Question:

> Maybe you missed the part that explains that the black box rehabilitates all kinds of > behavior problems. Separation anxiety, fear of thunder, excessive barking, submissive > urination, any obsessive or compulsive behaviors, even car sickness and begging for > food.

No, I read that, but how does it do that?  By making the dogs go to sleep?  Or what?  If it makes them go to sleep in one instance but does something else in another instance, how does that work?  I would think that if it works at all it would only be capable of producing one response in dogs and one response only, no? > As for a waste of money, Doggy Do Right is 100%  money back, satisfaction guaranteed, > forever. So if it don’t work, you get your money back. I expect maybe a two percent > failure rate. > Compare that with the expensive drugs the veterinary pharmaceutical industry are > pushing. Ask them for your money back after you walk out of the pharmacy. And, they > recommend a training program combined with drug therapy. So, you buy the expensive > drugs, pay for the "behaviorist," do the work, give the pills, and have about 50/50 > chance of success.

So, do any of your customers want to post to this group telling us about how well it works?  If it really is so wonderful I’d think they would want to help you get it out to more dog owners… Do you have a book or a video or anything like that?  Have you thought of getting vets or other well-known trainers to back your product after they examine it?   > If my machine offered 50% success, I wouldn’t sell it. > If my training method offered 50% success, I wouldn’t use it. > People rarely come to me because they want to become better handlers, or because they > have a good dog they want to make better. They come to me because there is no place > left to get the kind of help they need with their dogs.

And you solve their problems?  I’d think you’d have a whole bunch of them wanting to write testimonials for you… Hey, I’ll write a testimonial if you send me one for free.  I’ve got one dog that barks too much.  I also do rescue and most of the dogs I take in are not trained at all and could really use a device that does all the stuff your device does.  How about a free trial period?  Or a donation to rescue?  I could get you a tax ID number for a non-profit group so you could write it off.  Let me know. > But the important thing is, not does it work, but how does it work? It is called > allelomimetic behavior. That means the dog copies your actions.

But I find it hard to believe that a dog would see water coming out of a squeeky toy and would try to copy that by peeing.  I just don’t get it. How many dogs have you used that on?  What other sorts of housebreaking methods were being used at the same time?   > I have always had a huge number of dogs to experiment with.  In the past, if I could > not find enough new dogs to work with as subjects, I would recruit new problem dogs > with an offer of free training. > Not only have the methods and techniques I use been tested on hundreds of dogs, but > they have been tested on the most difficult dogs I could find, as well as normal > dogs. I grew up in a professional kennel, and have specialized in problem dog > behavior for thirty-six years.

So where are you?  Maybe somebody here can come visit you and then report back on what you have to offer.  What kennel did you grow up in? Do you have classes now or do you only work one-on-one?   cindi

Response:

: So, when I get testy about force and abuse in training, it’s because : I’ve seen and experienced the results. I’m used to dealing with : dangerous dogs that outweigh me by twenty-five or fifty pounds, and I : have learned the hard way. You get more flies with sugar, than you do : with vinegar. It does not appear that you have actually learned that lesson.  It is possible to argue your case in a persuasive manner.  Styles such as the one you used below, using a diminuitive of someone’s name, doesn’t quite fit into the "sugar" category. :>> > The fact is, Ruthie, that it’s because of the heavy handed training methods you :>> :>> > people use, that these dogs end up destroyed. I must say, however, that your "monkey-see. monkey-do" theory is given quite a bit of credence.  In response to the hostility of your posts people are hostile in return. You get emotional, others get emotional. Perhaps you would like to test your theory further? See if you could influence the group in the direction of polite consideration for your views by behaving in the way you want them to behave. I know it is difficult when you feel attacked, but perhaps you can rise above it and really show folks the difference between "sugar" and "vinegar." — Diane Blackman To reach a goal you must set a destination.

Response:

> And stops to listen, begins to yawn, sits down, follows the signal for a couple > of minutes, and plops down for the count. It’s totally automatic, Ruthie, even > you won’t have to stress yourself trying to figure it out.

I don’t have a problem believing that MAYBE, just maybe, your box makes dogs sleepy.  But in my opinion, my dogs sleep enough already.  I read your manual and your page about the box and all the box seems to do is make dogs lay down and go to sleep.  Is that really all the box does? If so, I would have to say it’s a big waste of money.   about making the squeaky toy "pee" on the newspaper for the dog to copy: > Have you ever tried that method? You run your mouth without any thought, about > something you’ve never experienced.

Jerry, the question is have you ever used this method, and if so, on how many dogs, and why do you think this had anything to do with their housebreaking?  Maybe they were just easy to housebreak and seeing some squeaky toy squirting water on a newspaper meant nothing to them.  You know, your methods have to be used on a large sample of dogs, a large representative sample, before anybody will think they might possibly be useful.  So, Jerry, how many dogs have you done this with? Ruth said: >> The end result of all of this is that the dog remains untrained and a >> problem, and is likely to end up in the "shelter" to be euthanized as >> unadoptable. > The fact is, Ruthie, that it’s because of the heavy handed training methods you > people use, that these dogs end up destroyed.

That’s just bullshit, Jerry.  The *majority* of dog owners I’ve dealt with who were getting rid of their dogs had never ever laid a hand on them.  They simply stand around saying commands and they wonder why the dog doesn’t obey.  They have never attempted to show a dog what they mean when they say sit either by forcing him to sit, by luring him into a sit, or by waiting around for him to sit on his own and then click-and-treat.  They simply think their dogs should know English.  And their dogs are rowdy, nippy, destructive and completely untrained.   A smaller portion of the dog owners I’ve talked to who are giving up dogs have been too rough with their dogs, in an abusive fashion, and their dogs are now afraid of them.  Lots of these dogs are not afraid of anybody but them, and are thus not "ruined".  Some of these dogs are afraid of everybody and are fear-biters, and some of the fear-biters can be rehabilitated.  But these are all dogs who were treated abusively, using my definition of abuse and not yours.  These are dogs who were hit or kicked, for the most part, just for being dogs.  These are not, I repeat NOT, dogs who experienced a hand on the rump to help them learn sit, or who experienced some collar corrections to help them learn heel, or who experienced a scruff shake for excessive mouthing.  No, the dogs who have owners who know how to do those things don’t wind up meeting me or my colleagues down at the pound.   And yes, those methods I just mentioned (hand on the rump, collar correction, scruff shake) are not the only way to train dogs.  But they are *one* way to train, and they are not abusive when done properly.   >> Did you know that 50% of dogs in the US do not make it >> past the age of 2 because of aggression, and that this problem is the >> end result of lack of training and clueless owners? > No, Ruthie, it’s because clue less trainers create problem behavior in dogs as > a result of their force and abuse in training. And well meaning but dangerously > ignorant people like you, eat that shit up.

No, that is not true.  Jerry, the majority of dogs who are given up are dogs who have not had *anything* done to them.  Their owners do not know how to train, using any kind of method, and they get rid of the dog because they think it’s the dog’s fault, so they just get rid of the dog and get a new one to see if he’ll be better. How much time do you spend down at the animal shelter, Jerry?  How many owners who want to get rid of their dogs have you talked to?  Do you just see dogs at the pound and *assume* that they are aggressive or wild or hyper because somebody has been too rough with them?  Where is your evidence that force and abuse in training are the reason dogs have been given up or made aggressive?  EVIDENCE, do you know what that word means? Cindi

Response:

No problem, Dan.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> i misunderstood i apologize mark

Response:

>> > And stops to listen, begins to yawn, sits down, follows the signal for a couple > > of minutes, and plops down for the count. It’s totally automatic, Ruthie, even > > you won’t have to stress yourself trying to figure it out. > I don’t have a problem believing that MAYBE, just maybe, your box makes > dogs sleepy.  But in my opinion, my dogs sleep enough already.  I read > your manual and your page about the box and all the box seems to do is > make dogs lay down and go to sleep.  Is that really all the box does? > If so, I would have to say it’s a big waste of money.

Maybe you missed the part that explains that the black box rehabilitates all kinds of behavior problems. Separation anxiety, fear of thunder, excessive barking, submissive urination, any obsessive or compulsive behaviors, even car sickness and begging for food. As for a waste of money, Doggy Do Right is 100%  money back, satisfaction guaranteed, forever. So if it don’t work, you get your money back. I expect maybe a two percent failure rate. Compare that with the expensive drugs the veterinary pharmaceutical industry are pushing. Ask them for your money back after you walk out of the pharmacy. And, they recommend a training program combined with drug therapy. So, you buy the expensive drugs, pay for the "behaviorist," do the work, give the pills, and have about 50/50 chance of success. If my machine offered 50% success, I wouldn’t sell it. If my training method offered 50% success, I wouldn’t use it. People rarely come to me because they want to become better handlers, or because they have a good dog they want to make better. They come to me because there is no place left to get the kind of help they need with their dogs. > about making the squeaky toy "pee" on the newspaper for the dog to copy: > > Have you ever tried that method? You run your mouth without any thought, about > > something you’ve never experienced. > Jerry, the question is have you ever used this method, and if so, on how > many dogs, and why do you think this had anything to do with their > housebreaking?  Maybe they were just easy to housebreak and seeing some > squeaky toy squirting water on a newspaper meant nothing to them.

I first used that technique about fifteen years ago on an adult Lhasa with a long history of housebreaking difficulty. But the important thing is, not does it work, but how does it work? It is called allelomimetic behavior. That means the dog copies your actions. > You > know, your methods have to be used on a large sample of dogs, a large > representative sample, before anybody will think they might possibly be > useful.  So, Jerry, how many dogs have you done this with?

I have always had a huge number of dogs to experiment with.  In the past, if I could not find enough new dogs to work with as subjects, I would recruit new problem dogs with an offer of free training. Not only have the methods and techniques I use been tested on hundreds of dogs, but they have been tested on the most difficult dogs I could find, as well as normal dogs. I grew up in a professional kennel, and have specialized in problem dog behavior for thirty-six years. So, when I get testy about force and abuse in training, it’s because I’ve seen and experienced the results. I’m used to dealing with dangerous dogs that outweigh me by twenty-five or fifty pounds, and I have learned the hard way. You get more flies with sugar, than you do with vinegar. Sincerely. Jerry Howe, Wits’ End Dog Training – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Ruth said: > > >> The end result of all of this is that the dog remains untrained and a > > >> problem, and is likely to end up in the "shelter" to be euthanized as > > >> unadoptable. > > The fact is, Ruthie, that it’s because of the heavy handed training methods you > > people use, that these dogs end up destroyed. > That’s just bullshit, Jerry.  The *majority* of dog owners I’ve dealt > with who were getting rid of their dogs had never ever laid a hand on > them.  They simply stand around saying commands and they wonder why the > dog doesn’t obey.  They have never attempted to show a dog what they > mean when they say sit either by forcing him to sit, by luring him into > a sit, or by waiting around for him to sit on his own and then > click-and-treat.  They simply think their dogs should know English.  And > their dogs are rowdy, nippy, destructive and completely untrained. > A smaller portion of the dog owners I’ve talked to who are giving up > dogs have been too rough with their dogs, in an abusive fashion, and > their dogs are now afraid of them.  Lots of these dogs are not afraid of > anybody but them, and are thus not "ruined".  Some of these dogs are > afraid of everybody and are fear-biters, and some of the fear-biters can > be rehabilitated.  But these are all dogs who were treated abusively, > using my definition of abuse and not yours.  These are dogs who were hit > or kicked, for the most part, just for being dogs.  These are not, I > repeat NOT, dogs who experienced a hand on the rump to help them learn > sit, or who experienced some collar corrections to help them learn heel, > or who experienced a scruff shake for excessive mouthing.  No, the dogs > who have owners who know how to do those things don’t wind up meeting me > or my colleagues down at the pound. > And yes, those methods I just mentioned (hand on the rump, collar > correction, scruff shake) are not the only way to train dogs.  But they > are *one* way to train, and they are not abusive when done properly. > > >> Did you know that 50% of dogs in the US do not make it > > >> past the age of 2 because of aggression, and that this problem is the > > >> end result of lack of training and clueless owners? > > No, Ruthie, it’s because clue less trainers create problem behavior in dogs as > > a result of their force and abuse in training. And well meaning but dangerously > > ignorant people like you, eat that shit up. > No, that is not true.  Jerry, the majority of dogs who are given up are > dogs who have not had *anything* done to them.  Their owners do not know > how to train, using any kind of method, and they get rid of the dog > because they think it’s the dog’s fault, so they just get rid of the dog > and get a new one to see if he’ll be better. > How much time do you spend down at the animal shelter, Jerry?  How many > owners who want to get rid of their dogs have you talked to?  Do you > just see dogs at the pound and *assume* that they are aggressive or wild > or hyper because somebody has been too rough with them?  Where is your > evidence that force and abuse in training are the reason dogs have been > given up or made aggressive?  EVIDENCE, do you know what that word > means? > Cindi

Response:

>  To be honest, I could give a shit about Jerry and his box, my whole point > was an attempt to demonstrate why it takes so long for anything to get > accomplished anymore.  No one wants to accept that their way is not the only > way, that there are better ways to do lots of things This is not really > geared towards dog folks, as much as it is to politicians, and scientist and > journalists and everyone else who refuses to remove their blinders.

Well, thank god people don’t accept new stuff when the arguments for it are as groundless as Jerry’s arguments!!! Surely you’re not lamenting the fact that people here didn’t just believe him without seeing any proof?  Because that is dangerous…especially if we are talking, like you said, about politics and science and the media.   I haven’t necessarily dismissed Jerry’s black box nor his ideas in his manual (those that I can manage to understand, that is), and I’ve said a million times that there are lots of different ways to train dogs.  What I and everybody else is complaining about is that Jerry offers no proof, and he also offers no clearly-written examples that people can understand and apply, and yet he constantly spouts about how he’s the only one who knows The Truth about dogs and dog training and how the rest of us are barbaric and stupid and how compulsive methods make dogs aggressive.  The latter part is just untrue, plain and simple, for a great majority of dogs.   That is not to say that positive-only methods don’t work just as well with some or even all dogs, because who knows if they do or not (although we’ve had this discussion many, many times on this group before and the consensus here does seem to always be that compulsive methods produce more reliable dogs), but Jerry’s not here saying just that positive methods work well or even that they are just better than compulsive methods.  He’s saying traditional methods ruin dogs and make dogs turn on their owners, and that is just bullshit.  And running around spouting bullshit like that makes it even harder for any of us to consider that maybe he has something worthwhile to report, because it makes him seem like an idiot and it’s doubtful an idiot has invented some wonderful new invention. I certainly hope *you’re* not the kind of person to just believe something somebody says because you are too afraid to be accused of having blinders on.  I’d be more than happy to believe that Jerry has some new technique that’s useful for some or even all dogs if only there were some proof. So, you said in another post that you’ve been trying some of his techniques… Good, great!  Please, tell us what you are trying, IN DETAIL, and describe how it’s going.  Jerry can’t seem to do that so maybe you can do that for him. Cindi

Response:

 i misunderstood i apologize mark

Response:

>Why would I, even if I were a marginally >successful dog trainer, throw away everything I >have worked for over thirty-six years, to cheat a >few people out of a hundred bucks? I can make >more than that in one hour of honest dog >training work.

We don’t even know if you are a trainer——you have never titled a dog, you will not allow people to see your own personal dog, you are not in the phonebook.  YOUR assuming that we are assuming all this——-I’m not. FRED HASSEN "SIT  MEANS SIT" Internet talkshow host http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit Dog Training for the Real World Sit Means Sit Dog Training (702-877-4581)              When your dog doesn’t know: "Sit from Shinola"  

Response:

>> stitched with finest floss on pure irish linen: > > Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? > >And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get > >so upset? > Simply turning on a box that emits a certain tone will do nothing to > train a dog- the constant tone becomes background noise that is not > connected to action or lack thereof on the part of the dog.

You’re catching on, Ruth. But that is not howe it works. Nice try, talk about what you know, not what you would like to believe. You experts make for a lot of fun, but little substance. > If the > dog is sitting calmly, he hears the tone.  If he is running around the > house like a fur-coated maniac, he hears the tone….

And stops to listen, begins to yawn, sits down, follows the signal for a couple of minutes, and plops down for the count. It’s totally automatic, Ruthie, even you won’t have to stress yourself trying to figure it out. > As for the housebreaking method of having your dog watch a plastic toy > dog dribble, that is complete and utter nonsense- this would mean less > than nothing to a dog (except maybe he could think it is an odd water > fountain).

Have you ever tried that method? You run your mouth without any thought, about something you’ve never experienced. > Why do we get upset?  Simple- Jerry is trying to make money by selling > his useless device to clueless dog owners who have problems with their > dogs.

No, Ruth, you get upset because you are being criticized for the way you endorse handling and training dogs. That’s all. There is no financial motive for me to be here getting nauseous listening to the crap you people espouse. The way you handle and regard your dogs is reflected in the responses you all give to criticism of the heavy handed, ignorant methods you use and endorse. > Because this device is of no value, they will continue to have > problems with their dog, but be $100 poorer.

That purchase price, including shipping, is 100% money back guaranteed if ever you are not satisfied with Doggy Do Right http://www.doggydoright.com . What portion of that is too complicated for your mind to grasp? If Doggy Do Right does not work to your satisfaction, I give back your money. I don’t want money that I have not earned and do not deserve. I can afford to return a high percentage of purchases, to keep my company and my customers satisfied. If Doggy Do Right works as well as I claim, I will become a multimillionaire. At worst, if Doggy Do Right is deemed marginally acceptable, I’m still set for life. If I am a fraud, I won’t be able to rip people off very long, and will face several years in jail on state and federal charges. Why would I, even if I were a marginally successful dog trainer, throw away everything I have worked for over thirty-six years, to cheat a few people out of a hundred bucks? I can make more than that in one hour of honest dog training work. > That $100 would be > better spent going to an obedience class or hiring a real trainer.

No so, Ruthie. Not when "real trainers" use real force, fear, and intimidation as a basis for training. Yank, jerk, shake, scold, punish, correct forever, rather than train once, properly. > The end result of all of this is that the dog remains untrained and a > problem, and is likely to end up in the "shelter" to be euthanized as > unadoptable.

The fact is, Ruthie, that it’s because of the heavy handed training methods you people use, that these dogs end up destroyed. > Did you know that 50% of dogs in the US do not make it > past the age of 2 because of aggression, and that this problem is the > end result of lack of training and clueless owners?

No, Ruthie, it’s because clue less trainers create problem behavior in dogs as a result of their force and abuse in training. And well meaning but dangerously ignorant people like you, eat that shit up. > Now do you > understand why we have a problem with Jerry?

Now, Ruthie, do you understand why I have a problem with you people? > Ruth Mays >  Cinnaminson NJ >    I finally got my head together, then my body fell apart.

Sincerely, Jerry Howe, Wits’ End Dog Training  http://www.doggydoright.com

Response:

You are right Sudhir. It is fun…and so far your the only one who has not immediately dismissed it.  To be honest, I could give a shit about Jerry and his box, my whole point was an attempt to demonstrate why it takes so long for anything to get accomplished anymore.  No one wants to accept that their way is not the only way, that there are better ways to do lots of things This is not really geared towards dog folks, as much as it is to politicians, and scientist and journalists and everyone else who refuses to remove their blinders.  I’m off my soapbox now….thanks for your time. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I have not blasted Jerry.  He can claim what he wants.  I claim a lot of > things too.  I just want to know: > 1) What exactly is his approach?  There is a manual but nothing in there > is "new". > 2) The black box.  If it is science then it should/would be published. > There is nothing that I can find in the literature from 1966 to date on > why it would work.  There is nothing published in peer reviewed journals > at least.  But that does not mean it does not work just that there is no > accepted evidence. > You can make a lot of things sound like science but most of those things > dont stand up to peer review.  If it is science and he is seeing a clear > behavioral effect using a specific range of sound then he should write it > up and get it published in an animal behavioral journal.  If it does work > and the data stand up in blind tests then I would buy it.  Not only that > he would be giving lectures all over the US and probably the world for a > truly novel way to modify animal behavior. > If not then I > need tons of examples from people with problem dogs.  Perhaps like > Dikeman and his video, Koehler and his book, Dobbs and their seminars, > Kilcommons and his seminars/books, Volehards and their seminars/books and so > on…..After all  I > bought all their their stuff, been to some of their seminars, spent money > on their ideas  because you can see that they works.  Its not just Jerry > that I question.  I question everyone until I can see it demonstrated to > my satisfaction.   Its really nothing personal with me > there is just no proof yet for some of the claims made by Jerry. > The way it works is that he makes a caim people here say prove it > :  I keep seeing all of you guys blasting Jerry, and I must say that it makes > : you guys look like the moron you accuse Jerry of being. While you all have > : your aproaches to dog behavior and training, you surely must respect the > : fact that he has found another aproach. I also think maybe you just don’t > : understand his approach. He is using variations on hypnosis techniques, > : Programming etc… Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? > : And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get > : so upset?  I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so > : far they are working farely well. While I am no expert, I would certainley > : think twice before allowing anyone access to my dog who would just blast a > : guys method while knowing little about it. So you guys get results with the > : methods you use…Thats great, but I suspect that some of you inadvertantly > : use techniques that are very similar in how they work. > :  It would sure be nice if you people would be constructive in your > : criticisms instead of childish and petty. > :  So can anyone here tell me why his techniques won’t work?

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->  I keep seeing all of you guys blasting Jerry, and I must say that it makes > you guys look like the moron you accuse Jerry of being. While you all have > your aproaches to dog behavior and training, you surely must respect the > fact that he has found another aproach. I also think maybe you just don’t > understand his approach. He is using variations on hypnosis techniques, > Programming etc… Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? > And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get > so upset?  I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so > far they are working farely well. While I am no expert, I would certainley > think twice before allowing anyone access to my dog who would just blast a > guys method while knowing little about it. So you guys get results with the > methods you use…Thats great, but I suspect that some of you inadvertantly > use techniques that are very similar in how they work. >  It would sure be nice if you people would be constructive in your > criticisms instead of childish and petty. >  So can anyone here tell me why his techniques won’t work?

Well, I for one have never claimed that his techniques won’t work. All I have ever claimed is that Jerry has not produced any evidence that they can work. Jerry does not have to provide proof if he does not wish to. But it’s rather silly of him to get angry when no one takes his claims seriously. Jerry is the one making the claim, so the burden of proof is on him, not on those who do not take his claims on faith. Also, it has well-established that I am a bozo, not a moron. There is a difference, you know. –Terri Willis and Harlan the Incredulous — — Chocolate is for BABIES AND AZTECS.  Now, garlic, that’s a GROWN-UP FLAVOR. — Kibo

Response:

I missed some of this, but if this "box" makes a noise to help train . . . why not spend $1.00 on a clicker?
Works for me!    -**** Posted from RemarQ, http://www.remarq.com/?a ****-  Search and Read Usenet Discussions in your Browser – FREE –

Response:

>The way it works is that he makes a claim >begins. Its kinda fun dont you think?

It’ll even be more fun after someone buys one. FRED HASSEN "SIT  MEANS SIT" Internet talkshow host http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit Dog Training for the Real World Sit Means Sit Dog Training (702-877-4581)              When your dog doesn’t know: "Sit from Shinola"  

Response:

oh mark please show us if it works thats great  but so far you are the only one to step forth to testify

Response:

Dan, Mark isn’t the one who believes in the box, he was only responding to jb.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> oh mark please show us > if it works thats great  but so far you are the only one to step forth > to testify

Response:

While I was listening to the Miles Davis CD, "Kind Of Blue," and >You didn’t answer my question. Why won’t it work?

Why won’t WHAT work? Who the hell even knows what "it" is! How can bumble bees fly?   I don’t know, do you? Hell, maybe they really can’t! >Are you so unwilling to admit that there could be a different way?

Sure, there "could" be.   But it’s up to the one claiming that there is a different way, to PROVE IT. >So what if your techniques are proven, so what if he didn’t invent anything.

Then SEND HIM *YOUR* MONEY! >I may be wrong but his techniques seem to be similar to a grounbreaking >researcherin the feild of hypnosis.

You’re right, you’re wrong. Howe breaks wind, not ground. > I believe his name is Erikson. Further I >believe Jerry mentioned something in a previos post about neuro linguistic >prgramming, which is related.

Related to WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT? > Again why won’t it work?

It might! And horses might FLY someday, too! Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeez. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >So can anyone here tell me why his >techniques > >won’t work? > jb—-let’s make this a bit easier.  You have read the manual, you tell > me what is "his technique" that hasn’t been around for years.  He didn’t > invent anything other than a box with no kind of proof that it works, > anywhere, anytime, or anyhow.  Since you, or noone else on the planet > has a box for you to say whether it works or not, let’s get back to "his > technique".  You obviously haven’t read very many posts, because Mr. > Howe is the one blasting proven techniques, while offering no proof that > he has a better way.  If you have a garden hose that you claim can train > everything on a dog forever, you better provide more than babble.  Since > there is no reason in your opinion that what Mr. Howe says makes sense, > why don’t you just buy his box??  I’m sure the measly 100 dollars will > come back to you in time alone.   Yea, buy his box—–then tell us all > how great he is.

– Dogman Dogman’s Den http://www.i1.net/~dogman "I follow my own advice, even if it sounds stupid."                             Jerry "Little Man" Howe "Ah geez Broke… I want to say it to… I think a 10 month old nippy, or "mouthy" dog, pup, canine should be put down.  No mouthy is acceptable by any breed."                                          Tcwood1122

Response:

I have not blasted Jerry.  He can claim what he wants.  I claim a lot of things too.  I just want to know: 1) What exactly is his approach?  There is a manual but nothing in there is "new". 2) The black box.  If it is science then it should/would be published.   There is nothing that I can find in the literature from 1966 to date on why it would work.  There is nothing published in peer reviewed journals at least.  But that does not mean it does not work just that there is no accepted evidence. You can make a lot of things sound like science but most of those things dont stand up to peer review.  If it is science and he is seeing a clear behavioral effect using a specific range of sound then he should write it up and get it published in an animal behavioral journal.  If it does work and the data stand up in blind tests then I would buy it.  Not only that he would be giving lectures all over the US and probably the world for a truly novel way to modify animal behavior. If not then I need tons of examples from people with problem dogs.  Perhaps like Dikeman and his video, Koehler and his book, Dobbs and their seminars, Kilcommons and his seminars/books, Volehards and their seminars/books and so on…..After all  I bought all their their stuff, been to some of their seminars, spent money on their ideas  because you can see that they works.  Its not just Jerry that I question.  I question everyone until I can see it demonstrated to my satisfaction.   Its really nothing personal with me there is just no proof yet for some of the claims made by Jerry.   The way it works is that he makes a caim people here say prove it

:  I keep seeing all of you guys blasting Jerry, and I must say that it makes : you guys look like the moron you accuse Jerry of being. While you all have : your aproaches to dog behavior and training, you surely must respect the : fact that he has found another aproach. I also think maybe you just don’t : understand his approach. He is using variations on hypnosis techniques, : Programming etc… Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? : And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get : so upset?  I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so : far they are working farely well. While I am no expert, I would certainley : think twice before allowing anyone access to my dog who would just blast a : guys method while knowing little about it. So you guys get results with the : methods you use…Thats great, but I suspect that some of you inadvertantly : use techniques that are very similar in how they work. :  It would sure be nice if you people would be constructive in your : criticisms instead of childish and petty. :  So can anyone here tell me why his techniques won’t work?

Response:

You didn’t answer my question. Why won’t it work? Are you so unwilling to admit that there could be a different way? So what if your techniques are proven, so what if he didn’t invent anything. I may be wrong but his techniques seem to be similar to a grounbreaking researcherin the feild of hypnosis. I believe his name is Erikson. Further I believe Jerry mentioned something in a previos post about neuro linguistic prgramming, which is related.  Again why won’t it work?

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->So can anyone here tell me why his >techniques >won’t work? > jb—-let’s make this a bit easier.  You have read the manual, you tell > me what is "his technique" that hasn’t been around for years.  He didn’t > invent anything other than a box with no kind of proof that it works, > anywhere, anytime, or anyhow.  Since you, or noone else on the planet > has a box for you to say whether it works or not, let’s get back to "his > technique".  You obviously haven’t read very many posts, because Mr. > Howe is the one blasting proven techniques, while offering no proof that > he has a better way.  If you have a garden hose that you claim can train > everything on a dog forever, you better provide more than babble.  Since > there is no reason in your opinion that what Mr. Howe says makes sense, > why don’t you just buy his box??  I’m sure the measly 100 dollars will > come back to you in time alone.   Yea, buy his box—–then tell us all > how great he is. > FRED HASSEN > "SIT  MEANS SIT" Internet talkshow host > http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit > Dog Training for the Real World > Sit Means Sit Dog Training (702-877-4581) >              When your dog doesn’t know: > "Sit from Shinola"

Response:

> jb: >>I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so > far they are working farely well. << > Which techniques are you playing around with? > If you can explain the technique better than Jerry can maybe we can all learn > something. > Deb* > I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn’t > looking good either.

Jerry. * full credit for maintaining your sense of humour. – Bob

Response:

Spam.  Pure and simple.  Jerry is spaming.  Moreover, jerry, and only Jerry swears by his little black box; no one else comes foreward.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I keep seeing all of you guys blasting Jerry, and I must say that it makes >you guys look like the moron you accuse Jerry of being. While you all have >your aproaches to dog behavior and training, you surely must respect the >fact that he has found another aproach. I also think maybe you just don’t >understand his approach. He is using variations on hypnosis techniques, >Programming etc… Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? >And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get >so upset?  I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so >far they are working farely well. While I am no expert, I would certainley >think twice before allowing anyone access to my dog who would just blast a >guys method while knowing little about it. So you guys get results with the >methods you use…Thats great, but I suspect that some of you inadvertantly >use techniques that are very similar in how they work. > It would sure be nice if you people would be constructive in your >criticisms instead of childish and petty. > So can anyone here tell me why his techniques won’t work?

Response:

jb: >>I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so far they are working farely well. << Which techniques are you playing around with?   If you can explain the technique better than Jerry can maybe we can all learn something. Deb* I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn’t looking good either.

Response:

>So can anyone here tell me why his >techniques >won’t work?

jb—-let’s make this a bit easier.  You have read the manual, you tell me what is "his technique" that hasn’t been around for years.  He didn’t invent anything other than a box with no kind of proof that it works, anywhere, anytime, or anyhow.  Since you, or noone else on the planet has a box for you to say whether it works or not, let’s get back to "his technique".  You obviously haven’t read very many posts, because Mr. Howe is the one blasting proven techniques, while offering no proof that he has a better way.  If you have a garden hose that you claim can train everything on a dog forever, you better provide more than babble.  Since there is no reason in your opinion that what Mr. Howe says makes sense, why don’t you just buy his box??  I’m sure the measly 100 dollars will come back to you in time alone.   Yea, buy his box—–then tell us all how great he is. FRED HASSEN "SIT  MEANS SIT" Internet talkshow host http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit Dog Training for the Real World Sit Means Sit Dog Training (702-877-4581)              When your dog doesn’t know: "Sit from Shinola"  

Response:

 I keep seeing all of you guys blasting Jerry, and I must say that it makes you guys look like the moron you accuse Jerry of being. While you all have your aproaches to dog behavior and training, you surely must respect the fact that he has found another aproach. I also think maybe you just don’t understand his approach. He is using variations on hypnosis techniques, Programming etc… Can someone please tell all of us why this won’t work? And if he truly doesn’t know what hes talking about, why do you people get so upset?  I have been playing around with some of his techniques, and so far they are working farely well. While I am no expert, I would certainley think twice before allowing anyone access to my dog who would just blast a guys method while knowing little about it. So you guys get results with the methods you use…Thats great, but I suspect that some of you inadvertantly use techniques that are very similar in how they work.  It would sure be nice if you people would be constructive in your criticisms instead of childish and petty.  So can anyone here tell me why his techniques won’t work?

Response: