Monochrome images can’t impart the same amount of real information as a colour image, if it’s just information you want, but monochrome images can give the scene or object more subjective resonances which appeal to our sensibilities or feelings.

To me that colour image would furnish more accurate taxonomic data if the purpose was to differentiate between individual animals, or pelage characteristics, but the eyes in the monochrome version just say “You’re my next meal!”…

Interesting reading Andy.
I suspect a lot of people he affected will be too traumatised, and perhaps ashamed, to bring their experiences to light – but I wouldn’t be surprised if his activities blighted hundreds, if not thousands of victims over the years.
Personally, I don’t think he had any altruistic motives. His charity and fundraising work was just the perfect environment, and cover, for his predilections.
So far, allegations about him start in 1959!

It’s like asking if an apple is better than an orange!
They both have their strengths and weaknesses, positives and negatives.

Cats can fend for themselves quite easily for extended periods – expert killers.
Dogs can be great companions.
Cats don’t need walks every day.
Cats look after themselves- daily washes, etc.
Dogs are alert 24/7 and make great burglar/postman alarms, and are fine deterrents.
Cats are independent, and don’t feel the need to be part of a pack.
A dog would attack a burglar and defend you, but would eat you if you were murdered.
A cat is less costly to care for than a dog – vet bills, food etc.

There has been lots of papers published on the subject – just look it up. Here’s one at random…
John C. Wickett1, Philip A. Vernon1, Donald H. Lee2
1 Department of Psychology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario N6A 5C2, Canada
2 Diagnostic Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital, London, Ontario N6A 5A5, Canada
Abstract
“The issue of the connection between brain size and intelligence has long been of interest to psychology. A review of past research using external head size measures as estimates of internal brain size indicates that head size-IQ correlations are typically in the order of r = 0.10 to 0.30(mean r = 0.194). Today, a more direct and accurate measure of brain size is afforded by the advent of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In the present study the relationship between brain size (measured via MRI), head size, and intelligence was examined in a sample of 40 healthy, right-handed females (ages 20 to 30 years). Whereas head size correlated r = 0.109 (NS) with full scale IQ, brain size and IQ correlated r = 0.395 (P< 0.05). It is clearly indicated that there is a positive relationship between the size of the brain and intelligence.”

The F-104A conversion will end in tears.
Just removing the wings and elevator surfaces from that widowmaker won’t stop it taking off one last time.
Shame, as the airframe was 56-0763, used in tests for the J-79, and as an X-15 chase plane…

That is an absurd statement…

Unpalatable maybe, but not absurd. Obvious physiological differences between nations show up all the time – Ethiopians do very well in marathons, West Africans do very well in activities requiring short-duration explosive energy, like boxing and, say, the 100 metres.
Why should the brain be any different – or is that just not PC to actually say so?
Look at the problems your own UC Berkeley had when they introduced the SAT (IQ) test in 1967 as an elegibility requirement! Before the test, black and Hispanic students comprised the majority of the student numbers, then after the test was introduced they became the minority, their places being replaced by people of mainly Asian descent. Berkeley have had to juggle the figures and introduce new ‘diversity’ rulings ever since, to try to massage the statistics straight again.
There is a direct correlation between human brain size and intelligence, and these published official US Army statistics are typical of international findings…

fig4: Cranial capacity for a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. Army personnel. The data, grouped into six sex-by-race categories, are collapsed across military rank. (East Asian men, closed circles; White men, closed squares; Black men, closed triangles; East Asian women, open circles; White women, open squares; Black women, open triangles). They show that, across the 19 different analyses controlling for body size, men averaged larger cranial capacities than did women, and East Asians averaged larger than did Whites or Blacks. Analysis 1 presents the data unadjusted for body size showing no difference for East Asian and White men. (From Rushton, 1992a, p. 408, Figure 1. Copyright 1992 by Ablex Publishing Corp.

Often wondered about that myself…

Oh no – here come all the Uranus and re-entry jokes…