The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
In human beings, most of us have three cone types and we can see colors that stem from that. In most mammals including your dog or your cat, there really are only two cone types and that limits the kind of vision that they can have in the domain of wavelength or color as you would say.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
In most mammals, including your dog um or your cat, there really are only two cone types. and that limits the kind of vision that they can have in the domain of wavelength or color as we would say.
There really three types of cones. And if you look at the way that color vision is thought to work, you can sort of see that it has to be three different signals.