influence on Human Psychological Traits



Genetics, Not Parenting, Key to Temperament, Studies Say, Los Angeles Times, February 20, 1994

Major Personality Study Finds That Traits Are Mostly Inherited, New York Times, December 2, 1986



PETER BORCHELT, IAN DUNBAR, RICHARD POLSKY and JAMES HA believe that purpose bred dogs, artificially selected for violent combat for 200 years are not genetically predisposed to violence. BORCHELT, DUNBAR, POLSKY and HA believe it is equally wrong to think that nature plays second fiddle to nurture in dogs. Unfortunately, they have been able to convince others of their distorted beliefs too.


So much for "experts".



Dr James Ha
http://www.seattlemet.com/news-and-profiles/articles/consider-the-pit-bull-february-2013

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/109770109.html

http://companionanimalsolutions.com/blogs/the-genetics-of-behavior-what-color-is-your-dog/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMyjS6m1Sq4


Jane Goodall
http://www.janegoodall.ca/goodall-bio-timeline.php

http://www.biography.com/people/jane-goodall-9542363#early-interest-in-primates

http://www.notablebiographies.com/Gi-He/Goodall-Jane.html#ixzz3Bo6e4pHc



The Nanny Dog Myth Revealed

Thomas Edison's pit bull

Famous Pit Bull Owners: The Thomas Alva Edison Edition

Famous Pit Bull Owners: The Presidential Edition

Pete Roosevelt: The Disgraced White House Bandog


Myth 99: Scientists know what they are talking about because they study animals in an objective way, Alexandra Semyonova

The science of how behavior is inherited in aggressive dogs by Alexandra Semyonova

Alexandra Semyonova's book, The 100 Silliest Things People Say About Dogs is available in the right side bar of this blog.

 

The Trouble with Experts


Only An Expert


 

Pitthetic Dementia

we can't let the dude, dubv and snack's hard work go to waste.

Pitthetic Dementia

Community members DubV and Dude, I BaggedYourPit coined this term by combining “pit” and ‘thetic,’ (assertion/dogma,) with “dementia” (a loss of reasoning and orientation through various pathologies) to describe a system of thought that is so flexible that it can take any information at all and use it to strengthen their hypotheses. It cannot be falsified in their minds. Persons suffering from pitthetic dementia can recall prescriptive talking points for the purpose of justifying beliefs, but have lost the ability to reason independently or accept rational conclusions in conflict with these beliefs.

here are my favorite examples of pitthetic dementia. feel free to share yours.

it's all how you raise 'em

whenever a pit bull goes on the attack, the pit nutters blame the owner for failing to provide proper training, socialization and care. often, but not always, the dogs have been abused or neglected. this theory is in sharp contrast to the fervor surrounding the saving of fight bust dogs and dogs rescued from abusive situations. compare the "it's all how you raise 'em" mantra to the most recent cruelty case in new jersey. this pit bull was starved and thrown in the garbage. someone rescued him. i am not sure that keeping him alive was the most prudent decision and if he survives, he will surely become the next poster pit for the "they're the most forgiving dogs evah" campaign. sad stories like patrick's illustrate beautifully the flexibility of pit nutter thought. just listen to the attending vet, Dr Tom Scavelli: "With all he's been through, he loves people, he's been very engaging with our staff, he doesn't seem to distrust people. He still comes out, he wants to be petted, he wants to have human contact." i doubt this wretched creature possesses the energy to be aggressive but if he survives, is adopted out and later does harm someone, the pit nutters will grant him a full pardon based on his hideous past.

another popular flex tactic on the it's all how you raise 'em theme is when a pit nutter shows up on line saying their pit bull is the most loving loyal dog they've ever owned and it is because they have raised it correctly. that same pit nutter will then state that their chihuahua or jack russell or border collie is the most vicious dog they've ever owned.

dog bite statistics

from time to time, common sense rears its politically incorrect head and people demand to be protected from the pit bull menace. media reports, animal people and the CDC are referenced as proof of the unique threat that gripping dogs pose. the pit nutters swear that bite statistics can never be trusted, no one can properly identify a pit bull (pitplexia) and the media is biased. they love to quote the CDC's reversal on the legitimacy of tracking dog bites by breed. yet, their ever flexible system of thought allows them to promote the 2008 "study" that shows you are "more likely to be bitten by a dachshund". this 2008 "study" is nothing more than a questionnaire administered to 6000 dog owners who were asked about their dogs' aggressive tendencies. i suspect the only thing that this "study" accurately measures is the level of honesty among owners of different dog breeds. and we all know how honest pit bull owners are.

funny thing about this particular link to the study, it was written by JOHN WOESTENDIEK, a 35 yr veteran of the newspaper business. the one time recipient of the pulitzer prize, now spends his days writing puff pieces on his blog ohmidog! and parrots the pit nutter party line. JOHN seems to have abandoned the principles of journalism he learned long ago. and he fails to take the most basic step promoted by pit nutters: do your own research! age and wisdom do not necessarily go hand in hand.

dogs and kids

you know the drill, pit bull mauls kid, people demand pit bull regulation. the nutters bombard the internet, blaming the parents and stating "I would NEVER leave any child ALONE with ANY dog!!" out of the other side of their mouth comes "Pit bulls were the original nanny dog!" and "I would never trust my children with any other breed."

fyi, here is DR. IAN DUNBAR in march 2010 advocating pit bulls as his FIRST choice of therapy dog for child psychiatric wards because pit bulls don't care when "children pull their tails and poke them".

racism and reverse discrimination

pit bull zealots attempt to paint anyone who shuns their dogs as a racist. they then proceed to boast of their devotion to pit bulls stating they will never own any other type of dog while sporting t-shirts and bumper stickers proclaiming "if it ain't pit, it ain't shit".

PIT HEIL!

Diane Jessup: grande dame of pit pundits

the pitbullguru paid a visit to my little blog and left a link to his 13 minute documentary in praise of wiggle butts. i encourage everyone to watch it. it features DIANE JESSUP and JANE BERKEY. what a treat! i know many of you have been unable to finish the pit bull propaganda videos that i post here. if it helps, think of the Pit Bull Hoax as a lost episode of Gilligan's Island.

Gilligan Jane Berkey

The Skipper Diane Jessup

The Professor Dr Nicholas Dodman

Mary Anne Drayton Michaels

Ginger Jean Donaldson

Mr Howell Ian Dunbar

Mrs Howell was tragically killed by a falling coconut.

DIANE JESSUP enjoys an unusually comfortable position as pit bull "expert". JESSUP is universally admired by all pit bull owners (except the game-dogger demographic). she has written books, trained sniffer dogs for the police, worked as an animal control officer and unlike her good friend KRIS CRAWFORD, she is not a deranged felon. Diane is in a unique position to lie and exaggerate with absolute authority. it seems no one ever questions her integrity or "expertise", until now.

let's take a closer look at DRAYTON MICHAELS' exaggerations first. this documentary, as best that i can tell, is at least one year old.

DRAYTON MICHAELS says: "DIANE has been working with pit bull dogs for over 30 years."

DIANE JESSUP says: "Having worked with the American pit bull breed for 25 years..." 9/1/10

DRAYTON adds a minimum of 6 awe inspiring years to her resume, twice the number of years he has been a dog trainer.

DRAYTON MICHAELS says: "She has authored many books on pit bulldogs."

amazon.com says: Jessup has authored three books, actually two books. i am not sure that a novel about a talking pit bull counts as anything other than bathroom reading material.

DRAYTON redefines 'many' to further inspire the gullible masses.

DRAYTON MICHAELS says: "She is also a former animal control officer of 20 years."

DIANE JESSUP says (in public): "I have watched with horror while misinformation, downright mistruths and ignorant statements have come out of Skeldon's office. This guys is a train wreck. THANK YOU to this group for standing up to this kind of abuse of office. I was an animal control officer for 20 years, and Skeldon makes me ashamed. I now train and donate detection dogs to law enforcement. Because of the breeds I use, I would never consider donating one to Lucas County. Please get someone with some professinalism in this position. Thank you."

(Jessup adding her 2¢ to the war on Tom Skeldon)

DIANE JESSUP says (in private): "Could she maybe ditch a few of the dogs and then sneak them back in a month or so? Believe me, AC doesn't check back."

(this is JESSUP helping someone continue to violate animal law in tacoma. this is her "expert" response to a woman who has been cited for dog at large and told by animal control that she is over the legal limit with 6 dogs and 4 cats and she has to get rid of some.)

i can't really fault DRAYTON here, i doubt that he follows JESSUP as closely as i do.

as you saw above, pit bull advocates have two personas. the one they share with the public and the one they share with each another.

here's my favorite "just between you, me and the fence post" pit nutter comment. this is the pit bull expert DIANE JESSUP on the ATTS:

"Would just like to mention that anyone entering with an American pit bull should keep in mind that the passing states are used to our advantage the past few years. Every failing dog takes us down a notch - so make sure you enter sound dogs! Thanks!" 3/31/08

(woops, looks like that link has been killed. not to worry.)

click to view it at 100%.

what is really pathetic about this comment is not just that she knows these scores are skewed and she encourages people to skew them even further (ie CHEAT) but with her knowledge of dogs, particularly in the protection sports, she KNOWS that it is unfair to compare the ATTS scores of pit bulls, german shepherds, malinois, dobies and rottweilers to the ATTS scores of border collies, labs, dachshunds, cockers and chihuahuas. it's apples to oranges, plain and simple.

DIANE JESSUP states publicly that she admires pit bulls for their loyalty, stability, sensitivity, eager to please, never say die attitude but then names them:

Crazy Kate, Dread, Grim, Maulie, Bad, Freakshow, Amp, and Hellboy. she gets a vanity plate for her van that says "1BADPIT", has a "nocurs@comcast.net" email address and promotes insulting t-shirts like this

two faces.