Scott,

Fantastic! I knew that in such a huge group of dog trainers that surely some had an interest and even some formal study into the subject! As I have said before, the certification or some other piece of paper makes no difference....but an interest in the principles and training is, for me, neat stuff.

I look forward to chewing these things over with you if you will oblige me!

I too, would never want a "book smart" completely inexperienced fellow at the helm either!

If you wish, I invite you to look over some of the past few threads and see if you care to find faults in anything I have said with regard to the behavioral science aspect. Maybe you can set me straight!
<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />
The "value" of the science is up for debate, I suppose, but I'd prefer to speak of the types of principles that I have briefly enumerated.

I look forward to a response!

So kelton,
I can see another analogy here.

What we need is a college physics professor to wander onto our forums. His dog experience will consist of owning a pet. However, he is fascinated by the courage test in SchH. So he posts multiple posts ( very large posts at that ) trying to get someone interested in the physics of the courage test. He will go on and on , in great detail about force vectors, and velocity, and other topics that really have a minimal interest to the people that actually perform courage tests. Finally, after the professor notices that almost no one will ask him questions about his beloved physics, he'll start to wander about the board and throw in comments about the connection to physics to what comment strikes his fancy.

Please notice the title of this particular forum:
Dogs as House Companions
Basic Dog Obedience

Sorry, reading your intial thread, and your statement of "I'd like to discuss the princples of behavioral science."

I'm not seeing how this relates to Dogs as House Companions.

Topic closed ( again )