http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE

merryb wrote:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE

Yeah, I've been showing that one around!

Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
particular painting, it's amazing.

Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!

Dave

"Mark Thorson" > wrote

> Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>> merryb wrote:
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>
>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
>> gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
> I'm not convinced this is for real. The elephant
> clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
> think that is being spliced between other scenes
> in which a person with a long glove that looks
> like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
> painting.

I thought so, too. All of a sudden this disembodied thing
starts painting flowers. It looks fake, at least what I saw
on television.

nancy

Dave Bell wrote:

> merryb wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>
> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>
> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
> particular painting, it's amazing.
>
> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!

But is it art?

:-)

Dave Smith wrote:
> Dave Bell wrote:
>
>> merryb wrote:
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
> But is it art?
>
> :-)
>
Hell.. if he painted food it would at least have been food related here.

Dave Bell wrote:
>
> merryb wrote:
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>
> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>
> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
> particular painting, it's amazing.
>
> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
> gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!

I'm not convinced this is for real. The elephant
clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
think that is being spliced between other scenes
in which a person with a long glove that looks
like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
painting.

If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
the scene cuts? If there were no scene cuts
at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
see the elephant making something sensible on
a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.

If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
The sort of money people in the West would pay
for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
a great temptation for someone in Thailand.

"Goomba38" > wrote in message
. ..
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>>> merryb wrote:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>>
>>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>>
>>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>
>> But is it art?
>>
>> :-)
>>
> Hell.. if he painted food it would at least have been food related here.
>
A still life of a bowl of peanuts, perhaps? <G>

Jill

Goomba38 wrote:

>
> >> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
> >> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
> >
> > But is it art?
> >
> > :-)
> >
> Hell.. if he painted food it would at least have been food related here.

Well, elephants work for peanuts :-)

On Apr 4, 2:43*pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
> Dave Bell wrote:
>
> > merryb wrote:
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>
> > Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>
> > Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
> > particular painting, it's amazing.
>
> > Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
> > gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
> I'm not convinced this is for real. *The elephant
> clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
> think that is being spliced between other scenes
> in which a person with a long glove that looks
> like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
> painting.
>
> If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
> zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
> the scene cuts? *If there were no scene cuts
> at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
> see the elephant making something sensible on
> a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.
>
> If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
> The sort of money people in the West would pay
> for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
> a great temptation for someone in Thailand.

To be honest, I think it could be a hoax, too- just wanted some
opinions. I think it's almost too incredible.

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:43:31 -0800, Mark Thorson >
wrote:

>Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>> merryb wrote:
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>
>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
>> gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
>I'm not convinced this is for real. The elephant
>clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
>think that is being spliced between other scenes
>in which a person with a long glove that looks
>like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
>painting.
>
>If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
>zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
>the scene cuts? If there were no scene cuts
>at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
>see the elephant making something sensible on
>a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.
>
>If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
>The sort of money people in the West would pay
>for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
>a great temptation for someone in Thailand.

According to Snopes.com, this is not a hoax.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals...ntpainting.asp

Ron

Goomba38 > wrote in
:

> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>>> merryb wrote:
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>>
>>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>>
>>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>
>> But is it art?
>>
>> :-)
>>
> Hell.. if he painted food it would at least have been food related
here.


I think the flower he painted was one of those 'nasties' that have been
used in abf of late :-)

Totally food related :-)


--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing.

Edmund Burke.

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:45:26 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Dave Bell wrote:
>
>> merryb wrote:
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>
>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
>But is it art?
>
>:-)
>

i don't know much about art, but i know his brother bob.

your pal,
blake

On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 13:43:31 -0800, Mark Thorson >
wrote:

>Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>> merryb wrote:
>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>
>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
>> gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>
>I'm not convinced this is for real. The elephant
>clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
>think that is being spliced between other scenes
>in which a person with a long glove that looks
>like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
>painting.
>
>If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
>zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
>the scene cuts? If there were no scene cuts
>at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
>see the elephant making something sensible on
>a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.
>
>If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
>The sort of money people in the West would pay
>for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
>a great temptation for someone in Thailand.

you're an imbecile.

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:45:26 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>>Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>>> merryb wrote:
>>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>>
>>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>>
>>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>>
>>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>
>>But is it art?
>>
>>:-)
>>
>
> i don't know much about art, but i know his brother bob.
>

Well, I can tell you that you can tell art from bob because art is the one
always hanging on the wall, whereas you can usually find bob in the pool.

ba-----boom!



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:16:50 -0700 (PDT), merryb >
wrote:

>On Apr 4, 2:43*pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>> Dave Bell wrote:
>>
>> > merryb wrote:
>> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>
>> > Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>
>> > Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>> > particular painting, it's amazing.
>>
>> > Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
>> > gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>
>> I'm not convinced this is for real. *The elephant
>> clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
>> think that is being spliced between other scenes
>> in which a person with a long glove that looks
>> like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
>> painting.
>>
>> If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
>> zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
>> the scene cuts? *If there were no scene cuts
>> at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
>> see the elephant making something sensible on
>> a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.
>>
>> If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
>> The sort of money people in the West would pay
>> for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
>> a great temptation for someone in Thailand.
>
>To be honest, I think it could be a hoax, too- just wanted some
>opinions. I think it's almost too incredible.

if so, they fooled c.b.s. as well:

<http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/14/60minutes/main329450.shtml>

people stand around and watch the elephants paint. it's a tourist
attraction, for god's sake, not film trickery.

your pal,
blake

Why are all the subjects of your messages, Blake, appending gg
onto the fronts of the messages?

This starts a new thread for those of us who have our newsreaders
set to do that when the subject changes. It also interferes with
those os us who have "OT:" filtered.

gg means nothing to us.

-sw


blake murphy > wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 16:16:50 -0700 (PDT), merryb >
> wrote:
>
>>On Apr 4, 2:43*pm, Mark Thorson > wrote:
>>> Dave Bell wrote:
>>>
>>> > merryb wrote:
>>> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>>
>>> > Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>>
>>> > Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>>> > particular painting, it's amazing.
>>>
>>> > Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand
>>> > gestures, touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced this is for real. *The elephant
>>> clearly has been taught to hold a brush, but I
>>> think that is being spliced between other scenes
>>> in which a person with a long glove that looks
>>> like an elephant's trunk is doing the "fine"
>>> painting.
>>>
>>> If this were not a hoax, then why does the view
>>> zoom in and out wildly, which helps to disguise
>>> the scene cuts? *If there were no scene cuts
>>> at all and no zooming, and if you could clearly
>>> see the elephant making something sensible on
>>> a blank canvas, I'd be more tempted to believe it.
>>>
>>> If it can be a fake, rest assured it is a fake.
>>> The sort of money people in the West would pay
>>> for alleged "elephant paintings" is certainly
>>> a great temptation for someone in Thailand.
>>
>>To be honest, I think it could be a hoax, too- just wanted some
>>opinions. I think it's almost too incredible.
>
> if so, they fooled c.b.s. as well:
>
> <http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/02/14/60minutes/main329450.shtml>
>
> people stand around and watch the elephants paint. it's a tourist
> attraction, for god's sake, not film trickery.
>
> your pal,
> blake

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 13:26:33 -0400, "cybercat" >
wrote:

>
>"blake murphy" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 16:45:26 -0400, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Dave Bell wrote:
>>>
>>>> merryb wrote:
>>>> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, I've been showing that one around!
>>>>
>>>> Even if the elephant's been laboriously trained to produce that
>>>> particular painting, it's amazing.
>>>>
>>>> Even if he's responding to subtle trainer clues - hand gestures,
>>>> touches, etc. - it's *still* amazing!
>>>
>>>But is it art?
>>>
>>>:-)
>>>
>>
>> i don't know much about art, but i know his brother bob.
>>
>
>Well, I can tell you that you can tell art from bob because art is the one
>always hanging on the wall, whereas you can usually find bob in the pool.
>
>ba-----boom!

i hadn't heard that one. is it yours?

your pal,
blake

On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 19:33:43 GMT, Sqwertz >
wrote:

>Why are all the subjects of your messages, Blake, appending gg
>onto the fronts of the messages?
>
>This starts a new thread for those of us who have our newsreaders
>set to do that when the subject changes. It also interferes with
>those os us who have "OT:" filtered.
>
> gg means nothing to us.
>
>-sw
>

as part of my research for setting up my newsproxy filters, for the
last two weeks i have been flagging gmail or posters with googlegroups
in the message i.d. with 'gm' or 'gg.' i wasn't thinking that the
subjects on posts i replied would still carry that header. my
apologies.

i'll try to keep this in mind.

my data collection period will end soon. i've got about fifty names
of regular and not-so-regular contributors collected, and intend to
email them to interested parties (drop me a line if you wish to get
the list), or maybe post them (without the addresses).

again, sorry for the inconvenience.

your pal,
blake

your pal,
blake

merryb > wrote in news:f6b65154-33a1-42e2-9886-1ca930e04845
@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LHoyB81LnE
>


And I'll top your one amazing painting elephant, with one 'no fear' Monkey
biker :-)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Afz6oTHAbo



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Edmund Burke.