Scientists Discover Cows Point North

Dr Sabine Begall and colleagues from the University of Duisburg-Essen have discovered that cows tend to point north. The researchers studied deer in the Czech Republic and looked at thousands of images of cattle on Google Earth. The animals tended to face north when eating or resting. "We conclude that the magnetic field is the only common and most likely factor responsible for the observed alignment," the scientists wrote in an article. I guess cows will become the must-have item for long-distance hikers now. Having an edible compass would come in handy if you get lost.

Comments

You too can be an armchair scientist.

[suso]

Is it possible? Yes. But I wonder how many factors they really looked into before coming to this conclusion. What about how cows perceive things like the locations of houses, barns and roads. Are a lot of farms on north/south roads or are fields on the south side of the farm so the cows are facing towards the barn or house? I don't know, but from reading the article, it doesn't sound like they looked into much other than making conclusions from Google Earth. What about the fact that aeriel photography is done during certain times of the day or during certain seasons. Surely those have an effect on cows. Poor science in my opinion. And the sad thing is that an article like this only causes people to start propogating facts that might be wrong. Not that what direction cows face is a big deal, but its common enough that it only propogates stupidity.

And why use Google Earth? Indiana (I know cows are sacred in India) seems like a prime candidate for studying cows from space. In 2005 Indiana University released a complete set of aerial photos of the whole state that had as high as 6" per pixel resolution. Which is better than Google Earth.

Besides that, how many good research scientists are going to promote their work by posting a link to Slashdot to an article in a newspaper.

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[baldass_newbie]

They may just like sun on their backs and not in their eyes.
Not everything requires 'scientific' conjecture (which is, I think, your point.)

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[SoCalChris]

I live in Montana, and there's plenty of cattle up here.

There was an article in the paper last winter about ranchers having to roam their pastures at night looking for cattle giving birth (They give birth in the middle of winter). The calves would immediately need to be taken to a barn, otherwise they would quickly freeze in the -20 to -30 temperatures we frequently get during winter nights.

Adult cows are very hardy though, and survive just fine in extreme cold, although they do tend to huddle together to block the wind and conserve each others heat.

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[Thelasko]

I believe a cow's eyes are on the sides of their head. Not at the front of their head, like ours. Therefore, the sun would be in their right eye in the morning, and the left eye in the afternoon.

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[G-forze]

Or maybe satellites take images at noon when the lighting is best because the sun happens to be at its highest (and in the south)?

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[HTH NE1]

How about learned patterns of sunlight corresponding to landmarks? Or did they also try blinding the cows?

Or sealing them inside a large white dome with no discernible edges so that it was all white to infinity?

And did they ask for guns? lots of guns?

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[Free the Cowards]

The alternative to causation is not only reverse causation. Correlation could be due to causation in either direction, but also due to a shared cause or even total coincidence.

For example, the building I live in is lined up north/south. Is this due to the Earth's magnetic field? No, it's because it's built on a north/south road.

Re:You too can be an armchair scientist.

[Thelasko]

Be careful how you read this.

Huge variations in the wind direction and sunlight in the areas where the beasts were found

!=

Huge variations in the wind direction and sunlight at the moment when the beasts were found

The first one could mean the scientist ruled out the amount of sunlight the area gets on average. (Oslo gets less sun than Palermo)

The second one means they took the pictures at various times in the day.

Re:Subject Requires More Study IMO

[Nymz]

I'm not sure this subject warrants any study at all...

Funny, but you never know, a lot of discovers come from looking into non-obvious places.

Re:I propose a new Game Show

[Paradise Pete]

You're right. People should never think critically and try to find other, simpler explanations for a supposed phenomenon, not as long as it comes from a scientist, of course.

Critical thinking is good, of course, but what usually happens here is that people think for about ten seconds, come up with something obvious, and just assume that the researchers who've been working on for months and sometimes years somehow never thought of it. Like this guy, for one example.