Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Haru getting over Juno's arrogance, just by devouring the whole wolf! Commission for k1ngm1da5/Midas 🔊 J.Fiera/ck19 .°•Audio cömş open.°• 🎨 TwitchyAnimations 🐰 Netflix/Beastars ( #beastars | #vore | #audio | #Haru )

47,200 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

10 条评论

moguior demon fox 的头像
moguior demon fox1 年前

It's usually the other way around.

Kabold 的头像
Kabold1 年前

Number one: i love ❤️ the animation Number Two: can I be in that belly? Number three: How do you do these amazing animation ^^

Midas 的头像
Midas1 年前

She's gonna be one fat rabbit with one hefty round gut of processed wolf meat by the sounds of it~

DanBun 的头像
DanBun1 年前

Hope that place she's lying down is comfy because it doesn't seem like she's getting up in a while

🔞 Gladiatus The Saldrak 🔞 的头像
🔞 Gladiatus The Saldrak 🔞1 年前

Sexy

Plushy~/Toy~/Withered~/Bear~/Kid~ 的头像
Plushy~/Toy~/Withered~/Bear~/Kid~1 年前

Me:

Gustavo 的头像
Gustavo1 年前

Can you Make the digestion?

Freddy Evans 的头像
Freddy Evans1 年前

Big

Christianmora1217@gmail.com 的头像

@voriswolf Haru looks so gorgeous like that

Carimbel😽❤ 的头像
Carimbel😽❤1 年前

From TwitchtAnimations!? That must have gone under my radar, where can i find the original??

相关视频

🚨 DEVELOPING: POTENTIAL BOMBSHELL AUDIO SURFACES IN MITCH WHISTLEBLOWER DRAMA – COULD BLOW UP THE SMEAR CAMPAIGN 🚨 New clip circulating (authenticity NOT confirmed yet – I'm working with Candace Owens to verify directly with Mitch. Stay tuned for update). If real, it's damning for the anti-Mitch crowd. The audio allegedly features: Mitch His ex (Candace Gracik – the main accuser) Their young son (voice only) The boy repeatedly calls his mom "mean," says she "manipulates" Mitch, and describes toxic behavior. Mitch defends her on the call – telling the son not to talk bad about mom, there's "nothing wrong with her." Classic sign of someone in an abusive dynamic protecting the abuser. The son (Nate) clearly believed his mom was the problem – not Mitch. This would shred Candace Gracik's credibility as a witness against Mitch... and by extension, the entire "he's an abuser so discredit the Fort Huachuca sighting" narrative pushed by Valhalla, Gary Melton, Alex Jones, etc. Their whole hit job hinges on painting Mitch as unreliable due to "past abuse" – but if the ex is the manipulator and liar? Game over. Again – not confirmed authentic yet. Deepfakes/AI are real. Waiting on direct word. But if it checks out... the people who went scorched earth on Mitch (and Candace) just got exposed hard. The truth always surfaces. Shoutout to Kat Espinda who is the source of this clip. FOLLOW Her! Clip linked below – judge for yourself while we verify. More soon. Eyes open. 🔥

Project Constitution

178,255 次观看 • 9 个月前

Here’s the MARINE ONE ATC audio from yesterday. M1 made several calls to NATIONAL TOWER (DCA) on the helicopter specific frequency advising they are 3 minutes from lifting. Tower here’s them briefly on one attempt and say’s they’re broken and unreadable. M1 then lifts getting a better radio line of sight to the tower cab and say’s they’re on the go. Tower comes back confused, saying, “Ok, no 3 minutes, roger” and there ensues confusion from the Tower as they just cleared a Embraer Regional Jet off Runway 01 which the runway basically points towards the Ellipse. M1 calls the traffic insight and decides to pause (smart pilots). While this Envoy Air jet is required to perform a left turn upon departure to avoid the P-56 Prohibited airspace that encompasses the Ellipse. You have a jet accelerating towards the helicopter carrying POTUS in an extremely nervous environment especially since the post DCA crash in 2025. Contributing factors are a relatively new landing zone for M1, DCA tower acknowledging M1 but can’t understand, a busy tower frequency already with several local, federal, and military helicopters already consuming the frequency. Being in tune *pun with VHF airband communications, operating helicopter and trying to call ATC from the ground. Sometimes you can hear ATC and they can hear you and the next minute (especially when you are on the cusp of line of sight comms) It can come down to a variety of factors including atmospheric conditions and just exactly how your antenna is pointed and in some cases this can be a matter of feet or less. The “angle of the dangle” if you will. I don’t know what procedures are in place for M1 communicating with ATC on the ground at the Ellipse besides VHF airband. I can tell you post this incident, I’d have an open telephone line to the tower cab during this whole pickup/dropoff evolution to ensure broken comms are received and understood. And or, I’d have a complete ground stop at DCA while M1 is on the ground. PS. There have been airliners departing DCA in the past and have missed their turn and penetrated the P-56 Prohibited airspace. So while it wasn’t as big of a deal this time, It could potentially be in the future if not addressed. Has something like this in the past happened?… probably but it’s just got now a microscope over the whole area every time these is one slight mix up or mess up. At lease the helipad is getting installed at the WH. Audio via ATC

Thenewarea51

118,198 次观看 • 2 个月前

The Berliner Prosecution / #Staatsanwaltschaft is a criminal organization, see for yourself: Recap: 02/14/23 Called Polizei Berlin to get rid of Helena Miller for stalking and harassment, she defamed / lied about a mental illness (psychosis) allegedly caused by my last remaining pain medicine (cannabis) Note: I showed my prescriptions and dosage plan, witnesses by my wife. Police obtained a search warrant and ambushed me while leaning peacfully by the window in my daughter's bedroom ventilating the apartment as always. They then lied about the event, and reported that I attacked them, swinging and kicking, (see bloodstains in the corner). Here the injuries I sustained: They first tried to suffocate me, no attempt to make an arrest were made, then a POK Annika Fischer tried to break my neck while four others pinned me down on all for limps, and whole lot more, see link above. I got booked in a psych ward at the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin Station 155, and put on COVID-Isolation after they did a test upon arrival. Helena Miller called the station, which ended up issuing a diagnosis without ever seeing me. See my videos starting on 16.02.23 from the psych ward after my wife brought me my phone below. Better Karma sent the Bezirksamt Mitte Social Psychiatric Service after contacting them on 01.06.23. The next day 02.06.23 right after my morning rehab training, I got greeted by a frantic Leni Hoellerer together with the Polizei Berlin pressing me to let them in to talk. When I refused and dismissed them to go and check my mailbox instead with my coffee mug in hand, I got put in cuffs in front of my neighbors. Despite my demands to be uncuffed and let back up, they drove me to the Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin. The same doctor, C. Müller, who already issued the false diagnosis told me that I have to stay per judges orders. After a short phone call, I received my US Passport back and left. The reason for the PsychKG application, based on self endagerment, prolonged tanning (sun exposure) and not consuming enough fluid as reported by Helena Miller on 01.06.23, was ruled unlawful by Judge Arukaslan on 02.06.23. I filed a Polizei Berlin report against Leni Hoellerer and Dr. Biernaht of the Social Psychiatric Service, but the prosecution denied the investigation, because of self endangerment not drinking enough and exposing myself to the sun too much, at 10AM in the morning. Essentially the exact wording used by Dr. Biernaht after a call with Helena Miller. Here that story: Note: The prosecution should have had enough evidence to close any case against me, hand over my unlawfully seized medicine, and investigate Polizei Berlin A56, holding sufficient evidence since 23.03.23. However, a prosecutor Weidemann offered me a deal on 11.04.23, saying that she would close the case, if I consent to having my medicine permanently seized and do not press criminal charges against those criminal cops from 14.02.23. After being humilated and embarrassed infront of my neighbors and having my personal rights violated once again, we got a visit from a BMBFSFJ employee M. Waelisch and Bezirksamt Mitte Leni Hoellerer on 30.06.23. During the meeting, M. Waelisch kept pressing me to sign some "family help", and then threatened that we might lose custody, that our child might have to live in a foster home if I refused to sign, and that he would report to family court that our daughter is endagered here at home. After that we got a visite from a Ariane Wichmann, who coerced my daughter to let her in to question her while I was out grocery shopping. I audio recorded the meeting with her for my legal protection at this point. Despite a clear 30 minute conversation, holding the audio files, she falsely reported that she had to limit me, and that I was psychotic, something the audio files clearly debunk. Then came the court date 27.09.23 on my wife's day off, I called a day before to cancel the hearing, because the case is inherently and obviously unlawful. However, when I told judge Bergmann that the case is unlwaful, and objecting the presentaton of false evidence by Ariane Wichmann and M. Waelisch, I got ejected from the court room. The judge then coerced my intimidated indigenous Mexican wife to chose between me at home or our daughter in a foster home. Here my angry rant from the court house after being ejected, denied my right to be heard: On 10.10.23 while working on making an inlay shelf in the kitchen, removig some drywall I got removed from my home by Ariane Wichmann and Berliner Police. Made homeless without a shower and still injured with a doctors note of incapacitation. Now we are getting to the Family Court, Prosecution and Vivantes Netzwerk für Gesundheit GmbH crime collusion. Judge Bergmann ordered a psychological exploration for me at the Vivantes Netzwerk für Gesundheit GmbH Humboldt with a Dr. S. Krüger. I recorded both meetings, the first biographic meeting with S. Krüger on 26.03.24 and the psychological assessment with Dr. Koes on 10.04.24. Now my argument: If cannabis, my last remaining chronic pain management medicine since 2017 would have ever caused a psychosis, mental extreme state, deulsions and paranoia, as well as aggresive behavior, why hasn't it happened on 10.04.24. Also, S. Krüger wasn't even present on 10.04.24, but wrote that she noticed that I was sweating profusely the longer the exploration went. Mr. Koes said that there are no signs of a personality disorder and no psychotic symptoms, and that this is what they would write in the report for Judge Bergmann. I just received a letter today, about a disciplinary complaint against Prosecutor Mali who apparently handled that case 274 JS 1930/23, denying an investigation saying obtaining the report by S. Krüger on 30.04.24 was legal, however the official date of the writte report sent to the Family Court was 27.05.24. Furthermore, the report from 30.04.24 was used to close a case against me for alledegly hitting, kicking, and resisting arrest on the inability to assume guilt. See the evidence below, like, and share to support my legal case against a criminal German government! 🧵👇

WeedUp Media

11,035 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨🛸👽 Alien Craft and Bodies - How Confident? 👽🛸🚨 "Confidence is high. Repeat: confidence is high." ~The Sherminator Grusch/Kelly Part 1 - Video and Transcript "As somebody who was in very high positions of trust over the years, I can assure you that that...the U.S. government has engaged in a crash retrieval and reverse engineering operation of non-human crafts and recovering the biologics as well. I take that assessment very seriously" ~Grusch (I'll do my best to finish all three parts tonight) ~ Biggest Takeaway How did Grusch see evidence of alleged non-human craft and bodies and how confident is he that this is legit? Grusch: "I came in as a skeptical eye, having briefed to a lot of U.S. programs. And I was thinking, oh, I'll figure out what this is. This might be some kind of U.S. program, some prosaic natural phenomenon, some kind of adversarial program, some strategic technical surprise. "Eventually, as I started pulsing my networks, digging into archives where, we'll just say, certain programs forgot to fully clean out safe drawers, and finding both audio-visual documentation. And then interviewing over 40 people all the way up to, I'll just say, the cabinet level over the course of four years. So a combination of oral testimony, audio-visual evidence and documentation. I became convinced, at a high-confidence level that the U.S. has engaged in a crash retrieval and reverse engineering operation of - like the trailer you just played, said - non-human crafts and recovering, you know, the biologics as well. "And I say high-confidence, as somebody who's written assessments for the President of the United States. I take that assessment very seriously, and that confidence level very seriously. But as somebody who was in very high positions of trust over the years, I can assure you that that is an accurate statement. That the U.S. government, its private partners, allies and adversaries, do have programs, doing this exact thing." ~~~ Megyn Kelly: "It's the age-old question that has fascinated humans for centuries and continues to: are we alone in the universe, or even on our own planet? My next guest says, not only are UFOs - or now they're called UAPs - Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. That's hard to remember, but UAPs - real, but the government has allegedly been aware of them for decades and running a disinformation campaign to make you feel like an idiot if you believe reports about them. "David Grusch is a former US Air Force Intelligence Officer and senior intelligence official. He was his agency's co-lead in UAP investigation and quote 'transmedium object analysis' and was reporting to the Pentagon's UAP Task Force as well. In 2023, Grusch filed a whistleblower complaint asserting that the United States has been operating a quote, 'multi-decade UAP crash retrieval and reverse engineering program,' meaning we're taking what we find - vehicles - and trying to figure out how they operated. And that Congress has been kept in the dark about large portions of the program. He later testified under oath before the House Oversight Committee, drawing national attention when he made this claim here. Watch." ~Video from the 2023 Oversight Committee Hearing~ Rep. Nancy Mace: "If you believe we have crashed craft, stated earlier, do we have the bodies of the pilots who piloted this craft?" David Grusch: "As I've stated publicly already in my NewsNation interview, biologics came with some of these recoveries, yeah." Mace: "Were they, I guess, human or non-human biologics?" Grusch: "Non-human, and that was the assessment of people with direct knowledge on the program I talked to that are currently still on the program." ~ Kelly: "So, he's alleging that we have crafts and we have non-human biologics from those crafts, and that the American people are being kept in the dark about it. And he is not alone. He is not alone. Now, Pentagon officials have publicly denied that there's any verified evidence of non-human intelligence or secret programs of this kind. They've been denying it for 80 years. But now, a new documentary called 'The Age of Disclosure' is taking center stage. It's extraordinary, examining decades of this alleged secrecy, and they have everyone in this film. "The film features interviews with 34 former and current government officials, including Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, and Representative Anna Paulina Luna, who claim the U.S. has long been concealing evidence of non-human intelligence and UAPs. Here's a part of the trailer." Begin Excerpt from "The Age of Disclosure" Tim Gallaudet: "Humanity is not the only intelligence in the Universe." Dr. Eric Davis: "Humanity is not the only intelligent species." Brett Feddersen: "We are absolutely not alone." Karl Nell: "Non-human intelligence exists." Jim Semivan: "UAPs are real ,they're here, and they're not human." Jay Stratton: "I have seen with my own eyes, non-human craft and non-human beings." Senator Mike Rounds: "This is so secret, very, very few people in our entire government have been allowed access to it." Secretary Marco Rubio: "Even presidents have been operating on a need-to-know basis, but that begins to ramp out of control." Kirsten Gillibrand: "It's not acceptable to have secret parts of government that no one ever sees." Rep. Tim Burchett Press Office: "You better be careful about a government that doesn't trust its people, because there's no telling what they'll pull on ya." ~End AoD Excerpt~ Kelly: "It's extraordinary. Let's get into it. David joins me now. David, thank you so much for your service and for being here." Grusch: "Thanks. Mellon. Um, excuse me (laughs). Thanks, Megan. Thank you for having me on." Kelly: "(laughs) No worries. This is like a crazy story and a stunning story and disturbing. And I have to tell you, I've always been sort of open minded to this issue, but more skeptical. And I my skepticism is gone, having watched 'The Age of Disclosure.'" (Until we hear from a firsthand witness who says they worked hands-on what they feel was a non-human craft, in the alleged Legacy crash retrieval and reverse engineering program, I think it's smart to retain some skepticism.) Kelly: "['The Age of Disclosure' is] incredibly well done, and they've got everybody. I mean, all of the like, astrophysicists and extremely-well-educated, and accomplished, scientists - who have been investigating this from the start. Well, not the start, because it was 80 years ago, but in recent decades - on camera, on the record, saying as much as they can. "And the director of the film (Dan Farah) has been making the rounds saying, the only reason he was able to get so many people to participate is because they felt there was safety in numbers and that they couldn't either fire everyone, or worse. Because a lot of these guys, these are distinguished guys, served in the Air Force like yourself, or served at the Pentagon, served all over the armed forces. A lot of these guys are actually worried not just about their careers getting killed, but about them themselves getting killed. I mean, set it up for us on the stakes of the number of people who went on camera and actually started saying as much as they could without violating classified restrictions." Grusch: "Certainly, that's a real fear, and we can certainly get into that. 'Age of Disclosure' was, you know, a project I didn't fully participate in, however, I do applaud the effort in these individuals for at least coming forward and speaking. And like you, I was a very skeptical person. I was certainly open to the topic. I was interested in space and science in a very precocious way, as a child. I ended up studying physics and the Air Force gave me a full-ride scholarship. And I was always, obviously, open to the topic, but I was in positions of high trust in the government at the most extreme levels, having walked the halls of the West Wing, personally handled the presidential daily intelligence brief and had some of the same broad accesses that the President and his cabinet has had over the years, even as a young man across multiple administrations "I figured - when I was eventually brought into this topic, working for the UAP Task Force - oh, I would know this exists. Somebody would have slipped and said something to me. At the time, I was briefed to over 90% out of all black programs in the Department of Defense and also the Intelligence Community, and I had an arrogant opinion of the topic. I was certainly open to the idea, but I figured I haven't seen any evidence and I would have been briefed into those kind of things, because I had a need-to-know at the time. So I came into it very similar to you, but open minded." Kelly: "And then, what specifically were you assigned to where you started to see actual evidence that we've been researching this for 80 years, that we do have crafts recovered, that we have, quote, 'biologics' recovered, which include some sort of other being. And what was your reaction when you started to learn this?" Grusch: "Yeah, I was very skeptical. I was in my military capacity, I had a parallel-civilian-intelligence career as well. But in my military-reserve capacity, I was the backup Intelligence Director for the National Reconnaissance Offices operation center. I briefed the NRO director. That's where I handled the PDB" Kelly: "Presidential Daily Brief." Grusch: "And I handled, essentially, all sensitive activities and all that stuff. And so, the UAP Task Force was looking for a representative from that organization. I came in as a skeptical eye, having briefed to a lot of U.S. programs. And I was thinking, oh, I'll figure out what this is. This might be some kind of U.S. program, some prosaic natural phenomenon, some kind of adversarial program, some strategic technical surprise. "But eventually, as I started pulsing my networks, digging into archives where, we'll just say, certain programs forgot to fully clean out safe drawers, and finding both audio visual documentation. And then interviewing over 40 people all the way up to, I'll just say, the cabinet level over the course of four years. So a combination of oral testimony, audio-visual evidence and documentation. I became convinced, at a high-confidence level that the U.S. has engaged in a crash retrieval and reverse engineering operation of - like the trailer you just played, said - non-human crafts and recovering, you know, the biologics as well. "And I say high-confidence, as somebody who's written assessments for the President of the United States. I take that assessment very seriously, and that confidence level very seriously. But as somebody who was in very high positions of trust over the years, I can assure you that that is an accurate statement. That the U.S. government, its private partners, allies and adversaries, do have programs, doing this exact thing." Kelly: "Many in our audience may know you, David, you've been kind of really celebrated [by] people for coming out as a whistleblower and calling attention the fact that our government's been hiding this from us. And even when told to disclose what they know to investigators and to the public or to the oversight seers they haven't. There's a deeper program called The Legacy program that has really...seems to have been trying to hide the most shocking pieces of what we know from even the UAP Task Force."

Joe Murgia

21,199 次观看 • 9 个月前

Suno's mission is to make it possible for everyone to make music. We imagine a future where music is a bigger, more valuable, and more meaningful part of people's lives than it even is today. Technology enables a future where the whole world can explore, create, and be active participants in an art form most have only ever consumed. From professional musicians seeking inspiration to friends and family writing songs for each other, we are exploring new ways to create, listen to, and experience music. So far, more than 12 million people are engaging with music in new ways that wouldn't be possible without Suno. We see this as early but promising progress. Major record labels see this vision as a threat to their business. Each and every time there's been innovation in music — from the earliest forms of recorded music, to sampling, to drum machines, to remixing, MP3s, and streaming music — the record labels have attempted to limit progress. They have spent decades attempting to control the terms of how we create and enjoy music, and this time is no different. So, it is perhaps not a surprise that on June 24th, members of the Recording Industry Association of America, which represents the major record labels, filed a lawsuit against Suno, alleging that the data used in training our music generation technologies infringed on the copyrights of the major record labels that they represent. This lawsuit is fundamentally flawed on both the facts and the law, and is nothing more than yet another instance where they chose litigation over innovation. For starters, the major record labels clearly hold misconceptions about how our technology works. Suno helps people create music through a similar process to one humans have used forever: by learning styles, patterns, and forms (in essence, the "grammar" or music), and then inventing new music around them. The major record labels are trying to argue that neural networks are mere parrots — copying and repeating — when in reality model training looks a lot more like a kid learning to write new rock songs by listening religiously to rock music. Like that kid, Suno gets better the more our AI learns. We train our models on medium- and high-quality music we can find on the open internet — just as Google's Gemini, Microsoft's Copilot, Anthropic's Claude, OpenAI's ChatGPT, and even Apple's new Apple Intelligence train their models on the open internet. Much of the open internet indeed contains copyrighted materials, and some of it is owned by major record labels. But, just like the kid writing their own rock songs after listening to the genre — or a teacher or a journalist reviewing existing materials to draw new insights — learning is not infringing. It never has been, and it is not now. The timing of this lawsuit was somewhat surprising. When this lawsuit landed, Suno was, in fact, having productive discussions with a number of the RIAA's major record label members to find ways of expanding the pie for music together. We did so not because we had to, but because we believe that the music industry could help us lead this expansion of opportunity for everyone, rather than resisting it. Whether this lawsuit is the result of over-eager lawyers throwing their weight around, or a conscious strategy to gain leverage in our commercial discussions, we believe that this lawsuit is an unnecessary impediment to a larger and more valuable future for music. This is particularly the case because Suno is a new kind of musical instrument, one that enables a new kind of creative process for everyone and opens new business opportunities for the industry. Suno is designed for original music, and we prize originality, both in how we build our product and in how people use it. People who use Suno are using the product to create their own, original music. They are not trying to recreate an existing song that can be heard somewhere else on the internet for free. But, even if they were trying to copy existing music, we have myriad controls in place to encourage originality and prevent duplicative use cases. We do so more aggressively than any other company in the industry, including other startups. Some of our originality-guarding features include checking for and preventing copyrighted content in audio uploads, and disallowing artist-based descriptions in requests to generate music. Why do we work to encourage originality? We do this because it makes for a more fun and engaging experience to create entirely original compositions on Suno. We do it because we think it makes Suno incredibly valuable to be a place where new musical talent can shine. AI allows anyone to realize the songs in their head, regardless of the money, equipment, or connections that they have. The future is an explosion of new artists that are creating music in new ways, building fan bases, finding new reasons to smile, and getting famous. We hope that the major record labels realize that we can build a stronger foundation for the music industry of tomorrow, together. With or without them, we will continue pursuing our mission on behalf of the many millions of music fans already creating with Suno, and all those who will in the coming months. We are excited and humbled to support this next generation of musicians and the music they create. --- 🎥: shing86 jams with Suno

Suno

46,955 次观看 • 2 年前

Dogs and wolves split apart at least 15,000 years ago. Then a golden retriever met a wolf pup, and did something his own owner says terrified him. 97 seconds. Sound on. Watch the video BEFORE you read another word. Then come back. I'll show you why this clip is stranger, and far more important, than it looks. (Long read. Bookmark it now. You'll want it later.) . I'm not going to tell you what happens in that video. Not one spoiler. Not a hint. Because the video does its own work, and it does it better than any caption I could write. What I can do is show you the invisible layer underneath it. The biology. The history. The 15,000 years of evolution that were supposed to make a moment like this impossible. When you press play, you are not watching two animals. You are watching two completely different answers to the same question, standing in the same yard. The question is: what does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? Read on. Then watch again. It will hit differently the second time. I guarantee it. . PART 1. THE SPLIT Let's start with the number that should bother you. Fifteen thousand years. Possibly forty thousand. Scientists still argue about the exact date, and they argue loudly. Somewhere in that window, a population of ancient wolves, one that no longer exists anywhere on Earth, forked into two paths. One path led to the wolf you know from documentaries. Wary. Silent in the trees. Built to survive without us. The other path led to the animal sleeping on your couch. Here's what almost nobody realizes: your dog did not descend from the modern gray wolf. Both descend from a shared ancestor that vanished. Dogs and wolves are less like parent and child, more like cousins who grew up in different countries and stopped speaking the same language. And yet their DNA is almost identical. Different by a sliver. They can even interbreed and produce fertile offspring. Biologically, the gap between them is tiny. Behaviorally, the gap is an ocean. In 2017, a Princeton-led team compared the genomes of dogs and wolves and found something eerie. Dogs carry differences in a region of the genome that, in humans, is linked to Williams-Beuren syndrome. It's a condition famous for one trait above all others: extreme, almost unstoppable friendliness. Researchers are still debating what it means. But the idea is staggering. Dogs may not just be tamer wolves. They may be wolves with a dial turned all the way up on one thing: wanting to be near us. Wolves never got that dial. Hold that thought. It matters more than you think. . PART 2. THE DOG WHO WAS BUILT TO BE GENTLE Now meet the golden retriever. He wasn't found in nature. He was designed. In the mid-1800s, on a vast estate in the Scottish Highlands, a wealthy lord named Dudley Marjoribanks set out to create the perfect gundog. A dog that would swim into cold water, find a fallen bird, and bring it back to the hunter without leaving a single tooth mark on it. Read that again. The defining feature of a golden retriever is what breeders call a soft mouth. A dog that can carry something fragile, something alive or nearly alive, in its jaws, and not crush it. For generations, the goldens who were gentlest got to breed. The ones who were rough didn't. Think about what that does over 150 years. You are not just selecting for a coat color or a size. You are selecting, again and again, for restraint. For an animal that has power in its jaws and chooses not to use it. Today the golden retriever guides the blind. Sits with the dying. Finds people buried under rubble. Walks into hospital rooms and lowers a blood pressure reading just by resting its head on a bed. We took a predator and, over centuries, we bred one question out of it: should I hurt this thing? The golden's answer is almost always no. Now here's the part I can't stop thinking about. That gentleness was never aimed at a wolf. It was bred for birds. For children. For us. So what happens when an animal engineered for tenderness meets an animal that was never engineered for anything, one that is still, in every cell, exactly what the wild made it? That's the video. Go watch it if you haven't. I'll be here. . PART 3. THE ANIMAL THAT WAS NEVER ASKED A wolf pup is born blind and deaf. It weighs about a pound. For its first weeks it knows three things: warmth, milk, and the smell of the pack. Its eyes open at around two weeks, and they are blue. They will change to gold or amber within the first months of life, like a color being poured in slowly. In the wild, that pup is raised by an entire family. Mother, father, older siblings, all of them feeding, guarding, teaching. Forget the "alpha wolf" myth you were taught. The biologist who popularized that term, David Mech, spent decades correcting himself. A wild pack is not a gang with a boss. It's a family. A breeding pair and their kids. Which means a wolf pup's entire universe is built around one idea: the pack is everything. Now think about what it means when that universe collapses. Here's the hard science on why wolves aren't dogs, even when humans raise them from the earliest days. Researchers who want socialized wolves take pups from the den at around ten days old and hand-raise them around the clock. Bottle. Warmth. Constant human contact. It's the closest thing to a perfect human upbringing a wolf can get. In a famous 2003 experiment in Hungary, scientists gave hand-raised wolves and ordinary dogs an impossible puzzle: food locked in a box that couldn't be opened. The dogs did something instantly recognizable. They turned around and looked at the nearest human. Straight at the face. Help me. The wolves, raised by humans since they were days old, looked at people far less. They kept working the problem alone. Let that sink in. Same upbringing. Same people. Same room. And still: one animal looks to us for help by instinct, and the other doesn't think to. That's the dial I mentioned. It isn't something you can install with love and a bottle. It took thousands of years of living beside us. There's a legendary experiment that proves how deep this goes. In 1959, in Siberia, a geneticist named Dmitri Belyaev started breeding silver foxes. He selected for exactly one trait: tameness. Nothing else. No looks, no size, no color. Within a handful of generations, the foxes started wagging their tails. Licking hands. Whining when humans left. Then something nobody asked for started happening. Floppy ears. Curly tails. Piebald coats. Foxes that looked like puppies. Pick for friendliness alone, and a whole different animal surfaces. It took decades of careful selection to make a fox that wants us. Which brings me to the question that makes this video so unsettling. If wanting a human is a trait that takes generations to build, what happens when an animal WITHOUT it forms a bond anyway? And who is that bond really with? . PART 4. THE NOSE THAT READS THE FUTURE Before I say another word about the video, let me tell you about the most underrated superpower in the animal kingdom. You have about six million scent receptors in your nose. A dog has around three hundred million. The part of a dog's brain that processes smell is, proportionally, dozens of times larger than yours. Dogs can detect certain odors at parts per trillion. Picture spotting a teaspoon of sugar dissolved in two Olympic swimming pools. But smell isn't the interesting part. The interesting part is what a dog smells ABOUT YOU. In 2022, researchers at Queen's University Belfast collected breath and sweat samples from people before and after they did stressful math tests. Then they trained dogs to tell the samples apart. The dogs picked out the stressed samples correctly about 94 percent of the time. Your dog can smell your cortisol. Your fear. Your dread. And here's the thing. You don't have to say anything. You don't have to cry. You can hold a perfectly calm face while your body chemistry is screaming. Now add routine. Dogs are pattern-recognition machines. They know what your keys sound like, what a suitcase means, which shoes you wear when you're leaving for an hour and which shoes you wear when you're leaving for good. Neuroscientist Gregory Berns put dogs in brain scanners and found that the reward center of a dog's brain lit up most strongly for the scent of a familiar person. Not a stranger. Not another dog. The person they loved. So when I tell you a dog can KNOW something is coming before anyone speaks, I'm not being poetic. I'm describing chemistry, memory, and pattern, running in parallel, faster than you can think. There's a moment in this video where you'll understand this section in your bones. I won't tell you when it is. You'll feel it. . PART 5. THE EYES Here is a fact that rewires how you see your own dog. In 2015, a Japanese team published a study in Science that stopped a lot of people cold. They found that when a dog and its owner look into each other's eyes, both of them get a surge of oxytocin. The bonding hormone. The same one that floods a new mother when she looks at her baby. A loop. Dog looks at you, your oxytocin rises, you look back, the dog's rises. Two nervous systems tuning to each other through nothing but a stare. And here's the twist that gives me chills. The same team tried it with hand-raised wolves and their human caretakers. The loop didn't form. The wolves didn't hold the gaze the same way. The humans didn't get the same hormone hit. Something that comes naturally between a dog and a person simply wasn't there. It gets stranger. In 2019, researchers published a paper in PNAS showing that dogs have a tiny facial muscle above the inner corner of the eyes that wolves essentially lack. It's the muscle that lifts the inner eyebrow. It's what creates the "puppy eyes" look that makes you feel something you can't argue with. A muscle. Evolved, apparently, for one audience: us. Shelter research backs it up. Dogs that make that expression more often tend to get adopted faster. Dogs learned to speak human with their faces. So eye contact, for a dog, is not a small thing. It's the deepest sentence in the language they invented for us. Which is why, when you watch this video, I want you to pay attention to something most people miss the first time. Watch the eyes. Watch who looks at whom. Watch who doesn't. Because in the dog's language, refusing to look at someone you love is one of the loudest things you can say. . PART 6. THE BOWL Ask any dog behaviorist what the ultimate test of trust between two canines is, and you'll hear the same word. Food. Resource guarding is one of the oldest, most primal instincts a dog has. Food is survival. A dog that doesn't defend its meal was, for most of history, a dog that didn't make it. Growls over a bone are not rudeness. They are ancient math. So the bowl is sacred. In a home with two dogs, watch who eats first, who eats faster, who stands too close, who gets a warning stare. A shared bowl between two animals is a peace treaty signed in kibble. Some dogs will happily share toys, beds, even the couch, and still lock up the moment a bowl hits the floor. Some never share it. Not once. Not with anyone. Now put a wolf pup in that picture. A wolf pup that has known real hunger. Or no mother at all. Or no pack. That's an animal for whom food is not a snack. It's a verdict on whether the world is safe. And put a dog who has never, ever shared his food in that same room. I'm not going to tell you what happens next. But when you get to that moment in the video, and you will know it when you see it, remember this section. Remember what the bowl means. . Pause for a second, because a pattern is forming. Smell tells a dog what's coming. Eyes tell him who matters. The bowl tells him who's safe. Play tells him who's family. Four separate systems, one conclusion, and it's the same conclusion every time. You now know how to read the language. All that's left is to watch someone speak it, with everything on the line. . PART 7. THE GRIEF NOBODY BELIEVED IN For most of the twentieth century, serious scientists were warned not to say that animals feel grief. The word for the sin was anthropomorphism. Projecting human feelings onto beasts. You could lose credibility for even suggesting it. And then the data started rolling in. In 1925, a Tokyo professor named Hidesaburo Ueno died suddenly at work. His Akita, Hachiko, who had walked him to Shibuya Station every morning and met him at the platform every evening, showed up at the station the next day. And the next. For nine years, nine months, and fifteen days. Every single evening. Until his own death in 1935. The Japanese made a statue. The world made movies. But the scientists stayed cautious. One dog. Could be habit. Then in 2022, a team in Italy studied hundreds of multi-dog households where one dog had died. Owners reported that the surviving dogs changed. They sought more attention. They played less. They were less active. Many showed sleep and appetite changes. Not proof of grief exactly as we feel it. Scientists are still honest about that gap. But proof that the loss of a companion reshapes a dog's whole behavior. Here's the honest version, and I'll give you both sides: skeptics say we can't know what a dog feels inside. That's fair. We can't. We can only observe behavior, hormones, brain activity. But if a dog changes when a friend disappears, then that friend was never "just another animal" to him. Which raises the question the video quietly asks: What happens when a dog can see the loss coming? Not after. Before. Does the grief start early? Watch and decide for yourself. . PART 8. PLAY IS A CONTRACT Every canine on Earth speaks one shared language of play, and it's older than domestication itself. It starts with a bow. Front legs down, rear end up, tail high. The famous play bow. Researchers, especially the biologist Marc Bekoff, spent years studying it and found that it works like a punctuation mark. It means: everything I do after this is a game. If I bite, it's not a real bite. If I pounce, it's not an attack. It's a contract. And here's the wild part: wolves use it. Foxes use it. Coyotes use it. Dogs use it. The signal predates the split I told you about in Part 1. Which means a dog and a wolf can meet, with 15,000 years of divergence between them, and still understand each other's opening move. It gets deeper. Play is a negotiation between unequals. A big dog playing with a smaller one will often hold back. Roll over. Let the little one "win." Researchers call it self-handicapping. It's the animal version of a father lifting his daughter onto his shoulders and letting her win the race. And they role-reverse. The chaser becomes the chased. The one on top ends up underneath. That only happens if both animals believe the other is safe. Play, in the animal kingdom, is the most honest test of trust there is. Nobody can fake it. You can't roleplay tenderness with a body that has fangs. You either mean it, or the game collapses in seconds. And it changes as the years go on. Puppies play like puppies. Then they grow. Their size changes. Their strength changes. Their jaws change. The game has to change with them, or it ends. Some friendships don't survive that. Some survive by getting more careful, more precise, more competitive, and somehow more loving at the same time. The end of this video is a masterclass in that. I'll leave it there. . PART 9. THE HARDEST KIND OF LOVE Now the uncomfortable part. The part the internet often skips. Wolves are not pets. Say it out loud and it sounds obvious. But every year, people fall in love with the idea of a wolf, and every year the story ends badly for the animal. A wolf is built to cover up to thirty miles in a day. To live in a family of its own kind. To communicate with howls that carry for miles. Its jaws, its instincts, its stress responses, its needs are those of a wild animal. A house cannot hold that. A backyard cannot hold that. Love, however genuine, is not a substitute for what a wolf actually needs. And here's the tragic loop wildlife rescuers talk about: an orphaned wolf pup that grows up around humans is often too habituated to ever be released. It didn't learn what its mother would have taught it. It doesn't fear what it should fear. So the "rescue" can't end in the forest. It has to end somewhere in between. Somewhere that isn't the wild and isn't a living room. A place built for what this animal is. That's where the real story lives. Not in the rescue. In the decision after. Because the hardest thing in the world isn't loving something. It's loving something enough to hand it to the people who can give it the life it needs, and then living with the hole that leaves. People get torn apart over decisions like that. Not because they didn't love the animal. Because they did. Sometimes the most loving act looks exactly like loss. And here is what stopped me. The human in this story wasn't the only one who understood that. Somebody else in that story understood it too. Somebody with four legs and no ability to speak. I won't say who. I won't say how. Just watch. . PART 10. WHY YOUR CHEST TIGHTENS Have you noticed something strange about videos like this? They don't make you sad exactly. They make you feel something warmer. A tightness in the chest. Goosebumps on your arms. Sometimes a sudden hot wetness at the corners of your eyes, and you don't know why. Psychologists have a name for it now. Kama muta. It's Sanskrit for "moved by love." The researcher who helped define it, Alan Fiske, argues that it's triggered by one specific thing: the sudden intensification of a bond. A reunion. A reconciliation. A loyalty proven under pressure. A stranger becoming family. That moment when two beings who could have stayed apart choose each other anyway. Across cultures and languages, the physical signature keeps showing up: chills, tears, warmth in the chest, a lump in the throat. It isn't sadness. It isn't happiness. It's the feeling of witnessing connection get stronger. Another psychologist, Jonathan Haidt, calls a cousin of it moral elevation. That warm lift you feel when you watch someone do something unexpectedly good. It makes you want to be better. Kinder. It literally makes people more likely to help others afterward. So why do animals trigger it so powerfully? Because animals strip out everything we distrust in human stories. No agenda. No performance. No PR. No "what's in it for me." A dog can't fake loyalty for likes. A wolf can't pretend to love you for status. When two animals from opposite ends of evolution choose each other, we're watching the purest version of the thing we hunger for in our own lives, in a form we can trust. That's why you'll feel it. That's why you'll want to show it to someone right after. And that's why the algorithm will keep showing it to you. . PART 11. SIXTEEN FACTS THAT WILL CHANGE HOW YOU SEE THIS CLIP FACT 1. For every wild wolf on Earth, there are thousands of dogs. One branch of the family tree took over the planet by befriending us. The other stayed wild and stayed rare. FACT 2. Wolf pups are born with blue eyes. Adult wolves usually have gold or amber. Nobody sees the change happen. It just does. FACT 3. Wolves rarely bark. Barking is mostly a dog invention, and one theory says it evolved largely to talk to humans. FACT 4. A dog's tail wag isn't just "happy." Research suggests a wag skewed to the right side tends to signal approach and comfort, and one skewed to the left signals hesitation or stress. A dog is broadcasting its mood in code, and you were never taught to read it. FACT 5. Dogs catch human yawns. Wolves catch yawns from each other, and more so from the ones they're closest to. Contagious yawning tracks emotional closeness, not just habit. FACT 6. A wolf can eat up to twenty pounds of meat in one sitting. Then not eat properly for days. Feast and famine is written into its body. FACT 7. In a dog's brain, praise only lights up the reward center when BOTH the words and the tone are right. Say "good boy" in a flat voice and it doesn't fully land. Dogs process what you say and how you say it separately, then combine them. FACT 8. A wild wolf lives roughly six to eight years. A golden retriever lives ten to twelve. One of them is built for hardship. The other is built for company. FACT 9. Dogs combine faces and voices to read emotion. In one study, dogs shown two human faces while hearing a voice looked longer at the face whose emotion matched the sound. FACT 10. A border collie named Chaser learned the names of more than 1,000 toys, and could pick out a brand-new one by pure elimination. That's reasoning, not tricks. FACT 11. Wolves in a wild pack are a family, not an army. The pups eat, the parents hunt, the older siblings babysit. The word "alpha" mostly belongs to captive wolves forced together, not wild ones. FACT 12. A dog's nose print is as unique as a human fingerprint. So is its bond with you. FACT 13. Dogs hear frequencies far above what you can, up to roughly 45,000 Hz and beyond. The world around you is full of sound they can't stop noticing. FACT 14. A wolf's paw print can be nearly five inches long. Bigger than most dogs' prints. Yet the golden retriever's heart, by any measure that matters, is not smaller. FACT 15. Dogs dream. They go through REM sleep just like you. The twitching, the tiny barks, the running paws: it's a brain replaying its day. FACT 16. The wolf is the ancestor of the dog only in the loosest sense. Both come from a wolf lineage that no longer exists. When you watch these two, you are watching an ancient family reunion between two branches that lost touch before recorded history. . PART 12. HOW TO WATCH IT (WITHOUT ME SPOILING IT) You've made it this far, which tells me one thing about you. You're not a scroller. You're a noticer. So here's how to watch this clip like someone who knows what they're looking at. FIRST WATCH. Just feel it. Don't analyze. Let the story run at its own speed. The clip is under two minutes and it doesn't waste a second. SECOND WATCH. Focus on distance. Notice how close the animals stand. How that changes. How it never quite changes the way you expect. THIRD WATCH. Focus on the dog. Only the dog. Not what he does. What he refuses to do. FOURTH WATCH. Focus on the ears and the tail. Everything a dog can't say, he says with those two things. And he says a lot. And the last five seconds? Do not skip them. Do not scroll early. Watch the final image and ask yourself one question: If this is what the two of them look like now, what did it cost to get here? . CLOSING. WHY THIS MATTERS MORE THAN A "CUTE VIDEO" Let me leave you with the thought that made me write all of this. We live in a world that constantly tells us bonds are transactional. That loyalty is naive. That people, and animals, only love you when you're useful. Then along comes a story like this, and it quietly breaks that theory. A dog engineered for gentleness. A wolf engineered by nothing but the wild. Fifteen thousand years of evolution between them, a wall of biology that says they should be strangers, or worse. And instead: a bond so strong that the humans standing around it were afraid of what it would cost. Not because anyone was in danger. Because one of them understood exactly what was at stake. That's the thing about animals. They don't need the science. They don't need Part 1 through Part 12. They don't know about oxytocin loops or kama muta or play bows. They just know who matters. And they act on it, immediately, with everything they've got. Maybe that's the real reason this kind of video travels the way it does. Not because it's cute. Because it reminds us of a level of loyalty we've quietly stopped expecting from each other. So do these three things. ONE. Go watch the video. All 97 seconds. Sound on. TWO. Come back and reply with the exact moment you felt it. I want the second, the caption, the look. Tell me where it got you. THREE. Send it to one person who needs to see what love looks like when nobody is performing it. You know who. Repost this if the video moved you. Follow me for more stories where science and animals collide. And remember the question from the top of this post, because now you can answer it. What does a creature do when it loves something it was never built to keep? If you watched carefully, you already know. If you didn't, go back. The answer is in the last frame.

Earth Unveiled

50,253 次观看 • 22 天前