Today we have part 2 of Paul Handford’s hummingbird photos (part 1 is here). Paul’s captions are indented, and you can enlarge his photos by clicking on them.
The Rufous hummer, Selasphorus rufus, was a common frequenter of our yard, boldly visiting the feeders. It has the distinction of being the northernmost breeding species of any member of the family (61°N, in southern Alaska). Given that they winter on the Gulf Coast and the southern Pacific slopes of Mexico, this means that, in terms of body-length, at least some Rufous hummers make the longest of all avian migrations!
The females closely resemble those of the congeneric Calliope hummer, differing in having longer tails and rufous, rather than buff flanks:
The males are mainly strongly rufous, and with a brilliant ‘metallic’ scarlet throat. Again, this is a colour produced by interference produced by the structural characteristics of the feathers rather than by pigment. As such, the brilliance shows when it is viewed directly; from the side, it appears dark, even black:
In modern education, Artificial Intelligence is increasingly marketed as a cognitive prosthesis: a tool that extends our mental reach, automates drudgery, and supposedly frees us to focus on higher-order creativity and insight. According to this narrative, AI does not replace thinking—it liberates it.
But beneath the polished interface of today’s Large Language Models (LLMs) lies a neurological and ethical trap, one with especially serious implications for developing minds. We are witnessing a subtle but profound shift from using tools to thinking with them, and, increasingly, letting them think for us.
The question Skeptic readers should be asking is not whether AI is impressive—it clearly is—but what kind of minds are formed when different kinds of thinking become optional. One place where this shift is especially revealing and especially consequential is moral development.
Moral DevelopmentIn moral education, how one arrives at a judgment matters more than which judgment one reaches. It is not about acquiring correct answers. Moral development involves cultivating the capacity to deliberate, restrain impulse, tolerate ambiguity, and reflect before acting. These capacities do not emerge automatically, rather, they are trained through effortful use. AI, however, is mostly indifferent to process and optimizes for output.
When we outsource the labor of reflection to an algorithm, we risk a form of ethical atrophy. This is not a Luddite rejection of AI but a skeptical, evidence-based examination of benefit claims that rarely account for developmental cost.
These are not merely philosophical concerns. They are grounded in the biology of how our moral capacities arise. To understand the stakes, we must begin with the adolescent brain. The teenage brain is not a finished system but more like a construction site. The prefrontal cortex (the executive center responsible for impulse control, long-term planning, and moral deliberation) undergoes rapid, uneven development throughout adolescence. Neural circuits that are exercised are strengthened and stabilized; those that are neglected are pruned away. This is not metaphor. It is biology.
Moral development involves cultivating the capacity to deliberate, restrain impulse, tolerate ambiguity, and reflect before acting.Moral development, as I explain in my book AI Ethics, Neuroscience, and Education, depends on what researchers call cognitive friction. This friction appears as hesitation before a difficult choice, the effort of weighing competing values, and the discomfort of uncertainty. These moments feel inefficient, but they are also indispensable. Generative AI, by design, removes this friction.
When a student asks ChatGPT for a nuanced ethical argument and receives an instant, polished response, the brain skips the work. The student receives the answer without undergoing the cognitive struggle required to produce it. Ethical questions begin to resemble technical problems with downloadable solutions. Students lose the habit of lingering in uncertainty; the very space where moral reasoning takes shape. AI does not hesitate and generates outputs based on probability, not conscience. Humans, however, should hesitate. That hesitation is not weakness but moral functioning.
Cognitive and Emotional DevelopmentIf moral reasoning is one casualty of reliance on LLMs, it is far from the only one. Consider writing. Writing is not simply a way to display what we know—it is the process through which we figure out what we think. Organizing vague intuitions into a coherent argument places a heavy demand on the developing prefrontal cortex, and when AI performs this structuring, it deprives the brain of precisely the exercise it needs to mature.
When we outsource the labor of reflection to an algorithm, we risk a form of ethical atrophy.If intelligence is measured only by output, for example the finished essay or the correct solution, AI appears miraculous. But if intelligence is understood as the capacity to reason, deliberate, and restrain impulse, AI-driven cognitive offloading begins to resemble a neurological shortcut with long-term consequences, not unlike actual shortcuts that reshape the terrain.
The danger does not stop at cognition. It extends into emotional and social development. We are entering an era of affective computing, in which machines are designed not merely to process information but to simulate emotional responsiveness. AI systems now speak in tones of empathy, reassurance, and concern. They never interrupt, misunderstand, or demand reciprocity.
For an isolated or anxious adolescent, an AI companion can feel safer than unpredictable human relationships. It offers validation without vulnerability and empathy without risk.
When a student asks ChatGPT for a nuanced ethical argument and receives an instant, polished response, the brain skips the work.But moral growth, just like cognitive abilities, does not occur in comfort. Human relationships require patience, accountability, and recognition of another person’s interior life. They involve misunderstanding, disagreement, and the difficult work of repair. AI relationships require none of this. They are emotionally efficient, and ethically hollow.
What they provide is a psychological sugar rush: immediate affirmation without the nutritional value of genuine connection. The ethical danger here is subtle: We are not merely giving students a new tool but also shaping their preferences. We are quietly training young people to prefer relationships that never challenge them. Over time, this fosters comfort with anthropomorphic simulations and anxiety toward real human empathy, which is messy, incomplete, and demanding.
Toward Skeptical AI LiteracyThis is not a call to ban AI. The question is not whether we use AI in education, but how and when.
Beyond the developmental effects described here, we should also note that LLMs hallucinate. With remarkable confidence, they fabricate sources, misstate facts, and invent details. This fluency creates trust. What emerges is a form of passive knowing: information is consumed without ownership or justification. In an era where machines can generate infinite content, the ability to distinguish truth from fluent fiction becomes one of the most critical civic skills we have. Ironically, our increasing reliance on AI may be eroding the vigilance that skill requires.
We are quietly training young people to prefer relationships that never challenge them.This means we need to be teaching students both how to prompt machines and how to resist them. In other words, AI output should be treated not as a truth to be consumed but as a hypothesis to be tested. We also need to teach the value of the seeming inefficiency of human thinking.
Finally, the central ethical question of our time is not whether machines can think for us. It is whether in allowing them to do so too often we risk forgetting how to think for ourselves. We must be careful not to engineer the atrophy of human wisdom.
Bill Maher is back, and this week he has a particularly good comedy bit: “New Rule: Eyeroll Activism.” His topic is similar to Ricky Gervais’s scathing remarks at the 2020 Golden Globes in that both men excoriate Hollywood for its virtue signaling, with Maher beginning with the wearing of anti-ICE pins at the Golden Globes. And since Hollywood is identified with the Democratic Party, Maher claims that this virtue-signaling, in which celebrities weigh in on political issues they know little or nothing about—but thinking that their “star power” gives them extra credibility—is said to turn off the average viewer. Maher argues that such “Golden Globe activism” actually works against liberals.
Here are the two money quotes. First, referring to ideological lapel pins:
“Get out of here with your virtue-signaling body ornaments. They are just crucifixes for liberals, because every time I see one I think, ‘Jesus Christ!'”
and to the signalers:
“I know it’s very important to you that you feel you’re making a difference, so let me assure you that are. You’re making independents vote Republican.”
The longer (23-minute) overtime segment with guests Marjorie Taylor Greene and MS Now host and former congressman Joe Scarborough, is not as funny, but Maher gets into it with Scarborough about attitudes towards America, and also shows a bit of the attitude that gets Maher labeled as an anti-vaxer. He seems to be pretty ignorant of the science attesting to the safety and efficacy of vaccinations.
We’re back with Caturday felids again, but I ask readers to help me out by sending me good cat-related news items when you see them. I may not use some, but I will look at all of them. Thanks.
Today we have three short items. The first, from History.com, describes a 1960 attempt by the CIA to turn cats into spies. In principle it was a good idea, but not so much in practice. Click the screenshot to read:
Here’s a description of “Operation Acoustic Kitty”:
The Acoustic Kitty was a sort of feline-android hybrid—a cyborg cat. A surgeon implanted a microphone in its ear and a radio transmitter at the base of its skull. The surgeon also wove an antenna into the cat’s fur, writes science journalist Emily Anthes in Frankenstein’s Cat: Cuddling Up to Biotech’s Brave New Beasts.
CIA operatives hoped they could train the cat to sit near foreign officials. That way, the cat could secretly transmit their private conversations to CIA operatives.
“For its first official test, CIA staffers drove Acoustic Kitty to the park and tasked it with capturing the conversation of two men sitting on a bench,” Anthes writes. “Instead, the cat wandered into the street, where it was promptly squashed by a taxi”—not the outcome they were expecting.
Oy! I bet the microphone contributed to its death.
“The problem was that cats are not especially trainable,” she writes. In a heavily redacted memo, the CIA concluded: “Our final examination of trained cats…convinced us that the program would not lend itself in a practical sense to our highly specialized needs.”
Here’s the conclusion, with credit given to the CIA:
There’s more: they tried to create spy insects:
With DARPA’s support, researchers at the University of California Berkeley successfully created a cyborg beetle whose movements they could remotely control. They reported their results in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience in October 2009.
“Berkeley scientists appear to have demonstrated an impressive degree of control over their insect’s flight; they report being able to use an implant for neural stimulation of the beetle’s brain to start, stop, and control the insect in flight,” reported Wired the month these findings came out. “They could even command turns by stimulating the basalar muscles.”
Well, to use the radio-controlled bugs as spies, they’d also have to equip them with microphones, which they didn’t, but they could be used for another purpose. The Wired article quotes the Berkeley researchers:
Eventually, the mind-controlled insects could be used to “serve as couriers to locations not easily accessible to humans or terrestrial robots,” What about pigeons, for crying out loud? They were used in WW1? Anyway, this is your tax dollars at work.********************
Here’s a post from Facebook (see also here) that I tried to check. It seems accurate in that it’s replicated elsewhere, including a newspaper (below), but information is scant. In this case, however, the cats detected spying, probably because cats have a broader hearing range than humans, especially at high frequencies, and their hearing is more sensitive than ours.
From Google News (I don’t know the newspaper). The incident is said to have taken place in 1964, but I lost the link to the article, which gave the quote below:
The article, titled “Cats Finger ‘Bugs'”, reports on the discovery of 30 hidden microphones in the Dutch Embassy in Moscow. The listening devices were reportedly found after two Siamese cats reacted to the imperceptible sound of a microphone being switched on. The article: And an AI response to my question about the incident:********************
Finally, in a 5-minute video, actor Jeremy Irons describes artistic depiction of lions, from ancient Egypt through ancient China, Greece, and Rome up to Rembrandt and beyond. Six drawings of lions by Rembrandt survive, and below you can see that one of them is up for auction.
Panthera, the organization that hosted the video and is a great place to donate money if you want to save big cats, also describes an upcoming auction of the Rembrandt lion drawing:On February 4, one of the most significant drawings by Rembrandt ever to reach auction will be sold at Sotheby’s, with 100% of proceeds protecting wild cats worldwide — art giving back to the animals that inspired it. While lions dominate culture, their real-world populations have declined by nearly 90%, and this historic auction directly supports Panthera’s work to reverse that trend.
Here’s Rembrandt’s drawing, of “Young Lion Resting” created between 1638 and 1642, and I hope it brings a lot of money for Panthera:
*********************
Lagniappe: A short video of three bobcats having fun in someone’s swimming pool:
And riceball cats from Facebook: cats made out of rice:
h/t: Debra
Praise Ceiling Cat: reader Tara Tanaka, photographer and videographer extrodinaire, has returned with an awesome video featuring both cats and d*gs (well, a bobcat and coyotes). Tara filmed it from her living room in Florida (Tara and her husband own a large tract of wetland). Tara’s Flickr page is here and her Vimeo page is here.
Tara’s Vimeo notes, which assure us that this is genuine:
“A Bobcat’s Encounter with Two Coyotes (Not AI)”
We had seen one or two coyotes around 9:30 the last two mornings. Hoping they would return for a third day I got my camera ready in the living room to try to record them. About 9:00 my husband said he saw one, so I made some final adjustments for the lighting and began to search for something moving in the distance. When I finally centered the subject in the viewfinder, I said “I think I’m looking at a bobcat.” Almost immediately the cat stood up and as I panned with it I was shocked when two coyotes ran into the frame, one on each side of the cat. Enjoy the interactions between the two species and between the very bonded pair of coyotes. I believe the female is pregnant.
After I finished filming I just sat in disbelief that I had had the opportunity to record something so unique – and from my living room! I feel like I could have gone to Yellowstone and spent a month in the field and not witnessed an encounter like this. Because of the dramatic temperature difference between the thawing ground and the sun heating the brown grass, the waves of heat shimmer intensified as the sun got higher and you can see them rippling across the screen. Despite the extreme conditions, I was thrilled that I was able to record the interaction so clearly from 1000′ away, and through a double-paned window.
We should have a pond full of water with waders arriving to nest right now, however due to a severe drought that started over a year ago, the entire swamp is dry. Without water to allow our large alligators to patrol under the nests and protect them from predators, I’m afraid that our hundreds of waders that nest here every year will not feel safe and will likely nest elsewhere.
Filmed with a Panasonic GH6 + Nikon 500mm f2.8 lens. Since I filmed it from inside the house, I used the audio from a video I shot from the yard last year.
The bobcat and coyotes don’t seem to mind each other, though the bobcat eventually climbs partway up a tree. Be sure to enlarge the video and put the sound up to hear the birds singing.
For the first time, a complex, ring-shaped molecule containing 13 atoms—including sulfur—has been detected in interstellar space, based on laboratory measurements. The discovery closes a critical gap by linking simple chemistry in space with the complex organic building blocks found in comets and meteorites. This represents a major step toward explaining the cosmic origins of the chemistry of life.
The search for life-supporting worlds in the Solar System includes the Jovian moon Europa. Yes, it's an iceberg of a world, but underneath its frozen exterior lies a deep, salty ocean and a nickel-iron core. It's heated by tidal flexing, and that puts pressure on the interior ocean, sending water and salts to the surface. As things turn out, there's also evidence of ammonia-bearing compounds on the surface. All these things combine to provide a fascinating look at Europa's geology and potential as a haven for life.
Red Geysers are an unusual class of galaxy that contain only old stars. Despite having plenty of star-forming gas, Red Geysers are quenched. Astronomers have mapped the flow of gas in these galaxies and figure out why they're dormant.
This is my favorite of all operatic arias; indeed, it may be my favorite piece of vocal classical music, and it’s a good way to end a dreary week. The aria, a short one, is “O mio babbino caro” (“Oh, my dear father”), and comes from Puccini’s Gianni Schicchi, first performed in 1918. It is of course very famous (I’m sure you’ve heard it) as it’s beautiful and short —too, short, in my view.
Wikipedia sets the scene:
It is sung by Lauretta after tensions between her father Schicchi and the family of Rinuccio, the boy she loves, have reached a breaking point that threatens to separate her from Rinuccio. It provides an interlude expressing lyrical simplicity and love in contrast with the atmosphere of hypocrisy, jealousy, double-dealing, and feuding in medieval Florence . It provides the only set piece in the through-composed opera.
I’ve listened to it enough times that I can sing along with it in Italian, though of course I wouldn’t want anyone to hear me.
The soprano here is the Norwegian singer Sissel Kyrkjebø (“Sissel” is the Norwegian version of “Cecilia”), who sings both classical and pop music (she sang the wordless music in the movie “Titanic”). My previous favorite version was by Kiri Te Kanawa, but I think this is at least as good. And this performance appears to be informal, though of course it was rehearsed. I like the “S” for Sissel on her tee-shirt.
You can find other renditions of the song by her on YouTube, but I like this one because of the tee-shirt. If you want to hear her handle another lovely song, but a popular one, go listen to her perform the traditional American folk song “Shenandoah,” accompanied by the Chieftains’ late Paddy Moloney on tin whistle. I posted that some time ago.
Here are the lyrics so you can sing along, too. But watch those high notes at the end!
O mio babbino caroMi piace, è bello, belloVo’ andare in Porta RossaA comperar l’anello Sì, sì, ci voglio andareE se l’amassi indarnoAndrei sul Ponte VecchioMa per buttarmi in Arno Mi struggo e mi tormentoO Dio, vorrei morir Babbo, pietà, pietàBabbo, pietà, pietà