cthia wrote:They were officially rated 0.83 on the sentience scale, even using primitive tools like axes and fishing nets and were thought to be slightly more intelligent and mentally capable than Beowulf's gremlins or perhaps Earth's dolphins (HHA1.1: ABF). They were the twelfth—and physically smallest—intelligent species known to humans.
My question is whether the increase in mental ability from the genengineered celery affected their placement on the sentience scale.
SWM wrote:There is no evidence suggesting that treecats who eat celery regularly are smarter than treecats who don't. Remember, most treecats have only limited access to celery.
You should also remember that the measurement you cite of treecat intelligence was taken during the period that treecats were hiding their full intelligence. If they were measured again today, they would probably come out about 1.0 on the intelligence scale, because they are no longer misleading the testers.
cthia wrote:Nah! Just a .90 as these type tests are always culturally biased, as are SATs. No reason to discount 'species bias' as well.
fallsfromtrees wrote:And there you go with the species bias. Who is to say that the 'cats are not well about 1.0 on the sentience scale?

See what I mean? Species bias runs amok.
They probably are as intelligent as humans. BUT. Won't show up on the culturally and species biased tests.